01.Professional Learning and Development
Paper
The Working Environment of Upper Secondary School Teachers During the First Year of the COVID-19 Pandemic
Súsanna Margrét Gestsdóttir, Guðrún Ragnarsdóttir
University of Iceland, Iceland
Presenting Author: Ragnarsdóttir, Guðrún
The COVID-19 pandemic presented many challenges to schoolwork all over the world. In Icelandic upper secondary schools all teaching was converted to emergency remote teaching (ERT, Bozkurt & Sharma, 2020) in March 2020. Teachers had one weekend to prepare for this enormous shift in their work and ERT was the norm till the end of the semester. In the autumn semester, schoolwork was optimistically organized as classroom-based or a mixture of classroom and remote teaching, only to revert to remote teaching as school buildings were closed to students again after a few weeks. The uncertainty and constant changes tested teacher’s adaptability and resourcefulness especially because few teachers had prior experience of remote teaching, let alone the ERT when previously planned teaching was suddenly moved online.
A sudden crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic disrupts the norms and traditions that characterize teacher’s work (Ragnarsdóttir, 2018; 2021) and it is known that changes may be challenging and stressful (Fullan, 2016; Ragnarsdóttir & Jóhannesson, 2014). It is not surprising that there was considerable insecurity among teachers globally regarding their duties and how to go about them during the pandemic (UNESCO, n.d.). The shift from classroom teaching to remote teaching could be a chaotic and stressful (see e.g. Hargreaves & Fullan, 2020; Harris & Jones, 2020), even under the best of circumstances (Huber & Helm, 2020). Closing of school buildings altered the interaction between teachers resulting in isolation that presumably increased the stress they were under.
The aim of this study is to investigate how teachers at the upper secondary level performed their duties under the new circumstances in 2020, especially during the first COVID lockdown in spring but also as the pandemic continued. Special emphasis is laid on how they experienced their working conditions, e.g., in terms of their definition of duties, stress, collaboration and administrative obligations, as well as their interaction with students and their parents. The support provided to teachers during the first stages of the pandemic, both technological, pedagogical and social is analysed. We investigate if these factors were affected by gender or school size. This may provide indications for the organisation of both teacher education and teacher’s professional development.
The study is a part of a larger long-term research: Upper secondary education and COVID-19: crisis, challenges, and adaptability. The research project received a grant from the Icelandic Research Fund 2021-2023 (No 217900-051).
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedFrom the onset it was evident that it was vital to document and investigate what happened during those extraordinary circumstances. The data used in the current paper derive from the nationwide questionnaires as well as the in-depth interviews with teachers who were transcribed and analysed. Group of researchers from the University of Iceland, School of Education, gathered information from upper secondary schools by two electronic surveys; one in the spring of 2020, the other by the end of the year (Ragnarsdóttir et al., 2022). Our results are based on teachers’ answers to questions regarding the changes made to their work during these first waves of the pandemic, as well as how they experienced their work, the level of stress, which support was on offer to them and how collaboration was affected by the ERT.
Then we use interviews from the study Upper secondary education and COVID-19: crisis, challenges, and adaptability. There three different upper secondary schools were selected for further investigation and interviews were made with different stakeholders in all schools. Among them were twelve teachers who represented various genders, school subjects and levels of successful teaching during the first waves of the pandemic. We used thematic analysis when analysing the interviews with teachers (Braun & Clarke, 2021).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe first results show that the teaching profession underwent radical changes during the first period of the pandemic (Gestsdóttir et al., 2020). Upper secondary teachers felt an increased pressure and stress at work and perceived their work as more complicated than before. The data show a significant gender difference, as female teachers seem to have been primary caregivers in the homes and consequently found it more strenuous to attend to their teaching duties as well. More collaboration with colleagues during the pandemic was reported and administrative meetings were more frequent. The collaboration with colleagues proved a crucial factor when coping with the recurring changes of working conditions. This was generally viewed as beneficial to their work by a large majority of teachers. Communication with students and parents increased overall and over time, especially according to female teachers, which may have added to the increased pressure at work.
