About my research

My research was set in the context of the European Commission’s eTwinning initiative and it looked specifically at the use of eTwinning Learning Events (non-formal learning). It examined how the community influences the development of teachers’ competence in online collaboration and discourse, and it considered the contribution of social aspects and online moderation.

I am very grateful to my supervisor, Dr. Julie-Ann Sime from Lancaster University, and to my eTwinning soulmate, Tiina Sarisalmi, for their invaluable support. And to my examiners, Prof. Marilyn Leask from the University of Bedfordshire and Dr. Don Passey from the University of Lancaster, for their valuable advice.
Keywords: online learning communities; community of inquiry; online collaboration; content analysis; social presence; social ties; teacher training

Sunday, 5 June 2011

Knowledge of practice

It is interesting how things can all of a sudden come together.  After weeks of coding the messages in the LE forum and generally looking at things at the meta-level, I decided to dig deeper and read again the teachers messages in the final reflection. I am encouraged to do this by the results from the coding which suggest that participants showed evidence of meta-cognition towards the end of the LE, during this session. The graph below is representative; it shows the results of coding for a participant from her/his first to last message, using the four levels proposed for Cognitive Presence in the CoI model (Garrison et al., 2001). The levels Triggering event and Exploration reflect cognition, whereas Integration and Resolution reflect meta-cognition, according to Garrison et al. Messages 25 onwards were during the final reflection, when we increased the teaching presence by asking participants specifically to post their reflections on what they had done in their teaching practice, what they had learned and the consequences for the future.



Reading the contributions I am encouraged by the depth of thought. The following are representative:
Using blogs, my teaching practice became more active and colaborative. Students had time for reflecting and correcting their mistakes, they became more independent and creative. They were motivated and they learn for 'pleasure and for knowing' not just for 'obligation'.
In general, social networking provides new ways to connect and share information and create networks of interest.  So, while in more traditional learning environments much of this must be orchestrated and planned by the instructor and organized through the grouping and pairing of students, when using a social networking tool this level of connection can happen immediately.
So social interaction and relationships can be an integral part of learning more than ever and can certainly enrich the learning experience for our students.  What is vital to realize however, is that the motivation created by these kinds of networks must be maximized by the instructor to benefit the students in their growth and development as learning community participants.  It is important to move students beyond social interaction to the kind of learning communities that are dynamic, rich, and very much reflective of the students who are participating.
Participants' comments, final reflection
Whilst reading through the teachers' comments I have also been looking at a paper by Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1999). They differentiate the learning that teachers undergo in training institutions, such as universities or teacher training colleges, called knowledge-for-practice, from what they learn in situ by trying out innovations in their teaching practice, called knowledge-in-practice. The first is formal knowledge and theory, including codification of wisdom in practice. The latter results from reflection in practice. Whereas the two are important and are clearly inter-related, the authors also suggest that there is a third type of knowledge that they call knowledge-of-practice, which is 'generated when teachers treat their own classrooms and schools as sites for intentional investigation at the same time that they treat the knowledge and theory produced by others as generative material for interrogation and interpretation'  (Cochran-Smith and Lytle, 1999, p.250). I see this as knowledge generated at a meta level, linking formal and informal, work and life, so that teachers see themselves both as learners and teachers in a community of practice with their peers; or as the authors suggest 'working within the contexts of inquiry communities to theorize and construct their work and to connect it to larger social, cultural, and political issues' (1999, p.250).
I see the community that we formed in our LE as engendering knowledge-of-practice, as reflected in the postings of the teachers in the final session. They seemed to be connecting their prior knowledge to what they had personally experienced in the LE as learners and to the consequences for their own teaching practice. They are seeing their role as teachers as being inextricably linked to their role as learners and the need for them to continually develop their own digital competence and online facilitation skills.
This links nicely to the workshop that I am attending here tomorrow in Seville at the JRC-IPTS, where we shall be looking at teacher collaboration and competence development as envisaged in 2025. I see online learning communities of teachers being the norm in the future, with teachers sharing their experience and knowledge with peers across Europe, generating knowledge-of-practice. With this in mind I shall continue to read the final reflections of the teachers in the LE, as I feel they will continue to inspire me.
Brian in Seville.
---

