rudy vandamme knowledge development in the classroom
DESCRIPTION
Presentation Dialogical Self conference 2010. Measuring teacher's ability to co-create and develop knowledge together with his students.TRANSCRIPT
The ability of teachers in higher education to develop knowledge in collaboration with
their students
Rudy Vandamme (BE) Erica Gasseling (NL)
GAC Assesment, Training en [email protected]
6th International Conference on Dialogical Self Theory Athens Sept-Octobre 2010
Content
1. Context: educational reform in the Netherlands
2. My PhD queste
3. Research method
4. Quantitive conclusions
5. Qualitative conclusions
6. Application in Training Teachers
7. Knowledge creation in higher professional education
3
Knowledge
Transmission
Students
Teacher as expert
Modern education paradigm: patriarchal
The teacher is transmitter of
knowledge
4
Modern education paradigm: industrial
School
Input
Teaching
Output
Learning
Learning is alinear processin the students
5
Knowledge
Students
Teacher as coach
Post-modern education paradigm: self-directed learning
Knowledge is Everywhere;The teacher is a coach or
facilitator
6
Knowledge
Selfdirectedlearning
Teacher as facilitator
Subgroup
Subgroup
Knowledge
Knowledge
Know
ledge
Knowledge
Post-modern education paradigm: self-directed learning
Colloborative learningamongst students
7
Our vision on education development
Education development is not a linear process to replace teacher-centered education by student-centered education, but to value all possiblities of the learning context, e.g. to construct education as a context of relationships.
NOT student-centeredNOT teacher-centeredBUT relationship centered
Ph.D Research queste
How to integrate institutional arranged relationships and the possibility of co-creative knowledge development?
Educationalstructure
Co-creativeKnowledge
Development
Thesis for this research module
The possibility of co-creative knowledge development in the classroom depends on teacher’s capacity to access different complementary I-positions in order to solve conflicting goals of education.
• Program targets
• Bringing up, ‘educating’ students
• Managing a mini society in the classroom
• Coaching individual students
• Doing research and knowledge development
• Inspiring young people, role model
The Dialogical Self theory, Hubert Hermans
I as teacher I as student
Self as monolithic
The Dialogical Self theory, Hubert Hermans
My knowledge
My partner
My students
Students
I as transferring knowledge
I as in search for recognition
I as coach
Dialogue
Extended Self
Books
School
Dialogical Self
Dialogical Self
The Dialogical Self theory, Hubert Hermans
My knowledge My students
My teacher
I as exploring worlds
I as ambitious
I as student
I as transferring knowledge
I as in search for recognition
I as teacher
I as creative I as detached from education
The interaction between the dialogical self of the teachers and the dialogical self of students
Research method: understanding teachers with the PPR and interview
• PPR = Personal Position Repertoire (Hermans), online instrument• Dialogue/interview• Professional (non-academic) higher education• 4 different schools (nurse, social work, HRM, communication)• 14 teachers:
– 3 men, 11 women– 4 young (< 5 years), 10 senior (> 10years)
• Procedure:– In every school one contact person who motivates the colleagues to
collaborate.– An opening email with a word doc attached, to frame the research and
to prepare for the online PPR.– Online PPR– Interview with each teacher (1,5 hour)– Dialogue amongst us (Erica & Rudy)
PPR: choosen repertoire
INTERNAL I-POSTIONS
I as expert
I as facilitator
I as responsable
I as passionated
I as structuring
I as teacher
I as student
I as artist
I as narrator
I as knowledge transfer
I as colleague
I as role model
I as evaluator
I as researcher
I as developer of knowledge
I as I am
I as I should be
EXTERNAL I-POSITIONS
My partner
My father
My mother
My children
My students from class 1
My students from class 2
My students from class 3
My sister/brother
My colleagues
God
My best friend
Somebody who needs help
The world
A teacher who is an example for me
De schoolleader
+ 5 EXTRA+ 5 EXTRA
Online PPR
Raw data of the PPR
I as...
My...students
Internal positions
External positions
Hierarchy of positions
Correlations
Some quantitative conclusions: hierarchy
10/12 teachers has strongest activation for I as I am
10/12 teachers indicatie lowest activation I as I have to be in school
Low internal: I as student, I as researcher, I as ego
High external: students (3 classes)
Low internal: world, God
Conclusions:
1.Typical for a teacher is to have a strong sense of being present ‘this is me’. They pace themselves in contrast with the school demands.
2.Teachers are very sensitive to connection with students! ‘their students’.
3.Doing co-creative research with students in placements, and contributing to the content professional community (writing a paper) is rare.
4.Teachers see themselves as translaters of knowledge from academic to professional context and helping their students to find their way through the learning career.
Some quantitative conclusions: correlations
The half of the sample (6teachers) shows a positive correlation between I as teacher and I as expert, knowledge transmission, rolemodel, evaluator BUT also I as developer of knowledge and not with being a researcher.
High correlations between the three classes > Teachers tend to do the same approach in different classes.
Only in one case there was a positive correlation between I as teacher and I as artist.