The results evoke important questions concerning teachers’ working conditions. The rapid professional development undertaken by teachers led to the majority of them adopting more varied teaching approaches than before the pandemic. Nevertheless, this was accompanied by a higher level of stress and insecurity. This may carry several implications. Teacher education needs to take these changed circumstances into account and prepare future teachers for the possibilities of hybrid teaching and increased flexibility and differentiation. Both experienced and newly qualified teachers need to have access to professional development that supports them. The time and opportunities that teachers need for collaboration and peer support must be included in their work. Reflecting on the situation in Iceland during the first stages of the pandemic can serve as a basis for comparison with teachers’ working conditions in other countries. It also contributes to the discourse on how handle future crisis may be reacted to and reveals institutionalized weaknesses.
ReferencesBozkurt, A. & Sharma, R.C. (2020). Emergency remote teaching in a time of global crisis due to CoronaVirus pandemic. Asian Journal of Distance Education 15(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3778083
Braun, V. og Clarke, V. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238
Fullan, M. (2016). The new meaning of educational change (5th edition). Teachers College Press.
Gestsdóttir, S.M., Ragnarsdóttir, G., Björnsdóttir, A. & Eiríksdóttir, E. (2020). Fjarkennsla í faraldri: Nám og kennsla í framhaldsskólum á tímum samkomubanns vegna COVID-19. [Remote teaching during a pandemic: learning and teaching in upper secondary schools during a ban on social gatherings due to COVID-19]. Sérrit Netlu 2020 – Menntakerfi og heimili á tímum COVID-19. https://netla.hi.is/serrit/2020/menntakerfi_heimili_covid19/09.pdf
Hargreaves, A. & M. Fullan. (2020). Professional capital after the pandemic: Revisiting and revising classic understandings of teachers’ work. Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 5(3-4), 327–336. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPCC-06-2020-0039
Harris, A. and Jones, M. (2020). COVID-19 – school leadership in disruptive times. School Leadership & Management, 40(4), 243–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2020.1811479
Huber, S. G. & Helm, C. (2020). COVID-19 and schooling: Evaluation, assessment and accountability in times of crises—reacting quickly to explore key issues for policy, practice and research with the school barometer. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 32, 237–270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-020-09322-y
Ragnarsdóttir, G. (2018). Kvika menntabreytinga: Viðbrögð framhaldsskólans við kröfum menntayfirvalda um breytingar. [Dynamics of change: The upper secondary schools’ responses to ministerial demands for change]. Sérrit Netlu 2018 – Framhaldsskólinn í brennidepli. https://netla.hi.is/serrit/2018/framhaldskolinn_brennidepli/05.pdf
Ragnarsdóttir, G. (2021). School leaders’ actions and hybridity when carrying out reform and confronting teachers’ responses: Institutional and organisational perspectives. Education Inquiry. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2021.1950272
Ragnarsdóttir, G., Gestsdóttir, S.M., Björnsdóttir, A. & Eiríksdóttir, E. (2022). Starfsumhverfi framhaldsskólakennara á fyrsta ári COVID-19 heimsfaraldurs. [The working environment of upper secondary school teachers during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic]. Netla – veftímarit um uppeldi og menntun. https://doi.org/10.24270/netla.2022.12
Ragnarsdóttir, G. & Jóhannesson, I.Á. (2014). Curriculum, crisis and the work and well-being of Icelandic upper secondary school teachers. Education Inquiry, 5(1), 43–67. https://doi.org/10.3402/edui.v5.24045
UNESCO. (n.d.). Education: From school closure to recovery. https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse
01.Professional Learning and Development
Paper
English Language Instructors' Views on Online Teacher Professional Development at Tertiary Level
Ayşegül Çetin1, Nur Cakır2
1TED University; 2Middle East Technical University
Presenting Author: Çetin, Ayşegül;
Cakır, Nur
Objectives
The aim of this study is to gain a deeper understanding about the online teacher professional development experiences of EFL instructors working at foundational universities during the emergency remote teaching (ERT) period.
Theoretical Framework
This study is grounded on the studies conducted in the field of teacher professional development (PD) and online teacher professional development (OTPD). Effective professional development is expected to include some specific features such as being content focused, active, collaborative, exemplary for effective teaching, continuous, and supportive for including external experts and mentoring (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017). Similarly, effective OTPD is required to provide compatible learning experiences and materials; an inquisitive, engaging, and reflective learning environment theoretically and pedagogically; accessible and flexible learning opportunities, profitable and continual online professional learning (Duffy et al., 2006).
