a European project on

teachers’ professional profilein ICT for education

> Introduction

> A European network of experts

> The week-long seminar

> An overview of European teachers’profiles in ICT for education

> The uTeacher event in Palermo

> A Common European Frameworkfor Teachers’ Professional Profilein ICT for Education

> Synoptic table of the uTeacheractivities and outputs

> Appendix

CONTENTS

3

Excerpts fromCALL FOR PROPOSALSPreparatory and InnovativeActions 2003/b - eLearningDG EAC/61/03 (2003/C 170/10)

“The European Commission launchedthe eLearning Initiative and Action Planto foster the adaptation of theEuropean Union’s education andtraining systems to the knowledgesociety, through the effective andrelevant use of information andcommunication technologies and theInternet for learning.

The eLearning Initiative and ActionPlan aim to provide the basis for a widedebate at European level, and toencourage increased coordination ofrelated actions within and betweenMember States.Peer reviewing aims at facilitatingcross-examination (or study) ofelearning practices or policies bypersons directly involved in educationand training.The outcome of the peer reviewprocess should be a betterunderstanding of how to develop goodpractice throughout Europe, providing abasis for the exchange and transfer ofexperience among education andtraining actors”.

The uTeacher projectThe uTeacher project addresses thefollowing issues of the eLearninginitiative.

Foster the adaptation of the EuropeanUnion’s education and training systemsto the knowledge society.Teachers can be key players in theadaptation of European school systemsto the knowledge society, provided thatthey are able to make effective andrelevant use of Information andCommunication Technologies (ICT) andthe Internet in their practice.uTeacher aims to understand anddefine the professional profile of ateacher who is faced with the issuesthat the knowledge society poses toschools. This profile is captured in a“Common European Framework” whichcan be seen as a means ofharmonising Initial Teacher Education(ITE) and Continuing ProfessionalDevelopment (CPD) across Europe.

INTRODUCTION

4

Cross-examination (or study) ofelearning practices or policies bypersons directly involved in educationand training to get a betterunderstanding of how to develop goodpractice throughout Europe.Clear understanding of the actualprofessional profile currently assumedas a basis for ITE and CPD acrossEurope is a prerequisite for defining theCommon European Framework.Such understanding can only beachieved through a participativeprocess involving field experts from allEuropean countries. uTeacher hascreated a network of NationalInvestigators who worked together toproduce an overview of teachers’professional profile pertaining to ICT foreducation that is assumed as a basisfor benchmarking in-service and pre-service training and accreditation in thevarious European countries.This network, which can be considereda real community of practice, hasworked cooperatively with theuTeacher partnership (see Appendix)to produce the Common EuropeanFramework.

To encourage increased coordination ofrelated actions within and betweenMember States.The Common European Frameworkdescribing teachers’ professional profilein ICT for the school of the knowledgesociety is a means for educationaladministrators, course designers,teachers, examining bodies, etc. toreflect on their current practice, with aview to situating and coordinating theirefforts and to ensuring that they meetthe real needs of school in theknowledge society.

Phases and outcomesof uTeacher

uTeacher has involved two mainphases.Phase 1: production of an overview ofteachers’ professional profile in ICT foreducation that underpins nationalteacher training programs in Europe.This overview was published in a bookentitled European Teachers Towardsthe Knowledge Society, writtencooperatively by the uTeacherpartnership, along with the nineteenEuropean National Investigators.

Phase 2: production of a commonframework for teachers’ professionaldevelopment as a tool for improvingteacher training in ICT for educationacross Europe.This framework was published in abook entitled A Common EuropeanFramework for Teachers’ ProfessionalProfile in ICT for Education.A hypermedia version was alsoproduced. This Framework is theresult of a cooperative processinvolving the uTeacher partnershipand the network of NationalInvestigators.

A feasibility study has defined theconditions for developing a Europeanorganisation responsible formaintaining the Framework, providing areference for the developmentof learning materials, and administeringquality assurance.

5

The project saw the formation of aEuropean network of expertscomposed of National Investigators(NIs) working in conjunction with thepartnership throughout the variousphases of the project.

• Identifying national InformationSourcesThe partnership identified anauthoritative national source in eachEuropean country (representative ofthe Ministry of Education, nationalbody responsible for teachereducation, academic expert, etc.),who helped the partnership appoint asuitable NI.

• Contacting the NationalInvestigatorsFollowing the suggestions of theNational Sources, the partnershipcontacted and appointed the NIs.

• Writing national reportsNIs produced national reportsfollowing guidelines provided by thepartnership. Each national reportdeals with ITE and CPD related toICT for Education in the givencountry.

• Processing of national reports inpreparation for the week-longseminarThe partnership identified keyaspects that emerged from thenational reports and drafted apreliminary document entitledTeachers’ Competencies in ICT forEducation within a KnowledgeSociety to serve as a guide fordiscussion and comparison at theVenice Seminar.

• Week-long seminar(Venice, 4th-9th October 2004)The NIs shared and explorednational viewpoints and experiences,and identified key aspects andissues at trans-national level.

