Loading...
Please wait, while we are loading the content...
Similar Documents
Why teachers are reluctant to use new technologies: Supporting teachers' action learning within a web environment
| Content Provider | Semantic Scholar |
|---|---|
| Author | Hoban, Garry Herrington, Anthony |
| Copyright Year | 2005 |
| Abstract | Action learning involves a small group (6-8 people) who meet regularly to share reflections and discuss ideas that they try out in practice. Key to the process of action learning is the sharing of personally relevant issues or problems in relation to the action being attempted. In this study a web environment was designed to support the sharing of strategies by teachers which also included a discussion space to provide feedback on the strategies attempted. One web environment was designed for an action learning team in a high school and another site for a team in an elementary school. It was anticipated that the web environment would become a growing repository of teaching strategies and provide a public forum for feedback and reflection. However, teachers in both schools did not use the web site. Interviews with key facilitators in both schools identified multiple reasons why the technology was not used. Considerations for the development and use of technology in schools will be discussed. What is Action Learning? Teacher professional learning is seen as a critical component in producing quality teaching and learning outcomes. With the diversity of teachers’ knowledge, experience and training, professional learning is necessary throughout a teacher’s career occurring along a continuum from initial undergraduate education, through school practicum, internship, induction, to ongoing lifelong learning (DEST, 2003; Ramsey, 2000). Over time, a wide variety of professional development strategies have been attempted. However, the value of these various formats of professional learning has been questioned by a number of educators. Feiman-Nemser (2001) suggests that traditional forms of professional development such as mentoring, one-off workshops, conferences and summer institutes do not provide a cohesive and planned approach, and are problematic in achieving desired outcomes. In addition, the content of many programs reflects the interests of outside presenters rather than allowing ownership of the issues faced by teachers in various stages of development. Action learning (Revans, 1981; 1982) is a commonly used approach for professional learning in business organizations and focuses on the personal concerns or interests of the participants. It involves a small group of colleagues reflecting and sharing experiences about their personal issues and problems of their workplace on a regular basis (Cusins, 1995; McGill & Beaty, 1995; Miller, 2003; Pedler, 1991; Wade & Hammick, 1999; Zuber-Skerritt, 1993). This collaborative type of workplace learning has been explored by groups in various contexts: executives in a textile company (Lewis, 1991); managers in a private hospital (Miller, 2003); supervisors in an electronic firm (Boddy, 1991); doctors in a hospital (Winkless, 1991); insurance agents attempting to improve the quality of their service (Schlesinger, 1991); and university students in health care education (Wade & Hammick, 1999). Action learning is now increasingly being used in educational contexts such as schools to support the process of teachers reflecting and sharing their instructional strategies (Yuen & Cheng, 2000). However, finding time to document and discuss these strategies is an ongoing problem which technology can sometimes address. Using Technology to Support Teachers’ Professional Learning Technology, and the internet in particular, is becoming a useful tool in teacher professional development. Bransford, Brown and Cocking (2000) in their summary of research into school learning noted ‘Opportunities for continued contact and support as teachers incorporate new ideas into their teaching are limited, yet the rapid spread of Internet access provides a ready means of maintaining such contact if appropriately designed tools and services are available’ (p. 27). Accordingly, there has been a growing trend to utilise the internet to develop ‘communities of practice’ as a focus for professional development. The concept of communities of practice evolves from Lave and Wenger’s (1991) theory of situated learning where professionals learn through increasing contribution and participation within their community. Communities have developed to provide support and professional development for teachers generally, (e.g., Tapped In); within particular disciplines such as mathematics teachers (e.g., Herrington, Herrington & Omari, 2001) and in particular career stages such as beginning teachers (e.g., Novice Teachers Support Project). Generally, however, these communities are structured around particular themes, topics or events and lack the facility to engage in sustained research of an issue or problem specific to a particular school or teacher. Nevertheless, one can envisage the use of the internet to support such action res earch, especially for the process of identifying and sharing teaching strategies that are being developed and tested in the classroom. In this study an effort to support teachers sharing strategies in their