Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and

Crossing Boundaries

for Learning

– through Technology

and Human Eorts

Crossing Boundaries

for Learning

– through Technology

and Human Eorts

Hannele Niemi, Jari Multisilta

& Erika Löfström (Eds.)

CICERO Learning Network, University of Helsinki

CICERO Learning

PO Box 9

(Siltavuorenpenger 5 A)

00014 University of Helsinki

FINLAND

Email: cicero@cicero.

Facebook: facebook.com/cicerolearning

Phone: +358 9 191 20642

Fax: +358 9 191 20616

Layout:

PS-kustannus/Marja Junnila ja Janne Hiltunen

Press:

Hansaprint 2014

ISBN 978-952-10-9878-9 (nid.)

ISBN 978-952-10-9879-6 (PDF)

Preface

TEPE is an academic network that promotes research- and evidence-based

teacher education. e annual conference brings together educational re

searchers, policy makers, teachers and practitioners from Europe and beyond.

is book is based on selected papers presented in the annual conference

of the Teacher Education Policy in Europe (TEPE) network in 2014 at the

University of Helsinki. e title of the conference was Learning Spaces with

Technology for 21st Century Skills in Teaching and Teacher Education.

TEPE conferences also provide a space for more general themes of teaching

and teacher education, in addition to the specic topic of the annual con

ference. In addition to technology-related themes, in this edition, there are

also articles that describe human eorts to provide learning spaces for all.

All papers are blindly peer-reviewed. e editors wish to thank all the

reviewers for their important work. ey have given extremely valuable com

ments and advice to the authors. e TEPE Board and local conference organ-

izers would also like thank CICERO Learning Coordination for managing

the review process. We wish to thank the University of Helsinki for providing

support and space for the conference and to thank the Federation of Finn

ish Learned Societies for its nancial support. We are also deeply thankful to

Tekes, the national agency for technology and innovations in Finland, which

has launched the Learning Solutions Programme and accepted the Finnable

2020 project as part of it. e TEPE conference was integrated into the project

work of Finnable 2020 and also created an important platform for discussions

regarding how to use technology as a tool for learning.

In Helsinki, March 20, 2014

Hannele Niemi

PH.D., Professor of

Education, University

of Helsinki

Jari Multisilta, PH.D.,

Professor, Dr. Tech.,

Director, Cicero Learn

ing,University of Hel-

sinki

Erika Löfström

PH.D., Senior

Researcher

University of Helsinki

Table of Contents

Prologue: Crossing Boundaries for Learning ................................................................9

Hannele Niemi, Jari Multisilta and Erika Löfström

Part I: Crossing Boundaries through Technology

1. Toward Global Sharing Pedagogy .......................................................................... 17

Hannele Niemi and Jari Multisilta

2. Crossing School-Family Boundaries through the Use of Technology ......... 37

Tiina Korhonen and Jari Lavonen

3. Crossing Classroom Boundaries through the Use of

Collaboration-Supporting ICT: A Case Study on School -

Kindergarten - Library - Senior Home Partnership ........................................... 67

Minna Kukkonen and Jari Lavonen

4. Crossing Classroom Boundaries in Science Teaching and

Learning through the Use of Smartphones ........................................................ 91

Kati Sormunen, Jari Lavonen and Kalle Juuti

Part II: New Tools for Teaching and Learning

5. Teachers’ Capacity to Change and the ICT Environment:

Insights from the ATEPIE Project .........................................................................113

 JelenaRadišićandJasminkaMarković

6. Prospective Teachers and New Technologies:

A Study among Student Teachers ....................................................................... 135

Anne Huhtala

7. E-Portfolio as a tool for Guiding Higher Education

Students’ Growth to Entrepreneurship .............................................................. 155

Tarja Römer-Paakkanen, Auli Pekkala and Päivi Rajaorko

8. Aordance as a Key Aspect in the Creation of New learning .......................191

Susanne Dau

Part III: Getting along with Dierent Learners

9. Conicting Ideas on Democracy and Values

Education in Swedish Teacher Education .......................................................... 223

Björn Åstrand

10. Demands and Challenges:

Experiences of Ethiopian Rural School Teachers.............................................253

Kati Keski-Mäenpää

Author biographies ......................................................................................................... 277

Prologue: Crossing Boundaries for Learning

Prologue: Crossing

Boundaries for Learning

Hannele Niemi, Jari Multisilta and Erika Löfström

e theme of the 2013 TEPE Conference was Learning Spaces with

Technology for 21st Century Skills in Teaching and Teacher education.

e motive behind the conference was that 21

century skills have become

an urgent priority of educational systems all over the world. Changing

environments, e.g., developing technological infrastructures, increasingly

networked communities, and constant access to digital resources, have

made 21

century skills more important than ever. ere are several deni-

tions (e.g. Ananiadou, & Claro, 2009; Binkley et al., 2012; Grin, Care,

& McGaw, 2012) of “21

century skills,” but all share common features.

Learners require active inquiry skills, knowledge must be constructed and

assessed, and learning environments are changing in a way that we cannot

even forecast. In most cases, knowledge is created in groups, and learners

learn from one another. Many prior boundaries between formal and non-

formal learning sites are in the process of breaking down. Learning spaces

are becoming more overlapping, seamless, joined, and blended. Learning

continues throughout life, and a school’s task is to provide learners with

the skills and competences with which they can continue their learning in

dierent phases of their lives. Learners also require competences in terms

of how to use learning environments that are nearly boundless and create

knowledge that will become endlessly growing and up-dated. We know

that innovations grow from collaboration and networking. e major

message of the various denitions of “21

century skills” is that learners

need new ways to think, learn and work. ey must self-regulate their

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

own learning. ey need collaborative skills and active knowledge creation

competences. To support these skills and competences, both students and

teachers are learners. Teacher education has a critical role in how these

skills can be achieved.

It is not only the need for 21

skills but also emerging technologies that

pose new challenges to schools and teachers. e younger generation is

using technology outside school in its free time, but in many schools, the

adoption of technologies is lagging. Technologies should be seen as tools

to improve and mediate learning and the learning process. Digital literacy

is one of the key competences needed for the future, and it is often listed

among the 21

century skills. However, technologies can also support

collaborative learning and knowledge creation, so technologies have a

role as a tool for use with other 21

century skills as well. e adoption

of new technologies for classroom use is not an easy task. is is why we

need case descriptions of the best practices and the results from scientic

research to help teachers develop their teaching methods and meet the

challenges they face. 

e Organizing Committee of the TEPE Network Conference 2013

invited papers that addressed the use of new technologies and the promo

tion of 21

century skills. e main themes of the call were as follows: New

technologies in teaching, learning, and teacher education; Teachers’ and

students’ 21

century skills; Promoting these skills in teacher education;

and 21st century skills in educational policy. e TEPE annual meeting

has always had also an option, in addition to the main conference theme,

to provide space for presentations about more general, urgent themes of

teaching and teacher education. As editors of this book, we realize how

important it is to widen the scope to include a discussion of the need to

provide learning spaces for all. Not all learning environments are techno

logical, but students must still learn skills that will help them to face the

future. Technology can be an important tool, but without other education

ally supportive structures and equal opportunities for a good education,

technology alone cannot solve problems or provide the necessary skills for

the future. With these reections, the editors titled the book as follows:

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Hu

man Eorts.

Prologue: Crossing Boundaries for Learning

In the introductory chapter, Hannele Niemi and Jari Multisilta intro-

duce a framework for Global Sharing Pedagogy (GSP). e model takes

as its point of departure the skills and competences required in working

life and, more generally, in life-long learning. Many of the subsequent

papers can be viewed in light of the mediating activities elemental to GSP,

namely digital literacy, collaboration, networking, and knowledge and

skills creation. ese are the key activities in learning engagement, and ICT

tools can be harnessed in many ways to support the development of these

competencies. e authors provide an example from digital storytelling.

e papers in the rst section explore how technology creates new

practices in schools. Technology has been used to facilitate personalized

learning and inclusion in science education, as well as in partnerships be

tween schools, homes, and the wider community. In their paper “Crossing

classroom boundaries in science teaching and learning through the use

of smartphones,” Kati Sormunen, Jari Lavonen,

and Kalle Juuti describe

how everyday technology might be incorporated into science teaching in

order to personalize the learning experience and engage pupils with science

content. e authors identify the potential as well as challenges, includ

ing the pupils’ need for teacher prompts to activate learning. e ndings

emphasise the importance of supporting the development of pupils’ self-

regulation skills in ICT-facilitated boundary-crossing learning activities.

Minna Kukkonen and Jari Lavonen describe a concrete example of

school-community collaboration facilitated through ICT tools in their

paper “Crossing classroom boundaries through the use of collaboration

supporting ICT: A case study on school - kindergarten - library - senior

home partnership”. e design-based research serves to show that the

ICT tools, along with a sound model of collaboration, provide vast op

portunities to involve pupils at school in activities closely intertwined with

their community, while supporting the development of important skills,

competences, and, perhaps most importantly, citizenship.

Similarly, schools and homes can also be perceived as forming partner

ships. Tiina Korhonen’s and Jari Lavonen’s paper “Crossing school-fam-

ily boundaries through the use of technology” provides ideas about how

schools might actively develop their relationships with parents. Again,

design=based research provides the model for exploring and developing

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

home-school collaboration through technology. e authors identify ar-

eas of communication and collaboration, on the one hand, and areas of

support for learning, on the other hand, in which technology serves to

mediate home-school involvement.

Part and parcel of teacher change agency is the teacher’s familiarity with

e-learning tools that can be harnessed to leverage change across teaching

and learning and across dierent levels, i.e., the individual, school, and

education system levels. In their paper “Teachers’ capacity to change and

the ICT environment: Insights from the ATEPIE Project”, Jelena Radisic

and Jasminka Marcovic explore teachers’ conceptions of change agency

in the Balkan region.

e papers in the second section explore how technology creates new

practices in higher education. e new practices are here viewed in terms

of the benets and challenges related to the use of ICT in schools, a tool

that promotes students’ self-direction and reection, and participation in

various learning spaces. Two of the papers focus on the context of teacher

education, which prepares teachers to work in increasingly complex so

cieties, but also on the increasingly versatile teaching and learning tools

at their disposal. Anne Huhtala’s paper “Prospective teachers and new

technologies: A study among student teachers” argues for the necessity of

preparing future teachers to condently utilize ICT tools in their teaching.

It analyses student teachers’ attitudes towards using ICT and identies the

benets and challenges of ICT as envisioned by these prospective teachers.

e paper “E-Portfolio as a tool for guiding higher education student

growth to entrepreneurship” by Tarja Römer-Paakkanen describes an eort

to develop a portfolio and reection tool for promoting entrepreneurship

among students. e paper provides valuable insight into the develop

ment process of an e-tool for others who are interested in developing tools

that foster students’ self-directed learning and promote reection, both of

which are important 21

century skills and competences.

In her paper “Aordance as a key aspect in the creation of new learn

ing” Susanne Dau explores the aordances of dierent learning spaces

in blended learning environments in an attempt to understand what the

driving forces behind students’ learning are in these dierent spaces. With

the increasing variety of learning spaces and platforms, there is still the

Prologue: Crossing Boundaries for Learning

need to recognize how face-to-face spaces may contribute to the overall

learning experience. By increasing our understanding of the aordances

of dierent contexts and spaces and the roles that students take in these

spaces, teacher educators can support the learning of prospective teachers.

ese student teachers will work with pupils who exibly shift spaces and

tools, and it will become more and more important for them to reect on

their learning experiences in order to understand the realities in which

their future pupils navigate and learn.

In the third section, “Getting along with Dierent Learners”, the au

thors return to fundamental questions of education that are now ever so

timely in our global community. e 21

century skills, such as infor-

mation literacy, critical thinking, collaboration, and problem-solving are

intertwined with the values and understandings of core competencies

that future generations must be equipped with, but how do teachers and

educators understand and approach democracy and values education?

rough his paper “Conicting ideas on democracy and values educa

tion in Swedish teacher education,” Björn Åstrand analyses this question

through the Swedish case and reminds us of the historically and culturally

rooted nature of education and education policy.

In the last paper, “Demands and challenges - Experiences of Ethiopian

rural school teachers”, Kati Keski-Mäenpää provides a glimpse of another

type of context, namely rural schools in Sub-Saharan Africa, where schools,

teachers, students, and their families struggle with a broad range of severe

challenges, not least of all poverty. is study reminds us that even though

ICT tools oer great promise for learning in a wide variety of contexts,

there are parts of the global community that lack the infrastructures and

resources necessary to take advantage of these opportunities. However,

the skills and competences necessary in these environments may not dier

that greatly from what is termed 21

century skills, and democracy and

values education is no less of an important question in these contexts. In

our minds, this study raises questions about boundary crossing between

developed and developing countries, as well as between school reality and

policy making.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

References

Ananiadou, K. & Claro, M. (2009). 21st century skills and competences for new mil-

lennium learners in OECD countries. OECD education working papers, No. 41.

OECDPublishing. http://www.oecdilibrary.org/docserver/download/5ks5f2x078kl.

pdf?expires=1391516958&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=1BF52B0FB52897

4886798A2CEB767DDB. Retrieved 8.11.2013

Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M. & Rumble,

M. 2012. Dening twenty‐rst century skills. In Patrick Grin, Barry McGaw &

Esther Care (Eds.) Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills. Dordrecht: Springer,

17–66.

Grin, P., Care, E. & McGaw, B. 2012. e changing role of education and schools.

In Patrick Grin, Barry McGaw & Esther Care (toim.) Assessment and teaching of

21st century skills. Dordrecht: Springer, 1–16.

Crossing Boundaries

through Technology

Part I

1 Toward Global Sharing Pedagogy

Toward Global Sharing Pedagogy

Hannele Niemi and Jari Multisilta

Abstract

Learning and learning environments have changed, and are still continu-

ously changing. Many changes are connected with information and com-

munication technologies. In this article, we analyze changes in learning

concepts and knowledge creation, and the types of skills that learners will

need in the future. New requirements are examined from a working life

perspective. On the basis of these changes, we introduce a new pedagogi

cal concept for teaching and learning in schools; global sharing pedagogy

(GSP). e aim is to engage students in learning through four mediators:

(1) Learner-driven knowledge and skills creation; (2) collaboration; (3)

networking; and (4) digital media competencies and literacies. As an ex

ample, we present the applications of GSP in digital storytelling. Finally,

we discuss the importance of how learners are prepared for the future

global world.

Keywords: Technology, Global, Learning, Pedagogy, School, ICT

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

Introduction

Finland was one of the leading global information societies in the 1990s,

but this leading edge status ended with the arrival of the new millennium.

Since 2006 (Brese & Carstensa, 2009), evidence has been growing to show

that applications of information and communication technology (ICT)

have decreased to moderate levels in Finnish schools, while student use of

new communication technology outside of schools has increased. Students

use computers and social media in their everyday lives, but schools do not

necessarily provide technological learning environments as eectively as

they could (Ubiquitous Information Society Advisory Board, 2010). ere

are also many indications that teachers do not have the skills to apply

technology in new learning environments, which today typically include

a strong social media component (Niemi, 2011). In Finnish society and

schools, the use of technology is now under a reform process. As one as

pect of these reform activities, a national program, “Learning Solutions”

(2011-2015), was established to seek new concepts and practices for using

technology as a tool in learning settings that are radically changing (Tekes,

2013). rough its calls for action, the program had accepted almost 20

projects by 2013, all of which had the same aim: To assess how dierent

partners, such as students, teachers, researchers, and public and private

sectors can more eectively develop the pedagogical use of ICT in Finnish

schools, and equip students with skills for the 21

century. One of these

projects is “Finnable 2020”, which aims to develop the idea of a boundless

classroom in a global world. e main purpose of the project is to nd new

principles and practices to show how schools can cross borders of formal

and informal learning settings, and to encourage dierent learners to work

together, locally and globally.

In this article, we aim to describe the type of theoretical basis that is

required for new practices when crossing boundaries of traditional class

rooms. e Finnable 2020 project has created the global sharing pedagogy

(GSP) model for its theoretical framework. First, we analyze the change

in the global world; it has been claimed that this change means that a

new pedagogical concept is required. We will then introduce the main

1 Toward Global Sharing Pedagogy

elements of GSP. Finally, we provide some examples of the way in which

the GSP model has been locally and globally implemented in 21st century

educational settings, using technological solutions.

Megatrends of Changing Learning

and Learning Environments

Boundless Life-Wide Learning

e concept of learning has gone through a multi-layered process of rede-

nition in recent years. It is regarded as an active individual process, whereby

learners construct their own knowledge base. Learning is also increasingly

viewed as a process that is based on sharing and participation with dier

ent partners in a community, and as a holistic constructing process that

is interconnected with learners’ emotional, social, and cultural premises

(Cole, 1991; Salomon, 1993; Cole & Cigagas, 2010; Niemi, 2009; Säljö,

2012; Hakkarainen et al., 2013). e concept of “life-long learning” is

more of a life-course process. We learn in dierent situations and areas of

life that are cross-boundary. Learning and knowledge are no longer the

monopolistic domains of schools, or even universities. In our modern so

cieties, there are many forums of learning, which may be called learning

spaces, and working life and work organizations are important learning

spaces (Nonaka & Konno, 1998; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995; Nonaka

& Toyama, 2003). Technology-enriched learning tools and spaces with

mobile technology, Web 2.0 applications, social media, and all existing

digital resources create a powerful arena for learning, both in formal and

informal education settings (Multisilta, 2012). Our learning is life-wide,

and consists of vertical life-course learning, as well as the horizontal di

mensions of learning. is means that there are continuous processes of

learning: vertically, throughout various ages, and horizontally, in cross-

boundary spaces of life (Niemi, 2003). Learning is not limited to certain

ages or institutions.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

Century Skills as the Aim of Educational Systems

e way to prepare a new generation for the future, its working life, and

life-wide learning has become as an urgent topic on the agenda of edu

cational systems (e.g., Binkley et al., 2012). e European Union (2006)

has dened the most important core competencies, and the Organisation

for Economic Co-operation and Development (Grin 2013; Grin, Mc

Gaw, & Care, 2013), as well as many global organizations, have identied

necessary 21

century skills. e most important message is that schools

must seek new forms of teaching and learning. Many discussions and

documents have proposed ways to face the future, and have delineated the

roles of schools and teachers in these changing contexts (e.g., Bellanca &

Brandt, 2010; Grin, McGaw, & Care, 2012). Anders Schleicher (2012)

argued that “Everyone realises that the skills that are easiest to teach and

easiest to test are now also the skills that are easiest to automate, digitise

and outsource. Of ever-growing importance, but so much harder to de

velop, are ways of thinking - creativity, critical thinking, problem-solving,

decision-making and learning; ways of working – including communica

tion and collaboration; and tools for working – including information

and communications technologies”.

Although denitions of 21

century skills vary, there are some com-

monalities. e most important factor is that students should have the

capacity to learn throughout their lives, and that education should provide

the skills and mental tools to enable them to do so. Inquiry and knowledge-

creation abilities are the most crucial, but they should be connected with

analytical and critical thinking skills, as well as creativity. Students should

have the capability to ask questions, and not simply seek or repeat ready

answers. ey need the ability to work independently, but also, increas

ingly, collaboratively. Life is ever more bound up with technology; learning

environments are continuously changing, and ICT provides many new

learning opportunities.

1 Toward Global Sharing Pedagogy

Working Life is changing toward Interconnectedness

Friedman (2005) has described our global world as at. He applied the

concept to the 21

century to describe the ways in which globalization

has changed core economic concepts. In his opinion, this attening is

a product of a convergence of the personal computer with ber-optic

micro cables, and the rise of work-ow software. He termed this period

“Globalization 3.0”, dierentiating it from the previous “Globalization

1.0” (in which countries and governments were the main protagonists),

and “Globalization 2.0” (in which multinational companies led the way

in driving global integration).

Friedman recounted many examples of companies based in India and

China, which, by providing a range of labor from typists and call center

operators, to accountants and computer programmers, have become inte

gral parts of the complex global supply chains for companies. e at world

is increasing social practice in all domains of life, not only in the global

economy. New technology and social media expand our communication

without any real limitations. Ramirez, Hine, Ji, Ulbrich, and Riordan

(2009) proposed that students need experiences and competencies to de

termine how to work in the at world. We also have evidence to suggest

that Web 2.0 technologies facilitate the acquisition of the skills required

to succeed in a new working life (e.g., Siemens, 2005).

e research group at the Institute for the Future (Davies, Fidler &

Gorbis, 2011) analyzed how work places will change in the coming years.

e qualities are based on a scenario that our global world will be increas

ingly connected. is increased global interconnectivity puts diversity

and adaptability at the center of organizational operations. Workplace

robotics nudges human workers out of rote, repetitive tasks, and new

media ecology requires new literacies. e group has identied the most

important skills that workers will need in the future, in which working

life will be connected with technology, but requires far more than tech

nological skills. In addition to identifying those abilities needed to use

new devices and technological applications, the research group (Davies,

Fidler & Gorbis, 2011) summarized the following skills as being the most

important: sense-making, social intelligence, novel and adaptive thinking,

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

cross-cultural competency, computational thinking, new-media literacy,

transdisciplinarity, design mindset ability, cognitive-load management,

and virtual collaboration. Skills and abilities will be related to higher-level

thinking, and social relationships that cannot be easily transferred to ma

chines, and which will enable us to create unique insights, will be critical

to decision-making. Workers will require social skills that enable them

to collaborate and build relationships of trust locally, as well as globally,

with larger groups of people in a variety of settings. Workers must also

be capable of responding to unique, unexpected circumstances that may

occur at any moment (Autor, 2010), and they will also require an ability

to understand concepts across multiple disciplines. New media literacy

is a necessary aspect of work, including critical reading and production

skills with regard to the many forms of media. is requirement will be

increased (Davies, Fidler & Gorbis, 2011), and in complex work envi

ronments cognitive load management is becoming urgent. Workers must

have an ability to discriminate and lter information for importance, and

to understand how to maximize cognitive functioning using a variety of

tools and techniques. Working environments view workers as agents that

take a design approach to work. It is usual for us to already create, modify,

and customize products and our environments to t to our needs. Work

ers are also members of virtual teams. Emerging technologies make it

easy to collaborate, despite physical distance. According to Davies, Fidler

and Gorbis (2011), the “virtual work environment demands a new set

of competencies”. Among these competencies are “the ability to develop

strategies for engaging and motivating a dispersed group”. For example,

video games and gamication could be used in motivating future virtual

teams (Davies, Fidler & Gorbis, 2011). We may conclude that teachers

and schools are at the forefront of new ways to help students to achieve

those skills and abilities that will be necessary in their future.

1 Toward Global Sharing Pedagogy

Knowledge Ecosystem

Today, knowledge creation is viewed as a non-linear, dialectical process,

with dierent partners and stakeholders. It is also an interaction with

technology-based learning environments and devices, which can be called

cultural artifacts. It is an interactive process, in which application of knowl

edge is no longer a one-directional process. Rather, it is a joint process,

whereby all partners, learners, experts, teachers, and other practitioners,

as well as representatives of companies and researchers, work together in

a complementary manner, seeking evidence for the creation of new tools

and improved learning practices.

Learning has increasingly been viewed as being embedded within a

social context and framework (Reynolds, Sinatra, & Jetton, 1996, p. 98;

Cole, 1991). Social perspective theories have variously been called social

constructivism, sociocultural perspective, socio-historical theory, and so

cio-cultural-historical psychology. Although the views of social perspective

theorists are diverse, each theorist posits that learning occurs through the

mediation of social interaction. Rather than use the terms acquisition and

representation, social perspective theorists regard knowledge as constructed

by, and distributed among, individuals and groups, as they interact with

one another and with cultural artifacts, such as pictures, texts, discourse,

and gestures. Knowledge is not an individual possession, but is socially

shared, and emerges from participation in social activity.

When dening knowledge creation as an interactive process, we see

that all educational settings, including schools, should prepare students

for “virtuous knowledge sharing” (European University Association, 2007,

p. 21). is notion is built on the conviction that creative knowledge

production is a sharing process. Instead of merely solving problems, indi

viduals and organizations create and dene problems, develop and apply

knowledge to solve the problems, and then further develop new knowledge

through the action of problem-solving. e organization and individuals

grow through such a process (Williams, Karousou, & Mackness. 2011:

Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995; Nonaka & Konno, 1998; Nonaka & Toyama,

2003). According to Nonaka & Toyama (2003), and knowledge-creation

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

is a transcending process, through which entities (individuals, groups,

organizations, etc.) transcend the boundary of the old into a new self by

acquiring new knowledge. In the process, novel conceptual artifacts and

structures for interaction are created, which provide possibilities, as well

as constrain the entities, in consequent knowledge creation cycles.

We can discuss a “knowledge ecosystem” in which all partners, learning

resources, and stakeholders provide additional value to each other by shar

ing and collaboration (Multisilta, 2012). In learning ecosystems, people

work together and expand their learning through social collaboration and

interaction with cultural artifacts. It means moving from static, transmit

ted content to knowledge that is ever-renewable and often constructed

jointly with other learners. Learning is a dynamic concept that depends on

learners’ epistemological propositions and social-cultural contexts (Cole

& Cigagas, 2010; Niemi, 2009; Säljö, 2010, 2012).

e reciprocal relationship between a human being and cultural artifacts

forms the grounds for development, which is not a straight path of quan

titative gains and accumulations. Social perspective theories emphasize

the role of social and cultural contexts in cognition. ey highlight the

eects of the social framework on our beliefs, concepts, and construction of

knowledge. Learning is embedded within a social context and framework,

and is a mutual interaction between human beings and cultural artifacts.

Salomon (1993) presented the concept of distributed cognition to de

scribe how the individual dierences between human beings, and their

own knowledge constructions created by their minds, are acknowledged.

