holmes online learning communities nl2012

Online Learning Communities for Teachers' Continuous Professional Development

Case study of an eTwinning Learning Event

April 2012Networked Learning conference, Maastricht

Brian Holmes, Lancaster University & European CommissionDr. Julie-Ann Sime, Lancaster University

with the support of

Tiina Sarisalmi, Municipality of Orivesi, Finland Anne Gilleran, European Schoolnet, Belgium

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/

2http://www.slideshare.net/holmebn


1. Research context

2. Research design

3. Findings

4. Conclusions


3http://www.slideshare.net/holmebn3

Study on learning communities supported by ICT

Benefits for learners:• Online communities support intentional and

non-intentional learning

• Participants can follow and observe life of others, encouraging reflection

• Support active learning of all key competences and transversal skills

• Online communities provide new opportunities for equality (Ala-Mutka, 2010)

• Greater individual understanding through a group endeavour (McConnell, 2006)

1. Research context

Online learning communities


1. Research context

Case study: an eTwinning Learning Event

• eTwinning supports teachers across Europe

° Joint pedagogical projects ° Continuous professional development° Thriving community of teachers

° ‘Learning Events’

° Short, intensive online sessions, in groups

° Focused on a theme, led by a subject expert

° Involve teachers in hands-on, non-formal learning with peers

° My case

° ‘Exploiting Web 2.0: eTwinning and Collaboration’

www.eTwinning.net

http://www.etwinning.net/


Online Learning Communities

1. Research context

2. Research design

3. Findings

4. Conclusions

Case study of an eTwinning Learning Event for Teachers' Continuous Professional Development


2. Research design

Theoretical framework

• Cognitive presence active learners in a community° Constructing meaning through sustained

communication° Essential for critical thinking

• Social presence feeling a person is ‘real’° Projecting personal characteristics into the

community° Directly contributes to success of learning

• Teaching presencedesign and support for active learning° Support and enhance cognitive and social

presence for the purposes of learning° Design often led by teacher° Facilitation often shared with learners

(Garrison et al, 2000, p.88)

COGNITIVEPRESENCE

Communication Medium

SOCIALPRESENCE

SupportingDiscourse

Community of Inquiry

TEACHING PRESENCE(Structure/Process)

SettingClimate

SelectingContent

EDUCATIONALEXPERIENCE


2. Research design

Research questions

In an eTwinning Learning Event (LE) for teachers’ continuous

professional development:

– How does the online learning community influence the development of teachers’ cognition, practice and competence?

– How do teaching presence and social presence influence the collaboration, the cognitive presence and the development of the community?


2. Research design

Action research• Completed two cycles of action research

1. Initial LE, April 2010, 156 teachers

2. Revised LE, Oct-Nov 2010, 142 teachers

• Participative research

Worked together with Tiina Sarisalmi, a teacher and the domain expert

Supported by EUN, the LE organisers Participated as tutor

• Data collection and analysis

– Initial and final interviews

– Final online questionnaire

– Coding of discussion forums using the Community of Inquiry framework

Cycle of Action Research (O’Leary, 2004, in Koshy, 2010, p.7)


1. Research context

2. Research design

3. Findings

4. Conclusions




3. Findings

Recommendations from 1st LE

• Increase social presence° More support for socio-emotional

aspects (Kreijns et al, 2003, Zenios & Holmes, 2010)

° Give time to develop trust, shared values and reciprocity (McConnell, 2006)

• Reinforce cognitive presence° Activities for critical thinking° Reflection in practice and

meta-cognition (Schön, 1987, Eraut, 1995)

• Strengthen teaching presence° Increase facilitation and

‘orchestration’ at key points (Dillenbourg, 2008)

Meta-cognition: reflection on own practice and competence

Web 2.0 tools and collaboration

Cognitive activities

° Introductions° What is web 2.0?° Documenting the learning

° Planning and managing a project

° Sharing videos, presentations, photos

° Collaborative learning

° Conclusion and evaluation

Social activities

° Introductions° Social interaction° Mutual support° Feedback° Stories


3. Findings

The revised LE

• Added time for practice and reflection– 12 days for the LE cognitive activities, 19 days to try out in own

teaching practice, 2 days of final reflection in the LE

– Encouraged sharing of stories, feelings and reflections

• Added a virtual staff room– A place for informal discussion and reflection in practice

– Tables of small groups to foster stronger ties

• Increased moderation– Moderation at key points to encourage and support

– Encouraged mutual support and guidance

week

1st LE

2nd LE

Cognitive activities Applying ideas in practice Final reflection

41 2 3


3. Findings

All messages over time in staff room

Frequency of messages related closely to activitiesand to the messages from tutors

Almost no messages whilst applying ideas in practice


3. Findings

Coding for cognitive presence

Example of Edita: illustrates the progression in cognition for a typical participant

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33

Messages in order of time (first to last)

Cogn

itive

pre

senc

e

Other

Triggeringevent

Exploration

Integration

Resolution

Cog

nitio

nC

ritic

al t

hink

ing

Coding suggests critical thinking reached in later stages Garrison et al (2001)


3. Findings

Views of participantsApplying ideas in practice …

‘I was able to apply what I learned in the classroom and my pupils are very excited and they want to learn more’ (final questionnaire)

Staff room …‘most of my time was spent in the staff room, to get ideas, to get support, and to feel proud and happy when my work got commented on. i think the idea of the staff room was the best’ (final interview)

Collaboration does not always work…‘Well in the forum there is merely discussion and I understand that cooperation is a step further and collaboration even further, and I did not enjoy not being able to collaborate in my own group’ (final interview)

Facilitation and feedback from the tutor is not always a good thing …‘I think those are things that can very easily smother the flame of creative thinking and learning’ (email feedback from tutor)

However ...