Cochran-Smith, M. & Lytle, S. L. (1999) 'Relationships of Knowledge and Practice: Teacher Learning in Communities'. Review of Research in Education, 24, pp.249-305
Garrison, D., Anderson, T. & Archer, W. (2001) 'Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education'. American Journal of Distance Education, 15 (1), pp.7-23

Sunday, 29 May 2011

Non-task sociability of CSCL

This paper builds upon previous studies that show that non-task related exchanges between students can have a significant impact on students enjoyment of CSCL, on creating a sense of community and learning outcomes (Abedin et al, 2011). And when CSCL is successful, such interactions can form a significant part of the discussion; Dewiyanti et al ( 2007) showed that 33% of interactions in such a CSCL environment were non-task related.

The context for the Abedin et al paper was a part-time postgraduate general management degree course offered by a large Australian university. Average age of the students was 36 years old with an average of 10 years' work experience. Amongst the online forums established for the course was a seminar room where the learning activities took place and a coffee shop to foster informal, social interaction. The latter is similar to the Staff Room that we established in our Learning Event for the same purposes.

They define on-task interactions as including instructional and learning activities, such as group learning, and pedagogical questions and answers. Non-task interactions, on the other hand, are about socialising and are not directly related to course content; eg jokes, compliments and greetings.

They developed a series of items for assessing non-task sociability and consulted researchers in the field to seek their opinion and to revise them. Based upon these, they conducted a quantitative survey of students, firstly in a pilot and then in a main study, asking their opinion and applying factor analysis to the results. They then assessed the relationship of non-task sociability to learning outcomes, which they defined as pedagogical effect, student interest and perceived learning.

The results of their analysis suggest that non-task sociability strongly affects student interest, which in turn leads to a higher willingness to participate in online discussions and to being intellectually challenged. Similarly there was a strong link to pedagogical affect.

It would be interesting for me to analyse the messages in our Staff Room to see to what extent they were task or non-task related. I suspect that, compared with the other forums in the Learning Event, the percentage of non-task was higher and may be one of the reasons why the addition of the Staff Room was perceived as being useful. As Dewiyanti et al indicate a 'CSCL environment with a higher perceived level of nontask sociability increases satisfaction of the course, bonds students together by fostering a sense of community and avoids development of a sense of isolation' (p.10, Dewiyanti et al, 2007).

Brian

Abedin, B., Daneshgar, F. & D'Ambra, J. (2011) 'Do nontask interactions matter? The relationship between nontask sociability of computer supported collaborative learning and learning outcomes', British Journal of Educational Technology, Blackwell Publishing Ltd. (ONLINE - http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01181.x - accessed 15.05.2011)

Dewiyanti, S., Brand-Gruwel, S., Jochems, W. & Broers, N. J. (2007) 'Students' experiences with collaborative learning in asynchronous Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning environments'. Computers in Human Behavior, 23 (1), pp.496-514

Sunday, 22 May 2011

Impact of learning communities on teachers' practice and student learning

 I received some useful feedback on the abstract that I submitted to BERA for their annual conference in September in London (http://beraconference.co.uk/) - it was accepted by the way and I shall be presenting in the afternoon of Tuesday 6 September.

One of the reviewers indicated that they missed the benefits of participation for teachers in the online community and that it looked 'like a project designed by and for researchers rather than relevant to teachers'. I guess the good news implicit in the comment is that what I wrote clearly reads like a research paper. The useful thing I need to note, however, is the need to reinforce the benefits of online communities for continuous professional development (CPD) of teachers.

