teachers learning with digital technologies: a review of ... · in such a context, not only are...

Teachers Learning with Digital Technologies:A review of research and projects

REPORT 14:

FUTURELAB SERIES

Tony Fisher, University of Nottingham Chris Higgins, Oxford Brookes University

Avril Loveless, University of Brighton

In recent years we have seen a significant,and long overdue, shift in education from anemphasis on ‘teaching’ to an emphasis on‘learning’. The focus of attention is nowfirmly on the learner, their needs, interestsand aspirations, at the heart of theeducation system. This change in focus is tobe welcomed as education is, of course,first and foremost about learners. And yet,in this shift are we in danger of losing sightof the people who are able to make thisvision for education a reality – namely, theteachers who are asked to change theirpractices, shift their goals and develop newapproaches to meet the needs of educationin a changing world?

If we are interested in changing education,we need more than ever to be interested inteacher education, teacher knowledge andteacher learning. If we want to encouragedifferent approaches to teaching andlearning, and new relationships betweenpupils and teachers, we need to understandthe ways in which teachers come to learn,adapt and make such new approaches areality. If schools are to become ‘learningorganisations’, with the confidence andcapability to adapt to rather than be buffetedby change, we need to invest considerabletime and attention to the question of howteachers as professionals can best managetheir own learning and developmentthroughout their professional lives.

It is in response to these concerns that we have commissioned this review, in orderto provide an overview of the research on teacher education, and to provide aroadmap for how this might best besupported in an age of digital technologies.Tellingly, for all the reams of researchliterature on children’s learning with digitaltechnologies, there is comparatively littleresearch on teachers’ learning with thesenew tools. This review focuses specificallyon what we understand to constitutepowerful learning environments forteachers, and maps onto this the potentialaffordances of digital technologies toenhance and expand these environments. In so doing, the review raises a number ofpossibilities for teachers to act as knowledgebuilders, as collaborators and as reflexivepractitioners. It offers models for the use ofdigital technologies in both initial teachereducation and in ongoing professionaldevelopment. As such, it is intended to actas a stimulus for debate and a call to actionfor the creation of learning experiences forteachers that are as powerful, relevant andmeaningful as those they are asked tocreate every day for their own students.

As always, we are keen to hear your viewson this review, and your proposals for futureaction at [email protected]

Keri Facer, Research Director, Futurelab

1

CONTENTS:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2

SECTION 1INTRODUCTION 5

SECTION 2THE NATURE OF TEACHERS’KNOWLEDGE AND LEARNING 7

SECTION 3TEACHER LEARNING AND THE AFFORDANCES OF DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES 19

SECTION 4CASE STUDIES 26

SECTION 5DISCUSSION: RETOOLING OR RENAISSANCE? 39

REFERENCES 42

Teachers Learning with Digital Technologies:A review of research and projects

REPORT 14:

FUTURELAB SERIES

Tony Fisher, University of Nottingham Chris Higgins, Oxford Brookes University Avril Loveless, University of Brighton

FOREWORD

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

Our purpose in this review is to examinehow teachers learn, and what part digitaltechnologies may have to play in thatprocess. We have consulted the literaturein order to examine the research base. We have found that, though there isresearch-based literature that deals withteacher learning, and a literature base for thinking about learning with digitaltechnologies, there is little that dealsdirectly with our specific focus of ‘teachersas learners with digital technologies’.There is very little fundamental researchthat investigates how teachers might learn with digital technologies. Rather,there seems to be a pervasive assumptionthat teachers will learn with digitaltechnologies. Hence, we take the approachof reviewing what is known about teacherlearning, before introducing digitaltechnologies into the equation.

THE NATURE OF TEACHERS’KNOWLEDGE AND LEARNING

Conventional conceptions of knowledge are that it resides 'in the head' ofindividuals and that it can be transferred(unproblematically) between the heads ofindividuals by processes of teaching andlearning, and training and development.

More recently, the theory and researchassociated with the ‘socio-cultural’ school of psychology have suggested that the nature and locus of knowledge are considerably less clear-cut andsignificantly more ‘social'. This view drawson ideas of distributed cognition, situatedcognition, and communities of practice, in

which ‘knowing’ and ‘thinking’ may not beseparated from the social context in whichthose mental functions occur. These socio-cultural aspects of knowledge have led tothe view that knowledge is not simply to bereduced to specific items or facts. With thesocio-cultural perspective our view shifts,from ‘knowledge’ as a state of individualmind to that of ‘knowing’ as a socialprocess. These views of teacher knowledgehave strong implications for our view ofhow teachers learn.

Teacher learning is an active, experientialprocess, through which knowledge isenacted, constructed and revised. There isalso a role for ‘conceptual inputs’ whichmay provide stimulus for different actions,including different pedagogical thinkingand different professional discussions.Teacher learning is subject to manyinfluences. It is best seen as complex andresistant to standardisation. Thiscomplexity reflects the interplay betweenthe professional and the personal, theindividual and the social, the objective andthe subjective, the formal and the informal,the situated and the generalised.

TEACHER LEARNING AND THEAFFORDANCES OF DIGITALTECHNOLOGIES

Digital technologies can play a role astools which afford learners the potential toengage with activities. The use of suchtools may extend or enhance their users’abilities, or even allow users to create newways of dealing with tasks which mightalso change the very nature of the activity.The technologies can also providelimitations and structure to activities,influencing the nature and boundaries of the activity. These ‘affordances’ and

2

there is very little

fundamentalresearch that

investigates howteachers might

learn with digitaltechnologies

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

‘constraints’ can be enabling andcomplementary as learners use thempurposefully, but they do not exist asabsolutes, or entities with power of their own. We propose to describe theaffordances of digital technologies as ‘clusters’ of purposeful activity inteacher learning (see table below).

Shulman and Shulman describe featuresof accomplished teacher development andteacher learning - vision, motivation,capability (sub-divided into understandingand practice), reflection, and community -and summarise them more colloquially asbeing ‘ready, willing and able’. They hopedthat their model would be used to “design,diagnose or explain efforts at teacherlearning in a more self-conscious andeffective manner” (2004, p269). Inconsidering the contribution of digitaltechnologies to teacher learning, theaffordances of the technologies can be

viewed as tools in expressing anddeveloping the dimensions of being ‘ready,willing and able’. These affordances can be articulated with the Shulman model’sfeatures of vision, motivation, understandingand practice, and can support reflectionand community at a range of levels.

CASE STUDIES

Five case studies are presented whichillustrate both facets of the discussion:each case exemplifies both the principlesof teacher knowledge and learning, andthe learning affordances of digitaltechnologies. The cases are not intendedto present a comprehensive overview of all that is happening in this fast changingfield, rather they have been chosenbecause they take full advantage of andexploit one or more of the ‘affordanceclusters’ that we have identified.

3

REPORT 14TEACHERS LEARNING WITH DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES: A REVIEW OF RESEARCH AND PROJECTS

TONY FISHER, UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM; CHRIS HIGGINS, OXFORD BROOKES UNIVERSITY; AVRIL LOVELESS, UNIVERSITY OF BRIGHTON

Knowledge building

Distributed cognition

Community and communication

Engagement

• adapting and developing ideas • modelling • representing understanding in multimodal

and dynamic ways

• accessing resources • finding things out • writing, composing and presenting with

mediating artefacts and tools

• exchanging and sharing communication • extending the context of activity • extending the participating community at local

and global levels

• exploring and playing • acknowledging risk and uncertainty • working with different dimensions of interactivity • responding to immediacy

Table 1: Clusters of purposeful activity with digital technologies

4

Each case study has a differentcombination of the affordance clusters and influences a selection of the elementsof the model of teacher learning anddevelopment. There is usually someexternal ‘conceptual input’, often astructured dialogue and reflection with a human presence, eg an online tutor,mentor, facilitator or peer, and an actionresearch orientation to the activities. Ineach case, teacher learning is seen asinherently complex – a situated processthat is ongoing, social and dynamic. Whatlinks the case studies is the use of specificdigital technologies in ways which enablethe users, via the affordance clusters, toovercome some of the constraints of timeand location which may characterise othercontexts for teacher learning.

DISCUSSION: RETOOLING OR RENAISSANCE?

Teacher learning with digital technologiesis a complex but exciting area. Much ofwhat we say in this review has implicationsfor school leaders, researchers, softwaredevelopers, teacher educators andtrainers, CPD providers, policy makers –and, of course, for teachers themselves.We ask whether we want a mere ‘retooling’of teacher competences for specificpurposes, or an approach which supportsa renaissance in teacher development foran uncertain future. This is not aboutmaking an industrial process moreefficient; rather, it is about enablingcultural change in the profession. Schoolsof the future will need a clear sense of thekinds of teacher professionalism, andteacher learning, they wish to support, inorder to make wise and informed decisionsabout the role of digital technologies inprocesses of supporting such learning.

We face a challenge. Processes of teacherlearning are complex, even messy, andteachers’ current working circumstancescontain inherent constraints. Yet thepossibilities for real change in the systemdo exist. If we can bring the technologiesinto situations that resonate strongly withteachers’ sense of professional and moralpurposes, we may yet see what might trulyprove to be a renaissance, in whichteachers would employ digital technologiesfor understanding, reflection, ingenuity andcreativity, and, through these, support theirown learning in new ways.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 INTRODUCTION

Modern education is experiencingunprecedented levels of change, and hasbeen for some time. This is reflected in awide-ranging, change-related literaturewhich suggests that change in educationmay now be thought of as a constantcondition, rather than an event (eg Fullan1991; Fullan 1993; Goodson 1993; Bell1995; Fullan 1997; Day et al 2000;Hargreaves et al 2001; Loveless and Ellis 2001; Goodson 2003).

In such a context, not only are teachersvital as agents of change; teachersthemselves also undergo change, and“teachers today are having to learn to teachin ways in which they have not been taughtthemselves” (Hargreaves et al 2001, p197).

Thus, the initial training of new teachers is in many ways different from that of theirrecent predecessors - in content, methods,structure and even location. Further,serving teachers are subject to ongoingrequirements to absorb the implications ofnew policies and implement new methodsand approaches. Research has indicated that:

“…lifelong learning is necessary forsustaining teacher morale, for careeradvancement and promotion, for a vibrantworkforce, for managing change, forimproving skills, content knowledge orpedagogy.” (Kington et al 2003, p43-4)

In short, there has probably never been amore important moment to be clear aboutthe nature of teacher learning than thepresent, yet too often the reform process issubject to instrumental assumptions, andthe crucial element of the learning processamong teachers is either overlooked or taken for granted.

Increasingly, digital technologies(particularly networked computers) arebeing employed to disseminate informationabout education to teachers. In the UK this is seen, for instance, in aspects of the infrastructure of the National Grid forLearning, where the aim is not only toprovide learning opportunities for pupilsand students, but for teachers as well.These opportunities are not just ‘top-down’. Networked technologies alsoprovide new opportunities for teachers to learn together, from one another.

Hence, in this review, we focus on the ideaof teachers as learners. We also examinehow the characteristics of digitaltechnologies provide opportunities toenable and support the processes ofteacher learning. We are convinced thatnew digital technologies offer greatpotential to support teachers as learners,but we are also concerned that, unless theprocesses are better understood, much of that potential will remain untapped.

1.1 SOME ASPECTS OF ‘THE BIG PICTURE’

The spread of new digital technologies isassociated with major changes in the waywe do many things. For example banking,printing, manufacturing, shopping andtelecommunications have all experiencedmajor change, made possible bynetworked digital technologies and themicroprocessor. The development ofincreased computer memory and fasterprocessing, together with the extension of the internet and its associatedtechnologies, is closely associated with thecompression of time and space and “thedeath of distance” (Cairncross 1997).

5

there hasprobably neverbeen a moreimportantmoment to beclear about thenature of teacherlearning than the present

SECTION 1

INTRODUCTION

Widespread change associated with newinformation technologies is an aspect ofglobalisation. In the globalised economy of‘the information age’, new technologiesplay a key part. “Geared as it is toelectronic money – money that exists onlyas digits in computers – the current worldeconomy has no parallels in earlier times”(Giddens 1999, p9). Some have gone even further, suggesting that new digitaltechnologies are associated with theemergence of what the sociologist ManuelCastells refers to as the new ‘informationalsociety’ (to distinguish it from earlier‘industrial’ and ‘agricultural’ societies) inwhich control of, and access to, informationand the means of its creation, storage anddistribution, are the primary sources ofpower (Castells 1996).

Writers on education (eg Hargreaves 1994;Woods et al 1997; Morley and Rassool1999; Helsby 2000; Robertson 2000; Smythet al 2000; Goodson 2003; Hargreaves2003) have set their analyses against thisbroader canvas of globalisation, showinghow it provides a set of influences, bothdirect and indirect, on the work of teachers.Globalisation and the ‘informationeconomy’ are aspects of the wider contextin which governments frame educationpolicy, and in which teachers do theirwork. Hence:

“The aim of many policy-makers in the UKand around the world is to encourageevolution into a learning society for the[21st] century: one in which all people areresponsible for their own learningthroughout their lives. Access toinformation and learning will often dependon new technologies as well as on anapproach to teaching which supportscollaborative professional development.

Governments in Europe and around theworld have already recognised the need toreview educational practices andincorporate new technologies. Their viewis of a vocational imperative and one inwhich IT will increase the quality andefficiency of learning itself.” (Somekh andDavis 1997, p3)

Government in the UK sees an opportunityto ‘transform’ education through the use ofnew technologies (DfES 2002; DfES 2003;DfES 2005). However some writers aremore cautious, adopting a more criticalstance towards some of what is claimedfor the educational potential of new digitaltechnologies. Some claims may be seen toreflect ‘technological determinism’(MacKenzie and Wajcman 1999, pxv), whichasserts or implies that the technologyinevitably makes things happen andoverlooks the role of human agency;others reflect ‘techno-utopianism’(Goodson et al 2002, p2) in suggesting thatall will be better in the technologicallyadvanced future.

