Proceedings of ULearn 11 – Research Stream

College of Education
Proceedings of ULearn 11
– Research Stream
18- 21 October 2011
Rotorua Energy Events Centre
Editors
Julie Mackey
Nicki Dabner
Jilaine Johnson
Niki Davis
1
11
ULearnResearchStreamCommittee
NikiDavis,UniversityofCanterburyProfessorofEͲLearning(Director)
NickiDabner,UniversityofCanterbury(ChairofReviewPanel,Editor)
JulieMackey,UniversityofCanterbury(EditorinChiefofULearn11Proceedings)
JilaineJohnson,UniversityofCanterbury(Editor)
PhilippaBuckley,UniversityofCanterbury
MarkBrown,MasseyUniversity
PhilippaGerbic,AucklandUniversityofTechnology
CathyGunn,UniversityofAuckland
KwokͲWingLai,UniversityofOtago
KerynPratt,UniversityofOtago
NoelineWright,UniversityofWaikato
Administration
SherryChrisp,CoreEducation
LynLarsen,UniversityofCanterburySchoolofLiteraciesandArtsinEducation
PleaseciteinAPAstyle:
Mackey,J.,Dabner,N.,Davis,N.&Johnson,J.(Eds.)(2011).ProceedingsofULearn2011
ResearchStream,18Ͳ21October2011,Rotorua.Christchurch:UniversityofCanterbury
SchoolofLiteraciesandArtsinEducation.
Contents
Preface
WelcomeLetter
SpotlightAbstract
NoelineWrightCriticalthinkingandtheWeb:Whyitseveryteacher’s
business
1
4
Abstracts
PhilippaBuckley&FionaGilmore:Tacklingtechnology.Astudyofteacher
educatorsastheydevelopawebͲbasedteachingapproach
10
JocelynCranefield,PakYoong&SidHuff:Drivingteacherchangethrough
brokeringinanonlinecommunityecosystem
16
JocelynCranefield,PakYoong&SidHuff:Fosteringchangethoughthe
knowledgeembeddingcycle:Theroleofonlinecommunities
25
MareeDavies&AnneSinclair:“Ithinkthattalkingonlinewasreally
awesome,wegottoargueanddisagree”
33
NikiDavis&DarrenSudlow:AchievementsoftheSouthernCentralDivide
schoolsinimplementingpersonalisedblendedlearning)
34
AnneͲMarieHunt,LindaMcMurrayandVickiNeedham:EvolvingeffectiveeͲ
learningpracticeswithresearchfromaregionalcampus
40
CraigMcDonaldͲBrown:TMI?TheneedforresearchexploringyoungNew
Zealandadolescents;informationprivacypractices
48
JulieMackey,DesBreeze,PhilippaBuckleyͲFoster,NickiDabner,andFiona
GilmoreInnovatetosurvive:Beingpreparedtoteachintimesofcrisis
55
HazelOwen:Facilitatingonlinecommunitiesofpracticeasanintegralpartof
effectiveprofessionallearning
65
SusanTull:Spiralsofdesign:DesignbasedresearchineͲlearningprofessional
development
75
PinelopiZaka,SueParkes&NikiDavis:Acasestudyofthefirst
blended/hybridonlinecourseinaNewZealandhighschool
83
2010Posters
ChrisAstall,JackieCowan&TraceyClelland:Newexperiencesofsocial
learningtoolswithinapreͲserviceteachingenvironment
SonjaBailey:EͲportfoliosinteachereducation
NickiDabner&GinaHaines:Exploringthepractice/theorynexuswithina
visualartcourseforprimaryteachereducationstudents
GinaHaines&NickiDabner:ExploringselfͲknowledgewithinavisualarts
courseforprimaryteachereducationstudents
LawrenceWalker&NikiDavis:Includingadultswithdyslexiainatext
dominatedenvironment–applicationsofdigitaltechnologies
PrefacetoProceedingsofULearn2011ResearchStream
The ULearn Research Stream was inaugurated at the ULearn Conference in Christchurch in October
2010.Itwas well received andcontinueswith a nationwidecommittee’s supportintoitssecond year.
The research stream strengthens the quality of the flow of the ULearn conference to inform
developments in teaching and learning in New Zealand, especially developments with digital
technologies in the schooling sector. The University of Canterbury eͲLearning Lab has continued to
partnerwithCOREtodevelopthis‘greenstream’underthefastflowingturbulentwatersofprofessional
learninganddevelopmentandinnovationinschoolsandthosewhoworkwithandthroughthem.
The aim of the Research Stream is to continue to celebrate achievements in the school sector and to
increasethespreadacrossalleducationalsectors,whilemaintainingtheparticipationofteacherleaders
at the centre. The Research Stream raises the profile of practitioner researchers engaged in the
schoolingsector,includingthoseininitialteachereducationandprofessionallearningcommunities,and
supportsthemwithrelevantresearchanddevelopmentinothersectorsandoverseas.Inthiswaythe
Research Stream increases the power and flow of ULearn for its participants nationally and
internationally.Aswenotedintheinauguralproceedings,thispublicationcontributesinthreeways:
1. ImprovingdisseminationbeyondtheOctoberconferenceevent.
2. Recruitingadditionalcontributingparticipants.
3. Recognitionwithqualityassuredoutputsthatarepeerreviewed.
The ULearn Research Stream has also opened channels with leading New Zealand journals and their
editorsandaprofessionalassociation.In2010thisincludedtheDistanceEducationAssociationofNew
Zealand’s Journal of Open Flexible and Distance learning which is now freely available to all ULearn
participantsthroughtheassociation’swebsiteathttp://www.deanz.org.nz/.
In2011wecontinueourcollaborationwiththeonlinejournalthatiscentraltoULearn’sthemes,namely
ComputersinNewZealandSchools(CINZS)editedbyKwokWingLaiandKerynPrattoftheUniversityof
OtagoCollegeofEducationCentreforDistanceEducationandLearning.In2011JulieMackeyandIwill
editCINZS’finalissueof2011bydrawingontheULearnconferencetobuildonthiscollaboration.
The2011ULearnResearchStreamhasbeensupportedbyawiderangeofpeoplewhowecouldliketo
thank,whilealsoindicatingsomeofthequalityassuranceprocessesthathavetakenplace.For2011we
invitedanexpertinICTandeducationfromallNewZealanduniversitiestojoinourcommitteeandwe
wouldliketothankthemallfortheirsupport.WewouldalsoliketothanktheULearncommitteeand
CORE colleagues, particularly Sherry, Gwenny and the CORE web team for their support. Building on
U
U
1
2010, the reviewing processes were based on those for NZARE and SITE; this year reviewing was
coordinatedby Nicki Dabner so that each submission had at least two independent peer reviews and
some were rejected. Feedback to authors enabled revisions before the accepted papers were edited
intotheseproceedingsundertheleadershipofJulieMackey.WewouldliketothankDr.Mackeyandher
teamforthisservice,particularlyJilaineJohnsonforhercarefulproofingandLynLarsenforlayoutand
proofing edits. Nicki Dabner also collected a range of posters that were exhibited during the 2010
Research Streamfor publicationintheseproceedings.The 2011posterscollected duringULearn 2011
willbeaddedtomakeversion2ofthisproceedingsbeforetheendof2011.
AboutComputersinNewZealandSchools
ComputersinNewZealandSchoolswasfirstpublishedin1989.Itisajournal/magazineaimed
at practitioners interested in the use of computers and other forms of information and
communication technologies in schools. The journal publishes articles from practitioners and
researchersonanyaspectoftheuseofICTinNewZealandschools,includingitsuseinearly
childhood, primary and secondary sectors. The articles are a mix of peerͲreviewed,
informationalandopinionbasedarticles,andincludesreportsofresearch,softwareandbook
reviews,withanemphasisonpracticalapplications.
Todevelopalearningcommunity,thejournalaimsatengagingthereadersindialoguingwith
theauthors.Asaresult,ineachissuesomeauthorswillmoderateafollowͲupdiscussionabout
his/herarticle.Itisanidealplaceforthosenewtotheresearchingandpublishingprocess,with
supportprovidedforthosewhowishtopublishanarticleinthejournal.Anyonehasfullaccess
tothearticlespublishedinthejournal,althoughthosewishingtotakepartindiscussionswill
beaskedtoregister.
ComputersinNewZealandSchoolsispublishedthreetimesayear,usuallyinMarch,Julyand
November,underthemanagementoftheUniversityofOtagoCollegeofEducationCentrefor
DistanceEducationandLearningTechnologies.Itseditorialboardincludesleadingresearchers
inthefieldfromthroughoutNewZealand,andthejournalisalsosupportedbytheMinistryof
Education, while retaining its independence in terms of the articles that are published.
(sourcedfromhttp://education2x.otago.ac.nz/cinzs/mod/resource/view.php?id=36).
TheULearnResearchStreamandtheDistanceEducationAssociationofNewZealand(DEANZ)ispleased
to announce the launch of research to inform and illustrate the matrix of the Ministry of Education’s
LearningCommunitiesOnlineHandbookandthesecondversionofthe LearningCommunitiesOnline
Handbook.ThemajorityoftheevidencewascollectedandproducedonlinebyDr.MichaelBarbourin
hissabbaticalinNewZealandduring2011,incollaborationwithDerekWenmoth(PrincipalInvestigator
andDEANZVicePresident)andNikiDavis(CoͲPrincipalInvestigatorandDEANZPresident)withfunding
fromtheMinistryofEducationVirtualLearningNetwork(VLN)andsupportfromCOREEducation,the
University of Canterbury eͲLearning Lab and Wayne State University. We would like to acknowledge
participation and support from Eddie Reisch and most of the VLN eͲlearning clusters in New Zealand
who are involved in open and distance learning. This approach to learning and teaching in schools is
becomingincreasinglyrelevantandpracticalwiththerolloutofUltrafastBroadbandinschools.ULearn
U
U
2
participants are recommended to browse the matrix, particularly the illustration of Phase 4
Implementation–LearnerNeeds: Provideongoingsupportforlearnersinthisenvironment. Thegoalof
theprojectwastostimulatefurtherillustrations.DerekWenmothandNikiDaviswillbeverypleasedto
receivefurtherevidenceandmaterialstocite.
Virtuallearningisthecommonthreadwoventhroughoutthe2011ResearchStreamproceedings.The
research includes practical reminders about critical thinking and the web (Noeline Wright’s spotlight),
and the information privacy practices and attitudes of New Zealand adolescents (Craig McDonaldͲ
Brown). Online communities of practice also feature strongly including Hazel Owen’s overview of a
Virtual Professional Learning and Development pilot for personalised and contextualised professional
learningopportunitiesofteachers;andtwoinformativepapersbyJocelynCranefield,PakYoongandSid
Huff. The first of these contributes new thinking about the role of online communities of practice to
supportdeepknowledgetransferthroughasixͲstageknowledgeembeddingcycleandthesecondpaper
providesinsightsintothewayanunofficialbloggingcommunityhelpedtofacilitateprofessionallearning
by connecting clusterͲbased communities and a global edublogging network. Niki Davis and Darren
Sudlow extend the potential of online learning communities through their discussion of the
achievements of the Southern Central Divide schools in implementing personalised blended learning
acrossthevirtuallearningsuperͲcluster.
Continuing the theme of online learning with a focus on initial teacher education AnneͲMarie Hunt,
LindaMcMurrayandVickiNeedhamdescribethestrategiesandpracticesdeemedtobemosteffective
bystudentsandstaffutilisingaMoodleͲbasedonlinelearningenvironmentforinitialteachereducation
inabiͲculturalcontext;andPhilippaBuckleyandFionaGilmorediscussthechallengesandachievements
associatedwithreͲdesigninginitialteachereducationcoursesforblendeddelivery.Lastly,JulieMackey,
Des Breeze, Philippa Buckley, Nicki Dabner and Fiona Gilmore share postͲearthquake survival tips in
blendedlearningfortimesofcrisesanduncertainty.
Aselectgroupofpostersareincludedintheproceedingsandconferenceattendeesareencouragedto
viewtheseandnonͲrefereedpostersduringtheconferenceandtointeractwiththeauthorswhowillbe
happy to discusstheir work. The postersection follows the theme of virtual education and includesa
fascinating insight into Susan Tull’s methodology for a designͲbased research project for professional
development to support adult literacy educators; Pinelopi Zaka, Sue Parkes and Niki Davis offer
suggestionsfor schoolscontemplating theimplementation ofblendedcourses; andMareeDaviesand
AnneSinclairrevealthevalueofonlinediscussionsinpromotingstudentͲtoͲstudentdiscussions.
Enjoy your participation in our exciting ULearn Research Stream and the whole conference and the
opportunitiesitbringstoenhanceeducationinNewZealandandworldwide.Pleasespreadwordofthis
researchstreamanditsproceedingstoimproveitsflowsothatitbecomesamightyriver.
Heoianƃ,mauriora
U
U
Niki Davis and Julie Mackey
DirectorandChiefEditor
3
ULearn11
ResearchStreamProceedings
SpotlightAbstract
Name: DrNoelineWright
Organisationalaffiliation:
UniversityofWaikato,Hamilton,NewZealand
[email protected]
Emailaddress: Title: CriticalthinkingandtheWeb:Whyit’severyteacher’sbusiness
Abstract
This paper outlines what happens when initial secondary teacher education students examine webͲ
basedtext.Overtwoyears,thissametaskhasidentifiedgapsinthesecohorts'criticalthinkingpractices,
which begs the following questions: If these adults don't know how to check web sources, how do
secondaryschoolstudentsgettolearntheseskills?Couldthisgaphelpexplainwhystudentsengagein
widespreadcopying?Whatdoteachersacrossthecurriculumneedtoknowtohelpstudentsbecritical
usersoftheWeb?
ThispresentationoutlineswhathappensinafourͲhourteacherͲeducationblock,andimplicationsfrom
this.Implicationsrelatetoliteracyacrossthecurriculum,theKeyCompetencies,teachers'pedagogical
design,andassessment.Thepresentationalsooutlinessomeeffectsonstudentteachers’thinkingand
pedagogicaldesignonpracticum,andsuggestssomeideasforteachers.
Introduction
The faceͲtoͲface graduate secondary teacher education programme based in Hamilton contains a
compulsory20hourmoduleonICTandcomplementstwoothercompulsorymodulesintheProfessional
Issues paper: Learning through Literacy and Maori Issues. The annual cohort size for this graduate
programmeaverages100students.InordertoprovidetheICTmodule,thecohortisorganisedintofour
groups, which helps manage the size of the group compared with the size of teaching spaces. This is
especiallyimportantwhenweneedaccesstocomputers.ThemodulecombinesfaceͲtoͲfacesessionsof
fourhourswithonlinetaskstocompletethe20hrsofclasstime.
TheICTmodulewasrenamedPICTafewyearsagotoemphasisetheimportanceofpedagogicaldesign
in relation to technological tools. Its title thus refers to Pedagogy and ICT. There were a number of
reasons for this, including providing opportunities to focus on learning purposes rather than
technological tools, highlighting the importance of teachers’ actions in designing effective learning
opportunities using technological tools (Wright, 2010). Mishra and Koehler’s (2006) framework also
guides the shape of the module, since they argue that ICT professional development divorced from
pedagogicalandcontentknowledgeisempty.Afurtherreasonwastomodelwaysofintegratingaspects
oftheKeyCompetencies,especiallyUsinglanguagesymbolsandtext,Relatingtoothers,andThinking
skills(MinistryofEducation,2007).Also,anassociatedreasonforthisemphasisisthatmostcurriculum
U
4
U
areas are represented in this cohort. It is therefore impossible to match specific tools/affordances to
specificcurriculumareas.
For the past five years, each of the fourͲhour session topics is repeated four times across two
Wednesdays.Oneofthesehasalwaysincludedafocusonthinkingcriticallyaboutwebsources.Thishas
been refined further in the past two years, and now deliberately centres attention on revealing the
initial teacher education students’ existing habits and practices about web sources. This is to identify
gaps and build new knowledge they can apply to their teaching practices. It is this session and the
observedtrendsarisingfromtheirpracticesthatarethefocusofthispaper.
‘Truth’andvalidityontheweb
This session is designed to alert teacher education students to issues related to ‘truth’ (a contested
notion,whichiswhyitisinsinglespeechmarks)andvalidityasitrelatestoinformationavailableonthe
Internet.Itisintendedtoachievetwothings:
x Helpthecohortfillanygapsintheirownapproachestoexaminingonlineresources
x Provide some ideas to adapt for their own pedagogical practices so that their students are more
informedusersofonlineresources.
This session begins with organising the class into six groups after a short discussion of some issues
teachers express about students’ use of online sources of information. This discussion is intended to
provide context, and hint at the focus of the next task, which begins with assigning to each group a
singlewebsitetoreview,accompaniedbyfourquestionstoanswer.Eachgroupmemberisdirectedto
answeronequestioneach,withallanswerscontributingtoasharedGoogleDoc.Thenasawholegroup,
they collaborate on a fifth question, designed to synthesise their thinking about the questions as a
preludetosharingwiththewidergroup.Whilethefocusisonthecontentofthetask,itisalsodesigned
to model how groups can work to build collective knowledge using technological tools and simple
organisationalstrategies.
Akeyfocusofthefifthquestionisdesignedtosynthesiseboththeirthinkingandprocessestheyusedto
examineboththesubstanceandveracityofthetext.Thewholegroupthenseeseachofthesesitesand
theindividualgroupexplainstheirdecisions.Whatthegroupsdon’tknowinadvanceisthatfourofthe
sitesarespoofsites,whiletwoaremoreserious:oneisaboutholocaustdenial,theotherpurportstobe
aboutNewZealandmen’srights.
Some practices emerged as common across groups and across time and cohorts. The most common
approachwasthatgroupstooktheirsiteatfacevalue.Somefocusedonitsvisualappealorlackofit,
whilesome,evenwhentheygoogledinformationtocheckunderstanding,stillfailedtotreatsiteswith
suspicion, even when they couldn’t understand its purpose. For example, Save the Guinea Worm
(http://www.deadlysins.com/guineaworm/index.htm). Even when they check what a guinea worm is,
theydon’taskobviousquestionslike,“WhywouldtherebeafoundationtosaveaparasitetheWorld
Health Organisation is trying to eradicate?” The most obvious spoof site is one called Help Save the
Endangered Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus (found at: http://zapatopi.net/treeoctopus/). While most
studentssaythere’snosuchthingasatreeoctopus,theyfailtodemonstratehowtheyknow,whythey
don’t believe the site’s content, or explain their information literacy strategies/approaches. Another
site, this time about Victorian Robots (http://www.bigredhair.com/robots/), also tends to be taken at
facevalue.Thereislittlequestioning, such as,“Did theVictoriansreallyhave robots, andis there any
other evidence of this?” The fourth spoof site is a fake floral sculpture studio
(http://www.floralsculptureclinic.nl/) designed by a conceptual artist. While the initial URL appears
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
5
legitimate,
navigating
away
from
the
page
takes
a
reader
to
http://www.simonevanbakel.nl/floral/newcoll.htm. This site is beguiling, but student teachers reacted
moretotheformofthesite,ratherthancheckingitscontent,especiallyanydetailsaboutprocedures
andstaff.
The holocaust denial (http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/wasthere.htm) and NZ Men’s Rights
(http://nzmera.orconhosting.net.nz/) sites are two sites which are potentially more serious in nature.
TheyarefreelyavailableontheWebandpresentextremeviews.TheformeriscoupledinGooglewitha
lineexplainingthatitisaboutproviding“Factsthatexposethefraudulentextortionracketknownasthe
holocaustofJews”.Thesiteitselfismostlytextwithafewhotlinks,andispennedbyDrE.R.Fields,who
isrevealedasanactivewhitesupremacist(http://bit.ly/hBO7gV).Whilestudentscommentingonthis
sitefeltitwasextreme,nonewentbeyondthesitetofindoutabouttheauthor.Overthreeyears,only
fivestudentshaveevercommentedontheholocaustURLitselfandwhat‘biblebelievers’mightsuggest
tothem.
PeterZohrab,thehostoftheNZMERAsite,hasdevelopedareputationforvociferousantiͲwomenviews
overtwodecades.HissitelistsfiveothermirrorsitesonthehomepageoftheBlackRibbonCampaign.
CommentsabouthisviewscanbefoundhereinVictoriaUniversity’sstudentpublicationSalient(2006)
(http://www.salient.org.nz/features/aͲmansͲworld) and here (http://bit.ly/1NAdIm) in David Farrar’s
Kiwiblogger (October 26, 2009). For as long as the NZMERA site has been used for this task, two
studentshaveusedasearchenginetofindoutmoreabouthim.
Methodology
TheframeworkforthispaperlinkstoselfͲstudyprocessesasoutlinedbyLaBoskey(2004)andLoughran
(2004).BothsuggestthatselfͲstudysupportsreflectiveandevaluativeexaminationsofone’spracticesin
order to develop those practices from an evidence basis. These examinations are thus highly context
dependent, and help tailor learning to specific groups of participants, particularly within teacher
educationcontexts.Thispaperisnotbasedonadeliberateresearchfocus,butisbasedonaccretionsof
experienceandreplicationwithdifferentcohorts.
Analysismethod
ThisstudymainlyreportsanecdotalfindingsandnotesgatheredoverathreeͲyearperiod.Itsynthesises
selfͲreflectionsbasedonstudents’responsestothistask,bothintermsofwhattheydiscoveredabout
how to check sites, and what they learned themselves about gaps in their own knowledge. Seidel’s
(1998) qualitative data analysis framework, which acknowledges the iterative, recursive and organic
natureofsomequalitativeinquiries,underpinshowtheanecdotaldataareunderstood.
ThedataarecollectedfromcommentsthecohortmadeduringfaceͲtoͲfacesessionsandfrompostings
inMoodlerelatedtothistask.Theanalysismethod,whilebasedonSeidel’sframework,is,nonetheless,
relativelyadhoc,giventhattheevaluationandreflectionwasnotadeliberateresearchintentionfrom
theoutset,butgrewoutoftherepeatedresultsovertime.
Findings
Overthreeyears,approximately280initialteachereducationstudentshaveundertakenthis‘Truth’and
validity on the webtask. Approximately 1% have actively gone behind the scenes to investigate a site
further.Onepossiblereasonforthisistheirviewthatanyresourceateacher/lecturerprovidesisgoing
to be authentic, so therefore it is already checked for content and veracity. Even when texts contain
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
6
U
U
U
U
contradictoryinformation,theyhavebeentakingtextsatfacevalueforthisreason.Perhapstheseinitial
teachereducationstudentsarestillinstudentmoderatherthanmakingthetransitiontoteachermode
and thus accepting what’s provided as legitimate rather than items for interrogation. And while
Prensky’s(2006)ideaofdigitalnativeshasmerit,theexercisedescribedinthispaperdemonstratesthat
evenwhilemoreandmoreyoungadultsaretechnologicallynative,theydonotalwaysusethesetools
withdiscriminationorthought.Suchpracticesmustbelearnediteratively.Prensky’sideahasthusbeen
assumedtomeanmorethanitdescribes.
Thisapparentfacevalueacceptanceoftextmaycontinueintoclassroomsunlessthereisanintervention
with teachers’ thinking and practices. In other words, if teachers aren’t using strategies which
interrogate texts for themselves, they may not know how to teach students. It may thus explain why
teachersinschoolscontinuetocomplainthatstudentscopyandpastetextfromsites,withoutjudging
themeritsofcontentorusingappropriateconventionstoacknowledgetheirsources.
A TeachersTV video (http://www.teachers.tv/videos/secondaryͲictͲwebͲliteracy), demonstrated how
importantitistoexplicitlyteachinformationliteracyskillsacrossthecurriculum.Andwhilethecontext
ofthevideowasBritish,itislikelythatstudentsinNewZealandwouldsaysimilarthingsinresponseto
firstmeetingtheprovidedsites’content.Oneoftheteachersinterviewedinthevideoremarkedthat
students learned how to critically examine online texts in their ICT classes, but that they did not
translatethislearningintoothersubjects.Thiscompartmentalisingoflearningintodiscretesubjectsis
commoninNewZealandtoo,andtheSecondaryLiteracyProjectisattemptingtoshowtheimportance
of teachersacrossthecurriculumusing similar literacy strategiesso it’seasierfor studentsto seethe
flexibility of effective learning approaches. The same goes for teaching students about how to
interrogateonlinetexts.
One of the hints provided in the video was to examine a URL by checking it in EasyWhois
(http://www.easywhois.com/), or adding site: to a URL. One of the secondary graduate teacher
education students in this year’s cohort, discovered that by checking her own website’s URL in
EasyWhois,foundthatitevenprovidedherphonenumber.Itraisedtheissueofprivacyonlineaswellas
demonstratingthe valueof the process.Significantly, once the faceͲtoͲface ‘Truth’ and validity onthe
websessionrevealsthegapsintheirknowledge,theteachereducationstudentsexpressedgratitudefor
learningwaysofjudginginformationanditssources.Thishasalsofounditswayintopracticumlessons.
For example, one student in the 2010 cohort reported on using elements of the task with a senior
history class. He was concerned about students’ overͲreliance on Wikipedia as their source of
information.Thisismostofhisrecount(reportedinMoodle24May,2010:
This lack of knowledge about appropriate research methods inspired me to develop a
lesson focusing on research methods and techniques… At first, students were a little
confusedasIintroducedthemto Google Scholar. Duringthe firsttwentyminutesofthe
lesson,onestudentremarkedthat“I’mgettingthissameinformationfromWikipedia,and
its way easier to find”. This is when my preͲclass planning came in, and I used my
knowledgeofWikipediato‘setthestudentsup’.Ihadfiguredthisquestioningwasgoing
to happen. So, just prior to the lesson, I logged into Wikipedia (as anyone can), and
changedbitsandpiecesofinformationaround.IthenaskedstudentstouseWikipediato
researchthese[particular]pagesandtellmesomeinteresting“facts”...Ofcourse,several
studentscamebackwith“facts”fromtheinformationIhadchanged...Thiswasavaluable
learning tool for students, and they began to realise that they shouldn’t believe all they
readfromsitessuchasWikipedia,asitisoftenfullwith“historicalopinions”.Inafollow
uplesson,Iaskedstudentstoreportbackwhattheyhadlearnt,andaskedthemtoshow
U
U
U
U
7
meacademicsourcesthattheyhadfoundOUTSIDEofWikipediabyusingthetechniques
learntinthepreviouslesson.Thesewereafewofthethingsthatstudentscommentedon:
x “ItwaskindofeyeopeningtoseethatWikipediahadsomuchcrapevidence.”
x “Mister,Ididn’trealisethatanyonecanwriteonWikipedia.”
x “AfterIgotmyheadaroundhowtouseit(GoogleScholar),itwasprettyuseful.Itwill
definitelyhelpmeatuniversitynextyear.”
x “it helped me think that i might have included some useless information in my
researchifihad…usedWikipediainsteadoftheseothersites.”
x “Ididn’treallyknowwhatiwaslookingfororhowtolookforitbeforethislesson.It
showedmethattherearewaybettersourcesthanjustusingGoogleandWikipedia.”
This deliberate pedagogical design had a positive effect on helping students think beyond the text in
frontofthem.Thisinitialteachereducationstudent’srecountpointstohowimportantitistoactively
anddeliberatelyshowotherswaysofcheckinginformationandusingvarioussources.
Conclusion
The onͲcampus ‘Truth’ and validity on the web session has over time, achieved a greater awareness
aboutwhatweneedtoknowtooperateeffectivelyasusersofonlineinformation.Italsohighlightsthe
pointthatwhilemanypeopleunder25arefrequentusersoftheinternetandothertechnologicaltools,
thisdoesnotnecessarilyequatewithbeingequippedwiththethinkingstrategiesthatsupporteffective
interrogationofcontent.
Theeffectofthe‘Truth’andvalidityonthewebsessioncanbeseeninthegraduates’practiceswhileon
practicum,andtheirdeliberateactsofteachingaboutalertingstudentstocheckinginformationonline.
Such tasks link to the Key Competencies of using language symbols and text, and thinking skills. They
alsodemonstratetheimportanceofcrossͲcurricularpracticeswhichreinforceinformationliteracyskills.
The gaps in beginning teachers’ knowledge about such practices, identified during the ‘Truth’ and
validityonthewebsession,begsanumberofquestions.Theseinclude:Howwidespreadisthisgapin
knowing ways of checking online texts? Does this also highlight some existing gaps in teachers’
knowledge leading to them complaining that students often copy and paste chunks of text? May this
practicerelatetostudentsnotknowinghowtoeffectivelysiftwhattheyfind?Doesthissuggestgapsin
teachers’deliberatepedagogicaldesignsacrossthecurriculum?
IfteachersexpectandwantstudentstoapplywellͲhonedcriticalthinkingpracticestoonlinesourcesof
information, then teachers needtopractice the deliberate teaching ofthese skills and agree that this
reallyiseverybody’sbusiness.
References
LaBoskey, V. K. (2004). The methodology of selfͲstudy and its theoretical underpinnings. In J. J.
Loughran,M.L.Hamilton,V.K.LaBoskey,&T.Russell(Eds.),InternationalHandbookofSelfͲStudyof
Teaching and Teacher Education Practices (Vol. 12, pp. 817Ͳ869). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
Retrievedfromhttp://www.springerlink.com/content/l108411h220nm211/
Loughran,J.J.(2004).LearningthroughselfͲstudy:Theinfluenceofpurpose,participantsandcontext.In
J. J. Loughran, M. L. Hamilton, V. K. LaBoskey, & T. Russell (Eds.), International Handbook of SelfͲ
U
8
U
Study of Teaching and Teacher Education Practices (Vol. 12, pp. 151Ͳ192). Dordrecht: Springer
Netherlands.Retrievedfromhttp://www.springerlink.com/content/p4302l1753736254/
U
U
MinistryofEducation.(2007).TheNewZealandCurriculum.Wellington,NZ:LearningMedia.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for
teacherknowledge.TeachersCollegeRecord,108(6),1017Ͳ1054.
Prensky, M. (2006). Digital natives, digital immigrants. Learners Together. Retrieved from
http://www.learnerstogether.net/digitalͲnativesͲdigitalͲimmigrants/53
Seidel, J. V. (1998). Qualitative data analysis (originally published as Qualitative Data Analysis, in The
Ethnographv5.0:AUsersGuide,AppendixE.ColoradoSprings.TheEthnographv5Manual.Retrieved
fromhttp://www.qualisresearch.com/
Wright,N.(2010).eͲLearningandimplicationsforNewZealandschools:Aliteraturereview.Wellington,
NZ:EducationCounts:MinistryofEducation.Retrievedfrom
http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/publications/ict/77614
U
U
U
U
U
U
9
ULearn11
ResearchStreamProceedings
PaperAbstract
Name: Organisationalaffiliation:
Emailaddress: Title:
PhilippaBuckley&FionaGilmore
SchoolofLiteracies&ArtsinEducation
UniversityofCanterbury
philippa.buckleyͲ[email protected]
[email protected]
U
U
U
U
TacklingTechnology:Astudyofteachereducatorsastheydevelopa
webͲbasedteachingapproach
Abstract
RecentdevelopmentsinteachereducationdeliveryhaverequiredliteracyeducatorswithintheSchool
of Literacy and Arts in Education, College of Education, University of Canterbury, to alter course
structure and content for future primary teachers (Davis et al, 2010). This has been a challenging
processwhichhasrequiredthesixteachereducatorsinvolvedinthisresearchtoactivelyreflectontheir
pedagogicalframeworkforeffectivetertiaryteaching.Aparticularfocusisthedeliverymodeandhowit
impacted the move between lectures, tutorials and online modes of teaching. This prompted the
teacherstoreflectandrefinetheirdefinitionof‘classroom’,andconfronttheirconceptionsofeffective
teachingandlearningwithinanexistingpreͲserviceteachereducationprogramme.Thispaperexplores
thefirststageofatwoͲphaseresearchprojectfocusingonthelecturers’journeyandstudentresponse
to the ongoing development of this blended classroom. At the conference, preliminary findings from
phaseonewillbepresentedanddiscussed.SemiͲstructuredindividualinterviewsofstaffinvolvedinthis
coursedevelopmentanddeliverywereanalysedtodescribetheprocessandjourney.Findingshighlight
the teaching team’s perceptions of and reactions to the innovation of blended course design. This
project utilised asystematic teacherinquiry approach at the tertiary level contributing tothe body of
literaturearoundthegrowthofonlinedeliverywithinteachereducation.
Introduction
RecentlywithintheNewZealandcontext,teachereducationhasundergonea‘seaofchange’(Davey&
Ham,2008).Traditionally,teachereducationwascompletedinindependentCollegesofEducationorby
other providers, but nationwide colleges have now merged with local universities. This has meant
considerable ‘organisational shifts’, as further restructuring and redevelopment processes are
undertakentoalignthevaryingteachingpractices.Wherestudentstraditionallyweretrainedinaface
to face model, within small groups (of up to 30 students) underpinned by social constructivist
approaches, there is now a trend towards adopting a mass lecture approach, more akin to the
traditionaluniversitymodelasexperiencedinternationally.
10
Distance learning, already well established in the College, had originated from the need to educate
students who didnot attendonͲcampus classes. Withthe above organisational shift, increase of class
sizeandreductionoffacetofacetime,onlinematerialneededtobeadaptedanddevelopedtoenhance
and support the face to face teaching. Despite having worked closely for several years, the team of
academicsinvolvedinthisresearchhadnevertaughttogetherandthisrationalisationprocessrequired
‘directandexplicit’conversationsaboutcontent,structureanddeliverywhichhadnotbeenneededin
thepastasacademicshadmoreautonomyovertheirindividualcoursesandcontent.
Theresearchquestionswereidentifiedas:
Howdoteachereducatorsdevelopaneffectiveblendedteachingcourse?
Howdoesthisprocesschallengetheirconceptionsandexistingpracticesofteachingatthetertiarylevel?
Traditionally embedded within the roots of the ‘technological history of distance education’, blended
learning is becoming a preferred way of teaching in higher education settings (Ernst, 2008). However
thishasleadtoavarietyofdefinitionsandinterpretations,asblendedlearningisutilisedinavarietyof
wayswithinthetertiarycontext(Mackey,2010).Thecurrenttrendto‘blend’thetraditionalclassroom
environmentwithaspectsofmodernonlinedeliveryhasdefinitionsthatincludehybrid,blended,mixed
mode and flexible.While Snart (2010)arguedthat thesecan be used interchangeably, Mackey (2010)
concludedthattheterm‘blended’isnotjustatechnologicaldefinitionbutcanalsobeusedtodescribe
the way that the learner “negotiates their own experiences and social contexts of learning” (p. 179).
Blended learning is becoming increasingly popular however it is argued that this approach has a long
waytogoandmoreresearchisneededsoinformeddecisionsanddebatecancontinuewithinthe21st
centurycontext(Snart,2010;AmreinͲBeardsley,Foulger,&Toth,2007).
Historically, educators have identified ‘best practices’ from both face to face and online, and
amalgamatedthesetoformeffectivelearningandteachingexperiences.Therationaleandadoptionof
blendedcoursesareofteninstitutionallymandatedasgreaterflexibilityisrequiredtomeetarangeof
diverseneedsinarangeofcontextsatanygiventime,withintighteconomicconstraints(Ernst,2008).
Tensionanddebateisrising internationallyfromfaculty, thatthisis seenasa ‘cashcow’ initiative for
academicinstitutionsastheycreatelargevirtualclassroomswhichrequirelesssupervisionorteaching
staff to monitor (Yang & Cornelious, 2004). Despite this concern, evidence has shown how blended
learningcanbeapositiveexperienceforbothstudentsandteachingstaff.Forexample,itcanprovide
an opportunity to give individualised attention (Ernst, 2008), use more social tools to promote
collaboration, reflection and higher order thinking (Simplicio, 2004), and establish collaborative
professional communities (Mackey, 2010). But, teachers still need to make careful pedagogical
decisions,withinaninstitutionalframeworkwhichhasastrongvisionandsupportivesystemsforboth
teachersandstudents(Snart,2010).
Teachermotivationiscentraltothesuccessoftertiaryonlinecourses.ManyeͲlearninginitiativeshave
beeninstigatedbyteachingstaffkeentoinnovateandimprovetheirteaching,andthesearelikelytobe
embracedandsustainedwhenenthusiasmfor,andrecognitionofthebenefitsofblendedlearningare
sharedbyfacultymembers(Davis&Fill,2007).Conversely,alackofmotivationfromfacultycanleadto
minimal engagement and participation in the online community of their course, ultimately leading to
student dropͲout (Connolly, Jones & Jones, 2007). Academic staff designing blended learning
environmentsbenefitfromtakingtimetoreflectonandevaluatethepedagogicalmodelsunderpinning
theirteaching(Fitzgibbon&Jones,2004).AmreinͲBeardsleyetal(2007)afterinterviewingbothstudents
and staff following a college’s first attempt atdesigning and implementationof a ‘blended approach’,
identified that instructors needed to collaborate more to develop common instructional procedures,
andguideandintroducestudentstothenewlayout.Theyhighlightthatinblendedlearning,programme
11
structurebecomesevenmorenecessaryandthusstrategicdecisionsandmuchonͲgoingcollaborationis
needed.