As luck had it, I came across a paper recently that reviewed the impact of professional learning communities (PLCs) on teaching practice and student learning (Vescio et al, 2008). It looks at the results of 11 studies that attempted to correlate participation in PLCs with improved practice and student achievements. They describe the move away from more traditional CPD, which mainly consists of knowledge acquired in training colleges or universities - what they describe as 'Knowledge for practice' (referring to work by Cochran-Smith and Little, 1999), to 'knowledge of practice' acquired by teachers applying ideas in their own classrooms through collaborative inquiry.

The paper cites Newmann et al (1996) in describing PLCs as having five essential characteristics: shared values and norms; clear and consistent focus on student learning; reflective dialogue; sharing teaching practice and a focus on collaboration. When I think about each of these characteristics, I see them as being present in the online learning community (the Learning Event, LE) that we held last year.  Indeed, the changes that we put in place, based upon an earlier LE, were to offer the teachers the possibility to try out what they had learned in their own teaching practice, to reflect with their peers on the results and to collaborate in terms of sharing good practice. The focus of the  LE was clearly on student learning, the teachers making their motivation to improve their teaching practice and student achievements quite explicit in their discussions. Moreover, as Vescio et al posit, teachers see a clearer connection to their own teaching practice if they experience the opportunities themselves as learners.

Vescio et al's paper is mainly about PLCs within schools, aimed at reforming teaching. Our LE was an online community for teachers from across schools, in different countries. Whereas this may not lead directly to a change in the culture within a school and a reform of teaching practice, it does provide a valuable source of inspiration for pioneering teachers. Indeed, it emerged from my interviews that for some of the teachers this was the only form of cooperation they had with peers; as one teacher remarked 'I have much more contact with my colleagues in eTwinning than with my colleagues at school'. Such a cross school community can be an advantage, as Vescio et al note: 'learning communities also cannot be insular, focused only on making   explicit   the   practical   wisdom   teachers already  possess  about  teaching'  and ' it is important that we seek external perspectives from other constituents (e.g. families, citizens, educators working outside our immediate environment,   educational   research,   sociological research) so that all aspects of our practice be can be interrogated as an integral part of our efforts' (Vescio et al, 2008, p89)

In conclusion, the paper notes that 'participation   in   learning   communities   impacts teaching practice as teachers become more student centered' and 'when  teachers  participate  in  a  learning community, students benefit as well' (p.88). They note that working collaboratively is the process that underpins a learning community, rather than the goal which remains improving student learning.

The paper calls for more research in which the teachers 'develop collaborative relationships with researchers to help document the impact of their efforts' (p.89) and more empirical evidence of the impact of learning communities on teaching practice. My analysis of the results of the LE will hopefully yield some evidence of impact in terms of the improved competence of the teachers involved, changes to their teaching practice and impact on student learning.

Brian
---



Cochran-Smith, M. & Lytle, S. L. (1999) 'Relationships of Knowledge and Practice: Teacher Learning in Communities'. Review of Research in Education, 24, pp.249-305

Newmann, F. M., Wehlage, G., Secada, W. & Marks, H. (1996) Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality, Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Vescio, V., Ross, D. & Adams, A. (2008) 'A review of research on the impact of professional learning communities on teaching practice and student learning'. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24 (1), pp.80-91

Sunday, 15 May 2011

Coding blues

Coding discussions in forums can be such a laborious process and I find myself going around in circles. Was that 'thank you Fred' evidence of teaching presence, facilitating discourse, or just a friendly reply to a fellow participant? Was that passing comment about the 'value of blogs for children' an indication of meta-cognition or a subjective statement?

As I traverse the dialogue in a forum I realise that I am seeing only the tip of the iceberg and will never really know what went on behind the scenes, in people heads.

One thing I can say for sure is that tutors, teachers, facilitators of online learning really need to encourage participants to express themselves fully in a forum and not just make passing remarks. Everyone needs a voice in their heads saying 'why do you say that?', 'what makes you come to that conclusion?', 'please explain your thinking!'. Otherwise other participants will never really understand the basis for your assertions and therefore, one could argue, critical thinking will not take place.Moreover, researchers will have a hard time coding the dialogue!

Brian.