Each individual has potential, but how this potential is developed and

activated depends on cultural symbol systems, and how such a joint sys

tem interacts in learning. Salomon views this joint system as one in which

learners interact with one another in a spiral-like manner. “An individual’s

inputs, through their collaborative activities, aect the nature of the joint,

distributed system, which in turn aects their cognitions such that their

subsequent participation is altered, resulting in subsequent altered joint

performances and products” (Salomon, 1993, p. 122). In virtual learn

ing contexts, distributed cognitions oer enormous opportunities to the

minds of students, and to culturally-constructed virtual artifacts (e.g.,

1 Toward Global Sharing Pedagogy

knowledge, sounds, visual images, human communication) in reciprocal

and interactive relationships.

New Learning Spaces Require Engagement

and Self-Organized Learning

e capacity to learn is not only a cognitive phenomenon. It is also an

emotional and social process (Boekaerts, 1997; Pintrich, 2000; Pintrich &

Ruohotie, 2000). We view learning as a holistic, constructive process that

is interconnected with learners’ emotional, social, cultural, and ethical real

ity. In technological environments, learners face all of these components,

and very often must take an active role without the direct supervision or

guidance that is available in face-to-face learning environments. Tech

nological environments provide open access to knowledge and learning,

but they also require a student to have the capacity to manage their own

learning; learners must have an awareness of how to manage their learning

processes. In learning psychology, we have a long tradition that provides

clear evidence that individuals need skills to steer their own learning pro

cesses. In the light of self-regulation research, self-regulated learners have

a large arsenal of cognitive and metacognitive strategies that they readily

deploy, when necessary, to accomplish academic tasks. In addition, self-

regulated learners have adaptive learning goals, and are persistent in their

eorts to reach these goals (Schunk & Zimmerman, 1994). Finally, self-

regulated learners are procient at monitoring and, if necessary, modifying

the strategy they use in response to shifting task demands. Self-regulated

learners are metacognitively active participants in their own learning (Pin

trich & Ruohotie, 2000).

Students control their learning through metacognition, and also use

cognitive and resource management strategies. Pintrich (2000) and Pin

trich and McKeachie (2000) introduced important control strategies in

learning tasks. ey grouped strategies into three broad categories: cog

nitive, metacognitive, and resource management. e cognitive category

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

includes strategies related to a student’s learning or encoding of material,

as well as strategies to facilitate retrieval of information. e metacognitive

strategies involve those related to planning, regulating, monitoring, and

modifying cognitive processes, while the resource management strategies

concern a student’s method of controlling resources (i.e., time, eort, out

side support) that inuence the quality and quantity of their involvement

in the task. Davies, Fidler and Gorbis (2011) described this as the ability

to manage the cognitive load.

In technological environments, self-regulated learning means that stu

dents use their cognition, as well as resource management skills. Respec-

tively, new technology provides tools to support and strengthen a learner’s

capacity to monitor their own learning, and also seek resources through

collaboration.

Jones, Valdez, Nowakowski, and Rasmussen (1994) suggested that suc

cessful, engaged learners are responsible for their own learning. ese

students are self-regulated, and are capable of dening their own learning

goals, and evaluating their own achievements. ey are also energized by

their learning; their joy in learning leads to a lifelong passion for solving

problems, understanding, and taking the next step in their thinking. ese

learners are strategic, in that they know how to learn and are capable of

transferring knowledge to solve problems creatively. Engaged learning

also involves being collaborative, that is, valuing and having the skills to

work with others.

Taylor and Parsons (2011) analyzed what student engagement might

be. ey introduced several types of engagement: academic, cognitive,

intellectual, institutional, emotional, behavioral, social, and psychological.

After exploring numerous denitions, they concluded that the following

criteria characterize engagement:

1. Learning that is relevant, real, and intentionally interdisciplinary, at

times moving learning from the classroom into the community.

2. Technology-rich learning environments, not just computers, but all

types of technology, including scientic equipment, multimedia re

sources, industrial technology, and diverse forms of portable commu-

nication technology.

1 Toward Global Sharing Pedagogy

3. Learning environments that are positive, challenging, and open, some-

times called “transparent” learning climates, encourage risk-taking and

guide learners toward co-articulated high expectations. Students are

involved in assessment for, and of, learning.

4. Collaboration via respectful “peer-to-peer” type relationships between

students and teachers.

Toward Global Sharing Pedagogy

e Finnable 2020 project has drafted a model of the GSP for promoting

21st century skills in schools. e aim has been to connect megatrends

of changes in learning concepts, knowledge creation, and working life

with teaching and learning. e GSP is based on socio-cultural theories.

Learning is viewed as a result of dialogical interactions between people,

substances, and artifacts (Pea, 2004; Cole & Cigagas, 2010; Säljö, 2012;

Hakkarainen, Paavola, Kangas, & Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, 2013). e

primary objective is to strengthen student engagement in learning and

mediate students as they become active learners and knowledge creators in

changes they are facing already, and will increasingly face in their future.

However, engagement is not viewed only as an end. It is also a means for

further learning. It is regarded as a motivational component that consists

of the emotional states of students, such as the joy and fun experienced in

learning, as well as qualities that are typical of self-regulated learning. It

includes commitment to learning tasks, and a willingness to make eorts

to achieve an objective (Pintrich, 2000; Pintrich & McKeachie, 2000).

Vygotsky (1978) introduced the idea of tools, symbolic and social me

diators, to the analysis of the learning process, and dened the role of

mediators as being to select, change, amplify, and interpret objects to the

learner (1978, 67). e framework of GSP has sorted mediators into four

categories (Figure 1): 1) Learner-driven knowledge and skills creation; 2)

collaboration; 3) networking; and 4) digital media competencies and literacies.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

Figure 1. Mediators in global sharing pedagogy

e role of mediators is very interactive. ey are interconnected, and

can act as both means and ends. For example, according to Multisilta and

Perttula (2013), when students learn using digital technologies, these tech

nologies enrich learning experiences, and contribute to the continuum of

learning. e use of the technology is an experience in itself, but it also

provides new skills that can be used in following learning situations.

Learner-driven knowledge and skills creation is a mediator that pro

vides learners with symbolic tools for the development of active learning

methods and metacognitive skills. is is a dynamic process in which

learners, guided by reection and metacognition, manage their thinking

and learning resources. Learners require strategic skills to manage their

own learning and create new knowledge, both individually and collabo

ratively (Pintrich & McKeachie 2000; Nevgi, Virtanen, & Niemi, 2006).

Schools and teachers should encourage students to engage in this type of

independent learning (Niemi, 2002; Scardamalia, 2002; Scardamalia &

– Critical thinking

– Creativity

– Argumentation

– Learning to learn skills

– Ethics and values

– Learning from others

– Sharing ideas and expe-

riences

– Social skills

– Cultural literacy and

understanding

– Help seeking and help

giving

– Content creation

– Critical content interpre-

tation and validating

– Social media skills

Collaboration

Digital

Literacy

Knowledge and

skills creation

Networking

Student

Engagement

1 Toward Global Sharing Pedagogy

Bereiter, 2003). Learning aects students cognitively, emotionally, socially,

and morally, and the more independent and self-regulating students are,

the more they must also be aware of, and employ, ethics and values. Me

diation toward student-driven knowledge creation consists of dierent

kinds of symbolic tools, such as critical thinking, creativity, argumenta

tion, “learning to learn” skills, and ethics and values.

Collaboration is a social mediator that allows or requires students to

work together (Hull et al., 2009; Pea & Lindgren, 2008; Rogo, 1990;

Wells 1999). It ensures that they can learn and work in the global world

in the future; they must develop the following competencies beyond the

purely “cognitive”: social skills, cultural literacy and understanding, help-

seeking, and help-giving strategies.

Networking is a social mediator that uses synergy of expertise of other

people and also provides tools for intercultural learning (Starke-Meyerring,

Duin, & Palvetzian, 2007; Starke-Meyerring & Wilson, 2008). Learning

is a continuous process of dialogical interaction with other people and

cultural artifacts. In distributed cognitions and interaction with dierent

artifacts, people introduce remarkable value that enhances their learning

and competencies. ese processes are mutually constitutive. All learners

are also contributors. us, networking means learning from others, as

well as sharing ideas and experiences.

Digital media competencies and literacies is primarily a tool mediator

that enriches learning through new technology environments, but it can

also consist of social and symbolic mediators though dierent kinds of

digital environments (Säljö, 2012). In technological environments, learn

ers are both content producers and consumers. As such, they need the skills

to study and work in digital environments. ey must also critically assess

and validate the knowledge they nd and create; they must be account

able to the norms of discourse and argumentation established by the adult

communities of practice in each discipline. ey also require skills in the

creation and discussion of social media, and in promoting ethical behavior

in these media environments. Mediation of digital media competencies

and literacy consists of the following skills that schools should provide

to students: content creation, with critical content interpretations and

validation, and social media skills that are part of digital environments.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

How to apply GSP in teaching and learning

e GSP model has been applied in the “Digital Storytelling” project,

which was a subproject of Finnable 2020. Students (n= 319) in three coun

tries created digital stories with video cameras and the MoViE (Mobile

Video Experience) platform (http://www.nnable./digital-storytelling.

html) for creating and sharing collaboratively produced video stories in

Finland, Greece, and California. MoViE enables users to record video

clips using their mobile devices (phones, tablets, digital cameras, etc.),

upload videos to the MoViE web site, and create video stories using all

the clips gathered by themselves and their collaborators (Multisilta &

Mäenpää, 2008; Multisilta, Perttula, Suominen, & Koivisto, 2010; Mul

tisilta, Suominen, Östman, 2012; Tuomi & Multisilta, 2010, 2012). Ex-

isting video clips can also be remixed to create new video stories, and the

content of the videos is not limited by the MoViE. Teachers and students

can create videos that t their needs and support learning, both in and

outside the classroom. e purpose was that students would have interna

tional partners with whom they could share their videos, and could receive

comments and feedback from their local and/or international peers. An

assumption was that video products are artifacts that challenge users to

learn more and step outside of their earlier proximal zone of learning, and

that media-sharing environments would add to learners’ engagement (Pea

& Lindgren, 2008; Lewis, Pea, & Rosen, 2010; Multisilta, Suominen, &

Östman, 2012; Multisilta & Pea, 2012). e results (Niemi & Multisilta,

2014) provided good support for the idea that digital storytelling has a

great eect on students’ motivation and enthusiasm. ese components

included both fun and commitment to hard work. e greatest predictor

of the mediators of engagement was the MoViE platform, which provided

an opportunity to create, shoot, and remix one’s own story in collabora

tion with a peer group. e second greatest predictor was collaborative

group work; students learned in collaborative processes when producing

their videos.

GSP with its mediators also highly eectively predicted students’ learn

ing outcomes, which were primarily 21

century generic skills, such as

1 Toward Global Sharing Pedagogy

problem-solving, argumentation, decision-making, and cooperation.

All components of GSP (Niemi & Multisilta, 2014): (1) Learner-driven

knowledge and skills creation; (2) collaboration; (3) networking; and (4) digi

tal media competencies and literacies had a high predictive eect on student

learning outcomes, providing support for the model. In particular, active

learning methods, such as learner-driven knowledge creation and MoViE

as a digital media tool, were very important (Niemi & Multislta, 2014).

Learning is acknowledged in Europe, as well as globally, as the very core

of economic development (Conçeicăo, Heitor, & Lundwall, 2003; Binkley

et al., 2012). ere is a great trust in the power of knowledge and learning.

However, there is also a growing concern: Who is becoming empowered

and who is not? e real danger emerges when young people drop out of

learning pathways. In our global world, there is a growing polarization

between people who have rich learning environments and the abilities to

learn new competencies, and people who are not in this position and do

not have these skills. We must create new solutions for the use of technol

ogy to empower dierent learners, and help them become active learners

and citizens. It also means making eorts to help individuals nd mean

ingfulness in their life.

Meaningfulness is very often linked to active learning and engagement

in learning. Taylor and Parsons (2011) analyzed several denitions of

engagement, and despite dierences, the common feature is that engage

ment is linked to a student’s active role: students design, plan, and carry

out their projects. Meaningfulness can also be promoted when students

publicly exhibit a project to themselves, to the community, or to a cli

ent. It has a transformative eect on their perception of themselves, their

relationship with learning, and their sense of place in the world around

them. e main function of schools is to prepare students for enquiry,

which will help them take an active role in their lives.

All over the world, 21

century skills have become an urgent topic on

the agenda of educational systems (Binkley et al., 2012). Schools are re

quired to seek new forms of teaching and learning for the future. Many

discussions and documents propose ways to face the future and delineate

the roles of schools and teachers in these changing contexts. Technology is

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

not an aim in and of itself, but it can be an important tool for empower-

ing students for what lies ahead.

Why should we prepare our students for global collaboration and net

working? Why is the pedagogical model “global”? ICT crosses borders.

Social media has broken all borders, nationally and internationally. e

Internet provides learning resources and databases that are accessible across

and within nations. In many areas of life, people depend on international

knowledge production, and working environments are increasingly global.

Our students will be both cosmopolitan learners and workers. is means

that one of the important aims of schools should be to prepare them for

a collaborative culture and the idea of sharing. Learner concepts regard

ing their agency in the global world mean that they should become active

global citizens, providing their contribution in the joint world. is agency

can be achieved only by having authentic experiences in schools across

borders and cultures. e GSP proposes that schools possess a teaching and

learning culture that allows and encourages the entire school community

to be open to collaboration, networking, active knowledge creation, and

digital literacy. is also means active interactions with partners outside

the school, and connections with other schools, both locally and globally.

References

Autor, D. (2010). e Polarization of Job Opportunities in the US Labor Market. Center

for American Progress and e Hamilton Project, April 2010.

Bellanca, J. & Brandt, R. (2010). 21st century skills: Rethinking how students learn.

Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.

Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M., & Rumble,

M. (2012). Dening twenty-rst century skills. In P. Grin, B. McGaw, & E. Care

(Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (pp. 17–66). Dordrecht: Springer.

Boekaerts, M. (1997). Self-regulated learning: A new concept embraced by research-

ers, policy makers, educators, teachers, and students. Learning and Instruction, 7 (2),

161–186.

Brese, F., & Carstens, R. (Eds.). (2009).Second information technology in education study:

SITES 2006 user guide for the international database. Amsterdam: IEA.

1 Toward Global Sharing Pedagogy

Cole, M. (1991). Conclusion. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.),

Perspectives on socially shared-cognition (pp. 398–417). Washington, DC: American

Psychological Association.

Cole, M., & Cigagas, X. E. (2010). Culture and cognition. In M. H. Bornstein (Ed.),

Handbook of cultural developmental science (pp. 127–142). New York, NY: Psychol-

ogy Press.

Conçeică o, P., Heitor, M. V., & Lundwall, B-Å. (Eds.) (2003). Innovation and competence

building with social cohesion for Europe. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Davies, A. Fidler, D., & Gorbis. D. (2011). Future Work Skills 2020. Palo Alto, CA:

Institute for the Future for University of Phoenix Research Institute. Retrieved Feb.

19, 2014 http://www.iftf.org/uploads/media/SR1382A_UPRI_future_work_skills_

sm.pdf

European University Association. (2007). Creativity in higher education: Report on the

EUA creativity project 2006–2007. Brussels: European University Association.

European Union (2006). Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the

Council of 18 December 2006 on key competences for lifelong learning. 2006/962/

EC. Ocial Journal of the European Union. 30.12.2006.

Finnable 2020. (2013). Finnable 2020 Research Project. University of Helsinki. http://

www.nnable.

Friedman. T. L. (2005). e world is at: A brief history of the twenty-rst century. New

York: omas L. Friedman.

Grin, P., McGaw, B., & Care, E. (Eds.). (2013). Assessment and teaching of 21st cen-

tury skills (pp. 17–66). Dordrecht, Germany: Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

doi:10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5_2

Grin, P. (2013, August). e assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (ATC-

S21S

). Presentation at TERA & PROMS Conference, Taiwan.

Grin, P., McGaw, B., & Care, E. (2012). e changing role of education and schools.

In P. Grin, B. McGaw, & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st cen-

tury skills (pp. 1–16). Dordrecht, Germany: Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

doi:10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5_2

Hakkarainen, K., Paavola, S., Kangas, K., & Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P. (2013). Socio-

cultural perspectives on collaborative learning: Towards collaborative knowledge crea-

tion. In C. E. Hmelo-Silver, A. M. O’Donnell, C. Chan, C. A. Chinn (Eds.), e in-

ternational handbook of collaborative learning (pp. 57–73). New York, NY: Routledge.

Hull, L., Zacher, J. & Hibbert, L. (2009). Youth, risk, and equity in a global world.

Review of Research in Education, 33(1), 117–159.

Jones, B., Valdez, G., Nowakowski, J., & Rasmussen, C. (1994). Designing Learning

and Technology for Educational Reform. Oak Brook, IL: North Central Regional Edu-

cational Laboratory.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

Lewis, S., Pea, R., & Rosen, J. (2010). Beyond participation to co-creating of meaning:

Mobile social media in generative learning communities. Social Science Information,

49(3), 1–19.

Multisilta, J. (2012). Designing learning ecosystems for mobile social media. In A. D.

Olofsson & J. O. Lindberg (Eds.), Informed design of educational technologies in higher

education (pp. 270–291). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

Multisilta, J., & Mäenpää, M. (2008). Mobile video stories. In Proceedings of the 3rd In-

ternational Conference on Digital Interactive Media in Entertainment and Arts (DIMEA

‘08): Vol. 349 (pp. 401–406). New York, NY: ACM. Retrieved from http://doi.acm.

org/10.1145/1413634.1413705

Multisilta, J., & Pea, R. (2012). Workshop on social mobile video and panoramic video.

Retrieved from http://jarimultisilta.com/workshop2012/

Multisilta J., & Perttula, A. (2013). Supporting learning with wireless sensor data. Future

Internet 2013, 5(1), 95–112.

Multisilta, J., Perttula, A., Suominen, M., & Koivisto, A. (2010). Mobile video sharing:

Documentation tools for working communities. In Proceedings of the 8th International

Interactive Conference on Interactive TV & Video (pp. 31–38). New York, NY: ACM.

Multisilta, J., Suominen, M., & Östman, S. (2012). A platform for mobile social media

and video sharing. International Journal of Arts and Technology, 5(1), 53–72.

Nevgi, A., Virtanen, P., & Niemi, H. (2006). Supporting students to develop collabora-

tive learning skills in technology-based environments. British Journal of Educational

Technology, 37(6), 937–947.

Niemi, H. (2011). Educating student teachers to become high quality professionals: A

Finnish case. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal Journal. 1(1), pp. 43–67.

Niemi, H. (2009). Why from teaching to learning. European Educational Research Jour-

nal, 8 (1), 1–17.

Niemi, H. (2003). Competence building in life-wide learning: Innovation, competence

building and social cohesion in Europe, (pp. 219–239). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Niemi, H. (2002). Active learning—A cultural change needed in teacher education and

in schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 763–780.

Niemi, H., & Multisilta, J. (2014, Spring, forthcoming). Digital storytelling promoting

21st century skills and students’ engagement. Technology, Pedagogy and Education.

Nonaka, I., & Konno, N. (1998). e Concept of ‘Ba ’: building a foundation for

knowledge creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 40–54.

Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). e knowledge-creating company: How Japanese

companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.

Nonaka, I., & Toyama, R. (2003). e knowledge-creating theory revisited: Knowledge

creation as a synthesizing process. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 1, 2–10.

Pea, R., & Lindgren, R. (2008). Collaboration design patterns in uses of a video platform

for research and education. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 1(4), 235–247.

1 Toward Global Sharing Pedagogy

Pea, R. D. (2004). e social and technological dimensions of scaolding and related

theoretical concepts for learning, education, and human activity. e Journal of the

Learning Sciences, 13(3), 423–451.

Pintrich, P. R., & Ruohotie, P. (Eds.). (2000). Conative constructions and self-regulated

learning. Hämeenlinna, Finland: RCVE.

Pintrich, P. R., & McKeachie, W. J. (2000). A Framework for conceptualizing student

motivation and self-regulated learning in the college classroom. In P. R. Pintrich &

P. Ruohotie (Eds.), Conative constructions and self-regulated learning (pp. 31–50).

Hämeenlinna, Finland: RCVE.

Pintrich, P. R. (2000). e role of motivation in self-regulated learning. In P. R. Pintrich

& P. Ruohotie (Eds.), Conative constructions and self-regulated learning (pp. 51–66).

Hämeenlinna, Finland: RCVE.

Ramirez, A., Hine, M., Ji, S., Ulbrich, F., and Riordan, R. (2009). Learning to succeed

in a at world: Information and communication technologies for a new generation

of business students. Learning Inquiry, 3(3), 157–175.

Reynolds, R. E., Sinatra, G. M., & Jetton, T. L. (1996). Views of knowledge acquisi-

tion and representation: A continuum from experience centered to mind centered.

Educational Psychologist, 31(2), 93–104.

Rogo, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context.

New York: Oxford University Press.

Salomon, G. (1993). No distribution without individual’s cognition: A dynamic interac-

tional view. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational

considerations (pp. 111–138). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2003). Knowledge building. In J.W. Guthrie (Ed.),

Encyclopedia of education (2nd ed.) (pp. 1370–1373). New York, NY: Macmillan

Reference.

Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of

knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp. 67–98).

Chicago: Open Court.

Schunk, D., & Zimmerman, B. (1994). Self-regulation of learning and performance:

Issues and educational applications. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Scleicher. A, (2012)- Preparing teachers and school leaders for the 21st century – Ministers

and Union leaders meet on how to turn visions into reality. Posted by Andreas Schleicher

on 17-Mar-2012. Retrieved Feb. 19.2014. https://community.oecd.org/community/

educationtoday/blog/2012/03/17/preparing-teachers-and-school-leaders-for-the-

21st-century-ministers-and-union-leaders-meet-on-how-to-turn-visions-into-reality.

Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International

Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3–10.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

Starke-Meyerring, D., Duin, A. H., & Palvetzian, T. (2007). Global partnerships: Posi-

tioning technical communication programs in the context of globalization. Technical

Communication Quarterly, 16(2), 139–174.

Starke-Meyerring, D., & Wilson, M. (Eds.) (2008). Designing globally networked learn-

ing environments: Visionary partnerships, policies, and pedagogies. Rotterdam: Sense

Publishers.

Säljö, R. (2012). Schooling and spaces for learning: Cultural dynamics and student

participation and agency. In E. Hjörne, G. van der Aalsvoort, & G. Abreu (Eds.),

Learning, social interaction and diversity - Exploring school practices (pp. 9–14). Rot-

terdam: Sense.

Säljö, R. (2010). Digital tools and challenges to institutional traditions of learning: tech-

nologies, social memory and the performative nature of learning. Journal of Computer

Assisted Learning, 26, 53–64.

Taylor, L., & Parsons, J. (2011). Improving student engagement. Current Issues in Edu-

cation, 14(1), 1-33

Tekes. (2013). Learning Solutions: Tekes Programme 2011–2015. Retrieved from http://

www.tekes./Julkaisut/tekes_learning_solutions.pdf

Tuomi, P., Multisilta, J. (2012) Comparative study on use of mobile videos in elemen-

tary and middle school. International Journal of Computer Information Systems and

Industrial Management Applications, 4, 255–266.

Tuomi, P., & Multisilta, J., (2010). MoViE: Experiences and attitudes—Learning

with a mobile social video application. Digital Culture & Education, 2(2), 165–189.

Available from http://www.digitalcultureandeducation.com/cms/wp-content/up-

loads/2010/10/dce 1024_tuomi_2010.pdf

Ubiquitous Information Society Advisory Board. (2010). ICTs in schools everyday life

project. Ministry Finnish National Plan for Educational Use of ICTs. Ministry of Trans-

port and Communication, Ministry of Culture and Education & National Board

of Education. Retrieved from http://www.edu./download/135308_TVT_ope-

tuskayton_suunnitelma_Eng.pdf (In English: http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.

kmrp.8500001)

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society: the development of higher psychological processes.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic Inquiry: Towards a Socio-cultural Practice and eory of Educa-

tion. Cambridge: University Press.

Williams, R., Karousou, R., & Mackness, J. (2011). Emergent learning and learning

ecologies in Web 2.0. e International Review of Research in Open and Distance

Learning,12(3), 39–59.

2 Crossing School -Family Boundaries Through the Use of Technology

Crossing School -Family

Boundaries Through the

Use of Technology

Tiina Korhonen and Jari Lavonen

Abstract

e aim of this study was to discover how already-available information

and communication technology (ICT) in homes and schools could be

better utilized to enhance home-school collaboration (HSC). Novel ideas

and innovations for use of existing ICT to support HSC, including innova

tions on learning and assessment, were generated by students, parents, and

teachers. Key data was collected from two second and third grade classes

of an elementary school in Espoo, Finland during the 2009–2010 school

year. e study was conducted using design-based research (DBR), with

both practitioners and researchers aiming to produce meaningful changes

in everyday HSC activities. During the rst phase of the study, the needs,

limitations, and ideas regarding HSC and the use of ICT in support of

HSC were collected from all participants. A preliminary analysis of the

data was discussed among teams of volunteer teachers, parents, and stu

dents. e teams selected candidate ideas for practical testing and further

development in two DBR cycles. After the cycles, a guide based on the

innovations was created to help other teachers, students, and parents utilize

ICT in HSC. e study results indicate a multitude of ways to use ICT

in HSC, including communication and interaction between students,

teachers, and parents, and support of student learning and growth. A novel

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

result of this study is that ICT can facilitate the practical implementation

of new types of collaboration, such as parent participation in learning at

school and student learning in their free time.