Forfacultythisprocessoftenrequirespracticaltechnicalchallengeswhichnecessitateongoingspecialist
support(Connollyetal,2007;Davis&Fill,2007;Fitzgibbon&Jones,2004;AmreinͲBeardsleyetal,2007;
Parker,Robinson&Hannafin,2008).Thissupportoftentakestheformoftechnicalspecialists(Davis&
Fill, 2007) or mentors (Parker et al, 2008) working in team situations alongside faculty during course
constructionandimplementation.CowieandNichols(2010)stresstheimportanceofsuchteamstaking
time to develop a shared culture and clear vision. Without this step “each group entering the new
relationship optimistically assume(s) that their culture would form the basis for the new working
relationship” (Cowie & Nichols, 2010, p. 83). In such scenarios tension inhibits and slows joint
understandingsforming.CowieandNichols’(2010)modelrecommendsanacademicstaffmemberhas
final responsibility across all aspects of course development and that course content is central to any
developments. Conversely, other models (see for example, Fitzgibbon & Jones, 2004; Connolly et al,
2007)placetechnicalstaffintheleadrole.
Researchdesign
CochranͲSmithandLytle(2009)presentedaclearchallengetouniversityfaculty,tothinkofthemselves
aspractitioners,byregardingtheirprofessionalworkasasiteforinquiry.Onlybydoingsocanfaculty
‘constructively disrupt university culture’, as they engage and work coͲconstructively in partnerships
with schools, teachers and students to test existing dominant frameworks for teacher education
(CochranͲSmith&Lytle2009;Zeichner,2002).Participatoryresearchintentionally‘blurs’theboundaries
between inquiry and practice, which can result in new tensions and professional dilemmas (CochranͲ
Smith&Lytle,2009).Thisresearchwasconductedwithinatertiarysetting,andincludedthetwonamed
researchersandfourotherparticipantswhomtheywerecoͲteachingwith.Thecommitmenttoengage
in this piece of research highlighted the need to systematically review the introduction of blended
learning,a‘teachinginnovation’,andforustoassumeresponsibilityforthemanagementanddirection
ofitsdevelopment.Twoexistingliteracycoursesandanewcoursefocusingonlearninglanguageshad
beenamalgamatedwithin thisblendedlearningframework.Unlikeprevious coursesoffered,thisnew
course was designed seamlessly between the on and off campus cohorts, with on campus students
utilisingthevirtualclassroom(withintheUniversity’sMoodleͲbasedLearnplatform)toenhancefaceto
facelecturesandworkshops.
EthicalapprovalwasgrantedfromtheEducationalResearchHumanEthicsCommittee.Fiveoutofthe
six participating staff directly taught into the course, and the other, an educational designer, was
responsible forleading onlinecoursedesign. SemiͲstructuredindividual interviews were conductedby
two of the teaching team. Questions included perceptions of blended learning; successful course
elements;barriersandenablers;andtheprofessionalandpersonalchallengesexperiencedwithinthis
process. A thematic analysis was utilised to interpret transcripts and emerging patterns and themes
wereidentified.
Emergingthemes
Developmentofcollaborativeprofessionalcommunity
The academic team brought their content area knowledge to the project, (literacy and learning
languages),andtheeducationaldesignerbroughttechnicalexpertise.Thedataconfirmedthesenseof
teamfeltbytheauthorsasthenatureoftheprojectrequiredtheacademicteamtomovebeyondtheir
12
traditionalwayofworking.Thecomplexityandultimatesuccessofthesitedevelopmentwasdescribed
bySally,theeducationaldesigner:
Itwasjustahugeteamononesite.Andyouknowwhattheysayabouttoomanycooks.
Butyoumanagednottoburnanything,whichwasreallygood.Andthatwasthebiggest
challenge because lots of people wanted to do things differently and you had lots of
differentteachingstyles.
As the course developed, it became clear that a professional learning community had evolved. Staff
werecollaborativelyworkingnotonlyontheacademicaspectsofthewebsitedevelopmentbutalsoto
buildtechnicalskills.Pauladiscussesthis
Sallywasbuildingmy[technical]capability,andattimesthatwasstressful,frustrating,
and downright annoying because she would do some things for me but wouldn’t do
others.AndgraduallyIpickedupandlearntmore….thenIgotintoapositionwhereI
washelpingotherpeopleintheteam,soitwasaspiral.
Innovationonashoestring
Acommonthreadintheteam’steachingbackgroundisthe‘DoItYourself’philosophythatunderpins
NewZealandeducation.Comingfromthisperspective,theteamwereexperiencedinovercomingfiscal
‘roadblocks’. The journey of developing the Learn site paralleled this pattern where high levels of
accountabilityintermsofthesitebeingavailabletostudentsandtighttimeframesweremandated.This
was made increasingly complex as the educational designer supporting development was responsible
for overseeing the development of several other courses, all with academics unfamiliar with Learn
withinthesametimeframe.
Freya notes the pressure involved in developing online sessions while simultaneously developing her
own technical competencies. “I just feel that my technical abilities are not matched, and I feel that it
consumedsomuchofmytimeandtheworkloaddoesn’treflectthat.Ijustdon’tseehowIcansustain
that.”Shedescribes“AndIfoundthatreallyfrustrating,tothepointwhereIwasintears.”Paulaechoes
this“Iknowthefirstone[teachingsession]tookmetwoweekstowrite.”Shealsosuggeststhewider
impact of this. “There have been other consequences because I wasn’t able to direct my attention
acrossallpartsofmyjob.”ThepressureontheinternalinfrastructureishighlightedbyJo,whofound
accesstotechnicalsupportproblematic“IhadafantasticvideoIreallywantedtouseonthesite,but
they[technicalsupport]werejustfranticallybusyatthattimeoftheyear.”
Teacherinquiry
During the journey of course development members of the team where (unconsciously) operating
within an inquiry model. The possibility of blended/hybrid learning was a very distant thought at the
beginning of the process. However the process of responding to the changes and challenges of the
developmentprovidedsystematicopportunitiesforprofessionaldialogue,reflection,andfurtheraction.
Combining academic and institutional needs, this process of problem solving incorporated carefully
thoughtoutresponsestothecontext.
Rolesandresponsibilities
Personaldefinitionsofwhatismeanstobea‘teacher’emergedfromthedataasapointofparticular
interest.Thereisevidencetosuggestthatsometeammemberssawtheteacherroleasmeetingstudent
needs not only in content terms but also in delivery mode. For some the use of technology could be
viewed as a medium that drew on learners’ prior experience and knowledge and as a tool that
developed content knowledge. This view required carefully drawing together of pedagogy, academic
13
content,andlearnerknowledge;then,workingthroughateachingbasedplanninganddecisionmaking
processrefiningonlinedeliverytomaximisetheopportunityforstudentlearning.
However,thisrequiredtheteacherto‘letgo’ofapersonalneedtoengagewithstudentsinafaceto
face manner. Teachers need to work within their own outlined expectations. Reflecting on students’
questionsaboutanassignmentFreyaoutlines,“Ifeltoneofthemostpowerfulthingsaboutdoingthis
online teaching is that we have cut that dependency out. Everyone has been able to get the same
message.Itisuponline…..Iwon’tanswerquestionsaboutcertainthingsandtheyknowthatisbecause
itisonline.”
Thedatahighlightshowlecturerswhohadcreatedinteractiveonlinesessionshadaclearsenseofthe
benefits of increased student responsibility. These lecturers communicated confidence in the learning
experiencestheyhadcreatedandtheresponsibilityoflearnerstoengagewiththeseinatimelymanner.
Howevertheseteacherscautionedagainsttheadhocuseofthisapproachandexpressedconcernthat
online learning opportunities (delivered in a blended model to face to face students) were selected
based on the suitability of content. Some content clearly lent itself to this approach, similarly other
contentwasmorecoherentlydeliveredinafacetofacelecturerͲledcontext.
Conclusion
Whilemoreanalysisofthedataneedstobecompleteditisevidentthatthisresearchhashighlighted
how a mandated institutional requirement can be utilised to initially motivate and initiate effective
learningcommunities.Italsodocumentshowdifficultthisprocesscanbebothintermsofworkloadbut
alsoatapersonalandprofessionallevel.Theseacademicsnotonlystruggledwiththeactualdemandsof
creating resources but how this challenged their personal teaching philosophies, as very open
conversations needed to take place. This should be of interest to not only teaching staff but also to
administratorsastheyembarkonablendedteachingjourneytogether.
References
AmreinͲBeardsley,A.,Foulger,T.S.,&Toth,M.(2007).Examiningthedevelopmentofahybriddegree
program: using student and instructor data to inform decisionͲmaking. Journal of Research on
TechnologyinEducation,39(4),331Ͳ357.
CochranͲSmith,M.,&Lytle,S.,L.(2009)Inquiryasstance.Practitionerresearchforthenextgeneration.
NY,USA:TeachersCollegePress.
Connolly,M.,Jones,C.,&Jones,N.(2007).Newapproaches,newvision:capturingteacherexperiences
inabravenewonlineworld.OpenLearning,22(1),43Ͳ56.
Cowie, P. & Nichols, M. (2010). The clash of cultures: Hybrid learning course development as
managementoftension.JournalofDistanceEducation,24(1),77Ͳ90.
Davey, R. & Ham, V. (2008). Professional learning in preservice and inservice teacher education. A
comparativestudy.AresearchreportfortheconsolidationphaseofINSTEP.Christchurch,NZ:CORE
Education.
Davis,H.C&Fill,K.(2007).Embeddingblendedlearninginauniversity’steachingculture:Experiences
andreflections.BritishJournalofEducationalTechnology,38(5),817Ͳ828.
14
Davis,N.,Mackey,J.,Mcgrath,A.,Morrow,D.,Walker,L.&Dabner,N.(2010).BlendingonlineandonͲ
site spaces and communities: Developing effective practices. In D. Gibson & B. Dodge (Eds.),
Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference
2010(pp.2696Ͳ2698).Chesapeake,VA:AACE.Retrievedfromhttp://www.editlib.org/p/33778.
U
U
Ernst, J., V. (2008). A comparison of traditional and hybrid online instructional presentation in
communicationtechnology,JournalofTechnologyEducation,19(2),40Ͳ49.
Fitzgibbon,K.,&Jones,N.(2004).Jumpingthehurdles:Challengesofstaffdevelopmentdeliveredina
blendedlearningenvironment.JournalofEducationalMedia,29(1),25Ͳ35.
Mackey,J.(2010).Virtuallearningandrealcommunities:onlineprofessionaldevelopmentforteachers.
In E. Stacey & P. Gerbic (Eds.), Effective blended learning practices: EvidenceͲbased perspectives in
ICTͲfacilitatededucation(163Ͳ181).Hershey,PA:InformationScienceReference.
Parker,D.,Robinson,L.,&Hannafin,R.(2008).“Blending”technologyandeffectivepedagogyinacore
courseforpreserviceteachers.JournalofComputinginTeacherEducation,24(2),49Ͳ54.
Simplicio, J.(2004). Today’s teachersstruggletoeducate a generation ofstudents unlike any that has
everbeenseenbefore.JournalofInstructionalPsychology,31(1),71Ͳ74.
Snart,J.A.(2010).Hybridlearning.TheperilsandpromiseofblendingonlineandfaceͲtoͲfaceinstruction
inhighereducation.SantaBarbara,California:Praeger.
Yang, Y. & Cornelious, L, F. (2004). Ensuring quality in online education instruction: What instructors
should know? Paper presented at the Association for Educational Communications and Technology
Conference,Chicago,October,2004.RetrievedfromERICdatabase.
Zeichner, K. (2002). Beyond traditional structures of student teaching. Teacher Education Quarterly,
2002,29(2),59Ͳ64.
15
ULearn11
ResearchStreamProceedings
PaperAbstract
Name: Organisationalaffiliation:
Emailaddress: Title:
JocelynCranefield,PakYoong&SidHuff
SchoolofInformationManagement
VictoriaUniversityofWellington
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
U
U
U
U
U
U
Drivingteacherchangethroughbrokeringinanonlinecommunity
ecosystem
Abstract
Thiscaseresearchprojectinvestigatedhowonlinecommunitieshelpeddrivechangeamongstclustersin
New Zealand’s ICT PD programme. The programme aimed to embed effective ICTͲbased teaching
practices in schools, together witha studentͲcentred approachthat positioned the teacher’s role asa
facilitatoroflearning.
Anunofficialbloggingcommunity,actingasabridgebetweenofficialclusterͲbasedcommunitiesanda
globaledublogging network, played a key role in embedding new professional knowledge and beliefs.
Influential individuals from this community (connectorͲleaders) employed a set of sophisticated
brokeringpracticesthatpromotedteacherchangebyfosteringfocusing,persuading,aligning,adapting
and owning (developing ownership of new ideas and approaches). Their influence was extended into
schools by the activities of followers who acted as brokers across the online/offline community
boundary
Thestudyrevealedstronglynormativeworkingsinalayeredonlinecommunitysystemandtheinfluence
of nonͲofficial brokers and opinionͲleaders in this system. ConnectorͲleaders demonstrated strong
awarenessoftheneedsoftheirfollowersandmadedifferentiateduseofvarioussocialtechnologiesto
meet their needs. Their role was, however, largely unrecognised by school leaders, owing to its
operation outside of traditional organisational structures. The study suggests potential to use online
communitiestosupportprofessionalchange,butraisesquestionsaboutsystemͲlevelsustainability.
Introduction
Thisstudyinvestigatedhowonlinecommunitiesfacilitatedtheembeddingofprofessionalknowledgein
the context of professional change in the ICT professional development programme; a 3Ͳyear
professionaldevelopmentprogrammeforNewZealandschools.Thepaperbeginswithanoutlineofthe
study’s motivation, followed by an overview of the research method and presentation of results. It
concludesbyconsideringthestudy’simplicationsforpracticeandfutureresearch.
16
Working knowledge – knowledge we use in our work – has been described as “a fluid mix of framed
experience,values,contextualinformation,andexpertinsightthatprovidesaframeworkforevaluating
and incorporating new experiences and information” (Davenport & Prusak, 1998, p. 5). Teachers’
knowledge is deeply embedded in individual interpretive frameworks, belief structures, work routines
and practices (Richardson & Placier, 2001). Borko and Putman (1996) note that, “what teachers know
and believe is completelyintertwined, both among domains and within actions and context” (p. 677).
Thisintertwinedstructuregainsrigidityovertime(Bennett,1992),soitisnecessaryfornewpracticesto
be underpinned by compatible interpretive frameworks and beliefs in order for them to become
embedded(Handal,2004;Richardson&Placier,2001).
Various authors have promoted online communities as a suitable means of facilitating knowledge
transfer among professionals (e.g., Hargreaves, 2003; Hew & Hara, 2007; Wagner and Bolloju, 2005).
Thereis,however,littleunderstandingofthemechanism(s)throughwhichdeepprofessionalknowledge
transfer,orembedding,occursinanonlinecommunitysetting.Ourresearchaimedtoaddressthisgap.
Itwasguidedbythequestion:Howdoonlinecommunitiesofpractice(CoPs)facilitatethetransferand
embedding of professional knowledge? New Zealand’s school system provided a context in which the
research question was strongly topical: The government had embarked on a strategy of embedding
knowledge about effective, studentͲcentred teaching through ICT, with the goal of improving systemͲ
level equity, while leveraging its investment in ICT infrastructure. Its eͲlearning strategy (Ministry of
Education,2006)lookedtoonlinecommunitiesandnetworks,tohelpachievethis.
Researchmethod
Thestudyusedqualitativemethodswithintheinterpretivisttraditionandemployedcaseresearch(Yin,
2003), as is appropriate when generating explanatory theory (Gregor, 2006) and tackling a how
question. We selected online communities (A, B, C and D) from clusters where the ICTPD programme
was seen by stakeholders as having been successful; conducting semiͲstructured interviews with 41
participants including lead teachers, teachers, principals/deputy principals, facilitators and the
programmeleader.Weconductedtworoundsofinterviews,refiningquestionsasthemesemerged.
During fieldwork, we found that Community D’s online community had become inactive. More
significantly, we discovered that key individuals from communities A, B and C belonged to a highly
active,unofficialonlinecommunityofbloggersthatplayedaninfluentialrole(CommunityE).Inorderto
better understand this community, we interviewed four further members, bringing the total to 45
participants. We took an inductive approach to theory generation, coding data using text analysis
(Cresswell, 2003). In parallel with interviews, we analysed online records, including instant messaging
transcripts,blogs,forums,DeliciousandTwitter.Alargesetofemergentcodeswasgraduallyreduced,
andbridgingandtheoreticalcodescreatedaskeycategories,relationshipsandtrendsemerged.Results
werevalidatedataparticipantworkshopandwithananonymousfeedbackwiki.
Overviewofresults
Participantsinteractedinacomplexonlinecommunityecosystem(Castro,2004)inwhichCommunityE
functioned as a hub (Figure 1). Community E’s core members were passionate believers in the
transformativepowerofICT.Theyuseddiversetechnologiesincludingblogs,instantmessaging,Twitter,
Delicious, RSS feeds, and Teacher Tube videos, to sustain their beliefs, enrich their professional
understandings,andpromoteandbrokerknowledge.CommunityEoperatedasabridgingcommunity
through which new knowledge (values, beliefs and practices associated with what one participant
17
termed the new way) was brokered. All three active clusterͲbased communities had overlapping
membershipwithCommunityE.Theseoverlapsoccurredinavisiblezonewithinwhichcoremembers
interacted with a visible online presence, and a peripheral invisible zone within which their followers
interacted invisibly, via IM, email and phone; and faceͲtoͲface, with the core members. Although
invisibleincommunityE,thesefollowerswerevisibleintheirclosed,clusterͲbasedonlinecommunities.
Figure 2. System of
Figure1:Systemofcommunitiesshowingtieredparticipantroles
communities
Four unofficial roles were identified: regular teachers, followerͲfeeders, connectorͲleaders and global
thoughtleaders/connectors.(Bloglinkagesrevealedagroupofoverseasbloggerswithstrong,multiple
ties to Community E.) Brokering roles were performed by visible connectorͲleaders and invisible
followerͲfeeders. ConnectorͲleaders were respected, wellͲconnected educators who believed in the
potentialofICTforenhancinglearningifusedinastudentͲcentricway.Theyhadahighlevelofonline
visibility,authoringblogs,andinteractedlessvisiblyusingIM,TwitterandeͲmail.FollowerͲfeederswere
invisible followers in the blogging community. Within their clusters they participated in closed online
forums and IM discussions, but spentconsiderably more time engaging with regular teachers faceͲtoͲ
face.AsknowledgebrokerstheythereforespannedtheonlineͲofflinecommunityboundary.
ProfessionalchangeandembeddingwaspromotedbyfiveknowledgeͲembeddingprocesses:
x FocusingͲfocusingonaspecificapproach(e.g.,alearningmodelorteachingmethod)
x PersuadingͲpersuadingoneselforothersofthebenefitofthenewapproach
x AligningͲaligningemergingnormswiththoseofthecommunity,throughcomparison
andadjustment
x Adapting Ͳ adapting and modifying established practice, interpretive frameworks and
valuestoaccommodateemergingbeliefsandnorms
x Owning Ͳ developing ownership through personalisation of new knowledge,
frameworks,practices,beliefsandvalues.
The following brokering practices of connectorͲleaders, combined with differentiated use of
technologies,promotedthefiveknowledgeͲembeddingprocesses.
KnowledgeͲbrokeringpractices
18
Filteringandfocusing
ConnectorͲleadersselectedfocisuchaslearningmodelsandtheories,usingthesetofiltertheonline
contentandguidetheirblogposts.
It’sgettinganunderstandingofthewayotherpeoplethink,andseeingthatthere's
…partsofwhatthey'resayingthatfitwithwhatI'mthinking,andwhatIbelieve.
Thejoboffilteringcontentwasinpartdevolvedtotrustedglobaledubloggers:
There'saboutfivepeople…I'llsubscribetotheRSSfeedinmyBloglines…soIsee
everythingthattheystickontheirDel.ici.ous…Iuse[them]asafilter.
Thiswasfollowedbyamanualappraisalofquality,describedbyonepersonastriage.Oncetheyhad
identified suitable content, they tagged it to create relevance to their followers. Doing this created
significantvalue:
It'slikegoingtothelibrary,andratherthansearchingforyourowngoodbooks,some
nicelibrarian…says,"Herearefifteenbooksyoumightwellbeinterestedin"…these
guyshavefilteredoutawholelotofgoodstuff,andsoIcanfocusonreadingand
thinkingaboutit.(FollowerͲfeeder)
Table1detailsthefilteringandfocusingpracticesandtechnologiesused.
Practice
Technologies
Explanation
Establishingfoci:Selecting
RSSfeeds
Aidsfocusing;reduces
guiding/framingfoci
noiseofwebcontent
Scanning,screeningandfiltering: RSSfeeds
Enhancesfocusingby
Scanningcontentusingfocito
aggregatingcontenton
screenandfilter
relevantthemes
Following:Followingrespected, Tagging/RSSfeeds,
Facilitatesaligningofideas;
influentialpeopleand/or
email,Twitter,Skype/ Topicalshiftsinthemes
colleagues
iChat
keepideasfreshand
relevant(reͲfocusing)
Ensuresattentionisgiven
Filteringforquality(“triage”):
ManualdecisionͲ
toquality,relevant
Screeningmaterialforrelevance makingsupportedby
material;condensesinputs
andquality
Skype/iChatpeer
(focusing)
review
Socialbookmarking
Contentiscontextualised
Sortingandclassifying:Sorting
(Del.icio.us)
usingcategoriesrelevantto
andclassifyingcontentinto
community,promoting
familiarcategories(community
focusingandaligning
taxonomy)
(thematicconvergence)
Table1.FilteringandfocusingpracticesofconnectorͲleaders
19
Reinforcingandcontextualizing
Havingidentifiedrelevant,qualitymaterial,connectorͲleadersreinforcedandcontextualisedmaterialto
increase its appeal (see Table 2). Repackaging and localising familiar ideas increased relevance while
underliningandenrichingkeythemes:
I'vetakenthisbitfromoneperson,thisbitfromsomeoneelse,andpackageditup
differently.(ConnectorͲleader)
Addinganoriginalperspectivetoathoughtleader’scontentconferredauthoritybyassociationonthe
citing author, and expanded the influence of the originator. Stirring things up highlighted tension
betweenexistingpracticesandtheemergingnewapproach.Exposinginconsistencycanhelpmotivate
attitude change (OinasͲKukkonen, 2010; Simons, 2001). Reinforcing and contextualising amplified
themeswhilepromotingownershipatthelocallevel.
Practice
Technologies
Explanation
Promoting:Citingor
Blogs,OnlineVideos, Amplifiessignificanceofmessage;drives
recommendingablogpostor
Tagging,RSSFeeds
followerstosource(persuadingothers
presentationbyanotherperson
whilealigningwithsource)
Extending:Usingsomeoneelse’s Blogs,OnlineVideos, Addslocalvalueandrelevanceby
Tagging,RSSFeeds
contextualisingcontent.Reinforcesby
(referenced)blogpostasa
addingweightoflocalauthor,whogains
springboardforone’sown
furthercredibilitythroughassociation
thoughts(alsodescribedas
withthecitedmaterial/author
piggybacking)
(persuading;aligning)
Blogs,OnlineVideos, Asabove,butmaytriggerdeeper
Stirringup:Asabove,but
Tagging,RSSFeeds
engagementofreaderswithconceptsas
disagreeingwithareferenced
theyarechallengedbycognitive
source
dissonancetotake/justifyastance
(promotesstrongerfocusing)
Tagging:Taggingreferenced
Blogs,Tagging,RSS
Alertstheoriginatortoanew,relevant
materialwiththeoriginator’s
feeds,eͲmail
posting(focusingandaligning).Thismay
name
leadtotheauthorresponding,
generatingfurtherauthorityandimpact
(persuading),anddeepeningthe
conversation.
Commentatinginagroup:
Twitter,Skype/iChat ContextualisesarealͲtimepresentation,
Commentatingonablogor
promotingasharedinterpretation
conferencekeynoteto
(focusing,aligning)
contextualiseit,adding
local/personalopinion
Remixing:Juxtaposingcontent
Blogs,Tagging,RSS
Noveltyhelpsgainattentionandcan
fromdifferentsourcestomakea feeds
generatenewinsights.Maypromote
point;givinganew‘spin’
persuading.
Echoing/resonating:Writinga
Blogs,Tagging,RSS
Recyclingfamiliarthemesfromanew
blogpostthatresonateswith
feeds
angle(aligning)reinforcesconcepts.Lack
previouslyintroducedthemes
ofcitationsuggestsowningofconcepts.
(withoutreferencing‘source’)
20
Table2.ReinforcingandcontextualisingpracticesofconnectorͲleaders
Feedingandhelpingothers
ConnectorͲleadersunderstoodtheneedsoftheirfollowers,goingtoconsiderablelengthsto‘feed’them
byeͲmailingthemlinkstoblogposts.Thiscustomisedservicehelpedteachersworkouttheirnextsteps
and led to discussions via eͲmail, phone and/or faceͲtoͲface. ConnectorͲleaders also provided a
voluntaryjustͲinͲtimesupportserviceforeachotherandtheirfollowers,creatingaspiritofreciprocity.
Competence with technology was essential for the successful embedding of the new approach, so
assistance with technical issues was important. IM and Twitter were tools of choice for
seeking/providing assistance. ConnectorͲleaders provided a matchmaking service, linking schools to
externalindividualswithrelevantspecialistknowledge.Table3showsthepracticesusedforfeedingand
helpingothers.
Practice
Technologies Explanation
Feeding
Ensuresdeliveryofrelevant
Matching:Matchingincomingonline eͲmail
content,aidingabilityof
(blog)contenttoknownneedsof
recipienttointerpret,embed
clustersandindividuals
andenactnewknowledge
Passivefeeding:Taggingcontentso Tagging,RSS
Resultsinfeedingoffollowers
itcanbeaccessedbyothers(see
feeds
whouseRSSfeedsand
alsoSortingandClassifyingabove)
bookmarks;promotesfocusing
Activefeeding:Alertingindividuals
eͲmail,
Personalisingcontent,combined
whohavelimitedonlinetimeto
Skype/iChat,
withindividualattention,builds
specificrelevantblog/onlinecontent Twitter
relevanceandowning;sustains
focusing
Helpingothers
Beingavailable:Communityculture Twitter,
MutualfacilitationofjustͲinͲtime
involveslongperiodsofbeing
Skype/iChat
supportservicesupports
continuouslyavailableonline
adaptingandpromotesaligning
Sharingsuccessesandproblems:
Twitter,
Aformofpersuadingthat
Sharingandcelebratingsuccess
Skype/iChat
sustainsbeliefsandcommitment
Testingandbenchmarking:Testing
Twitter,
Practicalsupportforembedding
outideaswithcolleagues,making
Skype/iChat
asideasandpracticesevolve;
comparisonsaboutideas
promotesaligning
implementedindifferentcontexts
Practicalsupportforfollowersas
Brokeringconnectionsandsolutions: Twitter,
Skype/iChat, theyimplementnewprocesses
Brokeringconnectionsbetween
eͲmail
andtechnologies(adapting)
localcommunitymembersand
technologyoreducational
experts/practitioners
Defendingthecommunity:
Blog,Twitter, Reinforcescommunitybeliefs
Defendingcommunitymembers
Skype/IM
andassertsaligning.Bolsters
whoareunderattack,using
individualmoralebydefending
supportivecomments/arguments
againstnonͲalignedviews
21
Table3.FeedingandhelpingothersͲpracticesofconnectorͲleaders BrokeringpracticesoffollowerͲfeeders
FollowerͲfeedersfollowedtheblogsofafewconnectorͲleaders,alsocommunicatingbehindͲtheͲscenes
with them, using email and instant messaging (IM) as invisible backchannels. They saw themselves as
feeding on the ideas of those whom they perceived as being ‘above’ them, and then feeding this
knowledgeontothosebelowthem,astheyadaptedandrecycledthemesinnewcontexts:
I rely on Rebecca. She spends hours and hours looking at blogs on the net. She finds
anythingthat'sworthwhile,andshe'llalertyoutoit…I'mabitlikeaparasite.Itakeup
her ideas, and I'm not confident enough to give things back. But I am passing it on to
peoplebelowme.Thereare…peoplefeedingoffme,whowillnevergoonͲline,soIhave
togooutseekingmoretogivetothem…
Thisfeedinglanguageissuggestiveofafoodchaininwhichfood(knowledge)isreusedanddigestedby
successivelevelsofconsumers.Inthissystem,knowledgegainedvalueasitwasvaried,amplified,and
enriched by knowledge brokers. This increased in systemͲlevel alignment of thinking through
redundancyandsaturationofpowerfulthemes:
It seems to me that there were a lot of things coming at once…. there were a lot of
thingsoutthere…aboutinquirylearning,andthosesortofphilosophicalshifts.Andyou
sort of just read stuff. But it was major, and through communication with the other
schools…westartedtochangethewaywe'ddonethingshere….
FollowerͲfeeders extended the reach of connectorͲleaders’ knowledge by transferring and embedding
knowledgeinthefaceͲtoͲfaceworkplacecommunity.Theyactedasgatekeepers:
Icheckthingsoutpriortotellingstaff.IguessImakedecisionsaboutwhatwillwork,
andwhatnottotellthem…(FollowerͲfeeder,CoPB)
Conclusionandimplications
ThisstudyuncoveredtheworkingsofacomplexsocioͲtechnologicalsysteminwhichanunofficial,yet
influentialcommunityofbloggersactedasbrokers.Twotiersofknowledgebrokers–connectorͲleaders
andfollowerͲfeeders–performedrolesthathelpeddrivetheembeddingofnewprofessionalknowledge
(beliefs,values,understandingsandpractices)overathreeͲyearperiod.
WhileconnectorͲleadersplayedakeyroleasbrokersintheonlinerealm,theirinfluencewasextended
and amplified by the activities of followerͲfeeders who crossed the onlineͲoffline boundary. These
secondary boundaryͲspanners were critical to systemͲlevel change, and the discovery of their behindͲ
theͲscenesactivities(usingIMandeͲmailassideͲchannels)challengesthesimplisticnotionofthelurker.
The discovery of their role in transferring knowledge across the onlineͲoffline boundary is also
significant:WithatendencytofocusononlinesystemsasstandͲalonechannels,suchactivityiseasily
overlooked.
There was poor recognition of the nature and value of the connectorͲleader role. Some principals
portrayedthesepeopleaseccentricswhoseextramuralonlineactivityhadlittlerelevancetotheregular
22
teacher.Uponreflection,thisisunsurprising:ThevalueofconnectorͲleaderscouldonlybeseenwhen
theroleoffollowerͲfeederswastakenintoaccount,yettheinvisibilityoffollowerͲfeeders’interactions
with connectorͲleaders made this value impossible to recognise. Furthermore, schools have no
responsibility for systemͲlevel change and traditional staffing structures do not support such roles.
Taking a system perspective is undoubtedly difficult for those inside the system, but failure to do so
couldleadtothekindofproblemthatoccursifakeyspeciesisremovedfromafunctioningecology.Itis
unclear how best to support broker roles, but if online communities are to play a meaningful part in
promotingsystemͲlevelchange,existingstaffingmodelsandwaysofrecognisingvaluewillneedtobe
replacedwithnewmodelsandmeansofrecognisingthevalueofbrokering.
Knowledge transfer studies typically adopt a diffusion perspective. This study has highlighted the
importance of normative processes in knowledge transfer exercises where change is required. Online
communities appear suited to supporting change strategies that take a normativeͲreͲeducative
approach(Chin&Benne,1969),anapproachbasedonaccomplishingchangethroughculturalandsocial
means.
Aswithanycasestudy,thesefindingsarecontextual,socannotbeuncriticallyappliedtoothercontexts.
However, this limitation may be at least partly compensated for by the richness of insights that an
interpretive case can generate. It is hoped that the discovery of brokering roles and practices in the
study, and the understanding of how they were combined with technologies, may provide insights to
those planning the application of online communities in situations of change. The study suggests
potentialtouseonlinecommunitiesasasocioͲtechnologicaltool,notmerelytopromotetheacquisition
ofproceduralmethods,buttofosteradeeperchangeinthewayinwhichprofessionalsconceiveoftheir
roleanditssourceofvalue.
Acknowledgements
ThisresearchoutlinedinthispaperwassupportedthroughaBrightFutureTopAchieverDoctoral
ScholarshipfromNewZealand’sTertiaryEducationCommission.
References
Bennett,N.(1992).Perspectivesonknowledgebasesforteaching.InT.Plomp(Ed.),European
ConferenceonEducationalResearch,339Ͳ342.Enschede,TheNetherlands:UniversityofTwente.
Borko,H.,&Putnam,R.(1996).Learningtoteach.InD.Berliner&R.Calfee(Eds.),Handbookof
educationalpsychology,673Ͳ708.NewYork:Macmillan.
Castro,M.(2004).Thecommunityofpracticeecosystem:Oncompetition,cooperation,differentiation,
andtheroleofblogs.KnowledgeBoard.Retrievedfromhttp://www.knowledgeboard.com/lib/1567
Chin,R.,&Benne,K.(1969).Generalstrategiesforeffectingchangesinhumansystems.InW.Bennis,K.
Benne&R.Chin(Eds.),ThePlanningOfChange(2nded.),32Ͳ59.NewYork:Holt,Rinehartand
Winston.
Cresswell,J.W.(2003).Researchdesign:Qualitative,quantitative,andmixedmethodsapproaches(2nd
ed.).ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.
Davenport,T.,&Prusak,L.(1998).Workingknowledge:Howorganizationsmanagewhattheyknow.
Boston:HarvardBusinessSchoolPress.
U
U
23
Gregor,S.(2006).Thenatureoftheoryininformationsystems.MISQuarterly,30(3),611Ͳ642.
Handal,B.(2004).Teachers'instructionalbeliefsaboutintegratingeducationaltechnology.EͲJournalof
InstructionalScienceandTechnology,17(1),1Ͳ10.
Hargreaves,D.(2003).Educationepidemic:Transformingsecondaryschoolsthroughinnovation
networks.Retrievedfromhttp://www.demos.co.uk/media/educationepidemic_page277.aspx
Hew,K.,&Hara,N.(2007).Knowledgesharinginonlineenvironments:Aqualitativecasestudy.Journal
oftheAssociationforInformationScienceandTechnology,58(14),2310Ͳ2324.
MinistryofEducation(2006).Enablingthe21stcenturylearnerͲAneͲlearningactionplanforschools
2006Ͳ2010.Wellington,NewZealand.
OinasͲKukkonen,H.(2010).Behaviorchangesupportsystems:Thenextfrontierforwebscience.Web
ScienceConference2010.April26Ͳ27,2010,Raleigh,NC,USA.
Richardson,V.,&Placier,P.(2001).Teacherchange.InV.Richardson(Ed.),Handbookofresearchon
teaching(4thed.),905Ͳ947).Washington,DC:AmericanEducationalResearchAssociation.
Simons,H.(2001)Persuasioninsociety.ThousandOaks:Sage
Wagner,C.,&Bolloju,N.(2005).Supportingknowledgemanagementinorganizationswith
conversationaltechnologies:Discussionforums,weblogs,andwikis.JournalofDatabase
Management,16(2),1Ͳ8.
Yin,R.(2003).Casestudyresearch,designandmethods(3rded.).Newbury
U
24
U
ULearn11
ResearchStreamProceedings
PaperAbstract
Name: Organisationalaffiliation:
Emailaddress: Title: JocelynCranefield,PakYoong&SidHuff
SchoolofInformationManagement
VictoriaUniversityofWellington
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
U
U
U
U
U
U
Fosteringschoolchangethroughtheknowledgeembeddingcycle:
theroleofonlinecommunities
Abstract
This study reports on an interpretivist study that investigated how a subset of school clusters
participating in the ICT Professional Development (ICTPD) programme utilised online communities of
practice (CoPs) to facilitate the embedding (or deep transfer) of knowledge about new methods of
teaching and learning through ICT. Schools in the study were found to have undertaken a sixͲstage
changejourney,describedastheknowledgeͲembeddingcycle.Eachstagewascharacterisedbyadistinct
set of challenges, with online CoPs playing a different role in addressing these issues and helping to
facilitateprogressionthroughthecycle.Thestagesoftheknowledgeembeddingcyclewere:Plottingthe
Course,ComingonBoard,SettingOut,StayingonCourse,AnchoringandSettling.Completionofallsix
stages constituted the end of an embedding cycle, resulting in the routine use of a customised new
model or approach that was rolled out across the school, bound up with a supporting set of shared
understandingsandvalues.
