Conference Agenda

Continuing professional development (CPD) has been a major research area of interest in the field of the teaching profession. Within this context, teacher motivation plays a key role in teachers’ engaging in CPD. Research into the reasons why teachers are motivated to participate in CPD is valuable to help us better understand teacher professionalism (Guskey, 2000; McMillan, McConnell & O’Sullivan, 2016; Ng, 2010).

“Competence for Quality” (Kompetanse for kvalitet) is a 10-year (2016-2025) national strategy for in-service teacher training (videreutdanning) which has been in practice since 2016. The goal of this training is to enhance pupils’ learning outcomes through further developing teachers’ and school leaders’ professional and pedagogical competence (Kunnskapsdepartementet, 2015). The Special Education 1 programme (Spesialpedagogikk 1) has become one important official offer in Norway providing in-service teachers with the competence package in the field of special needs education (SNE).

Although extensive research has been carried out on CPD of teachers in Norway, no single study exists which explores what motivates teachers to enrol in this Special Education 1 programme. In addition, the work in the field of SNE is usually viewed as one of the most challenging and most complicated compared to other fields of the teaching profession (Kiel, Heimlich, Markowetz, Braun & Weiβ, 2016; Payne, 2005). Hence, this research aims to examine what motivates teachers in Norway to engage themselves in this CPD programme in order to work in the field of SNE.

The theoretical framework applied in this research is Teacher CPD Motivation Model (McMillan, McConnell & O’Sullivan, 2016). This model attributes teacher CPD motivation to three major factors: intrinsic factors (advancement, growth, achievement), contingent factors (interpersonal relations, school policy), and tangential factor (compulsory system).

The study (N=267) examined how intellectual humility (IH) relates to learning, how it expressed in the following dimensions: independence of intellect and ego; openness to revising one's viewpoint; respect for others' viewpoints; lack of intellectual overconfidence. Philosophers discuss IH (Roberts, Cleveland 2016, Bąk et al. 2021, Barrett 2017) and/or explain the concept in religion (Hopkin et al., 2014, Hodge 2019). The psychological significance of humility has been examined by Wright, Nadelhoffer et al. (2017), intellectual humility in interpersonal theory was discussed by Priest (2017); However, although there are epistemologists interested in intellectual humility (Whitcomb et al., 2017; Kidd, 2016; Tanesini 2018; Spiegel 2012, etc.), attention to this phenomenon is not great. Cowley (2017) emphasizes that education should not only provide confidence valuing commonly available sources of meaning, but should also teach IH. Baeher (2016) argues that IH is closely related to good thinking and learning and is therefore a meaningful educational goal. IH can be seen as a humility that characterizes thoughts, beliefs, ideas and opinion area (Krumrei - Mancuso et al. (2020). IH involves openness to new information that can improve people's existing knowledge. In such a conceptualization, IH includes the independence of intellect and ego, which presupposes the conditions that people do not feel the threat of intellectual disagreements, are not overly confident in their knowledge, respect others' points of view and are ready to reconsider their own when the need arises (Krumrei-Mancuso, Rouse, 2016). In learning situations, the relationship between the advised and the consultant is common. Stephen, Truscot (2017) identify IH as important in the counseling relationship. An important aspect of IH is that respect for the beliefs of others encourages an honest exchange of ideas. Some opinions are incompatible with openness. Admitting that there is room for error and that someone else is wrong is an admission of imperfection. It involves an attitude that is potentially wrong, but that attitude is not weaker (Taylor, 2016). A teacher is a person who creates various learning situations involving students, colleagues, parents. In order to improve, the IH teacher should have an activity component.

Motivation is a central concept in education and the teacher-student relationship is significant in promoting students’ academic motivation and engagement in school (Hattie, 2009; Roorda et al., 2017). However, previous research has suggested that teacher education may not sufficiently prepare teachers how to build positive teacher-student relationships (Korpershoek et al., 2016; Rucinski et al., 2018). Teachers need a diversity of pedagogical strategies and professional tools to be able to adapt their instructional behaviour and motivational style to the diversity of students they meet in school. Motivational interviewing (MI) has gained attention as a method to promote students’ motivation (Rollnick et al., 2016; Strait et al., 2014), and previous studies have shown that MI can be an effective tool for teachers (Svensson et al., 2021). MI is a collaborative communication style used to enhance individuals’ motivation for change and is related to both positive academic outcomes as well as mental health outcomes (Rollnick et al., 2016; Snape & Atkinson, 2016; Strait et al., 2014). However, there is a lack of school-based interventions where teachers have specifically been trained in MI in order to increase students’ motivation, and to promote teachers’ instructional behaviours and teacher efficacy (i.e. teachers’ own belief in their capability to organize and implement specific teaching tasks required to achieve desired outcomes of student engagement and learning; Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001). Hence, this study aims to explore whether an MI-based intervention can increase teacher efficacy and teachers’ perceived autonomy-supportive teaching, and increase students’ academic motivation.