Thus we see that educational change,including the introduction of new digitaltechnologies, does not exist in isolation.We say this as a caveat, since in whatfollows we will concentrate on teachers aslearners, and the part that digitaltechnologies can play in teacher learning.However, we should not lose sight of thebigger picture of which this is but a part.

1.2 STRUCTURE AND SCOPE OF THIS REVIEW

It is not our purpose in this review toexamine overall change, actual andpotential, in how education is carried out.

6

SECTION 1

INTRODUCTION

Nor is it to examine the role of newtechnologies in education. Our purpose ismore specific, being to examine howteachers learn, and what part digitaltechnologies have to play in that process.

We have consulted the literature in orderto examine the research base in this field.We have found that, though there isresearch-based literature that deals withteacher learning, and a literature base forthinking about learning with digitaltechnologies, there is little that dealsdirectly with our specific focus of ‘teachersas learners with digital technologies’.Hence, we have taken the approach ofreviewing what is known about teacherlearning, before introducing digitaltechnologies into the equation.

The remainder of this review is divided intofour sections. In Section 2 we seek tounpack the complex nature of ‘teachers’knowledge’ and ‘teacher learning’ on thebasis of the research literature. In Section3 we focus on the new digital technologiesand the opportunities for teacher learningthat these technologies might offer.Section 4 explores some case studies inwhich aspects of teacher learning withdigital technologies are exemplified.Finally, in Section 5 we make someobservations about the use of digitaltechnologies to support teacher learning,in the light of the previous sections.

2 THE NATURE OF TEACHERS’KNOWLEDGE AND LEARNING

Teachers are knowledgeable people. They need to be, in order to do what theydo. Teacher knowledge includes ‘knowingone’s subject’ and techniques of how toteach it. It also includes other aspects of specialist professional knowledge,including legal responsibilities andrequirements, together with knowledgeabout the systems and routines of theparticular school in which a teacherteaches. Importantly, it also includesknowledge about individual pupils andstudents, such as their learning strengthsand needs, and how these may besupported, together with relevant aspectsof their personality and background.

We can see from the preceding paragraphthat teacher knowledge is a complexmixture of ‘know how’ (proceduralknowledge) and ‘knowing that’ (declarativeknowledge). In this section we explore theidea of teacher knowledge further,together with the closely associatedprocess of teacher learning. This isimportant since, if we are to understandthe potential of digital technologies tosupport teacher development, we need tohave a better understanding of thecomplexity of the superficially simple ideasof ‘knowledge’ and ‘learning’ before weintroduce digital technologies into theequation in Section 3. In particular, in thissection we will challenge simplisticnotions of ‘knowledge’ and ‘learning’.

Our view, supported by the literature, isthat the nature of teacher knowledge ishighly complex – even more so thanoutlined above. This may be at odds withthe view of 'the person in the street' whomay feel that all that teachers need to

7

teacherknowledge is acomplex mixtureof ‘know how’and ‘knowingthat’

SECTION 2

THE NATURE OF TEACHERS’ KNOWLEDGE AND LEARNING

‘know’ is their subject and how to keepgood order (as if either of those were inthemselves unproblematic). However,anyone who has had the experience ofbeing taught by someone who 'couldn't getthe subject over' will have realised thatthere is considerably more to teacherknowledge than that.

2.1 WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BEKNOWLEDGEABLE AS A TEACHER?

As indicated in the introduction to thissection, teachers need to be knowledgeablepeople. However, in the influential DfEE-commissioned Hay McBer report on'Research into Teacher Effectiveness',which has influenced Government thinkingon educational reform, the focus wassquarely on teacher skills and behaviours.Teacher knowledge, when it was referredto, was conceived largely as relating totheir subject area and how to teach it (Hay McBer 2000, para 1.1.5). Thoughthere are references to 'teamwork', the over-riding impression of teacherknowledge in the Hay McBer report is thatit is 'in the head' of the individual teacherand is manifest in observable aspects ofindividual performance. What it might bethat teachers know above and beyondissues of subject knowledge, and how theycome to know it - ie the substance andnature of teachers’ 'professional learning' -is very largely left unsaid in the report. In this review we seek to be rather moreexplicit about the complex and problematicnature of what it is that teachers know andhow they come to know it.

2.1.1 Individual and social views of knowledge

Conventional conceptions of knowledge are that it resides 'in the head' ofindividuals. Further, it can be transferred(unproblematically) between the heads ofindividuals by processes of teaching andlearning, and training and development.More recently, a different way of thinkingabout knowledge has emerged from the‘socio-cultural’ school of psychology. In thetheory and research associated with thisway of thinking, the nature and locus ofknowledge are considerably less clear-cutand significantly more ‘social'. Theseconceptions, the individual and the social,are sometimes presented as alternative –even incompatible – views of knowledge. In this section we will say something about both of these views in order toconclude that both are necessary to afuller understanding of the nature ofteacher knowledge.

2.1.2 Cognitive views of knowledge

Psychologists tend to refer to ‘cognition’rather than knowledge. Cognition is theprocess of receiving, processing, storingand using information. The cognitive viewof knowledge is that it exists in the mind inthe form of representations and symbols,and is organised into specific schemas.For instance, a schema for a ‘lesson’ willbe made up a number of separatecomponents including aspects of subjectknowledge, planned activity, rememberedexperience and many more, organised intoa coherent, complex structure – a schema.

Thinking may be seen as the mentalmanipulation or 'processing' of theseelements. When experience introduces

8

SECTION 2


new information, it may be incorporatedinto an existing schema with which it isconsistent. This is the process ofassimilation. However, if the new elementdoes not conform to an existing schema, itmay force the modification of the schema,or even the production of a new one. Thisis the process of accommodation.

These processes are familar to manyeducationalists from the work of thepsychologist Piaget. However, thoughPiaget's work focused on cognitivedevelopment among children, thecognitivist perspective would assert thatthis view of knowledge holds true for bothchildren and adults.

Thus, a teacher might have one or moreschemas for, say, 'lesson plan', whichwould be developed during training, andused each time a lesson is to be prepared.Other representations, for instanceaspects of the subject to be taught, wouldbe organised with the aid of the lessonplan schema. Programmes of ‘training’may attempt to modify the lesson planschema through the process of individualaccommodation to new information, forinstance the incorporation of new teachingtechniques associated with ICT. Hence,knowledge is not fixed but is best seen asdynamic, and undergoing processes ofconstruction and reconstruction in thelight of experience and new inputs.However, from the cognitivist perspective,knowledge remains essentially personaland in the head of the individual.

At its extreme, cognitivism may lead to a behaviourist view of learning. Thebehavioural view of learning wasdemonstrated in the famous experimentinvolving the conditioning of ‘Pavlov’sdogs’. Behaviourism, based on the ideas

of Skinner, suggests that individuallearners need to be given external stimulito elicit responses, and that observablebehaviours of the individual indicate thepresence of knowledge and the success of the learning.

2.1.3 Social views of knowledge

More recently, research attention hasturned to those aspects of knowledge in general, and teacher knowledge inparticular, that may be described as“social, distributed and situated” (egPutnam and Borko 2000). Thus, the focusof interest is on knowledge in the world ofsocial interaction between people, ratherthan the more strictly cognitivist view ofknowledge in the head of the individual.This view of knowledge draws on ideas ofdistributed cognition, situated cognition,and communities of practice in which theoperation of higher mental functions, suchas knowing and thinking, may not beseparated from the social context in whichthose mental functions occur (eg Wertsch1991). These approaches draw in turn onthe largely Soviet tradition of socialpsychology, expressed through the writingsof Vygotsky, Leont’ev and Luria.

Distributed cognition is a view ofknowledge that suggests that cognitivefunctioning, rather than residing inindividuals, is dispersed among people,objects and tools.

Situated cognition is a view of knowledgewhich suggests that what is known isintimately related to the specific context(situation) in which that knowledge wasacquired (Brown et al 1989). This view grewout of a realisation that the somewhatmechanistic 'rule-bound' approaches of

9

10

the traditional cognitivist approach wereinadequate to explain the observedcharacteristics of knowledge and learning.

Communities of practice (Lave andWenger 1991; Wenger 1998) is adevelopment of both of the above ideasand stresses the socio-cultural nature ofknowledge. “Communities of practice aregroups of people who share a concern or apassion for something they do and learnhow to do it better as they interactregularly” (Wenger, undated). Knowledge ismade evident in 'the way we do thingshere' – hence, much of this knowledge istacit, provisonal and enacted.

These socio-cultural aspects of knowledgehave led to the view that knowledge is notsimply to be reduced to specific items orfacts. Rather, if we adopt the socio-cultural perspective our view shifts from‘knowledge’ as a state of mind to that of‘knowing’ as a social process.

2.2 CLASSIFICATIONS OF TEACHERKNOWLEDGE

2.2.1 Formal and informal knowledge

One simple classification of teacherknowledge would have ‘formal’ knowledgeon the one hand (being the stuff ofuniversity-based knowledge abouteducation) and personal/practicalknowledge (developed largely throughexperience) on the other. Formalknowledge is often expressed in thelanguage of ‘academic’ discourse, whereaspersonal/practical knowledge is expressedby teachers in common-sense terms (Page2001). Too often these two forms ofknowledge about education are seen in

tension with one another, whereas bothinformal and formal aspects are necessarycomponents of an inclusive view of‘professional knowledge’ (Wideen et al1996, p192)

2.2.2 Shulman’s classification

Lee Shulman developed a seven-partclassification of teacher knowledge. Hedescribes teachers' practice as drawingupon a professional knowledge base builtup from seven elements:

• knowledge of subject matter (content knowledge)

• pedagogical content knowledge (the ways of representing subjectknowledge appropriately for learners)

• knowledge of curriculum (grasp of the materials, resources and ‘tools of the trade’)

• general pedagogical knowledge (broad understanding of managementand organisation)

• knowledge of learners and theircharacteristics

• knowledge of educational contexts(ranging from groupings, classrooms,schools, education authorities, nationalpolicies to wider communities andcultures)

• knowledge of educational aims,purposes and values.

(Shulman 1987)

These aspects of professional knowledgeare drawn from a range of sources and,Shulman argues, form the basis ofteaching as a ‘learned’ profession.

SECTION 2


knowledge is not simply to

be reduced to specific

items or facts

Part of Shulman's purpose was todemonstrate that, far from teaching beinga simple activity that anyone could do,teachers possess a specialised knowledgebase. Perhaps the most original andsignificant aspect of Shulman'sclassification is the category ofpedagogical content knowledge (PCK).With this category Shulman is clearlysuggesting that it is insufficient for ateacher to simply 'know the subject'.Rather, PCK suggests that a key part ofthe knowledge base for teaching isknowledge about how to teach specificaspects of whatever is to be taught. Forinstance, a science teacher who intends toteach about electricity will draw not onlyon knowledge about electricity, but alsoabout specific pedagogical approaches forhelping young people to understand whatelectricity is and how it operates. ThusPCK represents a level of professionalspecialism.

2.3 HOW DO TEACHERS LEARN?

In the previous section we outlined someperspectives on the nature of knowledge ingeneral, and that of teachers in particular.In this section, we address the processesof learning, of ‘coming to know’.

In current discourse, teacher learning isoften implicit rather than explicit. Forinstance in terms such as 'initial teachertraining' (ITT) and 'continuing professionaldevelopment' (CPD) (recently broughttogether strategically in the Training andDevelopment Agency for Schools, or TDA),the processes of teacher learning areimplied by the terms ‘training’ and‘development’ but not explicitly articulated.At the same time, published standardsspecify the performative criteria by which

teachers are required to demonstrate the outcomes of their training anddevelopment. There is an underlyingimplication in this discourse that theprocess of learning is instrumental andunproblematic: in essence, all teachersneed is to be given the right 'training', the right 'development', and the result will be observable and measurable in their performance.

However, in-depth research with teachers(eg Day 1999; Hargreaves et al 2001;Goodson 2003), has shown that thelearning process is considerably morecomplex, particularly when the context and substance of teacher learning is itself changing. In addition, the literatureindicates that “teacher learning requirestime and commitment if substantial rather than cosmetic changes in practiceare to occur” (Kington et al 2003, p43).

Teacher learning is closely bound up withthe earlier discussion of the nature ofteacher knowledge. We have alreadyindicated that, whilst having individualisedaspects, teacher knowledge is betterthought of as also having important social,distributed and situated characteristics.Further, teacher knowledge is dynamicrather than fixed, and constructed rather than transmitted. These views of the nature of teacher knowledge havestrong implications for our view of howteachers learn.

2.4 PROCESSES OF LEARNING

Learning is a process - or, moreaccurately, a number of processes - for theacquisition and development of knowledge,skills, attitudes or values. It takes placethrough the associated processes of being

11

far from teachingbeing a simpleactivity thatanyone could do,teachers possessa specialisedknowledge base

taught, studying or experience. Throughlearning, mental constructs or schemasare formulated or modified. Learning isalso complex: for example, the Theory intoPractice website lists 50 separate learningtheories.

Here we focus on three specific and, in ourview major, linked component processes ofteacher learning: experience, reflectionand construction.

2.4.1 Experience

By its nature, much of the work ofteachers is cyclical, at a number of scales.The underlying model of the teachingprocess is a cycle of lesson planning-implementation-evaluation, with evaluationhaving formative 'feed-forward' into thenext lesson plan. Other cycles for theteacher are the school day, the timetabledweek, the school term, the school year, theKey Stage and so on. Thus, an importantcomponent of teacher learning is theiterative, experiential component, thoughas has been pointed out, 20 years'experience can be developmental over thatperiod, or one year's experience repeated20 times (Ridgway 1997, p7).