Introduction
A Community of Practice (CoP) is a group of people who interact regularly and who are united by a
sharedinterestareaorprofession,andthevaluetheyplaceonlearninginthatarea(Wenger,1998).
CoPs are characterised by a sense of joint enterprise, shared accountability to a body of knowledge;
relationships of mutual engagement; and a shared repertoire of communal resources; artefacts,
assumptions,language,andunderstandings(Wenger,McDermott,&Snyder,2002).ThetermCoPwas
conceivedofintraditionalfaceͲtoͲfaceworksettings,butwithincreasingglobalisationandwidespread
uptakeoftheInternet,today’sCoPsarelikelytohaveavirtualdimension(Castro,2006;Kirshner&Lai,
2007). For this study we defined an online CoP in the broadest sense, as a CoP that relies on online
toolstoconnectitsmembers,whomayalsomeetfaceͲtoͲface(Dubé,Bourhis,&Jacob,2006;Lai,Pratt,
Anderson, & Stigter, 2005). Members may use traditional media (e.g., phone/fax) as well as IT tools
(e.g.,eͲmail, videoconference,newsgroup,forum,instantmessaging(IM),blogs,website,intranet)to
interact.WhiletraditionalonlineCoPsaretypicallyclosed,facilitatedandboundbyasharedplatform,
online CoPsthatarenotfacilitated alsoexisttoday,inthedenseareas ofreciprocallinksin blogging
25
networks (Efimova & Hendrik, 2005). Castro (2004, 2006) argues for the term community of practice
ecosystem to recognise the fact that individuals in today’s CoPs may interact in many overlapping
onlinespaces.
Online communities have been seen as providing benefits such as mitigating against the barriers of
distance, time and professional isolation, increasing opportunities for knowledge sharing, making
interactions more visible, sustaining these interactions and extending their reach (Davenport, 2004;
Hara&Kling,2002).Johnson(2001)suggeststhatonlineCoPschangenorms,makingiteasiertoshare
ideas. It has also been argued that online CoPs can act as an equaliser, removing traditional social
barriers to participation (BakerͲEveleth et al., 2005; Harasim, 1990), reducing psychological distance
(Rovai,2002)andpromotingsharedunderstanding(BakerͲEvelethetal.,2005).Thereis,however,little
research that provides evidence to support these purported benefits. Although it is known that
knowledgetransfercanoccurindistributedonlinesettings(Sarkeretal.,2005;Zhang&Watts,2003),
there is a poor understanding of how this occurs. Studies of online communities rarely go beyond
identifyingknowledgesharinganditsantecedentstoconsiderwhether,andhow,suchactivityachieves
deeper transfer. The study was motivated by this lack of understanding. It aimed to understand the
process through which professional knowledge is embedded (contextualised and integrated into
interpretiveframeworksandworkpractices),andtoidentifythetechnologies,roles,andotherfactors
thatcontributetodeeptransfer,orembedding.
New Zealand’s school system provided a context in which the above issue was strongly topical: The
governmenthadembarkedonastrategyofembeddingknowledgeabouteffectiveteachingthroughout
thesystem,atthesametimeaimingtocapitaliseonasignificantinvestmentonICTinfrastructure.Ithad
placed an onus on professional communities, including online communities and networks, to help
achievethis(MinistryofEducation,2005,2006).
Researchmethod
The research was conducted using a case research strategy (Yin, 2003) and an inductive process of
theorygeneration.TheresearchcasewastheICTPDnationalprofessionaldevelopmentprogrammefor
schools, comprising five CoP subunits: Four were regionally based clusters of 4Ͳ6 schools (educator
communities,withaninterestintheuseofICTforlearning)andoneblogͲbasedcommunity(avirtual
CoP of distributed teachers). Three of the four clusterͲbased CoPs combined facilitated online
discussions about teaching and learning with faceͲtoͲface workshops and meetings. Individuals also
interactedinformallyusingotheronlinetools(suchasiChat,Skype,Twitterandemail)andfaceͲtoͲface.
(ThefourthclusternolongerhadanactiveonlineCoP,usingICTtoolsforfunctionaltasksratherthan
professionaldialogueaboutlearning).Ourresearchcentredonahowquestion,soweselectedmature
clusters (nearing the end of the 3Ͳyear programme) in which knowledge about teaching and learning
withICTwasconsideredbyprogrammestakeholderstohavebeensuccessfullyembedded.
WeconductedtworoundsofsemiͲstructuredinterviewswith41membersoftheclusterCoPs(teachers,
lead teachers, principals and deputy principals, and facilitators). During data gathering in the clusters,
we found that a subset of key individuals belonged to the fifth CoP; an unofficial, informal virtual
community of distributed educators that overlapped with the more formal cluster communities. This
CoPmadestronguseofWeb2.0technologiesanditsmemberswereparticularlypassionateaboutthe
useofICTforstudentͲcentredlearning.Inordertobetterunderstandthebehaviorandroleofthisfifth
community, we interviewed four further people, bringing the total to 45. In addition, we collected
secondarydata,intheformofmilestonereports,online community forum records,Skypetranscripts,
blogcontent,andDeliciousandTwitterrecords.
26
We took an inductive approach to theory generation, coding data using a bottomͲup process of text
analysis (Cresswell, 2003). In parallel with interviews, we analysed online records, including instant
messagingtranscripts,blogs,forums,DeliciousandTwitter.Alargesetofemergentcodeswasgradually
reduced, and bridging and theoretical codes created as key categories, relationships and trends
emerged.Resultswerevalidatedataparticipantworkshopandwithananonymousfeedbackwiki.Data
were analysed at organisational (meso), individual (micro) and system (macro) levels, resulting in a
threeͲlevelexplanatorytheory.ThispaperreportsonthemesoͲ,ororganisationalͲlevelresults.
ThesixͲstageknowledgeͲembeddingcycle
Byiterativelymergingdatacategoriesrelatingtotheprocessofknowledgeembedding,wefoundthat
schoolshadfollowedasixͲstagechangejourney–whichwecalltheknowledgeembeddingcycle(KEC)–
as their understandings about teaching and learning with ICT became progressively embedded (see
Figure1).
Figure1:ThesixͲstageknowledgeembeddingcycle
Each stage of the cycle was characterised by a distinct set of activities and issues, with online CoPs
playingadifferentroleinaddressingissuesandfacilitatingprogressionthroughthecycle.Thestagesof
the KEC were: Plotting the Course, Coming on Board, Setting Out, Staying on Course, Anchoring and
Settling.Thenamesofthesestagesreferenceajourneyingmetaphorthatwasincommonuseamongst
participantsandwhichfosteredtheiracceptanceofchange.Completionofallsixstagesconstitutedthe
endofanembeddingcycle,resultingintheroutineuseofanewmodelormethodthatencapsulated
eachschool’snewapproach,boundupwithasupportingvaluesandbeliefs.Althoughthestagesappear
asclearlydelineated,therewereoverlapsbetweentheendofonestageandthestartofthenext.For
example,ComingonBoardoverlappedwiththenextstage,SettingOut,asteacherscameonboardat
different rates. In addition, although the cycle has six equal segments this does not mean that equal
amountsoftimewerespentineachstage.
27
We now summarise key issues that occurred at each stage, highlighting some of the ways in which
online CoPs facilitated the embedding of the new knowledge (practices, methods, values and
understandings),beforediscussingthesignificanceofresults.
Inthefirststage,PlottingtheCourse,leadersandfacilitatorsengagedinvisioning,selectingafocusand
buildingchangecoalitions.Theemphasiswasonestablishingthedirectionofchangeandhowtoenact
it.Plansforuseofonlinecommunitiesweremadeduringthisstage.
During thenext stage, Coming on Board, theemphasis moved to persuading individuals to committo
the professional change process. Facilitators used persuasion tactics, challenging and reframing the
statusquoofteachingwithpowerfulthemesandmetaphorsthatmadeitseemessentialtoembarkon
change. Online interactions during this stage helped to build commitment, faith in the new direction,
andsolidarity–asenseofbeing‘allinthesameboat’.Forumsprovidedasharedfocusandfosteredthe
developmentofsharedinterpretiveframeworksaspersuasivetermsandmetaphorsbegantobewidely
shared, referenced and varied in forum postings. (Figure 2 shows how variants of Prensky’s digital
immigrantmetaphorproliferatedinoneonlinecommunity,helpingreframeviewsoftheteacher’srole
whilebuildinggoodͲhumouredcollegialalignment.)
Figure2:CultivationofathemefromPrensky(2001)inonlineforum,showingthealignmentofthematic
variantswithintwofamiliesofmetaphors(CommunityA)
Theasynchronousnatureofforumsallowedteacherstoparticipatewhenandwheresuitedthem.This
allowed them time to review others’ comments, absorb their cumulative impact, and ensure their
responseswerealignedappropriately.
WhenIrespondit[is]…afterreadingotherssoIknowifIamontherighttrack...after
thinkingaboutthearticle,about what othershave written andthenwhenIhavetime
[toworkout]whatIthink.(Teacher)
Overtime,thecombinedimpactofmoderationandthecommunity’sopinionstobothalignmentanda
deepeningofindividualthinking.
As the readings went on and the moderations went on, you thought more
deeply…ratherthanjustyouhavingyouropinion,youweresortofforcedtothinkabout
the other person’s opinion… you broadened how you thought, and also perhaps
reinforced;“Yes,thisisthereasonwhyIthinklikethis”.(Leadteacher).
28
In the third stage, Setting Out, teachers piloted the schools’ chosen method(s), using a variety of
borrowed models. New knowledge became more distributed across clusters, increasing the value of,
and demand for, online collaboration. This was reflected in an expansion in the range of online tools
usedandinthepurposeofonlineengagement.LeadteachersengagedinmorefreesynchronouspeerͲ
toͲpeer activity in informal, invisibleengagement spaces, using IM (Skype and iChat). Here they could
safelytestouttheirthinking,offloadtopͲofͲtheͲheadfeedbackontheday’seventsandforumpostings,
engageinfrankdiscussion,seekhelp,sharenewjargon,anddrivetheircolleaguestoonlineresources.
Thisinformalcollaboration,togetherwithapracticeofpiggybackinginonlineforums–buildingonand
extending the ideas of others – helped individuals extend their thinking to new levels while fostering
collegialalignment.
To the surprise of several school principals, the culture of professional online discussion crossed over
into the informal workplace agenda. The online agenda and themes started to permeate faceͲtoͲface
discussions,dramaticallychangingthetenorofworkplaceinteractions.
…thewholeconversationinthestaffroomchangedfromtalkingaboutthethingsthat
weren’t about learning to talking about stuff that was about effective teaching and
learning….suddenlytherewereteacherstalkingteachinglanguage!
[I:]Andyoufeelitwastheonlineenvironmentthat[triggeredthat]?
That was part of it, because it made them think about what they’d been reading and
discuss it with someone else. Before they’d put it on[line] for everyone else, they
neededtotalkwiththeirmatesaboutit.(Principal)
The online community was, by now, creating an unprecedented level of visibility to the emerging
practices and thoughts of other teachers. Through participating in and/or reading online discussions,
individualsdiscoveredotherswithsimilarinterestsandlikethinking:
There were things that, even within [my] school, one of the teachers had been using,
and Ididn't know shewas inthe school doing that…. I could actually walk over to the
classroom and say, "Oh, can you show me how to do this?" It was quite good…It
encouraged that talk within the school, where you've read something…and you could
say,"Oh,I'vereadyourcommentaboutraͲraͲra,",andactuallytalktotheperson,rather
thandoingitonͲline.(Teacher)
Thisledtoanumberofinstancesofbuddying–sustained,productivepartnershipsthroughwhichlikeͲ
mindedteachershelpedeachotherwiththeirproblems.Buddyingbetweenteacherswithinschoolswas
sustained primarily through faceͲtoͲface interactions, while buddying across schools was more
dependent on online communication via IM tools, in soͲcalled sideͲconversations: discussions outside
thelargerforumͲbasedcommunitythatwereoffthevisiblerecord.
Inthefourthstage,StayingonCourse,thekeyissuewasmaintainingfocus–movingforwardwiththe
useofICTwhilestayingtruetothespiritofthenewstudentͲcentredapproach.Asindividualsbeganto
gain fluency they adapted their practice as well as the borrowed learning models and methods. They
sought and applied pragmatic, practical and technical knowledge, to aid them in effective delivery. A
desireformutualsupportandcollegialalignmentwasevidentthroughonlinepeerͲtoͲpeermonitoring
and benchmarking. While Coming on Board had been supported by an official, facilitated online
community, there was a shift during this stage towards a dependence on a nonͲofficial, distributed
onlinebloggingcommunityforleadershipandprovisionofknowledge.Asteacherscontemplatedtheir
next steps, and their needs became more personalised, the official schoolͲcentric online community
becamelessusefulandtherewasashifttowardsdependenceonindividualmembersofthisdistributed
29
communitytoprovidepersonalised,justͲinͲtimesupport.Leadteachersfacedfrequentchallengesand
werereliantontheadvice,affirmationsandopinionsofonlineinfluencerswithwhomtheydeveloped
close relationships, often communicating with them ‘invisibly’ via email or IM. Online interactions
amongst thisgroup becamemorefrequent,takingplace bothinvisible andinvisiblecontexts,suchas
instantmessagingandTwitter.TeachersalsoengagedinselfͲmonitoringduringthisstage,matchingup
theory with practice, reflecting on this online, and making practical adjustments. During Staying on
Course,knowledgeofthenewteachingapproachgainedconsiderabledepthandrichness.Itcontinued
tobepersonalisedandinternalisedbyindividuals,andbegantobecustomisedatthelevelofschools,to
fittheirorganisationalculturesandneeds.
In the penultimate stage, Anchoring, schools consolidated, integrated and routinised (made routine)
theirnewknowledge.Thefocusatthisstagewasondevelopingasharedapproachtothenewpractice,
[normalising and] routinising it, and formally documenting it. Within these limits, individuals were
encouraged to take a personalised approach. Knowledge became more unified, contextualised and
explicitasitwasembeddedinorganisationalandindividualroutines.Attheindividuallevel,itcontinued
to become more personalised and internalised (tacit). Informal online peerͲtoͲpeer communication
continued,withteachersaffirmingchange,celebratingtheirsuccesses,seekingandprovidingassistance
and reflecting on practiceinlight oftheory.Theoutcomeofthisstagewasknowledgethatwasmore
stronglyowned,aligned,routinisedandcontextͲspecific.
Thefinalstage,Settling,wasbasedaroundinstitutionalising–stoppingthejourneyinordertocement
thenewknowledgeinplace,atthecoreoftheorganisation’sroutinesandidentity.Cessationofchange
allowedtimeforlatecomerstoestablishthenewpractice.Individuals,whohadmasteredit,extended
the approach into new curriculum areas and/or ageͲlevels, making appropriate adjustments. The
benefits of formal online communities began to diminish, as schools in the clusters differentiated
themselvesfromeachotherandtheiremphasisshiftedtowardsbuildingonlinerepositoriesofschoolͲ
ownedmodelsandapproaches.Theresultingteachingplans,visionstatementsandcurriculareflected
the maturing,flowering, anddeeperunderstanding ofideas that hadbeenseededduringearlyonline
discussions,andwhichhadbeennurturedandenrichedduringthejourney.Bytheendofthisstage,a
new model or approach was being used routinely and was strongly owned, having been adapted and
customisedbyschoolsandpersonalisedandinternalisedbyindividuals.
SeveralparticipantsemphasisedtheviewthenewstudentͲcentred,ICTͲbasedteachingapproachwasa
new paradigm that could not become fully embedded until several embedding cycles, with new and
complementaryfoci,hadoccurred.ThemetaͲmodelfortheembeddingoftransformativeprofessional
knowledgeisthereforeaknowledgeͲembeddingspiralinwhicheachsuccessivecyclewrapsaroundand
reinforcesthepreviouscycle.Theembeddingofknowledgeisprocessthatisneverentirelycomplete,
characterised by the ongoing deepening and enrichment of understanding and increasing
personalisationofpractice.
Discussion
ThestudyupdatesCoPresearch,providingamodeltohelpunderstandhowonlineCoPscanfacilitate
‘deep’knowledgetransfer,asopposedtosimpleknowledgesharing.Thestudyalsodemonstratesthe
complexityofhowcontemporaryonlineCoPswork.Inparticular,ituncoveredasignificantamountof
invisible online community activity, often undertaken via IM tools. This invisible activity helped to
embed professional change, and to influence more visible, online activities, as well as events in the
(offline) workplace. The nature of interactions between formal/informal and visible/invisible online
30
contexts, and between the online/offline dimensions of a CoP, have emerged as important areas for
futurestudy.
Subject to further testing, the KEC could become a useful framework for schools embarking on
professional change. It promotes an awareness of stageͲdependent issues and how these might be
addressedbyonlineCoPs.Thestudywasalsousefulinidentifyingthevaluethatwasprovidedbyformal
schoolͲcentric online communities, versus unofficial communities with distributed leadership at
differentstagesofchange.Forexample,ComingonBoardwassupportedbyanofficial,facilitatedonline
community and this continued to build interͲschool alignment and discovery of likeͲminded peers.
However, as needs became more individualised during Staying on Course, there was a shift to
dependence on a nonͲofficial, distributed online CoP. During Anchoring, the official CoP once again
came into prominence, providing a focal point for aggregation of schoolͲspecific knowledge. This
suggests theneed for managers and facilitators to cultivate the kind of online environment that suits
their organisation’s state and stage of knowledge. It may be useful to alternate the periodic
reinvigoration of official online communities with the recruitment of individuals to join the more
informal,distributedcommunitiesthatsustainknowledgedevelopmentanddiscovery.
Acknowledgements
This research outlined in this paper was supported through a Bright Future Top Achiever Doctoral
ScholarshipfromNewZealand’sTertiaryEducationCommission.
References
BakerͲEveleth, L., Sarker, S., & Eveleth, D. (2005). Formation of an online community of practice: An
inductivestudyofkeyelements.Proceedingsofthe38thHawaiiInternationalConferenceonSystem
Sciences(HICSS'05),8,254b.Retrievedfrom
http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/210.1109/HICSS.2005.1275
Castro,M.(2004).Thecommunityofpracticeecosystem:Oncompetition,cooperation,differentiation,
andtheroleofblogs.KnowledgeBoard.Retrievedfromhttp://www.knowledgeboard.com/lib/1567
Castro,M.(2006).Revisitingcommunitiesofpractice:Fromfishermanguildstotheglobalvillage.Paper
presented at the 3rd European Knowledge Management Network Summer School, Madrid, Spain.
Retrievedfromhttp://www.knowledgeboard.com/item/2713.
Cresswell,J.W.(2003).Researchdesign:Qualitative,quantitative,andmixedmethodsapproaches(2nd
ed.).ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.
Davenport,E.(2004).Doubleagents:Visibleandinvisibleworkinanonlinecommunityofpractice.InP.
HildrethandC.Kimble(Eds.),Knowledgenetworks:Innovationthroughcommunitiesofpractice(pp.
256Ͳ266):IdeaGroupPublishing.
Dubé, L., Bourhis, A., & Jacob, R. (2006). Towards a typology of virtual communities of practice.
InterdisciplinaryJournalofInformation,Knowledge,andManagement,1,69Ͳ93.
Efimova,L.,&Hendrik,S.(2005).Insearchforavirtualsettlement:Anexplorationofweblogcommunity
boundaries Updated version of a paper presented at Communities and Technologies Conference
2005.Retrievedfrom
U
U
U
U
U
U
31
https://doc.telin.nl/dsweb/Get/DocumentͲ46041/weblog_community_boundaries.pdf
Hara, N., & Kling, R. (2002). Communities of practice with and without information technology. In E.
RasmussenandE.Toms(Eds.),Proceedingsofthe65thannualmeetingoftheAmericanSocietyfor
InformationScienceandTechnology(Vol.39,pp.338Ͳ349).Medford,NJ:InformationToday,Inc.
Harasim,L.(1990).Onlineeducation:Perspectivesonanewenvironment.NewYork:Praeger.
Johnson, C. (2001). A survey of current research on online communities of practice. The Internet and
HigherEducation(4),45Ͳ60.
Kirschner, P. A., & Lai, K. (2007). Online communities of practice in education. Technology, Pedagogy
andEducation,16(2),127Ͳ131.
Lai,K.,Pratt,K.,Anderson,M.,&Stigter,J.(2005).Literaturesynthesisandreview:Onlinecommunities
ofpractice.ReportforNewZealandMinistryofEducation.Retrievedfrom
http://educationcounts.edcentre.govt.nz/publications/curriculum/lrsͲonlineͲcom.html.
MinistryofEducation(2005).BriefingfortheincomingMinisterofEducation,October2005.Wellington,
NewZealand:Author.Retrievedfrom
http://www.minedu.govt.nz/index.cfm?layout=document&documentid=10907
Ministryof Education(2006). Enabling the 21st centurylearner Ͳ An eͲlearning action plan for schools
2006Ͳ2010.Wellington,NewZealand:Retrievedfrom
http://www.minedu.govt.nz/index.cfm?layout=document&documentid=10475&indexid=1024&index
parentid=1072
Rovai,A.(2002).Buildingsenseofcommunity atadistance.International Review ofResearch inOpen
andDistanceLearning,3(1),1Ͳ12.
Sarker, S., Sarker, S., Nicholson, D. B., & Joshi, K. (2005). Knowledge transfer in virtual systems
development teams: An exploratory study of four key enablers. IEEE Transactions on Professional
Communication,48(2),201Ͳ218.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Learning, meaning and identity. Oxford: Cambridge
UniversityPress.
Wenger,E.,McDermott,R.,&Snyder,W.(2002).Cultivatingcommunitiesofpractice.Boston:Harvard
BusinessSchoolPress.
Yin,R.(2003).Casestudyresearch,designandmethods(3rded.).NewburyPark:Sage.
Zhang, W., & Watts, S. (2003). Knowledge adoption in online communities of practice. ICIS 2003
Proceedings.Paper9.Retrievedfromhttp://aisel.aisnet.org/icis2003/9
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
32
U
ULearn11
ResearchStreamProceedings
PosterAbstract
Name: Organisationalaffiliation:
Emailaddress: Title:
MareeDavies&AnneSinclair
UniversityofAuckland
[email protected]
[email protected]
U
U
U
U
I think that talking online was really awesome, we got to argue and
disagree
PosterAbstract
Research on the Paideia Method (a method for discussing a topic) was conducted in 20 classrooms
acrossfiveschools,ofvaryingsocioeconomicenvironments(ages11Ͳ13)inAuckland,NewZealandin
2010. The researchers sought to further examine the results from their pilot study of the Paideia
Seminar,entitled‘TalkingAllowed:Ilikeitwhentheteacherletsustalkwithouttellinguswhattosay’
trialed in 2008 (Sinclair & Davies, 2011). In addition, in order to provide the optimum conditions to
preparethe students fortheface to face seminars, an online component (open source software) was
addedasanalternativemediumtoassiststudentsintheirpreparation.Theresearchquestionswere:
What happens to the Nature of Interaction and the Complexity of the Discussion when students
participateinaPaideiaSeminarandanonͲlinediscussioninpreparationforthefacetofaceSeminar?
WhatistheoptimalroleoftheteacherwhenparticipatinginaPaideiaSeminarandanonͲlinediscussion
toincreasecomplexityofdiscussion?
Methodology
The study used a mixed method exploratory design, (Author? 2003). The data for normative practice,
onͲlinediscussionandfaceͲtoͲfacewassubͲdividedintotwomaincategories:TheNatureofInteraction
andTheComplexityoftheDiscussion.TheNatureoftheinteractionwasanalysedaccordingtothetype
of interaction – e.g. student to student with a question (SSQ). Within the Nature of Interaction, the
dialogueinbothonͲlineandfaceͲtoͲfacewasanalysedaccordingtoitscomplexity,usingthefivestages
ofSOLO(theStructureofObservedLearningOutcomes)taxonomydevelopedbyBiggsandCollis(1982).
Results
Thisstudyfoundthatthecomplexityofthediscussionincreasedwhenteachertalkwasreducedandthe
interactions included mostly studentͲtoͲstudent responses in both a faceͲtoͲface seminar and onͲline
discussions. In particular the results from the onͲline discussions revealed the most significant shifts
fromsurfacetodeeplearning.Thestudyrevealedthesignificanceoftheteacher’sroletothestudentͲ
toͲstudentresponsesbeingatahighcomplexityofthinking.ForbothfaceͲtoͲfaceseminarsandtheonͲ
33
line Moodle discussion, when teachers provided opportunity and directions for students to garner
domainknowledge,theresultingdialoguewashigherincomplexity.
ULearn11
ResearchStreamProceedings
PaperAbstract
Name: Organisationalaffiliation:
Emailaddress: Title:
NikiDavis&DarrenSudlow
UniversityofCanterbury
[email protected]
[email protected]
U
U
U
U
AchievementsoftheSouthernCentralDivideschoolsinimplementing
personalisedblendedlearning
Abstract
CantaNetandWestNeteͲlearningclusterscametogetherin2010forathreeͲyearlongregionalproject
topersonaliselearningbyblendingonlinelearning,teachingandprofessionaldevelopmentacrosstheir
mainlyruralschoolswithsupportfromtheMinistryofEducationVirtualLearningNetwork.Partnering
with the University of Canterbury eͲLearning Lab, teachers’ achievements have been supported and
accreditedwithpostgraduatecoursesthatalsoaimtomodelpersonalisedonlineandblendedlearning.
Thispapercelebratestheachievementsoftheinitiativethroughaselfstudybytwoofitsleadlearners.
Introduction
Blended and online learning and teaching benefits student learning and achievement and is a rapidly
growingpracticeinallsectorsofeducationworldwide(LarreamendyͲJoerns&Leinhardt,2006;Means
et al, 2009; Oosterhof, Conrad & Ely, 2008), including the school sector (Powell & Barbour, 2011;
Elbaum,McIntyre&Smith,2002;Tiakiwai&Tiakiwai,2010),aswellaseducationforadultlearnerswith
literacy and numeracy needs (Davis & Fletcher, 2010). Teacher education institutions increasingly use
onlineandblendedprogrammestoreachmorefutureteachersandalsotoextendsupporttostudents
whentheyareoffcampusandinschools(Davis,2010).
This also brings new opportunities and challenges for teacher professional development and the
organization of schools, including networked learning between schools (Stevens & Davis, 2011). We
recognisethatfewschoolsinNewZealandarecurrentlyorganisedtoprovideteacherswiththesupport
thattheyneedtomovetoonlineteaching(Barbour,Davis&Wenmoth,2011)andnotethatoneofthe
challengesencounteredbythosewhoofferprofessionaldevelopmentistodesignopportunitiesthatare
attractiveandfitwiththeprofessionalcontextsofparticipants.
Online and blended learning in primary and secondary schools can expand educational opportunities
and improvestudent outcomes and skills. However, while student motivation, educational choice and
34
administrative efficiency can be enhanced with effective design and partnerships, the quality of
educationisthreatenedwhentheyarelacking.Blendedonlinelearningbyclassroomteachershasthe
potential to encourage personalized learning opportunities provided that teachers aim to address
different student needs, rather than to supplement teacherͲcentred practices (Elbaum, McIntyre &
Smith,2002).
Blended and online learning stimulate organisational challenges, including the dispersing of the
teacher’s role across a number of people such as the eTeacher and students’ eDeans and greater
distributionofleadershipwithinandacrossschoolsandthepartneringorganisations(Stevens&Davis,
2011).Thereforeprofessionaldevelopmentmustbecarefullynegotiatedandscaffoldedtomodelbest
practicesforonlineandblendedteachingandlearningforteachersandteachereducators,andtobest
servestudents’organizationstoo(Dabner&Davis,2010).
InNewZealand,thegovernmentiscurrentlyimplementinganactionplan to equipmostschools with
ultrafast broadband (see http://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/ultraͲfastͲbroadbandͲinvestmentͲ
proposalͲfinalised). This has both equity and economic drivers. The Ministry of Education Virtual
Learning Network (VLN) has enabled clusters of mainly rural schools to develop online programmes
using synchronous or asynchronous methods (Barbour et al, 2011). The need for professional
developmenttoimplementeffectiveonlineandblendedlearningisthereforerapidlyincreasinginNew
Zealand and innovative approaches to professional development that build upon knowledge of
eͲlearning,includingkaupapaMaorieducation(e.g.Tiakiwai&Tiakiwai,2010)andrelatedprofessional
development(e.g.Davis,Preston&Sahin,2009).
BlendedlearningdevelopedintheSouthernCentralDivideCluster
RegionalnetworksofschoolshaveformedinNewZealand.OneexampleisCantaNet,whichoriginated
in the first eͲlearning cluster of schools (Cantatech) over a decade ago. CantaNet merged with
AorakiNet,andjoinedWestNettobecomeasuperclusterofaround30ruralschoolsthataimtodevelop
personalisedblendedlearningapproachesacrosstheSouthIsland’scentraldivide.Thispaperdescribes
anovelapproachtoprofessionaldevelopmentthatweareimplementingwithteachersinCantaNetand
WestNet schools to increase personalised blended learning in their schools that also enables those
teacherstogainpostgraduatecreditfortheirachievements.Ourapproachisnovelbecauseweaimto
personalisetheprofessionaldevelopment
CantaNet, Aorakinet and WestNet eͲlearning clusters came together in 2010 for a threeͲyear long
regional project to personalise learning by blending online learning, teaching and professional
development across their mainly rural schools with support from the Ministry of Education Virtual
LearningNetwork.PartneringwiththeUniversityofCanterburyeͲLearningLab,teachers’achievements
have been supported and accredited with postgraduate courses that also aim to model personalised
onlineandblendedlearning.Thispapercelebratestheprojectparticipants’achievementsthroughaself
studybytwoofitsleadlearners.
The unique and challenging aspects of this professional development have been to model the
personalisingoftheteachers’learning,whilealsomaintainingthequalityofpostgraduatestudiesthat
link teachers to relevant knowledge in our field as well as developing their skills and practice. In our
WikiEducator site we publicly shared the early design in 2010 as follows (Storr et al, 2010, see
http://wikieducator.org/SCD):
Wewillpersonaliselearningby:
U
U
U
U
35
x
x
x
36
Enabling teachers and learners to construct blended learning programmes of
study.
Givinglearnerschoicesoverhowtheircoursesaretaught.
Challengingschoolstructuresandsystems.
Wewilldevelopaframeworkforinnovativeteachingby:
x Developingteacherleaders.
x Nurturingcommunitiesofpracticeanddistributeddepartments.
x Promotingcollaborativecoursedevelopmentandinnovativeteaching.
x Providing professional learning to teachers in the areas of pedagogy and
technology.
Weareproposingaprogrammeofprofessionallearninganddialoguethatwillenable
teachers and schools to develop an approach to teaching and learning that will
motivateandengagelearners.
Theprojectdevelopedthisinthreephases,twoofwhicharesupportedbyaUniversityofCanterbury
course. Our strategy adapted two postgraduate courses to enable and reward the teachers with a
Postgraduate Certificate in Education, while also providing a measure of quality assurance for the
professionaldevelopment.
Phase1
The first course EDEM628 ‘Best practices in online learning and teaching’ was adapted into and
enhancedwithmanyworkshopstodevelopsoftwareskillsaswellasbuildingacommunityamongthe
teachers,ePrincipals and teacher educator. For example, the course started with a twoͲdayretreatin
early March 2010 on the university campus where teachers began to adopt the Moodle Learning
Management System and VLN MyPortfolio, WikiEducator, and the University of Canterbury eLibrary.
SkilldevelopmentcontinuedthroughvideoconferencetutorialsandonlinelearningintheVLNMoodle.
The first assignment of an Institutional Review in June 2010 provided important information for the
project and all participating schools, and was recognised as an outstanding achievement for many
teachers.GuidancewasprovidedintheLearningManagementSystem(e.g.Ko&Rosen,2001)andon
WikiEducator.AnexampleiscanbeviewedwithinacasestudybyteacherMattMaudeinWikiEducator
(seehttp://wikieducator.org/SCD/SCD_Case_Studies#1._Case_study_of_web_enhanced_teaching_of_Physics_.26_Chemistry).
Teachersthentookturns,withinasmallgroupwhohadcommoninterest,tofacilitateonlinediscussion
of a relevant reading over the winter months. Each teacher selected a reading with support of the
courseleaderandmanyfollowedthisupwithashortliteraturereviewonatopicofhisorherchoice.
Examplesofreviewsthatremainvaluabletothewholecommunityare:“Personalisedlanguagelearning
through the blended approach and ePortfolios” and “Mobile learning for mobile learners”. These are
made available to peers through the teachers’ ePortfolio in VLN MyPortfolio. The teachers’ major
projectwastotrialorenhanceblendedlearningandtoreportonthattrial.
AsummerretreatinNovember2010intheinnovativeteachingroomontheUniversityofCanterbury
campus permitted the first exciting ‘Show and Tell’ of the star teachers’ achievements in blended
learning,accompaniedbyfeedback,includingparticipationbyamemberoftheVLNteamintheMinistry
of Education. The third retreat in March 2011 on the West Coast was more reflective and included
CanterburyFellowScottMcLeodspeakingaboutthebigshiftsineducationandsociety.Thefirstcourse
hadextendedoverayeartoenablesignificantselfpacingpersonalisedtoeachteachers’context,with
increasinguseofMyPortfoliobytheteacherstoshowcasetheirreflectivedevelopmentandexhibittheir
achievements. Lead teachers also presented their work to meetings of cluster principals and at the
national ULearn conference in October 2011 (see Appendix 1). Recordings of presentations were also
madepublicthroughtheprojectblogfacilitatedbyDarrenSudlow(seehttp://cantanet.org/).
U
U
U
U
37
2012:Thefinalyearoftheproject
ThesecondcourseforthePostgraduateCertificateiscurrentlybeingdesignedtopersonaliselearningto
the third and final stage of this project, and to increase the spread and sustainability of the blended
learningincludingitsleadership.Forthisculminatingcourse/projectworkthemainvenuemovestothe
individualandgroupareasofMyPortfolio(awayfromVLNMoodle)soastoincreasethesustainabilityof
access to resources and to increase the visibility of the achievements. The projects’ 2011 November
retreatwillstartthepersonalisationdesign forthe teachersandtheirschools. Startingin March 2012
NikiDaviswillleadthecourseofactivitiesandassessmenttobettermodelreflectivedevelopmentasa
leadlearner.ShealsoplanstosharesomeoftheseinWikiEducatorwhilealsodirectingparticipantsto
makegooduseoftheUniversityofCanterburyeLibraryanditslibrariansupport.Additionalcontentwill
include the development of knowledge and skills related to professional and organisational change
drawing on an existing postgraduate course (EDEM630 Change with digital technologies in education,
including Davis, 2011 in WikiEducator). Again the ePrincipals will facilitate the organisational
developmentoftheschools,includingtheannualeventforclusterschoolprincipalsandotherleaders.
They will also take special care of the teachers who join the project at this late stage (due to the
inevitable turnover of school staff). Assignments planned include negotiated contributions to the
following:
1. Institutional reviews of blended learning within and across schools. These will update and
extendthe2010institutionalreviewsthatwerepartofthefirstcourse.
2. Eachteacherwillalsobesupportedtodevelopadetaileddescriptionofoneaspectofbended
learning that has emerged plus critical review to inform, sustain and support further
developmentparticularlyinitiativesacrossnetworkedschools.
Althoughthisinnovativeapproachtopersonalisedblendedonlineprofessionaldevelopmentcomeswith
manychallengesaswellasbenefits,thepurposeofthispaperistocelebrateachievementsincludingthe
innovativeapproachtoprofessionaldevelopment.Thechallengeswillbetheclarifiedinlaterworkonce
wehaveworkedthoughthemallwiththesupportofthisoutstandingprofessionalcommunity.
Acknowledgements
The Southern Central Divide Blended Learning Programme (SCD BLP) regional eͲlearning cluster is a
three year project supported by the Ministry of Education and the VLN. We wish to acknowledge all
participants in the schools, University of Canterbury, Ministry of Education and service providers
includingWayneMackintoshandWikiEducator.