Apart from effective OTPD features, advantages and challenges of OTPD were benefited to construct this study as well. Access to flexible, cost-effective, high-quality PD without the constraints of time and place is the most significant asset of OTPD (Dede, 2006; Elliot, 2017; Magidin de Kramer et al., 2012; Powell & Bodur, 2019). Thanks to OTPD, teachers have access to PD activities that they may not have the chance of attending in face-to-face PD settings (Treacy et al., 2002) since OTPD can eliminate various financial and geographical restraints (Duffy et al., 2006; Wynants & Dennis, 2018).
The drawbacks of the OTPD, on the other hand, are listed as lack of social presence (Juárez-Díaz & Perales, 2021; Powell & Bodur, 2019; Wynants & Dennis, 2018) and late replies to questions on online platforms, limited interaction, inadequate feedback (Johar et al., 2021). In addition, technology-related problems such as disconnection, poor internet infrastructure, power cuts, slow technical support, and damaged hardware devices are some challenges of OTPD (Atmojo, 2021, Baran & Cagıltay, 2006; Johar et al., 2021; Sezer et al., 2017).
Even if there might have been a tendency to consider OTPD as a simple transition of teaching materials on digital environments in the past (Stevens-Long & Crowell, 2002), with the outburst of the pandemic OTPD immediately became a solution in order to support the instructors during the emergency remote teaching period. Until the pandemic, OTPD was an option as a mode of PD delivery, yet during the ERT, OTPD turned into an urgent solution monopoly to support the teachers (Atmojo, 2021). Teacher educators had to take immediate actions on pre-service and in-service levels (Bragg et al., 2021; Hartshorne et al., 2020).
This sudden transition to ERT came up with some difficulties (Bond, 2020; Hodges et al., 2020; Mishra et al., 2020) such as content developing, brand-new instructional tools, integrating parents into ERT process, students’ psychological well-being (Hartshorne et al., 2020). Outcomes of the OTPD and perception towards OTPD became the second highly asked instructor-related questions (Leary et al., 2020) and it was indicated whether OTPD practices support instructors for ERT and future use of what is learnt during the ERT in professional development should be an object of interest for researchers (Hodges et al., 2020).
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used
Phenomenology was determined as the research design of this study. Purposive sampling is essential for phenomenological studies as only these purposively selected participants can guide the researcher to reach an understanding about a particular experience (Smith et al., 2009). Six EFL instructors from six different foundation universities participated the study voluntarily.
Data was collected with semi-structured interviews allow to get a deeper understanding of the experiences of participants (Smith et al., 2009; Van Manen, 2016). To this end, all the participants were asked about the pre-pandemic PD activities at their institutions, OTPD activities during the ERT period, comparison of face-to-face and online PD activities, advantages and disadvantages of OTPD participants experienced, and possible future of OTPD. The study is approved by the Human Subject Ethics Committee of Middle East Technical University.
Data analysis of this study was grounded on the flexible steps created by Smith et al. (2009). In the analysis process, MAXQDA 22 program was used. Trustworthiness of this study was provided depending on the four criteria as of confirmability, dependability, credibility and transferability as described by Lincoln and Guba (1985). Intervention of researchers’ biases is unavoidable (Patton, 2014) but confirmability ensures that the experiences of the participants are conveyed in the study, not the biases of the researcher about participants’ experiences (Shenton, 2004). In order to promote confirmability, Shenton (2004) suggests three different strategies. All these three strategies suggested by Shenton (2004) were adopted in this study. Firstly, researcher’s possible biases and assumptions were acknowledged at the beginning of the study. These assumptions were listed in researcher’s role part. Secondly, possible limitations and weaknesses of the study design were presented in limitations part. Lastly, methodology of the study was provided in detail to provide audit trail for the readers. Audit trail permits the reader to observe the methodological stages of a study step by step (Shenton, 2004).
This phenomenological study was conducted in order to seek answers for the question below:
1. How did EFL instructors working at preparatory schools experience online teacher professional development during emergency remote teaching period?
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings
The results of the semi-structured interviews conducted with the instructors revealed that emergency OTPD was a) agile, b) needs-driven, c) unsuccessful to promote teachers’ and students’ overall well-being and motivation, d) lack of differentiation in terms of considering the experience and educational background of the instructors, e) lack of hands-on practice, and f) flexible.
The interviews conducted with the instructors revealed that institutions had to be agile in order to support the instructors in such crisis.
‘‘What was very fast, frankly, was that we grouped ourselves into that system. Here we were divided into units, a teacher was appointed to the head of the units, and a system was established in which small groups and coordinators came together…’’
It was also expressed that the nature of OTPD during the ERT was needs-driven. OTPD activities were designed depending on the needs of the instructors.