2.4.2 Reflection

The notion of reflection has an importantplace in conceptions of teacher learning.Reflection is implicit in the experientialmodel outlined in the previous paragraph,in the process of evaluation. Manyeducation writers using the notion ofreflection cite the important original workof Donald Schön. Schön's distinctionbetween short-term 'reflection in action',

and the more deliberative 'reflection onaction' (Schön 1983) is significant.Reflection on action is a means of learningfrom experience, and contributes to thedevelopment of teachers' practicalknowledge. This knowledge is then drawnupon in future situations of unavoidableuncertainty, to guide discretionaryprofessional judgement. Such judgementis deployed ‘in the heat of the moment’and it is this quick reflection in action thatcharacterises ‘expert practice’. Theexperience is then available for furtherreflection on action.

2.4.3 Construction

Learning is a constructive process, andteachers are constructive learners,progressively making meaning of theirexperiences. Such constructive learningtakes place both 'in the head', through thedevelopment and modification of schemas(eg reflection on the use of a new teachingmethod), and 'in the world', throughinteraction and discourse (eg discussion ofthat teaching method with colleagues). Knowledge construction 'in the world' issituated in specific contexts, such as aparticular school or department, and isdistributed between individuals, egmembers of a teaching team orcommunity of practice. Social learninginvolves interaction with others. Teachers,no less than other people, experienceVygotsky’s ‘zone of proximal development’(ZPD) in their constructive social learningwith others – colleagues, students,‘trainers’. In the ZPD, the teacher learns,with assistance, that which cannot beachieved unaided, for instance through theprocess of coaching.

12

the notion ofreflection has animportant place

in conceptions ofteacher learning

SECTION 2


2.5 FACTORS INFLUENCINGLEARNING

Learning is subject to numerous factors.Teachers will be familiar with the importanceof, for instance, motivation and time. Herewe focus on two more general groups offactors, relating to the individual and to the context.

2.5.1 Personal/individual factors

Learners differ from one another, andteachers are no exception. Learningrequires receptiveness to new ideas andinformation, and Rogers' influential workon the diffusion of innovation (Rogers 1995)resulted in a scale of typical receptivenessamong the population at large:

• innovators (2.5% of the population)

• early adopters (13.5%)

• early majority (34%)

• late majority (34%)

• laggards (16%)

(pp262-6)

Whilst not suggesting that thesepercentages would necessarily directlytranslate to the teaching population,Rogers’ classification suggests thatteachers will have different dispositionstowards change, learning and innovation.Research in teacher biography (egGoodson et al 2002; Goodson 2003) hasdemonstrated that the distinction betweenthe personal and the professional is oftenblurred, and hence other more personalaspects of teachers' lives have an impacton the professional sphere, includingprofessional learning. For instance,Goodson et al (2002) report a case study

of a teacher whose receptiveness to ateaching innovation (the use of ICT) wasgreatly reduced owing to personalcircumstances which, superficially, hadnothing whatsoever to do with school.

2.5.2 Contextual factors

The 'environment' in which learning takesplace is a key factor in that learning. Thisis expressed in the concept of 'situatedlearning', where aspects of the context caneither support or constrain learning.Awareness of this helps us to understandhow some knowledge may prove difficult totransfer, particularly if it has beendeveloped in a specific situation. Hence anexperienced teacher moving to a new jobin a new school may experienceunexpected difficulties simply as a resultof being ‘new’ and hence lackingknowledge of the local context.

A further aspect of the influence of contextis to be found in the notion of distributedlearning, where the development ofknowledge may be supported by andshared among other individuals, and alsoamong objects and tools.

2.5.3 Learning in activity systems

In recognition of the role of both individualand contextual factors in the process oflearning, we suggest here that it may beuseful to conceptualise learning as beingembedded in activity systems, in whichlearning may or may not be the specific,intended goal. The complex and socio-cultural views of teacher learning andknowledge described so far recognise thatlearning flourishes in environments whichenable purposeful activity and distributed

13

cognition (Somekh 2001). Teachers learnand develop their professional knowledgebest when the aims and purpose ofactivities are relevant and authentic totheir own lives; when they can use avariety of tools to help them realise andexpress their goals; and when they are in relationship with others in the widercommunity which shares rules and ways of working.

When we attempt in Section 3 tounderstand the role that digitaltechnologies might play in supportingteacher learning, therefore, we need toadopt a model for framing the discussionthat takes into account these elements of‘purposeful activity’, of ‘learning in socialcontexts’, and which also offers a way ofunderstanding the role played by tools,including new digital technologies. Onesuch approach is to consider theseenvironments as ‘activity’ systems(Wertsch 1998; Engeström et al 1999). Thisis because, within the concept of an activitysystem, people are seen to carry outactions or behaviours, including talk,

thought or knowledge construction, usingmediating tools (including language andother artefacts) to support them inpurposeful tasks. The key to this approachis that neither the teachers nor the toolsmay be understood in isolation. Rather,both are to be understood as aspects of‘mediated action’ (Wertsch 1998, p180;Engeström 1999, pp28-9), itself occurringwithin a more complex social setting:

“In this system, individuals and/or groupsengage in activities with purposefuloutcomes, assisted or constrained by theunique features (affordances) of the toolsthemselves and the rules, structures anddivisions of labour that govern the microand macro social groupings in which theactivity occurs.” (Somekh 2001, p165)

A generalised representation of the activity system is shown in Figure 1.

The use of specific activity systems as a frame for understanding teacherlearning is helpful in acknowledging that individuals do not learn or act alone.

14

SECTION 2


Fig 1: The activity system context of teacher learning

Mediating tools, including digital technologies

Community/organisational structuresof the context of the activity

Roles and division of labour

Rules and codes of behaviour

Teachers’ goals and tasks (Object)

OutcomesTeachers as ‘actors’(Subject)

Rather, individual ‘actors’ play a part in theinteractions with other people and theirexpectations, and with different tools,which help them to engage with andexpress their learning processes. Such aframework helps us to shift the focus fromteachers as individuals, to the morecomplex interactions that relate to andinfluence their learning experiences, asexpressed by the lower part of the triangle.Hence we see, for instance, that widerstructures, such as the ways in whichlearning and teaching are organised at thelevel of the school timetable, or thepresence of a particular assessmentregime, may influence the learningopportunities of individual teachers.

2.6 COMPLEXITY AND CURRENTCONCEPTIONS OF TEACHERKNOWLEDGE AND LEARNING

In this section we focus on three modelswhich bring together several aspects ofthe foregoing discussion of teacherknowledge and learning. These models,developed by Banks, Leach and Moon(1999), Hoban (2002) and Shulman andShulman (2004), are not incompatible with one another. Rather, they providethree alternative ways of portraying thecomplex, dynamic, situated, individual and social nature of teacher knowledgeand learning.

15

wider structures,such as the waysin which learningand teaching areorganised at thelevel of theschool timetable,may influencethe learningopportunities of individualteachers

Fig 2: Teacher knowledge used in creating a pedagogic setting (Taken from Leach, J and Moon, B (2000), p396)

Pedagogic knowledge• goals of learning

• knowledge of learners in the setting• selection of knowledge that

is the subject of the learning• selection of learning

and assessment activities• resources – human, material, technological (and the boundaries

from which drawn)• discourse

• roles and relationships

`Subject’ knowledgeincluding

• the essential questions of the subject

• networks of concepts• theoretical frameworks

• methods of enquiry• symbolic systems,

vocabularies and models

School knowledgeincluding

• the process oftransformation from‘subject’ knowledge

• historical, ideological,educational origins

• discourse, vocabularies,models, etc

Personal construct• educational goals

• view of mind and learning• prior individual

experience includingculture, gender, ethnicity

2.6.1 Banks, Leach and Moon

Work by Banks, Leach and Moon (Banks et al 1999; Leach and Moon 2000) hasattempted to provide a more developedview of teacher knowledge than Shulman'soriginal formulation of 1987. Their model,based on in-depth development work withteachers, draws on a number ofperspectives (including Shulman's) inpresenting a view of teacher knowledgethat is dynamic and interactive and whichallows for complexity and subtlety. Banks,Leach and Moon also recognise thepolitical nature of the debate in times of anincreasingly specified curriculum (eg theNational Curriculum) and centralguidelines on how to teach it (eg theNational Strategy), by resisting thedefinition, by others, of teachers “primarilyas technicians or pedagogical clerks”(Leach and Moon 1999, p109), and byreasserting the importance of the teacheras a knowledgeable professional. Hence, inaddition to identifying three interrelatedknowledge domains as shown in thediagram (Figure 2), they place at the centreof their model (and their thinking) the‘personal constructs’ which “wouldencompass, but go well beyond,elements… identified by Hay McBer (2000)as characteristics of effective teachers”(Leach and Moon 2000, p397).

2.6.2 Hoban

Banks, Leach and Moon’s model ofprofessional knowledge embodies therealisation that teacher knowledge ismultifaceted and subject to manyinfluences, including the teacherher/himself. Thus, teacher knowledge is complex. It is not to be viewed from

a position where ‘the known’ may beunproblematically separated from ‘theknower’, and where personal experience isnot relevant (Doll 1993). Rather, theindividual is key, and different individualsin similar situations can learn and knowvery differently. This idea draws oncomplexity theory in which it is recognisedthat similar initial conditions for change donot necessarily yield similar outcomes, andin which small causes can produce large, ifunpredictable, effects. Schools themselvesmay be regarded as “complex adaptivesystems” (Morrison 2002).

Hoban (2002) builds on this by takingexplicit account of complexity theory (pp22-40) in the rationale for his‘professional learning system’ (PLS), which is a conceptual and practical modelfor supporting the professional learning of teachers. In this perspective teacherknowledge is seen as constantly beingreconstructed in the course of experienceand of interaction with others. Such adynamic, situated, social view of teacherknowledge is incompatible withmechanistic ‘one-shot’ training models;nevertheless, there is an important placein the model for conceptual inputs of new ideas from outside the local setting.Hoban’s PLS (pp67-70) describes thecontext for a planned approach to long-term teacher learning. His PLS draws oncomplexity theory to provide a context forlearning which is both ‘transformative’(resulting in change to practices) and‘generative’ (in producing new knowledge).In the systems approach of Hoban’s PLS, relations among the componentsshown in Figure 3 may be as important as the components themselves (Hoban2002, p60-1).

16

teacherknowledge is

multifaceted andsubject to many

influences

SECTION 2


2.6.3 Shulman and Shulman

A somewhat different way of presentingsituated complexity as the context ofteacher learning is offered by Shulman andShulman (2004). On the basis of their workwith ‘accomplished’ teachers, Shulmanand Shulman identified the characteristicsof these teachers which were associatedwith their becoming accomplished:

“We would now stipulate that anaccomplished teacher has developed along the following dimensions: Anaccomplished teacher is a member of a professional community who is ready, willing, and able to teach and to learn from his or her teachingexperiences. Thus, the elements of thetheory are: Ready (possessing vision),Willing (having motivation), Able (both

knowing and being able ‘to do’), Reflective (learning from experience), and Communal (acting as a member of a professional community). Each of the dimensions entails an aspect ofpersonal/professional development, andcan connect with portions of a curriculumof teacher preparation or professionaldevelopment. We can think of teachersbecoming:

• ready to pursue a vision of classroomsor schools that constitute, for example,communities of learning;

• more willing to expend the energy andpersistence to sustain such teaching;

• more understanding of the concepts andprinciples needed for such teaching;

• more able to engage in the complexforms of pedagogical and organisationalpractice needed to transform theirvisions, motives and understandings intoa functioning, pragmatic reality;

• more capable of learning from their ownand others’ experiences through activereflection in and on their actions andtheir consequences; and

• more capable and experienced inworking as members of functioninglearning communities and/or of formingsuch communities in the settings wherethey work.

In list form, the new model argues that thefeatures of accomplished teacherdevelopment, and thus of teacher learning,are: Vision, Motivation, Understanding,Practice, Reflection, and Community.” (Shulman and Shulman 2004, p259,emphasis and capitalisation as original)

The Shulman model proposes a ‘nested’formulation, shown in Figure 4. It places

17

Conception of teachingas an art orprofession

Purposefor learning

Conceptual inputs require

differentknowledge

Timeframe is

long termProfessional

learningsystem(PLS)

Reflectionto make

connections

Communityinvolvessharing

experience Actionmeans

trying out ideas

Studentfeedbackon action

Fig 3: Conditions for teacher learning in a professional learning system (PLS) (Taken from Hoban, G (2002), p70)

individual reflection at the centre, andarranges round the activity of reflectionthree ‘levels of analysis’ or ‘layers’:individual, community and policy. Eachlayer reflects the composition of theothers. The ‘individual’ level is described inthe above quotation. The communal levelrepresents explicit recognition that teacherlearning is to be seen as situated incommunities of teachers: “…the individualand community levels are bothindependent and interactive” (p267). Policy,the outermost layer, represents theallocation of resources, for which Shulmanand Shulman use the metaphor of ‘capital’.

2.7 SUMMARY

Teacher knowledge and teacher learningare two sides of the same coin. Teacherknowledge is best seen as dynamic, andhence inseparable from the processes oflearning. Teacher learning in turn is anactive, experiential process, through whichknowledge is enacted, constructed andrevised. This does not however mean thatteacher knowledge is only to be developedthrough experience and reflection. There isalso a role for ‘conceptual inputs’ (Hoban2002, p69) which may provide stimulus fordifferent actions, including different

18

teacherknowledge and

teacher learningare two sides of

the same coin

SECTION 2


Fig 4: Levels of analysis: individual, community, and policy (Taken from Shulman, LS and Shulman, JH (2004), p268)

Technicalcapital

Moralcapital

Venturecapital

Curricularcapital

Share vision

Communityof practice

Sharedcommitment,

support

Knowledgebase

Vision

Practice

Under-standingMotivation

Policy/resources

Community

Individual

Reflection:individual &

institutionalised

pedagogical thinking and differentprofessional discussions.