References
Barbour,M., Davis,N.E. &Wenmoth, D. (2011).Illustrating online distance learning in schools in New
Zealand andNorth America Ͳ a DEANZ Webinar in association with the University of Canterbury eͲ
Learning Lab & Core Education. Retrieved from http://www.deanz.org.nz/home/index.php/onlineͲ
seminars/pastͲwebinars
Dabner, N., & Davis, N.E. (2009). Developing best practices in online teaching and learning to impact
studentsandtheirorganizations.InSameplaces,differentspaces.ProceedingsofASCILITEAuckland
2009.Retrievedfromhttp://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/auckland09/procs/filename.pdf
U
U
U
38
Davis,N.E.(2010)Technologyinpreserviceteachereducation.InP.Peterson,E.Baker,B.McGaw(Ed.),
InternationalEncyclopediaofEducation,Vol.8.(3rded.)(217Ͳ221).Oxford:Elsevier.
Davis,N.E.(2011,inpreparation). Changewithdigitaltechnologiesineducation.RetrievedSeptember
18,2011fromhttp://wikieducator.org/Davis(2011)
Davis, N. & Fletcher, J. (2010). EͲlearning for adult literacy, language and numeracy: Summary of
findings.Wellington:MinistryofEducation.
Davis, N., Preston, C. and Sahin, I. (2009) Training teachers to use new technologies impacts multiple
ecologies:Evidencefromanationalinitiative.BritishJournalofEducationalTechnology,40(5),861Ͳ
878.
Elbaum, B., McIntyre, C., Smith, A. (2002). Essential elements: Prepare, design and teach your online
course.Madison:Atwoodpublishing.
Ko,S.&Rossen.,S.(2001).Scoutingtheterritory:exploringyourinstitution’sresources.InKo&Rossen
(Eds)Teachingonline:apracticalguide(pp.19Ͳ35).Boston:HoughtonMifflin.
LarreamendyͲJoerns, J., & Leinhardt, G. (2006). Going the distance with online education. Review of
EducationalResearch,76(4),567Ͳ605.
Means,B.,Toyama,Y.,Murphy,R.,Bakia,M.,&Jones,K.(2009).EvaluationofevidenceͲbasedpractices
in online learning: A metaͲanalysis and review of onlineͲlearning studies. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
DepartmentofEducation,OfficeofPlanning,Evaluation,andPolicyDevelopment.
Oosterhof,A.,Conrad,R.,M.,&ElyD.,P.(2008),Chapter1:Historicalperspective.InA.,Oosterhof,R.M.
Conrad,&D.P.Ely,Assessinglearnersonline.(pp2Ͳ13).Colombus,OH:Pearson.
Powell,A.&Barbour,M.(2011).AnexaminationofgovernmentpoliciesforeͲlearninginNewZealand’s
secondaryschools.JournalofOpen,FlexibleandDistanceLearning,15(1),75Ͳ89.
Stevens, K. & Davis, N.E. (2011). Leadership of online distance learning in schools in New Zealand Ͳ a
DEANZ Webinar in association with the University of Canterbury eͲLearning Lab. Retrieved from
http://www.deanz.org.nz/home/index.php/onlineͲseminars/pastͲwebinars
Storr,T.,Sudlow,D.,Smith,V.,Graham,P.&Davis,N.E.(2010).SouthernCentralDivideICTPDCluster.
Retrievedfromhttp://wikieducator.org/SCD
Tiakiwai,SͲJ.,&Tiakiwai,H.(2010).Aliteraturereviewfocusedonvirtuallearningenvironments(VLEs)
andeͲlearninginthecontextoftereoMaoriandkaupapaMaorieducation.Wellington:Ministryof
Education.
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
39
Appendix1:SCDteachersULearn2011blurb
This presentation provides a summary of some of the projects that individuals have been working on
overthelast18monthsandhowtousesomeofthesenewtools.Wewillshowyouhowwehaveused
cool tools like Moodle, GoogleApps, Mahara (EͲportfolios), Webquests, Social Media, Video
Conferencing,SkypeandWebVideotoeducate.
WearenotexpertsbutcoalͲfaceteacherswhoaretryingtoblendthewayweuseICTintheclassroom
alongwithfacetofaceteaching.
Inoursessionwewillshowyouapproachestousethesetoolseffectivelyandsuccessfullyinboththe
primaryandsecondaryareas.Wehopeyoucomeawaynewtoolsyoucanusestraightaway.
Wewillshowyou:
x JustinThompson:StudentdrivenMoodlecoursesandusingGoogleDocseffectivelyinagroup
setting.
x MaryChisnall:UsingePortfoliosandMoodleinprimaryschools.
x LouiseDavy:StudentsusingWebquestsinaselfdirectedway,whilealsousingGoogleDocsto
allowstudentstopresenttheirwork.
x LindaHutt:UsingSocialMediaandVideoinadramaticway
x MattMaude:BeyondtheShoeBox.IntroducingePortfolioseffectivelytostaffandYear9.
40
ULearn11
ResearchStreamProceedings
PaperAbstract
Name: Organisationalaffiliation:
Emailaddress: Title:
AnneͲMarieHunt,LindaMcMurray&VickiNeedham
SchoolofEducationalStudies&HumanDevelopment
UniversityofCanterbury
anneͲ[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
U
U
U
U
U
U
EvolvingeffectiveeͲlearningpracticeswithresearchfromaregional
campus
Abstract
In 2010 the University of Canterbury(UC) changed their learning management system to a version of
MoodlecalledLearn.InthesameyeartheflexiblelearningoptionsoftheUniversity’sprimaryteacher
educationprogrammewererevitalisedsothatallcourseshaveone,andonlyone,Learn‘course’site.
Further developments in 2011 shifted the emphasis from print to digital resources, and helped to
embedLearnas an essential learningand teaching tool in all courses.Consequently, all courses make
greater use of blended eͲlearning for campus, regional and distance students within curriculum,
educationandprofessionalinquiry/professionalpractice.
ThefirstthreesemestersofstudentsenrolledintheRotoruacampus’blendedeͲlearningoptionofthe
UC Bachelor of Teaching and Learning (Primary) qualification were researched through individual
interviews, focus group discussion and observations. This paper presents the emerging ‘effective
practices’usedwithinLearn,asidentifiedinAugust2011,bystudentsandtheirlecturersinthisinitial
teachereducationprogrammebasedintheUCRotoruaregionalcampus.
Introduction
Giventhe2011RotoruaYear2cohortareamongthefirstUCCollegeofEducation(CoEd)studentswho
have studied online using the Learn learning management system (LMS) we were keen to gain their
perspectives of ‘effective practices’ during their first three semesters of study. With the considerable
developmentofeͲlearninggloballythereismuchresearchincludingsomevaluablestudiesof‘effective
practices’. However there is little or no research focusing on a MĈori and nonͲMĈori ethnic mix that
reflectsourRotoruacontext.Wethereforehadastronglocalmotivationtoresearchthiscontextwith
ourstudentsandsharethefindingswithourUCcolleaguestocontinueimprovinglearningandteaching
practicesinourowninstitutionandbeyond.ThisresearchalsosupportsthegoalsoftheNewZealand
government’s Tertiary Education Commission in “…increasing the achievement at degree…levels of
underͲrepresented groups, especially MĈori and Pacifica students,…and enhancing support structures
withinuniversities”(MinistryofEducation,2008.p.14).
41
Rotoruacontext
Since the Rotorua regional initiative was established in 1997 there has been a gradual shift in course
delivery from printͲbased to online learning, and from lecturers relying solely on telephone
communicationtoagreater useofcomputerandvideoconferencecommunication. Theseshiftshave
mostly been in response to student and institutional needs and emerging availability of innovative
technologicallearningandteachingtools.
The findings of this research will also contribute to the reͲdevelopment of the BTchLn degree for
implementation from 2012 (Brooker, 2010). Stakeholders of the Rotorua regional centre, which was
establishedinresponsetolocalneedsparticularlytoprovideforacommunitywhereMĈorimakeupa
significantpercentageofthepopulation,arekeentocontributetothedegreereͲdevelopmenttoensure
thatthisqualificationcontinuestoberesponsivetolocallyidentifiedandfuturenationalneeds.
TheRotoruacohortof23preͲserviceprimaryteacherstudents(20femaleand3males)whobegantheir
studies in2010includes9studentswhoidentify themselves as MĈori,2Korean, and12 New Zealand
European.Theagerangeofthesestudentsis19Ͳ53years.
RotoruastudentsattendfaceͲtoͲfaceProfessionalInquiry/Studiesclassesweeklyduringprimaryschool
terms,withallothercoursesstudiedthroughFLO(FlexiblelearningOption)online.Onlinecoursesare
complementedbytwofortnightblocksperyearofresidentialschoolsbasedinRotorua.
Relevantresearch,literatureandtheory
Thisresearchisinformedbyliteraturerelatedtodistancelearning,blendedlearningandeͲlearning(for
example,Skelton,2008;Zhaoet.al,2005),andMĈoriresearch(forexample,Smith,2005;Wong,2006).
Thefollowingsectionwillbrieflyexploresomeofthesekeyconceptsandrelatedtheories.
Skelton(2008)investigatedthelearningenvironmentofblendeddeliveryinatertiarysetting.Fromthe
students’ perspectives the blended learning provided access to studying on and off campus and it
providedflexibilityforwhentostudy.However,forsomeofthepredominantlyonlinestudents,there
wasstillanaspirationforthe“…buzz,andpresenceofotherstudents”(Skelton,2008,p.91).Kehrwald
(2010) suggests that social presence is a vital aspect for effective eͲlearning, with the value of
establishingasenseofbeingwithothers(teleͲpresence)andbecomingpartofacommunity,enhancing
success.
Zhaoetal(2005),intheirstudyoftheeffectivenessofdistanceeducation,identifiedinteraction,both
betweenpeersandinstructorsasoneoftheimportantfactorsforsuccess.Otherfactorsincludedthe
right mix of humans and technology, the appropriateness of the content, and the recognition that
certain learners would be more able to take advantage of distance education. Learners’ abilities to
succeedindistancelearningappearedtobeinfluencedbyearlyidentificationofconcernsandeffective
interventiontosupportthem.Elbaumet.al.(2002)outlineseventeenessentialelements“thatmakeup
a successful highͲquality onͲline course” (p.7). For this short paper these essential elements will be
drawnuponlaterinthediscussionofthefindingsofthisproject.
A recent overview of information and communication technology (ICT) in initial teacher education
providedbyDavis(2010)explainsthatICTis:
42
incorporated into preͲservice teacher education for three main purposes: (1)
preparing teachers to use ICTs in educationally effective ways with respect to
standards or competencies; (2) preparing KͲ12 teachers to teach ICTͲrelated
content;and(3)applyingICTstoserveteachereducation.ICTapplicationstoserve
teacher education include digital images, electronic portfolios, and the use of
technology to increase access to education. Major challenges described include
faculty and organizational development, equitable access to ICTs, and the
complexityofresearchingICTteachereducation.(p.217)
Thisisanexampleoftheuseofdigitaltechnologiestoincreaseaccesstoteachereducation,andatthe
UniversityofCanterburyweaimtodosoinawaythatmodelstheuseofICTforallthreepurposes.
WithinthisresearchitisimportanttoacknowledgehowMĈorimayperceivelearningandteachinginan
online/blended learning context. The work of Wong (2006) draws attention to tuakanaͲteina, “… the
interchangingroles of being either the ‘expert’ or the ‘learner’” (Wong, p. 47). Thesocial presence of
studentsandlecturerssupportingeachotherthroughonlinecommunitiesreflectsthetuakanaͲteinain
practice.
The authors of Ka Hikitia (Ministry of Education, 2008) use the MĈori concept of ako to describe
effective teaching (and learning). This concept holds that the teacher is also a learner and that the
learnerisalsoateacher(Hunt&Macfarlane,2011)asobservedandexperiencedbytheauthorsofthis
paper. When seeking appropriate research design, this ethos needed to be considered. In addition,
understanding the MĈori concept of manĈkitanga (respect) can direct ethical considerations. Smith
(2005,p.98)suggeststheimportanceofinvolvementateverystageindecisionmakingabouttimeand
place,“Arohakitetangata.Arespectforpeople–allowpeopletodefinetheirownspaceandmeeton
theirownterms”.
Ourposition
The three Rotorua UC nonͲMĈori researchers all have 15Ͳ20+ years of primary school teaching
experience,8Ͳ15yearsintertiaryteachingandshareapassionforinnovativelearningandteachingto
meet diverse learners’ needs. In addition, as preͲservice teacher educators, the researchers are
passionate about preparing future teachers to embrace ICT skills that will enhance their own and
children’slearning.
As‘insiders’theresearchersacknowledgedtheirstronginterestinmeetingtheeducationalneedsofthe
region and their strong motivation for this programme to succeed. They aimed to minimize any
potential bias by striving for a strong sense of whakawhanaungatanga which can be interpreted as
“‘familiness’, to ensure everyone is comfortable, respected, and has the opportunity to voice their
views”(Wilkieet.al.,2001,citedWong,2006).
Methodology
This research is a qualitative phenomenological case study, using an interpretive approach in a coͲ
constructed whakawhanaungatanga manner. The aim was to demonstrate the compatibility of these
theoriestodevelopatheoreticalframeworkwithinwhichtoconsidertheperspectivesofthestudents.
The overall methodology focused on students and researchers working together in a collaborative
manner, to explore the Rotorua regional UC preͲservice primary teachers’ perspectives of effective
practicesused withinLearnduringtheir firstthreesemesters ofstudy.The whole cohortof 23 Year2
Rotorua regional student teachers was invited to take part in this research project with the
43
understandingthatnoteveryonemaywishorbeabletoparticipate.Tenwomenstudentsconsented,
fivenonͲMĈoriandfiveMĈori.
Anopenendedindividualinterviewstrategywasusedinitiallywithfourrandomlyselectedconsenting
participants, two MĈori (M1, M2) and two nonͲMĈori (P1, P2). Each was encouraged to express their
thoughtsandopinionsfreelyinrelationtotheirperceptionsofeffectivepracticesusedwithinLearn.A
seriesoftriggerswerepreparedtoensureaconsistentfocusforeachoftheinterviews.Thethemesthat
emerged from the individual interviews were used to prepare a series of openͲended questions for a
semiͲstructured focus group discussion, in week four of the cohort’s fourth semester, with the
participation of all ten consenting participants. Any discussions beyond the emerging themes were
supportedandencouragedbytheinterviewerwhofacilitatedthefocusgroupdiscussion.Theaimwas
to maximise subject participation so that the transcripts derived from the recording of each session
wouldprovidearichdataset.Inadditiontotheinterviewsandfocusgroup,theleadresearcher,who
wasalsooneoftheProfessionalStudieslecturers,observedfacetofaceonaweeklybasisthecreation
andongoingdevelopmentofastronggroupculture.
Theresearchhasamassedawealthofdata.Thispresentationfocusesontheemergingthemesfromthe
four initial individual interviews as a preliminary analysis. Thematic analysis was used to identify the
emerging themes and the ten participants identified the following as key ‘effective practices’ within
Learn:
x Forums
x Video
x Evolvingstrategiesandtools.
Forums
Allfourindividualsinterviewedwerequicktocitetheforumsasbeingveryusefulfortheirlearningand
support,howeveroneoftheMĈoristudentssharedthatshedidnotinitiallyutilisetheforums.
Forumsaregood.Theyarereallygood.Ilikegettingquestionsansweredthroughthere.
SometimesIdon’tevenneedtoaskthequestionbecauseit’salreadybeenupandthe
answersIreadreallyfromlecturersifthestudentanswerswithprettymuchthesame
I’llgowithitbutIwaitforthelecturer(M2)
Accessing lectures through the forums and questions I find that really really easy… I
didn’tusealotoftheforumsatfirstcauseIfounditdifficulttonavigatearoundbutthat
wasbecauseofmyowncomputerissues.(M1)
The UC CoEd are striving for a seamless learning management tool for both FLO and on campus
students, however there still appears to be a need for several forums within Learn course sites to
differentiatebetweenthetwogroups:
Forums [are] just fantastic absolutely fantastic I think having a distant forum and an on
campusforum…isessential.(P1)
When the Learn site firstcame out there would be personal comments in the area that
shouldhavecommentsforthestudy…butnowovertimetheyhavechangeditandthey
haveanareaforthepersonalcommentsandadifferentoneforthework.That’smadeit
really…awesome.(M1)
44
Residentialschoollecturernewsonforums….yougettoprepareyourself.(P2)
All four participants strongly stated that forums are an informative and purposeful tool within Learn
courses and the regular presence of lecturers within these was a vital element. The implications of
expectationsoflecturerresponsivenesstoforumpostswillbediscussedlaterinthispaper.
The power of forums to develop studentͲstudent and studentͲlecturer relationships and learn from
differentperspectiveswasevident:
TheforumsIlikethatpartofitcauseit’snotjustforaskinglecturersquestionsit’slike
talkingtootherpeopleaswellthat’swhathassurprisedmeabouttheworkyoucangive
your opinion… you get different new perspectives… heaps of the stuff is collaborative
and youdon’t justworkwithRotorua people …you see that the lecturers are in there
readingitandyouthink...theydoreadityouknowit’sworthwhile.(P2)
There’sthisonelady…fromChristchurch…whentheearthquakeshappenedIjustfelt
somuchempathyforthestudents…whentheywereputtingthingslikeIamsoconfused
Idon’tknowwhereIamat,amIbehind?…Istartedpostingback…(M1)
We are posting comments on forums for readings we have to do and I posted a
commentonaforumacoupleofweeksagoandsheuseditinherlecturethatishow
powerfultheforumsare...inthevideolectures…themajorityofthestudentsthatI’ve
seeninlecturesareallEuropeanofwhiteethnicitysoIthinkwiththeculturalstudiesin
particularthecommentsthatareputtherebyotherethnicracesisreallyquitevaluable
to them to help them understand… some of them don’t see the perspectives of the
othercultures…sothatisreallycool.(M1)
M1wasquotedforsomethingshesaidandwethoughtwowshe(lecturer)goesthrough
and reads them how many would she get updated into her emails and they actually
interactwithyouandgetbacktoyoureallyfast.LotsthinkLearnisfordistancenoton
campusbutit’sforboth.Luckytohaveit!(P2)
Video
ThevalueofvideolinksoflecturesandtutorialswithinLearnwasstronglyvoicedbyallfourstudents.As
one student shared “I like it when the lectures are full recorded… I like hearing the questions the
students are asking” (P2). The ability to view videoed lectures and tutorials appears to have made
studentsfeelliketheywererightthereoncampus.Thisappearstohavemadeapositivedifferencefor
alltheinterviewedstudents’learning.
Thisyearbroughtinvideos…thevideolecturesmakeahugedifferencetomylearning….
(M1)
Avideoofalivelectureorclassyoujustfeellikeyouarethere.(P1)
I like the way they give you the choice as well … I can put the audio on my ipod and
listentoit…thatworksforme…anditsavesyourinternet…Icanprobablysee…wewill
45
belikeinthem,watchingthemlive…atthemomentwehavetowaitlikeadayanda
halfforustogetthem.(P2)
Evolvingstrategiesandtools
TheparticipantscommentedonseveralstrategieswhichtheyarebeginningtofindhelpfulwithinLearn.
AlloftheserelyondifferentfeaturesoftheLMSenvironment.Lecturersarebeginningtousethewide
rangeofavailabletoolsastheybecomemoreawareoftheirvalueforstudentsandtheirlearning.Drop
boxes and grade books were the two tools that all students felt need to be more utilised for their
assessments.
Dropboxes
The greater use of the drop box tool as a suggested future improvement was cited by both MĈori
studentsintheirindividualinterviews:
I like the drop boxes it’s a lot more cost effective for me to be able to just chuck
assignmentsinthereasopposedtopostingitdown.(M2’sveryfirstcomment)
Gradebooks
All students’ valued receiving a recent formative assessment grade through the course site Learn as
highlightedbythiscomment:
I would liketo seethe gradebook get used more cause campus students get to go in
andgettheirassignmentwehavetowaitforthemtogetsentandIthinkjustputour
markuponthere,that’swhatthey’reforandyeahwejustgotourliteracyonesfrom
there yah… I like that part of it too they are starting to utilise all of those little tools
thingsmore.(P2)
Suchtoolscontributedtostudents’timemanagement,animportantfactorforallstudentsinterviewed.
The availability and content of their Learn sites was enabling them to work efficiently and to be well
preparedforthesemesterahead:
Ilikethatit(Learnsite)comesup9daysbeforesemesterstartscauseIgoinhavealook
and see what they are… you can actually see what you are doing and the Course
Outlinesaretherebeforetheyaresenttoyousoyoucanhavealooktoseewhatthe
assignmentsare and your duedates for your calendar so that by the time that it (the
course)startsyoucangetstraightintoit.(P2)
Discussion
Elbaum et.al. (2002) suggest that “designing a learning community that is collaborative, engaging and
inclusive” is an essential component of a successful online course. Forums appear to be one way of
providing such an engaging and inclusive environment according to the Rotorua students interviewed
forthisproject.Howeverthisfindingneedstobetreatedcautiouslybecausethetenparticipantsmay
overͲrepresent those successfully engaging with their Learn courses. One of the MĈori students
individuallyinterviewedshared“inallhonesty…IhavejustrecentlylearntmywayaroundLearn”(M2).
Identifyingandprovidingextrasupportforsuchstudentswithintheirfirstsemesterofstudyisvitaland
46
an area for development for both UC students and staff. Promoting and closely monitoring students’
inclusive and collaborative engagement within Learn right from the beginning of their entry into the
programmeisvital.
ThestudentsinterviewedperceiveeffectiveUCCollegeofEducationlecturersasthosewhoareregularly
and consistently striving to “facilitate discussions in a way that keeps students onͲtask, promotes full
participation,andencouragespeercollaboration”(Elbaumet.al.2002,p.107).Byprovidingforumspace
and some time for peers to respond to each others’ questions and perspectives effective lecturer
practices appear aware of the need “to engage with students without overͲengaging” (Elbaum et.al,
2002,p.109)and“includeabalancedmixtureofindividualandgrouplearningactivities”(p.105).
ItisevidentfromtheUCcoursesviewedthat‘onesizedoesnotfitall’andthatlecturersdesigntheir
coursespacesdifferently.Forexample,thestructureandnumberofforumswithinacourseappearsto
dependonthepurposeandstructureofthecourse.Whilestudentssometimescallformoreconsistency
betweenonlinecoursestructures,formattingandlayout,anobservationfromthisstudyindicatesthat
course elements (including forums) need to be designed to align with different course objectives and
learningneeds.
Themostsignificantimprovementwithinthestudyperiodappearedtoberelatedtotheuseofvideosof
fulllecturesorclasses.However,notallstudentsrealisedthatsomeofthesevideoswerepostedonthe
Learn sites and therefore had not viewed all available. Early in 2010 both Rotorua students and UC
lecturers expressed their frustration with only being able to have partial and edited clips of lectures.
Elbaum et. al (2002) noted that “providing equal accessibility to all students” is a critical element of
successful online learning. Full videos of the live lectures uploaded onto Learn werehighlighted as an
exampleofeffectivepracticebyallfourstudents.Onestudentsuggestedthatideallyalldistanceflexible
learningoptionstudentswouldlikethechoiceofwatchinglecturesliveorviewingtherecordinglater.
Thesecouldalsobeaccessibletooncampusstudentsiftheyhadmissedorneededtorevisitalecture.
Suchdiscussionsraisemanydebatesandpossibleemergingissuesforoncampusprogrammes.
ItisanticipatedthattheuseoftheexistingandyettobedevelopedorreleasedMoodletoolsavailable
withinLearnwillcontinuetoevolverapidlyasisreflecteddailyinthe21stcenturyworldweareliving
within.Twosuchtoolsarethegradualmovetowardsusingthegradebookanddropboxtools.These
studentswereintroducedtoandusedthedropboxtoolwithintheirfirsttwoweeksoforientationin
2010. They find this tool very self explanatory, user friendly and are keen to be able to submit more
assessment tasks using this tool to save posting costs and for equity with on campus students for
submittingandreceivingassessmentfeedback.Arecentliteracygradethathadbeenreceivedthrough
the grade book tool was timely midͲsemester formative feedback and was greatly appreciated by all
students.
AshasbeenexperiencedduringthelasteighteenmonthseffectivepracticeswithinLearnareevolving
forbothUCCollegeofEducationstudentsandstaff.TheMĈoriconceptofAkoillustratesthisreciprocal
relationship; we are all learners and teachers as we continue on this ongoing and exciting learning
journey.
Conclusionandrecommendations
This research project has given a first formal insight into some Rotorua BTchLn (Primary) Year 2
students’perspectivesofevolving‘effectivepractices’usedwithintheUClearningmanagementsystem
47
named Learn. It was clear that the students valued the use of forums and video as tools which
supportedtheirinteractivityandengagement,andthattheycouldappreciatethepotentialoffeatures
suchasthedropboxandgradebooktostreamlineassessmentandfeedbackprocesses.Theprojectwill
contributetofuturepolicyandpracticeasstaffandstudentsstrivetogethertomaximisethepotential
ofthe LMStoolsthusensuring continualimprovementstothelearning andteachingprocesseswithin
ourowninstitutionandhelpingtoinformeͲlearningpracticesnationallyandpotentiallyinternationally.
References
Brooker,B.(2010)17.06.2010emailcommunicationsrenewdegreeBTchLnfor2012
Brooker,B.(2010)15.07.2010emailcommunicationsreNZTeachersCouncilreport.
Davis,N.E.(2010)Technologyinpreserviceteachereducation.InP.Peterson,E.Baker,B.McGaw(Ed.),
InternationalEncyclopediaofEducation,Vol.8.(3rded.)(217Ͳ221).Oxford:Elsevier.
Elbaum,B.McIntyre,C.,&Smith,A.(2002).Essentialelements–Prepare,design,andteachyouronline
course.AtwoodPublishing,Madison,WI.
Hunt, A.M., & Macfarlane, A. (2011). Tikanga MĈori: Building cultural consciousness into teacher
professional development. In P. Whitinui (Ed.), Kia Tangi Te Tţtţ: Permission to Speak: Successful
Schooling for MĈori Students in the 21st Century. Issues, Challenges and Alternatives (pp.58Ͳ79).
Wellington:NewZealandCouncilforEducationalResearch.
Kehrwald,B.A.(2010).Beingonline:socialpresenceassubjectivityinonlinelearning.LondonReviewof
Education,8(1),39Ͳ50.
MinistryofEducation(2008).TertiaryEducationStrategy.Wellington:MinistryofEducation.
Ministry of Education. (2008). Ka hikitia: Managing for success—The Ministry of Education MĈori
EducationStrategy2008–2012.Wellington:MinistryofEducation.
Skelton,D.(2008).Aninvestigationintothelearningenvironmentsofblendeddelivery(eͲlearningand
classroom)inatertiaryenvironment.TheInternationalJournalofLearning,15(5).
Smith,L.T.(2005).Ontrickyground:researchingthenativeintheageofuncertainty.InDenzin,N.K.&
Lincoln,Y.S.TheSagehandbookofqualitativeresearch3rdedition.ThousandOaks:Sagepublications.
Wong,M.(2006).ResearchinginaMĈoriculturalcontext:themoral,ethical,andculturalobligations.In
C.Mutch,Challengingthenotionof“other”.Wellington:NZCERPress...
Zhao,Y.,Lei,J.,BoYan,C.L.,&Hueyshan,S.T.(2005).Whatmakesthedifference?Apracticalanalysisof
researchontheeffectivenessofdistanceeducation.TeachersCollegeRecord.107(8),1836Ͳ1884.
48
ULearn11
ResearchStreamProceedings
PaperAbstract
Name: Organisationalaffiliation:
Emailaddress: Title:
CraigMcDonaldͲBrown
TahataiCoastSchool
[email protected]
U
U
TMI?TheneedforresearchexploringyoungNewZealandadolescents’
informationprivacypracticesandattitudes
Abstract
ThispaperhighlightsthecriticalneedforNewZealandͲbasedresearchregardingtheextentandnature
ofyoungadolescents’personalinformationdisclosureonthesocialnetworkingwebsites.Italsoseeksto
examine young adolescents' attitudes towards online privacy and risk, and how this affects their
willingness to disclose too much information (TMI) or perform privacy protection measures. The
importanceofthisresearchisoutlined,includingthefactthatnorecentresearchofthiskindbasedina
NewZealandcontextexists.Areviewofcurrentinternationalliteratureissummarised,highlightingkey
issues, variables and implications for New Zealand educators, parents and policy makers. Future
research will provide valuable data and information to the research community (particularly those
concerned with internet safety), schools who are forming their own internet safety programmes, and
parents.
Introduction
Theworldinwhichchildrenliveisinherentlyfullofrisk.SomemightarguethatariskͲfreechildhoodis
nochildhoodatall.However,theubiquityoftheinternetandsocialmediainthelivesofchildrentoday
presentsarangeofriskswhichdiffernotsomuchinkindwiththoseofthepast,butinpotential.The
ease with which information, text and images can be stored, copied, manipulated, replicated and
misused(Livingstone&Brake,2010),hascreatedaneedforvigilanceandactiononthepartofparents
and educators. The disclosure of personal information on social networking sites like Facebook by
childreninNewZealandisanissueofhighpublicinterest,asrevealedbythecurrentmediaattention
giventoit,suchasthereportonCloseUpon13August2010aboutadolescentuseofFacebook(TVNZ,
2010). In addition, the report by the Privacy Commissioner, 'Individual Privacy and Personal
Information', released in May 2010, identified the information children put on the internet about
themselvesastheissuethatcausedmostconcernamongrespondents,asitalsodidin2008.Thereis
considerablepublicinterestinthisissue,especiallyfromparents,educatorsandpolicyͲmakers.
However,inNewZealanditremainsanunderͲresearchedfieldofinquiry,makingitdifficultforparents,
educatorsandpolicyͲmakerstomakeinformeddecisionsabouthowbesttoimparttheskillsneededfor
children to become good digital citizens, with a high level of awareness of their rights and
responsibilitiestowardsthemselvesandothers.
49
FacebookisbyfarthemostvisitedsocialnetworkingwebsiteinNewZealand,accordingtotheNielsen
2010SocialMediaReport,releasedinJuly2010.ThisreporttrackedNewZealanders'socialmediausage
and found that Facebook had overtaken Bebo and MySpace, with 79% of social networkers (all ages)
having a Facebook profile, up from 19% in 2007(Nielsen, 2010). Research conducted by Perceptive
(citedby'TheStateofSocialMedia',2010)hasthepercentageevenhigherfor15Ͳ29yearolds,with90%
usingFacebookfrequently.Itisreasonabletoassumethatanyusageofsocialnetworkingsitesbyyoung
adolescents(forwhomthereislittledata)willreflectthispreferenceforFacebook,andyetthespeedof
changeintheuseofthesetechnologiesisoutstrippingtheavailableresearch.
ItshouldalsobenotedthatFacebook'stermsandconditionsstillstatethatusersmustbeaged13years
orovertohaveanaccount.However,itdoesnottakemuchtimeonFacebooktoseethatusersaged
below 13 are fairly common, these having (necessarily) submitted false dates of birth. Hinduja and
Patchin(2008),intheirstudyofMySpace,alsofoundinconsistenciesbetweenusers'birthdatesandthe
age on their profiles. In fact, they found that most of the MySpace profiles with ages listed above 80
years old were actually teenagers, some under MySpace's required age of 14. This was revealed by
friends'dateͲstampedbirthdaymessagesontheirprofilepages,aswellasreferencestoageandschool
level.
Background
There is very little current New ZealandͲbased research on the online practices of young adolescents,
especiallyinrelationtoprivacyprotectionandpersonalinformationdisclosure.Ifinformed strategies
andapproachestomitigatingprivacyriskaretobedevelopedthenitisessentialthattheyarebasedon
currentresearchinthisrapidlychangingfield.Furthermore,previousstudieshaveshownthatthereare
differencesbetweenNewZealandyoungpeople'sonlineriskͲtakingandthatofyouthinothercountries
suchastheUnitedStates.Forexample,BersonandBerson(2005)foundthatNewZealandteenagegirls
were twice as likely as U.S. teenage girls to meet a stranger they had met online.Therefore it is
importanttoincreasethebaseofresearchderivedfromaNewZealandcontext.
BecauseofthelackofNewZealandͲbasedresearch,wecanonlyspeculateastothepracticesofNew
Zealandadolescents,basedonoverseasstudies.AnOfcom(2008)reportonsocialnetworkingpractices
foundthat41%ofchildrenaged8Ͳ17whosesocialnetworkingprofilewasvisible,setittobevisibleto
everyone. Livingstone and Brake (2010) cite a 2007 study showing that 27% of 8Ͳ12 year olds have a
socialnetworkingprofile.Giventheveryhighnumberofyoungpeoplewithsocialnetworkingprofiles,
thispercentagewouldundoubtedlytranslateintoaveryhighnumberofchildren,andmaywellbeeven
higherin2011.Furthermore,DeSouzaandDick(2008)foundthatyoungerchildren(aged14andbelow)
tended to display more sensitive information than their older counterparts, and had less concern for
theirownprivacy,beinglessconcernedattheprospectofinformationbeingusedagainstthem.Berson
and Berson (2006) andStanaland, Leong and Lwin (2009)claim that developmentally, adolescents are
morevulnerabletopoordecisionmakingandmorelikelytotakerisks.
The New Zealand research that does exist (Duddy, Harre & ISG, 2002) is out of date considering the
rapid rate of change in this area. The results of that study showed that internet use increased
significantlybetweentheagesof7Ͳ10and11Ͳ12,andthatasstudentsgetoldertheyaremorelikelyto
discloseinformation.Theyalsofoundthat7Ͳ10yearoldsweremostlikelynottohaveheardofinternet
safety.Asvaluableasthisstudywas,itisunlikelythatthesefiguresreflectthecurrentsituationinNew
Zealand and this further supports the need for fresh research into adolescent internet usage in New
Zealand.
50
TheLiterature:Asummaryofperspectives,issuesandpriorities
There is a wide range of factors that influence personal information disclosure by young people, and
alsoanumberoffactorsthatmitigateagainstinappropriatedisclosure.Asstatedabove,verylittleofthe
availableliteratureandresearchrelatestoNewZealandadolescents,soithasbeennecessarytoanalyse
comparableoverseasstudies(inparticulartheUK,USAandAustralia)anddrawpossibleconclusionsfor
NewZealand,basedontheresearchfindingsthatdoexist.
Regarding age, the literature provides conflicting results. Some found that younger adolescents are
morelikelytodiscloseinformationthanolderadolescents.DeSouzaandDick(2008)foundthatthiswas
because they did not appreciate the significance of disclosure and were not concerned about
informationpotentiallybeingusedagainstthem.Thislackofcognitiveskillincreasesthevulnerabilityof
thisagegroup(Stanalandetal.,2009;Berson&Berson,2006).However,themajorityofarticlesfound
that in fact the older children are, the more likely they are to divulge personal information online
(Steeves&Webster,2008;Livingstone&Brake,2010;Youn,2005,2009;Duddyetal.,2002).Relatedto
this is the finding that as internet use increases (and this tends to increase with age), so does the
tendencytodisclosepersonalinformation(Duddyetal.,2002;Youn,2009).
Gender also plays a role in influencing online disclosure. De Souza and Dick (2008) and Hinduja and
Patchin (2008) found no difference between males and females disclosing information on MySpace,
andDuddy's et al. (2002) New Zealand study found the same. However, Steeves and Webster (2008)
found that boys were more likely to disclose information and show the least privacy protective
behaviour,asdidYoun(2005)whonotedthatthisisparticularlysoiftheinformationisinexchangefor
a gift or incentive. Disconcertingly, and mentioned above, Berson and Berson (2005) found that New
ZealandgirlsweretwiceaslikelyasU.S.girlstomeetastrangertheyhadmetonline.Nostudyfound
that girls were more likely to disclose personal information than boys, despite generally using social
networkingsitesmore(Ofcom,2008).
Theeffectofadultsupervisionandsupportwasanotherkeyfactorinfluencingonlineprivacybehaviour.
TheEUKidsOnlineprojectfoundthatparentsplayakeyroleinmediatinginternetsafety,moresothan
teachers (Hasebrink, Gorzig, Haddon, Kalmus & Livingstone, 2011). Parental supervision was found to
reduce,butnoteliminateprivacyͲriskybehaviour(Steeves&Webster,2008;Bersonetal.,2008;Wirth
et al., 2009). Berson and Berson (2005) found that New Zealand girls who had not discussed online
safety with a parent were four times more likely to agree to meet an internet acquaintance.
