01. Professional Learning and Development
Paper
Cultivating Self-Awareness in Teacher Education: A Community of Practice Approach
Joanne O'Flaherty1, Cassandra Iannucci2, Tracy Galvin3, Brighid Golden4, Dylan Scanlon2, Mary Fitzgerald5
1University of Limerick, Ireland; 2Deakin University; 3Ulster University; 4Mary Immaculate College; 5Consultant
Presenting Author: O'Flaherty, Joanne;
Galvin, Tracy
If we cannot sit with the complexities within us, there is no chance we can hold space for the complexities around ourselves".
Vanessa Andreotti
Global citizenship education (GCE) has become a pivotal element of initial teacher education (ITE) in Ireland, urging educators to foster self-awareness and social responsibility among learners. Anchored in the recognition of teacher educators (TEs) as policy actors who are mandated by Irish national policy to integrate GCE as one of seven core elements that must underpin ITE programs (Teaching Council 2020, p.14), this longitudinal study investigates the development, process, and scaffolding of an international Community of Practice (CoP) focused on enhancing TEs' self-awareness for GCE.
The theoretical framework informing this study is critical GCE. Critical GCE highlights the importance of learners reflecting upon their own knowledge and assumptions, and “exploring the implications of their own ways of seeing and being in the world in relation to power, relationships, and the distribution of labour and resources (Blackmore, 2016, p.39). It is rooted in social justice (Giroux & Bosio, 2021), as it invites learners to examine preconceived values and perspectives in local and global settings and reflect upon their understanding of the world (Bosio, 2020, 2023). Critical GCE, therefore demands a learner-centred, autonomous approach, where learners reflect and build upon their own experiences and social contexts to develop their knowledge and understanding (Leicht et al., 2018). Embracing these approaches creates space for plurality of perspectives rather than a pre-determined formula for what learners should do or think. Developing these dispositions to learning, and the competences associated with critical GCE, therefore requires continued and critical self-reflection (Blackmore, 2016). The research question driving this inquiry is: How do TEs experience professional learning aimed at fostering self-awareness in the context of critical GCE and social justice education? This question underscores the need for TEs to engage in reflective practices that illuminate their capacities and challenges in integrating critical GCE into their pedagogical repertoire.
Central to this investigation is the operationalisation of the CoP, which serves as a reflective space and a crucible for innovation in pedagogical strategies. Lave and Wenger (1991) define CoPs as ”a system of relationships between people, activities and the world; developing with time, and in relation to other tangential and overlapping CoPs” (p.91). CoPs are viewed as a powerful way to examine TE learning (Patton & Parker, 2017). This collaborative approach leverages shared resources and a repository of activities to foster a deep engagement with the 'self' (personal and professional), employing pedagogies that push the boundaries of comfort to promote genuine reflection and growth. The CoP's collective expertise in teacher education, coupled with its commitment to critical GCE and social justice, provides a rich backdrop for exploration and experimentation with various pedagogical prompts designed to enhance self-awareness for GCE. The shared resources form the backbone of the CoP’s collaborative efforts. These resources encompass a conceptual framework for exploring TE identity (from the perspective of the professional and personal self), professional learning needs, and the nexus of GCE and self-awareness. The repository also includes a diverse array of activities and prompts shared to stimulate discussion, encourage self and co-regulation, and foster relationality in the learning space.
The contribution of this study lies in its potential to illuminate potential pathways through which TEs can deepen their understanding of self-awareness for GCE. By examining the lived experiences and reflective practices within the CoP, this research aims to offer insights into how educators can navigate the complexities of their internal landscapes to better engage with the external challenges of global citizenship and social justice education.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe methodology of this study is constructed to capture the dynamic and reflective nature of an international CoP (n=6) engaged in developing self-awareness and pedagogical strategies for critical GCE. The CoP comprises expertise from diverse fields: teacher education, GCE, social justice education, self-study, universal design for learning (UDL), equity, diversity, inclusion (EDI), and psychotherapy.