Theoretical background
Motivational interviewing (MI) is based on four central components: partnership, compassion, acceptance, and evocation of change talk (Miller & Rollnick, 2012). In MI, the core is to get the student to state their own arguments for change, in order to strengthen motivation and confidence in their own abilities. Although MI is a collection of communication techniques, MI is in many ways similar to Self-Determination Theory (SDT), which is used as a relevant theoretical framework to understand school motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Ryan & Deci, 2017). Autonomy is central in both MI and SDT, and SDT distinguishes between autonomous motivation and controlled motivation. SDT emphasizes the importance of not controlling the students and suggests that students who are autonomously motivated are more engaged, effective and persistent compared to students who feel controlled. In this study, the concept autonomy support is central, which is defined as the teacher being respectful to the students’ perspective, and supports their intrinsic sources of motivation and sense of freedom of choice (Ryan & Deci, 2017). Previous research has shown that students who receive autonomy support from their teacher have reported increased intrinsic motivation and greater engagement in school (Reeve & Cheon, 2021).

The phenomenon of (inter)professional collaboration might not be globally considered a new research field; this area continues to evolve and develop as the challenges faced by many professionals are increasingly complex. The concept of (inter)professional collaboration has been widely studied in a variety of disciplines. Significant part of research in this field has been focusing on professionals whose main objective is to provide an effective, high-quality care to patients or clients (i.e. doctors, nurses, social workers).

In education, (inter)professional collaboration can be defined as a mutual, reciprocal effort among professionals, families, and other caregivers to deliver effective interventions to children for their increased physical, emotional, and academic well-being (Mostert, 1996). Its importance has been rising especially since many educational systems have established inclusion and inclusive education as one of their key priorities. However, this priority is not (yet) reflected by educational practices in a sufficient manner (Slee, 2018).

Attending different needs of heterogeneous student populations (in inclusive classrooms) can cause the teachers to reach the boundaries of their professional competence (Švec et al., in press). From the standpoint of cultural-historical activity theory and the concept of expansive learning (Engeström, 2001), collaboration in school settings provides the professionals with greater room to maneuver, i.e. more ways of acting and reacting to the needs of students (Roth & Lee, 2007). At the beginning of the collaboration, involved professionals (subjects) form a shared goal or purpose of the collaboration (object) by expanding their original goals (objects) and thus find a common ground. The process of achieving mutually defined goal is determined by sharing the cultural and material resources used in the collaboration (tools) and effective division of work, which combined lead to new ways of acting (innovative practice). If expansive learning is successful, this process eventually leads to internalization of shared cultural tools and practices, resulting in qualitative transformation of all components of the activity system (Engeström & Sannio, 2009).

Despite many benefits of (inter)professional collaboration and its potential in education, schools worldwide lack directions and clear guidelines regarding how to ensure its most effective implementation (Gable et al., 2004). Research has shown a wide variety of ways in which professionals collaborate. It is possible to identify two broader models of collaboration - the direct and the indirect model. In the case of the direct model the support person works with students, whereas the indirect model is characterized by joint work of professionals who aim to develop the teaching and learning community (Hedegaard-Soerensen et al., 2017). Possible forms of indirect collaboration include exchange of materials, methods and knowledge, division of work, joint planning and structuring, (inter)professional discourse and sharing responsibility (Wiedebusch et al., 2020).

Bearing in mind the importance of collaborative practice and variability in its realization in education, the current study aims to describe how the (inter)professional collaborative practices take place at selected primary and lower secondary schools. The presented study is an introductory part of a larger project which intends to establish the research field on (inter)professional collaboration in education in the Czech context. Despite being a discussed topic among teachers and related professionals as well as among scholars, systematic research in our country is lacking. Research on various forms of collaboration in a different cultural setting will broaden the knowledge on the subject and thus contribute to establishing potentially functional inclusive practice.