Discussion quantitative research
1.I positions are highly subjectively interpreted by teachers doing the PPR. Correlations are very unique for each teacher. It is not possible to generalise on a small sample. Each unique correlation profile has to be interpreted in dialogue with the teacher to become meaningful.
I as student - ‘no, I am not’ >> I as learning - ‘yes, always’
I as teacher - ‘yes, although I am a trainer, I still have a responsability’
I as Developer of knowledge - ‘yes I rewrite my syllabus every year’
I as researcher - ‘no, I am not working at university level’
I as artist - ‘no, I am not painting or sculpting’
I as coach - ‘yes and no’
2.The choice of I positions determines the outcome.
3.They have to learn to think ‘PPR’; it requires introspection.
4.Is it behaviour or narrative?
5.Is it created at the moment itself or is it a description?
6.Some connections are stupid, e.g. I as coach - a beloved person who is dead.
Further research vistas
1.Finding a way defining I positions in a less intepretative way.
2.Reducing external positions, related to the goal under study.
3.Enlarge it to a general mapping of personality.
4.Taking a representative sample so that an individual or smaller sample can be compared with statistical obtained averages.
5.Using the instrument as a starting point or an in between point in a dialogical inquiry.
6.Using the instrument as an educational tool for teachers.
SOCIAL ROLESI as teacher in a schoolI as father of childrenI as researcher at university
PSYCHOSOCIAL POSITIONSI as your teacherI as a fatherlike personI as an researcher in life
VALUATIONSTeachingParentinginquiryingChildisch
Interview questions
Interpreting data: What do you mean by...How are you doing education in classroom?From your biography, what is the psychosocial equivalent of being a teacher?How are you supporting the personal development (18years old) of the students?What challenges do you encounter in your own positioning?How do you develop knowledge through the interaction with students?
A dialogue
From valuation (SCM) to I-position
Transcript
interview
Valuations
PersonalPosition Repertoire
I as
Some qualitative conclusions: composition teacher PV
I as teacher - structure, strict ‘they are sponges’
X
I as mother - caring, loving ‘I see it all’
X
I as passionate - I want them to think for themselves
X
I as story teller
X
I as physican - students asking medical questions about themselves
X
I as coach - listening to individual questions
X
I as being aware of my pedagogical role - I as role model (‘see, this behavior is possible’)
Nurse school, Teacher Physiology, anatomy
My students are my sponges
I admit I am not developing knowledge;The content doesn’t fit
with the idea of co-creation
Some qualitative conclusions: composition teacher MdR
I as king - man, structure, giving direction
X
I as going for connection - woman, recognition,
X
I as Child - creative, playing, visualising ideas
X
I as producing creative result - integration of intership based data
Management, Teacher Human resources
I use my student to feed my own creative challenges.
Knowledge creation is the core of higher education;
integrating internship of students
Some qualitative conclusions: composition teacher CR
I as structuring - prestructured shedule
X
I as facilitator - giving materials
X
I as confronting them - ‘I go into it’, ‘hé what is happening here’, ‘be authentic’
X
I as giving space - sitting back
I know now better how to arrange education in orderto arrive at the learning
outcomes
Trainer communcation for teachers course
Knowledge creation is applied knowledge
Some conclusion
1.In general ‘structure’ and ‘connection’ will be present in any teacher’s profile. These positions are mixed in a way that brings together contradictory values of each (educational and humanistic).
2.Senior teachers can be succesful in different ways. Co-creation and knowledge development are not necessary to be a succesful teacher.
3.To be able to co-create knowledge development a teacher needs besides the general educational I positions (structure & connection ) a specific I position of creative knowledge development.
Discussion qualitative research
1. Doing only one interview gives as endresult an assesment. It is not enough to obtain data and categorize them. The researcher is out of dialogue.
2. Positions are sometimes explicit, sometimes not at all. It is artificial to speak about ‘I as ...’ if the person has just a feeling of doing something. - ‘Well if you insist, you can call it a position’.
3. I took the perspective of understanding teachers in how to manage the multiplicity of their job. It was difficult to keep in mind the reference of my research question. Is it possible to combine an understanding modus with a testing modus?
Further research vistas
1.Feedback the results to the teachers and discuss with them a mapping of there personality profile as teacher.
2.Doing a SCM with the material.
3.Looking for behavioral based patterning of I positions.
4.Starting with a general mapping of the dialogical self with a interview based agreement on the repertoire.
5.Using a developmental perspective to obtain a better inside in internal conflicts.
6.How can we study the open space (in between position) idea in the dialogical self?
7.Using constellation work to understand the relational field between teacher-students-knowledge.
8.How can we study deeper meanings of the presence of the ‘I as student modus’, discussed in literature as the necessary condition to connect with students?
Relational thinking, level 1: integrating relationships
Education is a context in which relationships are intentionally interacting upon each other in order to stimulate learning and development.
Collaboration
Learning communitycircle
Students
Teacher
Inspiration
Lear
nin
g
KnowledgeModel for
Training teachers
based on relational thinking
Relational questions, level 1
How is the knowledge voice present in the learningcircle?