Keywords: Home-School Collaboration, ICT, Deployment and Develop-

ment of Innovations

Introduction

e use of ICT in education, including the use of Internet applications

and learning environments, has undergone rapid development during the

last 20 years. Today, students, teachers, and parents have a wide selection

of ICT tools and environments at their daily disposal. In the school, teach

ers and students can use ICT for learning and for information retrieval,

for individualized learning, and for interaction between the school and

its surrounding community, such as HSC (Haaparanta & Tissari, 2008).

Despite the wide availability of ICT facilities, their use has not yet

become a natural part of everyday school life. eir use does not support

teaching and learning and is limited in various collaboration situations

(OECD, 2004, 2006; Lavonen, Juuti, Aksela, & Meisalo, 2006; Younie,

2006; Hayes, 2007; Hennessy et al., 2007; European Commission, 2013).

In order to make the use of ICT a natural part of interactions between a

school and its surrounding community, ICT must be integrated into the

school’s structural and pedagogical development activities (Haaparanta

& Tissari, 2008).

In early 2011, the Finnish National Board of Education made changes to

the national-level framework curriculum, including the section concern

ing HSC. e new policy emphasizes the importance of HSC in support-

ing the personalized, holistic growth of students and learning outcomes.

For the rst time, the renewed curriculum includes a policy advocating the

use of ICT to enhance HSC (Finnish National Board of Education, 2011).

is study uses a DBR approach to explore the implementation and use

of ICT to support HSC. e key conjecture is that it is possible to imple

2 Crossing School -Family Boundaries Through the Use of Technology

ment ICT-based collaboration and obtain results with the ICT facilities

already available today at home and in the school. e assumption is that

this can be achieved by identifying and developing innovations on ICT

use in HSC, by involving end users in the generation and development of

ICT use ideas, and by identifying and addressing the general challenges

of ICT use and implementation.

Research Questions

e study aimed to uncover what practical possibilities are there in the use of

ICT in HSC. In addition, the study aimed to nd out how students, teach

ers, and parents experience ICT-supported HSC and the adoption of ICT for

HSC. In this paper, we focus on the research question concerning the pos

sibilities that parents, teachers, and students see for the use of ICT in HSC.

Home-School Collaboration

e key objective of HSC is to support the holistic, safe growth and de-

velopment of children and youth (Finnish National Board of Education,

2011). A closer relationship between parents and their children’s educa

tion and school activities has an increasingly supportive eect on child

development and academic performance (Fullan, 2007).

In this study, we describe HSC based on the six types of home and

school involvement dened by Epstein (2009): parenting, communicat

ing, volunteering, learning at home, decision making, and collaborating

with the community.

Key themes in HSC are partnership and shared responsibility. Important

success factors in a home-school partnership include caring, trust, and re

spect. A home-school partnership provides students with a feeling of being

cared for and being supported by the community, thus encouraging stu

dents, guiding them, and motivating them to do their best (Epstein, 2009).

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

e key challenge in HSC is taking into account the varying needs and

goals of teachers, students, and parents. e general aim is to nd ways

to arrange HSC to support the development of an individual student and

to improve the team spirit and the feeling of social relatedness within the

class (Siniharju, 2003).

e lack of available time is a challenge in HSC for both teachers and

parents. Faced with increasing class sizes, teachers must nd time for

HSC with all parents within normal working hours, while also encourag

ing more passive parents to collaborate. Many parents would like to be

better informed about their children’s progress and school events. At the

same time, parents also struggle to nd time for HSC (Siniharju, 2003).

For successful HSC, respect for the thoughts, opinions, and wishes of

all stakeholders (teachers, students, and parents) is essential. e goal is

that through a long-term collaborative development activity, more families

and teachers will learn to work with one another as parts of a commu

nity for the benet of the children. As collaborative development work is

time-consuming, to achieve good results it should be planned as a regular

activity with all stakeholders (Epstein, 2009).

ICT Use in Home-School Collaboration

as an Innovation

In this study, the various possibilities of using ICT to enable HSC and

to overcome the challenges in the use of ICT in HSC are referred to as

innovations. An innovation is an idea, practice, or object that is perceived

as new (Rogers, 2003).

In order to enter, or diuse, into actual use, these innovations should

be adopted by individual teachers, parents, and students. We analyze the

process of adoption within the framework of Rogers’ theory on the adop

tion of innovations (Rogers, 2003).

According to Rogers, when an individual determines whether or not

to personally accept or reject an innovation, they seek information about

2 Crossing School -Family Boundaries Through the Use of Technology

the innovation and actively process that information, typically with other

people in the community. Rogers divides this adoption process into ve

phases: knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation, and conrma

tion (Rogers, 2003).

is study focuses on the last three phases of Rogers’ adoption process.

Specically, the study considers four key aspects of the adoption process

with the potential to aect the outcome of adoption in a positive or nega

tive way.

Individualization

In the re-invention of an innovation, an adopter or group of adopters

modies an available innovation to better suit their needs. rough re-

invention, the innovation is more likely to be accepted (Rogers, 2003). We

refer to such new or modied innovations created through re-invention,

or individualization, as individual innovations.

is study applies the DBR principle of generating ideas (McKenney &

Reeves, 2012) to encourage participants to re-invent innovations and thus

create novel individual innovations, which will more likely be adopted into

practice. In this study, individual innovations include the ideas of teach

ers, students, and parents about the use of the ICT facilities in HSC. e

innovations may include the use of ICT tools available in the classroom

or at home, such as computers, digital cameras, interactive whiteboards,

document cameras, as well as a web-based learning environment (WBLE)

called Opit, with access available to students, teachers, and parents.

Participation

Our assumption is that participation by teachers, students, and parents

in the generation and implementation of ideas will support their com

mitment and adoption of the innovations. is assumption is supported

by existing research, which indicates that user involvement in innovation

implementation increases the likelihood of continued use and further

development of the innovation (Rogers, 2003).

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

Usability

e usability of an innovation indicates the extent to which users can em-

ploy the innovation to achieve a particular goal; specically in this study,

how users can employ ICT innovations in HSC.

Nielsen (1993) approached the concept of usability from the perspec

tive of adoption and acceptability of the innovation. Along these lines,

usability could be dened through ve quality components. Learnability

of the innovation denes how easy it is for users to start using the in

novation. Eciency shows how quickly users can (after initial learning)

perform HSC activities using the innovation. Memorability denes how

easily users can re-establish prociency after not using the innovation for

a while. Freedom of error denes how error-prone HSC activities using the

innovation are. Finally, satisfaction denes the degree of pleasantness to

which users experience the use of the innovation and how easily they can

modify the innovation for their own individual innovations.

We assume that involvement of various stakeholders in the development

of innovations for ICT use in HSC can enhance the usability of the inno

vations. With better usability, the innovation becomes easier to learn and

use, which should lead to higher adoption rates. Fullan (2007) categorizes

the factors that can aect adoption of an innovation into two groups. e

rst group, properties of the innovation, can be seen to encompass the

usability of the innovation as well as properties of the artefact, including

computers, devices, applications, and the WBLE.

Environment

Fullan (2007) describes the second group of factors as environmental

factors, which include factors that are local to the school and community

and more external factors, such as national-level curriculum. Local factors

might include the pedagogical orientation of the teachers, the collabora

tion and reection practices between teachers and their beliefs about the

usability of ICT tools, and the culture of collaboration and leadership

within the school (Fullan, 2007).

2 Crossing School -Family Boundaries Through the Use of Technology

Local factors also include the characteristics of the community adopting

the innovation, for example, ICT skill levels of the parents, availability of

ICT equipment within homes and the school, and the eort required to

learn how to use the innovation (Fullan, 2007).

e adoption of ICT-based innovation at the school and in the com

munity may also be aected by a sense of time limitations, especially a

need for additional time to learn how to use the ICT tools. Adoption of

an innovation is also aected by the availability of other resources, such as

technical and pedagogical support, adequate nancial resources, and sup

port for professional development. In addition, existing beliefs of teachers,

parents, and students regarding the role of ICT use in HSC may inuence

the adoption of innovations (Fullan, 2007).

Design-Based Research (DBR) Process

As a methodological framework for designing an innovation and its use,

this study used the DBR approach, which has been suggested as a solu

tion for discontinuity between educational research and practice (Juuti

& Lavonen, 2006). DBR is a general framework for the design, develop

ment, implementation, and evaluation of educational activities within a

pragmatic framework. DBR emphasizes three aspects: 1) a design process

is essentially iterative, beginning with the recognition of the need to change

practice; 2) the design process generates a widely usable artefact, such as

learning activities or a learning environment; and 3) the design process pro

vides educational knowledge for more intelligible practice (Design-Based

Research Collective, 2003; Bell, Hoadley, & Linn, 2004).

DBR is comprised of a combination of theory development, prescrip

tions for successful design processes, and prescriptions for successful design

solutions. e design process includes four phases: 1) analysis of practical

problems, 2) development of solutions, 3) iterative cycles of testing and

renement of solutions in practice, and 4) reection to produce new re

search through the identication of new or enhanced design principles

(Reeves, 2006).

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

In this study, the DBR process was executed in alignment with the

rhythm of the school year and in collaboration with teachers, students,

and parents (see Figure 1). e study was conducted on two second and

third grade classes during the 2009–2010 school year in an elementary

school in Espoo, Finland. Both classes were inclusion classes, in which

special-needs children and general education children studied together.

e study was carried out through two design cycles. During the cycles,

the students, teachers, and parents generated ideas about the use of ICT

in HSC. ese ideas were evaluated, further developed, tested, and ap

plied in real HSC situations. Both the theory and practice of HSC were

advanced through these two design cycles (Gravemeijer & Cobb, 2006).

Figure 1. The application of design cycles in this study.

Preliminary

analysis

Pre-interview

Needs and

idea survey

Home and school

collaboration plan

Testing of

solutions

Preliminary

analysis

Renement

of solutions

Home and school

collaboration plan

Testing of

solutions

Testing of guides

Creation of

guides based

on solutions

Renement

of solutions

Cycle 1

Cycle 2

2 Crossing School -Family Boundaries Through the Use of Technology

Data Collection and Analysis

e data collected in this study consists of responses to questionnaires,

transcriptions of interviews, video recordings, eld reports, and notes of

project meetings. Table 1 outlines the data collection methods used dur

ing each study phase.

e study participants included 45 students, 21 teachers, and 94 par

ents. Of these, 4 teachers, 39 students, and 72 parents participated in the

rst two design cycles. e remainder of the participants took part in the

testing of the artefact.

Table 1. Data Collection Methods in Each Study Phase

Target Group

Study phase Teachers Parents Students

First design cycle

Needs and idea

survey

Questionnaire Questionnaire Group work led by

own teacher, brain-

storming in groups

(video recording)

Home-school

collaboration plan

Field report

PPT-presentation

Field report

PPT-presentation

Testing - - -

Second design cycle

Solution renement

and new innovations

Question-based re-

ports as pair work

Questionnaire Group interviews in

groups of 4 (video

recording and notes)

Home-school

collaboration plan

Video recording and

PPT-presentation

Video recording and

PPT-presentation

Testing Reports on the

intensive ICT use

weeks as pair work

Questionnaire on

intensive ICT use

weeks

(together with child)

Questionnaire on

intensive ICT use

weeks

(together with

parent)

Final phase

Solution renement

and processing of

the artefact

Interview in work

pairs

Questionnaire (all)

and an in-depth

interview with

selected parents (6)

Questionnaire and

group discussion

(video recording)

Testing of the

artefact

Interview Interview and ques-

tionnaire

Interview

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

As the collected data manifests itself in a variety of formats, a relational

database tool (Microsoft Access) was used to organize and analyze the data.

Each type of collected data (interview replies, questionnaire answers, video

recordings, and reports) was entered into its own table to easily search,

code, and lter the data (Figure 2). As part of this process, each type of

data was transformed into a technical format suitable for the database

(for example, transcripts of the audio recordings of the interviews were

prepared). Background information about study participants was also col

lected, recorded in the database, and made anonymous. e use of a rela-

tional database enabled the linking of related information, thus allowing

for exploration of relationships between the units of data.

Figure 2. Organization, coding, and analysis of the collected data.

e collected data were analyzed using qualitative, inductive content

analysis. e goal of content analysis is to construct categories that model

the concepts related to the use of ICT in HSC in light of the research

questions (Elo & Kyngäs, 2008).

Reference table:

coding and linking

of parts of reply,

answer or section

Research questions

Replies Answers Video sections Report sections

Interviews Questionnaires Video recordings Reports

Categories

(multiple levels)

2 Crossing School -Family Boundaries Through the Use of Technology

First, the collected data in the database was read through several times.

Next, the units of analysis were identied. A unit of analysis is a mention,

a sentence, or part of a sentence. Each unit of analysis was then coded into

a rst-level category that was identied using inductive content analysis.

rough further inductive content analysis, the rst-level categories were

combined to form higher-level categories. All units of analysis and the

mapping of units and categories were maintained in reference tables to

allow for verication of the analysis.

e following steps were taken to increase the reliability. To acquire deep

knowledge of the raw data, the rst author read the data several times. e

rst author then presented the coding scheme, preliminary categories and

examples of the raw data in each category to the other author, after which

minor modications were made to the category denitions. After complet

ing the categorization, the rst author presented it with examples of the

raw data to the second author. Agreement on the denitions of the cat

egories and on the coding of the data according to the categories was high.

Results

In this paper, we will focus on the possibilities that parents, teachers, and

students identied in the use of ICT in HSC.

In the study, teachers, students and parents indicated a variety of pos

sibilities or individual innovations for the use of ICT in HSC. Two main

categories of possibilities were identied in the analysis of the collected

data: communication and interaction and support for learning and growth.

In the analysis, the main categories were formed by combining two levels

of lower-level categories, of which the rst level is presented here (Table 2).

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

Table 2. Categorization of ICT Use Possibilities in HSC

Main Category Lower-Level Category Related to the Main Category

Communication and Interaction

Information • News

• Materials

• Direct messaging

• Scheduling,

• Student-specic

information

Participation • Pictures and videos of

school work

• Scheduled remote

participation

• Unscheduled remote

participation

• Sharing of views and

opinions

• Parent-led activities

Support for Learning and Growth

Support for learning and

personalization at school

• Personalized learning

• Mobile schoolwork

• Student portfolio

• Student email,

• Social learning

Supporting for learning at

home

• Homework

• Exam preparation

• Parent support

Evaluation • Continuous evaluation

• Self-evaluation

• Evaluation meetings

• Exams and quizzes

• Teacher feedback

• Parent feedback

Information

News. In the lower grades of Finnish primary schools, the traditional

method of communicating between school and home is based on the use

of a home message notebook (paper) that is carried by every student in

their school bag from school to home and from home to school. rough

the messages written in the notebook, the teacher and parents can com

municate on topics pertaining to the student. Moreover, the notebook

carries class-specic or school-wide news as attachments.

Several innovations related to the use of ICT in HSC arose from the

implementation of an enhanced version of the home message notebook

that was implemented through the WBLE and its various tools (i.e., e-

mail, blogs, and discussion forums).

2 Crossing School -Family Boundaries Through the Use of Technology

Parents took this one step further and presented several visions of ex-

tending the ICT-based home message notebook to cover class-specic

and school-wide news. For example, the front page of the school’s WBLE

could provide school-wide news and easy links to class-specic pages or

a “class electronic home message notebook” that contained class-specic

news and links to news for the parents’ association.

Well, it’s surely a good practice to have, right here on the front page,

very clearly, this most essential stuff because when you visit the pages,

that’s what you look at rst. And it’s good that these things that are

common to the whole school are here on the front page and clearly

visible so if you got more than one child, and that the home message

notebook is shown and I also like that the parents’ association pops

up from there immediately like that. (Parent 24)

Materials. Storage and distribution of school materials was mentioned

as a possibility for ICT use in HSC. School materials include forms, ma

terials for parent meetings, contact lists, exams, schedules, and archived

communication (i.e., monthly newsletters and letters from the principal).

is material could be stored in folders on class pages for the current

school year, thus making those items accessible to everyone in the class

community at any time and form anywhere.

We have created subfolders in the project folder of the home mes-

sage notebook, for example, parents’ meeting, contacts, exams and

timetables. Under each month, we have collected all the notications

for the month in question, for example, letters from the headmaster

and the classes’ own notes. (Teacher 3)

Direct messaging. e possibility of using ICT to support communica-

tion in quick-changing situations and regarding urgent issues was studied,

specically the use of voice call and text messaging features of mobile

phones, as well as the use of email.

Students and teachers mentioned the importance of a class-specic

phone number for handling urgent issues. With a class-specic phone

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

number, parents could easily contact a teacher or student regarding ur-

gent matters by simply using a normal mobile phone. Text messaging

was identied as especially useful for messages and call-back requests, as

a teacher normally cannot answer phone calls during the school day. e

class-specic phone could be the teacher’s personal mobile phone number,

or, since the phone would be primarily used only to receive text messages,

a dedicated phone with a cheap prepaid plan could be utilized. eir value

was noted by the respondents: “Classes’ own phone is of primary impor

tance in taking care of urgent matters” (Parent 26); “Text messages have

been sent on urgent issues” (Teacher 2); “e ability to communicate using

text messages if, for example, something that needs urgent communica

tion came to mind after the students left school for the day” (Parent 24).

e possibility of using email was identied, especially because mobile

access to email is increasing with smartphone use. Additional identied

benets of email use for direct messaging included the ease of sending email

messages to a group and the fact that a recipient can easily auto-forward

any incoming email messages to another email address, for example, to a

separate mobile email account.

Scheduling. Scheduling was identied as a key possibility for ICT use

in HSC. During the study, each class had its own class-specic page (i.e.,

“electronic home message notebook”) in the WBLE. is page could also

be used to share the weekly class schedule. With a shared schedule, stu

dents and parents could check the planned events for the next week and

specically keep track of deviations from the daily routine. We also identi

ed possibilities for using class-specic pages to schedule parent meetings

and chat discussions.

Our idea is that we will have the list of the week’s activities on the front

page. Parents can see there directly the most important things they

need to know each day. So that for each day information is added,

what happens that day, if there is something special on that day, like

something out of ordinary? And gym and such have been always put

on there so that parents always know what gym gear the students

need to bring. And this has been really really good. (Teacher 2)

2 Crossing School -Family Boundaries Through the Use of Technology

Others noted, “Book a time for example, for a chat discussion. One

could set aside some slots in the teacher’s diary after the teacher has al

located those” (Parent 42), and “e booking of the time for the parent-

child-teacher meeting etc. could be done through Opit” (Parent 42).

Student-specic information. Several possibilities were identied for

ICT use in the two-way sharing of personal student issues. Both teachers

and parents mentioned possibilities for daily collaboration, for example,

informing the teacher of a student’s absence or an urgent need for the

teacher to contact a student’s parents during the school day. Text messages,

email, and tool combinations were mentioned as possible uses of ICT in

this context, “In my opinion, email and the classes’ own phone have worked

well and also of course, text messages from the school” (Parent 3), and

Also, the text messages by us have currently been such that if we

know that we would not be able to reach a parent by email but that

the parent’s phone number is there, then we may have written a short

one like that for example, that the student got into some quarrel in

the school and that they will be bringing a message home in their

backpack. (Teacher 1)

Participation

Pictures and videos of schoolwork. e possibilities for using ICT

to support participation were mentioned. Students, teachers, and parents

provided ideas regarding the use of picture and video sharing to support

participation. We identied the fact that with these tools, parents can

get a better understanding of a student’s daily work in school: “Someone

could take photos or videos during class and then show, for example, in

the home message notebook, what they have been doing during the school

day” (Student 32), and

Sharing the everyday school activities with homes has become richer

with ICT. Parents can use ICT tools to follow the contents of class

activities (stories, pictures, videos) in their child’s class and also the

content created specically by their child. (Teacher 2)

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

Further, possibilities for using mobile ICT equipment were identied.

Students, teachers, and parents could carry mobile equipment with them,

for example to school events or when traveling with the family during the

school term. Using their own ICT equipment, it would be possible for

students to share pictures and narratives from their families’ remote travel

locations, as well as remotely participate in schoolwork: “We have seen the

photos to be a nice addition. Also, the photos taken by parents can be used,

like we did with the school Christmas party” (Parent 30). Additionally,

People travel a lot nowadays and take vacation trips also during the

school term and not only during breaks. Modern technology would

make it possible, for example, that the student would, while still trave

ling, send pictures and narrative and their possible pre-assignments

back to the school. (Parent 30)

e role of students in using ICT for participation was mentioned.

Students can, with the help of a teacher or a school assistant, share their

daily activities with parents and other stakeholders in the school commu

nity through a blog or network diary.

Other school stakeholders can also use ICT to support participation.

Parents mentioned the possibility of participating in the school commu

nity through a blog written by the principal or through the webpages of

the parents’ association.

Scheduled remote participation. Several possibilities for using ICT for

scheduled, real-time, remote participation were identied. Both students

and parents mentioned the possibility of providing live feeds from the class

room, allowing parents to participate in the classroom activities remotely, in

real time: “It would be great to maybe get a real-time picture from a classroom

during a lesson, but that would need permission from all parents” (Parent 8).

A real-time feed and chat could also make it easier for some parents to

participate in parents’ meetings and other gatherings:

A real-time net conference could make it easier for some parents to

participate. All the participants see who is present, (like in a physical

classroom). The discussions would be recorded and stored under

projects so that anybody could watch them at any time. (Parent 55)

2 Crossing School -Family Boundaries Through the Use of Technology

Another parent noted, “We could make use of chat in the parents’

meetings; if you cannot attend, there could be a chat person at the loca

tion who runs the chat between those present locally and those attending

remotely through chat” (Parent 42).

e possibility of recording scheduled sessions was identied, which

would eectively transform them into an unscheduled form of participa

tion for parents who cannot attend a scheduled session. e recordings

could be made available for parents in folders on the class-specic pages

of the WBLE.

Unscheduled remote participation. Ideas for using ICT in non-sched

uled, non-real-time remote participation were identied. A discussion

forum was suggested for participating both in the daily schoolwork and in

parents’ association activities. ICT use was identied as a way to lower the

entry barrier for parents who do not currently participate in these activities:

There could denitely be one for discussion for the parents of the

whole school, for example, on the activities of the parent’s associa

tion. It could be one that would touch everyone and maybe also

reach those families who have not dared to participate in the parents’

association or don’t know about it. Now, this could be like a channel

for communication. (Teacher 2)

ICT-based survey and questionnaire tools could be used to provide

responses during remote participation, as well as to collect various types

of feedback. Possible uses include sharing feedback on the suitability of

homework, distributing surveys on home rules and practices, identify

ing preferred forms of collaboration, and sharing parents’ views on their

children’s schooling.

Sharing of views and opinions. Possibilities for using ICT to share the

views and ideas of the stakeholders in the school community were iden

tied. For example, teachers, special-needs teachers, students, the head-

master and members of the parents’ association could share their thoughts

through blogs, “How about a blog by the teacher? And especially by a

special-needs teacher?” (Parent 8). Students had novel input:

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

Well, yes, and everyone could have one of their own that they could

put there, like exams, and there could be like one of those school

blogs, or, for example, in our class, we have like school blogs we

used to write every Friday. (Student 46)

And, parents noted other uses: “e headmaster could use Opit to share

more of their opinions. We’d love to read those” (Parent 49); and “e

parent’s association and class can already get their message heard more

easily than before, but we could make even more use of this: pictures of

happenings, a blog by the chair of the parents’ association, etc.” (Parent 30).

Parent-led activities. Parents can use ICT in parent-parent collabora

tion, or in activities organized by parents. e specic possible ICT uses

included storing minutes of the class parents’ committee meetings and

other materials on class-specic pages, as well as making use of a discussion

forum for parent discussions on education and upbringing.

Well, I think that trying to get a discussion going would be good,

it could be chat or whatever but that parents could really discuss

things there. For example, ponder some ideas about child upbring

ing, bedtimes and such, and discuss these with other parents so that

parents would nd it a bit like a parent café type of thing. (Teacher 2)

Learning Support and Personalization

Personalized learning. Several possibilities for using ICT to support learn-

ing were identied. To support a student’s learning, the teacher could link

exercises to the class-specic page or create learning modules in the WBLE.

e student could use these tools for personalized teacher-guided practice

so that the student could work at home on their own or with their parents.

Through the class-specic page in the WBLE, the teacher could also

provide guidance and tips for use in free time or during school holi

days. Using these tips, parents would be able to support the student

at home, “Learning modules created under projects support the

2 Crossing School -Family Boundaries Through the Use of Technology

child’s learning and make it possible to exercise more also at home,

either supported by parents or without them” (Teacher 2).

This stuff has been added there as a bit like something to do during

summer, something for the rainy summer day… there is Finnish and

math, and then, we had their book recommendations, and then, we

intend to put there still these like games and such. (Teacher 3)

ICT use was identied as a key enabler in terms of providing personal-

ized learning for each student. Teachers mentioned the possibility of having

a personal page or electronic home message notebook for each student in

the WBLE, as well as the possibility of creating groups of exercises to sup

port personalized learning. Further, they mentioned the possibility of using

the student’s personal page to provide personalized guidance and feedback.

If each student had their own personal home message notebook, one

could place their personalized exercises there, which they could work

on together with their parents. The teacher could place personalized

guidance and feedback on the web pages. (Teacher 4)

Mobile schoolwork. e use of ICT to manage learning content, home-

work, and remote school assignments was suggested. is would allow a

child who is on sick leave or traveling with their family to keep up with

their schoolwork: “Teaching and homework on the net. If the child is

sick or traveling, the teacher could assign homework using the computer”

(Parent 42).

Student portfolio. e use of ICT to allow parents to follow their chil

dren’s progress in school—and general growth—was suggested by parents

and teachers. e key concept suggested was a student’s personal page or

portfolio in the WBLE, which would grow over time and include con

tent such as the current goals agreed upon with the student, the student’s

schoolwork and creative work, the student’s self-evaluation and personal

ized teacher guidance and feedback, as well as feedback from the parents.