• Editing and publication of thebook European Teachers Towardsthe Knowledge Society

• Forming the board of authorsresponsible for populating theFramework structure, and the boardof reviewers, responsible for

providing the writers with feedback.• Producing guidelines for the

writers and reviewers• Exploratory population of some of

the Framework sections• Meeting in Palermo (8th-11st March

2005) to co-ordinate the writing andreviewing procedures.

• Populating the Frameworksections

• Producing the book The CommonEuropean Framework forTeachers’ Professional Profile inICT for Education andimplementing the Hypermedia

• Preparing a feasibility study intofuture development of the Framework.

A EUROPEANNETWORK OF

EXPERTS

Figure 1. The working community of experts

6

Figure 2.A map of thecountriesinvolved inuTeacher

The national information sourcesNineteen people who play a key role inmajor teacher education institutions wereidentified as primary information sourcesin each country (see Appendix).These contacts were asked to appoint a“National Investigator” responsible forproviding accurate and completeinformation to be used in the context of acomparative analysis at European level.

The NationalInvestigatorsNineteen National Investigatorswere appointed to describe the explicitor implicit competence profilepertaining to ICT in teachers’ practicethat is assumed as a referencefor in-service and pre-serviceprograms/initiatives/courses in theircountry (see Appendix).The contributions produced by theNational Investigators served as abasis for an analysis of teachers’competencies in ICT assumed in the

different European countries.Specifically, the investigators’ taskswere to:• produce a short national report in

line with guidelines provided by thepartnership;

• participate in a week-long seminar inVenice (4th-9th October 2004), wherea draft of the Common EuropeanFramework would be produced;

• participate in the Frameworkproduction.

7

To gain a clear picture of teachers’profile related to ICT for educationacross Europe, it was necessary toadopt a uniform structure for thenational reports so as to guaranteeconsistency and ensure that theinformation provided was suitable forcomparative purposes.This requirement was considered inpreparing the guidelines for drafting thenational reports: reporting procedureswere harmonized by making use of atemplate to be filled in and an exampleof filled template. Each of the headingswas explained and recommendationson how to compile the template wereprovided.Drawing on guidelines produced by theuTeacher partnership, each NationalInvestigator wrote a report on thesituation in his/her country concerningteachers’ ICT profile underlying InitialTraining and Continuing ProfessionalDevelopment. The national reportsfocus on a number of major issues, asfollows.

Initial and in-service teachertraining: objectives, subject areasand bodies setting out the objectivesand the areas of such trainingprocesses related to all aspects ofteachers’ practice involving ICT:these include the pedagogical uses ofICT in the classroom, the use of ICT forimproving school organisation, inprofessional development, forimproving personal productivity, forcooperation and networking, etc.

Curricular framework of ICT foreducation in teacher training (bothin initial and in-service training)describing the explicit or implicitcurricular framework of teacher traininginitiatives, mainly addressing the usesof ICT in the context of:- the classroom, to improve students’

learning;- the teachers’ community, to improve

their cooperation;- school organisation, to improve

school effectiveness;- teachers’ professional development,

to extend learning opportunities.

How teacher training is carried out(both in initial and in-servicetraining) explaining the ways in whichinitial and in-service training areaccomplished (using ICT tools or not,working online or not, workingcollaboratively or not, etc).

Teachers actual competencies andtasks in using ICT reporting studies orstatistical surveys concerning actualteacher uses of ICT in education.

Problems that teachers face in usingICT in their practice reporting studiesor statistical surveys concerningproblems faced by teachers in usingICT in education (e.g. lack of access tocomputers and a data projector, lack ofeducational materials at school, lack ofknowledge in using computers, etc.).

Content areas involved in teachers’competence profile in ICT foreducation listing broad topics related toteachers’ competence in ICT foreducation.These topics have been drawnfrom major national teacher traininginitiatives and programs, from initialtraining courses, or from NIs’ experienceas experts involved in the field.

During the project, the NIs workedtogether at a distance using an opensource platform (MOODLE) configuredand administered jointly by theGlasgow and Venice partners.http://macdui.educ.gla.ac.uk/uteacher/

Figure 3. The NIs cooperation area in MOODLE.

The National reports

8

The seminar was intended to bringtogether national investigators in orderto begin the process of constructing a

European Framework for Teachers’Professional Profile in ICT inEducation. The meeting was

attended by National Investigators fromItaly, Scotland, France, Denmark,

Finland, Sweden, The Netherlands,Germany, Belgium, Austria, Spain,

Portugal, Ireland and Iceland.

Investigators from Norway, Hungary,the Czech Republic, Greece and

England, also involved in this project,were unable to attend.

Staff were also present from the threeproject partners, and the meeting was

observed by the external evaluator.

THEWEEK-LONG

SEMINARSan Servolo Island, Venice

Figure 5. The venue of the week-long seminar

Figure 4. Island of San Servolo.