action learning teams with the use of a web environment will be discussed. This involved two settings, one high school and one primary/elementary school which were invited to trial the use of the web environment in the second half of 2004. In both schools, teachers had been using a new model of pedagogy developed for NSW schools (DET, 2003). It consisted of three dimensions of learning, each with six elements. The first dimension, ‘quality learning environment’ contains the elements of explicit quality criteria, high expectations, social support, students’ self-regulation and student direction. The second dimension, ‘intellectual quality’ includes the elements of deep knowledge, deep understanding, problematic knowledge, higher-order thinking, substantive communication and metalanguage. The third dimension of ‘significance’ includes background knowledge, inclusivity, cultural knowledge, knowledge integration, connectedness and narrative. A web site was designed for each school for the purpose of assisting teachers to document and share their teaching strategies in regard to the particular elements that the teachers nominated would be the focus of their professional learning over the next few months. In addition to documenting the strategies, a section was provided on the web site for teachers to reflect upon and give feedback on each particular strategy. However, six months after the schools had access to the web sites that had been designed to support them documenting and sharing their teaching strategies, it was realised that teachers in neither school had used the site. The key facilitator in each school was interviewed to ascertain why. This paper documents causes for this disappointing outcome for both the primary school and a secondary school involved. It is hoped that analysing why the sites were not used will provide insights into considerations for using technology for professional development. A brief case study will be provided using data from key teachers in each school. Case 1: Attempting to Use Technology to Support Action Learning in a High School Setting Conventionally, the pedagogy of high school teaching is usually driven by the content in each subject (Brookfield, 1986). For example, teachers usually think about the content or knowledge they want students to learn and then present the subject in sections accordingly. A different section of content is often presented each lesson or across several lessons and then it is sometimes demonstrated in a subsequent lesson. Ways of learning are considered, but these are usually a minor consideration in relation to the sequence of content presented in a busy school term. A more comprehensive view of school pedagogy is to view it as a dynamic relationship between teaching and learning (Hoban, 2000). This means that teaching needs to be presented in a more flexible way, as some forms of instruction need to be adapted to the way in which students are best learning. However, when teachers develop their strategies, it often stays within their own classroom as there is little opportunity for teachers to share strategies in a busy school week. A web environment, however, can be developed as a data base of teaching andlearning ideas and is a medium to share these ideas with other teachers. When some teachers gain a deeper understanding of how students learn, they may modify their pedagogy, meaning that learning drives teaching rather than vice versa. For this shift in relationship to occur, a framework is needed that views teaching and learning as a dynamic relationship. A web site was designed to support teachers in participating in action learning to facilitate this process. Design of the website The conceptual framework of the web site is an adaptation of a university website that shares strategies for developing graduate attributes across different university faculties (Hoban et al. 2004). A group of teachers in each school involved selected five elements or aspects of teaching for which they devised particular teaching strategies and documented these on the website. The five elements at the high school included: 1. developing a metalanguage for common meanings 2. developing explicit quality criteria for tasks 3. developing high expectations 4. developing knowledge integration across subjects 5. demonstrating “wow” or creative behaviour The home page of the school-based project was similar to the university project in that it provided descriptions of the five elements or aspects of teaching as shown in Figure 1. Figure 1. Homepage of the High School Site When a teacher clicks on one of the elements, it is linked to dialogue boxes to document a teaching strategy as shown in Figure 2. Table 1 provides an example of a strategy developed by a teacher for Personal Development, Health and Physical Education for the element of Metalanguage which assists students in understanding the meaning of terms. Figure 2. Example of Dialogue Spaces for do |
| Starting Page | 2581 |
| Ending Page | 2588 |
| Page Count | 8 |
| File Format | PDF HTM / HTML |
| Volume Number | 2005 |
| Alternate Webpage(s) | https://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2122&context=edupapers&httpsredir=1&referer= |
| Language | English |
| Access Restriction | Open |
| Content Type | Text |
| Resource Type | Article |