Data were collected from October 2023 onwards through cyclical CoP Meetings (n=7) and written reflections (n=16) all supported by a designated macro-critical friend who prompted and challenged the CoP to delve deeper into their reflections and thoughts. This role was crucial in developing a safe, nurturing, and non-evaluative space reflecting Carl Roger’s core conditions of empathy, congruence, and unconditional positive regard. This role also ensures that the group stays focused with appropriate boundaries and supports while monitoring for the safety and emotional regulation of participants. Each participant is encouraged to share openly and honestly. This process provides an opportunity for individuals to be seen and heard in the group as individuals, making the implicit explicit.
Each meeting within the CoP was recorded and transcribed to capture the rich dialogue and exchange of ideas. These meetings are the crux of data collection, providing insights into the pedagogical approaches and reflective questions aimed at exploring self-awareness for GCE and social justice matters. The CoP's schedule featured an alternating rhythm: hands-on pedagogical encounters focused on self-awareness prompts, individual written reflections and reflective dialogue meetings. Engaging with an individual reflection after each meeting was proposed by one member of the CoP and everyone agreed. This showcases the fluidity of the CoP and how it is developing and growing organically. Reflection is integral to our methodology. The individual reflections document CoP member observations, feelings, and engagements in response to the experiential activities. These reflections are then shared with all members via the CoP online platform. Each person’s approach is different, some like to write the reflection immediately, others like to ponder further and take a few days to write. The subsequent reflective group session allows for a consolidation process to occur reinforcing the cyclical process of what spontaneously emerged for participants, what they thought of it after and what now. CoP meeting transcriptions and member reflections were analysed using inductive thematic analysis to explore themes reflected in the data.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe study anticipates several key outcomes that will contribute to the discourse on teacher education and critical GCE: (1) an in-depth understanding of the self-awareness development process among TEs as they engage with GCE principles, (2) the identification of effective pedagogical strategies that facilitate self-awareness and its integration into teaching practices, and (3) insights into the cyclical process of reflective practice. It is anticipated that taken together, the three key outcomes listed here will inform the development of a model of professional learning for cultivating self-awareness in the contexts of critical GCE and social justice education that can be replicated in other educational contexts.
The experiential learning cycle described in this paper supports the development of self-awareness and facilitates personal and professional growth. Participants become aware of personal unconscious bias, values, and belief systems within themselves along with insecurities (complexities) and begin to separate these personal aspects of self, from the values of critical GCE, and the professional self. Participants can also explore ways of integrating their personal self with their professional self in a healthy way. The process undertaken by the CoP highlights the value of reflective enquiry and the ethical responsibility of educators to engage with GCE and social justice matters. By providing a space for vulnerability, the CoP also addresses themes of safety, belonging, and imposter syndrome, which are vital considerations for TEs navigating the complexities of critical GCE. Through experiential practice, CoP participants will experience first-hand the universal difficulties and challenges learners experience when tasked with engaging in reflective practice in this way, thus enabling us to carve out paths that may make it a less daunting and scary task for others.
ReferencesAndreotti, V. (2011). Actionable postcolonial theory in education. Palgrave Macmillan.
Blackmore, C. (2016). Towards a pedagogical framework for global citizenship education. International Journal of Development Education and Global Learning, 8(1), 39-56. Doi: 10.18546/IJDEGL.8.1.04
Bosio, E. (2023). Global citizenship education as a reflective dialogic pedagogy. Citizenship Teaching & Learning, 18, 177 – 194. https://doi.org/10.1386/ctl_00119_1
Bosio, E. (2020). Towards an ethical global citizenship education curriculum framework in the modern university. In D. Bourn (Ed.), Bloomsbury handbook for global education and learning (pp. 187–206). London: Bloomsbury. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350108769.0025
Bourn, D. (2015). The Theory and Practice of Global Learning. London: Development Education Research Centre, UCL Institute of Education.
Brockbank, A., & McGill, I. (2007). Facilitating Reflective Learning in Higher Education. McGraw-Hill Education.