Yep, we have given some thought on that it would be good if this

could become a bit like a portfolio-type home message notebook for

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

each child. It could contain that learning progress and self-created

stuff there within the child’s own home message notebook so that

the parents could see them and the children could also look up their

work. This way, they could even try something like process writing

and such and continue even at home and then store the stuff there in

their own home message notebook, in their own folder. (Teacher 2)

One parent noted: “One could nd in the student’s own folder more

information on what has been done in the school, especially what has been

exercised and how was the progress” (Parent 33).

Student email. With the use of ICT tools, including email, in HSC

students can become familiar with having their own email accounts and

learn, together with their parents, how to use their email accounts respon

sibly, “During the fall term, students got their own email accounts and we

have provided instructions for and used them also for home and school

communication” (Teacher 2).

Social learning. Several ideas about using ICT in collaborative learn

ing were generated. rough the use of ICT tools, a class could share

their collaborative work and activities (e.g., pictures and videos) with the

entire class community. ICT tools make it possible for students to share

the skills and knowledge they have acquired outside of school with their

schoolmates, their teacher, and their parents:

Students had a chance to perform their own experiments, which were

then shared with the whole class. For example, the idea to create a

cartoon animation started from an idea one of the students picked up

from Metkula [a learning environment in which children can practice

media literacy skills]. After it was shared with the class, the students

started creating their own animations at home as well. (Teacher 2)

2 Crossing School -Family Boundaries Through the Use of Technology

Supporting Learning at Home

Homework. Teachers, students, and parents mentioned several possibili-

ties for using ICT to support learning at home. Several parents expressed

the wish to see the homework for the day on the class-specic pages or

the electronic home message notebook. ey would like to use this in

formation to support the child in completing their homework. e same

use case was also brought up by a student. Students feel that it would be

good if their parents knew about their homework and could support them

in completing it.

We could have, to the extent possible, have notes in Opit for each

child on areas that could use practice at home. Sometimes, it feels

like it would be good if parents could check even daily the homework

by checking the student notebook of a child with a poor memory.

(Parent 18)

This is the way that parents can in a way follow what’s the homework. If

someone comes home from school and has a hobby and homework is

not interesting: a student is saying “no we didn’t get any homework”

and then they actually have a backpack full of that homework, so in

a way the parents also can follow things. (Student 46)

Exam preparation. e possibility of using ICT to support exam prepa-

ration at home was mentioned. For this purpose, teachers could use class-

specic pages to share additional preparation material that the students

could work on by themselves or with their parents.

We have placed folders for school subjects into the front page exer-

cise folder and collected in the folders Opit exercise materials on the

things we are learning. The students have worked on these exercises

especially when they are prepping for exams. (Teacher 3)

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

Parent support. ICT use was identied as a way to help parents help

their children in their learning. rough the use of ICT tools, a teacher can

guide both students and parents through a learning topic. For example, as

the method of long division has changed since parents were in school, they

mentioned that it would be good if they could watch a video recording

of the teacher showing the students how to use the current method. After

learning the new method themselves, the parents could view the video

again to review the topic together with their children and, equipped with

up-to-date knowledge, help their children with their math homework.

If a child needs help with their homework, especially on some specic

thing, parents could get instructions for that. For example, in math

the techniques (long division etc.) have changed and one nds out

that one can’t help the child without rst learning the new technique

oneself. (Parent 30)

Teachers identied ICT tools as having the ability to provide guidance

and convenient links to help parents in nding the correct exercises to

work on with their children.

Actually, today, as one little girl was like “I don’t know how to tell

Mom how to get to those games”, we put there in the home mes

sage notebook like links for like from here and then like just in case,

I mean Jill told that that she doesn’t know how to tell you; do this

and step 1, step 2, sign into Opit and such. (Teacher 6)

Evaluation

Continuous evaluation. Several possibilities regarding the use of ICT in

evaluation were identied. One key use case that was strongly mentioned

was implementing continuous evaluation by using the student’s own page

or portfolio: “Gathering a portfolio, where students set their own goals

and then evaluate if the goals have been met” (Teacher 1), and “It would

be awesome if one could follow so closely their child’s work and progress

in school subjects – even every day” (Parent 5).

2 Crossing School -Family Boundaries Through the Use of Technology

Self-evaluation. e study school integrates self-evaluation in its ac-

tivities, including a special evaluation week within each school term. e

evaluation week begins with each student completing a self-evaluation

form that they rst discuss with their parents and later with the teacher

in a student-parent-teacher meeting. e discussion with the teacher in

cludes strengths and areas for improvement that are noted on the form

as the student’s goals.

e possibility of using ICT to support self-evaluation activities was

identied. Specically, participants suggested the use of an electronic ver

sion of the self-evaluation form that could be stored in the student’s own

page for easy reference. “We could also ll out the self-evaluation forms

electronically, and they could be stored in the student’s own folder” (Parent

24). “For our school, moving the self-evaluation form into an electronic

format. Once again, gathering a portfolio; including also setting own goals

and pondering if the goals have been met” (Teacher 1).

Evaluation meetings. e possibility of using ICT for the student-

parent-teacher meetings was mentioned during the evaluation weeks. Us

ing a remote meeting tool would allow more parents to take part in these

key collaboration opportunities. “We could use computers in evaluation

discussions, for example, by using Skype for the discussion in case the par

ent just can’t manage to visit the school for the conversation” (Teacher 3).

Exams and quizzes. e possibilities of using ICT for exam preparation

included providing information about upcoming exams on the class-specic

pages, along with associated preparation materials and support for parent

use to help their children with exam preparation. With the quiz and assess

ment features of WBLEs, teachers can create online exams and quizzes. As

the results of these are readily available online, parents can review the results

with their child and support and guide them in areas they nd challenging.

We have placed folders for school subjects into the front page exer-

cise folder, and collected in the folders Opit exercise materials on the

things we are learning. The students have worked on these exercises

especially when they are prepping for exams. (Teacher 3)

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

In our class we have it so that when people take an exam they don’t

always bother to read the book so we’ve got rst in Opit all of these

exercises and there’s also sometimes been links in the home message

notebook. (Student 46)

I wonder if there could be some exams or quizzes or such so that

they would be visible. And that you could in a way browse them in

case there’s something … like talk with the kids like how come you

didn’t get this … maybe at that point teach them and see what are

in a way the weak points with the kid. In a way someway you could

there like help with that. (Parent 35)

Parents also mentioned the possibility of storing the results of traditional

evaluations and exams online for the identication of trends and areas in

which a student needs support. “It would be easier to le evaluations and

exams electronically and to follow progress in areas that have been agreed

for further development” (Parent 30). “If the teachers have time, it would

be good to always have exam grades in a single place there in Opit. is

way, it would be easier to stay up to date and follow the child’s progress”

(Parent 5).

Teacher feedback. ICT was identied as a means for teachers to pro

vide feedback to students. e teacher could provide feedback on the

student’s own page or along with the exercises stored on the page. Parents

also mentioned that they would like to use the student pages to see the

teacher’s mid-term evaluations, as well as teacher notes on areas parents

could help with in the students’ learning. “e teachers could from time

to time put in the kid’s prole some things about the school, I mean how

they are doing in school etc.” (Parent 5). “e teacher could place some

personalized guidance and feedback on the pages” (Teacher 4).

Parents’ feedback. e possibility of using ICT to provide feedback was

also identied in the other direction—feedback from parents. A teacher

mentioned that the feedback features of the WBLE could be used by par

ents to provide feedback to a student through the student’s own page, as

2 Crossing School -Family Boundaries Through the Use of Technology

well to the whole class through the class-specic pages. “We did not have

time to use the parent feedback function in Opit to evaluate students’

work. e feedback function was not available during the work weeks.

We’ll begin using it as soon as possible!” (Teacher 2).

Possibilities for Using ICT in HSC and the Six

Types of Home and School Involvement.

In Figure 3, we introduce a map of the categories of ICT use in HSC

identied in this study to the types of home and school involvement de

ned by Epstein et al. (2009). From the mapping, we see that ICT use

possibilities are not limited to communication (Type 2) but do extend to

various other types of home and school involvement.

Figure 3. Mapping of ICT use possibilities to the types of home and school

involvement

We identied two new types of home and school involvement: learning

at school and learning in free time. Following the conventions of the Ep

stein model, we refer to these new types as Type 7 and Type 8, respectively.

We see that the two new types of home and school involvement can be

Type 1 Type 3 Type 5 Type 7

Communication

and collaboration

Information

Participation

Support of learn-

ing and growth

Learning support

and individuali-

sation

Evaluation

Supporting

learning at home

Type 2 Type 4 Type 6 Type 8

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

practically apply the use of ICT tools so parents can actively participate

in their child’s learning at school. ICT use also makes it possible to extend

the child’s learning experience to their free time or playtime, beyond tra

ditional homework and learning at home.

Further, we note that the results of this study do not indicate ICT use

possibilities for collaborating with the community (Type 6). We see this

as a limit to the scope of the study because it did not involve participants

from the larger community (for example, the student welfare team, nearby

libraries, and other community members) and suggest that another study

could target ICT use possibilities for this involvement type.

We see that the use of ICT in HSC can support the existing types of

home and school involvement, as well as create new types of HSC. ICT

oers possibilities to enhance and extend the ways in which parents can

participate in activities in the school, as well as in supporting the learning

and growth of students.

Discussion

Key Results

In this paper, we have reported a number of possibilities that teachers,

parents, and students identied for ICT use in HSC.

e possibilities with a focus on communication and interaction were

classied into two main categories and several subcategories: information

(news, materials, direct messaging, scheduling, and student-specic infor

mation) and participation (pictures and videos of schoolwork, scheduled

remote participation, unscheduled remote participation, sharing of views

and opinions, parent-led activities).

e possibilities that focused on the support of learning and growth were

classied into three main categories and several subcategories: learning

support and personalization (personalized learning, mobile schoolwork,

student portfolio, student email, social learning); supporting learning at

home (homework, exam preparation, parent support); and evaluation

2 Crossing School -Family Boundaries Through the Use of Technology

(continuous evaluation, self-evaluation, evaluation meetings, exams and

quizzes, teacher feedback, parent feedback).

e results of the study indicate that ICT use provides possibilities for

crossing the traditional boundaries of HSC. rough the use of ICT, new

innovative ways of engaging in HSC can be implemented in practice. e

use of ICT oers new possibilities for collaboration and communication

between students, teachers, and parents, as well as to support the indi

vidual student’s learning and growth. In short, teachers and parents can

work together to support dierent types of learners.

e use of ICT opens new methods of involvement for teachers and

parents. Many of today’s parents are very interested in what happens in

the school, and teachers would appreciate support from parents. e re

sults of this study indicate that ICT use can enable parent participation

in everyday schoolwork (Type 7, learning at school).

Today’s students learn everywhere and make extensive use of ICT in

their free time. e results of this study emphasize the possibility of us

ing ICT to learn during their free time (Type 8, learning in free time).

When a student engages in learning activities during their free time, ICT-

based HSC enables parents and teachers to learn about a child’s interests,

knowledge, and skills and can make use of this information to support

the child’s individual learning and growth.

Each of the three stakeholder groups in this study (students, parents,

and teachers) has their own viewpoints about schooling and education.

Teachers are responsible for supporting student learning and growth ac

cording to the objectives set in the national and school-level curricula.

Parents seek information about the learning and growth of their children,

but they lack access to detailed knowledge about the curricular objectives.

Optimally, students also have a general understanding of the objectives

and are working towards them. erefore, an essential goal of HSC is to

support parents and students in recognizing the objectives and in achieving

them. Several possibilities identied in this study (e.g., the possibility of

focusing on homework and evaluation) can support students and parents

in reaching this goal.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

Recommendations

To make the possibilities of ICT use in HSC a reality, we recommend a

number of actions targeted at the key aspects of the adoption process that

have the potential to aect the outcome of adoption.

Based on the results of this study, the focus of HSC improvement should

be placed on participation, working together with all school stakeholders,

empowering teachers, students, and parents in voicing their ideas about

ICT use and providing them with the practical support they need to im

plement ICT as a part of their collaborative practices. When preparing

requirements for ICT vendors, IT managers should consider use cases

derived from the ICT use possibilities identied by these practitioners.

A prerequisite for ICT use in HSC is that all participants have access

to a workable level of ICT technology, including devices, software, and

connectivity. Today, most Finnish homes, students, and parents possess

equipment that is equivalent or better than what was used in this study.

However, there should be additional focus on improving the usability of

the currently available systems and tools, as that usability will contribute

to the adoption of HSC innovations based on those systems.

Of the local environment factors aecting the adoption of HSC inno

vations, the current bottleneck is with the ICT facilities provided by the

school for teacher use. Teachers currently use their own ICT equipment

(e.g., mobile phones, prepaid cards, and laptops) to support their HSC

needs. For the success of ICT use in HSC, it is crucial that the employer

support the teacher with standard personal tools required by today’s in

formation worker.

In addition, the adoption of ICT innovations at schools may require a

cultural change in ICT use at the school; ICT facilities in schools should

move away from a PC classroom model towards equipment that can be

used in the use cases indicated in this study.

Finally, to ensure the external environment supports ICT adoption,

the identied possibilities of ICT use in HSC should be recognized when

planning school operations and resourcing at the school, communal, and

national levels, and teacher education.

2 Crossing School -Family Boundaries Through the Use of Technology

Acknowledgments

is paper was made possible with support from the Finnable 2020 pro-

ject, funded by the Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innova-

tion (Tekes).

References

Bell, P., Hoadley, C. M., & Linn, M. C. (2004). Design-based research in education. In

M. C. Linn, E. A. Davis, & P. Bell (Eds.), Internet environments for science education

(pp. 73–84). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). e qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Ad-

vanced Nursing ,62(1), 107–115.

Epstein, J. L., Sanders, M. G., Sheldon, S. B., Simon, B. S., Salinas, K. C., Rodriguez

Jansorn, N., et al. (2009). School, family, and community partnership: Your handbook

for action (3rd ed.). ousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

European Commission. (2013). Survey of schools: ICT in education benchmarking access,

use and attitudes to technology in Europe’s schools. European Commission.

FNBE. (2011). Amendments and additions to the National Core Curriculum for Basic

Education. Helsinki: National Board of Education.

Fullan, M. (2007). e new meaning of educational change (4th ed). New York and

London: Teachers College Press.

Gravemeijer, K., & Cobb, P. (2006). Design research from the learning design perspec-

tive. In J. van den Akker, K., Gravemeijer, S., Mc Kenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.),

Educational design research (pp. 17–51). London: Routledge.

Haaparanta, H., Tissari V., & CICERO Learning. (2008). CICERO Learning-selvitysra-

portti: Tieto- ja viestintäteknologian hyödyntäminen opetuksessa ja opiskelussa [CICERO

Learning report: ICT in learning and teaching in Finnish comprehensive school]. Retrieved

from http://www.cicero./les/Cicero/site/CICERO_TVT-selvitysraportti.pdf

Hayes, D. N. A. (2007). ICT and learning: Lessons from Australian classrooms. Com-

puters & Education, 49(2), 385–395.

Hennessy, S., Wishart, J., Whitelock, D., Deaney, R., Brawn, R., La Velle, L., … Win-

terbottom, M. (2007). Pedagogical approaches for technology-integrated science

teaching. Computers & Education, 48(1), 137–152.

Juuti, K., & Lavonen, J. (2006). Design-based research in science education: One step

towards methodology. Nordic Studies in Science Education, 4, 54–68.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

Lavonen, J., Juuti, K., Aksela, M., & Meisalo, V. (2006). A professional development

project for improving the use of information and communication technologies in

science teaching. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 15(2), 159–174.

Lavonen, J., & Laaksonen, S. (2009). Context of Teaching and learning school science

in Finland: Reections on PISA 2006 results. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,

46(8), 922–944.

McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. C. (2012). Conducting educational design research. London:

Routledge.

Nielsen, J. (2000). Designing web usability: e practice of simplicity. New York: Riders.

OECD (2004). Completing the foundation for lifelong learning: An OECD survey of upper

secondary schools. Paris: OECD. Retrieved from http://213.253.134.43/oecd/pdfs/

browseit/9604011E.PDF Visited 3.1.2008

OECD. (2006). Are students ready for a technology-rich world?: What PISA studies tell us

(No. 54931). Paris: Programme for International Student Assessment.

Reeves, T. C. (2006). Design research from technology perspective. In J.van den Akker,

K. Gravemeijer, S. Mc Kenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research.

London: Routledge.

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.

Siniharju, M. (2003). Kodin ja koulun yhteistyö peruskoulun alaluokilla [Collaboratio

between home and school during the rst grades of compulsory education]. Helsinki:

Yliopistopaino

e Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging para-

digm for educational inquiry. Retrieved from http://www.designbasedresearch.org/

reppubs/DBRC2003.pdf

Younie, S. (2006). Implementing government policy on ICT in education: Lessons

learnt. Education and Information technologies, 11(3–4), 385–400.

3 Crossing Classroom Boundaries Through the Use of Collaboration Supporting

ICT: A Case Study on School – Kindergarten – Library – Seniors’ Home Partnership

Crossing Classroom Bounda-

ries Through the Use of Collabora-

tion Supporting ICT: A Case Study

on School – Kindergarten – Library

– Seniors’ Home Partnership

Minna Kukkonen and Jari Lavonen

Abstract

A new model for school-community collaboration (SCC) is needed to sup-

port students’ sense of community and 21st century skills. In this study,

SCC was developed and researched through the iterative-design-based

research (DBR) approach, in which teachers and out-of-school collabo

rators, students, and researchers collaborate in real learning situations.

e use of information and communication technology (ICT) in the

collaboration was considered an innovation adopted by the practitioners.

e aims of the study are to research the collaborators’ expectations of

and experiences with SCC and show how they may utilize ICT to support

student learning. An action team for partnership (ATP) was created and

activated within the framework of Epstein’s (2011) theory of school part

nership programs. Students were active on the action team. e adoption

of innovation was analyzed in the context of Rogers’s theory on the adop

tion of innovations to assess practitioner participation in learning within

collaboration. e data — focusing on partnership and student learning

— was gathered in multiple ways, including questionnaires, interviews,

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

and the analysis of artefacts (e.g., journals created by students and videos).

As a result, the expectations and requirements of collaboration, descrip

tions of ATP in action, and examples of ICT use in school-community

collaboration and student learning are presented. rough an action team

and ICT, it is possible to support school-community collaboration, which

in turn aids student learning and the development of life-long compe

tences by crossing boundaries in learning. e outcome of the DBR will

be artefacts, such as a new model for SCC and guidelines for ICT use in

collaboration. is research is part of the Finnable 2020 project to design

activities that support and enable students to cross boundaries.

Keywords: Collaboration, Crossing Boundaries, Diusion of Innovations,

Collaboration Supporting ICT

Introduction

is study promotes SCC through the use of ICT, which supports collabo-

ration. e aims of the study are to research the collaborators’ expectations

of, and experiences with, SCC. Moreover, a focus is on how school-library,

school-kindergarten, and school-seniors’ housing collaboration may uti

lize ICT to support students’ learning. It is needed to determine ways in

which the community can help students learn, collaborate, and operate in

the twenty-rst century. Collaboration supporting ICT will be used and

developed during this study. e project was implemented in one school

and its nearby collaborators in Finland in the capital metropolitan area.

3 Crossing Classroom Boundaries Through the Use of Collaboration Supporting

ICT: A Case Study on School – Kindergarten – Library – Seniors’ Home Partnership

Actions, Participation, and Collaboration

In this study, students engaged in learning and collaboration at various

SCC sites. In this process, students grew to be part of the community

culture, including its value base, practice, and tools. rough this inter

action, the students learned to control appropriate thinking and action

tools in the community. e key role in development and growth is the

interaction between the environment and its tools (such as ICT tools),

the community, and students (Kumpulainen et al., 2010).

In SCC sites, students change and adapt conceptual and procedural

knowledge through actions, participation, and collaboration. e start

ing point of the community participation is an action that is mutually

agreed upon and supported (Wenger, 1999). Actions are supported by a

variety of practices, tools, concepts, and language. Shared actions involve

the community members, students, teachers, and representatives from

the sites. Learning occurs as a collaborative process that adjusts through

the actions of individuals and communities in various environments and

conditions (Säljö, 1994).

In a community, knowledge and skills should be learned in order to

operate within that community. However, these competences cannot be

learned merely by following. Active participation and collaboration are

required. Individuals have their own needs and aspirations. rough con

structing SCC and operating in them, we can learn to utilize the diversity

oered and take advantage of data resources, expertise, and life experiences.

Active participation, agency, and life-long learning skills are important

constructional elements in a good life for an individual and the whole

of society.

A school is an organization with the task of guiding students to achieve

knowledge and skills that will allow them to successfully participate in

society and develop life-long 21

century competences (FNBE, 2004).

erefore, a school should ensure that it provides bridges between various

kinds of learning environments and that it supports crossing the bounda

ries that are easily built around the school. It cannot detach too greatly

from the outside world (Kumpulainen et al., 2010).

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

Within the frame of the national level and school curriculum (FNBE,

2004), teachers aim to provide opportunities for students to learn and ac

cumulate knowledge and skills in various contexts or learning environments.

In these contexts, ICT can create new dimensions of interaction, collabora

tion, and learning (Laru, 2012). Computer-supported collaborative learning

(CSCL) is based on the idea of developing new applications and software

to create explorative activities and social interaction. CSCL combines the

use of ICT and education, collaborative learning, and computer support.

It has several approaches, such as e-learning, online teaching, posting study

content, and collaborating face-to-face. Collaboration takes place while

browsing information on the Internet, during discussions, or through the

presentation of ndings (Stahl, Koschmann, & Suthers, 2006).

Laru (2012) highlights the importance of guidance while using dier

ent devices like ICT tools. According to him, enhancement of learning

processes can be facilitated through oering supportive collaboration en

vironments and tools for students. Collaboration requires that participants

share aims, are coordinated, and engage in problem-solving (Laru, 2012).

Adoption of Innovations

Another theoretical framework of the study is based on Rogers’ (2003)

theory on diusion and adoption of innovations. According to Rogers

(2003), an innovation is an object, idea, or practice that seems new to

an individual. An innovation may also be something one has known for

some time, but has not yet developed an attitude towards it, adopted it,

or rejected it (Rogers, 2003).

In this study, the innovation is SCC where ICT is used. Use of ICT

in education—especially in SCC—as an innovation consists of the use

of appropriate hardware and software. Use of ICT usually has some ben

et for its potential adopters, even if it may create uncertainty about the

consequences. During the adoption process, the adopter is motivated to

reduce this uncertainty. In this study, an ATP was created to decrease this

uncertainty. Moreover, the activities were planned in collaboration with

3 Crossing Classroom Boundaries Through the Use of Collaboration Supporting

ICT: A Case Study on School – Kindergarten – Library – Seniors’ Home Partnership

the adopters, and the use of ICT was practiced together. e adoption

process consisted of stages, beginning with hearing about an innovation,

to the nal stage of persuasion. Whether or not the decision is adopted, it

is implemented and nally leads to conrmation (Rogers, 2003).

Rogers (2003) denes a champion as a person who throws their weight

behind an innovation. e role of a champion is to bolster a new idea

within an organization, initiate the innovation process, and guide the

approval and implementation of the new idea within the organization.

e presence of an innovation champion contributes to the success of

conrming the idea. e champion need not be a top manager. Although

Smith, Redican, and Olsen (1992) formulate an administrative innovation

champion positive, Day (1984) found a powerful innovation champion

is needed when the innovation is costly, highly visible, or radical. Cham

pions play a role as an opinion leader in a community, and they help t

an innovation into the organizational context. Based on many examples,

Rogers (2003) suggests that innovation champions come in all ages and

have various abilities and degrees of formal power (Rogers, 2003).

e adoption of an innovation in an organization is more complex when

compared to the process that an individual goes through in the adoption

process. An individual cannot fully adopt an innovation until an organiza

tion has adopted it. ere are innovation adoption processes going on all

of the time in most organizations, and this is a fundamental characteristic

of organizations. Implementation amounts to the adaptation in which the

change of both the innovation and the organization occurs (Rogers, 2003).

Figure 1. Phases of adoption of an innovation within organizations, accord-

ing to Rogers’ (2003) theory.

– Agenda-setting

– Matching

– Redening

– Clarifying

– Routinizing

Initiation

Implementation

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

Figure 1 reveals that the adoption of innovation consists of two main

phases divided into ve stages. During the initiation phase, the adopter

goes through all the information-gathering, conceptualizing, and plan

ning stages, which are all essential for the adoption of an innovation. e

adopter makes decisions that consider the adoption of the innovation.

Sometimes knowledge related to the innovation launches the adoption

process. During the agenda-setting stage, the needs, problems, and issues

are identied, and onwards, an innovation is set to cope with the needs and

context of the organization. During the matching stage, the organization’s

agenda is compared to the innovation. In an optimal situation, the inno

vation matches some needs within the organization and some individuals

recognize the innovation as a possible solution to those needs. Adoption

will likely occur if the innovation eectively matches the organization’s

needs (Rogers, 2003).

e rst stage in the implementation phase is redening. During this

stage, the innovation is re-invented in order to accommodate the organi

zation’s needs and structure more closely. Both the innovation and the

organization will change or adopt new characteristics during the redening

stage. During the clarifying process, the innovation will become clearer to

the organization’s members. Clarifying requires sucient time to make the

innovation familiar to ensure rejection of the innovation. e meaning

of the innovation is constructed through an interaction. In implementa

tion process, the innovation champions play an important role. While the

innovation has been routinized into a part of the regular activities of the

organization at this point, the innovation has lost its separate identity and

the innovation process is completed. Participation of the organization’s

members in the innovation process makes sustainability of the innova

tion more likely over time. While adopting an innovation, organization

members will modify the innovation so they come to regard it as their

own, and thus will more likely continue to do so over time (Rogers, 2003).