Teacher learning is subject to manyinfluences (Banks et al 1999), and hence is best seen as complex and resistant tostandardisation. This complexity reflectsthe interplay between the professional andthe personal, the individual and the social,the objective and the subjective, the formaland the informal, the situated and thegeneralised.

Teachers themselves may be individuallymore or less disposed towardsprofessional learning, which requiresvision, capability, motivation, reflection andwillingness to participate in a professionalcommunity of practice (Shulman andShulman 2004). Hence teacher learning isto be seen as a blend of the individual andthe social, with due attention to be given to both aspects.

In the following section we will take thefive core components of the Shulmanmodel - vision, capability, motivation,reflection and community – and bring them together with the idea of digitaltechnologies as tools in support of teacherlearning, in a context of mediated action.

3 TEACHER LEARNING AND THE AFFORDANCES OF DIGITALTECHNOLOGIES

In the previous section we examined anumber of ideas relating to teacherknowledge and learning. In this section we will examine the idea of digitaltechnologies as tools in support of teacherlearning, in a context of ‘mediated action’(Wertsch 1998) in activity systems. Such a perspective will enable us to examine the particular affordances of thesetechnologies. We then bring theseaffordances together with the five corecomponents of the Shulman model -vision, capability, motivation, reflection andcommunity – in order to identify how digitaltechnologies can support teacher learning.

3.1 WHAT CAN DIGITALTECHNOLOGIES HELP US TO DO?

Digital technologies can play a role astools which afford learners the potential toengage with activities. The use of suchtools may extend or enhance their users’abilities, or even allow users to create newways of dealing with tasks which mightalso change the very nature of the activity.The technologies can also providelimitations and structure to activities,influencing the nature and boundaries ofthe activity. These ‘affordances’ and‘constraints’ can be enabling andcomplementary as learners use thempurposefully, but they do not exist asabsolutes, or entities with power of theirown (Gibson 1986; Greeno 1994; Kennewell2001; Howells 2005). The affordances ofdigital technologies must be considered inrelationship to the characteristics of thewider activity system with its people, tasks,

19

digitaltechnologies can play a roleas tools whichafford learnersthe potential toengage withactivities

SECTION 3

TEACHER LEARNING AND THE AFFORDANCES OF DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES

rules, structures and divisions of labourinteracting with each other. Such anapproach helps to set technologies in awider and interactive context, rather thanfocus particularly on them in isolation.

The ‘features’ of digital technologies which could make a distinctive contributionto activities have been described asprovisionality, interactivity, capacity, range,speed, accuracy, quality, automation,multimodality, neutrality and socialcredibility (DfEE 1998; Sharp et al. 2002).Such a way of describing the featureslocates these characteristics in thetechnologies themselves, and does notopen up the understanding of theinteraction between digital technologies as tools and the people who use thempurposefully within activity systems. It istherefore more helpful to consider theaffordances of digital technologies incontext in order to gain greater insight into

how these support and interact with thedevelopment of teachers’ professionalknowledge within a range of learningenvironments.

Conole and Dyke describe the affordancesof ICT as epitomising the features of latemodernity, and offer a taxonomy of:accessibility; speed of change; diversity;communication and collaboration;reflection; multimodal and non-linear;risk, fragility and uncertainty; immediacy;monopolisation and surveillance. Theyargue that making these affordancesexplicit will help practitioners to makeinformed choices about how they mightuse digital technologies (Conole and Dyke 2004).

Another framework which offers a way oflooking at digital technologies in use isthat of ‘ICT capability’, which relatesunderstanding and competence to the

20

Knowledge building

Distributed cognition

Community and communication

Engagement

• adapting and developing ideas • modelling • representing understanding in multimodal

and dynamic ways

• accessing resources • finding things out • writing, composing and presenting with

mediating artefacts and tools

• exchanging and sharing communication • extending the context of activity • extending the participating community at local

and global levels

• exploring and playing • acknowledging risk and uncertainty • working with different dimensions of interactivity • responding to immediacy

Table 1: Clusters of purposeful activity with digital technologies

SECTION 3


general processes of dealing withinformation. The word ‘capability’ carriesthe meanings of having power or fitnessfor a task, being qualified and able, beingopen to or susceptible to development, andimplies a knowledge or skill being turnedto use, an ability which is used actively,involving understanding and choice(Loveless 2003). The National Curriculumfor ICT identifies key processes of suchcapability as finding things out, developingideas and making things happen, andexchanging and sharing information (DfEE 1999b).

We have considered how the description of the features of ICT, the taxonomy ofaffordances described by Conole and Dyke and Loveless’ understandings of ICTcapability as purposeful and appropriatehuman activity might be woven together.We propose to describe the affordances of digital technologies as ‘clusters’ ofpurposeful activity in teacher learning, as laid out in Table 1.

These clusters, whilst identified separatelyhere for purposes of description andclarification, are not to be regarded asmutually exclusive – rather, they may beseen as overlapping and interleavingaspects of activity, and may more normallyoccur in association with one another,rather than separately. How might suchclusters of affordances of the digitaltechnologies be expressed in models ofprofessional knowledge, and therefore berecognised in the design and experience ofprojects, environments and initiatives forteacher learning?

3.2 AFFORDANCES OF DIGITALTECHNOLOGIES AND MODELS OF TEACHER LEARNING

In Section 2 the models described byBanks, Leach and Moon (1999), Hoban(2002) and Shulman and Shulman (2004)offer frameworks to express the featuresof professional knowledge and learning.These frameworks also reflect thecharacteristics of environments, settingsand experiences in which learning mightflourish for individuals and communities.The features that Shulman and Shulmandescribe of accomplished teacherdevelopment and teacher learning - vision, motivation, capability (subdividedinto ‘understanding’ and ‘practice’),reflection and community - weresummarised more colloquially as being‘ready, willing and able’.

Shulman and Shulman hoped that theirmodel would be used to “design, diagnoseor explain efforts at teacher learning in a more self-conscious and effectivemanner” (2004, p269). In considering thecontribution of digital technologies toteacher learning, the affordances of thetechnologies can be viewed as tools inexpressing and developing the dimensionsof being ‘ready, willing and able’. The model is helpful in two ways:

• It can be used to describe a ‘snapshot’of the dimensions of teachers’professional knowledge at the differentlevels of individual, community andpolicy. This locates teachers asindividuals within the wider interactionsin the systems, thus helping to explainwhy some initiatives and innovationsmight be successful in some contextsbut not others.

21

• It can indicate a goal in designingexperiences and environments forteachers’ learning. Professionaldevelopment initiatives need to ensurethat the interactions between thedimensions and layers are recognised inplanning, reflection and evaluation.

What might these dispositions of ‘ready,willing and able’ look like in the context ofteacher learning in an ‘information age’ in which digital technologies play such a significant role? How might thesedimensions of teacher knowledge relate to teachers’ own ICT capability andrecognition of the affordances of digitaltechnologies? Given what we understandabout teacher learning, how might weexploit the affordances of digitaltechnologies as tools in developingprofessional knowledge? How might wearticulate our ‘affordance clusters’ ofknowledge building, distributed cognition,community and communication andengagement with the features of teacher learning - vision, motivation,understanding, practice, reflection andcommunity – taken from the Shulmanmodel?

3.2.1 How can digital technologiessupport the development of teachers’ vision for education?

Shulman and Shulman define one featureof an accomplished teacher – vision - asbeing ready to pursue a vision ofclassrooms or schools that constitute, forexample, communities of learning. In theirmodel there is interaction between thelevels of moral capital, shared vision andvision in policy, community and individual.This creates the range of understandingsof the goals of education in an ‘information

society’ which itself can be perceived asinevitable, pervasive and associated witheconomic and social change. In the contextof teacher learning we take ‘vision’ to havethree elements: views of purposes ofeducation within society; views of learningand teaching; and expressions of widervisions of teachers’ own professionalidentity and contribution.

The affordances of digital technologieshave not only played a role in changing thesocial, cultural and economic landscape ofsociety, but also in developing teachers’vision of education. The affordance clusterof distributed cognition supports this byproviding mechanisms for receiving andgathering information about the nature ofthe world. However, teachers need acritical view of utopian and dystopian viewsof the ‘information age’, and an awarenessof the possibilities of bias, selection andmanipulation and the influence of vestedinterests. The community andcommunication cluster affordsopportunities for sharing views of theworld as well as providing communalsupport for cultures of resistance tounwelcome influence. Vision is alsodeveloped through the engagementaffordances through personal experience,exploration and informal learning withdigital technologies.

3.2.2 How can digital technologiessupport teachers’ motivation to learnand develop their practice?

Motivation for an accomplished teacher is described in the Shulmans’ model asbeing willing to expend the energy andpersistence to sustain teaching thatmatches their vision. Teachers’ willingnessto engage with innovation and change is

22

how might we exploit

the affordancesof digital

technologies as tools indeveloping

professionalknowledge?

SECTION 3


closely related to their vision of theirprofessional role and identity. Theirmotivation to learn is linked to the ways in which they are able to engage inprofessional development which isrelevant, useful and rewarding in improvingpractice in teaching and learning.Developing ideas and materials; accessinginformation and resources; participating in sharing and exchanging informationwith colleagues; and exploring newresources which make a contribution tothe curriculum and a range of teachingstrategies, are essential activities inteacher preparation, presentation andlearning.

Just as there are many factors which actas barriers and enablers to teachers’ use of ICT (Jones 2004; Scrimshaw 2004),the affordances of digital technologies can act as both enablers and barriers to motivation to learn. The knowledgebuilding cluster enables teachers to useand adapt multiple representations ofsubject content, and develop their ideasand own materials for use with theirpupils. The distributed cognition clusterprovides access to information andresources, potentially increasing the range and quality of material, yet raisingissues of information overload and theneed for critical appraisal of what is onoffer. Community and communicationaffordances allow participation in sharingand exchanging information withcolleagues, and being exposed to others’experience. The informal learning inherentin successful play with digital technologiesis a powerful example of the engagementcluster supporting motivation. A barrier is the time required for such playfulactivities, and a perception, born of apervasive culture of performativity, thatbecause it may not yield an immediate,

identifiable result, it is not worthwhile. Teachers may well be highly motivated touse digital technologies in their personaldevelopment of professional knowledge,and very aware of the presence of andpriority given to digital technologies intheir own learning and practice, yet not bewilling or able to change their pedagogy.This may not be because of personalresistance, but could be related to otherfactors in the system. For example, if thecurriculum and assessment frameworks in which they work do not require orrecognise professional and pedagogicalchange with digital technologies, teachersmay not feel encouraged to change in this way.

3.2.3 How can digital technologiessupport teachers’ professionalknowledge, understanding andpractice?

The category of ‘understanding’ in theShulman model of an accomplishedteacher is quite large and closely related to ‘practice’ in the overall category of‘capability’. It includes the aspects ofprofessional knowledge first describednearly 20 years ago (see Section 2.2.2).

The knowledge building cluster ofaffordances can play an important role in teacher learning, not only in providingmultiple representations of traditional and developing disciplinary knowledge, but also acting as mediating tools inchallenging conceptual understanding inthe disciplines, from musical composition (Gall and Breeze 2005) to the humangenome. Digital technologies can beappropriated not only to ‘amplify’ knowing,but also to ‘re-organise’ cognitive practice.Crook (2001) illustrates such appropriation

23

by describing how the use of wordprocessors, for example, not only allowsmore text to be written in the time (by acompetent keyboard typist), but also“restructures the underlying system ofwriting – it gets it done differently” (p26).The distributed cognition cluster is closelyassociated with the affordances forknowledge building, in that digitaltechnologies not only provide access toinformation, materials and representationsof the different aspects of professionalknowledge, but also play a part in thecomposition and presentation of teachers’conceptual understanding. The communityand communication affordances enableteachers to participate in a variety of‘knowing communities’ – from subjectassociations to formal and informalprofessional groupings. Engagement canbe reflected in the whole experience ofteachers’ learning with digital technologies– from word processing to WebQuests,wikis, PDAs and locative media.

Digital technologies might challengeunderstandings of subject knowledge, butthis in turn will challenge understandingsof Pedagogic Content Knowledge, whichmight then demand changes in curriculumresources, teaching strategies andapproaches to timetabling and classroommanagement. Loveless, DeVoogd andBohlin (2001) draw attention to how digitaltechnologies can provoke shifts inunderstanding of knowledge itself as it ispresented in the school curriculum.Traditional curricula can presentknowledge as static, impersonal andunchanging, yet this misrepresents therevisionary, creative, personal andpluralistic character of knowledge –characteristics which can be clearlyexpressed through the affordances ofdigital technologies.

The ability to engage in appropriateperformance in practice is described byShulman and Shulman as “the heart ofteaching, the capacity for intelligent andadaptive action” (2004, p263). Anaccomplished teacher is not only ready,willing, but also able to express vision,motivation and understanding throughaction and practice. McCormick andScrimshaw (2001) present a detaileddescription and discussion of three levelsof change in practice with digitaltechnologies, and how these affectprofessional knowledge. The levels ofchange are described as “… to improveefficiency of conventional teaching, toextend the reach of teaching and learning,and to transform teachers’ and learners’conceptions of the subject itself” (ibidpp44-45). Drawing attention to the ways inwhich many official Government initiativesin the UK, whilst using the term‘transformation’, actually focus more on‘efficiency’ levels of change in practice,McCormick and Scrimshaw’s analysisprovides a useful framework to support thedesign and evaluation of the developmentof teacher learning and practice withdigital technologies. It is in action andpractice that the affordances of knowledgebuilding, distributed cognition, communityand communication, and engagement, areexpressed, and illustrations of suchpractices in professional developmentprojects are presented in more detail inSection 4.