Gay, G. (2010). Culturally Responsive Teaching: Theory, Research, and Practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
Giroux, H. A., & Bosio, E. (2021). Critical pedagogy and global citizenship education. In E. Bosio (Ed.), Conversations on global citizenship education: Perspectives on research, teaching, and learning in higher education (pp. 3–12). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429346897-1
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Leicht, A, Heiss, J and Byun, W. (2018). Issues and trends in education for sustainable development, education on the move. Paris: UNESCO Publishing. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0026/002614/261445e.pdf [accessed 30 Aug 2023].
Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 74, 5-12.
Patton, K., & Parker, M. (2017). Teacher education communities of practice: More than a culture of collaboration. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 351-360.
Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2010). Globalizing Education Policy. Routledge.
Shulman, L.S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.
Teaching Council. (2020). Céim: Standards for Initial Teacher Education. Maynooth: Teaching Council.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press.
Zeichner, K. (1999). The new scholarship in teacher education. Educational Researcher, 28(9), 4-15.
01. Professional Learning and Development
Paper
"If You Want to Go Far, Go Together." Cross-School Teacher Team (CSTT) in an In-service Teacher Training Programme in Norway
Cheng-Yu Peter Pan, Heidi Gudmundset
NLA University College, Norway
Presenting Author: Pan, Cheng-Yu Peter;
Gudmundset, Heidi
The issue of professional learning community (PLC) has received considerable critical attention within the field of teacher continuing professional development (CPD). It is now well established from a variety of studies that PLC contributes greatly to teachers’ changes in practices, knowledge, beliefs, agency, and affective characteristics (Dogan, Pringle & Mesa, 2016; Long, Zhao, Yang, Zhao & Chen, 2021; Philpott & Oates, 2017; Tam, 2015).
In a narrow sense, PLC can be understood with the aim to facilitate school-wide improvement in teaching and learning and is usually linked to local school context where teachers work (Admiraal, Schenke, Jong, Emmelot & Sligte, 2021; Brennan & Gorman, 2023; Chen & Wang, 2015; Steyn, 2017). In a broader view, PLC is seen as a platform where a collective of individuals collaboratively examines and reflects on their practices in an ongoing, learning-focused, and inclusive manner, with the shared goal of promoting professional growth (Stoll et al. 2006).
The Special Education 1 programme (Spesialpedagogikk 1) represents a primary official in-service teacher training offer in Norway. This programme is assembly-based (samlingsbasert) with lectures and group activities addressing a variety of themes within special education. Teachers participating in the programme serve in either public or private schools (from first to tenth grade) across Norway. During the six assemblies they are grouped into several small learning teams (basisgrupper) for collaborative discussion and group tasks around cases. This CPD arrangement is similar to the concept and practice of CSTT (Cross-School Teacher Team) Cederlund (2018) introduced and examined in her seminal study in Sweden. The CSTT represents a form of PLC where teachers from different schools across Sweden but with shared pedagogical interests meet each other physically/digitally for CPD. This study concluded that CSTT can provide a professional space of diversity, interdependency, visibility, and transparency in which local practices are reflected on and transformed collectively.
In our previous investigation on teacher motivation for CPD in special education, we found out that one main reason for the teachers to participate in this in-service teacher training programme is the desire for professional socialisation, that is, the thirst for learning together with others (Pan, Østby & Gudmundset, 2023). Drawing upon both the broader understanding of PLC and teacher motivation for CPD in special education in Norway, this study attempts to explore how CSTT is experienced in the Special Education 1 programme.