9

The activitiesand productsThe meeting opened with anintroduction to the uTeacher projectand to the week’s activities by theproject leader, Vittorio Midoro.Activities for the next four days weredivided into three phases:

PHASE 1.Outline of the FrameworkParticipants were first asked to identifythe aims or purposes of a framework.This was not an easy task, but itsopen-ended character enabledparticipants to engage with it from theirown perspectives, and this activityrepresented a valuable calibration ofthe level of discourse at the seminar.Discussions were intense and wide-ranging, and in the end produced notonly an agreed list of aims, but also anagreed list of characteristics of theFramework.

Participants were offered a number offramework models to consider,including national models fromScotland and The Netherlands, and theCommon European Framework forLanguages. They then split into twoworking groups and, starting from theaims and characteristics alreadygenerated, set about defining astructure for the Framework.In the subsequent plenary session, thegroups presented two proposals forapproaching the draft structure; astrong impression emerged fromdiscussion that defining a frameworkstructure was a highly complex taskwhich also needed to take account ofthe type of references that would beused to populate that Framework.Consequently, participants decided toform two working groups dedicated toeither aspect.After much hard work, a draft modeland list of reference points were drawnup and proposed (“The CommonEuropean Framework for Teachers’Professional Profile in ICT forEducation”).

Figure 6. Developing the Framework

Characteristics of the Common European Framework

Aims• To inspire change• To provide a set of references for teachers and other

educational actors• To enable comparison and sharing of programmes and

practices• To build upon existing expertise (including other frameworks)• To facilitate mobility of teachers across Europe

Characteristics• Open (protect diversity)• An instrument for all educational actors• Built on teachers’ professional values• Consonant with other generic frameworks• Contains contextualised case studies and inspirational

practices• Focused on higher order capabilities rather than specific skills• Contains substantive elements• For all teachers

PHASE 2.Preparation of Position Papersand trial population of Framework Participants were divided into threegroups. Members of the groupspresented overviews of the pre-serviceand in-service provision with respect ofICT for teachers in their country, andreactions were requested regardingsimilarities, differences, and emergentissues.This again stimulated much discussion.The groups then began preparingposition papers which examined thekey issues, taking into account thenature, structure and implementation ofthe Framework proposed in Phase 1.In plenary session, participants werethen asked to try populating thepreviously negotiated model of theFramework, in order to gain clearerunderstanding of how this processmight best be carried out and to testthe validity of the model.Three working groups were formed forthis purpose, each dedicated to adifferent area of the Framework.The results were presented anddiscussed in plenary session.

PHASE 3.Next steps, feasibility and reporting Plenary discussion examined thestructure and organisation of thepublications which would emerge fromthe event and the timescale required toachieve the outputs. Participants werethen invited to express their opinions onthe prospects for Frameworkimplementation in their countries andon suitable strategies for enhancing itsadoption: their written responses werethen collated and analysed, and athematic overview presented.Finally, feedback on the success of theseminar was requested fromparticipants. It was recognised thatproducing a draft European Frameworkin this area is an extremely demandingtask, one that necessarily entails a longterm process calling for sustainedcommitment. It was generally felt thatmuch had been achieved and that thebasis for future development had beenconstructed: the National Investigators’preparatory work and the opportunityfor comparing national contexts andachievements during the seminar werecentral to this effort. The view was alsoexpressed that a more tangibleoutcome could have been achieved hadthe partners adopted a more guidedapproach to the activities and had therebeen more intensive focus onpopulating the Framework itself.Nevertheless, many of the participantswere keen to participate in furtherdevelopment of the Framework carriedout online. Finally, all appreciated theexcellent organisation of the seminarand the pleasant surroundings, whichhelped to create a friendly andconstructive working environment.

10

Figure 7. A group at work

11

An overview of current teacher profiles inICT for Education underlying InitialTeacher Education (ITE) and teachers’Continuing Professional Development(CPD) was the first output of the projectand resulted in the book EuropeanTeachers Towards a Knowledge Society,written by the uTeacher partnership inclose collaboration with the nineteenNational Investigators.Focusing on the European situationregarding the teacher competencies inICT for Education that emerge fromteacher training processes, the bookprovides a view of the differencesbetween national practices.Specifically, the book aims to:• provide insight into teacher

competencies in ICT for Educationacross Europe. This represents astarting point for defining a sharedframework for teachers’ professionaldevelopment, starting from the presentsituation;

• detect the main trends;• learn from one another;• share interesting ideas and

approaches;• avoid “reinventing the wheel”.

The book is structured into threesections. The first presents an overviewof ITE and CPD pertaining to ICT inEducation across Europe. The secondpart sketches teachers’ profile related toICT for Education. The third sectionsummarizes views of NIs groupsregarding the European situation.

AN OVERVIEWOF EUROPEAN

TEACHERS’PROFILES IN ICTFOR EDUCATION

Midoro V. (ed.) (2005), European TeachersTowards a Knowledge Society,Ed. Menabò, Ortona

12

The uTeacher event in Palermo washeld within the context of the ICMTLconference (International Conferenceon Methods and Technologies forLearning). The aim was two-fold:a) to start disseminating project ideas

and results;b) to co-ordinate and commence the

process of writing the CommonEuropean Framework.