3 Crossing Classroom Boundaries Through the Use of Collaboration Supporting

ICT: A Case Study on School – Kindergarten – Library – Seniors’ Home Partnership

Epstein’s Models for School–Community Partnerships

e framework of the study is based on Epstein’s (2011) school partnership

model (i.e., SCC). According to this model, the community is important

for the success of partnership programs. Epstein denes community to

include family and the school, and extends to the neighborhood, the city

or township, and all of society. According to Epstein, every school, district,

or state must identify with its community and design productive con

nections that will strengthen school programs and advance the interests

of the community. e main purpose for SCC is to help all youngsters

succeed in school and later on in life. Students are at the center of the

SCC. It is important to activate students to produce their own successes

by engaging, guiding, energizing, and motivating them in designed activi

ties (Epstein, 2011)

Epstein (2011) suggests an action team for partnerships (ATP) to im

prove plans and practices and to guide development linked to school

improvement goals. e idea of ATP is close to the idea of a champion

as dened by Rogers (2003). In addition, Epstein identies ve steps for

developing positive SCC (i.e. school, family, and community) collabora

tions. Identication of the ve steps is based on the eorts and insights

from hundreds of schools (Epstein, 2011).

Table 1. describes the steps towards appropriate and successful SCC based

on Epstein’s (2011) theory. Epstein denes ATP as an eective way to build

school partnerships. e ATP should include members of dierent entities

extensively, and it is important to include at least one member from the school

council, school improvement team, or other advisory group. A diverse mem

bership ensures various needs, interests, and talents are taken into account.

e chair or co-chairs of the ATP should have the respect of the members,

good communication skills, and understanding of the SCC claims. An ex

tensive team ensures that the responsibilities can be shared and that plans for

partnership will continue even if members move or change positions. Funds

are needed for various costs, such as salaries, sta development, and training

workshops. In addition, to do its work, the ATP requires explicit support

from the principal and district leaders for time for team training, meetings,

program evaluation, and conducting the activities (Epstein, 2011).

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

Table 1. Five Steps to Develop Positive School, Family, and Community Con-

nections, According to Epstein (2011).

Steps towards positive connections The key issues

Create an ATP for Partnerships (ATP) takes responsibility for

• assessing practices

• organizing options for partnerships

• implementing activities

• delegating leadership for activities

• evaluating steps

• continuing the improvement of practices

takes leadership or support roles

Obtain Funds and Other Support a budget to

• guide and support the activities

• support the salaries of a director and

facilitators

• provide for program costs

time and social support

Identify Starting Points gathering information about

• current practices

• views, experiences and wishes

• ideas

Develop a One-Year Action Plan a set of selected goals

specic involvement activities

schedule

responsibilities

costs

evaluation

Continue Planning, Evaluating and

Improving Programs

an annual presentation and celebration

a new One-Year Action Plan

3 Crossing Classroom Boundaries Through the Use of Collaboration Supporting

ICT: A Case Study on School – Kindergarten – Library – Seniors’ Home Partnership

Research Questions

e rst aim of the study is to nd out the collaborators’ expectations of

SCC. ese expectations are taken into consideration while planning the

collaboration and assessing the needs for collaboration. Secondly, experi

ences with SCC and ICT utilization are being researched. Ways of using

ICT in collaboration are in focus. Students’ participation and action in

collaboration are important while nding out how students adopt ICT

as an innovation. e research questions are:

Q. 1. What are the collaborators’ expectations and experiences with SCC?

Q. 2. How is ICT used in SCC between school, kindergarten, library

and seniors’ home?

Q. 3. How are students adopting ICT as an Innovation in SCC between

school, kindergarten, library and seniors’ home?

Method

According to Epstein’s (2011) model that describes SCC, an ATP is need-

ed. erefore, an ATP was established by the chair of the activity. e ATP

in this study consisted of two groups: an adult’s team and a student’s tutor-

team. e chair for the ATP is a teacher who is a researcher and member

of the school management team. In this study the ATP was established

by inviting representatives of organizations located near the school. e

organizations were selected based on their location and their (positive)

attitude towards collaboration. e managers of the organizations were

contacted and invited to join the collaboration. rough involvement of

the managers, the authority innovation-decision was made, which others

in the respective organizations must comply with, according to Rogers’

(2003) theory. e managers appointed team members to the ATP from

within their respective organizations. ese individuals were akin to lo

cal champions, throwing their weight behind the ICT as an innovation.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

Figure 2. The ATP in school collaboration in practice.

Figure 2 describes the team structure and members. e tutor students

were chosen by means of inclusive learning. e school participating in

the SCC was involved in the team teaching model used. Mainstream stu

dents, special needs students and their teachers, special needs teachers,

and assistants cooperated in various ways. In the fourth grade, there were

63 students, 4 teachers, and 2 assistant teachers in the classrooms. e

tutor students were individuals who were responsible, capable of studying

independently, and possessed good interaction skills. e tutor students

were chosen by their teachers. ere were an equal number of girls and

boys on the tutor team. e adult team included both male and female

members. All members of the ATP were considered to be the boosters of

ICT use in collaboration—also known as “champions” in the frame of

Rogers’ theory on adoption of innovations. eir role was to initiate the

innovation process by guiding and implementing the ATP ideas and goals

within their respective organizations. e actions were planned taking

into consideration Rogers’ (2003) theory of adoption of innovation and

Epstein’s (2011) theory of school partnerships. ese theories facilitate the

planning and implementation of the activities organized in the environ

ments in accordance with the aims of the collaboration.

Action Team

Five girls and ve boys

Manager

One senior home worker

Manager

Two library workers

Manager

One kindergarten teacher

One kindergarten nurse

One Teacher

Headmaster

Researcher

Ten Fourth grades

School

Kindergarten

City Library

Seniors’ Home

Adults

Tutor-Students

3 Crossing Classroom Boundaries Through the Use of Collaboration Supporting

ICT: A Case Study on School – Kindergarten – Library – Seniors’ Home Partnership

e study follows DBR methodology. DBR requires the collaboration

of practitioners and researchers in real teaching and learning situations, as

well as the creation of prototype solutions based on the aims and agreed-

upon design principles. DBR increases the capacity for designing educa

tional innovation that could also work in practice. Research proceeds in

iterative cycles. DBR explores possibilities for creating novel learning and

teaching environments and develops theories of learning and instruction

for dierent contexts. It also advances and consolidates design knowl

edge (Van Den Akker, Gravemeijer, McKenney, & Nieveen, 2006). e

designed activities—where the tutor students play an important role in

SCC and act as experts—were observed. Both the students and partners

were interviewed and asked to answer (paper and pencil) questionnaires.

e researcher kept a eld notebook with descriptions about the use of

ICT in SCC (e.g., how students used ICT, successes and diculties expe

rienced in dierent situations). Notes during the meetings were recorded

in the eld notebook. rough the analysis of the data, new knowledge

about the adoption of SCC and use of ICT in this SCC were obtained in

the framework of Rogers’ (2003) theory, while considering the adoption

of innovations.

Figure 3. Designed cycles to support the adoption of innovation, according

to Rogers’ (2003) theory in practice.

– Device and software

installation

– Education

– Assessment

– April-May 2012

Initiation

– Brainstorming and

planning

– Education

– Implementation

– Assessment

– September-

December 2012

Cycle 1

– Planning and

developing based

on assessment

– Implementation

– Assessment

– Decisions in

organization

– January-May 2013

Cycle 2

Collecting data: questionnaires, interviews, video recordings, journal (blogs)

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

Figure 3 represents the adoption process for SCC with the implementa-

tion of ICT. e initiation process included the installation and familiari-

zation of devices, such as SMART Boards, document cameras, and soft-

ware, as a part of the SCC. SMART Boards and peripherals were installed

in the seniors’ home, city library, kindergarten, and school. e number

of the facilities included in the study was assessed by the chair of the ATP

and school management, considering the need to enhance activities based

on need and practical issues. During the initiation, the chair educated the

ATP on the use of SMART Boards and its Notebook software. Educa

tion was provided to the ATP during the entire implementation process,

based on recognized needs. e tutor students received the most instruc

tion to allow them to share their newly acquired knowledge with their

schoolmates and the ATP members. Two cycles of implementation were

monitored relative to the school year periods. e expectations and need

for collaboration were identied. Goals and actions for implementation

during the cycles were planned jointly with the ATP. e rst cycle was

assessed collaboratively and included reection on the video recordings

and photos taken during implementation. Based on the experiences, ex

pectations, and needs from the rst cycle, the second cycle was planned

and goals were set collaboratively.

Multiple sources for data collection were utilized, as is characteristic

of DBR. Mixed methods were used in data analysis. e questionnaires

included open-ended questions and a Likert scale. After each action, the

ATP members were asked to complete a questionnaire about the incident

action. In this paper, we use the ATP members’ responses to the open-

ended questions from the questionnaires as preliminary data. e answers

were analyzed in accordance with the principles of theory-driven content

analysis (Patton, 2002). First, the content analysis began with themes

related to Epstein’s (2011) theory on collaboration (school-kindergarten,

school-seniors’ home, and school-library collaboration). And second, the

ideas in Rogers’ (2003) theory on adoption of innovation were followed.

In practice, the data was analyzed based on the aforementioned theories

(e.g., by determining how the ATP functioned within the new context of

ICT use). We analyzed how students and collaborators were able to par

ticipate in ATP activities and learn to control appropriate thinking and

3 Crossing Classroom Boundaries Through the Use of Collaboration Supporting

ICT: A Case Study on School – Kindergarten – Library – Seniors’ Home Partnership

action tools (like ICT) within the community. e same categories or

phenomena were searched in multiple data sources. Samples of responses

to the open-ended questions and interviews are noted in quotation marks.

Results

e results describe representative examples of the ATP activities and im-

plementation of ICT use in practice based on the collected data.

Expectations and Needs for Collaboration

Results of participant expectations and needs focused on four dimensions

(as seen in Figure 4). e members of the ATP organized, learned, and

interacted well, with fruitful support for future collaboration. ey felt

it was important to have a responsible leader—a main champion—who

shared responsibility with all members and encouraged participation in

Figure 4. Expectations and needs for collaboration.

Partners

Networking

New learning

cultures

Timing

Shared

responsibility

Support

Participation

ICT skills

Learning in

practice

Pedagogy

New ideas

Interaction

Nice common

moments

Openess and

accessibility

Joy and

enthusiasm

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

the collaboration. e ATP members’ experience of interaction and col-

laboration was seen as fruitful, open, and joyful. ey discovered new

partners and experienced new cultures for learning.

Collaboration in Kindergarten

According to the notes in the eld notebook, the ATP members used

ICT in SCC (especially SMART Boards and document cameras) in kin

dergarten in variously performed everyday activities. e tutor students

taught kindergarten children to create so-called electrical postcards that

were decorated using Notebook tools, printed, and made into postcards.

“Fourth graders taught preschool children how to make an easter card. At

rst, a fourth grader showed step-by-step how to make a card and then a

preschool children made the same themselves.” (ATP member 1)

Another example of tutor students acting as experts in kindergarten is

their creation of games. Tutor students instructed the collaborators, includ

ing the ATP members and children in kindergarten, how to use a SMART

Board to make visual memory games. Kindergarten children were asked

to choose some of their toys which were scanned into a document camera

and ported to the Smart Notebook software. A block to hide one toy at a

time was calculated with Notebook tools. Children were asked to close their

eyes while one child would cover up one toy; the other children were asked

to identify the missing object. is game was called “Kim’s game” and was

redened by tutor students and the chair to t the use of SMART Board

software in kindergarten. “Tutor-students taught kindergarten children to

scan their own toys to SMART and then cut the pictures to make a Kim’s

game out of those toys,” (ATP member 2) and “We scanned children’s toys

and made a Kim’s game out of those pictures.” (Tutor student 1)

Another memory game called “Pairs” was built using the lesson activity

toolkit (LAT) available in Notebook. e toolkit consists of the ready-

made activity layouts that can be edited by dierent means. Tutor students

taught the ATP members to use this toolkit. e kindergarten members

in the ATP used LAT tools with kindergarten children. ey used web-

based software like the Papunet game (http://papunet.net/english/), which

3 Crossing Classroom Boundaries Through the Use of Collaboration Supporting

ICT: A Case Study on School – Kindergarten – Library – Seniors’ Home Partnership

is easily redened using a SMART Board and works with small children.

Some kindergarten children and members of the ATP have taught the use

of Papunet to school students using the conference system, Adobe Connect

Pro, with the help of the chair. Adobe Connect Pro is used to send and

share audio-video les of kindergarten children singing and reciting poems

together with students from school to the organizations in collaboration.

In Kindergarten we have practiced to use SMART Board and Note-

book (What the Board is? How to use it?) We have taken pictures of

children with [the] document camera and used the photos to make a

Kim’s game. SMART is one alternative activity to choose when play

ing, and children play Papunet and other children’s games. They also

draw and watch and analyse pictures. We have also made anagrams

and memory games with children. We have sent a poem and singing

session with school and recorded it. We have also made an advent’s

calendar by using lesson activity toolkit. (ATP member 2)

Collaboration in the Library

e city library involved in the SCC is a modern library with various kinds

of activities oered to patrons. e tutor-students have been involved in

some of these activities. e library oers action days for patrons where

tutor students have, for example, provided advice on the use of the SMART

Board and its software. e patrons have been able to experiment with

the functions discussed. Tutor students also taught patrons how to create

electrical postcards; the patrons were able to produce them. e library’s

SMART Board is used to create animations in its children’s animation club.

e members of the club come up with stories and fairy-tales and illustrate

them with drawings and paintings created with crayons and watercolors.

ese illustrations are scanned with a document camera and ported to the

Notebook. With the Notebook tools, these paintings are made into an

animation with the system that the chair of the ATP has innovated. ose

animations are revised with movie editing tools. e document camera

is used during storybook time to show illustrations from a storybook to

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

children. A library worker keen on table role playing games used a SMART

Board in his role playing game club for youngsters. e Adobe Connect

Pro conference system has been used to send and share concerts, ideas

for nding interesting books to read, puppet shows, and other activities

to make reading and culture attractive to all collaborating organizations.

Well we have had Niina Bell’s children’s concert, and there were about

three hundred children in the library to listen to it. And moreover the

concert was sent with Adobe Connect Pro to kindergarten and other

partners. So there [was a] huge amount of listeners. So maybe a thou

sand of persons enjoyed the concert at a moment. And then there

has been education and animation club in the library. (ATP member 3)

Collaboration in the Seniors’ Home

In the seniors’ home, the SMART Board was used to share student pres-

entations created at school on multiple subjects. e created animations

were shown using the SMART Board. e mobile devices (e.g., laptops)

were used to share presentations and poems on Valentine’s Day. Movies

were produced using the iMovie application on iPads. Tutor students and

senior citizens have played games together on the iPads. Mobile devices

have been used to record interviews with senior citizens who tell about

their life experiences and those interviews are then shared with the school.

In collaboration, the seniors in senior home have got activities. Each

visit to [the] senior home has been very valuable to seniors. It has

been really brilliant to use ICT tools with seniors. There is a huge

need for this kind of collaboration. (ATP member 4)

3 Crossing Classroom Boundaries Through the Use of Collaboration Supporting

ICT: A Case Study on School – Kindergarten – Library – Seniors’ Home Partnership

Results on SCC

Results about the usefulness of the collaboration and experiences of the

collaborators are provided below in table 2 as direct quotations that have

been selected as typical responses.

Table 2. Usefulness and experiences of the collaboration.

Collaboration “Collaboration has been interesting, fun and motivating.” (ATP

member 5)

“Activity has been planned and organized. The teacher and the

students were eager to participate, as well as almost all involved

partners.” (ATP member 7)

“Interdisciplinary collaboration is strengthened and shown its

power.” (ATP member 6)

Students’ Exper-

tise and Interper-

sonal Skills

“The students are great teachers and they precisely learn while

teaching.” (ATP member 7)

“I think this is really nice and I would like to collaborate with elderly

people and make them happy.” (Tutor Student 1)

Valuable

Networking

“I think it is important that the school’s teaching will spread out-

side the school building and the school will collaborate with the

surrounding society.” (ATP member 7)

“I think the collaboration is fruitful and I would prefer more [of]

this kind of life-cycle thinking in our society.” (ATP member 4)

Management

Support

“The busy schedule and overlaps have been preventing the col-

laboration for my part. Some of the partners have not been able

to participate. There have been some logistical problems and

obsolete software.” (ATP member 5)

Keys to Success:

Regular Meet-

ings, Training, and

Leader of ATP

“This has been a very interesting and educational project. I have

learnt new and versatile ways to use information and communi-

cation technology, especially SMART Board.” (ATP member 2)

“I was a chair and I showed and taught what I have learned.” (Tu-

tor Student 2)

“This collaboration is really worthwhile.” (ATP member 8)

“Without an extra adult and leader, the action would have been

impossible. The role of leader has been really important.” (ATP

member 7)

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

Table 2 represents the experiences of the participants in SCC. e

collaboration has been seen as interesting and successful. Well-organized

action and meetings have been seen as the key successes of collaboration.

e role of the leader has been important in terms of taking care of the

content of the meetings, including the goals, which are set as a group.

A well-organised schedule for meetings and training had an important

role. Even if there have been some overlaps, most of the participants have

been able to be present in meetings and training. Obsolete software has

not prevented the collaboration, but it has been found to be less eective

than the newest software. is caused some frustration for the eective

users of ICT.

It is important that all participants felt they had equal possibilities of

participating in the entire process, including planning, action, and evalu

ation. Well-planned meetings have provided trust and feelings of eective

collaboration. e participants have taken on shared responsibilities and

participated actively. e actions of tutor-students have been found to be

useful. e tutor-students have been able to learn a great deal of knowl

edge and skills, and moreover, they have been able to share their expertise.

Tutor-students have been positively proud of their role in collaboration.

3 Crossing Classroom Boundaries Through the Use of Collaboration Supporting

ICT: A Case Study on School – Kindergarten – Library – Seniors’ Home Partnership

Discussion and Conclusions

e use of ICT to promote SCC was recognized as a means of support

for students learning twenty-rst century skills (Binkley et al., 2011), as

has been seen in the results of this study. ICT was used in SCC in multi

ple ways where thinking, collaboration skills, and problem solving were

needed. ese skills were also needed in the planning of the ICT use in

SCC. New ideas and innovations in using ICT in SCC were created. ICT

tools were linked together in multiple ways. Students, for example, aug

mented an activity with storytelling, writing, and drawing based on stories.

e drawings were imported into Notebook and nally, animations were

recorded using the SMART Board. ose animations were presented at

all collaborating organizations and other places, like learning exhibitions.

Consequently, collaboration through the use of ICT is fruitful for CSS

and learning to use ICT.

e results strengthen the idea of the importance of SCC. is col

laboration creates versatile environments for learning. Moreover, the col-

laboration is an important way for an individual to combine, link together,

as well as take advantage of data resources, expertise, and life experiences.

e life-long learning and lifecycle approach was maintained as an integral

component of this study. Tutor students visited the kindergarten, library,

and seniors’ home in multiple ways, especially to share ideas and expertise

and give joy to partners and patrons. For tutor students, these visits were

situations in which they could provide guidance, teaching, and presenta

tion of their competences-especially while planning the visits. e shared

responsibilities and activities, expertise, and life experiences are important

elements that can be extended to society as a whole.

e use of ICT in SCC was redesigned and matched to t the needs of

each partner, according to dierent needs and constraints at the partner

site. e introduction of the potential benets and uses of the ICT tools

was important from the point of view of supporting the generation of

new ideas for the use of ICT tools in SCC. When participants became

familiar with the basic use of an ICT tool, it became easier for them to

match the use to t the context of their own site and needs. For exam

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

ple, in making animations, participants used ICT tools in a creative way

to nd new solutions by testing dierent kinds of tools and possibilities

together. Tutor students also taught children in kindergarten, classmates

at school, and patrons of the library to make postcards with the SMART

Board, including pictures and texts. ose cards were printed and given

to friends and relatives.

rough the actions of the organizations, tutor students acted as ex

perts and gained experience on how to interact in public situations and

to act as a teacher or presenter. According to student responses to the

questionnaires and to interviews with them, they enjoyed acting as tu

tor students. ey felt they learned many twenty-rst century skills, like

using ICT in dierent situations. ey found signicance in getting to

know older people, and that even old people with memory disorders were

kind and interested in collaborating with students and in seeing and using

new ICT devices. Tutor students were proud to give happiness and joy

to older people. e results were parallel to Epstein’s (2011) theory for

school collaboration programs. SCC has fostered learning of twenty-rst

century competencies, like critical thinking, collaboration, interaction,

innovation, creativity, and ICT skills. Tutor students especially became

familiar with the versatility of ICT tools. As a result, they have been able

to redene the use of those tools by generating new ways to employ them.

In general, the tutor students were enthusiastic users of ICT and developed

the use of ICT within their own organizations and shared their expertise

with others. ey surprised others with the games and animations they

created. Afterwards, they claimed they felt incredibly happy and proud

about their accomplishments. e tutor students voluntarily spent some

of their school breaks practicing their ICT skills.

e experiences demonstrate that through establishing an ATP with

representatives from organizations, it is possible for a school to collaborate

and allow students to act as partners in society, giving them opportuni

ties the school cannot provide itself. Shared actions integrate community

members. It is important to pay attention to the active participation, ac

countability, and time resources to make the ATP work fruitful. rough

good planning and intensive collaboration, it is possible to maintain a

community where learning takes place regardless of time, place, or age.

3 Crossing Classroom Boundaries Through the Use of Collaboration Supporting

ICT: A Case Study on School – Kindergarten – Library – Seniors’ Home Partnership

Relying on Rogers’ (2011) theory, the importance of participation and

ability to modify the innovation for one’s own needs makes the innova

tion sustainable over time. Moreover, Rogers’ (2003) suggestions on the

characteristics of innovation champions were conrmed in this study: the

champions were of various ages, and they had various kinds of abilities

and degrees of formal power. is was seen as important in this study.

Students were capable of learning even better than adults because they

were open-minded and had courage. ey also had time to practice ICT

tools during the school days and breaks and received more education than

the busy adults.

e rst cycle of the DBR project was initiated to determine how dif

ferent devices were suitable for dierent purposes. SMART Boards were

suitable for small children in kindergarten when installation considered

placement and height. e small children accepted use of the interactive

tools naturally, and they felt free to test the possibilities. Mobile devices

seemed to be valuable in seniors’ homes. In a way, ICT has been a tool to

increase student visitation at seniors’ homes and naturally sustains inter

action with seniors.

e results show that it is possible to arrange new learning environ

ments and cross boundaries through the active participation of various

professions, patrons, students, and ages. By sharing ideas, planning, and

implementing the ICT jointly, it is possible to provide positive feedback

about participant and organization expectations and needs.

Schools must provide bridges between dierent kinds of learning en

vironments and allow the crossing of boundaries to organizations located

near the school in order to open possibilities to the outside world. Sharing

experiences, research, and implementing outcomes in practice will foster

collaboration. Teacher education should be involved in the development of

collaboration possibilities and use of ICT as a tool in everyday activities and

life-long learning. e roles of teachers at school should be reconsidered.

Teachers have many responsibilities in student education and learning,

considering the curriculum, and all other tasks. Resources are limited, and

building up a well-functioning ATP is time consuming and demanding.

One solution is to nominate a teacher at the school to be responsible for

collaborating with organizations close to the school. is person could

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

also be the chair of the ATP. is teacher could arrange interaction and

build bridges between various learning environments. e teacher should

be released form the burden of having their own class. e teacher should

also be educated in ICT use and in supporting the learning and profes

sional development of other partners.

In the future, it would be interesting to further research how students

learn collaboratively. Specically, is it possible to learn important twenty-

rst century skills in collaboration? And, what is the signicance to stu

dents of being members of the ATP? It is also important to research ways

to share new ideas for teacher education to create collaboration and interac

tion by crossing boundaries and forming new environments for learning.

Acknowledgement

e research is part of the Finnable 2020 sub-project, School Partnership

and Networks. An important aim of the Finnable project is to design

activities that support and enable students to cross boundaries. e Uni

versity of Helsinki and the Department of Teacher Education Faculty of

Behavioural Sciences are involved in the Finnable project.

References

Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., & Rumble, M. (2011).

Dening 21st century skills. London: e Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century

Skills. Retrieved from http://atc21s.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/1-Dening-

21st-Century-Skills.pdf

Epstein, J. L. (2011). School, family, and community partnerships: Preparing educators and

improving schools (2nd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Westview Press

FNBE: Finnish National Board of Education. (2004). Finnish national core curricula for

basic education. Vammala: Vammalan kirjapaino Oy.

Kumpulainen, K., Krokfors L., Lipponen, L., Tissari V., Hilppö, J., & Rajala, A. (2010).

Learning bridges: Toward participatory learning environments. Helsinki: Helsinki Uni-

versity Print.

3 Crossing Classroom Boundaries Through the Use of Collaboration Supporting

ICT: A Case Study on School – Kindergarten – Library – Seniors’ Home Partnership

Laru, J. (2012). Scaolding learning activities with collaborative scripts and mobile devices.

Retrieved from http://herkules.oulu./isbn9789514299407/isbn9789514299407.

pdf

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). ousand

Oaks: Sage Publications.

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diusion of innovations, (5th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.

Säljö, R. (1994). Minding action. Conceiving of the world versus participating in cul-

tural practices. Nordisk Pedagogik, 14(2), 71–80.

Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative

learning: An historical perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of

the learning sciences (pp. 409–426). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Retrieved from http://GerryStahl.net/cscl/CSCL_English.pdf

e Design-Based Research Collective (2003). Design-based research: an emerging para-

digm for educational inquiry. Retrieved from http://www.designbasedresearch.org/

reppubs/DBRC2003.pdf

Van den Akker, J., Gravemeijer, K., McKenney, S., & Nieveen, N. (2006). Educational

design research. London: Routledge.