3.2.4 How can digital technologiessupport teachers’ reflection?

Critical and analytical reflection isconsidered to be central to teachers’professional learning and practice (Schon1983; Mason 2002; Pollard 2002; Shulman

24

digitaltechnologies

might challengeunderstandings

of subjectknowledge

SECTION 3


and Shulman 2004). Professionaldevelopment should “enhance teachers’capacities to learn from their own and oneanother’s experience” and influence theirpotential for purposeful change (Shulmanand Shulman 2004 p264).

Reflective knowledge building can besupported by technologies such as digitalvideo, which enable teachers to capture,observe and review critical moments intheir own practice. This can be extended by applications which enable teachers to select examples of such episodes, and then analyse and annotate theseselections, linking them to reflectivecommentary through text, image andhyperlinks (see, for example, the use of 'VideoPapers' in Olivero et al 2004). The community and communicationaffordances can be exploited as teachersreflect upon their practice within a widercommunity. They can use communicationtools to engage in reflective analysis ofmaterials and experiences with colleaguesand mentors, and such opportunities forreflection, both on general practice and theuse of ICT in their teaching, need to bebuilt into and prioritised in the design ofprofessional development schemes andinnovations.

3.2.5 How can digital technologiessupport teachers’ learning incommunity?

In describing their model, Shulman andShulman recognise the mutual shapingand interactions between individuals andthe groups and communities within andbetween which they work and move. Vision,motivation, understanding, practice andreflection can be expressed at the level of

local communities through shared visions,community commitments, communities ofpractice and joint review. Individuals withincommunities can flourish, or be inhibited;they can also make positive or negativecontributions to the development of thecommunity. Digital technologies can play arole in supporting teachers in gaining andsustaining a communal orientation in theirprofessional learning.

The knowledge building cluster ofaffordances supports learning incommunity when ideas, knowledge andunderstanding are co-constructed withtools such as wikis, shared databases,online conferencing, discussion forumsand VLEs (virtual learning environments).The distributed cognition cluster can alsobe expressed in the connection betweenpeople using digital technologies to worktogether with information andrepresentations. There are clear overlapswith the discussion of the community andcommunication affordances in each of thedimensions discussed above –accomplished teachers can draw upondigital technologies to help them learn tobe ‘ready, willing and able’ in connectionwith others. Barnett notes how networkedtechnologies can support teacherprofessional development by reducingindividual isolation and supporting sharingof experience; by fostering reflection andinfluencing the development of practice;and playing a role in process of formingcommunities of practice (Barnett 2002).

3.3 SUMMARY

In Section 2 we described teacherknowledge and learning as situated,complex and generated in “the interplaybetween the professional and the personal,

25

reflectiveknowledgebuilding can be supported by technologiessuch as digitalvideo

the individual and the social, the objective and the subjective, the formaland the informal, the situated and thegeneralised”. In the current section wehave discussed how knowledge building,distributed cognition, community andcommunication and engagement are allprocesses involved in the development ofteachers’ professional knowledge as anexpression of dispositions to be ‘ready,willing and able’. The affordances of digitaltechnologies can be articulated with theShulman model’s features of vision,motivation, understanding and practice,and can support reflection and communityat individual, community and policy levels. In this section we have also indicated thecomplexity of the interactions betweenfactors which enable, constrain, challengeor contradict our understandings of thecontribution of digital technologies toteacher knowledge.

4 CASE STUDIES

In this section we provide some detailedcase studies to exemplify some of theprinciples of teacher knowledge andlearning, as outlined in Section 2, and thelearning affordances of activity in whichdigital technologies are part of the context,as outlined in Section 3. We do not seek to provide a comprehensive, synopticoverview of all that is happening in thisfast-changing field. Rather, we havechosen cases (and we acknowledge thatwe could have chosen others, to equaleffect) which are fully taking advantage of and exploiting one or more of the‘affordance clusters’ identified in Section 3:knowledge building, distributed cognition,community and communication, andengagement.

4.1 THE MULTIMEDIA PORTABLESFOR TEACHERS PILOT

This case study is among a group ofprojects referred to as the ‘EducationDepartments’ Superhighways Initiative’(Scrimshaw 1997). The MultimediaPortables for Teachers Pilot (MPTP) placedmultimedia portable computers in thehands of 1,150 teachers in 575 primary and secondary schools. The computerswere supplied with internet subscriptionsand a selection of pre-installed productivitysoftware, together with a selection ofreference and subject-focused CD-Romtitles. The two main project aims were to:

• increase teacher confidence andcompetence in the use of IT resources

• promote learning in the pupils taught by the teachers taking part in the pilot.

(University of Nottingham School of Education 1998)

26

SECTION 4

CASE STUDIES

It can be seen that in MPTP the digitaltechnology was both the means ofsupporting teacher learning and the objectof that learning.

A notable feature of MPTP was the almostcomplete lack of formal structure: the onlyrequirements upon teachers were toattend a session to familiarise them withtheir computer, to connect to the internet,and to cooperate with the evaluation.Hence, teachers were free to learn aboutand use their computers wherever andhowever they saw fit.

The project report notes that 98% ofteachers involved in the project madeeffective use of their computer, thoughmany started from a low base of personalICT capability. Teachers involved in the project completed a baselinequestionnaire, including self-ratings ofconfidence and competence. Self-ratedconfidence and competence in the use ofthe computer were both seen to increasemarkedly during the life of the project, asdemonstrated by questionnaire resultsfrom over a thousand participants, andborne out by school visits. At the end ofthe project, 93% of participants “felt thattheir knowledge of IT had increased‘substantially’” (ibid, p5).

A very small minority of teachers did notmake particularly effective use of theircomputer in comparison with othersinvolved in this highly successful project.This seemed to be associated with one ormore of: a low level of confidence, poorsupport or poor motivation. However, thefirst two were not sufficient conditions, and were often overcome by other projectteachers with a stronger ‘internal locus of control’.

The evaluation report concludes: “Thispilot has been an extremely successfulone, and it has changed many teachers’lives. An important part of the success isrelated to the ongoing nature of thelearning which the project has facilitated”(ibid, p32).

Recognition of the possibility of sociallearning among teachers was built into theproject, in that computers were placedwith two teachers in a given school, givingthe potential for working with a local‘partner’. In some primary schools this ledto a particular degree of collaboration, asit did where the two teachers were in thesame secondary school department.However, in most of the 60 schools visitedas MPTP case studies, “there wassurprisingly little relationship between thetwo teachers on the project, and in somesecondary schools in particular there wasvirtually no contact” (ibid, p28).

However, other social learning, often ininformal contexts, was supported by theaffordance of portability, which meant that:

“Teachers who did not have access to astrong support structure in their usualworking environment at school could gainaccess to one, from colleagues, friends,neighbours or family… [so] portability gaveaccess to informal support networks,which assisted many teachers in solvingproblems and increasing confidence.” (ibid, p31)

The affordance cluster of distributedcognition was exemplified in this project,as the computer supported access todistributed knowledge. Teachers used theproject CD-Roms and in some casesbought additional titles to supplementthose provided by the project. Teachers

27

also made use of the internet for e-mailcommunication, and for web-basedinformation. One project teacher in anMPTP case-study primary school, who wasa computer non-user before the project,said, “Everything I’ve learnt is from thenet” (ibid, p51), which she described as “atremendous self-helping organisation”(ibid, p50). Portability also had a bearingon the notion of distributed knowledge, inthe sense that teachers used the computerat home and at school, with portabilityrendering the computer, with its contentsof (say) electronic marksheets and draftreports and worksheets, as something ofan electronic briefcase.

Since there were so few specificrequirements of teachers participating inthe project, what teachers actually learnt,and how they learnt it, varied according totheir different personal and professionalcontexts. This approach allowed elementsof the engagement and knowledge buildingaffordance clusters to come into play. Oneof the evaluators wrote in a summaryreport, “There was great diversity in whatthe teachers did: no two were the same”(ibid, p13). Thus there was considerablepersonalisation of learning within theproject according to the situations in whichteachers were using the portablecomputers. Some, prioritising the use ofthe computer in the teaching situation,were developing personal pedagogicalcontent knowledge relating to the use ofICT. Others, using the computer at home,were developing their personal ICTcapability by, for instance, searching theweb in connection with a hobby beforegaining sufficient confidence to use thecomputer in their teaching. There werenumerous other examples where the lackof specified project requirements could beseen as helpful in supporting different

highly localised (and, hence, highlysituated) use of, and learning about, the computer.

This adaptability of MPTP to take accountof highly individual circumstances enabledteachers to learn to use aspects of thetechnological tool as a ‘mediating artefact’to address their own authentic purposes,specified according to their individualneeds and interests within their ownsituations. Thus learning in MPTP wasboth individual and social. The projectdisplays, if not an architecture, then atleast the presence, of opportunities forteachers to engage in the development ofknowledge that is “participatory,distributed and socially guided” (Crook2001, p19). Hence the project may be seento be an example of those “innovations ofcomputer use in education [that] implicitlyendorse this cultural view of knowing”(ibid). In terms of the frameworksdiscussed in Section 2, the affordancesoffered by the technology had an impact on the teachers’ vision, motivation,understanding and practice.

4.2 TALKING HEADS COMMUNITY

The Talking Heads online communitybegan as a pilot project in 1999 for the1,200 new head teachers appointed inEngland to their first headship during thatyear. It aimed to reduce isolation, enablethe sharing of good practice and offeremotional and professional support. When the National College of SchoolLeadership (NCSL) was proposed, with the stated aim of providing school leaderswith “the chance to share their experienceof what works” and “the opportunity tolearn from the best in leadership”, it was realised that:

28

the technologyhad an

impact on theteachers’ vision,

motivation,understanding

and practice

SECTION 4

CASE STUDIES

“The major part of the college’s operationsmust be available on-line as a virtualcollege… It will establish new networkswithin the profession, including problem-solving groups of heads across thecountry, discussion groups on priorityissues, on-line master classes, and accessto the most up-to-date research evidence.”(DfEE 1999a)

Thus, after its successful pilot, TalkingHeads was absorbed into the new NCSL in 2000-2001, and by 2002 there wereapproximately 6,000 members of thecommunity. Talking Heads is now (2005) just one of a number of onlinecommunities grouped under the umbrellaof NCSL talk2learn, which has 71,000members. It has become a centrallyorganised, highly structured, social arena.

From the beginning, the software forTalking Heads provided a range of onlinetools to support communication. Thesehave developed over time and now include(NCSL 2005):

Asynchronous dialogical tools to support discussion:

• conversations allow users to engage in a discussion

• discussions have contributions dividedinto topics and threads

• debates allow users to contributearound different themes or positions,contributions are colour codedaccording to the debating position taken

• brainstorms allow users to contributeideas anonymously into an online space

• ‘hotseats’ allow contributors to askquestions of a guest or expert who isthen able to respond; questions and

answers are threaded to allow further discussion.

Synchronous communication tools:

• chat provides a facility for a group ofusers to meet online at a specified time for real-time discussion

• whiteboard provides a graphicalinterface enabling discussion to takeplace around images, diagrams etc

• instant messaging provides one-to-onesynchronous communication.

Other tools:

• page publishing allows text, audio andvideo to be uploaded and shared

• articles allow users to write and publishtext-based information

• e-mail provides a web-based e-mailfacility

• sticky notes can be written and left for other users to see.

This sophisticated collection ofcollaboration tools is designed to scaffold learner interactions and afford a range of learning behaviours,demonstrating how online learning can enable a variety of interactions.

NCSL published a summary evaluationreport (NCSL 2002) based on: regularreports from the developers Ultralab,based at Anglia Polytechnic University; a commissioned evaluation from BristolUniversity, which undertook a sample of users and examined other researchevidence in this field; questionnairesurveys of users; internal NCSLevaluations.

29

The Bristol evaluation reported:

“This innovative strategy is uniquelyambitious… [there are no] otherprogrammes operating on a magnitude ofscale comparable to [these] communities.”(ibid, p2)

An Ultralab questionnaire survey of 165users in 2001 reported:

• 44% of the members surveyed were ableto list concrete ways in which TalkingHeads was increasing theireffectiveness

• 40% of heads were also able to identifythat the use of Talking Heads had led toschool improvement.

(ibid, p8)

The main findings of the evaluations werefound to be:

• informal online communities can help toreduce head teacher isolation

• active and relevant online communitiescan enable head teachers to generateand exchange insights regardingpractice that can develop capacity forschool improvement

• the expertise within Talking Heads is avaluable resource for schoolimprovement and for exchanging andarchiving expertise

• large cohort communities provide aneffective way for head teachers to gainquick access to a spectrum ofperspectives on key topical issues

• small communities provide an effectivesupport environment, especially whencommitment to participation isembedded into the community’spurpose and development

• Talking Heads has made an importantcontribution to the use of ICT by headsand their understanding of itscontribution to learning and schoolmanagement.

(ibid, p5)

A key feature in the success of the TalkingHeads community has been the role offacilitators in administering and developingthe community environment, and providinginteractive help, support and encourage-ment for the heads. As the Ultralab teamreported:

“The overriding factor behind buildingcommitment and purposeful activity is therole and activities of the facilitator, whohas professional educational knowledgeand builds personable and purposefulrelationships with head teachers.Facilitation is a complex, skilled, professionaltask.” (Bradshaw et al 2002, p9)

The Talking Heads community sought to be the virtual space where all 24,000 headteachers in England could engage indialogue. This shared communicationextended the community of practice foreach head beyond anything previouslyenvisaged, and exploited the affordanceswe have called community andcommunication. The distributed nature of the knowledge available to a headexemplified the distributed cognitionaffordance cluster. This was evident in the access to guests and experts via the‘hotseat’ activities, but also via naturaldiscourse with all the other participants,and the access to the growing resourcethat they were developing together.