How is the teacher’s voice present in the learningcircle?
How are the students’ voices present in the learningcircle?
How is the relationship between teacher and knowledge brought into the learning community?
How is the relationship between student and teacher part of the learning community?
How is the relationship between student and knowledge brought into the learning community?
Relational thinking, level 2: integrating multiplicity
The multiplicity of each participant makes the learning community more alive.
Student roleI as curiousI as naiveI as criticalI as I am
Teacher roleI as expertI as facilitator I as coachI as researcherI as I am
I as factual/ I as perspectiveI as incarnated ideaI as historical rooted I as related to someones biographyI as developmentalLearning
communitycircle
Knowledge
Relational questions, level 2
• Are you showing monolithic ‘teacher’ behaviour or a repertoire of different positions?
• Are distinct I-positions recognised by the students?
• Is ‘knowledge’ differentiated or put into the circle as truth?
• Are students accepted in their multiplicity?
• Is the multiplicity of the teacher fit for its purpose?
e.g. If you like to co-create, you need to activate a not knowing position.
35
Training Teachers with I-positions, level 1 & 2
I as architect
I as classroom manager
I as cocreator
12
8
I as FacilitatorI as coach
4
5
7
I as expert
I as researcher
Students
3
I as I am
I as student6
Relational thinking, level 3: integrating extended self
The dialogicality of all participants creates a complex field of interactions that enhance the possibility of development and creativity.
Student roleMy friendsMy teacherMy life world
Teacher roleMy studentsMy husbandMy childMy university
My costumersMy contextMy studentsMy media
Learning communitycircle
Knowledge
Relational questions, level 3
• How is the other (student/teacher/knowledge) represented as an external position in my dialogical self?
• What is the constellation of the different positions in the extended self related to each other?
• How is learning, researching and the unknown represented in the state of the teacher?
Relational thinking, level 4: integrating external relationships
The external relationships helps the learning to be embedded in context.
Student
Teacher
Learning communitycircle
KnowledgeAcademic community
Partner
Hobby
Childen
Friends
Parents
School
Colleagues
Student job
Parents
Siblings
Hobby
Lover
Friends
Placement
Manuals
Universities
Internet community
(Ken Gergen)
Relational questions, level 4
How are all relationships brought into the circle?
Home life of students
Peer relationship, classroom relationships
Home life of teacher
Relationship of teacher with the school
Relationship of teacher with his professional community
Relational thinking, level 5: contextual, holarchy
Teacher, students, knowledge and their relationships are ‘nested’ in the development of the bigger whole, e.g. The society (e.g.powerrelations, cultural patterns, educational reform, professional identity), development of human civilisation, global issues (e.g. Peak oil, financial crisis, migrations, ecology, climate change).
Student
Teacher
Learning communitycircle
KnowledgeAcademic community
Partner
Hobby
Childen
Friends
Parents
School
Colleages
Student job
Parents
Siblings
Hobby
Loved one
Friends
Internship
Manuals
Researchers
Internet community
(Ken Wilber)
Relational questions, level 5
In what bigger context is the education embedded?
What role does education play in that context?
How is the way education is constructed a contribution to the development of societal, ecological and global challenges?
Knowledge creation in higher professional education
Collaboration
Learning communitycircle
Students
Teacher
Inspiration
Curr
iculu
m le
arnin
g
Knowledge
Professional field
(placement)Experiental learning
Gap between theory and practice
In higher professional education two learning circles are present. In general, they are quit seperated.
Knowledge creation in higher professional education
Collaboration
Learning communitycircle
Students
Teacher
Inspiration
Curr
iculu
m le
arnin
g
Knowledge
Professional field
(placement)Experiental learning
Gap between theory and practice
Coach, supervisor
Knowledge creation in higher professional education
Knowledge creation is the product of the interaction between academic/theoretical frames and the professional practice of the students during his placement.
The teacher facilitates the construction of knowledge and manages the integration of the necessary curriculum learning and experiental learning in the field.
Collaboration
Students
Teacher
Inspiration
Curr
iculu
m le
arnin
g
Knowledge
Professional field
(placement)Experiental learning
Gap between theory and practice
Coach, supervisor
Knowledge creation in higher professional education
The lector is more skilled in research methods.
Collaboration
Students
Teacher
Inspiration
Curr
iculu
m le
arnin
g
Knowledge
Professional field
(placement)Experiental learning
Gap between theory and practice
Coach, supervisor
Lector
Lector
Knowledge creation in higher professional education
Collaboration
Learning communitycircle
Students
Teacher
Inspiration
Curr
iculu
m le
arnin
g
Knowledge
Professional field
(placement)Experiental learning
Gap between theory and practice
Coach, supervisor
If higher professional education wants to enhance knowledge creation, the teacher’s professioal identity should move towards the profile of ‘lector’.
The presence of knowledge creation depends now solely on the repertoire of the teacher, e.g. the presence of a desire to develop knowledge.