The keynotesThe keynote speech opening theconference was given by Ms. MarujaGutiérrez Díaz, Head of MultimediaUnit in the European Commission's DGEducation and Culture.This was followed by a second keynotefrom Vittorio Midoro, project managerof uTeacher, who presented theproject in plenary session.

The uTeacher panel sessionA panel session was held involving theuTeacher partners and some NationalInvestigators. The speakers describedhow the Common EuropeanFramework might be useful in their owncountries and how it would bring addedEuropean value.

Working session on the uTeacherFrameworkThis meeting was attended by theauthors' board, bringing togethernational investigators from Denmark,Italy, Finland, Germany, Hungary,Ireland, Scotland, Sweden and TheNetherlands.The aims of the working session were to:• harmonise and streamline Framework

writing procedures;• examine and discuss the Framework

contents produced so far.Figure 9. The venue

THE UTEACHER EVENT INPALERMO

Figure 8. The uTeacher roundtable session

13

The Common European Framework (CEF) forTeacher’s Professional Profile in ICT forEducation contributes towards raising thequality of educational and training systems inEurope by offering a shared basis for thedefinition of content domains, syllabuses andcurricula in the field of ICT for education, bothin Initial Teacher Education (ITE) andteachers’ Continuing ProfessionalDevelopment (CPD).

This book centres on an element that isabsolutely crucial to the quality of Europeaneducational and training systems: teachers.The work presented in this book can beplaced in the mainstream of the strategydescribed in the Education & Training 2010programme, published by the EuropeanCommission, Directorate for Education andCulture. More precisely, it aims to describethe teacher’s professional profile in ICT foreducation within a changing educationsystem, one which faces issues andchallenges posed by the knowledge society.

The CEF is intended to function at theEuropean level, where it may serve toharmonise national initiatives, and to offerparameters within which differences betweennational and regional policies, emphases andcultures may be expressed. The CEF allowsthe development of mutual trust betweenstakeholders in national ITE and CPDsystems, and encourages cooperationbetween these systems. It addresseseducation and in-service training providers,teachers, trainers and learners, within andbeyond national frontiers.

The CEF is also a tool for teachers who wantto take personal initiative in developing theirprofessionalism in ICT for education by

creating and following individual learningpathways, that is, the legitimate business andambition of the ICT pioneer teacher. It helpsthese teachers understand the skills andknowledge they possess and/or lack, and tofind suitable means to develop aspects oftheir professionalism in ICT for education.

The teacher’s professional profile aims tocapture the identity of a teacher capable offunctioning successfully in the changing worldof school education: the CEF focuses on aspecific area of that profile, namely, thoseaspects that are in some way related to ICTand its adoption for education within theknowledge society.

The CEF was originally conceived in the formof a matrix. The columns of the matrixrepresented the areas of social action of theteacher, that is the dimensions of action inwhich the teacher participates, and defineshim/herself and the vision of educationalpraxis. The rows of the matrix represented thevarious contexts of the vision and action ofthe innovative teacher, the spheres of activitywithin which the teacher orients him/herselfand constructs relationships with the variousactors within the educational field.

A COMMONEUROPEAN

FRAMEWORKFOR TEACHERS’PROFESSIONALPROFILE IN ICT

FOR EDUCATION

A Common EuropeanFramework for Teachers’

Professional Profile inICT for Education

edited by Vittorio Midoro

Midoro V. (ed.) (2005), A Common EuropeanFramework for Teachers’ Professional Profile in ICTfor Education, Ed. Menabò, Ortona

14

Figure 10. Matrix model of the Common European Framework and section abstracts.

INTERACTIONWITH

SECTORS

PEDAGOGY

CURRICULUM/SUBJECTMATTER

ORGANISATION

TECHNOLOGY

PROFESSIONALDEVELOPMENT

ETHICS

POLICY

INNOVATION

SELFContinuous personal

construction ofprofessional identity

Becoming aware of theconstant impact of ICT onlearning, school and society,and constructing a personalvision/philosophy of learningand pedagogy suitable for aknowledge society.

Given the rapid growth inknowledge, reflecting onthe key areas and topics toaddress within the subjectarea; understanding theimpact of ICT on thedidactics of the discipline.

Constructing a personalvision of schoolorganisation that respondsto the demands andchallenges of theknowledge society.

Constantly pursuingtechnical and cognitiveproficiency.

Becoming aware of theincreasing need forcontinuous professionaldevelopment and themeans to achieve it.

Making one’s primeresponsibility the educationand welfare of all the studentsin one’s care and acceptingICT as important for creatinga knowledge society.

Critically reflecting on ICTpolicies and strategiespertaining to the school-ICT-knowledge societyrelationship andconstructing one’s personalvision.

Critically engage with theneed for ICT-led innovationand the transformativepower of positive change.

PUPILSFacilitation of students’

learning and development

Developing and managinglearning environmentsconsonant both with one’spersonal vision oflearning/pedagogy and withthe demands and challengesof the knowledge society.