Collaborative tools

I presented to a group a of colleagues at work this week on good practice, tips and hints for managing online collaboration and communities. My desire was to balance the presentation by our IT department on the tools to be used (Ning, Wiki, CIRCABC, etc) with some reflection on the organisational issues.

It was quite a challenge and the preparations took me for than 1.5 days. Why? Because I realised there is so much one can say on the subject that it is very hard to know where to start; especially for an audience with mixed levels of knowledge on the topic.

I decided it was necessary to go back to some of the roots of learning theory, emphasising the move in thinking from behaviourism and instruction, through to cognition and social constructivism. My reasoning being that some colleagues were interpreting the use of social networks as tools for chit-chat and making friends, rather than as tools to support the fundemental process of learning. And as such, where questioning why we are investing resources in them.


The most interesting slide for me to present, and one which raised considerable interest, showed the results of my coding of the Staff Room in our recent eTwinning Learning Event for web 2.0 tools. The graph shows messages posted over time (number per day) for both participants (the teachers) and the tutors (Tiina and I), in relationship to the activities taking place. Without going into too many details at this stage, the results suggest:

° interaction took place when it was needed for the cognitive activities and less so during the three weeks when participants were applying what they had learned in their own teaching practice. In other words, discourse was purposeful
° the level of interaction was significantly influenced by the level of tutor interaction, the former generally following the latter. This was more pronounced at the start of the LE than at the end
° tutor interaction was significant at the start but tailed off towards the end
° the community was ephemeral, being largely dormant during periods of individual practice and dying off quickly after the final reflection activity had finished


The reaction from the colleagues was that they were not surprised with the results. Nevertheless, they served to emphasise that we shouldn't have too great expectations when setting up online communities. Learning in communities is purposeful and participants will quickly move on once they perceive that there is no longer immediate added value in discourse for their learning. I wonder to what extent the same can be said for other types of community - such of Communities of Practice - which are perhaps less focused on individual learning as the primary goal.

Brian

Monday, 25 April 2011

Epilogue

As an epilogue to my previous posting, I think it is worth sharing the experience that I am having in reading two books in parallel, using two quite different technologies.

The first, by Savin-Baden, arrived by post approximately one week after being ordered from Book Depository in the UK - a wonderful service that offers books on the continent, and elsewhere, at competitive prices and NO POSTAGE. Fantastic! As ever with a new book, I enjoyed sifting through the pages to get a feel for the contents and carried it studiously in my Bench bag until such time as I had a few minutes to read an excerpt.

The second, by Becker, was mine within seconds of my finding it on the web and downloading it to my iPad. To be more precise, selecting it and buying it online from Amazon.com (apparently, Amazon.co.uk has IPR issues with buyers living in Belgium; I say living, as I was in Spain at the time of purchase). Taking my lightweight, slim iPad with me everywhere, I have access to all my academic papers and, more specifically, my newly downloaded book by Becker. The highlighting is not easy but - and here's the delight - my highlighted text is available anywhere online via Amazon and, moreover, having downloaded the Kindle app for PC, I have access to my book on my desktop complete with the highlights that I did on the plane. Moreover it was easy to cut and paste them to my previous posting.

On the other hand, for the paper book, I had to find the relevant page and highlight, and retype in the text (I guess I could have scanned it and used character recognition software, but that would have been too onerous).

So, as you may have guessed, I am convinced about the advantage of an eBook and of having my notes / highlights synchronised across devices. But a word of caution; no reading the iPad during take off and landing, or on the few occasions that the sun actually shines in Brussels and one is lured into the garden by the thought of recharging one's vitamin D. Ah well, you can't have everythin

Brian

Finding one's own voice

I am reading a couple of books in-between other things and whilst travelling. The first is by Becker (2007) and is to do with how social scientists write or rather how they should write. The second is by Savin-Baden (2008) and concerns the context, time and place in which people learn - what she calls 'learning spaces'.