1. Research context

2. Research design

3. Findings

4. Conclusions




4. Conclusions

From the teachers’ perspectiveOnline learning community The online community supports teachers to develop their professional

competence The community provides opportunity for mutual support, exchange of

experience and reflection in a trusted environment The community is useful for as long as it supports learning

Learning by doing Teachers who apply what they are learning in their own teaching practice

gain motivation, confidence and belief in what they are doing

Guidance It is beneficial to provide moderation at key points and to back-off as and

when peer support emerges

Social interaction Social interaction is important - it facilitates learning and engenders a

sense of community


4. Conclusions

From an academic perspective (1/2)

Facilitation and mutual support Teaching presence has a positive impact on cognitive presence

(critical thinking) (Dillenbourg, 2008; Shea & Bidjerano, 2009)

Reflective practitioners Applying ideas in practice and reflection-in-practice with peers reinforces

competence development (Schön, 1987; Eraut, 1995)

Vicarious learning from peers (Lave and Wenger, 1991)

Social and community aspects The learning community engendered mutual support, trust and sharing. It

provides an appropriate micro-context for reflection (Boud and Walker, 1998; Grossman et al, 2000; McConnell, 2006)

Social ties are important for learning, however interaction is purposeful and the community is task based and ephemeral (Riel and Polin, 2004; Garrison and Arbaugh, 2007)

Community of Inquiry framework The CoI framework is useful to analyse learning holistically in a

community, and the interrelation between the cognitive, teaching and social aspects (Garrison et al, 2000)

The cognitive presence coding scheme was the most straightforward to apply and the most useful, perhaps because it is based on the Practical Inquiry model (Garrison et al, 2001)

The teaching presence coding scheme favours instruction and ‘tutor as expert’ rather than ‘tutor as facilitator/moderator’ (Anderson, et al., 2001)

The social presence coding scheme needs to be updated to take into account social affordances of modern social computing (Rourke, et al., 2001)

4. Conclusions

From an academic perspective (2/2)


References (1 of 3)

Ala-Mutka, K. (2010) Learning in informal online networks and communities, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS), J., European Commission (ONLINE accessed 18.11.2010 - http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu/publications/pub.cfm?id=3059 -)

Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D. & Archer, W. (2001) 'Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context'. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5 (2), pp.1-17

Boud, D. & Walker, D. (1998) 'Promoting reflection in professional courses: The challenge of context'. Studies in Higher Education, 23 (2), pp.191-206

Dillenbourg, P. (2008) 'Integrating technologies into educational ecosystems'. Distance Education, 29 (2), pp.127 – 140

Eraut, M. (1995) 'Schon Shock: a case for refraining reflection-in-action?'. Teachers and Teaching, 1 (1), pp.9 – 22

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T. & Archer, W. (2000) 'Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education'. The Internet and Higher Education, 2 (2-3), pp.87-105

http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu/publications/pub.cfm?id=3059




References (2 of 3)

Garrison, D. R. & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007) 'Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions'. The Internet and Higher Education, 10 (3), pp.157-172

Garrison, D., Anderson, T. & Archer, W. (2001) 'Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education'. American Journal of Distance Education, 15 (1), pp.7-23

Grossman, P., Wineburg, S. & Woolworth, S. (2000) What makes teacher community different from a gathering of teachers?, Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington

Koshy, V. (2010) Action research for improving educational practice, 2nd ed., London, Sage publications Ltd.

Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A. & Jochems, W. (2003) 'Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: a review of the research'. Computers in Human Behavior, 19 (3), pp.335-353

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Cambridge University Press.

References (3 of 3)

McConnell, D. (2006) E-Learning Groups and Communities. Maidenhead, Open University Press.

Riel, M. & Polin, L. (2004) 'Online learning communities: Common ground and critical differences in designing technical environments', in Barab, S., Kling, R. & Gray, B. (Eds.), Designing for virtual communities in the service of learning, pp.16-50, Cambridge University Press

Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. & Archer, W. (2001) 'Assessing Social Presence in Asynchronous Text-based Computer Conferencing'. Journal of Distance Education, 14 (2), pp.50-71

Schön, D. A. (1987) Educating the reflective practitioner, Jossey-Bass San Francisco.

Shea, P. & Bidjerano, T. (2009) 'Community of inquiry as a theoretical framework to foster ‘‘epistemic engagement” and ‘‘cognitive presence” in online education'. Computers & Education, 52, pp.543-553

Zenios, M. & Holmes, B. (2010), 'Knowledge creation in networked learning: combined tools and affordances', Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning 2010, Copenhagen, pp.471-479


Thank you

[email protected]

http://holmesbrian.blogspot.com/

mailto:[email protected]




holmes online learning communities nl2012

Education

etwinning learning eventapril

purposes of learning

research designaction

networked learning conference

nonformal learning

research context case

thriving community of

learners http