‘‘We can say that these videos followed the online classes later. In other words, these asynchronous videos for OTPD accompanied the process. We can say that the needs in the process developed in parallel with the needs of the instructors or the problems they experienced.’’
Despite the advantages of OTPD, it was also indicated that OTPD activities failed to provide support for teachers’ and students’ well-being.
‘‘…everything in face-to-face was transferred to online, and teachers and students were worn out in this process. I wish PD had supported our motivation and mental health in such overloaded workload.’’
Significance
Even if there are numerous OTPD program evaluations, OTPD activities during the pandemic is a current gap in the literature. There is still a need for structured and robust research in the literature (Lay et al., 2020). For a similar future scenario, the study has a great value to contribute to the practices in the field of education.
ReferencesAtmojo, A. E. P. (2021). EFL teachers’ online teacher professional development experiences amidst the COVID-19 pandemic: Practices and perceptions.
Baran, B., & Cagiltay, K. (2006). Teachers' experiences in online professional development environment.
Bond, M. (2020). Schools and emergency remote education during the COVID-19 pandemic: A living rapid systematic review.
Bragg, L., Walsh, C., & Heyeres, M. (2021). Successful design and delivery of online professional development for teachers: A systematic review of the literature.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Teacher education around the world: What can we learn from international practice?.
Dede, C. (2006). Online professional development for teachers: Emerging models and methods.
Duffy, T. M., Kirkley, J. R., del Valle, R., Malopinsky, L. V., Scholten, C. M., Neely, G. R., et al. (2006). Online teacher professional development: A learning architecture.
Elliott, J. C. (2017). The evolution from traditional to online professional development: A review.
Hartshorne, R., Baumgartner, E., Kaplan-Rakowski, R., Mouza, C., & Ferdig, R. E. (2020). Special issue editorial: Preservice and in-service professional development during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Hodges, C. B., Moore, S., Lockee, B. B., Trust, T., & Bond, M. A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning.
Johar, et al., (2021). The challenges experienced by teachers in online workshop during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Juárez-Díaz, C., & Perales, M. (2021). Language Teachers’ Emergency Remote Teaching Experiences During the COVID-19 Confinement.
Lay, et al., (2020). Examining a Decade of Research in Online Teacher Professional Development.
Leary, et. Al, (2020). Professional Development for Online Teaching: A Literature Review.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry.
Magidin de Kramer et al., (2012). Relationship of online teacher professional development to seventh-gradete teachers’ and students’ knowledge and practices in English language arts.
Mishra, L., Gupta, T., & Shree, A. (2020). Online teaching-learning in higher education during lockdown period of COVID-19 pandemic.
Powell, C. G., & Bodur, Y. (2019). Teachers’ perceptions of an online Professional development experience: Implications for a design and implementation framework
Sezer, B., Yilmaz, F. G. K., & Yilmaz, R. (2017). Comparison of online and traditional face-to-face in-service training practices: an experimental study.
Smith, J. A., Flowers P., & Larkin M., (2009). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: theory, method and research.
Stevens-Long, J., & Crowell, C. (2002). The design and delivery of interactive online graduate education.
Treacy, B., Kleiman, G., & Peterson, K. (2002). Successful online professional development
01.Professional Learning and Development
Paper
Open Educational Resources in Inclusive Classrooms: An Interview Study on Practices and Training Needs of Teachers in Austria
Jessica Berger1, Katharina Maitz1,2, Barbara Gasteiger-Klicpera1
1Research Center for Inclusive Education, University of Graz, Graz, Austria; 2Private University College of Teacher Education Augustinum, Graz, Austria
Presenting Author: Berger, Jessica
Digital media are increasingly used in classrooms and in different instructional settings finding their way into the lives of teachers and students (Brandhofer & Wiesner, 2018; Brüggemann, 2019). In the context of increasingly heterogeneous classrooms, digital media and technology can open up new, exciting opportunities for teaching and learning. However, taking advantage of these opportunities is not an easy task since teachers see themselves confronted with the need to overcome rigid classroom structures in order to meet the students' different learning needs. Especially in inclusive schooling, teachers are required to create an environment that provides possibilities for individualized learning with differentiated and cooperative learning approaches (Thiele & Bosse, 2019).