Designing and managinglearning environmentswhich take into account theopportunities and limits ofICT in the didactics of agiven subject area.

Within the limits of contextconstrains, implementingan organisation of theschool/classroom thatresponds to the demandsand challenges of theknowledge society.

Exploiting ICT to facilitate students’ learning.

Planning and taking actionsto develop one’sprofessionalism regardingthe education and welfareof students.

Gearing one’s practice tothe principle that theeducation and welfare of allthe students in one’s care isone’s prime responsibility.

Given context constrains andpolicy/strategyrequirements, implementingactions that respond to thedemands and challenges ofthe ICT policies of schooland environment.

Shaping and re-shapingICT-led change in terms ofthe learning & teaching weprovide.

COLLEAGUESCooperation at school level

and within teacher’community of practice

Sharing practice, repertoire,and learning/pedagogyvisions. Collaborating ininterdisciplinaryeducational activities.

Sharing practice, repertoire,and “know how” in uses ofICT in the subject area,both with colleagues andinside the teachingcommunity.

Sharing practice, repertoire,and organisational visionsand cooperating withcolleagues on classroomand school organisation.

Exploiting ICT capabilitiesto interact with colleaguesand teachers’ communitiesof practice.

Learning to exploit ICT tocooperate with colleaguesand the teachingcommunity.

Playing a positive and activerole in cooperating withcolleagues and interactinginside teachers’ communitiesof practice using ICT toolsand resources in anappropriate way.

Critically reflecting withcolleagues on policies andstrategies pertaining to theimpact of ICT on the schoolsystem and cooperating toimplement and evaluatethem.

Working with colleagues tointroduce and developinnovative uses of ICT inschools and teachers’ widerpractice communities.

ENVIRONMENTInteraction with the external

environment

Considering and using thelocal and globalenvironment as a resourceand as an arena for schooland learning.

Using local and globalresources to foster learningin a given subject area.

Contributing to build aschool organisation linkedto the local and globalenvironment.

Exploiting ICT to createlearning networks, bringingadded value to school andsociety (locally and globally).

Identifying and exploitingthe opportunities offered bythe local and globalenvironment to developone’s professionalism.

Recognising responsibilityto prepare citizens able tolive in harmony with thesocial and physicalenvironment

Given the limits of one’saction, contributing to thedevelopment of policies andstrategies related to theconstruction of a schoolstrictly linked to theenvironment.

Contributing to building aculture of informed educationchange beyond the school; atregional, national and supra-national level.

15

The underlying assumption is that inhis/her practice, the teacher interactswith different classes of individuals(pupils, colleagues and entities in theexternal environment – be theyindividuals or bodies) as well asengaging in self-reflective activity.This interaction takes place withindifferent, but interdependent, domains:pedagogy, curriculum/subject matter,organisation, technology, professionaldevelopment, ethics, policies andinnovation.Each of the cells in the resulting grid(Figure 10) contains a brief and(necessarily) highly abstract descriptionof teacher practice related to thespecific context of relationships and thegiven domain of educational action.

The form of the iris (Figure 11)emphasises the layers of socialorientation and action extendingoutwards from the individual and alsoextending inwards from the broadestenvironment. This representationcaptures the never-ending tensionbetween social forces influencing theindividual and the creative contributionof the individual to the ongoing re-creation of the social order.One of the arenas in which this tensionis played out is the educational system.In this perspective, the innovatingteacher operates within culturalparameters but can make atransformative input to the structureand functioning of the social order.

Figure 11.Iris model

of theCommon

EuropeanFramework

16

The FrameworkHypermediaAlong with the book, the CommonEuropean Framework for Teachers’Professional Profile in ICT forEducation is available as ahypermedia, a dynamic object throughwhich the CEF can be easily andconstantly updated. Besides providingeasy online access to the Frameworkcontents, the Hypermedia includes aseries of case studies and referencesthat may be general in nature or morestrictly related to regional/nationalcontexts.

For each cell of the CEF, the briefabstract becomes a gateway toanalytical content addressing a numberof different areas:• the context of the actions related to

the practice described in the abstract• the actions related to this practice• the knowledge areas related to the

activities involved• references• issues and case studies. Figure 12. The CEF Hypermedia homepage

Figure 13. The CEF Hypermedia: examples ofFramework section organization

http://www.univirtual.it/uteacher/

17

The futureTo keep pace with the development ofthe knowledge society, the CEF needsto be maintained and extended overtime. Moreover, the systematiccertification of learning processes forITE and CPD based on the CEF willalso be required, an activity to beconducted in association with thequality certification working groupsacting in the context of the Bolognaprocess. This will help to promoteEuropean cooperation in qualityassurance, with a view to developingcomparable criteria and methodologies,as well as necessary Europeandimensions in higher education,particularly with regards to curriculardevelopment, inter-institutionalco-operation, mobility schemes andintegrated programmes of study,training and research related to ICT foreducation in ITE and CPD.