Both place a lot of emphasis on the need for researchers to write on a regular basis.  Savin-Baden highlights how when and where we learn has changed dramatically over the years, as the nature of learning has changed (less information transfer, more applied knowledge in practice; less individualistic, more social) and technology has advanced (social networking; any place and time connectivity) to support boundless learning. She refers to 'liquid learning' and whereas the term sounds rather like new marketing hype, the message behind it is clear - lifelong, lifewide learning unhindered by physical or temporal constraints; moreover, learning that is 'characterised by emancipation, reflexivity and flexibility' (2008, p.26).

Savin-Baden refers to constrained learning spaces ('striated'), such as a traditional lecture theatre or VLE, and contrasts these to more open, flexible spaces ('smooth spaces'):

Students here would be encouraged to contest knowledge and ideas proffered by lecturers and in doing so create their own stance towards knowledge(s). Yet the movement is not towards a given trajectory, instead, there is a sense of displacement of notions of time and place so that the learning space is not defined, but becomes defined by the creator of the space' (Savin-Baden, 2008, p.14). 

She also refers to 'writing spaces' and addresses the challenge of a Ph.D. student writing up their thesis (a challenge that I can easily associate with!):

Writing up a thesis is often a large writing challenge and for many this is a space in which they learn to write and develop an academic voice. Yet, as academic tradition goes, the textual voice of a thesis must not be too strident; there must be a sense of humility in the writing, since one is not yet deemed to have 'arrived' (Savin-Baden, 2008, p.37)


In describing writing spaces, she writes refreshingly about the problems that writers often have in getting started. Mistakenly they look to others for the magic formulae for overcoming 'writers' block' as if it were some external agent or force, rather than an individual challenge.

There seems to be an assumption that there are hints and tips about how to go about creating writing spaces or the task of writing itself; short cuts that help to avoid the struggle and pain. Yet this is one of the main challenges of being in a writing space that no one else can create or inhabit. As writing spaces are our own spaces where we also have to deal with our own disjunctions (Savin-Baden, 2008, p.40-41)

Moreover,  writing spaces should be places where we adopt our own stance, find our own voice so that we may offer our opinion on what we have read. This, for me, is the real challenge and this is where I turn to the other book by Becker  (2007). He too writes about the problems that individuals have in writing; in this case, social scientists. They are characterised, he says, by writing that is too hesitant to take a stance and uses all sorts of convoluted ways of getting to the point. However, he posits that the reason for doing this is the fear of rejection, of criticism by others, of not being perfect. Hence these writers will go to great lengths to emphasise that their writing is a first draft, a work in progress and something that still needs refinement. Furthermore, they may take pride in using a special language that sets them apart as an academic

While I personally find scholarly writing boring and prefer to spend my time reading novels, academic elitism is a part of every graduate student’s socialization. I mean that academic writing is not English but written in a shorthand that only members of the profession can decipher. . . . I think it is a way to. . . maintain group boundaries of elitism. . . . Ideas are supposed to be written in such a fashion that they are difficult for untrained people to understand. This is scholarly writing. And if you want to be a scholar you need to learn to reproduce this way of writing. (Becker, 2007, p.30)

This reflects some of my own experience with academic writing, which is often written in the third person, with convoluted expressions and a propensity to create new words to describe something that has been said before but may be perceived to be old fashioned or unsophisticated. I should add that I see this often in my own institution where departments will use different terms when referring to the same idea in order to mark their territory. As Becker suggest, power and identity seem to play an important role.


Living as an intellectual or academic makes people want to appear smart, in the sense of clever or intelligent, to themselves and others. But not only smart. They also want to appear knowledgeable or worldly or sophisticated or down-home or professional—all sorts of things, many of which they can hint at in the details of their writing (Becker, 2007, p.31)

My reading of the two books continues, however I already feel humbled by having a mirror held up to me.


Brian
-----


Becker, H. S. (2007) Writing for social scientists: How to start and finish your thesis, book, or article, University of Chicago press.



Savin-Baden, M. (2008) Learning spaces: creating opportunities for knowledge creation in academic life, Open Univ Press.