4 Crossing Classroom Boundaries in Science Teaching and

Learning Through the Use of Smartphones

Crossing Classroom

Boundaries in Science Teaching

and Learning Through the Use

of Smartphones

Kati Sormunen, Jari Lavonen and Kalle Juuti

Abstract

e aim of this study was to better understand how smartphones can be

applied as a means for personalized learning. Altogether, 49 fth grade

pupils and 3 teachers in an elementary school in the area of the capital

of Finland participated in design-based research. Together the teachers,

pupils, and researchers designed and implemented the use of smartphones

in personalized science learning inside and outside school situations. After

having time to become acquainted with the smartphones, the pupils used

the phones during the water-themed science project. During the project,

students were asked by web questionnaire what kind of applications and

for what purposes they used the smartphones, while the teacher empha

sized certain applications. Based on pupils’ responses to questionnaires and

teachers’ logs, pupils used phones primarily for making notes, revisions,

and information gathering. It seems that pupils need strong guidance in

order to apply smartphones in learning.

Keywords: Personalized Learning, Science Learning, Inclusion, Mobile

Learning

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

Introduction

Primary teachers face diverse challenges when organizing primary science

activities according to the national-level curriculum and in heterogeneous

classrooms in which several pupils with special needs are integrated into

the class (Futurelab, 2003). Moreover, in this rapidly changing society, the

technological environment and family life generate their own challenges

to everyday classroom practices. Most teachers are willing to adopt new

technology for use in their classrooms and respond well to the challenges

(Lavonen, Juuti, Aksela, & Meisalo, 2006). However, it is not clear how

technology should be used in a way that supports primary science learning

amongst pupils with dierent needs (Warwick, Wilson, & Winterbottom,

2006). ere is on-going educational policy discussion on twenty-rst cen

tury competences among Organisation for Economic Co-operation and

Development (OECD) countries, of which Finland is a member. Essential

to this policy discussion is the question of future challenges. e twenty-

rst century competences emphasize novel ways of thinking and working

and how engagement in thinking and working are supported. Moreover,

it is essential to ask what the future context and tools needed for working

will be (ITL-Research, 2011; James & Pollard, 2004; Lavonen, 2012). In

order to prepare pupils for future challenges, the notion of personalized

learning is often acknowledged in policy discussions.

is paper presents the results of a design based research (DBR) project

conducted with smartphones in science classrooms. ere was a special

focus on personalized learning. First, we introduce the theoretical back

ground for personalized mobile learning, and then describe the three cycles

of the DBR and the data collection techniques in the method section.

e results section describes the outcomes of the study and explains how

pupils use smartphones in personalized science learning. A discussion and

conclusion are provided in the nal section of the paper.

4 Crossing Classroom Boundaries in Science Teaching and

Learning Through the Use of Smartphones

Theoretical Background

Personalized Learning

e term personalized learning has been dened in dierent ways. Primar-

ily, the term is used in studies that deal with software design in computer

science (e.g., Samson & Karangiannidis, 2002). However, we understand

personalized learning in a broader way. In this study, we are interested in

the use of technology as a means for personalizing learning for pupils in

side and outside school. For us, personalized learning is a process in which

pupils are exposed to high-quality teaching and learning, and their abilities

and working and learning skills are further developed by oering variation

in the selection of content, the learning process, and concrete outcomes

of the process. Personalized learning is a reaction to the fact that pupils

come to school with dierent knowledge and skill bases, as well as varying

learning preferences, interests, and aptitudes (Heller, Mayer, Hockemeyer,

& Albert, 2005). erefore, each pupil must be taken into account and

schools need to create equal learning opportunities for everyone tailored

to their individual knowledge, skills, and needs (Järvelä,2006).

e origin of personalized of learning is political. In practice, the Finnish

National Core Curriculum for Basic Education 2004 (FNCCBE) is the

political document that schools should follow. e FNCCBE (2004, pp.

16–18) provides teachers with a guide for organizing personalized learning

in a classroom. Figure 1 summarizes how the FNCCBE denes personal

ized learning at the pupil, home-school collaboration, and classroom levels.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

Figure 1. Personalized learning in the Finnish National Core Curriculum for

Basic Education 2004 (pp. 16–18).

e term inclusion is part of the notion of personalized learning. In the

inclusive education pupils identied with special educational needs are

learning in mainstream classes. eir diversity of interests, abilities and

attainments are noticed (Hick, Kershner & Farrell 2009). e idea of in

clusion is present in Miliband’s (2006) denition of personalized learning,

which has ve components:

· Learning should be based on personal knowledge of each pupil’s

strengths and weaknesses;

· Students should learn a variety of learning strategies, from which they

can pick their own characteristic way of learning;

· Students should be able to choose their own breadth of study and their

own learning paths;

· Class work should support those individual learning paths; and

· e school’s immediate environment and the wider community should

support personalized learning.

Dierentiation is a key issue in planning personalized learning. Fullan

(2009) noted that in the United States, dierentiated instruction is a more

Personalized

learning in the

curriculum

Home-school

collaboration

– Shared responsibilities

– Identifying pupils’

ways of working

– Setting goals together

Pupil

– Individual needs,

abilities and interests

– Expert in his/her

learning

– Motivation

Classroom

– Structured planning

and 21

-century

learning

– Collaboration

– Meaningful learning

– Diversity of dierent

learning enviroments

4 Crossing Classroom Boundaries in Science Teaching and

Learning Through the Use of Smartphones

common term to describe a concept similar to personalized learning. At

the practical level, teachers can engage in dierentiation in terms of the

content, process, or product. Content is what the teacher wants pupils to

learn and the materials or mechanisms through which this is accomplished.

Process describes activities designed to ensure that students use key skills

to make sense out of essential ideas and information. Products are vehicles

through which pupils demonstrate and extend what they have learned

(Tomlinson, 1999).

Mobile Learning Expands Learning Environments

e aims for the use of information and communication technology (ICT)

in education are also written in the FNCCBE. Basic education has to oer

a fundamental knowledge of technology. Instruction must advance under

standing of the operating principles of tools, equipment, and machines,

and teach the pupils how to use them (e FNCCBE, 2004, pp. 36–41).

As personalized learning is learning for today’s concept (Miliband, 2006),

mobile learning and mobile tools, like smartphones, provide pupils an op

portunity to work wherever and whenever they need to (Kotilainen, 2011).

Sharples, Taylor, and Vavoula (2005) stated that the basic assumption

related to mobile learning is that learners are continually on the move.

Students learn across space, taking ideas and learning resources gained in

one location and applying or developing them in another. Eective mo

bile learning involves learning knowledge, the assessment of the learning

process and outcomes, and collaboration.

Sharples et al. (2005) concluded that a social-constructivist approach

is best suited for mobile learning, as it emphasizes learning as an ac

tive process of building knowledge and skills through practice within

a supportive community. Hakkarainen (2009) introduced collaborative

knowledge building as an object-oriented process, where the objects being

developed can be problems and theories, ideas and concepts, prototypes

and materially embodied artefacts, or projects or practices being subjected

to development and transformation. Knowledge-building competences

are needed in a knowledge-creation society. e learning described above

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

is also emphasized in the FNCCBE: learning is both an individual and a

collaborative process in which a pupil builds knowledge and skills.

In this study, we are interested in how the smartphone as an ICT tool

works as a means of personalized learning. e smartphones are used to

support individual learning and for the collection and analysis of informa

tion. Pupils have their own smartphones and are familiar with using them.

ey have the same skills for handling these devices as many adults. ey

are also eager to use them and learn more about them. Research on learn

ing and motivation shows that the use of ICT tools in science education

could support meaningful learning and student motivation (Hakkarainen,

2009; Lavonen, Krzywacki, Koistinen, Welzel-Breuer, & Erb, 2012; Os

borne & Hennessy, 2003).

Research Questions

In this paper, we aim to answer the following two questions:

· How do pupils use smartphones in personalized learning while engaged

in a science project?

· How does the teacher’s guidance during the science project inuence

the frequency of smartphone use?

We will answer these research questions by analyzing daily reports from

the pupils about their smartphone use and the teacher-researcher’s eld

notes.

4 Crossing Classroom Boundaries in Science Teaching and

Learning Through the Use of Smartphones

Method

e study was conducted according to the principles of DBR (Sand-

oval, 2013). In order to acquire novel educational knowledge concerning

smartphone use by pupils in personalized learning, a science project was

designed to include several ways to apply smartphones.

e DBR had four phases (Figure 2). In the rst phase, all the practi

tioners familiarized themselves with the devices. Data about actions in that

phase were collected through the teacher-researcher’s eld notes. In the

second phase, practitioners planned the process with a view to generating

models for smartphone use in science learning.

In the third phase, the developed models were tested in action. e uses

of the smartphone were determined using a questionnaire lled out by the

students every evening after school for a three week period. e question

naires were administered through the smartphones (using the Socrative ap-

plication). e questionnaire had both yes/no and open-ended questions.

e teacher-researcher also wrote eld notes during the testing period.

e fourth phase, which was only completed by the researchers, in

volved reections on the actions of the rst three phases. In this nal

phase, the uses of the developed models were also assessed. e answers to

the questionnaires were analyzed through statistical methods (frequencies

and correlations). Open-ended answers were analyzed through content

analysis. e results were compared and reected upon in the eld notes.

Figure 2. The phases of design-based research.

Getting to know

the device

Data collection:

Researcher’s

eldnotes

Testing in action

Data collection:

Research’s

eldnotes

Pupils’

questionnaires

Planning the

process

Datacollection:

Video recordings

Assessment of the

use and actions

Analysis:

Quantitative

analysis of

frequences

Qualitatice con-

tent analysis

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

Context of the Study

is section briey describes the rst and second phases of the DBR

project in order to illustrate how students familiarized themselves with

the smartphones before phase three: the science project. Altogether, 49

pupils (54% male, all age 11) and three teachers (the teacher-researcher

and two classroom teachers) were active practitioners in the study. One

of the teachers is the rst author of this paper.

Phase One: Getting to Know the Devices

At the beginning of the cycle (the end of August 2012), the pupils received

smartphones (Nokia Lumia 800). Each smartphone had a data package on

it allowing the use of the Internet, but the ability to make or receive calls

with the phones was not activated. is reduced the expense. During the

Table 1. Familiarizing Students with the Smartphones, Their Applications,

and the Use of Applications in Learning

Personalizing

the Device

Using Applications Phone as a

Learning Tool

Support for

Pupils/Parents

- Getting started

- Creating a

Windows Live ID

- Setting a picture

as wallpaper

- Setting the style

and ringtone

- Pinning websites

to the start menu

- Syncing pictures

and videos to

SkyDrive

- Taking pictures

and videos

- Making calendar

marks and

notications

- Adding contacts

- Windows Live

settings and

functions

- Sports Tracker

- Multiplication app

- Sending emails

and SMS

- Searching

information (arts)

- Practicing English

vocabulary with

OneNote

- Making short

lms with phones

- Writing down

logging informa-

tion for OneNote

- Making an English

word test with

Socrative or SMS

- Completing

homework and

sending it to the

teacher

- Submitting work

with Socrative

- Parental meeting

to introduce the

phones

- Setting up an

Xbox account and

using

Marketplace

- Creation of a

video tutorial on

how to create the

Xbox account

- Making and

accepting friend

requests in

Messenger

4 Crossing Classroom Boundaries in Science Teaching and

Learning Through the Use of Smartphones

rst month, the pupils learned to use the smartphones together and ac-

tively shared their experiences (Table 1). e smartphones had been set up

before being given to the pupils and the pupils played with and examined

the devices as they desired. e practitioners shared ideas and the teachers

used these in several learning situations. A meeting was also organized with

the parents to discuss the use of the smartphones. e teacher-researcher

also created a video tutorial that showed how to create an account.

Phase Two: The Brainstorming and Planning Processes

During the second phase (Figure 2), together the teachers designed the

basic structure of the water project and generated preliminary models for

active smartphone use in science learning. e pupils were included in the

planning process, especially for the planning of models for smartphone

use. It was decided that an idea generation session with pupils would be

organized in order to get novel ideas on smartphone use in project type

learning. e teachers took into account the characteristics of the person

alization of learning in the form of the content and in the learning process

in their planning. In this personalization, the individual needs, abilities,

and former learning experiences of each pupil were taken into considera

tion. e teachers decided to use varied methods in their lessons, like

group work and guided inquiry, and focused on the dierentiation process.

After the teachers’ planning and pupil idea generation session, the pupils

were introduced to the water project and working methods, including an

orientation to the inquiry process and the use of smartphones during the

project. After this introduction, pupils were divided into 12 groups, with

four pupils in each, including both girls and boys. Groups were given the

task of generating ideas for the versatile use of smartphones during the

project. One group member was designated as the group leader; this indi

vidual was given quick training on idea generation techniques and how to

support all pupils during the idea generation session. Support for all group

members and the minimization of critical evaluations during the idea gen

eration sessions were especially emphasized. Group leaders were chosen

according to their ability to take video recordings with an iPad. Leaders

had a note sheet with them to support note taking during idea generation.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

100

Group sessions were recorded using an iPad and the ideas from the groups

were collected during a session with the whole class (Table 2); the ideas

were then printed on posters that were put up on the classroom walls.

en the pupils were given the opportunity to establish aims and special

working methods as well as to decide on the physical space for learning.

During the pupils’ idea generation, the planning, and the testing phases,

the pupils were divided into three groups of 16 pupils each. Each group

worked with one teacher for one week (two teachers with three lessons

administered by each). e science project topic was water and its prop

erties (states of water, surface tension, buoyancy, capillarity, dissolution,

and solution) and the pollution and purication of water. Teachers guided

pupils in inquiry activities in which they used smartphones. e pupils

looked up information from various sources and made reports, which they

emailed to the teachers at the end of the project. In the reporting phase,

the pupils used dierent tools like cameras, voice recorders, and notepads.

Table 2. Classication of Pupils’ Ideas for Smartphone Use in Personalized

Science Learning Formulated in the Idea Generation Sessions

Content Spaces Tools Support-

ing the Learning

Process

Cooperation

Tools

Tool Applications

- Search engines

Google and Bing

-> Picture search

-> Video search

- Wikipedia

- YouTube

- Helsingin Sano-

mat (newspaper)

- Taking pictures

- Making podcasts

- Writing

- Taking videos

- Making lists

- Listening to pod-

casts

- SkyDrive

- Messenger

- Vimeo

- Skype

- Email

- Oce programs

- Sääkaveri

(weather app)

- Map software/

navigator

- Calculator

- Water level app

- Helsingin sano-

mat app

- Vimeo

- Skype

e generated ideas were analyzed and evaluated together, rst with

teachers and then with pupils. Teachers supported the implementation of

the ideas in the classroom situation. In order to support personalized learn

101

4 Crossing Classroom Boundaries in Science Teaching and

Learning Through the Use of Smartphones

ing, the teachers, along with the pupils, decided to emphasize the making

of notes (process) and searching for information (content) using the Inter

net. In particular, the use of dierent tools in their learning process, such

as voice recorders, video recorders, notepads, and calendars, personalized

the note making and allowed appropriate tools to be employed, especially

in the case of pupils with special needs. Moreover, teachers also decided

to share information through email (cooperation). Other ideas could be

freely implemented for learning.

Data Gathering

e research data—pupil self-evaluation of smartphone use in learning—

was collected through smartphone questionnaires at the end of each school

day during the three-week period of the water project. e questionnaire

was designed and administered using Socrative (a free web-based student-

response system). Socrative was familiar to the pupils. ey had used it,

for example, on English word tests and peer reviews. e week before data

collection, we pinned the Socrative website to each phone’s start screen.

We also created calendar notications about the questionnaire.

e questionnaire contained yes/no questions that aimed to clarify the

use of smartphone tools and collaboration between pupils and teachers.

After each question, there was an open-ended question. e response

rate during the rst week was 77.5%, the second week it was 60.4%, and

the third week it was 53.0%. e data were analyzed using quantitative

methods. During the rst four days, the teacher-researcher made sure

that everyone answered the questionnaire, and calendar alarms were cre

ated to accomplish this. If a pupil did not respond, the pupil completed

it the next day at school. During the second and third weeks, the teacher

only reminded pupils to answer and sent emails home, asking parents to

remind the pupils as well. is is why the response rate declined over the

course of the project. However, this did not aect the reliability of the

study, because we were interested in how pupils adapted the smartphones

to their learning.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

102

During the DBR, the teacher-researcher kept a eld notebook. is

included descriptions of how the teacher had guided the pupils’ use of

the smartphones, how the pupils used the phones, and what successes and

diculties were evident. e notes were compared to the results of the

questionnaire. If there were dierences between the questionnaire data

and eld-notes, students were asked to resubmit their answers or notes

were claried. For example, on the tenth day of the project, only one pupil

responded through the questionnaire that he had been in contact with a

teacher. e eld notes indicated that thirteen pupils sent emails to the

teacher. is was reported to the pupils and they were asked to answer

the questionnaire more carefully. erefore, it was important that the

teacher-researcher kept the eld notebook, because the notes supported

the interpretation of the questionnaire data and strengthened the reli

ability of the analysis.

Results

Table 3 shows the frequencies of pupils’ self-evaluations of the smartphone

use in science learning. We grouped the data into three main categories

based on the review on personalization (content, process, and coopera

tion). Subcategories were also formed, specically process (making notes,

exercises, and using the calendar) and cooperation (help from home, con

tact with friends, and contact with the teacher). In the table, categories

are given in the top row, and under each of these the pupils’ daily usage is

shown. Underlined numbers show that the teachers supported pupils in

applying smartphones in their science learning project in a personalized

way. e science project days are marked with an asterisk. e last row of

the table shows the total usage during the project.

103

4 Crossing Classroom Boundaries in Science Teaching and

Learning Through the Use of Smartphones

Table 3. Smartphone Use in the Science Project (All Respondents)

Day

Content Process Cooperation

Searching

informa-

tion

Making

notes

Exercises Using the

calendar

Help from

home

Con-

tacting

friends

Contact-

ing the

teacher

28 12 17 18 17 7 4

2 10 5

7 12 16 4 2

19 41 31 5 13 7 7

4 9 12 14 9 4 4 1

6 13 15 4 3 2 5

6 14 13

13 4 14 6 4

7 8

21 12 3 8 6 2

17 26 14 3 13 6 12

9 8 8 12 4 9 4 2

10* 8

24 11 4 4 6 13

11 3 4

13 3 11 3 9

12 11 4

15 3 15 3 9

13*

12 25 12 3 8 4 11

14 3 3 9 2 9 4 3

15*

6 20 14 2 3 4 15

SUM 162 231 209 79 147 70 99

Note. Science project days are marked with asterisks. Underlining shows

tools emphasized in teaching.

Pupils primarily used smartphones in their working processes. ey made

notes with dierent applications (Oce, OneNote). Pupils were guided to

make notes in diverse ways, including through writing, voice recordings,

pictures, and videos. ey also had homework on project days in which they

were asked to review learned topics by reading their notes (exercises). Play

ing educational games and watching educational videos where also included

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

104

in the exercises. Pupils used the calendar during the rst two days. On the

rst day, they made calendar entries at school with the teachers. Pupils also

used smartphones for information gathering. e methods that pupils em

ployed for using smartphones were similar to the teachers’ aims for the use

of smartphones during the water project. In accordance with these aims,

teachers also guided pupils to use OneNote and Oce for note taking and

to employ the smartphones to search for information.

Pupils exhibited dierent kinds of cooperation during the water project.

Primarily, they received help from home. Help generally involved remind

ers to answer the data-gathering questionnaires. Contact with friends or

the teacher was minimal, even though pupils were expected to contact

the teacher.

Pupils reported an increase in the use of smartphones when the teacher

asked them to apply smartphones in their learning activities rather than

in situations where the students were able to work according to their free

choices (marked with an asterisk in Table 3). e use of smartphones

for making notes and completing exercises seemed to be connected to

the teacher’s actions, such as the recommendation to use the phone tool.

Pupils searched for information fairly consistently during the project,

but searches increased when such information gathering was included as

part of the learning activity. Help from home was stable during the cycle,

as was contacting friends. Pupils used the calendar most on the rst day

when they marked it as a class. Contact with teachers increased towards

the end of the project. In the second and third weeks, contact with the

teacher increased both through email and text messages.

105

4 Crossing Classroom Boundaries in Science Teaching and

Learning Through the Use of Smartphones

Discussion and Conclusions

In this research, we dealt with a device that is relatively unfamiliar to adults

and teachers. However, the device had great potential to elicit learning,

especially from those who have special needs, such as dyslexic students.

e main result of this research was the insight that pupils do not spon

taneously use smartphones in learning. erefore, they need continuous

guidance, at least at the beginning of the project, related to how to apply

smartphones in learning. Further, teachers require pedagogical support

when it comes to the use of smartphones. is must be taken into con

sideration in the teachers’ pre- and in-service education, as well as in the

implementation of education policy.

At present, teachers are educating children who are used to interacting

with digital technology. ese “diginatives” have diverse skills in using

contemporary ICT tools. During this project, several pupils had their own

smartphones, allowing them to access information and support quickly.

Unfortunately, these devices were used almost entirely for entertainment

purposes. Such issues bring challenges for educators. ere has been a

vivid discussion in the leading Finnish newspaper, Helsingin Sanomat,

concerning smartphone use at school. e common opinion seems to be

that smartphones disturb learning at school (Juntunen, 2013).

Personalized learning is a process that aims to support eective learning

in which pupils’ abilities, work habits, and strategies are developed. It is im

portant to create concrete models that clarify how to personalize learning

in practice in the way that Järvelä (2006) and Miliband (2006) described

and in line with what the FNCCBE expects. Figure 3 introduces an ap

proach to personalizing learning with smartphones. Based on the results

of this research, the adaptation of smartphones as a tool for personalized

learning is a long process that requires teachers to engage in a great deal

of structured planning, followed by the introduction of the use of smart

phones to pupils along with continuous guidance. e guiding teacher

must also oer divertive learning materials for dierent learning strategies.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

106

Figure 3. Model of the use of smartphones in personalized learning.

is study emphasized the importance of working with the device col-

laboratively in the initial stage. Co-planning and empowering pupils to

engage in activities in which the approaches to smartphone use are gen

erated will support pupil ownership of smartphone use. Pupils are mo-

tivated to explore the possibilities of the device, and the teacher has the

pedagogical expertise to use those ideas in learning situations. At the same

time, pupils reect on their learning strategies and nd tools that both

support and help them plan the next steps in their learning. is process

is important when we want to personalize learning, as Miliband (2006)

described. ese metacognitive skills need time to develop and the teacher

must oer situations that allow student self-reection.

e study shows that the types of smartphone use that have been car

ried out regularly in real educational situations mirror everyday use. For

example, information searches and the use of OneNote to make notes and

do exercises were exhibited regularly in every phase of the study (see Tables

1, 2, and 3). It was dicult to convince students to employ tools not typi

cally used in making notes, such as the voice recorder, video recorder, and

Personalized

learning with

smartphones

Collaboration

– Sharing expertise

– Learning plan for

mobile learning

– Planning actions

together

Pupil

– Personalized applica-

tions (notes, pictures,

videos, podcasts)

– Absording information

(text, picture, podcast,

video, collaboration)

– Working (guidance, in-

dependence, choice)

Teacher

– Structure planning

and introduction

– Guidance to the

purposeful use of

smartphones

– Oering diverting

learning materials

(text, picture, podcast,

video, application)

107

4 Crossing Classroom Boundaries in Science Teaching and

Learning Through the Use of Smartphones

calendar, even though these functionalities could personalize student note

taking. erefore, the teacher from time to time must review the various

mobile learning tools that can be used so that the pupils’ employment of

mobile devices in their learning becomes more versatile. Teachers also need

to create ways to support pupils and parents, both in terms of learning

and problems they experience with the device itself. In this study, a parent

meeting was organized and tutorial videos were shared.

During this process, teachers and researchers produced a learning plan

that included mobile learning. e process of initiating the use of smart

phones in personalized learning is still on-going. e second iteration cycle

of the DBR with the same pupils was performed in spring 2013, when the

phones were used in collaborative settings and data on this use were collected.

In fall 2013, smartphone tools were used in diverse ways in the learning.

Acknowledgements

is study is part of the Finnable 2020 sub-project entitled School Part-

nership and Networks funded by the Finnish Funding Agency for Tech-

nology and Innovation. e project will generate innovative ways to use

smartphones in science education and crossing boundaries inside and

outside the classroom.

References

Finnish National Board of Education. (2004). Finnish national core curriculum for basic

education 2004. Retrieved from http://www.oph./english/sources_of_information/

core_curricula_and_qualication_requirements/basic_education

Fullan, M. (2009). Michael Fullan’s response to MS 3 questions about personalized learning.

Retrieved from http://www.michaelfullan.ca/media/13435863160.html

Futurelab. (2003). Literature review in primary science and ICT. Belfast: Graduate School

of Education, Queens University.

Hakkarainen, K. (2009). A knowledge-practice perspective on technology-mediated

learning. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 4,

213–231.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

108

Heller, J., Mayer, B., Hockemeyer, C., & Albert, D. (2005). Competence-based knowl-

edge structures for personalised learning: Distributed resources and virtual experiments.

Retrieved from http://telearn.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/19/04/82/PDF/Heller-

J_Competence_2005.pdf

Hick, P., Kershner, R. & Farrell, P.T. 2009. Psychology for Inclusive Education. New direc-

tions in theory and practice. London and New York: Routledge.