Unfortunately,manyarticlesalsosuggestedthatlackofparentalknowledge,skillandawarenessaround
internet safety and their child's usage was a barrier to parents fulfilling this role effectively (Ofcom,
2008;DeSouza&Dick,2008;Berson&Berson,2006).
Adolescents'privacyconcernwasalsoinfluencedbysocialfactors,withmanyyoungteensdecidingthat
thesocialbenefitsofpersonalinformationdisclosureoutweighedtherisks(Boyd,inHinduja&Patchin,
2008; Ofcom, 2008; De Souza & Dick, 2008; Steeves & Webster, 2008). SelfͲpromotion was seen by
manyyoungpeopleasthewholepointofsocialnetworking(Ofcom,2008).Thosewithhigherconcern
for privacy in their personal lives reflected this in their online practices (De Souza & Dick, 2008), with
Youn(2009)findingthatperceivedvulnerabilitytoriskwasthemostimportantfactorinexplaininglevel
ofprivacyconcern.
51
Perhaps one of the most significant findings of a number of the articles surveyed was that generally
youngpeopleareusingsocialnetworkingwebsitesresponsiblyandconsistentlywithhowtheyconduct
their offline behaviour, yet the small percentage of those who do take privacy risks are of sufficient
numericalsize(consideringthemillionsofusersofsocialnetworkingwebsites)towarrantconsiderable
concern from researchers, educators and parents (De Souza & Dick, 2008; Williams & Merton, 2008;
Hinduja&Patchin,2008).
Implications
Despite the fact that much of the research around adolescents' privacy behaviours with social media
comesfromoverseas,theliteraturesurveyedhereneverthelessgivesaninsightintothefactorswhich
mightinfluencethedisclosureofpersonalinformationonlinebyNewZealandyoungpeople.Infact,this
paucity of New ZealandͲbased research in this area highlights our first implication, that there is a
desperateneedforfurtherresearchhereinNewZealandaroundprivacyriskforyoungpeople.
The research repeatedly shows that the actual risk from online predators is very, very low, and that
young people by and large are using social media responsibly (Ofcom, 2008; De Souza & Dick, 2008;
Hinduja & Patchin, 2008). However, there is an atͲrisk demographic, as well as particular riskͲtaking
behavioursthatincreasethevulnerabilityofpeopleandincreasetheirchancesofinclusioninthesmall
percentagethatbecomevictimtoonlinethreats.Becauseofthehugenumbersofyoungpeopleusing
socialmediathisstatisticallysmall'atͲrisk'groupisnumericallylarge,andshouldthereforebetargeted
by educators in an effort to both raise awareness of risk and impart practical skills and strategies to
protectthemselves.Forthistohappenthereneedstobefurtherresearchtomoreaccuratelydefinethe
characteristicsandbehavioursofthisgroup(Ofcom,2008;Livingstone&Brake,2010),andthedegree
towhichexistingoverseasresearchisrelevanttotheNewZealandcontext.
A further implication of the literature surveyed is that any effort to increase privacy awareness and
protectionskillsmustincludeparents.Becausemanyschoolsapproachsocialnetworkingwebsiteswith
caution,orblockthemoutright,youngpeopletendtospendmostoftheironlinesocialnetworkingtime
athome.Thereforeanyattempttoincreasechildren'sselfͲefficacyandawarenessofdigitalcitizenship
mustinvolvetheirparents/caregivers,andbeseenasapartnership.Manystudiesshowedthatparental
supervisionofonlinebehavioursreducedtheamountofriskͲtakingbehavior(Steeves&Webster,2008;
Bersonetal.,2008;Wirthetal.,2009),butthattheawarenessandskilllevelsofthoseparentswasoften
notsufficienttoprovidethesupportthatyoungpeopleneeded(Ofcom,2008;Sharplesetal.,2009;De
Souza&Dick,2008;Berson&Berson,2006;Youn2005;Hinduja&Patchin,2008;Wirthetal.,2009).
Partofthisisnodoubtduetotherapidpaceatwhichthetechnologyandhabitsofuseofyoungpeople
change.Itmaywellbethatifaschoolwishestobemosteffectiveinprotectingitsyoungpeoplefrom
the risks of personal information disclosure, then it has a role to play in educating parents through
seminars and workshops. Hope (2002) and Ofsted (2010) both affirm the importance of schools and
families working together in partnership, with schools needing to be proactive in initiating this
partnership.The aforementioned research by the Privacy Commissioner, as well as the fact that
increasingnumbersofolderadultsareusingsocialnetworkingsiteslikeFaceBook,suggeststhatthere
couldbeconsiderabledemandforsuchaprogramme.
Finally,agreatnumberofarticlespointedouttheneedtoinvestigatetheperceptionsandbeliefsthat
youngadolescentsthemselvesholdregardingprivacyrisk(DeSouza&Dick,2008;Steeves&Webster,
2008;Hinduja&Patchin,2009;Youn,2009),particularlyforthe10Ͳ12agegroup(Youn,2005),asmany
studies frame their research around the 13Ͳ19 age group. Research around existing perceptions and
52
erroneous beliefs about risk and vulnerability will help to inform the development of more effective
strategies for giving young people the skills they need to navigate the everͲchanging seas of social
media.ExploringthisissueindepthinaNewZealandcontextneedstobearesearchpriority.
Conclusion
Mitchell,WolakandFinkelhor(2010)identifyanumberofreasonswhyresearcharoundonlinesafetyis
of vital importance. They claim that the disproportionate media attention given to unusual but high
profileexamplesofonlinedangerhastoomuchinfluenceonpolicyformation.Thiscanresultinwhat
they describe as an 'infrastructure of anxiety built on untested assumptions' (p.1). Furthermore, they
postulatethatresearchofhighqualitycanhelptoensurethattheresponsetoproblemsisappropriate
andeffective,andnotwastefulofresources.
New ZealandͲbased research will help to separate actual adolescent online practice from mediaͲhype
based on sensationalist (albeit serious) examples. It will, therefore, provide a robust and reliable
benchmarkthatotherresearchersandpolicymakersmightusetoinformpolicyinregardstoappropriate
responses,bothinschoolsandmorebroadlyinsociety.
References
Berson,I.R.,&Berson,M.(2005).Challengingonlinebehavioursofyouth:Findingsfromacomparative
analysis of young people in the United States and New Zealand. Social Science Computer Review,
23(1),29Ͳ38,DOI:10.1177/0894439304271532.
Berson, I. R., & Berson, M. (2006). Children and their digital dossiers: Lessons in privacy rights in the
digitalage.Enhancingdemocracywithtechnologyinthesocialstudies[SpecialIssue].International
JournalofSocialEducation,21(1),135Ͳ147.
Berson, I.R., Berson, M., Desai, S., Falls, D., & Fenaughty, J. (2008). An analysis of electronic media to
prepare children for safe and ethical practices in digital environments. Contemporary Issues in
TechnologyandTeacherEducation.8(3),222Ͳ243.Retrievedfrom
http://www.citejournal.org/vol8/iss3/socialstudies/article2.cfm
De Souza, Z. & Dick, G.N. (2008). Information disclosure on MySpace Ͳ the what, the why and the
implications.PastoralCareinEducation,26(3),143Ͳ157.DOI:10.1080/02643940802246427
Duddy, M., Harré, N., & Internet Safety Group. (2002). The Net Generation: Internet safety issues for
youngNewZealanders.Retrievedfromhttp://hectorsworld.netsafe.org.nz/teachers/research
Hasebrink, U., Görzig, A., Haddon, L., Kalmus, V. & Livingstone, S. (2011) Patterns of risk and safety
online. InͲdepth analyses from the EU Kids Online survey of 9Ͳ16 year olds and their parents in 25
countries.LSE,London:EUKidsOnline.
Hinduja, S. & Patchin, J. (2008). Personal information of adolescents on the Internet: A quantitative
contentanalysisofMySpace.JournalofAdolescence,31(1),125Ͳ146.
DOI:10.1016/j.adolescence.2007.05.004.
U
U
U
U
U
53
Hope,J.(2002).Internetsafety:IssuesforNewZealandprimaryschools.PaperpresentedattheNetSafe:
Society,SafetyandtheInternet,Auckland.Retrievedfrom
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~john/NetSafe/Hope.pdf.
Livingston,S.&Brake,D.R.(2010). Ontherapidriseofsocialnetworkingsites:Newfindingsandpolicy
implications.Children&Society,24(1),75Ͳ83.DOI:10.1111/j.1099Ͳ0860.2009.00243.x
Mitchell,K.,Wolak,J.,&Finkelhor,D.(2010).Onlinesafety:Whyresearchisimportant.YouthandMedia
PolicyWorkingGroupInitiative:PubliusProject.Retrievedfrom
http://publius.cc/online_safety_why_research_important
Nielsen. (2010). 1.8 million New Zealanders interacting via social networking sites. Retrieved from
http://nz.nielsen.com/news/Social_Media_ReportJul10.shtml
Ofcom. (2008). Social networking: A quantitative and qualitative research report into attitudes,
behavioursanduse.OfficeofCommunications:London.Retrievedfrom
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/advice/media_literacy/medlitpub/medlitpubrss/socialnetworking
Ofsted (2010). The safe use of new technologies. Retrieved from http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/OfstedͲ
home/PublicationsͲandͲresearch/BrowseͲallͲby/DocumentsͲbyͲtype/ThematicͲreports/TheͲsafeͲuseͲ
ofͲnewͲtechnologies
Privacy Commissioner. (2010). Individual privacy and personal information: UMR Omnibus Results.
Wellington:UMRResearch.
Sharples,M.,Grabner,R.,Harrison,C.&Logan,K.(2009).EͲSafetyandWeb2.0forchildrenaged11Ͳ16.
JournalofComputerAssistedLearning,25,70Ͳ84.DOI:10.1111/j.1365Ͳ2729.2008.00304.x
Stanaland, A., & Lwin, M., & Leong, S. (2009). Providing parents with online privacy information:
ApproachesintheUSandtheUK.TheJournalofConsumerAffairs,43(3),474Ͳ495.
Steeves,V.&Webster,C.(2008).Closingthebarndoor:TheeffectofparentalsupervisiononCanadian
children’sonlineprivacy.Technology&Society,28(1),4Ͳ19.
ThestateofsocialmediainNewZealand(STATS).(2010).Retrievedfrom http://ijump.co.nz/theͲstateͲ
ofͲsocialͲmediaͲinͲnewͲzealandͲstats/
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
TVNZ. (2010). EightͲyearͲold seduced on Facebook. Retrieved on 13 August 2010 from
http://tvnz.co.nz/closeͲup/eightͲyearͲoldͲseducedͲfacebookͲ3700342/video.
Williams, A., & Merten, M.J. (2008). A review of online social networking profiles by adolescents:
Implicationsforfutureresearchandintervention.Adolescence:aninternationalquarterlydevotedto
the physiological, psychological, psychiatric, sociological, and educational aspects of the second
decadeofhumanlife,43(170),253Ͳ275.
Wirth,C.B.,Rifon,N.J.,LaRose,R.,&Lewis,M.(2009).PromotingteenageonlinesafetywithaniͲsafety
intervention: Enhancing selfͲefficacy and protective behaviours. Retrieved from
http://www.msu.edu/~wirthch1/childsafety07.pdf
U
U
U
U
U
54
U
Youn, S. (2009). Determinants of online privacy concern and its influence on privacy protection
behaviorsamongyoungadolescents,TheJournalofConsumerAffairs,43(3),389Ͳ429.
Youn,S.(2005).Teenagers'perceptionsofonlineprivacyandcopingbehaviors:AriskͲbenefitappraisal
approach.JournalofBroadcasting&ElectronicMedia,49(1),86Ͳ110.
U
U
55
ULearn11
ResearchStreamProceedings
PaperAbstract
Name: Organisationalaffiliation:
Emailaddress: Title: Abstract
JulieMackey,DesBreeze,PhilippaBuckley,NickiDabner
&FionaGilmore
SchoolofLiteracies&ArtsinEducation
UniversityofCanterbury
[email protected]
[email protected]
philippa.buckleyͲ[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Innovatetosurvive:Beingpreparedtoteachintimesofcrisis
“YouknowyouarefromChristchurchwhen…yourwellͲfoundedplansforblendedeͲlearningareshaken,
stirred and reͲblended before you have had a chance to teach your first lesson.” Blended and online
learningarewellͲestablishedstrategiesinmanytertiaryinstitutionswheretheycomplementorreplace
traditional faceͲtoͲface pedagogies. However, very little has been written about the role of blended
learning in times of crisis or natural disaster, or about the ways that institutions can be prepared for
blended learning in emergency situations. Five educators from the College of Education, University of
Canterbury, share their experiences of reͲthinking blended learning strategies to cope with
unprecedented disruption in the wake of the Canterbury earthquakes. This paper offers insights into
educationalinnovationintimesofcrisis,andincludessurvivaltipsonhowtoprepareyourorganisation
for the unexpected. Our aim is to offer the academic equivalent of Civil Defence’s “get ready – get
through” survival guide to assist others to plan blended learning strategies that will prove resilient in
timesofcrisis.
Background/context
ItisTuesday22Februaryandourfirstclassoftheyearisscheduledtobeginat1.10
pm.It’s12.50pmandI’mstillinmyofficedoingsomelastminutechecksintheonline
course site knowing that my colleague will be in our collaborative eͲlearning lab
welcomingournewestintakeofBTchLnstudents.I’mjustgatheringmyteachingnotes
whenallofasuddenanenormousjoltshakestheroomviolently,andastherocking
gathers momentum I dive under my desk in frightened disbelief. Our fiveͲstory
building is being tossed like a dinghy bouncing across a ship’s wake. I’d experienced
several sizable quakes in this building postͲSeptember 2010 but nothing like this…
(Julie).
56
Weevacuatedthebuildingsinshockleavingbehindlaptops,teachingresources,andpersonalitems.We
hadnoideaoftheextentofthedamagebutastheafternoonunfoldedwefacedthetragicrealityofthe
destructionthatthe6.3magnitudeearthquakehadwroughtonChristchurch.Astateofemergencywas
declaredinthecity,thecampuswasclosed,andstaffandstudentsfocusedtheirenergyonthebasicsof
survivalandcaringforoneanother,familiesandfriends.
While no buildings on campus collapsed, the magnitude of the quake meant rigorous engineering
assessmentswererequiredbeforeanybuildingcouldbereͲopened,andmanybuildingsneededsome
repairs to meet safety codes. The campus remained closed for approximately three weeks and then,
whenitdidreͲopen,physicalteachingspaceswereinshortsupplyasbuildingswereslowlyclearedfor
useoverensuingmonths.IntheinterimperiodstafffromtheCollegeofEducationbegantorevisetheir
teachingstrategiestoconsiderhowbesttomeettheneedsofstudents.Manystudents,includingour
firstyear flexiblelearninggroupwhohadbeenon campusfortheirintroductory programme, hadleft
thecity;manyothersweredealingwithappallinghomeandfamilysituations;andalmostallhadbeen
affectedinsomewayby thedevastating lossesexperiencedacross thecity.Itwas veryapparentthat
‘normal’teachingmethodswerenotgoingtobepossibleintheensuingweeksandthatwewouldneed
tobeinnovativetomeetthediverseneedsofstudentsandstaffinthisunprecedentedsituation.
The College of Education found itself in a relatively strong position to extend its blended learning
options.Aswellasastronghistoryindistanceandonlinedeliveryofteachereducationandprofessional
developmentcourses,theCollegehadinstigatedarevitalisationoftheirflexiblelearningstrategiesfor
primary teacher education in 2010. That revitalisation had resulted in substantial changes to the way
courseswereorganisedandthealignmentofcampus,distanceandregionalcourseoccurrencessothat
all versions of a course were coordinated by one academic staff member, and each course was
supported by a single site in the MoodleͲbased LMS (Davis, et al, 2011; Davis, Mackey, McGrath,
Morrow,Walker&Dabner,2010).ThesignificantreͲdevelopmentofonlinecoursesitesin2010andthe
accompanyinggainsinstaffconfidencetoadoptblendedlearningapproacheswerekeyelementswhich
enabled our emergency response in February. Even so, we realised there was a very real difference
between planned design for blended delivery and the rapid adaptations, innovations and responses
requiredinemergencyconditions.Thispapersharesaspectsofourexperienceandofferssurvivaltips
forotherinstitutionswhowanttobepreparedforunexpecteddisruptions.
Methodology
Thisresearch wastriggeredbyaseries ofunexpectedanddisruptivenatural eventsandconsequently
theresearchframeworkhasevolvedintandemwiththelearningexperiencesofstaffandstudents.Our
framework is based on a retrospective and reflective design model in which a group of five teacher
educators from the University of Canterbury came together to reflect on their experiences as they
responded to their changing institutional and student needs. We offer descriptive and detailed
accounts,basedonourautobiographiesof‘whatitislike’tobeupcloseinthiscontextasdefinedbythe
authorsandsubsequentevents(Cohen,Manion&Morrison,2007).Theconclusionsaremadewithina
qualitativeframeworkinwhichtheyareanalysedthroughthelensoftheparticipantsandthecontextin
whichwewereworking(Cohen,Manion&Morrison,2007).Athematicanalysisstrategywasutilisedto
identifycategoriesandthemesfromtheautobiographicaldataasreflectivestatementswerecompared
andcontrasted,andlinkagesandconnectionsweremade(LeCompte&PreissleascitedinMutch,2005).
Wemet regularlytocompareandcontrastourexperiencesandtoidentify thethemes,synergiesand
keylearningsfromourcollectiveexperiences.
Literature
57
InrecentyearswebͲbasedtechnologieshavecontributedtoablurringofboundariesbetweenfaceͲtoͲ
face and distance learning and consequently institutions have become increasingly interested in the
affordancesofblendedlearning.Rationalesforadoptingblendedlearningstrategiesincludeeconomic
efficiencies,increasingaccesstostudyfordiversegroupsofstudents,improvingstudents’engagement
especiallyinlargeclasses,andenhancingpedagogicaleffectivenessthroughblendedactivitiesincluding
interaction (Dziuban, Moskal, & Hartman, 2005; Sharpe, Benfield, Roberts & Francis, 2006; Stacey &
Gerbic,2009).Asaconcept,blendedlearningisopentointerpretationand,whiletherearenumerous
definitions of what constitutes blended learning (Stacey & Gerbic, 2009), this can be regarded as a
strengthasbothacademicstaffandstudentscontributetotheevolvingunderstandingofwhatis,and
canbeblended(Sharpe,Benfield,Roberts&Francis,2006).
In spite of the rather nebulous nature of blended learning there is some consensus that effective
blended learning “requires more careful design and support than traditional faceͲtoͲface teaching”
(Mason, 2000, p. xiv) and is not simply a matter of providing online resources and content to
supplement faceͲtoͲface teaching. As Garrison and Vaughan (2008, p. 5) suggest, blended learning
requiresthe“thoughtfulfusionoffaceͲtoͲfaceandonlinelearningexperiences”andtheydescribehow
effective blendedlearning integratesan optimalmixof oral and writtencommunicationsandphysical
and virtual environments, taking into account the learners, context and purpose of the learning
scenario.Blendedlearningrequiresknowledgeabouthowlearningtheory,pedagogy,contentandthe
use of technology can be combined to support learningexperiences (Cross, 2006; Kanuka & Garrison,
2004).Effectiveblendsaretheresultofdeliberateandcarefulplanningbecauseblendedlearningisnot
merely “an addition or a layering of technology, but a potentially transformative process” (Stacey &
Gerbic,2009,p.3).Studentsalsoneedtobewellpreparedwiththeskillsandunderstandingstointeract
inblendedmodesandactivities(Hamilton&Tee,2010).
Thetransformativepotentialofblendedlearningforinitialteachereducationhasbeenwellresearched
andacknowledged(forexample,Davis,etal.,2011;Geer,2009;Simpson&Anderson,2009).Asinother
tertiary education fields, these examples highlight the deliberate and intentional nature of planning,
implementing and evaluating for successful blended learning. However, there is very little research
describingtheimplementationofblendedlearningintimesofcrisisoremergencywherethereisneither
timenorresourcesforextensivedesign.
Successfulimplementationofblendedlearningrequiresfacultytoactivelyengageincoursedesignand
Garrison etal.(2008) arguethattransformativechange canonly be sustainedwhenthisis completed
systematically within a learning community of inquiry. Such communities should not be institutionally
drivennormonitored,butratherselfͲorganised,socialandrelatetotheprofessionallearningissuesthat
mattermosttoitsparticipants(GroundwaterͲSmith&Mockler,2009).Stolletal(2006)identifiedfive
characteristics of effective learning communities: shared values and vision, collective responsibility,
reflective professional inquiry, collaboration, and promotion of group as well as individual learning.
Members of learning communities need to be clear about their shared and individual responsibility.
Learningwithinthecommunityisfacilitatedbysystematicandexplicitprocesseswhichmayincorporate
many common professional development activities such as workshops, tip sheets and models, but
professionallearningalsonecessitatestimeforfacultytodiscuss,reflectandproblemͲsolvetheircourse
redesign (Stoll, et al., 2006). While the literature suggests that effective professional learning is
supported through systematic reflection and inquiry processes, it is worth exploring the potential for
innovation and transformative change when professional learning communities are disrupted and
disturbed.
58
The verb innovate means to “introduce changes and new ideas” (Cambridge Dictionary Online,
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british) and implies doing things in a new way (MerriamͲ
Webster Online Dictionary, http://www.merriamͲwebster.com/dictionary/innovate). Whilecreativity is
theabilitytoproduceoriginal,worthwhileideas,innovationistheprocessofimplementingtheseand
effectingchange(McLean,2005). “Innovationisrarely a solitaryindividual creation” (Sawyer, 2006,p.
42) as organisational culture, collaborative teams, relationships and group dynamics are factors in
successful innovation (McLean, 2005, Sawyer, 2006). When innovation is discussed in the eͲlearning
literatureitoftenreferstotechnologicalratherthanpedagogicalelements(Salmon,2005),however,in
thispaperwepresentexamplesofinnovationthatcombinenewpedagogicalapproacheswithexisting
technologies.Whilethecontextisoneofnecessity,theagilechangeprocessesaresupportedbysmall
collaborativeteamsdrivenbytheirsharedresponsibilityformeetingstudents’learningneeds.
U
U
U
U
Impetusforinnovation
As teacher educators we were well used to significant change. In 2007 the Christchurch College of
Education merged with the University of Canterbury and in the ensuing five years we adapted our
programmes,processesandapproachestoalignwiththenewcultureinwhichwewereworking.Many
ofthesechangesweredrivenbybroaderinstitutionalrequirementsandfiscalimperatives(Davisetal.,
2010). The driver for change in February 2011 was different. Changes were earthquake imposed but
stronglystudentͲfocused.Thesechangesweredrivenbyourunderstandingofstudents’needsandour
conviction that we could offer a worthwhile quality programme in spite of the extraordinary context
withitslackofphysicalspacesandresources.
While facilities, time and resources were in short supply we drew on the knowledge, experience and
capabilityofstafftoidentifyhowourexistingblendedlearningstrategiescouldbeextendedtocaternot
only for our current group of flexible learning students but also the larger cohort of campus based
students.Thiswasmorecomplexthanitseemed.Thetimingoftheearthquakemeantthatnoneofour
first year students (distance or campus) had participated in their orientation sessions for the LMS, eͲ
portfolios, email and other ICT resources. None of our campus students had access to the additional
resources(suchasCDs,DVDs,andprintmaterial)thathadbeensenttodistancestudents;andnoneof
theauthorshadaccesstotheirnonͲdigitalresourcesstoredindamagedbuildings.Wealsohadveryreal
concerns about the ability of students to access online resources given the precarious
telecommunicationsinfrastructureacrossthecity,andstudents’readinesstoengageinstudygiventhe
emotionalandphysicaldifficultiesmanywereexperiencing.Itwastimetoinnovate,andaswereflect
on our experiences from Semester One, 2011 we realise that many of these changes will help shape
futureblendedlearningdesign.
Innovationandsurvivalstories
ThissectionpresentsexamplesofsmallͲscalebutimportantinnovationsininitialteachereducation(ITE)
courses that used blended learning to varying degrees preͲearthquake. The first example is from a
literacy and languages course designed from the outset for both campus and distance delivery in a
relativelyseamlessmanner;thesecondexampleisamathematicscourseoriginallydesignedwithquite
distinctapproachesforcampusanddistancestudents;andthethird,acompulsorycourseinanhonours
programme,wasdesignedforasmallcohortofcampusstudentsonly.Thefinalexampledescribeshow
multimedia and social media were used within an arts and ICT course to connect with and engage
students. Each brief account identifies an element of innovative change prompted by the extreme
circumstances and, at the same time, illustrates how members of the learning community worked
togethertomeettheneedsofbothstaffandstudentsinthiscontext.
59
Philippa:Supportingcolleaguestoinnovate
Asacoursecoordinator,Ifeltcomfortablethatthattheonlineframeworkdevelopedandimplemented
fordistancestudentsthepreviousyearwouldprovideasuitablestartingpointtocaterfortheneedsof
thenowdisplacedonͲcampusstudentcohort.However,IrealisedthatwhileIhadarobustknowledge
of and familiarity with the learning management system, my colleagues were less comfortable and
conversant with the practical intricacies of the virtual classroom. Course coordination in this context
meantworkingcloselyalongsideteachingstaffonaverypersonalandpracticallevel.Coursemeetings
were held at my dining room table, and only began after a colleague arriving from a badly affected
suburb enjoyed a shower and some hot food. Working together to post and monitor messages to
students, establish forum dialogue and review content, increased colleagues’ confidence through
authenticallysituatedmodellinganddemonstrationoftheLMS’scapabilities.
As Somekh (2007) notes “Innovation is always challenging, or even stressful, because it involves
disturbingtheestablishedroutinesthroughwhichindividualsandgroupsperformandcontinuouslyreͲ
affirmtheiridentity”(p.2).Changingcircumstancesledtomourningthelossofconsistentfacetoface
deliveryacrossthatsemester,howeverdeepeningteamawarenessofwhattheLMScouldofferledto
positive and productive professional conversations about webͲbased learning experiences and
possibilities.Innovationonouroriginalcoursedesignoccurredaspartofthisprocess.Oneparticularly
successful example was the [supported] creation of an online book club by a team member who had
previouslybeenlessenthusiasticaboutonlinelearning.
While children’s literature content had been developed within online teaching sessions, there was a
needfordialogueandthesharingofstudents’knowledgeabouttextandexperiencesusingtheseina
teaching context. The ‘Book Club’ was housed in a forum and started with contributions from the
lecturers, and successfully attracted student interest with often detailed online discussions following.
Thisinitialstagequicklygavewaytostudentledcontributionsandconversations,whichgainedfurther
momentum, during students’ practicum experiences. Significant student contributions and positive
feedbackhavenowseenasimilar‘BookClub’strategyimplementedacrosstwocourses.
Thissmallinnovationhasprovidedaspringboardforprofessionaldialogueaboutonlineteachingwithin
the team. The forum signalled the start of a pedagogical shift as collectively the team, has begun to
explorehowthefeaturesoftheLMScanbeusedtoconstructauthenticandmeaningfulexperiencesfor
students.
Des:Cohortconvergenceandenhancedlearnerfocusedengagement
IncontrasttothecourseabovewheretheLMSsitewasdesignedforarelativelyseamlessintegrationof
distanceandcampuscohorts,oursecondexampledescribesanotherresponsewithinacoursethatwas
less wellͲprepared for blended learning across different cohorts. The course aimed to equip students
withanunderstandingofthemathematicsandtechnologycurriculumareas,andtohelpthemdevelop
effective and appropriate pedagogical approaches.The original campus delivery plan relied on wholeͲ
cohort lectures to share and discuss mathematical and technological knowledge and pedagogy, and
small group sessions to engage students with classroom learning activities and materials in an
interactivesetting.NeitheroftheseapproacheswasviableintheimmediatepostͲquakeperiod.
I was teaching this course for the very first time, and while I had sound curriculum knowledge and
considerable expertise in the use of technologies, I was working within an inherited structure with
60
distinct strategies for campus and distance students. On one hand I was confident that our online
resourcesandlearningexperiencescouldbeadaptedtomeettheneedsofcampusstudentsbutIalso
realisedthatthedelivery,captureandonlineavailabilityoflectureswouldnotbepossibleandthishad
beenakeyaspectofourplannedcoursedesign.Thepriorityforinnovationinthiscasewastoidentify
effectivewaystointeractandcommunicatewithstudentswithoutfaceͲtoͲfacelectures,andtoquickly
convertcontentͲrichmaterialintoanaccessibleformatwithinanextremelyshorttimeframe.
A number of professional discussions were held with colleagues, eͲlearning leaders and eͲlearning
advisorsonhowtoensurethechangeswemadetoourblendedlearningpracticeswouldresultinan
equitablelearningexperienceforallstudents.Wereflectedontheseinteractions,ourcorebeliefsabout
tertiaryteachingandlearning,andtheneedsofourundergraduateITEstudentsanddecidedweneeded
torapidlyredesignthewayswecommunicatedwith,interactedwith,taughtandassessedourstudents.
TheseconversationsledtoanumberofchangesincludingthewayweusedvariousfeaturesoftheLMS
to communicate with students, a revised course outline and assessments, and the provision of
additionalresourcessuchasaCDandDVDofteachingandassessmentexemplarsnormallydistributed
todistancestudents.
One of our most important decisions, and the one which led to a successful innovation, was to resist
replicatinglecturesonline.InsteadweoptedforsmallselfͲdirectedlearningexperienceswhichrequired
studentstolocate,engagewithandevaluatewebͲbasedcontent,includingexamplesofgoodpractice.
We offered support via a discussion forum and weekly webinars using Adobe Connect. The weekly
webinars, which were also recorded and posted online for those who could not participate
synchronously,wereparticularlywellreceivedbyourstudentswhovaluedtheopportunitytointeract
withlecturersandeachother.Initiallythewebinarsweremadeavailabletocampusstudentshowever
asmoredistanceandregionalstudentsalsoengagedtheinvitationwasextendedtoincludeallstudents.
Thesechanges,enabledbytechnologybutcentredoninteractivepedagogies,transformedourcourse
and our role within our course. We moved further away from the role of content focused lecturer
towardsthatoflearnerfocusededucator.Inmakingthisshiftwefeltthatwehadbeguntorediscover
our teacher identity and to make changes that would enhance student learning experiences in the
future.
Fiona:Usingcollegialnetworkstosupportinnovation
As events unfolded in February, it became clear that I needed to work differently in developing my
blendedlearningskilllevelandknowledge.Previousprofessionallearninganddevelopmentexperiences
related to blended learning had been instigated by the institution utilising common practices such as
workshops,teachingnotesandresources,‘testimonials’andindividualtutorialsfromacoursedesigner
ifrequested.Therationalehadbeenpresentedtousthroughthepresentationof‘successstories’and
the need for economic rationalisation…then with the events of February’s earthquake, an authentic
rationale provided a mechanism for me to move forward but in a much different way. The supports
mentionedabovewerenolongerreadilyavailable,andIwasforcedtotakeresponsibilityformyown
professionaldevelopmentandupͲskillingwithinthedemandsofthiscontextandsituation.
Verysoon,quiteunconsciously,andinasimilarmannertothepreviousscenario,Iestablishedabrand
new network of people across curriculum areas and outside my immediate teaching team. None of
thesepeopleweredesignatedasthe‘technicalexperts’withinblendedlearningcoursedesign,butthey
were able to assist in problem solving and shared a similar enthusiasm to create an engaging and
61
stimulating virtual classroom for our students. Lieberman and Miller (1999) argue that effective
professional communities require both outside and inside knowledge. Furthermore the ‘inside
knowledge’ is not only necessary to create an effective community but also in achieving sustainable
improvements (Lieberman & Miller, 1999). This experience enabled us, as I include others, to build
capacityinmanyways.Conversationswereshortbutdirectandwerebasedoneffectivepedagogyas
we moved forward, questioning ourselves and each other. They were personalised and fulfilling as I
grewinconfidencesupportedbyateamoflearners,bouncingideasoffeachother.Icouldevensupport
andhelpothers…itwasquiteanempoweringprocessasIfeltchallengedasareallearner,withadirect
connectiontomyclassroomandtheveryrealdilemmasofmyteaching(Lieberman&Miller,1999).
An example of this learning was the incorporation of a shared Google Docs site in order to allow all
students to create a joint text. Students were developing skills in writing literature reviews by
synthesisinginformationwithinasharedframework,whichcouldbeusedasaworkingdocument.With
limited access to my course designer, whom I had clung onto desperately preͲquake; I was forced to
lookelsewhere.IdescribedwhatIwantedtoachieveandsomeonesuggestedusingGoogleDocsbutdid
not knowhow. I hadseveral quick conversations with a range of people whogave different pieces of
informationwhichincludedadviceonthetechnology,implementationandpotentialuse.PriortothisI
wouldhavemissedoutonalloftheserichconversationsacrossavarietyofcurriculumareas,andnow
have made someverystrongand sustainable relationships, which have encouraged me and othersto
experimentandproblemͲsolveforourselvesandeachother.LikeLinuswithhisblanket,Icouldletgoof
mine...whatasenseofachievementandfreedom!
Nicki:Innovationswithmultimediaandsocialmedia
Theflexibilityrequiredtodealwiththechallengespresentedbytheearthquakeservedtohighlightfor
me the positive affordance and rich potential of digital technology and an eͲlearning environment in
higher education, in times of crisis and beyond. This included the broad range of communication
systems used by the university: email, the social networking site ‘Facebook’, YouTube, Skype, Twitter
andimportantlytheuniversity’slearningmanagementsystem.TheinitialmessagesIpostedtostudents
afterthequakeweremainlythatofreassurance,whilstreinforcingthattheyneededtoregularlycheck
theirstudentemailaccounts,theUCwebsiteandtheassociatedsiteonFacebookforupdatesaboutthe
evolving situation at the university. As it became obvious there was to be no immediate ‘return to
normality’, my focus then turned to addressing the changes that needed to be made to the design,
learning sequence and content of my undergraduate and postͲgraduate courses. In the absence of a
physical campus, staff teaching one course met at the course coordinator’s home to conduct this
redevelopment. A flip video was used to create a short informal video clip that introduced the staff
workingontheredevelopments.Thiswaswarmlyreceivedbythestudents,withonecommentingthat
“afterwatchingthevideo,Icantelleverythingisgoingtobealrightnow.”Moreshortvideoclipswere
created, housed on YouTube and then embedded into the LMS. Skype was also used to provide an
immediatevideolinkwithstudentsatoneoftheregionalcampusesintheNorthIsland.Astheweeks
progressed, all course changes were clearly highlighted for students in the LMS, question forums
regularly monitored and updated by staff, and regular news items emailed to encourage student
engagementandaddressissues.Studentsincreasinglybegantotakeownershipofmanyonlineforums,
usingtheseasavehicletoprovideencouragementandsupporttoeachother.
Inconclusion
Althoughincrediblychallengingatthetime,outcomeshaveemergedthathaveimpactedourteachingin
a positive manner. These include the reduction of the distance/campus dichotomy within courses,
62
leadingtoamoreblendeddeliveryandanincreaseincoursedeliverycongruency,contentcurrency,and
thedevelopmentofonlinecommunitiesforallstudents.Theexperiencehasalsoimpactedourdesignof
new courses, including the provision of online and multiͲmedia resources (CD/DVDs) to all students
(regardless of delivery mode), and the increased utilisation of the online environment and associated
Web 2.0 tools for our teaching and student learning. We have adopted broader approaches to
communication, identified alternative resources, and strategies, and extended our own professional
learning networks. The changeshave occurred from within the community of educatorsand illustrate
authentic, selfͲorganised learning experiences in response to current issues (GroundwaterͲSmith &
Mockler, 2009). While innovations occurred in ‘survival mode’ they are now becoming essential
elements for a thriving learning community. We urge other educators to ‘get ready’ so they can ‘get
through’ if disaster strikes and thrive in the meantime. The following questions are intended as a
prompttoprepareyourlearningcommunityfortimesofcrisisorunexpectedinterruptions.
Survivalkitideas:keyquestionstoaskyourself
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
How would you contact and communicate with students if your campus was closed
suddenly?
Howwouldyoucollaboratewithcolleaguestoplanandteachfromgeographicallyseparate
locations(forexampleusingLMS,remoteITaccess,cloudcomputing)?
How well do you and your colleagues understand the capabilities of your LMS and the
potential use of other digital technologies including social media to enhance and support
learnersandtheirlearning?
Howwell(andforhowlong)couldyoucontinuetoteachifyouwereunabletoaccessyour
office/teachingspaceand/orphysicalteachingresourcesforanextendedperiod?
HowwellpreparedisyourinstitutiontofunctionelectronicallywithoffͲsitebackͲup,cloud
computing,etc?