It is likely that head teachers entering intothe Talking Heads community were alreadyready and willing to participate - they had

30

informal onlinecommunities can

help to reducehead teacher

isolation

SECTION 4

CASE STUDIES

vision and motivation - but the affordancesof the technology (the use of facilitators,the expertise available within thecommunity, the range of tools toencourage communication andcollaboration) encouraged them to engage with the learning community, be more reflective and helped them todevelop their abilities.

4.3 TEACHERS’ PROFESSIONALDEVELOPMENT IN THE USE OF ICT IN SUBJECT TEACHING – KS3SCIENCE PILOT

In 2002 a pilot project for online CPD in the use of ICT in subject teaching wasconducted for Key Stage 3 scienceteachers. The intention was to develophigher order ICT skills of teachers who had completed their basic ICT trainingunder the New Opportunities Fund (NOF) programme and, in particular, tostrengthen the teachers’ ability to teachKS3 science using ICT. The overall aim was to enhance the teachers’ pedagogicalcontent knowledge (their knowledge ofhow to teach what they teach) byintroducing an ICT element, and to use ICT to support that process.

Science departments in 40 schools weregiven a laptop, a data projector, sciencesoftware, related online materials andaccess to a dedicated website. Althoughtwo different developers were involved,dealing with 20 schools each, the modelsof CPD adopted were very similar. Thewebsites were the focal points for the CPDmaterials. Online pedagogic tutorialsoffered the teachers suggestions on how toteach a particular topic using ICT. A varietyof teaching resources was provided

including digital video clips, animations,documents and simulations. After thelesson had been taught, the teacher wouldengage in a dialogue with an online mentorby responding to reflective questioning tosupport the evaluation of the teachingexperience that had taken place.

Both developers provided paper materialsto introduce the CPD approach andsupport users. One developer held a face-to-face induction day with participants,which was felt to be particularly valuable,whereas the other provided up to threeafter-school training and review sessions.In both cases the face-to-face componentof the CPD model was appreciated.

The project offered the affordances ofknowledge building, both of subjectknowledge and of pedagogical contentknowledge:

“Many experienced teachers commentedon the development of their understandingof the place of ICT in their teaching and oftheir ICT skills, although their subjectknowledge had not been extended.However, for more recently qualifiedteachers or for those teaching outsidetheir particular subject specialism therewas also a contribution to subjectknowledge.” (Denning et al 2002, p2)

A contributory factor to the success of theknowledge building was the adaptability ofmuch of the material, exemplifying theaffordances of engagement:

“There is strong evidence that teacherswere able to use the resources as a basisfor interesting and effective scienceteaching. In some cases the materialswere used without modification, although asignificant number of teachers customized

31

a key feature in the success of the Talking Headscommunity hasbeen the role of facilitators

the materials, making adjustments andadaptations to provide a better match withthe classes taught.” (ibid, p3)

The situated nature of the learning was felt to be important:

“Materials produced by both developersproved to be highly usable. This was, inpart, a consequence of the familiarity of the teaching contexts used by thedevelopers for the deployment of the ICTresources.” (ibid, p3)

Access to distributed knowledge was afeature of the CPD model adopted. Awealth of online material and software wasprovided, and a multitude of links to web-based resources, ranging from skillsteaching to research evidence, wascontained within the pedagogic tutorials.

For some participants there was a socialelement to the learning. In some schoolsone or two teachers engaged in the CPDprocess effectively independently, but:

“For many schools the impact reached farbeyond individual teachers, promptingdepartment-wide exploration of newteaching strategies and renewedenthusiasm for sharing and collaboration.”(ibid, p4)

The community and communicationaspects of the project had varied success.A feature of the CPD model was theintended engagement of the teachers indialogue with their online mentors.Generally the one-to-one communicationwas felt to be useful and high qualitydiscussion of classroom use often tookplace. However, the development of awider community of practice was lesssuccessful, with limited levels of teacher

participation in the online discussions. This may have been due, in part, to therelatively short timescale of the pilot.

The evaluation report concludes that theproject was successful in achieving itsmain aims:

“Teachers reported a positive impact ontheir ability to teach KS3 science using ICT.A large majority (over 80%) reported thatthe materials promoted more effectivescience lessons, supported more effectivescience learning and raised teacherawareness of ICT use.” (ibid, p2)

and:

“93% of teachers reported an increase inconfidence in the use of ICT.” (ibid, p4)

This model had two strikingly successfulelements: the high level and quality of conceptual input, exploiting theaffordances of knowledge building andengagement, which impacted on theteachers’ understanding and practice; and the requirement for reflection by theteacher on their practice and discussionwith their online mentor about theirexperiences using the material andapproaches suggested.

The model has the potential to supportsmall primary schools, small secondarydepartments or isolated subject specialistsby the mechanism of the online mentors,but the establishment of local networksthrough face-to-face interaction and thesubsequent development and maintenanceof online communities of practice wouldrequire the continued support of facilitators.

In 2004, the approach was extended todevelop materials for all KS3 subjects,

32

the model hasthe potential tosupport small

primary schools,small secondarydepartments orisolated subject

specialists

SECTION 4

CASE STUDIES

together with KS1/2 numeracy and literacy,in the ESTUICT (Enhancing SubjectTeaching Using ICT) programme. Many ofthe materials developed for ESTUICT arenow being made available by the DfES, freeof charge, as the ‘Learning and TeachingUsing ICT – Practical Support Pack’.

4.4 ‘E-LEARNING COMMUNITIES’ IN INITIAL TEACHER EDUCATION

In January 2004 the then Teacher TrainingAgency (TTA) (now the Training andDevelopment Agency for Schools - TDA)invited all approved providers of initialteacher training in England to bid forgrants to support the development of “e-learning teacher training communitiesto enhance the delivery of ITT” (TTA 2004,letter to providers).

The ‘communities’ identified in thespecification for bids could be funded up toa maximum of £25,000, and:

“…should be a vehicle for communicationbetween trainees and school and providerbased tutors and mentors; encourage thesharing of ideas and practice betweentrainees and be a link between thetrainees and their support; and should bedriven by the desire and a plan to improveteaching and learning.” (ibid)

A significant aspect of this scheme was its recognition of distributed and situatedaspects of knowledge in the preparation of new teachers. Thus, bids could begenerated locally, taking account ofdetailed aspects of a given local situation.From a total of 131 bids submitted, 61were funded, making use of a variety oftechnologies. Here we focus on two: thedevelopment of the use of a virtual

learning environment (VLE) in the OxfordBrookes University Partnership, and theextension of the teaching and learningobservatory (TLO) network in the Universityof Nottingham Partnership. Shortdescriptions of a number of the otherprojects are also available (TTA 2005).Further funding rounds have followed andfrom those we discuss the use of personaldigital assistants (PDAs) in the Universityof Bristol Partnership.

4.4.1 Virtual Learning Environment(VLE) – Oxford Brookes UniversityInstitute of Education

The Oxford Brookes VLE was developed tosupport the 307 trainees on the PrimaryPGCE course in 2004/05. During theacademic year the trainees undertookschool experience placements in 420schools and 21 school mentors weredirectly involved with the project.The VLE was intended to provide:

• a structured means of communicationbetween the trainees and university stafffor administration purposes during theyear

• a central resource supportinguniversity-based teaching sessions

• a communications mechanism forenabling the documentation involved inmonitoring trainees’ progress while onschool experience to be transmittedelectronically between the schools andthe university

• a forum for mutual support for thetrainees while they were away from theuniversity during school experienceperiods.

33

The administration function of the VLE was effective, both while the students were in university and when they were outin the schools. There was little use of theVLE by school mentors as a means ofcommunication with their students, andwith hindsight this was not felt to besurprising as:

“Conventional communication waspreferred – through telephoneconversations, e-mail contact and face-to-face meetings. Mentors felt that there is often little to discuss that would beshared beyond the triad of mentor-university tutor-trainee.” (Oxford Brookes University 2005)

The material supporting the university-based teaching sessions usually consistedof session notes enhanced by links,references and commentaries. Only theICT tutors actively incorporated the VLEinto taught sessions. The resources actedas a valuable record of the sessions andprovided a library of material allowingaccess to the widely distributed knowledgebase that supports teacher traineepreparation.

The use of the VLE also enabled the use ofan extended range of media. Videos wereprepared showing trainees what to expectat the start of their placements, and todemonstrate aspects of modern foreignlanguage teaching in the primary school.Audio clips were produced by the musiceducation tutor, for which copyright wasnegotiated so that the trainees coulddownload them and use them duringplacements.

“The move into resources of a genuinelymultimedia nature is a critical shift whichmarks the difference between what canreadily be offered electronically to enrich

the trainees’ learning in contrast to thelimitations imposed by traditional media.”(ibid, p5)

The trainees engaged in video productionas well and their films were uploaded intothe VLE, as were many still images of bothprofessional and social activities, all ofwhich contributed to the development ofthe online community.

The structure of the VLE, its content andthe approaches adopted make use of theaffordances of the knowledge building anddistributed cognition affordance clusters.

The discussion forums were successful in developing a feeling of communityamongst the trainees, both during theuniversity-based periods of the course andwhile the trainees were out in the schoolsduring school experience periods,exemplifying the community andcommunication affordance cluster. Themessages were a mixture of professionaldiscussions, requests for ideas for lessonswhile on school experience, expressions ofmutual support and details of socialarrangements. It is worth noting that,while there were a large number ofmessages addressed to the whole cohortin subject area forums, the majority ofmessages were posted in the teachinggroup forums. These were forums set upfor each of the groups of 30 or so studentswho attended sessions together, and thesegroups quickly developed group identities.

Overall in terms of the teaching andknowledge frameworks of Section 2, theproject provided conceptual inputs, whichwere an aid to the trainees’ understandingand practice, and also successfullyintroduced them to the community ofteachers as learners.

34

discussionforums were

successful in developing

a feeling ofcommunity

amongst thetrainees

SECTION 4

CASE STUDIES

4.4.2 The Teaching and LearningObservatory (TLO) – University ofNottingham School of Education

The Teaching and Learning Observatory(TLO) network consists of a number ofsites used to enhance pre- and in-serviceteacher education in a UK context. Theproject uses new technologies “to explorethe gradual realisation that classroomboundaries can be redefined throughteacher education practices. The TLO links a network of remote national andinternational secondary or ‘beacon’schools with a university educationdepartment through innovative videoconferencing facilities and interactivetechnology: pan/zoom/tilt cameras… videoconferencing with large screen facility, ‘hot tables’ and interactive whiteboards”(Do Coyle, originator of the TLO concept).

The original nucleus of the TLO was avideo-conferencing link between theUniversity of Nottingham School ofEducation and Hockerill Anglo-EuropeanCollege in Bishop’s Stortford. In addition toremotely controlled cameras, theinstallation in both locations included anetworked interactive whiteboard and dataprojection. Before an observation,introductory protocols ensure that theclass to be observed is introduced to theobservers – ethical principles are adheredto, and observation is not covert. Theremotely controlled camera allows theobserving group to pan round the roomand zoom in on the teacher, and on classactivity. Microphones at the observing endof the link may be muted to allow localdiscussion among observers.

The original focus was on innovativeforeign languages pedagogy, with anemphasis on content and languageintegration (eg geography through the

medium of French). Large groups ofstudent teachers at the School ofEducation can observe innovative teachinglive, as a large data-projected image withsound, with classroom interactivewhiteboard use ‘mirrored’ locally. After thelesson they use video-conferencing todiscuss the lesson with the teacher andwhere possible with class members. Inaddition, lessons may be simultaneouslyrecorded to videotape for later use. Thisapproach makes use of the affordances ofthe community and communication cluster.

Since its inception the TLO network hasexpanded, and now includes severalschools with similar interactiveclassrooms and video-conferencing. TheTDA-supported project is the most recentphase of the extension of the network,installing a TLO in Swanwick Hall School.This has supported extension of use intoother subject areas, where:

“…large groups of trainees have been ableto have a shared experience of observingthe same lesson in ‘real time’, followed byan immediate debrief with the teacherconcerned. This is an enhancement of thetraining experience, since it supportsgroup discussion and reflection on thebasis of a shared experience.” (University ofNottingham School of Education 2005, p5)

The TLO has also been used for a two-centres CPD event, led from Swanwick andwith the University TLO as a ‘satellite’venue. Evaluation indicated the need formore extensive adaptation of the approachto CPD: “I feel that it was a really usefulsession as it foregrounded several issuesabout using the technology to support suchan event. There are issues about thetechnology itself, protocols for the users,and the specifics of activities” (sessionparticipant).

35

classroomboundaries canbe redefinedthrough teachereducationpractices

A further use of the TLO link withSwanwick has been to bring a group ofschool students and student teacherstogether in a virtual meeting, for thepurpose of giving advice to the studentteachers about what to do, and not to do, when on teaching practice.

This project provides an example wherethe affordances of the technology supportthe reflective and communal elements ofteacher learning, and can contribute to thedevelopment of vision and motivation fortrainee teachers.

4.4.3 Personal Digital Assistants(PDAS) – University of BristolGraduate School of Education

The Secondary PGCE at the University of Bristol is supported by a VLE withdiscussion groups, course documents andlinks to teaching resources. It had beenfound that regular use of the VLE bystudents while on teaching practice couldbe difficult, due to problems of access viatraditional computers and availability ofstorage media. PDAs had been consideredas a solution to this problem. Researchhas also shown the possible benefits forteachers of the use of PDAs in terms ofclassroom management and presentationof information (Becta 2003). Thus thissmall-scale project looked at the use ofinternet-enabled PDAs by 14 PGCESecondary Science students to enable theiraccess to the VLE and internet, andsupport their teaching and learning.