The theoretical framework adopted in this study is practice architecture (Kemmis & Grootenboer, 2008). According to Kemmis and Grootenboer (2008), practice is complex and socially established. It is a cooperative human activity encompassing saying, doing, and relating. Saying refers to individuals’ expressions, allowing us to understand us, others, and the world. Doing means the actions and activities we take and undertake. Relating indicates identity and role shaped in relation to others.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedData were collected from the teacher cohort (57) of the academic year 2022-2023. Forty-two and 46 teachers took part in the online survey (as a form of programme evaluation) in the autumn 2022 and in the spring 2023, respectively. Various aspects of question were designed to find out the possibilities, challenges, and limitations of this Special Education 1 programme. In total, five questions were included in the data analysis process of this investigation. They were specifically focused on experience in group work. These questions allowed the teachers to quantify their experience and elaborate their thoughts and feelings with own words. Thematic analysis (Guest, MacQueen & Namey, 2011) were carried out to examine the textual responses.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findingsin teacher CPD. The majority of teachers participating in the online survey highly appreciated working together with other teachers in the group. They experienced the cooperative learning process in terms of saying, doing, and relating according to the theory of practice architecture (Kemmis & Grootenboer, 2008). CSTT created a professional space for the teachers to reflect on and share their own possibilities and challenges at schools (saying). Discussion around cases also allowed the teachers to examine personal values and perspectives and form a collective solution to a specific problem (doing). Since each teacher was assigned into and stayed in the same group throughout the whole in-service training programme, the CSTT provided a secured environment where the teachers could build up social connections with each other and drew work-related inspirations from one another (relating). Nevertheless, a small number of teachers were particularly critical about the arrangement of cross-CSTT. In their views, it seems not necessary and less fruitful to work together with another CSTT in the programme.
Taken together, CSTT is recognised as a valuable and educative type of PLC for teacher CPD. It provides an ideal platform for teachers to engage in professional sosialisation. The programme’s learning outcomes are strengthened and enriched as teachers contribute their shared pedagogical interests and varied work experiences to the learning process.
ReferencesAdmiraal, W., Schenke, W., Jong, L. D., Emmelot, Y., & Sligte, H. (2021). Schools as professional learning communities: what can schools do to support professional development of their teachers? Professional Development in Education, 47(4), 684-698.
Brennan, A & Gorman, A. (2023). Leading transformative professional learning for inclusion across the teacher education continuum: Lesson from online and on-site learning communities. Professional Development in Education, 49(6), 1117-1130.
Cederlund, K. (2018). The cross-school teacher team as a site for learning. Education Inquiry, 9(2), 193-209.
Chen, P. & Wang, T. (2015). Exploring the evolution of a teacher professional learning community: a longitudinal case study at a Taiwanese high school. Teacher Development: An International Journal of Teachers' Professional Development, 19(4), 427-444.
Dogan, S., Pringle, R. & Mesa, J. (2016). The impacts of professional learning communities on science teachers' knowledge, practice and student learning: a review. Professional Development in Education, 42(4), 569-588.
Guest, G., MacQueen, K. M., & Namey, E. E. (2011). Applied Thematic Analysis. SAGE Publications.
Kemmis, S. & Grootenboer, P. (2008). Situating praxis in practice: Practice architectures and the cultural, social and material conditions for practice. In S. Kemmis & T. J. Smith (Eds.), Enabling praxis: Challenges for Education (pp. 37–64). Brill.
Long, T., Zhao, G., Yang, X., Zhao, R. & Chen, Q. (2021). Bridging the belief-action gap in a teachers' professional learning community on teaching of thinking. Professional Development in Education, 47(5), 729-744.
Pan, C.-Y., Østby, S. B. & Gudmundset, H. (2023, August 23-25). What motivates teachers in Norway to participate in continuing professional development in special education? [Conference presentation]. ECER 2023, Glasgow, Scotland. https://eera-ecer.de/ecer-programmes/conference/28/contribution/55512
Philpott, C. & Oates, C. (2017). Teacher agency and professional learning communities: what can Learning Rounds in Scotland teach us? Professional Development in Education, 43(3), 318-333.
Stoll, L., Bolam, R., McMahon, A., Wallace, M., & Thomas, S. (2006). Professional learning communities: A review of the literature. Journal of Educational Change, 7(4), 221–258.
Tam, A. C. F. (2015). The role of a professional learning community in teacher change: a perspective from beliefs and practices. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 21(1), 22-43.