HowopenandwellͲpreparedareyouandyourcolleaguestouseblendedoronlinelearning
pedagogies?
Who are the people in your immediate and wider communities with the expertise to
support emergency situations from technical, institutional, social and pedagogical
perspectives?
Acknowledgements
Theauthorswouldliketoacknowledgetheresilience,resourcefulness,andperseveranceofcolleagues
who have provided a high quality programme throughout the 2011 academic year, as well as the
dedication of our students who were determined to continue their learning journey in spite of the
difficulties.
References
Cohen, L. & Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th Ed.). Oxon, UK:
Routledge.
Cross,J.(2006).Foreword.InC.J.Bonk&C.R.Graham(Eds.),Thehandbookofblendedlearning:Global
perspectives,localdesigns(pp.xviiͲxxiii).SanFrancisco:Pfeiffer.
63
Davis,N.,Dabner,N.,Mackey,J.,Walker,L.,Hunt,A.M.,Breeze,D.,Morrow,D.,Astall,C.&Cowan,J.
(2011).Convergingofferingsofteachereducationintimesofausterity:Transformingspaces,places
and roles. In M. Koehler & P. Mishra (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology &
Teacher Education International Conference 2011 (pp. 224Ͳ229). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Retrieved
fromhttp://www.editlib.org/p/36263.
U
U
Davis,N.,Mackey,J.,Mcgrath,A.,Morrow,D.,Walker,L.&Dabner,N.(2010).BlendingonlineandonͲ
site spaces and communities: Developing effective practices. In D. Gibson & B. Dodge (Eds.),
Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference
2010(pp.2696Ͳ2698).Chesapeake,VA:AACE.Retrievedfromhttp://www.editlib.org/p/33778.
U
U
Dziuban,C.,Moskal,P.,&Hartman,J.(2005).Highereducation,blendedlearningandthegenerations:
Knowledge is power—no more. In J. Bourne & J. C. Moore (Eds.), Elements of quality online
education:Engagingcommunities.Needham,MA:SloanCenterforOnlineEducation.
Garrison,D. R., &Vaughan, N.D. (2008).Blendedlearning inhigher education:Framework,principles,
andguidelines.SanFrancisco:JosseyͲBass.
Geer,R.(2009).Strategiesforblendedapproachesinteachereducation.InE.Stacey&P.Gerbic(Eds.),
Effectiveblendedlearningpractices:evidenceͲbasedperspectivesinICTͲfacilitatededucation(pp.39Ͳ
61).Hershey,PA:InformationScienceReference.
GroundwaterͲSmith, S. & Mockler, N. (2009). Teacher professional learning in an age of compliance.
Mindthegap.Australia:Springer.
Hamilton,J.,&Tee,S.(2010)Teachingandlearning:ASEMblendedlearningsystemsapproach.Higher
EducationResearchandDevelopment(HERD),29(6).1Ͳ16.
Kanuka, H., & Garrison, D. R. (2004). Cognitive presence in online learning. Journal of Computing in
HigherEducation,15(2),30Ͳ48.
Lieberman,A.,&Miller,L.(1999).Teacherstransformingtheirworldandtheirwork.NY,USA:Teachers
CollegePress.
Mason, R. (2009). Foreword. In E. Stacey & P. Gerbic (Eds.), Effective blended learning practices:
evidenceͲbased perspectives in ICTͲfacilitated education (pp. 62Ͳ78). Hershey, PA: Information
ScienceReference.
McLean, L. D. (2005). Organizational culture’s influence on creativity and innovation: A review of the
literature and implications for human resource development. Advances in Developing Human
Resources,7(2),226Ͳ246.
Mutch,C.(2005).Doingeducationalresearch:Apractitioner’sguidetogettingstarted.Wellington:New
ZealandCouncilforEducationalResearch.
Salmon,G.(2005).Flyingnotflapping:astrategicframeworkforeͲlearningandpedagogicalinnovation
inhighereducationinstitutions.ALTͲJResearchinLearningTechnology,13(3),201–218.
64
Sawyer,K.(2006).Educatingforinnovation,ThinkingSkillsandCreativity,1,41–48.
Sharpe, R., Benfield,G., Roberts,G., &Francis, R. (2006). Theundergraduate experience of blendedeͲ
learning:areviewofUKliteratureandpractice.TheHigherEducationAcademy.
Simpson, M., & Anderson, B. (2009). Redesigning initial teacher education. In E. Stacey & P. Gerbic
(Eds.), Effective blended learning practices: evidenceͲbased perspectives in ICTͲfacilitated education
(pp.62Ͳ78).Hershey,PA:InformationScienceReference.
Somekh, B. (2007). Pedagogy and learning with ICT. Researching the art of innovation. London:
Routledge
Stacey,E.,&Gerbic,P.(Eds.).(2009).Effectiveblendedlearningpractices:evidenceͲbasedperspectives
inICTͲfacilitatededucation.Hershey,PA:InformationScienceReference.
Stoll,L.&Louis,K.,S.(2007)Professionallearningcommunities:elaboratingnewapproaches.InL.Stoll
andK.S.Louis(Eds.),Professionallearningcommunities’divergence,depthanddilemmas.NY,USA:
McGrawͲHillEducation.
65
ULearn11
ResearchStreamProceedings
PaperAbstract
Name: Organisationalaffiliation:
Emailaddress: Title:
HazelOwen
EthosConsultancyNZ
[email protected]
Facilitatingonlinecommunitiesofpracticeasanintegralpartof
effectiveprofessionallearninganddevelopment
Abstract
Professional Learning and Development (PLD) provision for educators in the primary and secondary
sectors in New Zealand (NZ) is undergoing a period of assessment around how it is offered, designed
andfacilitatedtohelpensureapositiveimpactonthequalityofteaching,andinturnonoutcomesfor
diverse students. Questions are being raised around what actually should define a programme of
professionallearning.Thegeneralshiftappearstobetowardpersonalisedlearningenvironments,selfͲ
pacedlearning,andsocialidentity.
WhileCommunitiesofPractice(CoPs)ineducationarenothingnew,andonlineCoPshavebeengaining
inusageinNZoverthelastfiveyears(Laietal,2006),thereisstilldiscussionaroundhowonlineCoPs
are most effectively facilitated when they form an integral part of formal PLD. A pilot to develop a
VirtualProfessionalLearningandDevelopment(VPLD)modelthatofferedpersonalised,contextualised
PLDwasinitiatedbytheNZMinistryofEducation(MoE).Theprojectfocusedonprimaryandsecondary
school teachers, although one tertiary teacher participated. This paper provides an overview of the
VPLD pilot (2009–2010). The VPLD was designed to provide a range of affordances that provided
flexibility of choice, time and approach for participants, while also valuing personal theories of, and
experienceswith,learningandteaching.ItwasalsocouchedwithinanactiveCoP.Thispaperfocuseson
theroleoftheCoPintheVPLD,whilealsosynthesisingassociatedfindingsfromtheinͲdepthevaluation
conductedduringthepilot.
Results from this pilot reaffirm learning as a social phenomenon. Furthermore, when professional
learning was situated within the practitioner's context, but with complementary, easilyͲaccessible
opportunitiesforsharingofpracticewithinanonlineCoP,theparticipantsdemonstratedhighlevelsof
engagementaswellasshiftsintheirownteachingpractice.Benefitsreportedbyparticipantsincludea
change in their own role as teachers, as well as improvements in student achievement of learning
outcomes, and increases in the quantity and quality of collaboration and communication between
learners.Whileitwouldbesimplistictodrawadirectrelationshipofcauseandeffect,theVPLDmodel
withintegratedCoPappearstoofferaneffectiveapproachtoPLDprovisionthatdoesnotdivorcethe
teacherfromtheircontext,oraddtosignificantlytotheirworkload,butwhichdoesenablethemtobe
professionallearners.
66
Introduction
Professional Learning and Development (PLD) provision for educators in the primary and secondary
sectors in New Zealand (NZ) is undergoing a period of assessment around how it is offered, designed
andfacilitatedtohelpensureapositiveimpactonthequalityofteaching,andinturnonoutcomesfor
diverse students. Questions are being raised around what actually should define a programme of
professionallearning.Thegeneralshiftappearstobetowardpersonalisedlearningenvironments,selfͲ
pacedlearning,andsocialidentity.
WhileCommunitiesofPractice(CoPs)ineducationarenothingnew,andonlineCoPshavebeengaining
inusageinPLDinNZoverthelastfiveyears(Lai,Pratt,Anderson,&Stiger,2006),thereisstilldiscussion
aroundhowonlineCoPsaremosteffectivelyfacilitatedwhentheyformanintegralpartofformalPLD.A
pilot to develop a Virtual Professional Learning and Development (VPLD) model that offered
personalised, contextualised PLD was initiated by the NZ MoE. The project focused on primary and
secondaryschoolteachers,althoughonetertiaryteacherparticipated.Thispaperprovidesanoverview
oftheVirtualProfessionalLearningandDevelopment(VPLD)pilot(2009–2010).TheVPLDwasdesigned
toprovidearangeofaffordancesthatprovidedflexibilityofchoice,timeandapproachforparticipants,
whilealsovaluingpersonaltheoriesof,andexperienceswith,learningandteaching.Itwasalsocouched
within an active CoP. This paper focuses on the role of the CoP in the VPLD, while also synthesising
associatedfindingsfromtheinͲdepthevaluationconductedduringthepilot.
Literaturereview
Cognitionhasbeenshowntobeinfluencedbyemotional,socialandculturalcontextsaswellasaccessto
information (Timperley, Wilson, Barrar, & Fung, 2007). Sociocultural considerations are therefore
inextricable from the design of effective PLD, in particular a practitioner’s workͲcontext, which will
include history, customs, rituals, and narratives that help define their education community (Stoll,
McMahon,&Thomas,2006).ContextualisedPLDhasbeenreportedtohaveapositiveimpactonstudent
learningoutcomes,becausethereisadirectconnectionbetweenprinciplesofeffectiveteachingandthe
adaptationofthoseteachingpracticestolocalcircumstances(Shea,Pickett&Li,2005). Whensuchan
approach is employed, teachers are more likely to apply strategies to address known issues around
studentlearningintheirspecificlearningcommunity(Timperley,2008),whilealsoactivelyengagingin
theexploration,developmentandapplication,ofconceptualframeworksthatencourageconsideration
of their students in a new light (Timperley et al, 2007). Also, from a practical stance, given that “the
everydaydemandsofworkarealwayslikelytotakeprecedenceoveranystaffdevelopment”(Milligan,
1999,p.17),PLDneedstobeflexibleandintegratedintowhatateacherisalreadydoing,ratherthan
additionaltoit.Easyaccesstopeers,mentorsandresourcesisparamount,asarepeercritique(Mayes,&
deFreitas,2004),andinvolvementinavarietyoftasks(Kublin,Wetherby,Crais,&Prizant,1989).These
factors can be complemented by Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) in general, and
synchronous communication in particular (Tu, 2004) through their ability to empower educators to
decidewhenandwithwhomtheycollaborate(Sharples,2000).
Frequentlyreferredtoinformaleducationcontexts,CommunitiesofPractice(CoPs)Ͳatheorydeveloped
inthelatterhalfofthe1980sandinthe1990sbyLaveandWenger,andsinceextended(e.g.byHildreth,
Kimble,&Wright,2000)Ͳencompassthenotionof 'situatedlearning'wherebypractitioners construct
meaningscollectivelyinacommunity(Wenger,1998).CoPsaredifferentiatedfromothersocialgroups
byhavingasharedpracticeandassociatedcommunalidentity,asharedvision,explicitandimplicitroles,
67
procedures and rules, and mutual knowledge and learning (DuncanͲHewitt, & Austin, 2005).
Membership in a CoP is diverse and heterogeneous (Schlager, Fusco, & Schank, 2002), and members
havearangeofexperience,andexpertiseincomplementaryareas(Laietal,2006).WhenCoPsarean
integralpartofPLDtheycanprovideformalandinformallearningopportunities,aswellasaspacefor
practitionerstoparticipateinconversationsaroundlearningandteachingandsharepractices(Brown&
Duguid,2000),andtodevelopsupportiveprofessionalnetworks(Wengeretal.,2002).
ThereisawiderangeofdefinitionsforonlineCoPs,butmostincludenotionsofagroupofpeoplewho
via a common space on the Internet, engage in public discussions, interactions, and information
exchanges (Tilley, Hills, Bruce, & Meyers, 2006). Each group will have its own identity, which in turn
shapes the experience that its members have within that community (Chang et al, 1999). Human
connection and emotion around common interests are also identified as key factors for forming
relationshipswithintheonlinegroup(Tilleyetal,2006).AnonlineCoPsharesmostofthefeaturesof
thosethataredevelopedinfaceͲtoͲfacecontexts,althoughtheyarealsonecessarilydistinguishedbythe
factthatcommunicationandcollaborationisviaCMC.Laietal(2006)definetheuniquecharacteristics
of an online CoP as 1) topͲdown in design, 2) taking longer to develop, 3) comprising members who
usuallydonotknoweachotherbeforetheyjoin,4)whereleadersarerecruitedasopposedtoemerging
fromthecommunity,and5)wheresomeformof technologicalsupportisrequiredtohelpensurethe
survivaloftheCoP.ThisfinalpointalludestotheallͲimportantselectionofan'onlinespace'foranonline
CoP,thatensureseasycommunication,abilitytosearch(andforinstance,tagforsimpleretrieval),and
simplenavigation(Preece,2000).
Nevertheless,anonlineCoPstillincludesthenotionof'situatedlearning'wherebyalearnerisseenas
engaginginacommunity,asopposedtolearningasafiniteprocesswhichanindividualundertakeswith
littleornoreferencetothecontext(s)thattheyareinvolvedin(Wenger,1998).Asaconceptitisnot
new;Vygotsky(1978)suggestedthatintheprocessofhumandevelopmentcontextandcognitionare
inseparable. In other words, human development is essentially cultural, and without participating in
constructive social interaction, the development of higher mental functions will not occur. In turn,
through the process of interaction, learners have their own influence on the learning community of
whichtheyaremembers(Owen,2006).Furthermore,participationinacommunityhasthepotentialto
enhance an individual’s learning through, for example, assistance from and interaction with more
advanced peers or a mentor (a concept known as ‘scaffolding’). Thus, opportunities can be provided
wherethegapbetweenalearner’salreadyassimilatedknowledgeorskills,andknowledgeorskillsyet
tobeassimilated,canbebridged(Wertsch,1991).
AreasonablelevelofpersonalorprofessionalinvestmentinanonlineCoPisnecessaryforparticipantsto
gainasenseofstayinginformed,andhavinginputaroundtheshapeand‘culture’ofthecommunity.On
the other hand it is important not to bombard participants with activities, requests, information, and
expectations.AsHallam(2008)identifies,asuccessfulcommunityappearstodependonestablishinga
balance between too little and too much communication, between facilitated and organic
activities/contributions,andbetweenlurkersandcontributors(seeFigure1).Sustainedlifeandgrowth
ofacommunityisverymuchdependentonhavingadedicatedconvenorwhoispaidfortheirtime,or
alternativelyisgiventimeallowance,orwhohastheroleformallyincorporatedintheirjobdescription.
68
Figure1.Theessentialfactorforeffectiveness:TheVPLDCommunityConvenor(s)(adaptedfromHallam,
2008)
DescriptionoftheVPLDCoP
The VPLD pilot sought to foster the formation of a CoP with the nine secondary and primary school
teachersandonetertiaryteacher.Thesepractitionerswereworkinginavarietyoflocationsrangingfrom
Kaitaia to Canterbury, as well as from a range of disciplines. The practitioners were from diverse
backgrounds, ethnicities and cultures, and most did not know each other before participating in the
VPLDprogramme.
AfterconsiderationofissuesaroundeaseofuseandnonͲhierarchicalrolesthatwouldenableallgroup
members to contribute equally, a decision was made to establish an online space in Ning –
http://virtualicteltpd.ning.com/.Thespacewasinitiallypopulatedwithdiscussions,activities,resources
andinformationthatweretargetedatengagingnewparticipants.AtafaceͲtoͲfacemeetinginDecember
2009participantsweresupportedthroughthesignupprocess,andwereencouragedtocreateaprofile,
andexplorethespacesandtools.Anextendeddiscussionaroundthepossiblepurposesandprotocolsof
theonlinespaceledtosomekeydecisions;forexample,onewastokeepthecommunityclosedexcept
toindividualsinvitedfromthewidereducationcommunity.Thisinpart,wasduetothenatureofsome
of the potential uses of the online CoP space such as reflections. Participants felt that they could be
morehonestandopenina'safe'spacewithpeoplethattheyknew.Afterthelauncharangeofongoing
strategieswereusedbytheVPLDcommunitycoordinatortoencouragecommunityengagement,suchas
U
U
69
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Showcasingcommunitymemberwork;
Writingandsendingamonthlynewsletter;
Locating,filteringandevaluatingrelevantresources;
Facilitatingcollaboration;
Identifyingopportunitiesforspecialinterestgroups;
Assistingwithnetworkingwithcolleaguesandother'experts';
Disseminatinginformation(e.g.events,formallearningopportunities,conferencesetc.);
Raisingawareness;and
Coordinatingopportunitiestoparticipateinonlinesessions/meetings.
Participants were also scaffolded to record selfͲreflections, and urged to offer comments, suggestions
and encouragement to each other. As such, there was a focus on awareness of peer support and
individualandcommunityneeds,aswellastheprovisionofopportunitiesforcoͲconstructingnewbeliefͲ
systemsaboutlearningandteaching(Bishop,Berryman,Cavanagh,&Teddy,2007).
ThestudyfocusedonevaluatingtheefficacyofthedesignoftheVPLD.Themainquestionpertainingto
the VPLD online CoP was: How are participants' opinions of the value of the VPLD pilot affected by
participationintheVPLDCoP?
Toexplorethequestionabove,itwasnecessarytogeneratearich,examinablebodyofdatathatwould
permit an inͲdepth investigation into the design and facilitation of the VPLD pilot initiative. Data was
collectedfromallareasoftheVPLDNing,aswellasviathreeonlinesurveys(January2010,June2010,
and December 2010), recorded discussions from mentor meetings, and comments in other
communicationsuchasemails.Aqualitativeapproachwasusedtointerpretthe1)openͲendedsurvey
responses, 2) activity in the VPLD online community spaces, and 3) the Adobe Connect recordings.
Recurringwordswerenotedaspossibleemergentthemesandusedascodes.Comparativemethodsof
analysiswereusedduringcoding(Charmaz,2008).
Mainfindings
Thissectionexaminessomeofthemainfindings,andthelessonslearnedaroundthefacilitationofan
online CoP, as well as highlighting some of the issues inherent in a 'virtual' CoP. Please note that all
quotationsarecitedwithtyposintactandindicatedwith[sic].
Being a part of the VPLD online CoP was seen as different things by different participants. These
included(listedwiththemostfrequentlymentionedfirst):
x Feelingsof'belonging'andcompanionship;
x Provisionofplatformsforsharingideas,practiceandexperiences;
x Impact(s)onstudentlearning;
x ‘Crossfertilisation’ofideas;
x Accesstoonlinespaces/resources;
x Recognitionofworkandachievement(s)and
x Opportunitiestonetwork.
While the overall outcomes around teachers' professional learning were consistent with any wellͲ
70
designed PLD intervention, one positive point of difference was that the online CoP immersed and
engaged practitioners in a virtual environment. Within this environment a range of approaches to
design, facilitation, and evaluation that could potentially be applied to enhance their own students’
learningexperienceandoutcomesweremodelled.Feedbackfromparticipantsincluded:
Being geographically diffuse [sic] the creation of a community of other teachers who are
progressive in their development and practice both affirms and supports the collective
confidence in the validity of our projects. The resource sharing has, for me, been an
essentialpartoftheevolutionoftheoriginalconceptofmyproject,asithasgivenmethe
tools and awareness to develop and integrate new aspects of elearning into the original
model, further enhancing the learning opportunities for the students and helping to
generatenewquestionsandideas....(Surveyresponse)
Being a part of a networked community. Sharing experiences ideas and having the
opportunity to learn about methodology across the sector – Awesome! (Virtual meeting
transcript)
As such, participants were encouraged to adopt new pedagogies, technologies, tools, and vocabulary
partlyfromthe‘viral’effectofsharingeffectivepracticeswithinaCoP(Moses,1985).
The extendedduration ofthe VPLD, and the subsuming of thecontent, tools and meaning of the PLD
withineachteacher'scontextappearstohavehadadeep,lastingeffectonteachingpractice.Anecdotal
evidence also indicates increasedstudent engagement; for instance, one participant felt that theyhad
altered their teaching practice so that the “students and teacher [were] working and sharing in an
environmentthateveryonehadtocooperateandworktogether”.Anotherparticipantcommentedthat:
Personally,Ionlyneedtoseetheachievement,attitudeandengagementofmystudents
toknowthatIamontherighttrack.Collectivelywehaveallbeenfindingnewtoolsand
techniquesthattheotherteammembersarenotfamiliarwith,andourexperiences,while
uniqueallhaveacommonthemethataffirmsthepurposeandexistence[sic]ofthegroup
project.(Surveyresponse)
WhilethesequotationsdonotreferspecificallytothevirtualnatureoftheVPLD,thereisaninherent
recognition of the value of community; a community that was mainly enabled by the ease of
synchronousandasynchronousonlinecommunicationandcontribution.
PriortotheVPLDinitiativeseveralteachersfeltisolatedintheirownschoolcommunity,andwerekeenly
awareoftheapparentlackofsupportandunderstandingaroundwhattheywereattemptingtoachieve
with students. For example, one teacher stated that "I stand alone and feel lonely at school....No one
knowswhatIamdoing".So,particularlyimportantforparticipantswasthesensethattheywerepartof
a meaningful community of professional practitioners. Such a community it was found enabled the
personalised,longͲtermsupportofparticipants,alongsidethebuildingofrelationships,theidentification
ofkeyneeds,andconsequentincreaseinconfidence("asIhavegotten[sic]toknowpeopleinthegroup
I have become less inhibited in contributing ideas". [Virtual meeting transcript]), ‘voice’, and selfͲ
direction.
Furthermore, because the VPLD CoP formed over time it offered a 'sandpit' Ͳ a safe environment in
whicheducatorscould'play',therebytrialingrolesandapproachesbeforetryingthemwithstudentsand
direct peers. However, there was also celebration of the robustness of alternative points of view that
71
practitioners from other disciplines and sectors could bring to the community. As such, the eclectic
combinationofdisparatedisciplinesandsectorshelpedcreateacoherent,supportivecommunity
In any selfͲmotivated learning environment participants are provided with the freedom to choose
whether to engage (with or without genuine enthusiasm), and some will decline to embrace the
opportunity(Bruckman,2003).TheaimwiththeCoPwastofindabalanceorcompromisebetweena
selfͲmotivated socioͲconstructivist environment where engagement and upͲskilling were the ultimate
rewards,andamoretraditionalperspectivewherePLDwasdirectlylinkedtoperformancereviewsand
promotion. It was challenging to find the right balance, especially as work commitments ebbed and
flowedforparticipants.Onerespondentadvisedthatfutureparticipants“mustensurethattheyarenot
tooheavilyinvolvedineitherschoolornationalinitiatives.Theyneedtogiveasmuchtimeastheycanto
this initiative to see its real value to learning” (Survey response). A barrier that was consistently
identified throughout the VPLD initiative was lack of time to participate (which is in keeping with the
findings of research conducted recently in New Zealand, for example, Ham, 2009). Therefore, it is
strongly recommended that the one hour funded release time per week be funded by an educator’s
institution,andthateacheducatorbeenabledtochoosehowtheywouldliketousethisreleasetime.
AclearexampleofhowwelltheVPLDpilotwasreceivedwhentherewerefewbarrierswasexpressedin
the followingsurveyresponse:“Thanksfor theopportunity.I've learnedmuchand been inspired over
time,withoutpressureofinstantresults.That'swhatPDshouldbeabout”.However,duringthecourse
ofthepilotprojectitbecameobviousthatamongtheVPLDteacherstherewasnotequalityofaccessto
thetechnologyitself,orintheleveloftechnicalsupport.Thisaspectwasshownclearlybytheresponses
intheDecember2010surveytothequestion“What,ifany,technicalissueshaveyoufacedduringthe
VPD initiative?” While five of the nine respondents had no issues with Internet connectivity at their
institutionorathome,twohadintermittentissueswithconnectivityattheschool,andoneathome,and
twohadongoingissueswithboth.Bandwidthwasonlyaprobleminitiallyforonerespondent,butthree
had problems with technical skills. Two respondents reported issues with accessing the online space
used by the VPLD community, with one respondent mentioning: “Access to Nings was blocked by
Watchdogforsomereasonandtookalittlewhiletoresolve”(Emailcommunication).Previousstudies
haveshownthatexternalfactorssuchastechnicalproblemshaveanextensiveimpactonaccessto,and
satisfactionwith,learningexperiences(forexample,Owen,2010).
Somethingthatdidtakesometimetorecognisethoughwaswhilesometeachersimmediatelystartedto
producevisible,measurableresults,othersrequiredtimetoprocessinternallyandbecomeapartofthe
CoP.Duringthisperiodthementorsometimeshadtheimpressionthattheseteacherswerelessengaged
– something that one participant referred to: “During the first 6 months I have been slack, as I
experienced many hurdles initially. I did not like the fact that I was slack, and because of this I am
determinedtohaveamuchbetternext6months”(Onlinecommunityreflection).Itwasfoundthatwith
consistentguidance,support,inclusioninthecommunityandinvitationstocontribute,levelsofvisible
engagement gradually increased, in all but one instance. For the one teacher who faced frustrating
technical and time barriers, engagement remained limited. While ICT skills and experience could be
augmented,somenegativefactorsweretechnical(bandwidthandhardware/software)andcouldnotbe
resolved.ForthebiggerpictureofscalingtheVPLDmodeltoanationwideinitiativethesefactorshave
severalimplications.Notleastistheassociatedcostimplicationtoaschoolwhoseteachersareengaged
in thisformofPLD (Shea,Pickett,& Li,2005),whicharguablylacksthecommonacceptanceof 'value'
whencomparedwithmoreestablishedexpertͲnoviceformsofPLD(Lock,2006).
Synthesisandconclusions
72
ThefindingsassociatedwiththeVPLDonlineCoPillustratedthatcriticalelementsoftheVPLDmodelare
1) provision of an experience where ‘training’ in discrete ‘stand alone’ skills takes second place to a
teacher's own learning journey couched in their own practice; 2) requirement that a level of
responsibilitytobetakenbyparticipantsfortheirownprofessionallearningwithinthecommunity,asall
participantsarecoͲconstructorsofknowledge;and3)fosteringofaffectivefactorsincludingcommunity,
voice,andbelonging.
When professional learning was situated within the practitioner's context, but with complementary,
easilyͲaccessible opportunities for sharing of practice within an online CoP, the participants
demonstrated high levels of engagement as well as shifts in their own teaching practice. Benefits
identifiedbyparticipantsincludedthechangeintheirownroleasteachers,wherebytheyceasedtobe
the main source of 'knowledge', assistance and provider of resources. In addition, during their
participation in the VPLD pilot, improvements in student achievement of learning outcomes were
reported,whileothereffectsnoticedwereaffectiveinnature,includingimprovedquantityandqualityof
collaboration, and communication between learners. While it would be simplistic to draw a direct
relationship of cause and effect, the VPLD model with integrated CoP appears to offer an effective
approach to PLD provision, while also being sustainable and scalable. The two main limitations of the
study are its generalisability and longitudinal effects. The number of participants is too limited to
developbroadgeneralisations.However,thelimitedfindingsdoprovideabasicframework,whichwillbe
trialedinfuturestudiesoftheVPLDprogramme,andthatcouldbedevelopedtosuitothercontextsin
New Zealand and beyond. Furthermore, while a study is being conducted with the 2011 VPLD
participants,asyettheresultsarenotavailable.
ManyofthefactorsidentifiedintheVPLDpilotlinktothewiderconversationsthatareoccurringaround
educationingeneral,andsociallearninginparticular.Questionsarebeingraisedaroundwhatactually
should constitute a programme of professional learning, as well as the role(s) of educators as coͲ
constructorsoftheirownprofessionaldevelopment.Thegeneralshiftappearstobetowardpersonalised
learningenvironments,selfͲpacedlearning,andsocialidentity.Assuch,associatedconversationswithin
educationcommunitiesareessentialtoestablishagreementaroundthevalueofonlineCoPsineducator
PLD–otherwisetheapproachislikelytosufferfromunderͲfundingandlackofsupport.
References
Bishop,R.,Berryman,M.,Cavanagh,T.,&Teddy,L.(2007).Establishingaculturallyresponsivepedagogy
ofrelations.Retrievedfromhttp://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/publications/?a=59197
Brown,J.S.,&Duguid,P.(2000).Thesociallifeofinformation.Cambridge,MA:HarvardBusinessSchool
Press.
Bruckman, A. (2003). CoͲevolution of technological design and pedagogy in an online learning
community. In S. Barab, R. Kling & J. Gray (Eds.), Designing virtual communities in the service of
learning(pp.1Ͳ22).Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Chang,A.,Kannan,P.K.,&Whinston,A.B.(1999).Electroniccommunitiesasintermediaries:theissues
andeconomics.Paperpresentedatthe32ndHawaiiInternationalConferenceonSystemSciences.
Retrievedfrom
U
U
73
http://csdl2.computer.org/persagen/DLAbsToc.jsp?resourcePath=/dl/proceedings/&toc=comp/proce
edings/hicss/1999/0001/05/0001toc.xml&DOI=10.1109/HICSS.1999.772942
U
U
Charmaz, K. (2008). Grounded theory as an emergent method. In S. HesseͲBiber & P. Leavy (Eds.),
Handbookofemergentmethods(pp.155Ͳ170).NewYork:TheGuilfordPress.
DuncanͲHewitt, W., & Austin, Z. (2005). Pharmacy schools as expert communities of practice? A
proposal to radically restructure pharmacy education to optimize learning. American Journal of
PharmaceuticalEducation,69(3),1Ͳ7.
Hallam, G. (2008). The Australian ePortfolio project and the opportunities to develop a community of
practice. Paper presented at the Ascilite 2008: Where are you in the landscape of educational
technology?Retrievedfromwww.ascilite.org.au/conferences/melbourne08/procs/hallam.pdf
Ham,V.(2009).OutcomesforteachersandstudentsintheICTPDSchoolClustersProgramme2005Ͳ2007
ͲAnationaloverview.Wellington:MinistryofEducation.Retrievedfrom
http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/48764/921_Outcomes2005Ͳ
07.pdf
Hildreth, P., Kimble, C., & Wright P. (2000). Communities of practice in the distributed international
environment.JournalofKnowledgeManagement,4(1),27Ͳ38.
Kublin,K.S.,Wetherby,A.M.,Crais,E.R.,&Prizant,B.M.(1989).Prelinguisticdynamicassessment:A
transactional perspective. In A. M. Wetherby, S. F. Warren & J. Reichle (Eds.), Transitions in
prelinguisticcommunication(pp.285Ͳ312).Baltimore:PaulH.Brookes.
Lai, K. W., Pratt, K., Anderson, M., & Stiger, J. (2006). Literature review and synthesis: Online
communitiesofpractice.Retrievedfrom
http://www.minedu.govt.nz/index.cfm?layout=document&documentid=11279&indexid=5879&index
parentid=5871
Lock, J. V. (2006). A new image: Online communities to facilitate teacher professional development.
JournalofTechnologyTeacherEducation,14(4),663Ͳ678.
Mayes, T., & de Freitas, S. (2004). JISC eͲlearning models desk study: Review of eͲlearning theories,
frameworksandmodels.Retrievedfrom
www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/Stage%202%20Learning%20Models%20(Version%201).pdf
Milligan, C. (1999). Delivering staff and professional development using virtual learning rnvironments,
Edinburgh:HeriotͲWattUniversity.Retrievedfrom
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/jtap/jtapͲ044.pdf
Moses, I. (1985). Academic development units and the improvement of teaching. Higher Education,
14(75),64Ͳ109.
Owen,H.(2006).EquippingESLstudentswiththeskillstosurviveuniversitystudy:Socioculturaltheory
andCALL.InP.Davidson,M.AlHamly,J.Aydelott,C.Coombe&S.Troudi(Eds.),Proceedingsofthe
11th TESOL Arabia conference: Teaching, Learning, Leading (Vol. 10, pp. 93Ͳ108). Dubai: TESOL
Arabia.
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
74
U
Owen,H.(2010,October).The trialsand triumphs of adapting a tertiary faceͲtoͲface course to online
distancemode.PracticeandEvidenceofScholarshipof TeachingandLearning inHigherEducation,
5(2),137Ͳ155.Retrievedfromhttp://www.pestlhe.org.uk/index.php/pestlhe/article/view/93/206
Preece, J. (2000). Online communities: designing usability, supporting sociability. Chichester, UK: John
Wiley&Sons.
Schlager, M., Fusco, J., & Schank, P. (2002). Building virtual communities: Learning and change in
cyberspace. In K. Renninger & W. Shumar (Eds.), Evolution of an online education community of
practice(pp.129Ͳ158).Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Sharples, M. (2000). Disruptive devices: Personal technologies and education. Retrieved from
http://www.eee.bham.ac.uk/handler/ePapers/disruptive.pdf
Shea, P., Pickett, A., & Li, C. (2005). Increasing access to higher education: A study of the diffusion of
online teaching among 913 college faculty. The International Review of Research in Open and
DistanceLearning,6(2),1Ͳ8.Retrievedfrom
http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/viewArticle/238/493
Stoll, L., McMahon, A., & Thomas, S. (2006). Identifying and leading effective professional learning
communities.JournalofSchoolLeadership,16(5),620Ͳ640.
Tilley,C.M.,Hills,A.P.,Bruce,C.S.,&Meyers,N.(2002).Communication,informationandwellͲbeing
forAustralianswithphysicaldisabilities.Disability&Rehabilitation,24(9),503Ͳ510.
Timperley,H.(2008).Teacherprofessionallearninganddevelopment.EducationalPracticeSeries–18.
International Academy of Education & International Bureau of Education Paris. UNESCO. Retrieved
from
http://www.ibe.unesco.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Publications/Educational_Practices/EdPractices_
18.pdf
Timperley,H.,Wilson,A.,Barrar,H.,&Fung,I.(2007).Teacherprofessionallearninganddevelopment:
Best evidence synthesis iteration [BES]. Wellington: Ministry of Education. Retrieved from
http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/16901/TPLandDBESentire.pdf
Tu, C. (2004). Online collaborative learning communities: TwentyͲone designs to building an online
collaborativelearningcommunity.Westport,CT:LibrariesUnlimited.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978).Mind in society: The developmentofhigher psychological processes. Cambridge
MA:HarvardUniversityPress.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge
UniversityPress.
Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. M. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to
managingknowledge.Boston:HarvardBusinessSchoolPress.
Wertsch,J.V.(1991).Voicesofthemind:Asocioculturalapproachtomediatedaction.Cambridge,MA:
Harvard.
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
75
76
ULearn11
ResearchStreamProceedings
PosterAbstract
Name: Organisationalaffiliation:
Emailaddress: Title:
SusanTull
UniversityofCanterbury
[email protected]
U
U
Spiralsofdesign:DesignbasedresearchineͲlearningprofessional
development
Abstract
The choice of methodology can define the shape of a piece of research. A designͲbased research
approach was chosen to conduct research into the development of an intervention which aims to
develop a model of professional development to support adult literacy educators in implementing eͲ
learningfortheirclients.Thispaperoutlinesthereasonsforthismethodologicalchoice.Itdescribesthe
spirallingcyclesoftheresearchdesign,aswellastheimpactthisapproachhasonthedevelopmentof
theintervention.
Background
Research, like a spiral, has to begin somewhere. The research described in this paper began with a
plannedinterventionwhichaimstoaddressanidentifiedgapinavailableprofessionaldevelopment,and
therealisationthat theinterventionanditsdevelopment wouldnot beseen inallits colours, through
the lens of more traditional research methodology. Two important needs identified as necessary for
improving adult literacy in New Zealand are (1) programmes which allow high levels of participation
basedonacurriculumwhichislinkedtotherealͲlifeliteracyandnumeracyneedsofthelearners,and(2)
educatorswhoareabletoincorporateawidevarietyofstrategies,includingeffectivecomputeruse,into
theirteachingprogrammes(MinistryofEducation,2005).EͲlearninghastheabilitytoprovideresources
and learning opportunities more attuned to a learner’s real life experience than many of the more
traditional learning resources, but educators need to know how to include it effectively into their
teaching practice. An increase in the use of eͲlearning in classrooms and workplaces will be greatly
facilitated by focusing on professional development for the most important element of the
organisationalsystem–theeducator.