Open Educational Resources (OER) have a great potential for usage in inclusive teaching. The aim of OER is to encourage the creation and exchange of free, openly licensed, digitally available, and adaptable teaching materials. The possibility of using and adapting the materials for individual needs and sharing them with other teachers has the potential to create a diverse offer that can be used internationally. Since OER can be any educational material, there are no restrictions in terms of form or medium, the materials can range from course materials and textbooks to audio and video materials (Butcher, 2015). However, the pedagogical competences, the knowledge and skills of teachers, as well as the teachers' attitude towards technologies and digital media (Schmidt-Hertha, 2020) play a significant role in the successful use of (digital) OER in the classroom (Brüggemann, 2019, Schmidt-Hertha, 2020).
The numerous possibilities of OER for teaching and learning and the concrete application have so far been studied mainly in the field of higher education (e.g. Baas, Admiraal & van den Berg, 2019; Zagdragchaa & Trotter, 2017). There have been far fewer studies up to now regarding the school sector (Buchner & Höfler, 2020), and even less studies concerning the area of inclusive education. In particular, the perspective of teachers has been rarely explored on a qualitative scientific level (Otto, Schröder, Dieckmann & Sander, 2021), e.g. by involving them as experts in the pedagogical-practical implementation. In terms of teachers' knowledge on the topic of OER in general, as well as regarding the legal issues, the possibilities of use and the development of OER, only very few publications can be found in the current German- and English-language research literature. Nevertheless, those existing international studies point out that there is a clear lack of knowledge about the concept of OER among teachers (e.g. Hildah & Kinuya, 2021; Orwenjo & Erastus, 2018; Tang, Lin & Qian, 2021), although particularly for teachers in inclusive settings, OER can be an important design element of individualised teaching. To date, research on teachers’ needs and concerns with regard to OER and, in particular, on how teachers can be supported in implementing OER in the classroom is scarce. The present study aims to take a first step to fill this gap and lay the foundation for further research projects in this area.
To do so, the following research questions are addressed:
- What do primary and secondary school teachers know about OER?
- How do primary and secondary school teachers find, develop, implement, and share OER?
- What knowledge gaps to be filled and training needs do primary and secondary school teachers report to effectively use OER in their teaching, create OER, and share them?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedIn the present study, we conducted semi-structured guided interviews with teachers that were actively teaching in a primary or secondary school in Austria. The interviews took place in spring/summer of 2022 (April to June) via the online tool Cisco Webex. Prior to the interview, an online questionnaire (LimeSurvey) for gathering information on their demographic data as well as teaching experience, type of school and teaching subjects was filled in by the interview partners.
The interview guideline was developed based on an exhaustive literature review, went through feedback loops within the research team, and was pre-tested with a teacher. The final version of the guideline consists of the following ten core areas: (1) inclusion in the classroom, (2) inclusive teaching and software used, (3) defining OER, (4) experiences with OER, (5) usage of OER in the lessons, (6) seeking behavior and quality assessment of OER, (7) demands on the materials and evaluation of quality, (8) good examples of OER in the lessons, (9) producing and sharing OER, and (10) wishes and demands.
A total of eleven teachers (10 female, 1 m) were interviewed. At the time of the interview, the teachers were on average 48 years old (SD=10.27) and worked at schools in the four Austrian provinces of Vorarlberg (45.5%), Styria (36.4%), Vienna (9.1%) and Burgenland (9.1%). Eight of them (72.7%) stated that they were working in an inclusive context. Two teachers stated that they teach in both primary and secondary schools, while two other teachers worked at a university college for teacher education in addition to a primary or secondary school. One teacher taught in a primary school with an integrated special needs school. On average, the teachers had 21 years of teaching experience (M=21.45; SD=13.19), with an average of 8 years (M=7.91; SD=7.73) of teaching in an inclusive context.
The interviews lasted on average 99.73 minutes (SD=23.51, Min=70, Max=152). The transcription and analysis of the interviews was carried out using MAXQDA 2020 software. The analysis process followed the methodology of qualitative content analysis, based on Rädiker and Kuckartz (2019).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsBased on the interviews, a clear lack of knowledge regarding the concept of OER is apparent among the teachers. Thus, the majority of the interviewees (n=9) indicated that they had never heard of this topic or at least had not dealt with it yet. Even the teachers (n=2), who reported to have some experience with OER, showed uncertainties about clearly defining and identifying OER. Since we expected this pattern, we provided a comprehensive definition of OER (UNESCO, 2012) during the interview (as part of the interview guide) to have a common understanding for further discussion of the topic.