To accomplish these tasks, a proposalhas been submitted to the EuropeanCommission to create the conditions

for establishing an institution whichshould perform CEF maintenance anddevelopment, as well as certification ofthe learning processes based on it.The network of experts created duringuTeacher will be involved, as well as allthe organisations which havemanifested an interest in the CEF andwhich can potentially support theestablishment of this initiative.

Another proposal has been submittedto the European Commission for thecreation of a European area of TeacherEducation in ICT for Education throughthe design and implementation of avirtual campus.This virtual campus will involve anetwork of European Universities(Higher Education Institutions) in chargeof Initial Teacher Education (ITE) andContinuing Professional Development(CPD) and will promote mobility both forstudent-teachers and teachers throughthe definition of a system of creditsbased on the ECTS system.

18

uTeacher activities and outputs (Synoptic Table)Re

ports

Inte

rnat

iona

lDi

ssem

inat

ion

uTea

cher

eve

ntEu

rope

anW

eek-

long

sem

inar

Anal

ysis

of t

each

ers’

pro

fess

iona

l pro

files

Eval

uatio

nin

Pal

erm

oFr

amew

ork

in V

enic

ere

late

d to

ICT

for e

duca

tion

in E

U Co

untri

es(0

9-11

.03.

2005

)(0

1.11

.200

4-30

.06.

2005

)(0

4-09

.10.

2004

)(0

2.01

.200

4-31

.12.

2004

)List of national information/project sources

Guidelines and template for the national reports

List of national investigators (NIs)

Organizing the work of NIsContacting NIs, delivering guidelines and templates for the national reports,assisting NIs during compilation, gathering reports, providing feedback

National reports

“Teachers competencies in ICT for education within a knowledge society”Preparatory document for the week-long seminar

Activity booklet for the week-long seminar

“European Teachers Towards the Knowledge Society”Book providing an overview of the current teacher profile in ICT for education underlying initialteacher training and continuing professional development initiatives across Europe

Venice International Seminar, October 4th – 9th 2004Target: 14 National Investigators

Outline of the Common European FrameworkDefinition of the structure of a Common European Frameworkpertaining to expertise in ICT for education

“A Common European Framework for Teachers’ Professional Profile in ICT for Education”Book and Hypermedia on the Common European Framework

Feasibility study defining the conditions for developing a European organisationto maintain the Framework

uTeacher event in Palermo, March 9th and 11th 2005Plenary and roundtable session on uTeacher at the International Conference on Methods andTechnologies for Learning in Palermo (Italy). Target: Framework authors’ board

Working session on the Common European Framework in Palermo, March 8th – 11th 2005A meeting attended by the Framework authors' board to harmonise and improve the writingprocedures of the Framework

uTeacher project website (since January 2004) http://ulearn.itd.ge.cnr.it/uteacher/

Flier (February 2004)

First Booklet (December 2004)

Final Booklet (June 2005)

Special issue of TD journal, published by ITD-CNR

First Evaluation Report (December 2004)

Second Evaluation Report (June 2005)

Interim Report (December 2004)

Final Report (July 2005)

19

uTeacher partnership

AUSTRIAHelmut StemmerAustrian Federal Ministry ofEducation, Science andCulture

BELGIUMHerman CoeneKarel de Grote-Hogeschool,Department of Education

CZECH REPUBLICZdena LustigovaCharles University Prague

DENMARKPeter BollerslevIFIP Denmark

ENGLANDDebra MyhillUniversity of Exeter

FINLANDJouni KangasniemiMinistry of Education

FRANCEOdile de ChalendarMinistère de la Jeunesse, del’Éducation Nationale et de laRecherche

GERMANYDietlind FischerComenius-Institut

GREECELouisa Anastopoulos Ministry of NationalEducation & Religious Affairs

HUNGARYKovács EmeseTempus Public Foundation

ICELANDArnor GudmundssonMinistry of Education,Science and Culture

IRELANDMary Shine ThompsonSt Patrick’s College

ITALYVittorio MidoroIstituto Tecnologie Didattiche,CNR

NORWAYMorten SobyNorwegian Network for IT -Research and Competencein Education, University ofOslo

PORTUGALIda BrandaoMinistéio da Educacao,Departamento de AvaliacaoProspectiva e Planeamento

SCOTLANDAllan MartinUniversity of Glasgow

SPAINJuana M. SanchoUniversitat de Barcelona

SWEDENCarl HOLMBERGSwedish Agency for FlexibleLearning

THE NETHERLANDSLejo SwachtenHogeschool van Utrecht-Faculty of education

Information sources

APPENDIX

Istituto Tecnologie Didattiche is the onlyinstitute of Italy’s National ResearchCouncil (CNR) exclusively devoted toresearch in the field of educational

technology. It is based in Genoa and has a branch in Palermo.The Genoa headquarters derives from the former Istituto TecnologieDidattiche (founded in 1970) and the Palermo branch originated fromthe Istituto Tecnologie Didattiche e Formative (founded in 1993).The institute features both basic and applied research, technologicaldevelopment and transfer, in the following areas:– Study of teaching/learning processes and of systems devoted to

their realisation.– Development of innovative solutions for educational and training

problems based on a systematic approach to design, managementand evaluation of learning environments.