ITL-Research 2011. (2011). Findings and implications. Retrieved from http://www.itl-

research.com/images/stories/reports/ITL%20Research%202011%20Findings%20

and%20Implications%20-%20Final.pdf

James, M., & Pollard, A. (Eds.). (2004). Personalised learning—TLRP commentary.

London: TLRP.

Järvelä, S. (2006). Personalised learning? New insights into fostering learning capacity.

In OECD: Personalising Education (pp. 31–46). Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/

site/schoolingfortomorrowknowledgebase/themes/demand/41176687.pdf

Juntunen, E. (2013, May 23). “Kännykkävapaus” rauhoitti oppitunnit Ylivieskassa.

Helsingin Sanomat. Retrieved from http://www.hs.

Juntunen, E. (2013, May 24). Kännykkärauha laskeutui Ylivieskaan. Helsingin Sanomat.

Retrieved from http://www.hs.

Kotilainen, M.-R. (2011). Mobiiliuden mahdollisuuksia oppilaslähtöisen sisällöntuo-

tannon tukemisessa portfoliotyöskentelyssä. In M. Kankaanranta (Ed.), Opetustek-

nologia koulun arjessa (pp. 141–164). Jyväskylä.

Lavonen, J. (2012). School partnership and networks: Research plan. Helsinki: FINNAB-

LE 2020.

Lavonen, J., Juuti, K., Aksela, M., & Meisalo, V. (2006). A professional development

project for improving the use of information and communication technology in sci-

ence teaching. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 15(2), 159–174.

Lavonen, J., Krzywacki, H., Koistinen, L., Welzel-Breuer, M., & Erb, R. (2012). In-

service teacher education course module design focusing on usability of ICT applica-

tions in science education. Nordina, 8(2), 138–149.

Miliband, D. (2006). Choice and voice in personalised learning. In OECD: Personalising

Education, (pp. 21–30). Retrieved from https://www1.oecd.org/site/schoolingforto-

morrowknowledgebase/themes/demand/41175554.pdf

Osborne, J., & Hennessy, S. (2003). Literature review in science education and the role

of ICT: Promise, problems and future directions. Bristol: Futurelab.

Sampson, D., & Karagiannidis, C. (2002). Personalised learning: Educational, techno-

logical and standardisation perspective. Interactive Educational Multimedia, 4, 24–39.

Sandoval, W. (2013). Conjecture mapping: An approach to systematic educational de-

sign research. Journal of the Learning Sciences. doi:10.1080/10508406.2013.778204

Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2005). Towards a theory of mobile learning.

Retrieved from http://www.mlearn.org.za/CD/papers/Sharples.pdf

109

4 Crossing Classroom Boundaries in Science Teaching and

Learning Through the Use of Smartphones

Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). e dierentiated classroom—Responding to the needs of all

learners [Kindle edition]. Retrieved from Amazon.com

Warwick, P., Wilson, E., & Winterbottom, M. (2006). Teaching and learning primary

science with ICT. New York: Open University Press.

New Tools for

Teaching and Learning

Part II

113

5 Teachers’ Capacity to Change and ICT Environment: Insights from the ATEPIE Project

Teachers’ Capacity to Change

and ICT Environment: Insights

from the ATEPIE Project

Jelena Radišić and Jasminka Marković

Abstract

Teacher capacity to cope with and take change forward is increasingly rec-

ognized as an essential part of the roles and competences of teachers. e

agenda to increase school inclusiveness and responsiveness to the rising

diversity of students and the change in learning environments implies that,

in addition to utilizing scientically grounded pedagogies, teachers must

also address changing conditions that aect their teaching. One prom

ising possibility for making teaching and learning environments more

supportive is to enrich learning situations with technology, thus creating

collaborative spaces for learning, sharing, and expanding our perceptions

on how learning occurs. e objective of this paper is to describe how

teachers participating in the project Advancing Teacher Professionalism

for Inclusive, Quality and Relevant Education (ATEPIE) perceive them

selves and manifest skills in their practices, particularly with regard to ICT.

rough ve focus groups organized in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia,

Montenegro, Macedonia, and Serbia we explored teachers’ perceptions of

their practices as change agents. Furthermore, all participants completed

a questionnaire to provide more data on their use of information technol

ogy in their everyday lives, their perceptions about using ICT in teaching,

and their perceptions about their own competence in using ICT. Among

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

114

the perceived traits, teachers acting as agents of change have indicated

the necessity to have expertise, creativeness, and innovativeness. Teach

ers believe that a readiness to learn and skills in nding information are

among the most important competences teachers must hold. Although

teachers generally feel condent using technologies, they rarely bring it

to their teaching practice.

Keywords: Teacher Competence, Teachers’ Perceptions, ICT

Introduction

As a part of their overall political and economic transition, the countries

of South East Europe (SEE) have become involved in the comprehensive

reform of their education systems. e main feature of the reforms in the

SEE region is moving from the “system level,” downwards. Legislation

and strategies are prepared, and new curricula for pre-school, primary,

and secondary education are being developed and adopted, all with an

aim to provide quality, equitable, and inclusive education for every child,

according to their potential. us, the focus of the reform is gradually

shifting to what actually happens within schools, or more specically,

within classrooms, between the pupils and their teacher. is means that

schools and teachers become paramount in ensuring that actual change

of practice occurs, making it truly inclusive in an attempt to respond to

the diverse needs of students.

Given the economic situation of SEE countries, global economic trends,

and intense competition for public funds between education and other

public sectors, it is highly unlikely that the pressure to reform the education

system will be supported by any signicant increase in resources allocated

to the education sector. is means that the schools are expected to and

must be capable of changing and adapting to the new challenges they face.

To eectively create responsive schools, schools themselves must rely on

competent teachers and have open, democratic, participative governance

with active parental and local community involvement. However, reforms

115

5 Teachers’ Capacity to Change and ICT Environment: Insights from the ATEPIE Project

in all SEE countries appear to assume that teachers are adequately moti-

vated and skilled to respond to the needs of the community and individual

children. Teachers should be able to adopt new teaching and learning

approaches for children with diverse educational needs and from various

socio-economic backgrounds.

Long ago Fullan (1993a) has emphasized how schools are expected to

participate in a continuous “renewal”, with expectations to change being

put at the fore. Yet, the way the educational hierarchy is structured and

decision are made, along with the way teachers are initially prepared for

the teaching profession and schools are lead, rather results in a system in

which the status quo is retained. e remedy is seen in making explicit

the goals and skills of change agency. In order to be eective, a teacher

must become a career-long learner of more sophisticated pedagogies and

technologies. He/she has to be able to perform and obtain productive

collaborations with colleagues, parents, and other important stakehold

ers. Any systemic reform which profoundly does not tackle the teachers,

will not lead to any kind of a profound change (Sarason, 1996). us,

teacher competencies and agency to change have become the focal points

of the discourse that describes teachers’ roles and everyday practice. Teacher

competences are understood as an integrated combination of personality

traits, knowledge, skills, and attitudes, all of which are required for the

ecient management of various teaching and learning situations (Tigelaar,

Dolmans, Wolfhagen, & van der Vleuten, 2004, p. 255).

Agency is perceived as the process through which teachers develop a

vision of improved practice, act strategically to evaluate and improve their

own actions, and mutually share responsibility for change and outcomes

of all students (Frost, 2012). Although there is a longstanding assumption

that teachers can generate social and educational change (Freire, 1970; Ful

lan, 1993a, 1993b), evidence about the capacity of teachers to cope with

and lead change and how this manifests in their own practice is scarce.

Nieto (2007) acknowledges several roles teacher as agents of change em

body in their classroom: 1) believing in, and advocating for, public educa-

tion; 2) challenging conventional wisdom; 3) improvising; 4) modelling

social justice, and 5) using their power inside and outside of the classroom

(p. 303). e author further emphasizes that the most successful teacher

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

116

leaders are skilled in their pedagogy, well versed in their subject matter,

and consciously political in the sense that they know their work makes

a dierence. ey exemplify particular behaviors and attitudes that help

them teach their students, while at the same time challenging inequities

both in their schools and more broadly, in their communities and beyond.

In the above described process of reforms, teachers are also expected

to be capable and willing to actively participate in the development of

new curricula, new policy documents, teaching approaches, and teaching

aids, and to be in charge of their own professional development. With

this in mind, information and communication technology (ICT) is seen

as an instrument and opportunity to provide a variety of tools that can

open up new possibilities in the classroom. As stated in the report, Key

Data on Learning and Innovation through ICT at School in Europe (EA

CEA/Eurydice, 2011, p.3) ICT can specically help tailor the educational

process to an individual student’s needs. ICT can also provide learners

with the crucial digital competences needed in today’s knowledge-based

economy. Furthermore, Condie and Munro (2007) argue that computers

in the classroom can be particularly useful in personalizing teaching and

learning, regardless of the particular aim (e.g. to respond to special needs,

individual interests, or to implement individualized learning programs).

Finally, in the policy brief on ICT for Learning, Innovation and Creativity

in Europe delivered by the Institute for Prospective Technological Stud

ies (Ala-Mutka, Punie, & Redecker, 2008), the benets of using ICT in

teaching and learning are discussed. Notwithstanding ICT potential to

advance the eectiveness of learning and learning outcomes, methods used

in doing so are of crucial importance.

Although many authors agree that ICT provides a number of ways to

improve teaching and learning, their integration into existing educational

programs is seen as a complex process involving many dierent factors

(Balanskat, Blamire, & Kefala, 2006). ough the barriers hindering ef

fective integration of ICT tools in education may be classied in various

ways (Mumtaz, 2000; Pelgrum, 2008; Bingimlas, 2009), two main sets

of obstacles are usually singled out—those relating to teacher behavior,

beliefs, and knowledge, and those related to school-level barriers (e.g.,

117

5 Teachers’ Capacity to Change and ICT Environment: Insights from the ATEPIE Project

insucient technological infrastructure, software, Internet connectivity,

and technical support).

As noted by Law, Pelgrum, and Plomp (2008), ICT in the classroom

has an eect on the pedagogical methods employed by teachers. Yet, those

teachers using ICT must possess adequate knowledge to fully utilize it in

their own classrooms. Also, ICT must be used in a purposive way that

allows teaching and learning environments to become more supportive,

thus creating collaborative spaces in which both teaching and learning may

occur. Finally, teachers need to see the value of enriching learning situa

tions with technology. erefore, in addition to having specially trained

ICT teachers, it is important that all subject and general teachers have

the knowledge and skills to enable them to integrate ICT into their daily

teaching routines. Initial teacher education should provide teachers with

knowledge of new and innovative approaches, but continuous professional

development, i.e., in-service education, should also do so equally. Only

this will provide teachers with the condence to try using digital technolo

gies and reect on the impact these may have on their teaching practices.

Korte and Hüsing (2007) argue that although a positive trend is ob

served in teacher use of computers in the class, general motivation to

use ICT is often questioned. As technologies are continuously changing,

teachers need regular support to keep up with the latest developments and

the necessity of continuous professional support in that domain as well.

To achieve this, access to minimally satisfactory ICT infrastructure is still

one of the most important precursors contributing to the ecient use of

digital technologies in schools. Some research (Pelgrum, 2001; Korte &

Hüsing 2007) shows that over the past decade, a lack of technical support

is still perceived by teachers as one of the main barriers to the introduction

of ICT resources in their daily routines.

In almost all European countries, a specic (often national) strategy re

lated to digital competence and usage of ICT in schools has been adopted

(European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2012). e tactics vary from

wide-reaching strategies that encompass several areas, to ones with a focus

specically on ICT in education. Despite the developed strategies, data

show that primary and secondary school teachers of approximately half

the student population across the European Union do not use computers

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

118

in mathematics or science lessons, even when computer availability is not

an issue (EACEA/Eurydice, 2011). Data collected within the European

Survey on Languages Competences (2012) suggest that ICT is regularly

used during language lessons for less than 20% of the student body in

Europe (EACEA/Eurydice, 2012).

Western Balkans countries recognize the use and value of ICT in educa

tion. However it is dicult to nd systemic data on how ICT is used in

schools across the region. Despite the fact that all Western Balkans coun

tries are aligning their strategic education documents with those developed

within the EU (i.e., competence based education), not all countries are

developing at the same pace. For example, while digital competence is

part of the Croatian curriculum framework (Ministry of Science, Educa

tion and Sport, 2011), in Serbia, development of e-education is part of

the National Strategy for an Information Society in Serbia (Ocial Ga

zette of Republic of Serbia, No. 40/2010), while the national curriculum

framework is yet to be designed. However, despite the above mentioned

dierences, development of ICT in education is observed through the

requirement of learning and professional development for both students

and teachers and the necessity of establishing a broad ICT structure.

In cooperation with theEducation Support Program of Open Soci

ety Foundations (ESP/OSF), the Centre for Education Policy in Serbia

with partner organizations in Western Balkans countries implemented the

Advancing Teacher Professionalism for Inclusive, Quality and Relevant

Education (ATEPIE) project. e main project output is the Regional

Teachers’ Competences Framework, which can serve as a guideline for

upcoming changes to educational practices and the reform of the educa

tional system. Within the scope of the project activities the learning envi-

ronment, with a focus on information literacy, is dened as one of the six

most important areas of the competences for the teaching profession. In

addition to developing the regional teachers’ competences frameworks, the

project has also strived to empower teachers from Bosnia and Herzegovina,

119

5 Teachers’ Capacity to Change and ICT Environment: Insights from the ATEPIE Project

Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, and Serbia who are involved in a related

project, International Teacher Leadership.

e objective of this paper is to describe how teachers who participated

in the Advancing Teacher Professionalism for Inclusive, Quality and Rel

evant Education (ATEPIE) project perceive themselves and manifest skills

in their practices. In particular, which competences teachers perceive as

most important and necessary in their everyday classroom routines, keep

ing in mind the demands of the current reforms in the SEE region? And,

with respect to the use of ICT in schools, what are the current practices of

teachers in the teaching and learning process and to what extent teachers

perceive ICT as a tool for enriching the learning environment?

Methodology

Sample

e data were gathered in September and October 2012 through 5 focus

groups with 52 teachers participating in the ITL program in the Western

Balkans. One focus group from each of the following ve countries was

formed: Serbia, Macedonia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Mon

1. International Teacher Leadership project (ITL) was initiated by David Frost at the University

of Cambridge Faculty of Education in 2008 in response to interest shown by researchers and

practitioners in countries such as Croatia, Greece, Portugal, Romania, Spain and Turkey in the

work on teacher leadership within LfL and the HertsCam programme. e purpose of the ITL

project is to develop programmes of support for teacher leadership in a number of countries

and then explore how this can contribute to educational reform. ese programmes take the

form of support groups within schools or clusters of schools and some kind of local knowledge

network within which teachers can inspire each other by sharing accounts of their initiatives.

e project is conceived as a collaboration with partners – researchers, practitioners and other

activists in 15 national sites: Albania, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Greece, Croatia, Kosovo

(as dened by UNSCR 1244), FYR Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, New Zealand, Portugal,

Romania, Serbia, Turkey, UK (Sth East) and UK (Cambridge). More about International Teacher

Leadership may be found at http://www.educ.cam.ac.uk/centres/l/researchanddevelopment/

teachers/itl/ and http://www.nastavnickovodstvo.net/

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

120

tenegro. Each focus group included teachers working in lower and upper

elementary schools (ISCED 1 and 2). When choosing ISCED 2 teachers,

subject matter diversity was taken into consideration (e.g., language and

math, foreign languages, social and natural sciences). Years of experience

and status as full or part time teachers was also considered. However, we

paid particular attention to whether a teacher had participated in the ITL

program. Out of all teachers who participated from all ve focus groups

(52 teachers), 46 participants were female and 6 male. Further, 7% of

teachers were younger than 30 years of age; 32% belonged to the 30–40

age group, 43% were in the 40–50 age group, and 18% were older than

50 years of age. Regarding their work experience, 8% of teachers had up

to 5 years of teaching experience, 27% had 6–10 years, 44% had 11–20

years, and 22% had over 20 years of teaching experience.

Instruments

For the purpose of this study, two techniques were used to gather data: focus

group interviews and a questionnaire. A focus group guide comprised of sev

eral subtopics was developed. e topics were: a) necessary traits for teachers,

considering teachers’ roles today; b) professional competences, knowledge,

and skills that teachers should possess; and c) values teachers should strive

for in their everyday practices. e focus group guide was provided in the

local languages. Each focus group session lasted between 90 and120 minutes.

e focus group discussions were recorded and transcribed.

Following the focus groups sessions, each teacher completed a ques

tionnaire comprised of items related to the use of ICT in everyday life

(e.g., use of various websites and social networks, following news services

online). Teachers’ attitudes related to usage of ICT in teaching (e.g., ICT

can enhance teaching and the learning process; ICT can foster cooperation

between students; ICT fosters student participation in class); and percep

tion of their own competences when using ICT in everyday practice (e.g.,

I successfully use text processor applications; I use ICT in teaching to

provide feedback to my students). e participants were not aware of the

content and the purpose of the questionnaire prior to its administration.

121

5 Teachers’ Capacity to Change and ICT Environment: Insights from the ATEPIE Project

Analysis

Analysis of the data obtained through the focus groups was completed giving

consideration to specic subtopics. Teacher perceptions were analyzed rela

tive to current views related to teacher competences. Data were coded and

analyzed using the constantcomparison method (Merriam, 1998). Origi

nally the method itself was developed as a means of developing grounded

theory, which again consists of categories, properties, and hypothesis rep

resenting conceptual links between the categories and properties. e basic

strategy of the method is to constantly compare participant responses. Due

to these basic principles of analysis the method is widely used even outside

the grounded theory approach. Participant responses were compared to all of

the transcripts relating to a specic topic in order to formulate preliminary

categories and subcategories, which were then applied to all data. Results are

presentedprimarily bylisting dierentelementsthat appear in participant

responses. Some individual respondents are quoted. e quotes selected

reectopinionsof mostteachers who participated in the study.

SPSS 20 was used for the descriptive and correlational analysis of ques

tionnaire data.

Results

Four major topics emerged from the teacher narratives. ey relate to: 1)

desirable teacher traits, 2) values important in the teaching profession, 3)

description of everyday practices, and 4) obstacles teachers encounter in

their everyday practice. Finally, teachers discussed what it meant for them

to be agents of change and the skills needed to act as an agent of change.

In their attempt to describe desirable features that a teacher should

possess, especially in light of the demands put on the teaching profes

sion today, the focus group participants described expertise, creativity

and innovativeness as three key elements every teacher should possess. As

teachers are expected to become principal agents that ensure actual change

of practice, they also need to be cooperative, tolerant, exible, and com

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

122

municative when interacting with others. However, they all agreed that a

teacher, as a change agent, must be ready to “pull up one’s sleeve” in order

to foster the necessary change.

“For me a teacher leader is someone who is willing to take risks,

someone who is innovative and has vision.” (primary school teacher,

Macedonia)

In line with that, we observed among the teachers participating in the

study that readiness to learn, being aware of the inuence that the teacher

profession has on the broader public, and the level of self-condence that

allows one to put things in motion and motivate others are important

pillars of the profession today. Our participants recognize that these are

essential values that a teacher should strive for, along without forgetting

that the children are those who matter the most. Teachers also emphasized

how fullling this mandate is only possible for those teachers who believe

in a culture of collaboration between colleagues, who are ready to act as a

role model, and who are even ready to “ght the windmills” if necessary.

Consequently, today a teacher is not really a teacher if their practice is

simply to wait for the 45 minutes of class time to pass (the duration of a

lesson in the Balkan countries) and then go home. A teacher is expected

to organize, participate, motivate, and put people and actions into motion

around them. Especially while working with pupils, teachers are obliged

to employ various teaching methods, adapting them to the needs of the

individual child. Teachers must improvise in a meaningful way:

“The teacher - leader has to have broad cultural knowledge and seek

new information about the conditions in the school, municipality and

society permanently.” (primary school teacher, Croatia)

“I think that the initial professional knowledge is one of the crucial

prerequisites but it is not always enough. The constant professional

development is fundamental to keep us teachers “alive” and aware

of the development of our profession in the contemporary societies.”

(primary school teacher, Serbia)

123

5 Teachers’ Capacity to Change and ICT Environment: Insights from the ATEPIE Project

Teachers also recognize that their everyday routines cannot take place

without teamwork and encouragement given and received from others.

In that sense, sharing ideas among colleagues is emphasized as an impor

tant aspect of a day-to-day practice. However, what is noticeable in the

teachers’ narratives is that when teachers do talk about their practice, it is

described at the individual level, in the context of a school that the par

ticular teacher works in. erefore, collaboration between the teachers

takes place within their own work place and if one steps out of the school

walls for collaboration to take place, it is with the local entrepreneur or a

parent, but not a fellow teacher from another school.

It is important to determine what hinders the everyday routine in a

teacher’s attempts to make a dierence. First, teachers themselves admit

that it is simply very dicult to start something new, that they lack the

courage to try out new things and attempt to change well-established

practices. Notably, an obstacle that comes hand-in-hand with the desire

to change is evident in comments about attempts of fellow colleagues to

underrate any action that may lead to change. Participants referred to

these colleagues as “brakemen.” Teachers participating in the focus groups

further explained how these colleagues are simply unaware of the deep

impact the teaching profession has on the lives of not just their students,

but of the wider community as well. Further obstacles are seen in purely

administrative and logistic issues that could be resolved, but to what extent

greatly depends on school administration and the head teacher/principal.

Finally, when conversing about the skills needed for teachers to act as

agents of change, dexterity in locating new information and knowing

where to look seems to be the key feature recognized by the focus group

participants. is of course does not undervalue possessing necessary peda

gogical and subject matter knowledge, or adapting and developing one’s

own practice accordingly. Teachers emphasize how “nding information”

is not only important for the purpose of showing new examples to stu

dents, but is also important in keeping up-to-date in the ability to use

available technologies.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

124

“Only a good, dedicated practitioner can make positive changes in

education. Therefore it is necessary these teachers to use contempo

rary teaching models.” (primary school teacher, Montenegro)

“It is sometimes hard for our generation to cope with new technolo

gies, projectors, new media, but we have to learn these as well and

be well acquainted with it. This is the fear of our generation.” (primary

school teacher, Bosnia and Herzegovina)

Following these ndings, we focused specically on those related to the

issue of availability and usage of ICT in the everyday lives and work of

teachers. According to teacher reports, half of the teachers in the sample

often or very often use a variety of websites and social networks to keep in

contact with family and friends, one third uses social networking almost

every day for fun, while two thirds use web browsers such as Google to

obtain information. One third of the teachers in the sample pay their bills

online. Overall, we can say that ICT is available to the group of respondent

teachers. Almost all have personal computers and a computer is an available

tool in their work place. e majority of teachers (80%) had completed

some kind of course related to use of ICT. Furthermore, most teachers

(91%) state that ICT-equipped classrooms exist in the school. According

to our participants, two-thirds also have computers in their classrooms.

Overall, teachers participating in the study believe ICT can improve the

teaching and learning process. Only 15% did not believe so. In particular,

teachers agree that ICT can assist them in providing instructional materials

that enhances the quality of teaching; usage of ICT has a positive eect

on student motivation, and may enhance student participation in class.

Although some dierences are noticeable in the number of teachers in

agreement that a particular feature is improved with the usage of ICT, the

seven features in Table 1 related to student learning and teaching highly

correlate with each other (r(52) = .79 to .93, p < .01).

In terms of perceiving their own competence in using particular software

or online utilities, teachers mostly feel comfortable in dealing with word

processors (e.g., Word), presentation kits (e.g., PowerPoint), and search en

gines like Internet Explorer or Chrome. Teachers feel least competent when

125

5 Teachers’ Capacity to Change and ICT Environment: Insights from the ATEPIE Project

Table 1. How ICT Can be Utilized in the Classroom

I believe ICT can:

Do Not

Agree

at All

Less

Agree

Fully

Agree

Improve the teaching and learning 15% 0% 33% 52%

Improve critical thinking 15% 8% 44% 33%

Enhance the participation of students in class 15% 8% 50% 27%

Improve cooperation between students 15% 8% 42% 35%

Improve interaction between students and

teachers

17% 6% 44% 33%

Assists teachers in providing instructional

materials that enhance quality of teaching

15% 0% 21% 64%

Has a positive eect on students motivation 15% 0% 35% 50%

Table 2. Perception of Own Competence and ICT

How Do You Assess Your Own Competencies

to Use …

Do Not

Know

How to

Use

Basic

Knowl-

edge

Ca-

pable

Fully

Ca-

pable

Word processors (e.g., Word) 17% 8% 15% 60%

Tables and spreadsheets (e.g., Excel) 15% 23% 37% 25%

Presentation kits (e.g., PowerPoint) 15% 14% 15% 56%

Data bases (e.g., Access) 37% 25% 16% 22%

Search engines (e.g., Google) 15% 8% 13% 64%

Mail service (e.g., Gmail) 21% 14% 19% 46%

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

126

dealing with databases. If we look closely at these results, it is obvious they

correspond signicantly with those related to usage of ICT in everyday life.

Teachers nd a variety of information through search engines, but use

various websites to maintain social contacts. No contact is provided, for

example, with any database in that way. is is in line with the results

obtained on how ICT is used in teaching. On an everyday basis, a very

small number of teachers in the sample use ICT (6–10%). is is especially

important if we consider the fact that all teachers participating in the study

are involved in the teacher leadership program and that all develop their

own small scale projects to foster participation of their students.