The project aimed to investigate thepotential of the PDA in particular as:

• an electronic book

• a source of dedicated science software

• an interface to the world wide webespecially via a course-linked VLE

• a store of previously recorded pupil data

• a communications device for e-mailingpeers and tutors.

(Wishart et al 2005)

After the students had become familiarwith the PDAs, they reported value in usingthem for supporting their teaching practiceand their own learning. However later inthe year, towards the end of the mainblock of time in school, use diminishedwith three students dropping out of thestudy citing, amongst other reasons, thatthe pressures of school experience meantthat use of the relatively unfamiliar PDAsbecame not a help but a hindrance.

During the course of the year the mostcommonly used applications were thecalendar or diary scheduler, the web browserand the e-mail client. One student reported:

“The calendar and task functionality hasbeen extremely useful. My timetable issurprisingly fluid, with various planningand review meetings being scheduled andre-scheduled – any paper diary would beunreadable and unusable.” (ibid, p3)

The other applications that proved usefulwere software such as spreadsheets ormarkbooks for organising pupil data, andthe word processor or note recorder tonote information for future use. Onestudent commented:

“During teaching practice I have foundmyself constantly bombarded with new and noteworthy information. The PDA has allowed me to keep meaningful notesof this information, and structure theinformation (i.e. file) in a way that allowsme to access it easily.” (ibid, p5)

36

SECTION 4

CASE STUDIES

The use of the web browser to gainimmediate access to the resources of theworld wide web exploited the affordancesof distributed cognition. Using the e-mailclient to send e-mails and to chat withpeers, tutors, family and friendsexemplified the affordances of communityand communication in providing valuedsupport to the students while on teachingpractice. The scheduling, pupil data andnote-taking activities again exploit theaffordances of distributed cognition.

While the experiment was only partiallysuccessful in the sense that, for thesestudents, the use of the relativelyunfamiliar PDAs tailed off as the pressuresof the PGCE course increased, it can beseen that there is great potential for theuse of hand-held internet-enabled devicesto support student learning in future. Theaffordances of the technology can help toinform the students’ understanding andpractice and maintain their feeling of beingpart of a community of learners while awayfrom the university on school experience.

4.5 TEACHERS’ TV

This case study considers the televisionchannel Teachers’ TV, which is a recentinnovation, having been launched inFebruary 2005. It is funded by the DfES,but has full editorial independence in theproduction of its programmes, which aretransmitted digitally over satellite andterrestrial networks. The broadcastservices are supported and supplementedby a multifunctional website.

The channel objectives are defined as:

• sharing best practice and innovationacross the country

• providing practical ideas to saveteachers’ time

• providing and recommending classroomresources

• delivering educational news anddocumentaries

• supporting in-service training andpersonal development in school.

(Teachers’ TV presentation at TDAconference, Autumn 2005)

The schedule is divided into three zones -Primary, Secondary and General. ThePrimary and Secondary Zones provide twotypes of programme: subject programmes- identified by National Curriculum subjectand Key Stage, and concentrating onteachers in action, advice and reviews of resources; and role programmes -addressing the needs of those with specificroles or responsibilities in school egmanagers, NQTs, TAs, coordinators for ICT or Special Needs. There are also pupilprogrammes from the BBC and Channel 4to record and use in the classroom. TheGeneral Zone contains programmes ofgeneral interest such as documentaries on educational issues, current affairsprogrammes, careers advice,masterclasses on teaching techniques and behaviour management etc.

The complementary website(www.teachers.tv) contains resourcematerial and programme information, butalso acts as a valuable programme archivefor CPD purposes. The video library hascomprehensive search facilities, allowingsearching by subject, role and keyword,and contains 1,000 programmes as at April2006. Virtually every CPD programme thathas been transmitted is available, andthese programmes can be viewed online,or downloaded. Clips can also be edited for use in CPD presentations.

37

there is greatpotential for theuse of hand-heldinternet-enableddevices tosupport studentlearning in future

There is little available yet in the way ofresearch findings or formal evaluation ofthe material and its use. However,informal reports by users (Teachers' TV2005) comment on:

• The possibilities for innovative modes ofaccess to CPD materials - Teachers’ TVcan be watched on PDAs, or hotlinks toselected programmes on the websitecan be e-mailed to specific colleagues.

• Downloading footage and viewing it ondemand means that a new model ofCPD is developing - teachers can watcha 15-minute programme at school whenconvenient to them, and a tailor-madepackage of CPD can be developed byand for individual teachers.

• The material is valued as it showspractical activity in real classrooms.

• Teachers’ TV has a friendly andprofessional feel, reminiscent ofregional teacher centres.

The most obvious affordances of thetechnology engaged with in this case study are those of the community andcommunication cluster. However, elementsof the other clusters are also present: thedistributed nature of the materialavailable; the conceptual inputs providedby the programmes encourage knowledgebuilding at both the subject andprofessional level; there are possibilitiesfor the affordance of the engagementcluster for those teachers who downloadmaterial and then edit clips to use in their own material.

The affordances of the project cancontribute to the development of the vision and motivation of the teachers bypresenting realistic examples of colleaguesin action, can help to develop their

understanding and practice with thematerials made available, and can engagethem in a wider community of teachersthan would be possible in their normalenvironment.

4.6 SUMMARY

What characterises these case studies istheir specific, situated instantiations of theaffordance clusters described in Section 3.Our view of these affordance clusters isthat they are not simply inherent in thetechnologies themselves. Rather, theyrelate to specific, given circumstances inwhich the technologies are – or might be -in use. Each case study has a differentcombination of the affordance clusters andinfluences a selection of the elements ofthe model of teacher learning anddevelopment. There is usually someexternal ‘conceptual input’, often astructured dialogue and reflection with ahuman presence, eg an online tutor,mentor, facilitator or peer, and an actionresearch orientation to the activities.In each case, teacher learning is seen asinherently complex – a situated processthat is ongoing, social and dynamic. Thisreflects our understanding of teacherlearning as outlined in Section 2. Suchteacher learning can, we believe, besignificantly supported and enhanced bythe use of digital technologies. What linksthe case studies is the use of specificdigital technologies in ways which enablethe users, via the affordance clusters, toovercome some of the constraints of timeand location which may characterise othercontexts for teacher learning.

38

teacher learningis seen asinherently

complex – asituated processthat is ongoing,

social anddynamic

SECTION 4

CASE STUDIES

5 DISCUSSION: RETOOLING OR RENAISSANCE?

We have seen that teacher learning withdigital technologies is a complex but, we suggest, exciting area. Much of whatwe have said in the previous sections has implications for school leaders,researchers, software developers, teachereducators and trainers, CPD providers,policy makers – and, of course, forteachers themselves.

Change is now a constant condition in oureducation system, reflecting changes inthe wider world. This has implications forteacher identity and role. What sort ofteacher development is needed in order tokeep pace with such change? We have toask ourselves whether we want a mere‘retooling’ of teacher competences forspecific purposes, or an approach whichsupports a renaissance in teacherdevelopment for an uncertain future. Thisis not about making an industrial processmore efficient; rather, it is about enablingcultural change in the profession.

An instrumental model of teacherdevelopment is limited. It attempts tocapture, copy and disseminate elements of‘good practice’, out of the context in whichthey were developed, in order to refreshthe educational process as if retooling anindustrial production line. This may appearto meet short-term needs, but does littleto develop reflexive professionals capableof intelligent action in fast-changingcontexts.

A more comprehensive account of teacherdevelopment is needed. Hargreaves andGoodson propose a view of ‘postmodernprofessionalism’, based on sevenprinciples which they identify as follows:

• opportunities and responsibility toexercise discretionary judgement

• opportunities and expectations toengage with moral and social purposes

• commitment to working collegiallywithin collaborative cultures

• occupational heteronomy rather thanself-protective autonomy

• a commitment to active care and notjust anodyne service for students

• a self-directed search and struggle forcontinuous learning

• the creation and recognition of high task complexity.

(Hargreaves and Goodson 1996, pp20-21.These are condensed versions of the sevenprinciples, with emphasis is as in theoriginal.)

These principles imply high levels ofindividual agency, that is, the power of the individual to do things and to effect change. To them, we would addopportunities and support for creativity,and a recognition of the situatedaffordances of digital technologies tosupport teachers as knowledgeablelearners.

Thus, an environment for renaissance inteacher development will often includenew content (Hoban’s ‘conceptual inputs’),which is sometimes necessary but is,alone, never sufficient for professionalgrowth. At its heart, such an environmentfor CPD will necessarily offer: structureddialogue and reflection; human presence,experience and memory; and an action-researching orientation.

To such an environment, digitaltechnologies can contribute enhancedopportunities for knowledge building,

39

we have to ask ourselveswhether we want a mere'retooling' ofteachercompetences or a renaissancein teacherdevelopment

SECTION 5


communication, distributed cognition, and engagement, as expressed in theaffordance clusters described in Section 3.Thus, schools of the future will need aclear sense of the kinds of teacherprofessionalism and teacher learning theywish to support, in order to make wise andinformed decisions about the role of digitaltechnologies in the CPD process. Suchcommunities will be resistant tobandwagons and snake-oil sellers.

In this fast-moving field there is a cleargap in research. There is very littlefundamental research that investigateshow teachers might learn with digitaltechnologies. Rather, there seems to be apervasive assumption that teachers willlearn with digital technologies. Someteachers will, of course, but the culturally,institutionally and historically situatedprocesses whereby this happens, andhence how best to support it, are not fullyunderstood.

Such research is needed to inform thedevelopment of planned approaches toteacher learning with digital technologies.One of the messages from our review ofmodels of teacher learning is that, in thelight of the evident complexity, a holisticapproach is needed. The models shouldnot be disaggregated or atomised, withelements being taken out of context for a‘quick fix’. There is no shortage of Hoban’s‘conceptual inputs’, but there is a need forbetter - and better understood - structuresin which to use them.

Teachers need to be effective learners inorder to do their jobs in circumstanceswhich are changing rapidly. This is not justan issue for initial teacher training, butalso for ongoing CPD for teachers aslifelong learners. The potential affordances

of new digital technologies have much tooffer in this regard. However, underpresent circumstances we fear that theseopportunities are likely to remainunderexploited by many teachers. Thenature of current reforms may well make it difficult for teachers to experience the'buzz' that comes from professionaldevelopment:

“One of the most telling criticisms ofdetailed, standards-oriented reforms (orthose that possess similar characteristicsand are labelled as outcomes based) isthat they reduce the curriculum, andcurriculum planning, to narrowly technicaland rational processes, losing much ofwhat should be powerful and engaging in learning teaching.” (Hargreaves et al2001, p20)

Digital technologies, however engaginglypresented and useful the content may be,cannot alone overcome the structuralconstraints imposed by other aspects ofteachers' work. Teachers have experiencedconsiderable intensification of their workand continue to do so. In their study ofprimary school teachers' use of ICT,Moseley et al (1999) found that the biggestchallenge reported by teachers was timeto develop skills and confidence in usingICT (p103).

As we saw in Section 3, the affordanceclusters presented by digital technologiesoffer opportunities for the kinds of teacherlearning that we described in Section 2,and we have exemplified such digitally-supported teacher learning in Section 4.However, for this kind of learning tobecome embedded within the wider‘macrosystem’ of a country’s educationalprovision means that it must equally beembedded within the microsystem of each

40

schools of thefuture will need

a clear sense of the kinds

of teacherprofessionalism

and teacherlearning they

wish to support

SECTION 5


and every individual professional life, and we are a long way from that goal.

We have the technology. However,paradoxically, it is those sametechnologies which offer the opportunitieswe have written about in this review thathave also enabled “the acceleration of justabout everything” (Gleick 1999), and henceare deeply implicated in the wider causesof the intensification of teachers’ work,itself one of the reasons why it is sodifficult to make the most of thoseopportunities:

“When teachers have their time stolenfrom them, one of the most preciousthings they lose is the time to learn and tothink. Knowledge-driven organisationsdepend on effective brainpower – onunderstanding, reflection, ingenuity andcreativity. But standardised reforms havetaken away teachers’ time to think; andtheir imposed, prescriptive requirementshave replaced creativity with compliance.An overexamined professional life isproducing an unexamined, unreflectiveone.” (Hargreaves 2003, pp82-3)

We face a considerable challenge. Theprocesses of teacher learning are complex,even messy, and teachers’ current workingcircumstances contain inherentconstraints. Yet the possibilities for realchange in the system do exist. If we canbring the technologies into situations thatresonate strongly with teachers’ sense ofprofessional and moral purposes, we mayyet see what might truly prove to be arenaissance, in which teachers wouldemploy digital technologies for'understanding, reflection, ingenuity andcreativity', and, through these, supporttheir own learning in new ways.

