ipec iodl&icem 2010

Collaboration and Social Roles: IPEC| IODL & ICEM, Anadulo Univ, 2010

Aveiro

Maria João Loureiro

Oporto

Coimbra


University of Aveiro

• created in 1973• around 12.000 students • graduate and post-

graduate courses • teachers education • sciences, math, …• engineering • Health• …

• member of the European Consortium of Innovative Universities, ECTS label.


Previous research

• impact of teachers education courses (post-graduation) in teachers practices

• gap between research and practice (context Science Education, …)

• teachers with MsD, thus involved in experiential action/research are willing to innovate their practices -> can contribute to sustainable educational changes and innovation


Previous researchProject “Culturas” – 2006 (constrains to school innovation)

05

10152025

A B C D E F G

Categories of the constraints

Freq

uenc

y

Interviews

Dissertations

A – intra and inter communities connectionsB – attitudes toward innovation emerging from research C – nature of teachers’ training D – school resources and management E – representations F – theoretical discourse G - educational policy

IPEC site http://ipecproject.wordpress.com/a-nossa-producao


Dynamics of Interaction

Science Education Research and School Practices:evaluation perspectives



Summary

• project presentation• participants • methodology• results

– collaboration and leadership roles

• final thought


Project presentation

role of ICT and online CoPresearch should be developed

by researchers and practitioners

interaction between those com-munities should be promoted

gap between educational research and practitioners

assumptions


interactioninteraction


How to improve?

school practices

research practices

• Problem



INTERACTIONNature

Dynamic

Difficulties

Procedures

Focus

IMPACT

Online

context

practices

research



• Methodology – qualitative case-based study (IPEC CoP) / action-research– data gathering tools

• interviews (focus-group – initial and final perceptions)• logs (interaction analysis)

– process (Wenger), collaboration (adaptation of Gunawardena et al., 1997), leadership (Reeves-Lipscomb et al., 2004)

• documental analyses (lesson plans, students’ worksheets, final reflections, reports, publications, …)

• online questionnaires – teachers’ problems, sense of community - McMillan e Chavis (1986),

obstacles to the interaction, …)



• TasksI.perceptions

Lessons planification

Action

F.perceptions


Participants

• Researchersnumber – 10 (U.Aveiro, U.Évora, U.Lisbon)degree – PhD (8), 2 finishing their PhDresearch areas – Science Education / 3 ICT in Education• background in Biology, Engineering, Geology and Physics• epistemology of science, problem solving, assessment and

evaluation, language, STS, ICT

professional experience – more than 15 yearsexperience in teachers education – 15 to 30 years


Participants

• Teachersnumber – 30genre – F (70%)education – graduation (5 years). ~ 40% had a post-graduation degree (MsD)teaching areas – biology/geology, physics/chemistry, ICT (2)professional experience ~70% more than 10 yearsexperience in teachers education – 30% in initial teachers education and almost 50% in in-service teachers education.research experience – 24% research projects and 35% MsD.


Participants (data analysis)

• PhD and MsD studentsMargarida Marques – MsD (doing the PhD), dynamics of interaction, curriculum management, sense of community, obstacles… Sérgio Pinho – MsD, leadership rolesCarla Rosa– assessment competencies (G2)Graça Cruz – reflexive competencies (G2 and G3)Carla Lopes – research technician and PhD, collaboration /assessment of outdoors activities (new project)


Establishing the CoP - potencial

• Tasks (before May 2006)– regional meetings

• gather participants, focus interviews– online questionnaires

• teachers characterization, problems, curricular themes– first general meeting

• personnel contact – develop trust, sense of community• familiarization with the technology• share and discuss results (focus interviews)• discuss procedures


Establishing the CoP - coalescente

• Tasks (2006)– May to end of Oct. (online).

• working groups (4)• information sharing (practices, literature, …) • negotiation of interests and themes

– Oct. to Dez. 2006 (mostly online)• working plans

– goals– working plan (task, calendar, …)– evaluation


Groups

Chat

E-mail

ForumExchange of

files Publication* Access Publication** Access

Group 1 0 116 114 156 5352 18

Group 2 137 465 317 649 9580 37

Group 3 1716 908 106 95 3597 0

Group 4 158 506 153 429 3984 14

Dynamics of interaction - active

• Explored tools (LMS)



• group 1– goal:

• project based/interdisciplinary teaching strategies

– difficulties: • conciliate Noudar Project (EDIA) • reduced online discussion

– interaction: beginning very active – “empty”

“ Our absence is related with the fact that we have a lot of work (…) we are finishing the development of materials for the Moudar project, then we will have more time to interact”