– Study of ICT as a factor determining new cognitive needs and asresources for the learning/teaching activity.

Ca' Foscari - Università di Venezia wasfounded in 1868 as a High School ofBusiness, first in Italy. Its learning offer istoday articulated in 32 three year degreesand 37 two year degrees in addition to post-degree offer that concerns 9 masters, 18Phds and a postgraduate school forsecondary school teachers (SSIS).The SSIS is a post-graduate school forsecondary teachers, instituted by the Ministryfor University, Research and Education in1998, according to the European plan for theeducational harmonization. The school is at aregional level and is supported by aconsortium of the Universities of the RegionVeneto located in Venice, Padova andVerona. Specific objective of the SSIS is theprofessional training of secondary teachers.The School lasts two years and has a finalexamination with qualifying value.

The University of Glasgow is one of thelongest established Universities in the UK,with a very high research rating awardedby the UK Government organisationcharged with assessing research effort inHigher Education.

Its Education Faculty has been formed from thejoining of the University Education Department, theDepartment of Adult and Continuing Education, theTeaching and Learning Service, and St. Andrew'sCollege of Education which itself has given over 100years service to the education sector.The University confers Education degrees,Doctorates, diplomas and teaching certificates,enabling candidates to become fully qualifiedteachers in the Primary, Secondary and Tertiarysectors, promoting the continual professionaldevelopment of practising teachers, and enhancingthe University's education research activities.

20

National Investigators

AUSTRIA • Hubert Egger / PIB – bmbwkHubert Egger works at the Pedagogical Institute in Feldkirch/Vorarlberg/Austriateaching mathematics, physics and ICT in upper secondary school; elearning-coordinator and project-manager for the ‘ILIAS open source learning managementsystem’ in Vorarlberg/Austria.

BELGIUM • Armand Greefs / Karel de Grote HogeschoolSince 2002 Armand Greefs has been teaching ICT at the Karel de Grote Hogeschoolin Antwerp, Belgium, in initial teacher training for primary and secondary schoolteachers.Previously he taught ICT-related courses in secondary school for 18 years.

CZECH REPUBLIC • Zdena Lustigova / Charles University PragueZdena Lustigova’s educational and research work has concentrated on computeraided science education, especially on computer based laboratory work, ontelecommunications technologies in education and computer based distanceeducation. She focuses mainly on in-service teacher training, international onlineeducation and communication projects, and remote laboratories.

DENMARK • Ulla Gjørling / UNI-C Ulla Gjørling is a chief consultant in UNI•C, The Danish IT Centre for Education andResearch. She is responsible for a series of Pedagogical ICT Licences – a concept ofteachers’ professional development in the pedagogical application of ICT in teachingand learning. She is also involved in a number of European collaboration activities,among which the international uptake of the Pedagogical ICT Licences in the eContentproject EPICT, see www.epict.org.

ENGLAND • Kate Watson / School of Education and Lifelong Learning, University of ExeterKate Watson has extensive experience in the field of ICT and e-learning with aspecific focus on the teaching of ICT and its use in the classroom. This is an activeresearch area within the school, with participation in the teaching of the course fromthroughout ICT team.

FINLAND • Jouni Kangasniemi / Senior Adviser, Ministry of EducationJouni Kangasniemi is currently working for the Finnish Ministry of Education. He is thechairman of a working group preparing the national guidelines for in-service training ofteachers. He has also been involved in the development of the Finnish Programme forEducation, Training and Research in the Information Society. Currently he is one of thesecretaries for the executive group for the programme.

FRANCE • Georges-Louis Baron / Laboratoire EDA, Université René DescartesGeorges-Louis Baron is professor of education at the French Institute for PedagogicalResearch (INRP), where he has been in charge of a research department. He hasbeen working on ICT in education for many years, with a special interest in the studyof social contexts.

21

GERMANY • Edwin Stiller / State Institute for schools, RSD (Regierungsschuldirektor)Responsible for the section “Initial teacher training (First and second phase)” in the“State Institute for School”, Soest, NorthRhine-Westphalia.Editor and author of school books and teaching publications in the social andeducational sciences.

GREECE • Giorgos Papadopoulos / Hellenic Pedagogical InstituteGeorgios K. Papadopoulos is Consultant of Education and Head of ICT unit, in HellenicPedagogical Institute. He received the Diploma in Mathematics from University ofThessaloniki, the MSc in Computer Science from University of Athens and the Ph.D. inSystems Reliability from University of Athens.

GREECE • Michail Karamanis / Information Society SAMichalis Karamanis is an Instructional Designer and Project Manager in InformationSociety SA, a government organisation responsible for the design and implementationof ICT projects under EU funding for the Greek public sector. He holds a BSc in Physicsand an MSc in Learning Systems Design.