In general, all interviewed teachers expressed a positive attitude regarding the use of OER. Regarding the availability of materials, they expressed a strong desire to expand the range and quantity of the materials. Additionally, they reported difficulties in distinguishing OER from other (conditionally) free teaching materials, as many German language repositories provide a mixed offer.
Individualisation of lessons and differentiation of materials are crucial parts of high-quality (inclusive) teaching and all teachers expressed a strong preference for file formats that allow easy adaptation of the materials. Furthermore, all eleven teachers stated that they create their own materials for teaching and would be basically willing to share them as OER. However, they actually refrained from doing so because of uncertainties regarding the process of publication and licensing. This fits well with the teachers' desire to address the concept OER in teacher education and further training, linking theory and practice.
In summary, three major areas of demand were identified in our study: (1) an expansion and consolidation of available, quality-assured OER in a well-structured repository, (2) guidelines and support for sharing their own OER and (3) an expansion of teacher training and further education regarding OER.
ReferencesBaas, M., Admiraal, W. & van den Berg, E. (2019). Teachers’ Adoption of Open Educational Resources in Higher Education. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2019(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.510
Brandhofer, G. & Wiesner, C. (2018). Medienbildung im Kontext der Digitalisierung: Ein integratives Modell für digitale Kompetenzen. Online Journal for Research and Education, (10), 1–15. https://journal.ph-noe.ac.at/index.php/resource/article/view/574/600
Brüggemann, M. (2019). Berufsfeld Grundschule. In I. Bosse, J.-R. Schluchter & I. Zorn (Eds.), Handbuch Inklusion und Medienbildung (1st edition, pp. 111–117). Beltz Juventa.
Buchner, J. & Höfler, E. (2019). Der Flipped Classroom als Motor für Open Educational Resources? MedienPädagogik: Zeitschrift für Theorie und Praxis der Medienbildung, 34, 67–88. https://doi.org/10.21240/mpaed/34/2020.01.24.X
Butcher, N. (2015). A Basic Guide to Open Educational Resources (OER). UNESCO and Commonwealth of Learning. http://dspace.col.org/
Hildah, A. & Kinuya, G. (2021). When the Trainer is Untrained: Stakeholder Incapacitation in Implementation and Utilisation of Open Educational Resources in Kenya. Journal of Learning for Development, 8(1), 171–181. https://jl4d.org/index.php/ejl4d/article/view/396/591
Orwenjo, D. O. & Erastus, F. K. (2018). Challenges of Adopting Open Educational Resources (OER) in Kenyan Secondary Schools: The Case of Open Resources for English Language Teaching (ORELT). Journal of Learning for Development, 5(2), 148–162. https://jl4d.org/index.php/ejl4d/article/view/282/317
Otto, D., Schröder, N., Diekmann, D. & Sander, P. (2021). Offen gemacht: Der Stand der internationalen evidenzbasierten Forschung zu Open Educational Resources (OER). Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 24(5), 1061–1085.
Rädiker, S. & Kuckartz, U. (2019). Analyse qualitativer Daten mit MAXQDA. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
Schmidt-Hertha, B. (2020). Vermittlung medienpädagogischer Kompetenz in der Fort- und Weiterbildung von Lehrkräften. Zeitschrift Für Pädagogik, 66(2), 191–207.
Tang, H., Lin, Y.-J. & Qian, Y. (2021). Improving K-12 Teachers' Acceptance of Open Educational Resources by Open Educational Practices: A Mixed Methods Inquiry. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69(6), 3209–3232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-10046-z
Thiele, A. & Bosse, I. (2019). Inklusionsorientierter Literaturunterricht mit (digitalen) Medien: Ein Beispiel für die Auseinandersetzung der Fachdidaktiken mit Inklusion in einer mediatisierten Gesellschaft. In I. Bosse, J.-R. Schluchter & I. Zorn (Eds.), Handbuch Inklusion und Medienbildung (1st edition, pp. 77–91). Beltz Juventa.
UNESCO. (2012). World Open Educational Resources (OER) Congress: 2012 Paris OER Declaration. Paris: UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000246687
Zagdragchaa, B. & Trotter, H. (2017). Cultural-historical factors influencing OER adoption in Mongolia´s higher education sector. In C. Hodgkinson-Williams & P. Arinto (Eds.), Adoption and impact of OER in the Global South (pp. 389–424). Cape Town & Ottawa: African Minds, International Development Research Centre & Research on Open Educational Resources.
|