• group 2– goals:

• preparation of a fieldtrip to a quarry - Quinta do Moinho• research indicators – outdoors (Orion, 1994, Marques, 2006)

“(…) S. Pedro da Cova is not very interesting, it is from the pedagogical point of view less interesting. Since we have sustainability concerns, he [an expert in Geology] suggest a visit to another quarry - Pedreira da Madalena (granítica), na Quinta do Moinho, no Canidelo. It is a quarry where granite is being explored taking into account the actual directives (either Portuguese and from the EU) and that we can visit with our students (…)”



• group 2 (cont.)– products:

• lessons plan (before, during, after), worksheets, implementation in several classrooms (involvement of other school teachers), evaluation of the developed materials (students and teachers), …

– difficulties: • definition of the educational objectives and competences that students would develop and how to assess them

– interaction (blended): • high participation - fluctuate (Wenger, 1998), in forums (2 years)

• main decisions and discussion – face to face meetings - culture




• development of pedagogical materials (ICT integration) – natural resources management (energy – Problem resolution)

– problem: How to improve the energetic management in our school?– products: ~ G2 – worksheet to explore a film about the use of natural

resources

– difficulties: • ~ G2 (2th meeting – assessment of competencies - Roldão)

– interaction (blended): only during 2007• chat (short period ~ 12 sessions)• face to face meeting




• develop assessment instruments to use in project-based approaches

– difficulties: • several members quit – three (“lack of critical mass”)• one of the members interacted in a very fluctuant way (involvement in other activities – coordinator of the group that aim ICT integration in the school)

– interaction (online): • forums, chat, Skype, …• about specific questions and with others group (richness)


Total

0 50 100 150 200 250

Inv 1

Inv 2

ProfA

ProfB

ProfC

ProfD

ProfE

Part

icip

an

tes

Nº de unidades codificadas

Líder intelectual Facilitador Mentor Part. Activo

Dynamics of interaction – roles G2


Dynamics of interaction - roles

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Inv4

Inv6

ProfF

ProfG

ProfH

ProfI

ProfJ

Par

ticip

ante

s

Nº de unidades codif icadas

Líder intelectual Facilitador Mentor Part. Activo


0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Inv 1

Inv 2

Prof A

Prof B

Prof C

Prof D

Prof E

Par

ticip

ante

s


V – Afirmações de acordo_aplicação dos novos signif icados construídos

IV – Teste de sínteses ou Co-Construções propostas

III – Negociação de signif icado - Co-Construção de tarefas no âmbito do projecto comum

II – A descoberta e exploração de dissonância ou inconsistências nas tarefas, ideias, conceitos ou afirmações

I - Partilha - Comparação de informação

Dynamics of interaction - collaboration

Online - sharingFace to face meetings


Dynamics of interaction - collaboration

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Inv 4

Inv 6

Prof F

Prof G

Prof H

Prof I

Prof J

Par

ticip

ante

s


Afirmações de acordo_aplicação dos novos signif icados construídos

Teste de sínteses ou Co-Construções propostas

Negociação de signif icado - Co-Construção de tarefas no âmbito do projecto comum

A descoberta e exploração de dissonância ou inconsistências nas tarefas, ideias, conceitos ou afirmações

Partilha - Comparação de informação

Online - negotiationNumber of sessions


Dynamics of interaction

Leadership roles

Level of participation

Collaboration

Contexts

(age, tasks, time, … )

and ICT use cultures


Online

Impact

• teachers’ perceptions

Actualization

Reflection

Questioning

Becoming closer

Interaction

Dialogue

Sharing

Innovation

Co-construction

Collaborative teaching

Enrichment

(Dis)equilibriumICT competences

Involvement


Elements of the IPEC CoP

• domain– shared learning agenda: science teaching – sustainability (practices

based on competence development – fieldtrip, problem solving)– value: innovation (organization of fieldtrip, PSolving, ICT integration)

• community– shared vision of science education, interactions, relations, trust,

diversity, …• practice

– pool of ideas, materials, tools, information, histories, … disseminated in various national meetings


Final thoughts

• Research and school practices have their own dynamics but can be articulated to:– researchers

• promote the knowledge of difficulties emerging from school practices - identify topics and areas of difficulties – research problems

• develop quality teaching materials (based on research, innovative, …)

– teachers• facilitate the access to research literature• promote more thoughtful practices and teachers professional development


Final thoughts

• IPEC – contributed for a school that “facilitate the development of each one potential” (my father, following Padre Américo)

– impact on researchers’ practices??– impact on professional practices (participants and that were not involved

in the project)– impact of the developed materials in students learning

Those last are rarely achieved through other type of professional development initiatives, as MsD (Costa et al, 2003, Loureiro et al, 2006)


Thanks you for our attention!

