35th annual conference of the association for teacher education in europe
DESCRIPTION
The Continuous Professional Development of Teachers and Researchers for an Adaptive and Inclusive School. 35th Annual Conference of the Association for Teacher Education in Europe Budapest, August 28th, 2010. The reasons of a new approach: social context. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
The Continuous Professional Development
of Teachers and Researchers for an
Adaptive and Inclusive School
35th Annual Conference of the Associationfor Teacher Education in Europe
Budapest, August 28th, 2010
Krisztina Gaskó
Orsolya Kálmán
György Mészáros
Nóra Rapos
Eötvös Loránd UniversityFaculty of Education and Psychology
new challenges worldwide (globalization, postmodernism, etc.),
teachers and schools face new requirements and expectations (ad eg. measurement politics)
Hungarian social problems: hierarchic society – selective school system strong stereotypes and prejudices in the
society – stereotypes and categories in school
The reasons of a new approach: social context
slow penetration of some worldwide tendencies in educational theory (gender issues, social constructivism, critical pedagogy etc.)
scarcity of conceptual and theoretical background
divergent concepts: inclusion, adaptivity
in-service TE programs not related to institutions, communities
in-service TE without the mentality of continuous professional development
lack of reflection on the social context
The reasons of a new approach: insufficient in-service teacher education
Our research and development project: our story
studying the international literature study visit abroad studying new adaptive, innovative initiatives in Hungary studying schools in collaboration with the PLC: five „adaptive” schools three-phase case study supporting the reflection of the PLC
elaborating a theoretical framework
elaborating tools for schools to help the PLC
promoting the CPD of teachers in the context of the process of the innovation of their institution
a school network of adaptive-inclusive schools;
promoting of the sharing of adaptive ways among the PLCs
activitiesactivities goalsgoals future future
VALUES: main dimensions of our conceptual framework
new challenges, the expectation of continuous innovation and reflection
adaptive reaction to the context, to the students’ characteristics, innovative, reflective learning in the school community with social responsibility
adaptivity in every institution: in danger in a new situation as a special institution as a second chance institution as a popular district school
but lack of reflection and common, tipical answers
Adaptivity
individualistic society, democracy, equity, school not only an institution and an organization
but a community with shared goals, with a continuous learning process together (Bergmark, 2009; Stoll – Louis, 2007; Sergiovanni, 1994)
school is situated in the local community like a node in a net (Crowson – Goldring, 2010)
collaboration with the students (school democracy) opening a community space in block of flats
context but with a middle-class mentality
School as community
Diversity and fighting against categories
Essentialisation of the categiories like SEN and disadvantaged students
The categories are regulated by the law but have different interpretations
Focus on integration
The categories: Relative, a social construction
(McLaren, 1995) One aspect of the student’s
characteristics New focuses (e.g. homosexual
students, dropped out talented students)
Diversity
Inclusion: school for all children
Complex pedagogical understanding of each student as a distinct personality
BOUNDED BY CATEGORIES
Focusing on individual characteristics but a very strong social influence
of the SEN category in a special institution
Not fighting against the categories but struggling with them
Scarce reflectionNo interpretation of
diversityAbsence of
new categories
‘Believing in every student’but inflexible trackings,
hierarchy of programmes in a second chance school
Learning-centeredness Method-centeredness
in teachers’ thinking and teaching
in in-service learning programmes
Strong emphasis on individual learning
Well-established learning theory Goal and way
The theory of social constructivism (Littleton – Häkkinen, 1999) Social, cultural context Different levels of learning Process of learning as
participation, interaction, knowledge construction
Diversity in the communities Learner’s identity
Learning-centerednessas a goal and a way in a primary school
Everyday knowledge
Intrinsic motivation of students
Project pedagogy
Supporting
self-regulated
learning
Relatedness of individual
and group learning
a) in students’ learning
b) amongst teachers
?
Issues to be consideredaccording to in-service learning
Best practices as we think about them… Practices on the road Learning through interaction, participation Mutuality
A school network as we plan… Based on professional support A system of ‘adoption’ What kinds of incentives can we offer for the schools?
Is there a future for school networks?
ReferencesBergmark, U. (2009): Building an Ethical Learning Community in Schools. Luleå University of Technology, Department of Education, Luleå.
Crowson, R.L. – Goldring, E.B. (2010): School Community Relations. In: Peterson, P. – McGaw, Baker – McGaw, Barry (szerk.): International Encyclopedia of Education. Elsevier, Oxford, 106-112.
Littleton, K. – Häkkinen, P. (1999): Learning together: Understanding the process of computer-based collaborative learning. In: Dillengourg, P. (szerk.): Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches, Pergamon, Oxford, 20-31.
McLaren, P. (1995): Critical Pedagogy and Predatory Culture. Oppositional Politics in a Postmodern Era. Routledge, New York.
Sergiovanni, T. (1994): Organizations or communities? Changing the metaphor changes the theory.Educational Administration Quarterly, 30, 214-226.
Stoll, L. – Louis, K. S. (2007): Professional learning communities: elaborating new approach. In: Stoll, L. – Louis, K. S. (szerk.): Professional Learning Communities: Divergence, Depth and Dilemmas. Open University Press, 1-13.