HUNGARY • Andrea Kárpáti / Eötvös UniversityAndrea Kárpáti is an educational researcher and UNESCO Chair for ICT in Educationat Eötvös Loránd University, Faculty of Sciences. She is Chief Editor for a series oftextbooks entitled “Teaching with ICT” and has been the Hungarian senior investigatorof several EU and OECD projects on ICT competencies and educational programmesaimed at creating equity through ICT.

ICELAND • Kristín Helga Gudmundsdóttir/ Department of Continuing Education, Iceland University of Education

Kristín Helga Gudmundsdóttir is Project Manager in Continuing Education at theDepartment of Continuing Education of Iceland University of Education. At present sheis manager of NERA (Nordic Educational Research Association).

IRELAND • Conor Galvin / University College DublinConor Galvin is an academic researcher based at University College Dublin, Ireland. Hehas extensive experience in education policy; education ICT; school-based curriculumaction; continuity & change in education; and teachers' knowledge. His researchinterests include understanding how Information and Communication Technologies(ICT) can support research activity and in relation to teachers' / student teachers'professional preparation and development.

ITALY • Vittorio Midoro / Istituto Tecnologie Didattiche, CNRProject manager of uTeacher, Midoro is senior research fellow at Istituto TecnologieDidattiche (National Research Council, Italy). His present research activity pertains toon line education, co-operative learning and e-learning for lifelong elarning.

22

NORWAY • Morten Soby/ Norwegian Network for IT - Research and Competence in Education, University of OsloMorten Søby is Director for the Norwegian Network for IT-Research and Competence inEducation (1997-). He has been a Consultant for NKS Distance Education (87-91),Research Fellow at the Institute for Educational Research, University of Oslo (91-96) andDirector of 6th International Conference on Cyberspace (97). Member of the NordicCouncil of Ministers IT-policy group (99-00).

PORTUGAL • Cristina Novo / Escola Superior de Educação de SantarémCristina Novo is a teacher at the Escola Superior de Educação de Santarém. She’sinvolved in a number of projects on teacher training in ICT for education. Specialized inEducation for Children with Special Needs, and continued with a post-graduation inOrganization and Evaluation - Distance Education, presently she is in her way toterminate her mastering studies in Education and Multimedia. Her professional areasof interest are: opened and distant learning, software evaluation, ICT and specialneeds and on-line educational contents, specially in Portuguese.

SCOTLAND • John Dixon / University of GlasgowJohn Dixon works in the Department of Educational Studies at the University of Glasgow.His main tasks revolve around preparing undergraduate and post-graduate students forentry into the teaching profession, and in this context he has been involved in research andteaching in the uses of ICT in education for over 20 years.

SPAIN • Juana M. Sancho / Universitat de BarcelonaProfessor of Educational Technology at University of Barcelona. Co-ordinator of theQuality Research Group FINT (Formación, Innovación y Nuevas Tecnologías).Co-director of the Centre for Studies of Change in Culture and Education (ParcCientífic de Barcelona). Co-ordinator of the European project “School +: More than aplatform to build the school of tomorrow”.

SWEDEN • Carl Holmberg / Swedish Agency for Flexible LearningCarl Holmberg has many years of experience of research and development work indistance education and flexible learning. Currently he is Senior Adviser in the SwedishAgency for Flexible Learning (CFL). CFL is a change agent in education systems inSweden. He is also Chair of European Experts’ Network for Education andTechnology (EENet) and a Member of the Executive Committee of the EuropeanDistance and E-Learning Network (EDEN).

THE NETHERLANDS • Pieter Hogenbirk / Inspectorate of EducationPieter Hogenbirk has been project manager of more than 100 projects on ict ineducation. In 1997 he became process manager for integrating ICT in primary,secondary and tertiary education on behalf of the Dutch government. From 2000 on heis working as a educational inspector, with special duties in the field of ICT ineducation. He is vice-chair of the IFIP-Working Group on secondary education andinvolved in a number of Dutch, European and Unesco ict-projects.

This document reflects the work done in uTeacherby all the partners of the project listed in alphabetical order:

Monica Banzato, ItalyStefania Bocconi, ItalyIrene Brown, ScotlandBob Byiers, ScotlandDomenico Corcione, ItalyJohn Dixon, ScotlandJeffrey Earp, ItalyAlida Favaretto, ItalyUmberto Margiotta, ItalyAllan Martin, ScotlandVittorio Midoro, Italy - uTeacher project managerFrancesca Pozzi, ItalyManuela Repetto, ItalyCaterina Roseo, Italy

Grafic designMoby DickOrtona, Italy

Printed byLitografia BotoliniRocca San Giovanni, Italy

June 2005

Istituto per le Tecnologie Didattiche,CNR, Italy - Prime contractor

SSIS VenetoUniversity of Venice, Italy

The University of Glasgow,Scotland

This project has been carried out with the support ofthe European Community. The content of this projectdoes not necessarily reflect the position of theEuropean Community, nor does it involve anyresponsibility on the part of the European Community.

a European project on

teachers’ professional profilein ICT for education