Maria João [email protected]


Initial perceptions (school practices)

• aims/objectives of Science Education– focus: education / instruction

– content centered teaching strategies – official curricula– “I can’t separate the development of knowledge from the development

of competencies [skills, attitudes, …]”

• lessons plans– teacher / student centered

• STS and interdisciplinary approaches– “I try to relate the content with their [students] lives.” – “… pedagogical pair … the math is after physics and so students can

try math models to the phenomena under study”– practical activities: exp. work, fieldtrips, “research” activities,

discussion and argumentation (journal articles), problem solving.


Initial perceptions (school practices)

• evaluation and assessment– insufficient evaluation culture

– “70% test, 15% for personal work, 15% for observation …” – “ we evaluate the product and not the process”

– diversity of evaluation methodologies– “we use different methodologies … portfolios, presentations and

communication of their work, …”


• research possibilities for school practices– practice innovation (change, reflection)

– “introduce pedagogical content knowledge in the organization of teaching strategies”

– “… research gives us insights to our reflection … increase our critical skills related to our practices”

– more thoughtful practices– “[from] what we read, we acknowledge written information that things

ought to be made like that [as we think they should].”

Initial perceptions (interaction)


Initial perceptions (interaction)

• school practices possibilities for research. – give importance to actual practices

– “… by observing individuals [teachers] in that context [classroom], one can see the problems from another perspective."

– emergence of new research problems– “research is being developed in some areas and not in others more

pertinent [teachers-students and students-students interactions, leadership]”

– “.. We should find proposition suitable to motivate students that doesn’t like to learn”

– "...we are researching new methodologies and the point is the relationships [between teachers and students]."


Initial perceptions (constraints)

• intra and inter communities connections • attitudes toward innovation emerging from

research • nature of teachers’ training • school resources and management • representations • theoretical discourse


Research being carried out

• Evaluation of the interaction dynamic– Guna model– Roles

• Impact on curricular management– obsjectives / activities– innovation

• Evaluation of competencies– Reflexive– Assessment and evaluation competencies


Perceptions about research

• what influence the research agenda?– international research community– institutions

• national research politic (FCT)• research centres/universities (local politics, projects,

dissertations, thesis,)• Need to improve professional school practices

– personal aspects• relations and communication among researchers (work with

friends)


Perceptions about research

• ICT exploitation– create favorable context to innovation

• research limitation– analytical and compartmented (PS, practical work, STS, HC,

ICT, …)• epistemological complexity of education

– fragile because it is reactive• Need to clarify the projects (problems)


Perceptions about …/methodologies

• empirical work– turned to school practice and not to theoretical reflection

• qualitative vs quantitative approaches• similar methodologies

– case studies, action-research

• Meta-analyses and literature reviews– researchers professional development (end of the carrier)


Perceptions about …/validation

• we learn how to do research doing– permanent process, interrogation, reflection, …

• we recognize the our research limitations– personal (epistemologies), methodologies, tools, …

• rigor exigency in the validation process – preliminarily results


Perceptions about …/dissemination

• research transfer to school practice– language (to difficult)– results are not operational (PS, STS, …)

• teachers’ resistances– organizational– cultural– personal


Perceptions about …/ethics

• idiosyncratic sense of the communities and mutual respect– researchers and teachers

• work to vs with teachers• need to be cautious in the activities (overload)

– readings, tasks, …

• contribute to non isolation (researchers and teachers)


Perceptions about …/constraints

• task overload and dispersions – projects, lecturing, supervising, administrative work, …

• community heterogeneity– need to create networks– need of an active voice in the educational politic– Inconsistencies of the educative system (teachers

education, competencies-based curriculum vs national exams, …)


Teachers’ expectations

• innovate– Reflect about our own practice

• collaborate• in-dept

– thoughtful practice

• evolve– use e-learning platforms


Researchers’ expectations

• respect and account – personal and professional “parcours”

• invests in collaborative research• accept changing process

– attitudes, procedures, …

• improve participated practices


Doubts/questions …

• organization of working groups– guidelines?– how to promote the interactions/roles?– how to analyze the interactions?– how to shape de group (logic)?

• evidences– of interactions?– their impact on teachers and researchers practices?

ipec iodl&icem 2010

Education

social roles

ipec iodl icem

anadulo univ

years collaboration

initial teachers education

procedures collaboration

evaluation collaboration

practitioners collaboration