Thispaperdescribesthemethodologychosenforthisresearchinvestigatinghowanonlineenvironment
foradultliteracyeducatorscansupportthedevelopmentofeͲlearningfortheirlearners.Theresearch
aimstodemonstrateamodelofonlineprofessionaldevelopmenttosupportthedevelopmentofskillsin
eͲlearning, within the context of an online community of practice for an organisation which has a
physicallydistributedcommunity.Thisonlinecommunity,oncedeveloped,hasthepotentialtoprovide
the peer support and sharing shown to encourage the uptake of new technologies (Covington,
77
Petherbridge,&Warren,2005).Withintheinterventiondevelopedforthem,theprofessionalpracticeof
this online community of Adult Literacy Educators is being studied with respect to their abilities to
communicate productively, work collaboratively, share and access resources in an online environment,
and to integrate the use of eͲlearning into their teaching programmes through their own online
classrooms.
Two theories underpin this intervention. The situated learning theory of Legitimate Peripheral
Participation (LPP) developed by Lave and Wenger (1991) moves the focus of learning from more
structured learning sessions to within the context of everyday practice within communities. LPP
illuminates an apprentice style model of learning, in which a community of practice draws its
‘newcomers’, through their participation within the everyday practice of the community, to eventual
masteryoftheircraft.TheLearning/AdoptionTrajectoryofSherry,Billig,TavalinandGibson(2000),isa
professionalgrowthmodelbywhichteacherslearningtouseinstructionaltechnologytoenhancetheir
teachingpractice,progressthroughaseriesofstages.InthisrevisedLearning/AdoptionTrajectorythese
stages are: teacher as learner; teacher as adopter; teacher as coͲlearner; teacher as reaffirmer or
rejecter; and finally teacher as leader. Using a combination of these theories, this research aims to
developaselfsustainingmodelofprofessionaldevelopmentandidentifyrelevantdesignprinciples.
This intervention is one which involves a phased approach, and as Hoadley (2005) points out, “In
designͲbased research, we can…incrementally increase our understanding of a particular designed
intervention in a particular context over time” (p. 46). The intervention is being implemented in
widening stages, like the loops of a spiral to facilitate a gradual increase in the tutors’ skills and
encouragetutorstoprogressthroughthelearning/adoptiontrajectory.Theonlineenvironmentinthis
interventionwillbeconstructedinawaywhichprovidesthelevelsofaccesstotheresources,members,
and ongoing activity, which is needed for a newcomer to gradually become a full member of the
community(Lave&Wenger,1999).
WhydesignͲbasedresearch?
Wang and Hannafin (2005) define designͲbased research as, “a systematic but flexible methodology
aimed to improve educational practices through iterative analysis, design, development, and
implementation,basedoncollaborationamongresearchersandpractitionersinrealͲworldsettings,and
leading to contextuallyͲsensitive design principles and theories” (p. 6). A designͲbased research
approach,whichcombinesbothquantitativeandqualitativemethods,waschosenasthebestfitforthis
study, to focus on uncovering the relationships between those educational theories, the designed
intervention, and the professional practice of this community. As Hoadley (2005) succinctly put it,
"DesignͲbasedresearchboilsdowntotryingtounderstandtheworldbytryingtochangeit"(p.46),and
thatiswhatthisresearchhopestodo.
Reeves,McKenney,andHerrington(2011)pointoutthat“theoryalmostseemstobeanafterthoughtin
manyotherapproachestoeducationalresearch,butineducationaldesignresearch[alsocalleddesignͲ
based research], it plays a primary role in the shaping of prototype innovations that address serious
problems”(p.58).Thisresearchbeganwiththeoryandavisionforhowitmightbeimplementedinthis
context.Themethodologychosenforthisresearchneededtoreflectthisfocusontheoryandbeflexible
enoughtoallowiterativecyclesofdevelopment,andanypossiblechangesofdirectionwhichmightbe
needed to create an intervention which achieves the desired results. This research aims to find a
solutiontotheproblem,andReevesetal(2011)tellusthat,designͲbasedresearch,“isnot‘done’until
desirable results are attained, results that represent progress in solving the problems with which the
researchprojectsbegan”(p.59).
78
The creation of this intervention needed to be a collaborative effort by the designer and the
participants,atalllevelsoftheorganization,toensurethebestpossiblechanceofsuccess.Theresearch
methodchosentoinvestigatethisdevelopinginterventionneededtobeonewhichisflexibleenoughto
allow for ongoing developments and broad enough to capture the context and the collaboration.
BannanͲRitland and Baek (2008) explain that, “the continual redefinition of constraints and the
generation of new goals in the design phase highlight how pragmatic, dynamic, and generative
processesareintegratedindesignresearch”(p.299).
DesignͲbased research has what Reeves et al. (2011) describe as “the twin objectives of developing
creativeapproachestosolvinghumanteaching,learning,andperformanceproblemswhileatthesame
time constructing a body of design principles that can guide future development efforts” (p. 55). The
problemofeffectivelyintegratingeͲlearningintothepracticeofAdultLiteracyEducatorsisnotisolated
tooneorganisation,sothemethodologychosenneededtobeonewhichwouldallowthefindingsofthe
research to be generalised in a way which makes it available to other practitioners and organisations
allowing them to see how it could be applied to their context. Reeves et al. (2011) also highlight the
ability ofdesignͲbased researchto provide “a direct linkbetween research and practice, and thusthe
chances that it will have a meaningful impact are greatly enhanced” (p. 58). This research aims to
produce not only a rich description of the intervention, but also the principles used to create, and
evaluatewhatwasputinplace,enablingittobeusefultootherpractitioners.
79
80
PhaseFour
PhaseThree
EvaluationͲ
Researching
thelocal
impact
PhaseTwo
Enactment
(intwo
stages)
Phase
PreͲresearch
PhaseOne
Informed
exploration
Interventionrefinement
Stage4Intervention
Summativedatagathering
Publishdoctoralthesis
Formativedatagathered
InterventionRefinement
Stage3Intervention
Formativedatagathered
InterventionRefinement
Stage2Intervention
GroundedTheorydevelopment
Redesignandfurtherdevelopment
oftheintervention
Stage1Intervention
Formativedatagathered
MainActivity
Developonlineenvironment
Reviewingtheliterature
Evaluatingtheexistingenvironment
Method
Environmentdesignfocusesonfacilitatingresourcesharingandcommunication
literaturereviewcomprisingthreemajorareas
SemiͲstructuredindividualandfocusgroupinterviews
Analysisofactivitylogs,statisticsandartefactsfromtheMoodleenvironment
Designnarrative
Analysis
Theoriginalonlineenvironmentisenhanced,usingcurrenttheoreticalunderstandings,
andtheresultsoftheevaluation.
Theinterventionusedmoreextensivelybyadultliteracyeducators.
InformalfeedbackthroughDesignForum
Analysisofactivitylogs,statisticsandartefactsfromtheMoodleenvironment
SemiͲstructuredcontextualisedindividualandfocusgroupinterviews
Designnarrative.
RefinementofinterventionusinginformationfromStage1datagatheringandanalysis
Trainingthetutorstoworkwiththeinterventiontocreateonlineclassroomsfortheir
clients,andtriallingitwithafewoftheirstudentsorworkplaces.
Informalfeedbackthroughfeedback/commentsforum.
Analysisofactivitylogs,statisticsandartefactsfromtheMoodleenvironment
SemiͲstructuredcontextualisedindividualinterviews
Designnarrative.
RefinementofinterventionusinginformationfromStage2datagatheringandanalysis.
Useofanonlineclassroomextendedtotheremainderofthetutors’students,
workplacesandprogrammeswhereappropriate
Useofanonlineclassroomcanbeextendedtoothertutors.
Informalfeedbackthroughfeedback/commentsforum.
Analysisofactivitylogs,statisticsandartefactsfromtheMoodleenvironment
SemiͲstructuredcontextualisedindividualinterviews
Designnarrative.
Analysis.Improvementsmade.
Ifrequiredtoobtaindesiredresults
Analysis
Table1:Overviewofresearchplan
81
Researchplanandmethods
Prior to the research beginning the author, who is also the researcher and designer, developed an online
environmentforagroupofAdultLiteracyEducatorsusingtheLearningManagementSystem,Moodle.The
creation of this environment was the starting point for the design of the intervention which will be
developedinpartnershipwiththeorganisationusingit,andinvestigatedthroughaspiralofiterativecycles
ofdesign,enactment,evaluationandredesign.TheDesignͲBasedResearchCollective(2003)explainsthat,
“ThepartnershipsanditerationtypicalofdesignͲbasedresearch…resultinincreasingalignmentoftheory,
design,practice,andmeasurementovertime.”Thisphasedinterventiondevelopmentwillfollowapattern
similar to the Integrative Learning Design Framework, a general model for designͲbased research in
education, developed by BannanͲRitland (2003). The first three phases of the framework; ‘informed
exploration’,‘enactment’and‘evaluation:localimpact’willbeincluded(seeTable1:OverviewofResearch
Plan).
WhiletheiterativenatureofdesignͲbasedresearchiswellsuitedtothecomplex,realͲworldnatureofthis
educational setting, establishing the influencethat the interventionput in place for thisstudyhas on the
professionalpracticeoftheparticipantswillnotalwaysbestraightforward.AsWangandHannafin(2005)
pointout,“becausedesignersworkintimatelywithparticipants,unanticipatedinfluences…mayresultfrom
their pervasive presence” (p. 20). The reliability of the research findings will be promoted through a
triangulation of methods including insightful interviewing, accurate site data gathering and analysis, and
carefullydocumentedobservationwithinthedesignnarrative.
Thedesignandthestoryofitsdevelopmentareavitalelementinthisresearch.Adesignnarrativeisbeing
produced to support the larger outcomes of the research and “meet the challenge of replicability by
adequatelydescribingresearchcontexts”(Bell,Hoadley,&Linn,2004,p.79).Thedesignnarrativetellsthe
storyoftheinterventiondesign,andthecontextandtheintervention’susewithinitareanintegralpartof
this story. Here are recorded the events and circumstances surrounding changes, both successes and
failures, which can help to distinguish intentional changes from accidental ones. Here can be found the
‘why’aswellasthe‘what’,informationwhichmayhelpusersinothercontextstodecidewhetherthesame
decisions would be appropriate for them. The design narrative may also help to determine whether the
results generated by the data are adequate for capturing the findings. It is recognised that there will be
some limitations related to the multiple roles this researcher plays as the sole intervention designer,
technical support person, eͲlearning advisor and researcher. The design narrative will also help to clarify
the designer view as distinct from the other aspects of this researcher’s roles. As Bell, Hoadley and Linn
(2004)explain,adesignnarrative“canhelpmakeexplicitsomeoftheimplicitknowledgethedesigneror
research partnerships used to understand and implement the intervention”(p. 79) The addition of this
designnarrativeshouldenhancetheunderstandingoftheresearchcontext,increasingtheopportunityfor
others to consider how the results of this study might inform their own context, and possibly enabling
replicableresultsinaverysimilarcontext.
Researchphases
ThespiralofthisresearchdesignbeginswithPhaseOneoftheresearch‘InformedExploration’,wherethe
theoretical framework for the study was first established. A literature review, comprising three major
areas: professional development for educators, online communities of practice for educators’ informal
professional development, and professional development for adult literacy educators, was then
undertaken.Aformativeevaluationofthedevelopingonlineenvironmentwasthenconducted.
Severaldatacollectionmethodswereemployed.Thenineteenparticipantswereinterviewedinindividual
interviews for those participants with leadership roles within the organisation, and group interviews for
tutors focussed on their different work environments. Four sets of data were also gathered from the
Moodlesiteduringthis‘InformedExploration’phase:
82
x
x
x
x
The statistics from each area of the site showing the recorded activity of the participants
withinthesiteͲtheirpageviews,posts,anddocumentviews
Thestatisticsforresourcesandactivitieswithinthesitesuchasdocumentsandforums
Thelogsofeachparticipant’sactivitieswithinthesite
Thecontentsofalltheforumpostsmadebyparticipantsduringthisinitialphase
The design narrative, however, was most informative in revealing the smaller cycles of implementation,
use, evaluation and redesign which had taken place within the development of the site to this point.
Elementssuchasthesitenavigation,thedesignoftheresourcelibrary,thenewsletterdatabase,andthe
way in which smaller groups of tutors could use the site for collaborative work, all underwent changes
followingtheirinitialimplementation.Valuableinformationonwhatworksforthiscommunityhasalready
beengatheredanddesignprinciplesarebeingformulatedforthisphaseoftheintervention’sdevelopment.
Astudyofastaticimplementationisunlikelytohaverevealedthedepthandbreadthofusefulinformation
thatthisdesignbasedmethodologyhas.Belletal.(2004)statethat,“Researchersneedtounderstandhow
new forms of technology can be productively embedded into larger systems of human activity….DesignͲ
basedapproachesprovideforsuchcontextualizationandintegrationoftechnologyineducationalpractice”
(p.76).Thiscanbeseeneveninthisfirstloopoftheresearchspiral.
InPhaseTwooftheresearch,‘Enactment’,therearetwostageswhichformthenextwideningloopsofthe
spiral.Theseencompasstheredesignandfurtherdevelopmentoftheinterventionthroughiterativecycles
ofimplementation,enactment,datagatheringandanalysis,andrefinement.
StageOneinvolvesanupdateoftheliteraturereviewandthetheoreticalframeworkofthisenvironment,
to incorporate the findings of the first phase. During this stage the intervention, with changes made
followingtheanalysisofPhaseOnedata,willbestudiedforitsabilitiestoenhancethedevelopingonline
practiceoftheparticipantsinregardtocommunicatingproductivelyandworkingcollaboratively,aswellas
theiruseoftheenvironmentfortutorprofessionaldevelopment.Inadditiontothedatagatheringmethods
inPhaseOne,thisbroadersweepoftheresearchspiralwillusetoolsavailablewithintheMoodlesitesuch
as forums and other interactive activities to give tutors the ability to provide continual feedback on the
environment as they are using it, thus increasing the ability of the research to develop the intervention
throughsmallerdesign/evaluation/redesigncycles.
Stage Two of this phase of the implementation will widen the spiral further to broaden the use of the
existingfacilitieswithintheenvironment,inthenextloopofthedesign.Thisstagewillinvolveencouraging
andsupportingsometutorstoworkwithintheMoodlesitetocreateonlineclassrooms,andtrialelements
of eͲlearning with a few of their clients. At this point teaching resources to support the development of
tutorcreatedonlineclassroomswillalsobeadded.Previousmethodsofdatagatheringwillbeusedinthe
formativeevaluationofthisstage,butwithagreateremphasisonindividualexperiences.
InPhaseThreeoftheresearch,‘EvaluationofLocalImpact’,thespiralofthisinterventionwidensfurther.In
thisthirdstagethetutorswillbeencouragedtoextendtheiruseoftheonlineclassroomfacilitiestothe
remainder of their students, workplaces and programmes as appropriate. The ability to use the Moodle
environmentforeͲlearningfortheirclientswillbeextendedtomoretutors.Thesweepofthisloopofthe
spiralevaluatestheinterventionwithinthewidercontextoftheorganisation.FormativedatafromPhase
ThreewillbegatheredusingsimilarmethodstothoseofStageTwo.
ThedatagatheredfromPhaseThree,andanupdateoftheliteraturereview,willbeusedtoidentifyany
other modifications which may need to be made to the intervention at this point. If modifications are
considerednecessary,theresearchwillcontinueintoafourthstagewhichwillbeafurtheriterationofthe
Stage Three processes with a focus on those improvements. If no further modifications are required,
83
summative data will be gathered using similar methods as those already described, and retrospective
analysisofalldatagatheredwilldrawthisphaseoftheresearchtoaclose.
The fourth and final phase in BannanͲRitland’s (2003) Integrative Learning Design Framework is that of
publication.Reeves,Herrington,&Oliver(2005)havesomesoundadviceonthedisseminationofdesignͲ
based research, such as to “present inͲprogress reports of their design research initiatives at general
international conferences” (p. 109). Publication should happen frequently throughout this research. It is
intended that, as they are produced, the interim results of this research will be disseminated further
throughjournalsandconferences.Thefinalloopinthespiralofthisresearchwillinvolvethepublicationof
adoctoralthesis,butthedevelopmentoftheinterventionbythecommunityitself,shouldcontinue.
Conclusions
Summarisingtheprogressoftheresearchtodatecouldcreateatidyconclusion,butdesignͲbasedresearch
isnottidy,soitisnotpossibletoidentifyonepointonthespiralofthisresearchandsay,“Wearehere”.At
thetimeofwritingthispaper,thedatagatheringforPhaseOnehasbeencompleted,andearlyanalysishas
identifiedsomeguidingprinciplesthatwillbedeveloped.Atthesametime,theorganisationcannotstop
andwaitforthese,sothedevelopmentoftheinterventionhasmovedintophasetwowhereimprovements
are already being made, used and evaluated. The progression of the tutors along the learning/adoption
trajectorydidnotwaiteither.Whilesomeareusingtheimprovedenvironmentandremainingas‘teacher
aslearner’instageoneofthissecondphase,afewhavebecome‘teacherasadopter’havingmovedonto
stagetwowheretheyaredevelopingeͲlearningfortheirsomeoftheirclientswithintheenvironment.All
thisisasitshouldbeintherealworld,andasReevesetal.(2011)stated,designͲbasedresearchis“aviable
approachtosolvingrealproblemsinpracticeandtoadvancingtheoreticalunderstandingaswell”(p.62),
andsothespiralcontinuestogrow.
References
BannanͲRitland, B. (2003). The role of design in research: The integrative learning design framework.
EducationalResearcher,32(1),21Ͳ24.
BannanͲRitland,B.,&Baek,J.Y.(2008).Investigatingtheactofdesignindesignresearch:Theroadtaken.
In A. E. Kelly, R. A. Lesh & J. Y. Baek (Eds.), Handbook of design research methods in education:
Innovationsinscience,technology,engineering,andmathematicslearningandteaching:Routledge.
Bell,P.,Hoadley,C.M.,&Linn,M.C.(2004).DesignͲbasedresearchineducation.InM.C.Linn,E.A.Davis&
P.Bell(Eds.),Internetenvironmentsforscienceeducation(pp.73Ͳ88).Mahwah,N.J.:LawrenceErlbaum
Associates.
Covington,D.,Petherbridge,D.,&Warren,S.E.(2005).Bestpractices:Atriangulatedsupportapproachin
transitioning faculty to online teaching. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 8(1), .
retrievedfromhttp://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/spring81/covington81.htm.
DesignͲBased Research Collective. (2003). DesignͲbased research: An emerging paradigm for educational
inquiry.EducationalResearcher,32(1),5Ͳ8.
Hoadley,C.M.(2005).DesignͲbasedresearchmethodsandtheorybuilding:Acasestudyofresearchwith
SpeakEasy.EducationalTechnology,45(1),p42Ͳ47.
Lave,J.,&Wenger,E.(1991).Situatedlearning:Legitimateperipheralparticipation.Cambridge:Cambridge
UnivPress.
U
84
U
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1999). Learning and Pedagogy in Communities of Practice. In J. Leach & B. Moon
(Eds.),Learnersandpedagogy.ThousandOaks,California:PaulChapmanEducationalPublishing.
MinistryofEducation.(2005).LightingtheWay:Asummaryofthebestavailableevidenceabouteffective
adultliteracy,numeracyandlanguageteaching.Wellington,N.Z.:TertiaryEducationLearningOutcomes
Policy.
Reeves, T. C., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2005). Design research: A socially responsible approach to
instructionaltechnologyresearchinhighereducation.JournalofComputinginHigherEducation,16(2),
96Ͳ115.
Reeves, T. C., McKenney, S., & Herrington, J. (2011). Publishing and perishing: The critical importance of
educationaldesignresearch.AustralasianJournalofEducationalTechnology,27(1),55Ͳ65.
Sherry,L.,Billig,S.,Tavalin,F.,&Gibson,D.(2000).NewInsightsonTechnologyAdoptioninCommunities
of Learners. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference:
ProceedingsofSITE2000(11th,SanDiego,California,)(pp.2044Ͳ2049)..Chesapeake,VA:AACE.
Wang, F., & Hannafin, M. J. (2005). DesignͲbased research and technologyͲenhanced learning
environments.EducationalTechnologyResearchandDevelopment,53(4),5Ͳ23.
85
ULearn11
ResearchStreamProceedings
PosterAbstract
Name: Organisationalaffiliation:
Emailaddress: Title:
PinelopiZaka,SueParkes&NikiDavis
EͲlearninglab
UniversityofCanterbury
[email protected]
sueͲ[email protected]
[email protected]
U
U
U
U
U
U
Acasestudyofthefirstblended/hybridonlinecourseinaNewZealand
highschool
Abstract
This pilot study aims to encourage discussion on effective blended school education, by examining one
teacher’s first implementation of blended teaching and learning into a course in a New Zealand High
school. Data collection included observations of the online and faceͲtoͲface learning environments,
interviews with the teacher and some of the students. The findings show that, during this first blended
course,extendedandflexiblelearningopportunitieswereprovidedandthestudentsdevelopedICTskills
whilst increasing in confidence. The course enhanced faceͲtoͲface and online interactions, while the
studentsbegantodevelopmoreindependentlearning,selfͲmanagementandhigherorderthinkingskills.
Studentlearningwasenrichedwithavarietyofresourcesandauthenticactivities,whiletheteacherwas
given opportunities for professional growth. Challenges included students’ restricted access to ICT, low
confidenceonusingtechnology,limitedabilitytoselfͲdirecttheirlearningandinteractthroughtheonline
medium. The teacher’s lack of previous blended teaching experience and limited school support and
infrastructurealsochallengedtheeffectiveimplementationoftheblendedcourse.Suggestionsforschools
considering implementing blended approaches include ongoing review of students’ skills, concise online
course structure, expectations and objectives, onsite student support and facilitation, faceͲtoͲface
interactionopportunities,teachers’commitmentandengagementinprofessionaldevelopment,leadership
support and provision of adequate infrastructure. The pilot study also provides the basis to inform the
design of the first author’s main research on blended teaching and learning in New Zealand schools, by
reflectingonthemethods,thepreliminaryfindingsandtheirimplicationsforpracticeandfutureresearch.
Introduction
Online education, either with fully online taught courses that replace faceͲtoͲface instruction, or
blended/hybridcourseswherefaceͲtoͲfaceinstructionisenhancedwithonlinecontent,isadoptedglobally
byeducationalproviders(Meansetal.,2009).Forschoollearnersthebenefitsofonlineeducationinclude
enhancement of motivation, expansion of educational access, provision of high quality learning
opportunities and improvement of student outcomes and skills (Barbour & Reeves, 2009). Most
importantly,onlinelearningisacknowledgedasameansforeducationalreform(Dutton,2004;Davis,2008)
andtechnologydiffusionatschools,includingonlineandblendedapproachesshouldbeusedasaway“to
helpdevelopnewkindsofcurriculumandpedagogythatwillbothrespondtoandshapethe21stͲcentury
world” (Bolstad et al., 2006, p. 25). Some scholars (e.g. Doering & Veletsianos, 2008; Frailich, Kesner &
86
Hofstein,2007)arguethatblendedteachingandlearningismoresuitableforschoollearners,asstudents,
whooftenfacedifficultiesinselfͲdirectingtheirlearningandinteractingonlinewhenenrolledinfullyonline
taught courses, can gradually familiarize with independent learning and online communication and
collaboration.
The continuing expansion of online and blended teaching and learning increases the need to investigate
andunderstandeffectiveimplementation(Barbour,2010).However,althoughblendedschooleducationis
afastdevelopingarea(Horn&Staker,2011),thebodyoftheliterature,especiallyforschoolstudents,is
stillinsufficient,therefore,increasingtheneedforfurtherresearch(Meansetal.,2009).Giventhat95%of
New Zealand schools will have access by 2015 to ultra fast broadband, the need for further research on
blendedschooleducationtoinformprofessionalandorganizationaldevelopmentisevident(Parkes,Zaka&
Davis, 2011). This paper presents a pilot study that examines the implementation of the first blended
course in a New Zealand high school by an experienced in her field teacher. This pilot study was first
publishedintheonlinejournalComputersinNewZealandSchools:Learning,Teaching,Technology(Parkes
et al., 2011) and aims to encourage discussion on the implications of blended education for school
students,teachersandleadership,aswellastoprovidethebasisforthedesignofthefirstauthor’smain
researchonblendedteachingandlearninginNewZealandschools.Thispaperpresentsashorterversionof
this first publication and includes further reflection on the implications of the pilot study for the first
author’smainresearch.
Methodology
The pilot study was carried out by the first and second author, embedded within their postgraduate
programmeineͲlearningledbythethirdauthor.Theresearchquestionswereformedasfollowing:1)In
what ways is the online content blended into the teacher’s Home Economics course? 2) What are the
positive outcomes and the challenges occurring throughout the implementation of the blended course?
3)Howcantheoutcomesofthisstudyinformandbeinformedbytheliteratureoneffectivepracticesto
implementblendedteachingandlearninginsecondaryschoolsettings?
Pilotstudiescan provide in advance evidence onpotential challengesduringthe researchprocess and in
testing the appropriateness of the data collection methods (Teijlingen & Hundley, 2002). A case study
methodology was followed, as the aim was to understand in more depthhow one teacher implemented
herfirstblendedcourse,aswellastheteacher’sandstudents’blendedteachingandlearningexperiences.
Beingacasestudy“a‘how’or‘why’questionisbeingaskedaboutacontemporarysetofeventsoverwhich
theinvestigatorhaslittleornocontrol”(Yin,1994,p.9).Itsintrinsiccharacterimpliesthatthefocusison
one specific case, due to its interesting particularity, rather than its representativeness of other cases
(Stake,2003).
ParticipantsconsistedofaHomeEconomicsclassteacher(secondauthor)andhereightstudentsofmixed
abilities and skills, who were studying for National Certificate Educational Achievement (NCEA) Level 2
Home Economics, at a Decile 3, urban multicultural high school. The teacher, an experienced Home
Economics Head of Department, implemented for the first time a blended course, using the Moodle
platform (since the beginning of Term 2, May 2010). The blended course involved two units of work:
a)“Healthyfoodfortheschoolcanteen”ͲExploreanutritionalconcernforatargetedgroupandb)“Fuel
forPerformance”ͲExaminethenutritionalconsiderationsofpeoplewithhighenergyneeds.Theteacher
used a blended approach, considering that high school students are not independent enough to work
online asynchronously and that a Home Economics course requires practical sessions with formative
discussionsandassessmentthatcannotbeofferedthroughafullyonlinetaughtprogramme.Theteacher
aimedtoenhancestudentengagement,ICTrelatedandselfͲdirectedlearningskills,whileembeddingthe
key competencies (Ministry of Education, 2007) into the teaching programme. The course’s weekly
schedule included one hour of faceͲtoͲface teaching, one hour of practical work, one hour of online
87
teachingwiththeteacher’sfacilitationandonehourofstudents’onlineindependentstudyattheschool
library,withouttheteacher’sonsitepresence.
Data collection methods included: 1) Observations of the online and faceͲtoͲface learning environment,
aiming to understand how the blended course was implemented, the teacher’s and students’ presence
within the class. Through direct observation the researcher can access information that is not always
mentioned in interviews; understanding the context of the phenomenon of study is enhanced, while
participants’ experiences are inductively discovered (Hatch, 2002). 2) Interview with the class teacher,
focusing on her blended teaching experiences. A written questionnaire was used with open ended
questions for the teacher to reflect on and answer, followed by two meetings with the first author to
discuss on the questions and clarify further aspects. Interviews aim “to understand the world from the
subject’spointofview,tounfoldthemeaningofpeoples’experiences,touncovertheirlivedworldpriorto
scientificexplanations”(Kvale,1996,p.1).3)Groupinterviewswithtwopairsofstudents,focusingontheir
blended learning experiences. The group provided a safe environment to cooperate and generate more
ideas than one participant could generate on their own (Lederman, 1990). All interviews were audio
recordedandtranscribedbythefirstauthor.Codesandthemesweregeneratedduringtheanalysisafter
discussion between the first author and the teacher for triangulation and clarification. The themes were
also triangulated with current relevant literature. The small sample and the restricted data collection
influencedbytheChristchurchSeptember4thearthquake,arethebasiclimitationsofthisstudy.
Findingsandconsiderationsforschools
Thethemesidentifiedbytheanalysisillustratetheoutcomesoftheblendedcourse:
x Provisionofextendedandflexiblelearningopportunities.Flexibilitywasimportantfortheteacherwho
couldmanagetimetableissues,butalsoforthestudents,especiallywhentheywereabsentfromclass
for several reasons. For example, one student said: “I use the online environment at home if I don’t
catchup[inschool]”.However,somestudentswithlimitedICTaccessfromhomecouldnotfullybenefit
fromtheextendedlearningopportunitiesoftheblendedcourse.
x Development of ICT skills and confidence. All students agreed that the more they interacted with the
online learning environment, the more familiar and confident they became to use ICT. For example,
accordingtoonestudent:“It’sabitconfusing[atthebeginning],butIjustgotusedtoit…Ifindthat
prettyeasy[now]”.
x Enhancement of faceͲtoͲface and online interactions. Communications focused on course related
contentandothertopics,whichstrengthenedstudents’relationshipswitheachotherandtheteacher.
The friendly atmosphere within the online and faceͲtoͲface learning environment encouraged
interactions beyond school hours. For example: “A student texted me [the teacher] during the school
holidays asking me how to cook chicken pieces and [another student] texted me to tell me that the
schoolrugbyleagueteamwonthefinal”.
x Development of students’ independent learning, selfͲmanagement and higher order thinking skills.
These skills were developed at different levels, depending on students’ learning styles. For example,
according to the teacher, one student “has come in twice during study line to work independently
withoutpeersandalreadyIcouldseegrowthinhiscognitiveprocessing”.
x Provision of a variety of resources and activities. Most of the online material could not be accessed
through paper resources, therefore improving the breadth and depth of student learning and often
enabling linkages to authentic contexts. The opportunity to select from various tools for their tasks
enhanced student engagement and motivation, addressing different needs and learning styles. For
example, one student said that he enjoyed using an online tool (glogster.edu) that enabled him to
personalizehisworkaccordingtohisinterests.
88
x Professionaldevelopmentopportunitiestotheteacher.Throughtheblendedcoursetheteacher’sICT
skills and blended teaching were improved, as she was encouraged to continuously selfͲreflect to
improve her teaching practice and address the students’ needs: “My classroom practice with these
students did change. By having to work online, I was organised differently [...]. My instructions were
definitelymoredefined,butthereisdefinitelyroomforimprovements”.
x Student related challenges linked to their readiness to learn online. Student confidence and ability to
navigate through the online environment often depended on their ICT access at home. The students
also faced difficulties in engaging in online dialogue and could not fully appreciate the extended
interactionopportunitiesthattheforumscouldoffer.Allstudentsconsideredthattheteacher’sonsite
presence and support was a catalyst in remaining engaged, as during their independent online study
they could not always selfͲdirect their learning and avoid distractions. For example, one student said:
“Youdon’tmeantowhenyouenduptalkingtoeveryoneanyway”.
x Challengesrelatedtotheteacher’snopreviousblendedteachingexperience.Fortheteacher,engaging
studentswitheͲlearningwasamoralandprofessionalresponsibility,topreparethemforthechanging
demandsinoursociety,acknowledgingtheneedto“getoutofthecomfortzone”.However,issueson
the technical and pedagogical use of the online learning environment could not be easily addressed
having no previous blended teaching experience. For example the teacher commented: “There is still
muchtolearn.It’sachallengeinkeepingabreastofthechanges,newapplications,newknowledgeand
inusingthehardware,softwareandletalonetheavailabletools”.
x Limitedschoolsupportandinfrastructure.Theteacheroftenfeltthattheleadershipdidnotempathize
withhergoals.Theschoolserverblockedusefulwebsitesthatthestudentscouldnotaccess,whilethe
availablecomputerswerenotconvenientenough,oftencausingfurtheraccessproblems.However,as
the teacher noted, after this first year of implementation at the school, the school’s attitude and
decisionstowardstheadoptionofblendedapproachesarebeginningtochange.
Based on our findings, the following considerations for schools and teachers were generated, after
triangulation with the literature, to encourage discussion on effective blended education: a) Ongoing
reviewofstudents’skillsandcharacteristicstohelpteacherstodesigntheirpracticesandprovidesupport,
according to student needs (Johnston, 2007); b) concise online course structure, expectations and
objectives to help students to remain focused on the content (Wang & Yang, 2005) and increase their
metacognitive skills (Herring, 2004); c) onsite support and facilitation to help students to develop selfͲ
directed learning skills and gradually become familiar with independent learning (Davis & Niederhauser,
2007); d) faceͲtoͲface interaction opportunities to strengthen relationships and increase student
confidencetointeractonline(Bolstad&Lin,2009);e)teachercommitmentandengagementinprofessional
developmenttoenhancetheirreflectionandtohelpthemtoimprovetheirpractices(DiPietroetal.,2008);
f) leadership support and adequate school infrastructure to help teachers to effectively undertake their
newroleandmanagethechallenges(Davis,2008).
Conclusionandnextsteps
Thefindingsofthispilotstudyillustratethecomplexityofimplementingblendedteachingandlearningin
schools and the multiple factors that influence its effectiveness. However, despite the complexity of ICT
diffusion at schools, including the implementation of blended approaches, misconceptions on effective
online/blendededucationareabundant(Davis,2008;Picciano&Seaman,2009;Compton,Davis&Mackey,
2009). In New Zealand, further research on blended school education is needed, as the government is
‘rollingout’ultrafastbroadbandfor95%ofschools,whilethedisruptioncausedbynaturaldisasters(e.g.
three Christchurch earthquakes and more recently snow days), highlights the need for schools to adopt
more flexible learning opportunities (Parkes et al., 2011). By examining the implementation of the first
89
blendedcoursebyanexperiencedteacheranddiscussingtheimplicationsforstudents,teachersandschool
leadership,thisstudyprovidesavaluablecontributiontotheresearchliteratureandcaninformpracticein
NewZealandschools.
Thispilotstudyalsohelpedtoinformthefirstauthor’smainresearchonblendedteachingandlearningin
New Zealand schools, by reflecting on the methods, the preliminary findings and their implications for
practice and future research. The research question of the main study, “How is blended teaching and
learningimplementedinaNewZealandhighschool?”,aimstounderstandindepththeimplementationof
blendedteachingandlearninginoneparticularschoolandthenfocusinoneparticularclassroom,inorder
to inform professional and organizational development in similar contexts. The case study methodology
used in the pilot study is also appropriate for the main research, as it allows for collection of rich in
descriptiondatathatarehighlyrelevanttoreality,thereforeproviding“anaturalbasisforgeneralization”
(Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2007, p. 256). Although it is not focused in providing generalizations, the
strength of the main research will lie on the fact that “case studies are of value for refining theory and
suggesting complexities for further investigation, as well as helping to establish the limits of
generalizability”(Stake,2003,p.156).
The outcomes of the pilot study also suggest the following considerations for the main research:
Observations of the course’s online and faceͲtoͲface learning environment provided a deeper
understanding on the context of the blended course and more objective insights on the participants’
experiences.Thiswasparticularlyimportantforstudentparticipants,giventheirlevelofmaturitytoreflect
ontheirgrowththroughblendedlearningduringtheinterviews.Theindividualinterviewswiththeteacher
andgroupinterviewswithsomeofthestudentsprovidedaccesstoinformationthatcouldnotbeobserved.
The fact that students were interviewed in groups helped them to feel more comfortable, being
encouraged by each other’s presence to generate more opinions. However, a longer period of class
observationsbeforetheinterviewswouldpotentiallyincreasestudentconfidencetosharetheirviewswith
theresearcher.Thefindingsshowingtheimpactofleadershipsupportoneffectiveimplementationandthe
differencesbetweentheteacher’sandschoolleaders’vision,pointouttheneedforfurtherinvestigationof
school leadership’s perspectives on blended teaching and learning approaches. Such challenges are not
unexpected, given the complexity of implementing blended teaching and learning and school leaders’
limitedexperiencesononline/blendededucation(Davis,2008;2011).Mostimportantly,thefirstauthor’s
collaboration with the class teacher (second author) enabled better triangulation of the findings and
encouraged reflection for both individuals which helped them to improve their role as a researcher and
teacherrespectively.
