35th annual conference of the association for teacher education in europe

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?

Thank you for your attention!

gasko.krisztina@ppk.elte.hukalman.orsolya@ppk.elte.humeszarosgyuri.d@gmail.com

rapos.nora@ppk.elte.hu

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.