01. Professional Learning and Development
Paper
A South-South Teaching Collaboration To Develop The Capacity Of Educators
Monique Keevy
University of Johannesburg, South Africa
Presenting Author: Keevy, Monique
The World Bank calls for the capacity development of developing countries due to their inherent socio-economic and political challenges (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2007). This has further resulted in calls to develop the capacity of higher education institutions (HEIs) in developing countries as this is a way to contribute to the economy and society by increasing human capital (Färnman et al., 2016; Pinheiro et al., 2016). Capacity development, via the educator, is the starting point of social change as educators have the propensity to concomitantly impact students, the HEI and society at large (Aragón & Macedo, 2010). Capacity development at HEIs has hitherto primarily been observed through cross-border offerings between HEIs in the North and the South (OECD, 2007; Sánchez-Chaparro et al., 2021). There is, however, a strong belief that the capacity development paradigm must be altered away from the dominant and unequal frameworks of North-South interaction (Pearson, 2011; Standing & Taylor, 2016). Therefore, it is not always necessary to import capacity from the North (Färnman et al., 2016) as developing countries can “tap into possible synergies” with other developing countries (Chaturvedi, 2016:3)
This study examined the viability of a South-South teaching collaboration between a partner HEI in South Africa and two recipient HEIs: one in South Africa and the other in Namibia. South Africa, as the partner HEI, was selected as the context of this study as it is a dichotomy; despite the presence of first-world convenience, significant levels of poverty prevail. Some South African universities are well-developed and encompass several distinguished research institutions, while others lack the facilities and Information Technology infrastructure required for relevant teaching. Data collection comprised questionnaires and interviews with recipient educators involved in the capacity development relationship to understand further their experiences and perceptions of the viability of a South-South teaching collaboration.
This study makes a twofold contribution. First, it responds to calls to examine South-South collaborations in building capacity in developing countries (Pearson, 2011). It does so by examining the capacity development relationship between educators at a well-developed HEI in South Africa and recipient educators at two less-developed HEIs in the region. This study gives voice to the Southern perspective, which is often not heard in the debate on North-South or South-South collaborations (Pearson, 2011; Adriansen & Madsen, 2019). Finally, the study contributes to the limited literature on teaching collaboration in capacity development relationships as prior studies have primarily focused on research collaborations (Brum & Knobel, 2018).
While this study examines the HEIs in Africa, this study will be of interest to an international readership. HEIs in South Africa and Namibia are uniquely positioned: some enjoy international recognition for their academic programmes, yet others face a variety of challenges typical of a developing context. Consequently, the findings of this study may resonate with HEIs located in other developing markets as more than 84% of the world’s population resides in the developing world (Bloom, 2020). As developing countries typically have a large number of universities, this study is of relevance for a large contingent of the world’s universities.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe study followed a constructivist qualitative research paradigm to explore a South-South teaching collaboration to develop the capacity of educators. Given the limited prior empirical investigation of this study’s research objective, an inductive case study approach was followed to explore the views of recipient educators at two HEIs. Educators are recipients of the capacity development intervention and were considered to have first-hand experience of the viability of a South-South teaching collaboration through their active involvement in the capacity development relationship. Recipients were, therefore, intrinsically bound to the case. The two HEIs (cases) were purposively selected, given their similarities, including in both cases
the recipient educators were involved in teaching collaboration with the same partner HEI.
the HEIs are located in a developing country in Africa.
the HEIs are public.
the recipient educators teach in an undergraduate academic programme.
A qualitative questionnaire was first used to gather information. This was followed by semi-structured interviews with fewer educators to obtain a deeper understanding of the viability of a South-South teaching collaboration. The questionnaire was distributed to 27 participants, 13 from Namibia and 14 from South Africa. In total, 25 respondents completed the questionnaire, 12 from Namibia and all participants from South Africa, giving a response rate of 93%.
The data from the demographic data of the questionnaires was used to identify participants to include in the interviews. Using this technique, the researcher purposively selected a mix of educators. In deciding on the selection of the participants, an equal split of participants from both Namibia and South Africa was considered satisfactory, as well as a wide range of characteristics (gender, academic qualifications and first language) to obtain a variety of perspectives.