Acknowledgements
This pilot study was first published in the online journal Computers in New Zealand Schools: Learning,
Teaching, Technology (see: http://education2x.otago.ac.nz/cinzs/mod/resource/ view.php?id=155). We
wishtoacknowledgetheeditorsandreviewersofthejournal,fortheirsupportandvaluablefeedback.We
also wish to thank the school, including its leadership, the students and their parents for their support
during this study, as well as colleagues in another school and the university who provided support and
encouragement.ThisresearchanddevelopmentispartoftheongoingworkoftheUniversityofCanterbury
eͲlearningLab.
References
Barbour,M.,K.(2010).ResearchingKͲ12onlinelearning:Whatdoweknowandwhatshouldweexamine?
DistanceLearning,7(2),6Ͳ12.
Barbour,M.,K.&Reeves,T.,C.(2009).Therealityofvirtualschools:Areviewoftheliterature.Computers
andEducation,52(2),402Ͳ416.
U
90
U
Bolstad,R.,Gilbert,J.,Vaughan,K.,Darr,C.&Cooper,G.(2006).Zoominginonlearninginthedigitalage
(ZILDA).Report1:Zoominginon“digitalage”learners.Wellington:NZCER.
Bolstad, R. & Lin, M. (2009). Students’ experiences of learning in virtual classrooms. Wellington, New
Zealand: NZCER. Retrieved from http://www.nzcer.org.nz/pdfs/ studentsͲexperiencesͲlearningͲvirtualͲ
classrooms.pdf
Cohen,L.,Manion,L.&Morrison,K.(2007).ResearchMethodsinEducation.NewYork,NY:Routledge.
Compton, L.K., Davis, N.E., & Mackey, J. (2009). Virtual field experience in virtual schooling. Journal of
TechnologyandTeacherEducation,17(4),459Ͳ477.
Davis,N.E.(2008).HowmayteacherlearningbepromotedforeducationalrenewalwithIT?Modelsand
theoriesofITdiffusion.InJ.Voogt&G.Knezek(Eds.),Internationalhandbookofinformationtechnology
inprimaryandsecondaryeducation(pp.507Ͳ519).NewYork:Springer.
Davis, N.E. (2011, submitted). Leadership for online learning within and across secondary schools: An
ecologicalperspectiveonchangetheories.ALTͲJ.
Davis,N.E.&Niederhauser,D.S.(2007)VirtualSchooling.Learning&LeadingwithTechnology,34(7),10Ͳ
15.
DiPietro,M.,Ferdig,R.E.,Black,E.,W.&Preston,M.(2008).BestpracticesinteachingKͲ12online:Lessons
learnedfromMichiganvirtualschoolteachers.JournalofInteractiveOnlineLearning,7(1),10Ͳ35.
Doering, A. & Veletsianos, G. (2008). Hybrid online education: Identifying integration models using
adventurelearning.JournalofResearchonTechnologyinEducation,41(1),23Ͳ41.
Dutton,W.(2004).Socialtransformationinaninformationsociety:Rethinkingaccesstoyouandtheworld.
Paris:UNESCOWSISPublicationSeries.
Frailich,M.,Kesner,M.&Hofstein,A.(2007).Theinfluenceofwebbasedchemistrylearningonstudents'
perceptions, attitudes and achievements. Research in Science & Technological Education, 25(2), 179Ͳ
197.
Hatch, A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in education settings. Albany: State University of New York
Press.
Herring,M.(2004).Developmentofconstructivistbaseddistancelearningenvironments:Aknowledgebase
forKͲ12teachers.TheQuarterlyReviewofDistanceEducation,5(4),231Ͳ242.
Horn, M. & Staker, H. (2011). The Rise of KͲ12 Blended Learning, Retrieved from
http://www.innosightinstitute.org/innosight/wpͲcontent/uploads/2011/01/TheͲRiseͲofͲKͲ12ͲBlendedͲ
Learning.pdf
Johnston,S.(2007).Developingqualityvirtualcourses:Selectinginstructionalmodels.InC.Cavanaugh&R.
Blomeyer (Eds.), What works in KͲ12 online learning (pp.21Ͳ31). Eugene, OR: International Society for
TechnologyinEducation.
Kvale,S.(1996).Interview:anintroductiontoqualitativeresearchinterviewing.ThousandOaks:Sage.
U
U
U
U
91
Lederman,L.,C.(1990).Assessingeducationaleffectiveness:Thefocusgroupinterviewasatechniquefor
datacollection.CommunicationEducation,39(2),117Ͳ127.
Means,B.,Toyama,Y.,Murphy,R.,Bakia,M.,&Jones,K.(2009).EvaluationofevidenceͲbasedpracticesin
online learning: A metaͲanalysis and review of onlineͲlearning studies. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
DepartmentofEducation,OfficeofPlanning,Evaluation,andPolicyDevelopment.
MinistryofEducation(2007).TheNewZealandCurriculum.Wellington,NewZealand:LearningMedia.
Parkes, S., Zaka, P., & Davis, N. (2011). The first blended or hybrid online course in a New Zealand
secondary school: A case study. Computers in New Zealand Schools: Learning, teaching, technology,
23(1),1Ͳ30.
Picciano, A. G., & Seaman, J. (2009). KͲ12 online learning: A 2008 followͲup of the survey of U.S. school
district administrators. Needham, MA: Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. Retrieved from
http://www.sloanconsortium.org/publications/survey/pdf/kͲ12_online_learning_2008.pdf
Stake,R.,E.(2003).CaseStudies.InN.K.Denzin&Y.S.Lincoln(Eds.),Strategiesofqualitativeinquiry(2nd
ed.,pp.134Ͳ164).ThousandOaks:Sage.
Teijlingen,E.,&Hundley,V.(2002).Theimportanceofpilotstudies.NursingStandard,16(40),33Ͳ36.
Wang,S.,K. &Yang,C.(2005).Theinterfacedesignandthe usabilitytesting ofafossilizationwebͲbased
learningenvironment.JournalofScienceEducationandTechnology,14(3),305Ͳ313.
Yin,R.(1994).Casestudyresearch:Designandmethods.(2nded.).ThousandOaks:Sage.
U
92
U
First and second year students enrolled in a Bachelor of Teaching and
Learning degree (BTchLn) in Primary education were invited to take part
in the study. A group of 10 first year students studying a Health Education
paper (EDHL151) and 8 second year students taking a Physical Education
paper (EDPE264) were recruited (78% female, 22% male). Both of these
Education papers were being developed using a number of the features
of the Moodle learning environment (Learn). This aspect of course
design incorporated a number of interactive Web 2.0 tools to support the
teaching and learning process.
Prior to the start of the course, students completed an online survey.
The survey used a combination of Likert scales and open-ended
questions. The initial survey (adapted from Elgort, Smith & Toland, 2008)
consisted of students’ demographic information, current experiences
and perceived confidence and competence in using a range of ICT
technologies and expectations of working in an online environment
using a wiki.
Students enrolled in each Education paper were asked to work
collaboratively within a wiki and develop a response to a question based
around the course content. Students were provided with a forum to allow
discussion and sharing of ideas based around the course work, prior to
uploading their work onto the wiki for editing and development. The
forum also gave students the opportunity to discuss other issues, such as
problems with the technology. They were given three weeks to complete
the wiki before another task, wiki and associated forum was posted. One
wiki task was designed to be open-ended, allowing students to gain
experience and confidence to write to the wiki, whereas the second wiki
task was more focused with a view to encouraging collaboration and
higher level thinking. Students were given a clear set of guidelines for
writing within the wiki. We, lecturers from each of the Education papers,
interacted with the students using a facilitator approach (Kennard, 2007)
whilst the students worked collaboratively using the forum and wiki.
At the conclusion of each course, students completed a post survey
that explored attitudes and factors associated with wiki interaction
(adapted from Elgort, Smith & Toland, 2008). Data taken from the wikis
and discussion forums included the number and content of forum posts,
wiki history and wiki content. The lecturers kept journals throughout the
course, which not only served as a way of reflecting on the process, but also
provided a means to manage the development of the wikis.
(0.7)
3.5
(0.7)
( SD)
Confidence
(mean)
(SD)
(0.7)
3.5
(0.6)
3.5
(0.8)
3.4
(0.8)
3.5
(0.7)
3.4
(0.6)
3.2
(0.8)
2.7
(0.8)
2.4
(1.0)
2.8
(0.9)
2.7
(1.3)
2.3
(1.1)
1.8
(1.2)
2.8
(1.2)
2.9
[email protected]
Findings
(1.0)
1.9
(0.5)
1.5
(0.8)
1.8
(0.5)
1.5
(0.9)
1.5
(0.5)
1.2
“I am excited to be involved in this wiki. I think that when I contribute I will be
anxious about how others feel about my comments. I need to make sure that I am
clear in my comments especially when I am offering up a different opinion.”
Two predominant themes emerged when students were asked what
they were looking forward to about working in an on-line collaborative
environment: developing technological skills and connectivity. In the
first theme, developing technological skills, the opportunity for
students to learn and develop new skills relevant to their own personal
learning was a key feature. Students also considered the possible
outcomes of using this style of learning and use of wiki within their
own classrooms to support their pupils.
The second theme identified was connectivity; the ability to
communicate quickly and remotely with colleagues and having the
opportunity to interact with peers from outside their social groups.
Student concerns about working in an on-line environment were
essentially emotive. These included issues with personal confidence,
awareness of the audience, inclusivity, the security of the site, the need
for respect of individual ideas and the concern that they may be judged
in a negative way through contributions. These concerns reflect the
little experience students have of using collaborative learning tools.
Working in an online collaborative environment
26
12
EDHL151
EDPE264
8
7
No. of
individuals
4
9
No. of threads
within the forum
0%
35%
% postings to forum specifically
related to technical issues
It was expected that the students would use the wiki to develop a
document collaboratively. There was no evidence to suggest that any
editing of the text had taken place. Even the addition of the text was
linear and students made no attempt to write or edit collaboratively.
The wiki did not attract the same collaboration as did the forum.
The students generally felt dissatisfied with the way they worked as a
group, both in writing to a wiki and working in an online environment.
Less than one third agreed that all members did a fair share of the work
for the wiki; “One person tended to dominate and everyone didn’t
comment to all the different ideas that were put forward. This resulted in
me personally deciding not to contribute much anymore.”
We identified two main barriers that made it harder for the students to
contribute to the wiki. Firstly, time constraints associated with other course
work and commitments. This barrier was clearly exemplified by one student,
“Time, time, time! Because our PE assignments were one of the assignments
due later in the semester, it meant contributing to the wiki did not feel or
demand as ‘high priority’ until closer to the assignment time, because by
then it had more relevance and immediate benefit.”
The second barrier identified was the lack of extrinsic motivation.
Another student explained, “..it was not compulsory for our Education
[paper]. I believe the wiki is an incredibly powerful tool and should be
incorporated into an element of one subject and made compulsory
(marks go towards it).” Students were reluctant to participate and
contribute to either the forum or wiki because it did not attract course
marks and did not contribute towards the final assessment grade.
Working collaboratively
Although the wiki was the task, students were encouraged to post
initial thoughts and ideas to the forum and transfer these ideas to the
wiki for further editing and development. Only one wiki was created
(EDHL151 group). The forum was used to both to resolve technical issues
and discuss the wiki task. A large number of conversation threads
generated rich discussion regarding the wiki task.
Table 2. Number of contributions to the forum associated with wiki 1 for both groups of students. Note:
No forum posts were made for wiki 2 for either group.
No. forum
posts
Group
Davies, J. & Merchant, G. (2009). Web 2.0 for schools: Learning and social participation. New York: Peter Lang
Elgort, I., Smith, A. G., & Toland, J. (2008). Is wiki an effective platform for group course work?
Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(2), 195-210.
Foley, B., & Chang, T. (2008). Wiki as a Professional Development Tool. Paper presented at the Society for Information
Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2008, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA.
Kennard, C. (2007). Wiki Productivity and Discussion Forum Activity in a Postgraduate Online Distance Learning Course.
Paper presented at the World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2007,
Vancouver, Canada.
Lin, H. & Kelsey, K. (2009). Building a Networked Environment in Wikis: The Evolving Phases of Collaborative
Learning in a Wikibook Project. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 40(2), 145 – 169.
Liu, M., Kalk, D., Kinney, L., Orr, G., & Reid, M. (2009). Web 2.0 and Its Use in Higher Education: A Review of Literature.
Paper presented at the World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher
Education 2009, Vancouver, Canada.
Schroeder, B. (2009). Within the Wiki: Best Practices for Educators. AACE Journal, 17(3), 181-197.
Wheeler, S., & Wheeler, D. (2009). Using wikis to promote quality learning in teacher training.
Learning, Media and Technology, 34(1), 1-10.
References
Ņ ‘Personal feelings’ regarding their reluctance to contribute was a
major barrier affecting wiki development. It is important to model
collaborative activities for students and having defined roles for all
participants (Foley & Chang, 2008; Lin & Kelsey, 2009; Schroder, 2009).
In this case, the authors could have provided greater preliminary
instruction as to what a wiki was and how to use the process as well
as clearly modelling the transition of ideas from the relative safety of
the forum to the wiki. Students needed to be able to see how the wiki
could develop and what the product might look like.
Ņ ‘Time’ was another factor that contributed to the lack of wiki use.
If the wiki activity becomes more integral to the course and embedded
within the assessment with credit given for participation, students are
more likely to put greater emphasis into developing and applying these
social constructivist pedagogies.
Ņ ‘Wiki purpose’. As a learning experience, wiki construction should be
meaningful and authentic (Schroder, 2009). However, the process of
writing the wiki is just as important as the text making (Davies &
Merchant, 2009). The authors believed that having two variations of wiki
may have enhanced student contribution, however this was not the case.
Barriers affecting wiki development
This initial pilot study was conducted to allow the authors to experience
the collaborative and interactive online components of the Moodle
environment (Learn). Students lacked experience in the use of a wiki as
an on-line tool. Even though they were provided with some instructions
on accessing, writing and editing a wiki, they were still very reluctant to
complete the task. The lecturers felt that they could have provided more
instruction on how to construct a wiki and made an attempt to model
this process. The forums that were associated with the wiki provided a
more ‘secure’ place for the students to make suggestions and comments
about one another’s ideas. Although the students were able to
contribute to this type of collaborative learning, they were very reluctant
to then develop this within the wiki.
Discussion and implications
Results from this initial study have given the lecturers greater insight into how to develop the interactive on-line component of a new combined preservice first year Education paper. The move to a Moodle virtual learning environment provides greater opportunity to use a wider range of Web 2.0 tools
that have the potential to encourage constructivist learning practices within a collaborative learning community. Follow-up research will explore the use
of wikis and forums within a whole cohort of first year undergraduates.
Abstract
Table 1. Student use of a range of computer tools. Note: Students were asked to rate their experience
and confidence using a Likert scale (where 1 = none and 4 = heaps). Means and standard deviations are
shown for N=18.
3.6
Experience
(mean)
Email
Methodology
Word
Processing
Students were asked to contribute to two wikis throughout the duration of
the Education paper. Each wiki had a forum specifically associated with it.
Internet
Prior to the start of both Education papers, 67% of the students
surveyed agreed or strongly agreed (using a five point Likert scale) when
asked if they found computers easy to use and 55% of students agreed
or strongly agreed that their level of computer literacy was high.
Students were more comfortable using familiar computer tools such as
word processing, using the internet and University intranet (StudentNet).
However, fewer students had experienced social Web 2.0 tools such as
blogs and wikis (Tab. 1).
Student
Net
Writing to the wiki
Moodle
Computer experience
Initial perceptions
You Tube
The move by the University of Canterbury to a Moodle virtual learning
environment, ‘Learn’ (http://learn.canterbury.ac.nz/), has provided
opportunities to explore ways of developing learning communities and
social constructivist pedagogies; such as peer-to-peer learning, creation
of knowledge and enabling collaborative authoring (Liu, Kalk, Kinney,
Orr & Reid, 2009). This can be achieved through using empowering
technologies such as the Web 2.0 tools (Foley & Chang, 2008). Although
social networking tools are becoming increasingly prevalent in
students’ social environments (Wheeler & Wheeler, 2009), experience of
pre-service teachers’ and lecturers’ use of many of these Web 2.0 tools
in a collaborative learning environment is still emerging.
Current evidence suggests that a wiki as a tool for collaborative learning
may not be as effective as we think (Liu et al., 2009). The authors were
interested in exploring how easily pre-service teachers were able to
adapt to and use a wiki as part of their on-line course work.
School of Sciences and Physical Education, College of Education, University of Canterbury, New Zealand.
Bebo
Introduction
Tracy Clelland
Facebook
Jackie Cowan
Blog
Chris Astall
Wiki
Smaller sub heading
New experiences of social learning tools within a pre-service teaching environment
WikiED!
Twitter
2.
1.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Schools (Community)
a) Principal
b) Associate Teachers
c) students in the schools
Government and other agencies
External factors
Implementation
Need
Clarity
Complexity
Quality/Practicality
Characteristics of Change
Michael Fullan (2007)
Adapted from The New Meaning of
Educational Change.
The Role of Pre-Service teachers as
Change Agents
1. a)Head of Secondary Programme
b) Head of School
2. Teacher Educators
3. Student Teachers
Local Characteristics
There are currently changes occurring with the NZ curriculum, and the
realignment of the achievement standards. A very large change for
teachers! If a new ICT innovation, in this case the introduction of eportfolios, is to be managed and implemented successfully, both preservice and current teachers can work with other stakeholders to ensure
that introduction of e-portfolios has a positive impact on learning and
assessment, and also will continue to be used long-term.
Change theory embodies a number of theoretical frameworks or models
that allow a researcher to analyse aspects of the 'change process' within
an institution or educational context. Cobb (2001) defines a change agent
as someone who possesses the skills, desire and motivation necessary to
make schools more equitable. A teacher who is a change agent believes
that schools must not simply perpetuate the present social order but seek
to effect change by assuring that all students have the necessary skills for
equal access to job opportunities. Each stakeholder identified within the
Change agent model must work together to have a shared vision, and
implement any new initiative so that its effects will be long lasting.
Change Theory
They are a tool that allow both students and teachers to collect and
organise artefacts that have been created in many different media
types. For example audio, video, graphics, text, and the use of many
web 2.0 tools. Material can be organised in a way that that can either
showcase a students work, or show the development of their learning
over time.
What are e-Portfolios?
Sonja Bailey
School of Sciences and Physical Education
email: [email protected]
%ORJ3RVWV :HEVLWH/LQNV 5HVRXUFHV
)LOHV
Number of Students in course = 14
Number of Artefacts
7H[W2WKHU
9LGHRV
:HE
UHVRXUFHV
Fullan, M. (2007) dŚĞEĞǁDĞĂŶŝŶŐŽĨĚƵĐĂƚŝŽŶĂůŚĂŶŐĞ. (4th Ed.) Teachers College Press. New York, NY.
References
Cobb, J. (2001). Graduates of professional development school programs: Perceptions of the teacher as change
agent. Teacher Education Quarterly, 28(4), 89.
7H[W
5HIOHFWLRQ
3LFWXUHV
Number of Artefacts Shared in a Secondary Pre-Service
Teacher Education Curriculum Course.
Examples of Ă myportfolio ǀŝĞǁ͕ƐŚŽǁĐĂƐŝŶŐa variety of artefacts.
‡ New teachers have the skills to use an e-Portfolio, but do schools have
the infrastructure to accommodate them?
‡ Associate teachers being aware and accommodating of e-Portfolio use
by pre-service teachers while in their classrooms.
‡ Greater connectivity between courses, and a learning journey in a
subject can span multiple years. For example Science investigation skills
which are transferable from Level 1 through to level 3.
‡ As a forward thinking tool in relation to implementing internal
achievement standards.
‡ Embracing this as a new tool. Many of the features of an e-portfolio
have links to the NZ curriculum, such as the key competencies, and elearning and pedagogy.
Implications For Schools.
‡ The chance to be ‘bottom up’ change agents. As current users of the
technology they will be able to bring their own experiences of e-portfolio
use, and begin to implement them into schools.
‡ As a collaborative tool, to share resources with their peers, developing a
learning community. This is apparent in the number of ‘files’ shared within
the groups view (see graph)
‡ As an assessment tool, to showcase examples of work the students have
produced. This can include work done within a course, as well as examples
which have been collected while out on teaching practice demonstrating that
they have acquired skills in relation to ITE requirements.
‡ As a reflective tool to be used to document students learning, and
subsequent changes in their learning as the course progresses.
How are E-Portfolios being used in Teacher Education?
Abstract: This study looks at the use of educational e-portfolios in pre-service teacher education and how they have been implemented to allow students to share their resources, reflect on their teaching practice, providing
evidence of best practice and show examples of work created in a Secondary Biology teaching course. Students were introduced to WKH myporfolio VRIWZDUHDWWKHEHJLQQLQJRIWKHFRXUVHDQGZHUHUHTXLUHGWRXSORDG
documents of their own as well as examples of work produced in their classrooms for part of the course assessment. Using the Change Theory and the characteristics of change, need, clarity, complexity and
TXDOLW\SUDFWLFDOLW\,ZLOOGLVFXVVZKHWKHUFXUUHQWVWXGHQWVFRXOGEHFKDQJHDJHQWVIURPWKH ERWWRPXS IRUH-portfolio introduction into New Zealand schools. Examples of types of artefacts will be examined including a
possible way to use e-Portfolios specifically in secondary Science Education and how they can be used to meet and incorporate the values and key competencies of the New Zealand curriculum.
(3RUWIROLRVLQ7HDFKHU(GXFDWLRQ
Exploring the Practice/ Theory Nexus Within a Visual Art
Course for Primary Teacher Education Students
Nicki Dabner & Gina Haines
University of Canterbury
Creating Identity Masks and Visual Journals
Graduating-year students create a mask exploring the rich theme of ‘Identity’ and
document their thinking, on-going reflections and the art-making process in a
visual journal. Class sessions are flexible and the resulting masks displayed in an
exhibition shared with local schools and the public.
Student Engagement (Pintrich, 2003)
Adaptive self-efficacy and competence
Opportunity to succeed but process also challenges students
Adaptive attributions and beliefs
Choices, supportive learning community and environment, feedback
High levels of interest and intrinsic motivation
Personally meaningful, stimulating creativity and exploration of values
High levels of value
Relevant learning, work exhibited and shared with broad audience
Goals to motivate and direct
Personal and social responsibility, scaffolding and individual accountability
Reflective Practice
(Schon,1987)
Reflection-in-action
Formative
Conscious, articulated in words and images
Critical involving questioning and restructuring
Immediate, giving rise to experimentation
New action arising from reflection
Reflection-on-action
Summative
Reviewing actions and reflective deliberations
Evaluating to make sense of past experiences
Reflection on action
The masks are exhibited for three weeks and the
students work with children from local schools in a
‘Responding to Art’ session when they view the
exhibition
Using a context of Positive Psychology to link
new horizons with individual signature strengths
and engaging in exploring positive emotion and
creative thinking through the artistic expression of
collage, led to the creation of these ‘CUSP’ artworks.
They were exhibited.
To be on a ‘Cusp’ - is being at the beginning of a new adventure
and moving into a future where the horizon is wide and endless
possibilities unfold…
Exploring self-knowledge and using reflection skills
encourages direct awareness and consideration
towards how students’ attitudes and beliefs may
impact their future teaching of Visual Art.
“…The opening of
the curtains shows
I am open to new
challenges and am
looking toward
the future…”
“…This is the first
thing that I have
done since I was 17.
I am now 36.
It’s scary,
but positive…”
“The green frame
is more transparent
and represents
emotional barriers
I have set myself
over time…”
Students were asked to reflect on why they are embarking on this new professional journey
and what they bring to the Primary Teacher Education field in a Visual Art context.
Exploring self-knowledge within a Visual Arts Course
for Primary Teacher Education Students Gina Haines & Nicki Dabner, University of Canterbury
,QFOXGLQJDGXOWVZLWKG\VOH[LDLQDWH[WGRPLQDWHGHQYLURQPHQW
DSSOLFDWLRQVRIGLJLWDOWHFKQRORJLHV
Lawrence Walker MTchLn and Niki Davis PhD
University of Canterbury College of Education e-Learning Lab
Abstract
,QWHUQDWLRQDOVXUYH\VKDYHUDLVHGDZDUHQHVVWKDWIURPWRRIDGXOWVKDYHOLWHUDF\QHHGV7KHVHDGXOWVDUHFKDOOHQJHGLQ RXUVW FHQWXU\WH[W
GRPLQDWHGHQYLURQPHQWZLWKHFRQRPLFDQGVRFLDOFRQVHTXHQFHVIRUWKHPVHOYHVDQGWKHLUIDPLOLHV(DUOH,WLVOLNHO\WKDWDKLJKSURSRUWLRQRI
WKHPDUHG\VOH[LFDQGWKDWHOHDUQLQJLVRIYDOXHSURYLGHGLWLVFDUHIXOO\HPEHGGHGZLWKLQWKHLUOLIHUROHV'DYLV)OHWFKHU7KLVSDSHUUHYLHZV
ZD\VLQZKLFKGLJLWDOWHFKQRORJLHVPD\EHDGRSWHGWRUHGXFHWKHEDUULHUVRISDUWLFLSDWLRQLQFUHDVHVRFLDOVNLOOVDQGDVD OHDUQLQJSDUWQHU +RZHYHUZH
DOVRPXVWWDNHFDUHQRWWRVXJJHVWWKDWWKHUHPHG\OLHVVLPSO\LQWKHKDQGVRIWKHLQGLYLGXDOLWLVDOVRLQWKHKDQGVRIWKRVHLQWKHLUFRPPXQLWLHVDQG
VRFLHW\DVDZKROH6HDOH8OHDUQ RXUSUHVHQWDWLRQZLOOSURYLGHGHPRQVWUDWLRQVRIUHOHYDQWVRIWZDUHDQGKDUGZDUHWRUDLVHDZDUHQHVVRIWKH
UDQJHWKDWPD\EHDGRSWHGLQVW FHQWXU\E\DGXOWVZLWKG\VOH[LDWRUHGXFHWKHLUH[FOXVLRQDWZRUNDQGLQFRPPXQLWLHVDQGVRWKH\PD\EHWWHUVXSSRUW
WKHLUFKLOGUHQ:HKRSHWKDWE\UDLVLQJDZDUHQHVVDPRQJVFKRROWHDFKHUVWKDWPRUHSHRSOHZLOOEHFRPHDZDUHRIWKHSRVVLELOLWLHVRIGLJLWDOWHFKQRORJLHV
DQGZRUNZLWKXVWRUHGXFHH[FOXVLRQ
%DFNJURXQG
The New Zealand Ministry of Education has defined basic literacy as “Using printed and written information to function in society to achieve one’s goals and to develop one’s knowledge and potential.” The 2006 Adult Literacy and
Life Skills (ALL) survey showed that over a million adult New Zealanders are missing some of the skills they need to successfully accomplish the literacy tasks, including numeracy, common in today’s society and economy. This and
other international surveys (e.g. IALTS) have raised awareness that from 20 to 40% of adults have literacy needs. These adults are challenged in our 21 st century text dominated environment, with economic and social consequences
for themselves and helping their children succeed in education (Earle, 2009). Similar reports have been published elsewhere, including Canada (Statistics Canada, 2008), the USA and UK. It is likely that a high proportion of these
adults are dyslexic.
Misunderstanding of the abilities of dyslexic adults has led to exclusion. For example, in a US study Fink (2002) interviewed 60 dyslexic adults in the USA who were deemed to be ‘successful’ in their careers and some shared their
experiences of discouragement earlier in their careers when they were explicitly discouraged from attempting higher levels of mathematics because their advisors assumed that they would have trouble with the mathematical
reasoning. This example is an illustration of exclusion created by people located in the dyslexic’s environment, who may have over generalized the numeracy challenges experienced by some dyslexics due, for example to ordering
difficulties, to predict lack of ability in higher order mathematics. In addition, there is now a good body of work on the use of digital technologies to transform mathematics related resources to support all learners, including
dyslexics (e.g. Freda et al, 2008; Hersch & Stapleton, 2006; Soiffer, 2005 cited in Seale 2010).
:KDWUROHVIRUGLJLWDOWHFKQRORJLHV"
Opportunities for inclusion in the 21st century have increased with information and communication technologies, but they are not well known by the adults, those who teach them or their whanau. We recognize the first two of
the three roles for digital technologies for dyslexic adults identified by Curzon, Selby and Ryba (2000) namely: as a means of overcoming barriers to participation; as a learning partner, and as a tool to develop social skills. These
must also be contextualized into where the agency lies in relation to removal of the barriers, because the introduction of a digital tool in a way that identifies an adult as ‘special’ is likely to be unhelpful, particularly if it leads to
stigmatization. Such stigmatization is one way in which society increases exclusion (Searle, 2010).
As a means of overcoming barriers to participation, dyslexic adults can adopt a variety of digital tools. Digital technologies specifically designed to ameliorate the learning difficulties experienced by people with various disabilities
offer an important means of providing equitable access to learning (Abbott, 2007; Lister, 2007). It is common to find computers and hand held devices that change the format and medium of information, thus reducing the need to
read text, because it can be read by the machine by selecting words, passages or even whole documents (text to speech output). Additional tools are also available to assist interpretation, including thesaurus and the web. These
reduce the challenge of decoding leaving more capacity for higher order skills of interpretation and analysis. The widespread use of mobile phones and smaller handheld computers has increased access to such devices in the
community and workplace. In addition, such devices are now commonplace so that dyslexic adults are not seen as ‘special’ when they use these tools.
Speech to text is also valuable for some dyslexic adults. Comprehensive software suites designed for those needing assistance with writing (and reading) include packages that have matured through many software generations,
such as: ‘TextHelp Read and Write 9’ and ‘Read and Write Gold’. These assistive suites of software can be used alongside or instead of a word processor adding speech to text and text to speech, predictive text, phonetic spell
checking, optical character recognition, and homophone identification. A ‘read along’ facility can be used to highlight the text being read in a fluent manner by the voice chosen by the dyslexic adult. Such self-initiated reading may be
repeated as many times as wished and it may also be output as an audio file and loaded into a mobile device such as an iPod. These additional tools are valuable because word recognition and fluency of reading are factors in the
comprehension of text (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development 2000). As may be expected the use of an iPod or other device with headphones enables the adult to listen to text in a discrete, socially
acceptable manner without risk t health and safety. Many smaller pieces of software are also available for one or more of the tools within the comprehensive suite, often at low cost or free from the Internet, e.g. TextAloud.Voicecontrolled software, for example, is becoming increasingly common, and speech input and output can be used to increase the speed and accuracy of reading and writing. These benefits contribute to gains in literacy skills because
they tend to favour time on task and exposure to a wider range of vocabulary. However, the technical assistance needed to set up such software is a challenge that we will return to later.
Today, computer-related technologies offer various types of assistance to dyslexic adults. For example, organisers in mobile phones can be used to overcome short-term memory and ordering challenges (Gillon et al., 2009). Mobile
devices that are speech enabled have an upcoming part to play in augmenting reading in the workplace and at home. The potential is similar to the texting revolution among cell phone users under 25 years of age. Technologies
that read back digitalised text are becoming increasingly common. In New Zealand, Apple’s iPod Touch and iPhone have lead the revolution and the Apple iPad looks set to follow. CapturaTalk is a software product that enables a
cell phone running Windows Mobile Operating System to capture (via built in camera) an image of a chart or text and proceed to read it back to the user (Prizmo a similar application for the iPhone). Prizmo has in addition to
optical character recognition and read back functions, the ability to translate documents by linking back to web based translation applications, further extending its functionality. These highly portable, socially acceptable devices may
do more for individuals who have reading difficulties than dedicated devices have done in the past. Mass produced devices that are relatively cheap to purchase, using robust operating systems have the potential to lead the way
forward in text reading because of their social acceptance, reliability and ease of operation.
As we introduced earlier, digital technologies can act as a learning partner for dyslexic adults. Davis and Fletcher (2010) found that e-learning is relevant to and useful for most adults with literacy, language and/or numeracy learning
needs, providing the learning programme is carefully designed to fit each individual’s needs and lifestyle, their proficiency with computer-related technologies, and their reading literacy. For example, distance e-learning can provide a
cost-effective way of extending the development of literacy skills of adults currently at an intermediate level of literacy and/or numeracy, and who may need help to develop specific skills. E-learning can also help provide the time
and intense practice needed to develop literacy skills. However, the potential of e-learning depends on ongoing professional development for tutors and others who support learners, including the organisations where programmes
and resources are developed, such as colleges and private training providers. Access to training in the workplace and at home requires development of infrastructure and support from employers and whƗnau. Motivation to engage
with e-learning is closely tied to self efficacy so it is important to build early success with e-learning.
Digital inclusion of dyslexic adults requires supportive action from many people beyond the adult dyslexics. These aspects of digital inclusion are located by others in the environment and within the ecology as a whole (Searle,
2010). Perhaps most misleading is the fragility of the software and hardware systems. Repeated technical work appears to be necessary to maintain compatibility between hardware and software and across different types of
software (e.g. the text reader fails to work after updating of web browser software). This can limit or even prevent some of these adults from using digital technologies (Abbott, 2007; Seale, 2006a). Also, guidance on how best to
use certain technologies to good effect is often limited, which makes it difficult for the dyslexic to benefit from them. For example, books that guide tutors working with dyslexics are widely available but provide little information
on using digital technologies (see, for example, Townsend & Turner, 2000; Yeo, 2003). A recent exception written for the adults themselves is Smythe (2010). Both Abbott (2007) and Seale (2006b) strongly recommend e-learning
support for adults and their tutors from Learning Support Centres and Computer Centres, plus close liaison between these centres.
At Ulearn’10 our presentation will provide demonstrations of relevant software and hardware to raise awareness of the range that may be adopted in 21st century by adults with dyslexia to reduce their exclusion at work and in
communities. Digital exclusion is a construction of society, and the text domination of 21st century society has been fuelled by digital technologies (Searle 2010). Dyslexia tends to occur in families and teachers know the individual
needs of their students. Improving the literacy of parents with poor literacy skills has a positive impact on children’s achievement (Biddulph et al., 2003). Teachers are also an important audience because they can communicate
possibilities of digital technologies for adults as well as children, and the ways such tools may be integrated into adults’ lives. We hope that by raising awareness among school teachers that more people will become aware of the
possibilities of digital technologies and work with us to reduce exclusion.
5HIHUHQFHV
Abbott, C. (2007). E-inclusion: Learning difficulties and computer-related technologies. Futurelab Report 15. Bristol: University of Bristol. Retrieved April 24, 2009, from http://www.futurelab. org.uk/litreviews.
Biddulph, F., Biddulph, J. & Biddulph, C. (2003). 7KHFRPSOH[LW\RIFRPPXQLW\DQGIDPLO\LQIOXHQFHVRQFKLOGUHQ VDFKLHYHPHQWLQ1HZ=HDODQG%HVWHYLGHQFHV\QWKHVLV. Wellington: Ministry of Education.
Curzon, J., Selby, L. & Ryba, K. (2000). Realising the power within: Partnerships and information and communication technology. (181 207) In D. Frease, R. Moltzen & K. Ryber (Eds.), Learners with special needs in Aotearoa New Zealand (
2nd ed.) Palmerston North: Dunmore Press.
Davis, N. E. & Fletcher, J. (2010). E-learning, mixed mode and distance learning for adult literacy, language and numeracy: Summary report. Wellington: Ministry of Education.
Earle, D. (2009). The effect of first language and education on literacy, employment and income: an analysis from the Adult Literacy and Life Skills Survey. Wellington: Ministry of Education. Retrieved September 24, 2009,
from http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/ publications/tertiary_education/55973/1.
Gillon, G., Davis, N. E., Everatt, J., McNeill, B. & Moran, H. (2009). Supporting adults with dyslexia: A resource for adult literacy programmes. Wellington: Tertiary Education Council. Ministry of Education. (undated). Adult literacy in New Zealand; Results from the International
Adult Literacy Survey. Wellington: Ministry of Education.
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the
subgroups (NIH Publication No. 00-4754). Washington, D.C: US Government Printing Office.
Seale, J. (2006a). E-learning and disability in higher education: Accessibility research and practice. London: Routledge.
Seale, J. (2006b). A contextualised model of accessible e-learning practice in higher education institutions. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 22(2), 268288.
Seale, J. (2010). Digital inclusion. Accessed September 10, 2010, from http://www.tlrp.org/tel
Smythe, I. (2010). Dyslexia in a digital age. London & New York: Continuum International.
Townsend, J., & Turner, M. (Eds.). (2000). Dyslexia in practice. Kluwer: Springer.
Yeo, D. (2003). Dyslexia, dyspraxia and mathematics. London: Whurr Publishing.
Contact: [email protected]
Phone DD (03) 345 8153