41

teachers need to be effectivelearners in orderto do their jobsin circumstanceswhich arechanging rapidly

REFERENCES

Banks, F, Leach, J and Moon, B (1999).New understandings of teachers'pedagogic knowledge. In Learners andPedagogy, J Leach and B Moon. London:Paul Chapman Publishing in associationwith The Open University Press

Barnett, M (2002). Issues and trendsconcerning new technologies for teacherprofessional development: a review of theliterature. Annual Meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association, NewOrleans

Becta (2003). Handheld computers: PDASin Schools. Coventry: Becta

Bell, J (ed) (1995). Teachers Talk aboutTeaching: Coping with Change in TurbulentTimes. Buckingham: Open University Press

Bradshaw, P, Powell, S and Terrell, I(2002). Online communities - vehicles forprofessional learning. British EducationalResearch Association Conference, Exeter

Brown, JS, Collins, A and Duguid, P(1989). Situated cognition and the cultureof learning. Educational Researcher 18(1):32-42

Cairncross, F (1997). The Death ofDistance. London: Orion Business Books

Castells, M (1996). The Rise of theNetwork Society. Oxford: Blackwell

Conole, G and Dyke, M (2004). What arethe affordances of information andcommunication technologies? ALT-J,Research in Learning Technology 12(2):113-124

Crook, C (2001). The social character ofknowing and learning: implications ofcultural psychology for educational tech-nology. Journal of Information Technologyfor Teacher Education, 10(1&2): 19-36

Day, C (1999). Developing Teachers: TheChallenges of Lifelong Learning. London:Falmer Press

Day, C, Fernandez, A, Hauge, TE andMøller, J, Eds (2000). The Life and Work ofTeachers: International Perspectives inChanging Times. London: Falmer Press

Denning, T, Fisher, T, Higgins, C,Johnson, M, Loveless, A and Tweats, R(2002). Teachers' ProfessionalDevelopment in the Use of ICT in SubjectTeaching (KS3 Science) - Final Report.Unpublished

DfEE (1998). Circular 4/98 Teaching: HighStatus, High Standards. London: DfEE

DfEE (1999a). National College of SchoolLeadership - A Prospectus. London: DfEE

DfEE (1999b). The National Curriculum forEngland: Information and CommunicationTechnology. London: DfEE

DfES (2002). Transforming the Way WeLearn: A Vision for the Future of ICT inSchools. London: DfES

DfES (2003). Fulfilling the Potential:Transforming Teaching and LearningThrough ICT in Schools. London: DfES

DfES (2005). Harnessing the Potential:Transforming Learning and Children'sServices. London: DfES

Doll, WEJ (1993). A Post-modernPerspective on Curriculum. New York:Teachers College Press

Engeström, Y (1999). Activity theory andindividual and social transformation. InPerspectives on Activity Theory, YEngeström, R Miettinen and R-LPunamäki. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press: 19-38

Engeström, Y, Miettinen, R andPunamäki, R-L, Eds. (1999). Perspectiveson Activity Theory. Learning in Doing:

42

REFERENCES

Social, Cognitive and ComputationalPerspectives. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press

Fullan, M (1991). The New Meaning ofEducational Change. New York: TeachersCollege Press

Fullan, M (1993). Change Forces: Probingthe Depths of Educational Reform.London: Falmer Press

Fullan, M (1997). Planning, doing andcoping with change. In OrganisationalEffectiveness and Improvements inEducation, A Harris, N Bennett and MPreedy. Buckingham: Open UniversityPress: 205-215

Gall, M and Breeze, N (2005). Musiccomposition lessons: the multimodalaffordances of technology. EducationalReview 57(4): 415-433

Gibson, JJ (1986). The Ecological Approachto Visual Perception. Hillsdale: LawrenceErlbaum Associates

Giddens, A (1999). Runaway World: HowGlobalisation is Reshaping our Lives.London: Profile Books

Gleick, J (1999). Faster: the Acceleration ofJust About Everything. London: Abacus

Goodson, IF (1993). School Subjects andCurriculum Change. London: Falmer Press

Goodson, IF (2003). ProfessionalKnowledge, Professional Lives: Studies inEducation and Change. Maidenhead: OpenUniversity Press

Goodson, IF, Knobel, M, Lankshear, C andMangan, JM (2002). Cyber Spaces/SocialSpaces: Culture Clash in ComputerizedClassrooms. New York: PalgraveMacmillan

Greeno, J (1994). Gibson’s affordances.Psychological Review 101: 336 - 342

Hargreaves, A (1994). Changing Teachers,Changing Times. London: Cassell

Hargreaves, A (2003). Teaching in theKnowledge Society: Education in the Age ofInsecurity. Maidenhead: Open UniversityPress

Hargreaves, A, Earl, L, Moore, S andManning, S (2001). Learning to Change:Teaching Beyond Subjects and Standards.San Francisco: Jossey Bass

Hargreaves, A and Goodson, I (1996).Teachers' professional lives: aspirationsand actualities. In Teachers' ProfessionalLives, IF Goodson and A Hargreaves.London: Falmer Press: 1-27

Hay McBer (2000). Research into TeacherEffectiveness: A Model of TeacherEffectiveness. London

Helsby, G (2000). Multiple truths andcontested realities: the changing faces ofteacher professionalism in England. In TheLife and Work of Teachers: InternationalPerspectives in Changing Times, C Day, AFernandez, TE Hauge and J Møller.London: Falmer Press: 93-108

Hoban, G (2002). Teacher Learning forEducational Change. Buckingham: OpenUniversity Press

Howells, J (2005). The Management ofInnovation and Technology: the Shaping ofTechnology and Institutions of the MarketEconomy. London: Sage

Jones, A (2004). A Review of the ResearchLiterature on Barriers to Uptake of ICT byTeachers. Coventry: Becta

Kennewell, S (2001). Using affordancesand constraints to evaluate the use ofinformation and communicationstechnology in teaching and learning.Journal of Information Technology forTeacher Education 10(1 & 2): 101-116

43

Kington, A, Lee, T, Day, C and Sammons,P (2003). A critical review of the literatureon school and teacher effectiveness andteachers' work and lives: towardsrelational and relative effectiveness (aVitae Project symposium paper). BritishEducational Research AssociationConference, Edinburgh

Lave, J and Wenger, E (1991). SituatedLearning: Legitimate PeripheralParticipation. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press

Leach, J and Moon, B (2000). Pedagogy,information and communicationstechnology and teachers' professionalknowledge. Curriculum Journal 11(3): 385-404

Loveless, A (2003). The interactionbetween primary teachers’ perceptions ofICT and their pedagogy. Education andInformation Technologies 8(4): 313-326

Loveless, A, DeVoogd, G and Bohlin, R(2001). Something old, something new: ispedagogy affected by ICT? In ICT, Pedagogyand the Curriculum: Subject to Change, A Loveless and V Ellis. London: Routledge:63-83

Loveless, A and Ellis, V (eds) (2001). ICT,Pedagogy and the Curriculum: Subject toChange. London: Routledge

MacKenzie, D and Wajcman, J (eds) (1999).The Social Shaping of Technology.Buckingham: Open University Press

Mason, J (2002). Researching Your OwnPractice: The Discipline of Noticing.London and New York: RoutledgeFalmer.

McCormick, R and Scrimshaw, P (2001).Information and communicationstechnology, knowledge and pedagogy.Education, Communication andInformation 1(1): 37-57

Morley, L and Rassool, N (1999). SchoolEffectiveness: Fracturing the Discourse.London: Falmer Press

Morrison, K (2002). School Leadership and Complexity Theory. London:RoutledgeFalmer

Moseley, D, Higgins, S, Bramald, R,Hardman, F, Miller, J, Mroz, M, Tse, H,Newton, D, Thompson, I, Williamson, J,Halligan, J, Bramald, S, Newton, L,Tymms, P, Henderson, B and Stout, J(1999). Ways Forward with ICT: EffectivePedagogy using Information andCommunications Technology for Literacyand Numeracy in Primary Schools.Newcastle: University of Newcastle

NCSL (2002). Talk2learn: An EvaluationReport on NCSL's Online Communitiesincluding Talking Heads and Virtual Heads.Nottingham: NCSL

NCSL (2005). Talk2learn User Guide.Nottingham: NCSL

Olivero, F, Sutherland, R and John, P(2004). Seeing is believing: usingvideopapers to transform teachers'professional knowledge and practice.Cambridge Journal of Education 34(2)

Oxford Brookes University (2005).Supporting E-learning Communities in ITT- Oxford Brookes University Final Report.Unpublished

Page, RN (2001). Common sense: a formof teacher knowledge. Journal ofCurriculum Studies 33(5): 525-533

Pollard, A (2002). Reflective Teaching.London: Continuum

Putnam, RT and Borko, H (2000). What donew views of knowledge and thinking haveto say about research on teacher learning.Educational Researcher 29(1): 4-15

44

REFERENCES

Ridgway, J (1997). Vygotsky, informaticscapability, and professional development.In Information Technology: SupportingChange Through Teacher Education, DPassey and B Samways. London: Chapman& Hall: 3-19

Robertson, SL (2000). A Class Act:Changing Teachers' Work, the State andGlobalisation. New York: Falmer

Rogers, EM (1995). Diffusion ofInnovations. New York: Free Press

Schön, D (1983). The ReflectivePractitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. London: Temple Smith

Scrimshaw, P (1997). Preparing for theInformation Age: Synoptic Report of theEducation Departments' SuperhighwaysInitiative. London, The Welsh Office, DENI,The Scottish Office, DfEE

Scrimshaw, P (2004). Enabling Teachers toMake Successful Use of ICT. Coventry:Becta

Sharp, J, Potter, J, Allen, J and Loveless,A (2002). Primary ICT: Knowledge,Understanding and Practice. Exeter:Learning Matters

Shulman, LS (1987). Knowledge andteaching: foundations of the new reform.Harvard Educational Review 57(1): 1-22

Shulman, LS and Shulman, JH (2004).How and what teachers learn: a shiftingperspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies36(2): 257-271

Smyth, J, Dow, A, Hattam, R, Reid, A andShacklock, G (2000). Teachers' Work in aGlobalising Economy. London: FalmerPress

Somekh, B (2001). Methodological issuesin identifying and describing the wayknowledge is constructed with and withoutinformation and communications

technology. Journal of InformationTechnology for Teacher Education 10(1 & 2): 157-178

Somekh, B and Davis, N (eds) (1997).Using Information Technology Effectively inTeaching and Learning. London: Routledge

Teachers' TV (2005). Case studies.Unpublished

TTA (2005). E-learning Today for theTeachers of Ttomorrow: Project Reports.London: TTA

University of Nottingham School ofEducation (1998). Multimedia Portables forTeachers Pilot Project Report. Coventry:Becta

University of Nottingham School ofEducation (2005). Supporting E-learningcommunities in ITT - University ofNottingham Partnership Final Report,Unpublished

Wenger, E (1998). Communities ofPractice: Learning, Meaning and Iidentity.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Wertsch, JV (1991). Voices of the Mind: ASociocultural Approach to Mediated Action.Cambridge, Mass: Harvard UniversityPress

Wertsch, JV (1998). Mind as Action. NewYork: Oxford University Press

Wideen, MF, Mayer-Smith, JA and Moon,BJ (1996). Teachers' professional lives:aspirations and actualities. In Teachers'Professional Lives, IF Goodson and AHargreaves. London: Falmer Press: 187-204

Wishart, J, McFarlane, A and Ramsden, A(2005). Using personal digital assistants(PDAs) with internet access to supportiInitial teacher training in the UK. 4ThWorld Conference on Mobile Learning,Cape Town SA

45

Woods, P, Jeffrey, B, Troman, G andBoyle, M (1997). Restructuring Schools,Reconstructing Teachers: Responding toChange in the Primary School.Buckingham: Open University Press

46

REFERENCES

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the important contributions made by Tim Denning(Keele University) during the discussion stage of the preparation of this review, and KeriFacer, our editor at FutureLab, for her highly constructive and helpful comments duringthe draft stages. As ever, any shortcomings remain our responsibility. As long-standingmembers of the Association for Information Technology in Teacher Education we wouldalso like to acknowledge the less direct - but no less valuable - contributions of ourcolleagues in that network, and also those of the many teachers, both in training and inservice, with whom we have worked over the years. All have stimulated and supportedthe development of our thinking and our practice.

About Futurelab

Futurelab is passionate about transforming the way people learn. Tapping into the hugepotential offered by digital and other technologies, we are developing innovative learningresources and practices that support new approaches to education for the 21st century.

Working in partnership with industry, policy and practice, Futurelab:

• incubates new ideas, taking them from the lab to the classroom• offers hard evidence and practical advice to support the design and use of innovative

learning tools• communicates the latest thinking and practice in educational ICT• provides the space for experimentation and the exchange of ideas between the

creative, technology and education sectors.

A not-for-profit organisation, Futurelab is committed to sharing the lessons learnt fromour research and development in order to inform positive change to educational policyand practice.

Futurelab1 Canons RoadHarboursideBristol BS1 5UHUnited Kingdom

tel +44 (0)117 915 8200fax +44 (0)117 915 [email protected]

www.futurelab.org.uk

Registered charity 1113051

Creative Commons

© Futurelab 2006. All rights reserved; Futurelab has an open access policy which encourages circulation ofour work, including this report, under certain copyright conditions - however, please ensure that Futurelab isacknowledged. For full details of our Creative Commons licence, go to www.futurelab.org.uk/open_access.htm

Disclaimer

These reviews have been published to present useful and timely information and to stimulate thinking anddebate. It should be recognised that the opinions expressed in this document are personal to the author andshould not be taken to reflect the views of Futurelab. Futurelab does not guarantee the accuracy of theinformation or opinion contained within the review.

This publication is available to download from the Futurelab website –www.futurelab.org.uk/research/lit_reviews.htm

Also from Futurelab:

Literature Reviews and Research ReportsWritten by leading academics, these publications provide comprehensive surveys ofresearch and practice in a range of different fields.

HandbooksDrawing on Futurelab's in-house R&D programme as well as projects from around theworld, these handbooks offer practical advice and guidance to support the design anddevelopment of new approaches to education.

Opening Education SeriesFocusing on emergent ideas in education and technology, this series of publicationsopens up new areas for debate and discussion.

We encourage the use and circulation of the text content of these publications, whichare available to download from the Futurelab website – www.futurelab.org.uk/research.For full details of our open access policy, go to www.futurelab.org.uk/open_access.htm.

teachers learning with digital technologies: a review of ... · in such a context, not only are...

Documents