Interviews were conducted with 10 educators, as saturation of data became evident. The interviews were recorded using the Microsoft Teams recording tool and were professionally transcribed, providing accurate accounts of the participants’ perspectives and experiences. All qualitative data sets were analysed in ATLAS.ti. The analysis of the questionnaire’s open-ended responses and the interview data involved thematic analysis of the responses following Braun and Clarke’s recommendations (2006). In line with ethical clearance, consent was obtained from participants during both stages, and participants were given the option to withdraw at any stage during the study.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThis study found that South-South collaborations were positively viewed by recipient educators as parties have a shared understanding of the situation on the ground. Recipient educators conveyed that South-South collaborations share “a common platform” as educators appear to “complain about similar things” (Interviewee 9). A Southern partner is suitably positioned to recognise student challenges, especially those associated with students from disadvantaged communities (Interviewees 2, 3). The partner institution “understands the calibre of students that we have” as “it’s different compared to a university” in the North (Interviewee 3, also Interviewee 10). Furthermore, Southern partners have insight into the type of political environment and frustrations experienced by recipient educators (Interviewee 3). Given this outlook, Southern partners understand the local realities and the local higher education environment better than their developed counterparts (Interviewees 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10), thereby leading to the creation of tighter synergies in the South-South collaboration.
As with all research, the current study is subject to limitations. This includes inherent subjectivity and potential response bias associated with interview data. Furthermore, the relatively small sample data (for both the questionnaires and the interviews) limits the generalisability of the results. However, this study was purposefully designed with a small number of participants to generate a rich and detailed understanding of South-South collaborations.
Finally, this study, argues that with a collaboration between two universities in the same country, partners display enhanced insight into the political environment of the prevailing demographic context and are well-positioned to address such complex contexts. Moreover, collaborations in the same region, enable an understanding of regional realities and the regional higher education environment, thereby creating synergies in the teaching collaboration. In both contexts, the partner HEI must be a well-developed internationally recognised institution.
ReferencesAdriansen, H. K., & Madsen, L. M. (2019). Capacity-building projects in African higher education. Learning and Teaching, 12(2), 1–23.
Aragón, A. O., & Macedo, J. C. G. (2010). A systemic theories of change approach for purposeful capacity development. Institute of Development Studies (IDS) Bulletin, 41(3), 87–99.
Bloom, D. E. (2020). Population 2020. https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2020/03/pdf/changing-demographics-and-economic-growth-bloom.pdf.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Brum, J. A., & Knobel, M. (2018). The international dimension of the Brazilian higher education system through the prism of South-South cooperation. International Journal of African Higher Education, 4(2), 92–103.
Färnman, R., Diwan, V., Zwarenstein, M. & Atkins, S. (2016). Successes and challenges of north-south partnerships - key lessons from the African/Asian regional capacity development projects. Global Health Action, 9(1), 1–10.
Chaturvedi, S. (2016). The development compact: a theoretical construct for south–south cooperation. Research and Information System for Developing Countries, Discussion Paper No 203.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2007). Executive summary. In Vincent-Lancrin, S. (Ed.), Cross-border tertiary education: a way towards capacity development, The World Bank and OECD Publishing: Paris, France, pp. 11–20.
Pearson, J. (2011). Training and beyond: Seeking better practices for capacity development. OECD Development Co-Operation Working Papers, No 1, OECD Publishing.
Pinheiro, R., Normann, R., & Johnsen, H. C. G. (2016). External engagement and the academic heartland: The case of a regionally-embedded university. Science and Public Policy, 43(6), 787–797.
Sánchez-Chaparro, T., Remaud, B., Gómez-Frías, V., Duykaerts, C., & Jolly, A. M. (2021). Benefits and challenges of cross-border quality assurance in higher education. A case study in engineering education in Europe. Quality in Higher Education, 1–18.
Standing, H., & Taylor, P. (2016). Engaged excellence. Institute of Development Studies (IDS) Bulletin, 47(6), 169–178.
|