Table 3. Usage of ICT at Work (in Teaching)

I use ICT in teaching for… Not at

All

Occa-

sion-

ally

Often Every

Day

Instructing students 29% 37% 24% 10%

Communication with the students 33% 36% 25% 6%

Organization of discussion in class, presentations

and (or) demonstrations

18% 31% 41% 10%

Assessment of students’ progress (tests and

excursuses)

29% 47% 14% 10%

Feedback to students 45% 22% 27% 6%

Fostering cooperation among students 30% 24% 36% 10%

Among the several possible ways in which ICT can be used in the

process of teaching and learning and organization of discussion in class,

presentations and demonstrations take the leading position, being used

“often” by 41% of teachers in their teaching. However, this frequently

takes the form of a PowerPoint presentation shown to students without

any in-depth discussion on the topic.

e striking result is the fact that 46% of teachers never use ICT as a

tool to provide feedback to students. In an era where ICT is the domi

nant form of communication, especially for the younger generation, such

127

5 Teachers’ Capacity to Change and ICT Environment: Insights from the ATEPIE Project

neglect of a possible channel to improve ties with students is surprising,

especially among teachers who have access to ICT and who feel competent

in using it in such a manner.

Discussion

e purpose of this study was to explore the competences teachers par-

ticipating in the Advancing Teacher Professionalism for Inclusive, Quality

and Relevant Education (ATEPIE) project perceive as most important and

necessary in everyday classroom routines, bearing in mind the demands of

current reforms in the SEE region. In respect to usage of ICT in schools,

we wished to address teachers’ current practices in the eld and the extent

to which teachers perceive ICT as a tool that enriches the learning envi

ronment and thus, their everyday practice.

Respecting teacher competences, it is worth noting that the teachers

who participated in the study intuitively recognize the traits, knowledge,

skills, and attitudes they need to eciently handle various teaching and

learning situations. ey all recognize creativity, innovativeness, and readi

ness to change and learn as important qualities. Communication and

cooperation skills, as well as tolerance and exibility, are also recognized

as important features that teachers today must have. In brief, it can be

concluded that teachers are aware that the competences they need are

those required to support learning and improve dedication of the entire

school culture to the improvement of student achievement and motiva

tion to learn and progress. Finally, it is important to point out that the

characteristics teachers discussed were the characteristics they possessed as

voluntary participants in the ITL. erefore, motivation for participation

in the study was exclusively intrinsic and directed towards the improve

ment of own work quality. Most teachers are involved in various school

projects and teacher training seminars. It was important for participant

teachers to learn and improve their own abilities and capacities through

the ITL program.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

128

If we accept the assumption that teachers can generate social and educa-

tional change (Freire, 1970) and that the most successful teacher leaders are

skilled in their pedagogy, well versed in their subject matter, and politically

conscious in the sense that they know their work makes a dierence (Nieto,

2007), then teacher statements that they need to employ various teaching

methods and adapt them to the needs of students provides a basis for a

strong belief in the capacity of teachers to act as change agents. Teachers in

our study recognized interactive learning as a learning mode that provides

students with opportunities to benet from their prior experiences and pre

viously acquired knowledge, while the responses provided by the teachers

clearly show their awareness of the complexity of their role as a teacher and

the overall responsibility and social signicance of the teaching profession.

It is clear that teachers believe the activities performed by a teacher

acting as an agent of change can be implemented at dierent levels: on

an individual level (improving the professional education of teachers),

at the school level, and at the education system level. But the individual

level dominates teacher perceptions. One skill all teachers recognized as

crucial is the readiness to learn, using both formal and non-formal op

portunities. In this paper we have explored the issue of the use of ICT

in the classroom and the beliefs that doing so contributes signicantly to

the learning process. Although the sample of teachers participating in this

study is far from representative in terms of the teacher corpus among the

ve countries, results of the analysis point to the gaps in the teacher belief

system and their day-to-day routines when it comes to ICT.

Although usage of ICT is seen as a tool that signicantly contributes to

the teaching and learning process, especially in the domain of enhancing

student motivation and contributing to the quality of instructional mate

rial used in the classroom, only a small number of teachers in the study

reported actually using ICT on a regular basis. Again, we note that these

are teachers who are involved in various school projects and who empha

size the importance of learning and improving their own abilities and

capacities. Also, to all study participants, ICT is available (i.e., computers

are accessible in their schools, in their classrooms, and in their homes).

As previously stated, agreement exists in the literature that ICT provides

many ways to improve teaching and learning, while it is acknowledged that

129

5 Teachers’ Capacity to Change and ICT Environment: Insights from the ATEPIE Project

ICT integration into existing educational programs is a complex process

(Balanskat, Blamire, & Kefala, 2006). In this particular case, among the

teachers in this study there seemed to be no major barriers that hinder

usage of ICT. Most teacher respondents were positively oriented towards

the usage of ICT and there was no report of insucient technological

infrastructure, software, Internet connectivity, or technical support. But

the gap does exist. One should ask whether the main obstacle is, as one

teacher said, “the generation gap.”

Teachers noted that it was dicult to cope with all the changes they

faced, including the utilization of ICT. Some of our results conrm this

position. e narratives of the teachers themselves about the importance

of learning throughout life indicate that a signicant number of them do

not feel competent in the use of large databases, tables, and spread sheets.

To some, even using an e-mail service presents an obstacle, despite hav

ing identied the positive value of ICT. Law and colleagues (2008) note

how ICT in the classroom has an eect on the pedagogical methods em

ployed by teachers, but also note that teachers need to possess adequate

knowledge to deal with ICT in their own classrooms and to use it in a

purposive way. Although 80% of respondent teachers passed some sort of

training related to utilization of ICT, we may speculate that the level of

available support is not continuous, and that this seriously contributes to

the reported gap between beliefs teachers hold, their perceptions of their

own competence, and actual classroom practice. Only when teachers are

condent in their own abilities will they try new teaching methods using

digital technologies, and only then will these more visibly aect everyday

teaching practices. At the moment, for the majority of the 52 teachers who

participated in our study, ICT is still something they do not fully grasp.

It is used in everyday life to socialize and nd new information, but only

10% of the respondent teachers nd ways to use ICT in teaching on a

daily basis. To others, this is a goal they may reach at some point in the

future. Since there is currently no agreement about the desirable level of

ICT competence that a teacher should possess, especially in the Western

Balkan countries, the process of getting all teachers to include ICT in their

daily teaching strategies will continue to be slow.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

130

Conclusions and Recommendations

Despite the fact that the teachers who participated in the study reported

availability of ICT in their classrooms, broad usage of ICT in everyday

life, and their overall positive orientation towards general usage of ICT, a

gap between everyday life usage of ICT and their own teaching practice

does exist. Because this disparity may be due to varying factors, recom

mendations are given for dierent policy levels.

System Policy Level

Despite the fact that the value of ICT in education is recognized in all

countries included in this study, the “missing link” of their educational

strategies lays in the fact that there is no unied, comprehensive strategic

approach that takes into account the ICT needs at all levels of education,

as well as the ways in which systemic data on how ICT is used in education

may be collected. In other words, the national strategies and legislation in

the eld of education should have stronger references to ICT literacy and

should be better harmonized with 1) EU policies and legal frameworks

related to digital competence and 2) recommendations on the collection

of systemic data using the same methodology.e role of ICT should be

come an integral part of the general outcomes of education in all Western

Balkan countries and should not lag behind the role that ICT already has

in daily life of both students and the teachers.

School Policy Level

Legislation should be adopted for schools and a team be formed to plan

and integrate ICT into the teaching process in a manner that is in line

with recommendations in the UNESCO document, Information and

Communication Technologies in Teacher Education: A Planning Guide

(UNESCO, 2002), which recommends that formation of such a team

be at the educational institution level. e team would assist teachers in

131

5 Teachers’ Capacity to Change and ICT Environment: Insights from the ATEPIE Project

nding the most adequate content, tasks, and exercises (in the subjects

they teach) for the topics they plan to cover using ICT.In this way, exist

ing ICT competencies of teachers are fostered and teachers will receive

support to acquire new ones.

Schools should be supported and encouraged to provide a higher degree

of networking and exchange of experience between experts and teachers

with experience in the application of ICT in education to enable a quicker

transfer of knowledge and usage of experiences that have come as a result

of a number of projects and initiatives in this area.

Teachers’ Pre-Service and In-Service Training Policy Level

It is necessary to pay special attention to ICT competence in preparing

future teachers for the teaching profession.e ideal solution would be

a compulsory subject or module during initial education at pedagogical

faculties.

During in-service teacher training, it is recommended that compulsory

ICT training programs be introduced to teachers as part of their profes

sional development. ese training programs should include both basic

theoretical concepts and principles of developing multimedia content, as

well as development of multimedia teaching and learning materials. If

possible, these training programs could become a compulsory part of the

teacher licensing and relicensing process.

In countries where reference to ICT application does not exist, standards

of teacher competencies and standards for the teaching profession should

be amended to include indicators that measure levels of ICT competency.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

132

Limitation of the Study and Further Research

e study presented in this paper was a small-scale study focused on a

specic group of teachers—participants in the ITL program. us, it is

not a representative sample of the teacher body of the Western Balkan

countries. Considering the topic of this paper and its focus on teachers

acting as agents of change and their utilization of ICT in everyday prac

tice, we may argue that the sample used is the most favorable one. us,

further research will focus on teachers from ISCED 1 to 3 (primary and

secondary education), but will take into account a regular and more rep

resentative sample of teachers and will explore their beliefs and practices

relating to usage of ICT. Given that in-service professional development

programs target these educational levels, the lack of data on the topic in

the region, and the emphasis on usage of ICT, we consider the present

and planned study will signicantly contribute to evidence needed when

determining eective policies.

References

Ala-Mutka, K., Punie, Y., & Redecker, C. (2008). ICT for Learning, Innovation and

Creativity. Policy brief prepared by the Institute for Prospective Technological Stud-

ies (IPTS), Joint Research Centre, European Commission. Luxembourg: Oce for

Ocial Publications of the European Communities. Retrieved from http://ftp.jrc.

es/EURdoc/JRC48707.TN.pdf

Balanskat, A., Blamire, R., & Kefala, S. (2006). A review of studies of ICT impact on

schools in Europe. Brussels: European Schoolnet.

Condie, R., & Munro, R. (2007). e impact of ICT in schools - a landscape review. [pdf]

Coventry (UK): British Educational Communications and Technology Agency (Becta)

Available at: http://publications.becta.org.uk/display.cfm?resID=28221&page=1835

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed.New York: Herder and Herder.

Frost, D. (2012). From professional development to system change: teacher leadership

and innovation. Professional Development in Education, 38(2), 205–227.

Fullan, M. (1993a).Change Forces: Probing the Depths of Educational Reform. London:

Falmer Press.

Fullan, M.G. (1993b). Why Teachers Must Become Change Agents. e Professional

TeacherPages, 50(6), 12-17.

133

5 Teachers’ Capacity to Change and ICT Environment: Insights from the ATEPIE Project

Korte, W. B., & Hüsing, T. (2007). Benchmarking access and use of ICT in European

schools 2006: Results from head teacher and a classroom teacher surveys in 27 Eu-

ropean countries. eLearning Papers, 2(1), pp. 1–6.

Law, N., Pelgrum, W. J., & Plomp, T. (Eds.). (2008). Pedagogy and ICT use in schools

around the world – Findings from the IEA SITES 2006 study. Hong Kong: Springer.

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study application in education. San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Mumtaz, S. (2000). Factors aecting teachers’ use of information and communications

technology: A review of the literature. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher

Education, 9(3), pp. 319–342.

Ministry of Science, Education and Sports. (2011). Nacionalni okvirni kurikulum za

predškolski odgoj i obrazovanje te opće obvezno i srednjoškolsko obrazovanje. Zagreb:

Ministarstvo znanosti, obrazovanja i športa republike Hrvatske.

Nieto, S. (2007). e colour of innovative and sustainable leadership: Learning from

teacher leaders. Journal of Educational Change, 8(4), 299–309.

Pelgrum, W. J., 2001. Obstacles to the integration of ICT in education: results from a

worldwide educational assessment. Computers & Education, 37, pp.163–178.

Pelgrum, W. J., 2008. School practices and conditions for pedagogy and ICT. In N. Law,

W. Pelgrum, & T. Plomp (Eds.), Pedagogy and ICT use in schools around the world.

Findings from the SITES 2006 study (pp. 67–122). London: Springer.

Saranson, S.B. (1996). Revisiting ’the Culture of the School and the Problem of Change’.

New York: Teachers College Press.

Strategija razvoja informacionog društva, Ocial Gazette of Republic of Serbia, No.

40/2010

Tigelaar, D. E. H., Dolmans, D. H. J. M., Wolfhagen, I. H. A. P., & van der Vleuten,

C. P. M. (2004). e development and validation of a framework for teaching com-

petencies in higher education, Higher Education, 48(2), pp. 253– 68.

UNESCO (2002). Information and communication technologies in teacher education, A

planning guide, Paris: UNESCO.

135

6 Prospective Teachers and New Technologies: A Study among Student Teachers

Prospective Teachers and

New Technologies: A Study among

Student Teachers

Anne Huhtala

Abstract

is paper reports on a study whose aim was to examine how student

teachers relate to the use of new technologies in teaching. e use of

technology in all areas of our lives is increasing rapidly, aecting society

in a profound way. It is often taken for granted that teaching is also af

fected by this change. However, changing traditional teaching methods is

a long and complicated process that requires new ways of looking at the

relationship between a teacher and student, and at human and technology

interaction. At the beginning of 2013, I collected data from 44 prospec

tive language teachers at the University of Helsinki about dierent aspects

of using new technologies in teaching. One half of the students had no

teaching experience, whereas the other half had at least some teaching

experience. e study revealed some interesting dierences between the

two groups. Students with teaching experience were more uncertain about

whether their skills in using new technologies in teaching were sucient.

Even when mostly positive towards using new technologies in their own

teaching, they seemed more aware of the risks and hazards of the increas

ing use of technology. Many informants in both groups commented on

the problems schools and teachers had keeping pace with technological

developments. As these students plan to become language teachers, this

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

136

study can give new and useful information about why teachers either fa-

vour new technologies in their own teaching, or alternatively, are critical

towards using learning technology.

Keywords: New Technologies, University Students, Student Teachers,

Teaching and Learning, Teacher Education

Introduction

e use of technology in all areas of our lives is increasing rapidly, which

aects society in a profound way and demands new skills and competences

of everyone. Naturally, what happens in society at large has consequences

on teaching and learning (and vice versa), as well as on teacher education.

I see teachers as key persons in implementing new practices in schools,

even if they obviously need the support of actors that are both external,

e.g., municipal, and internal, e.g., school principals (Owston, 2007).

Student teachers of today are the teachers of tomorrow, which makes

their skills in and attitudes towards the use of new technologies in teach

ing and learning signicant. As Yuen and Ma (2008) state on the basis of

several studies, teacher attitudes and acceptance of technology are central

to their preparedness for using technology in their teaching.

is paper reports on a study conducted at the beginning of 2013. e

aim of the study was to examine how prospective language teachers see

their own ability to use new technologies and how they feel about using

information and communication technologies (ICT) in their teaching in

the future. When I use the term new technologies in this paper, I refer to

all kinds of modern technologies that can be used to support and enhance

learning, such as social media (e.g., YouTube, blogs, Facebook), interactive

whiteboards, e-learning platforms, and so on.

I believe it relevant to study how student teachers see their own skills in

using ICT, and whether they think their university studies have provided

them with sucient knowledge and skills to use ICT in the classroom as

a teacher. New information on this subject can hopefully help plan for

137

6 Prospective Teachers and New Technologies: A Study among Student Teachers

the education of student teachers and support them in their professional

development.

My research questions are as follows:

a) How do university students who are studying to become language teach

ers evaluate their own skills in using new technologies?

b) What do these students think about the use of new technologies in

teaching?

c) What benets and problems do they see in using new technologies in

schools?

Background

Especially in Western societies, computers in classrooms, at home and at

work are seen as more or less self-evident. We even talk about Society 3.0

(Moravec, 2008; van den Ho, 2011), referring to the rapid changes in

our globalized world that require innovation, creativity, and a new way of

looking at knowledge and knowledge production. As the world changes,

education must also change to meet the new challenges. Researchers have

begun using the concept of Education 3.0 for this new, creative, educa

tional generation that in many ways (and in many parts of the world) is

still more of a vision or a future goal than reality. is new technological

and pedagogical change naturally aects the way education is planned. In

Finland, the Finnish National Board of Education (FNBE) has initiated a

project called School 3.0 in its attempt to increase the use of social media

in basic education (FNBE, 2010). According to the Basic Education Act

(628/1998, Ch. 1, Section 2:1), the objective of basic education is “to

support pupils’ growth into humanity and into ethically responsible mem

bership of society and to provide them with knowledge and skills needed

in life”. In today’s world, the use of new technologies can be regarded as

a basic skill required of all pupils.

Keats and Schmidt (2007, ree generations of education, para. 1–3)

describe the three educational generations in the following way:

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

138

“Education 1.0 is, like the rst generation of the Web, a largely one-

way process. ... Students are largely consumers of information re

sources that are delivered to them, and although they may engage

in activities based around those resources, those activities are for

the most part undertaken in isolation or in isolated local groups.

... Education 2.0 happens when the technologies of Web 2.0 [par

ticipation technologies] are used to enhance traditional approaches

to education. Education 2.0 involves the use of blogs, podcasts,

social bookmarking and related participation technologies but the

circumstances under which the technologies are used are still largely

embedded within the framework of Education 1.0. … Education 3.0

is characterized by rich, cross-institutional, cross-cultural educational

opportunities within which the learners themselves play a key role

as creators of knowledge artifacts that are shared, and where social

networking and social benets outside the immediate scope of ac

tivity play a strong role. The distinction between artifacts, people

and process becomes blurred, as do distinctions of space and time.”

However, as Keats and Schmidt (2007, ree generations of education,

para. 7) write, “We are still far from Education 3.0, even Education 2.0 is

not as widespread it is [sic] might seem to the already initiated, especially

in the developing world and particularly in Africa” (see also Keats, 2009).

Although they wrote their article several years ago, their comment can still

be seen as relevant. e shift from Education 2.0 to Education 3.0 is not

automatic, but will require the involvement of many actors in education.

In her pilot study of 26 young (aged 18–24) undergraduates’ use of

new (Web 2.0) technologies, Kumar (2010) found out that her informants

used new technologies quite frequently for personal purposes, but much

less for educational purposes. In addition, they were mainly consumers

of content, not producers. However, they saw many benets in the use

of e.g., Podcasts and Online videos in education, and made suggestions

about how technology could be used in teaching and learning.

Using technology in classrooms is in itself not a new phenomenon.

But integrating technology and learning has never been unproblematic.

As Wang and Reeves (2003) declare on the basis of their overview of

several studies, using television and other older technologies in teaching

139

6 Prospective Teachers and New Technologies: A Study among Student Teachers

and learning was no success. ey also ask whether newer (computer)

technologies will “repeat the failure” (p. 49) of older technologies. Very

often, the unsuccessful integration of learning and technology is seen as a

result of teacher and learner resistance. But according to Wang and Reeves

(2003, p. 55), the reasons are more complicated: teachers nd it dicult

to combine constructionist pedagogy that using computers in classrooms

entails, with other central requirements and expectations aecting the

work of teachers, such as maintaining discipline and improving the test

grades of their students. ese kinds of comments are relatively common

also in today’s schools.

Computers in schools are seen as necessary in order to “prepare students

for their e-future” (Wang & Reeves, 2003, p. 54), and new technologies

are regarded as a central part of teaching and learning. However, one of

the problems of new technology is that it very soon becomes “old” tech

nology. As Wang and Reeves (2003) state, “A ‘new’ computer with latest

technologies is likely to become inadequate to utilize the latest software

and operating systems after just a few years of use ... . Rapidly changing

technology will only accelerate in the future” (p. 54). Wang and Reeves

(2003) also take up the need for more support for teachers, as well as the

need for a closer collaboration with researchers.

Owston (2007) has studied classrooms and schools where the use of

pedagogical innovations has been successfully sustained. He concludes:

“Essential conditions for the sustainability of classroom innovation

were teacher and student support of the innovation, teacher per

ceived value of the innovation, teacher professional development,

and principal approval. Contributing factors for sustainability were

supportive plans and policies, funding, innovation champions, and

internal and external recognition and support” (p. 61).

He thereby sees the role of teachers as central in sustaining the use of

new technologies. As he states, without teacher support, innovation is not

possible. In order to continue using new technologies, teachers must see the

use of technology as valuable and meaningful, and they must acquire the

necessary technical skills and knowledge to use them eectively through

formal or informal learning (Owston, 2007). Interestingly, Yuen and Ma

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

140

(2008), in their study concerning teacher acceptance of e-learning tech-

nology, came to the conclusion that perceived usefulness did not predict

the intention to use e-learning technology. Instead, “contrary to previous

literature, perceived ease of use became the sole determinant to the predic

tion of intention to use” (p. 229) and perceived ease of use was “predicted

by computer self-ecacy” (p. 236), i.e., how well teachers believed they

could use computer technology. It is worth acknowledging, however, that

the results of Yuen and Ma deviate from those generally found in studies

utilizing the Technology Acceptance Model. For example, in his study

concerning primary school teachers’ technology use, Haaparanta (2008)

found that perceived usefulness predicts future computer use much better

than perceived ease of use.

ere are those who comment about the risk that computer use will

make learning lonelier, isolated, and even anti-social; the critics have found

it a challenge to combine eective learning with the use of new tech

nologies (see Stahl, Koschmann, & Suthers, 2006). Computer-supported

collaborative learning (CSCL) has been oered as a possible solution to

this problem. According to Stahl et al. (2006), CSCL is not the same as

individual learners co-operating with each other; instead, it means con

structing meaning together with others, learning in collaboration. is

interaction and joint knowledge construction is supported by technology,

not replaced by it.

Later in this paper, I discuss my results in light of the studies presented

in this section. While the main purpose of this small study is to draw a

“sketch” of the phenomenon, I hope the results presented here can be used

to determine how best to support student teachers in their ICT use, an

important aspect of their professional development.

141

6 Prospective Teachers and New Technologies: A Study among Student Teachers

Data and Method

e data for my study were collected at the beginning of the 2013 spring

semester. My informants were university students studying at the Uni

versity of Helsinki with the aim of becoming language teachers in the

future. All the students have Swedish as either their major or as one of

their minor subjects.

e data were collected anonymously and participation in the study

was completely voluntary. I used a questionnaire consisting of 10 open-

ended questions about the use of new technologies in teaching and learn

ing. I gave a short introduction on the purpose of the study and invited

the students present to complete the questionnaire. Almost all students

who heard about the study were interested and wished to participate. In

return, I promised to inform each student (i.e., the 44 informants and all

others in attendance for my presentation) of the preliminary results of this

study. As only three of the informants were male and because their answers

proved not to dier from the answers of the female informants, I will not

distinguish between the responses of male and female student teachers.

For my analysis, I divided the informants into two groups, those who

reported having no teaching experience at all (Group 1: n

= 22 students)

and those who reported having at least some teaching experience (Group

2: n

= 22 students). To analyze the data, I used a combination of quantita-

tive and qualitative analysis. e analysis is mainly qualitative, consisting

of thematic content analysis (Zhang & Wildemuth, 2009; Kohlbacher,

2006; Tuomi & Sarajärvi, 2004; Eskola & Suoranta, 2003). e responses

of the informants were coded and then organized into thematic categories

separately within each group (i.e., Group 1 and Group 2). Quantitative

analysis (presented as numbers and percentages) was used to compare

the two groups concerning the informants’ reported skills in using new

technologies, their plans for using new technologies in their own teach

ing practice, and their evaluation of whether they had acquired enough

knowledge and practice using ICT during their university studies, includ

ing their teacher education.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

142

As the number of informants in my study was only 44, I do not expect

that the results can be generalized. e results concern this special group,

but can be seen as an interesting statement concerning the role of ICT

in teacher education. e informants gave their answers in Finnish. e

text fragments from the answers that I use in this paper to exemplify some

relevant points were translated from Finnish to English by me.

Results

Prospective Language Teachers and New Technologies,

Quantitative Analysis

e informants were asked to comment on what they thought about us-

ing new technologies in their own teaching. e answers were categorized

as either positive or doubtful (Table 1). e doubtful category included

responses that indicated a slightly negative or hesitant attitude towards

using new technologies. A couple of informants gave no answer to this

question, and I interpreted the non-response as an expression of hesitancy

and therefore categorized these non-responses as doubtful.

Table 1. Attitude towards Using New Technologies in Own Teaching

Positive Doubtful

Group 1 (no experience) (n

= 22) 10 (45.5%) 12 (54.5%)

Group 2 (with experience) (n

= 22) 15 (68.2%) 7 (31.8%)

Groups 1 & 2 (n =44) 25 (56.8%) 19 (43.2%)

e majority of informants, 25 student teachers (57%), were unre-

servedly positive towards using new technologies in their own teaching.

Intriguingly, those with at least some teaching experience (Group 2) were

more positive than those with no teaching experience (Group 1). As many

as 15 informants (68%) in Group 2 were entirely positive, versus 10

positive informants (45.5%) in Group 1. e informants’ own teaching

143

6 Prospective Teachers and New Technologies: A Study among Student Teachers

experience seems to have aected their attitudes towards the use of new

technologies in teaching, making them more positive.

e informants were also asked to evaluate their own skills in using

ICT. e results can be seen in Table 2.

Table 2. Evaluation of Own Skills in Using ICT

Positive Doubtful

Group 1 (no experience) (n

= 22) 7 (31.8%) 15 (68.2%)

Group 2 (with experience) (n

= 22) 3 (13.6%) 19 (86.4%)

Groups 1 & 2 (n = 44) 10 (22.7%) 34 (77.3%)

It became clear during analysis that the informants often evaluated their

skills as decient or poor. Only 10 informants out of 44 (23%) regarded

their own skills as sucient, whereas the remainder (34 informants, or

77%) either saw their skills as unsatisfactory or were uncertain. A couple

of informants gave no answer to this question, which I saw as a sign of

doubtfulness. Only 7 informants in Group 1 and 3 informants in Group

2 were completely content with their skills. What is notable is that those

with at least some teaching experience regarded their skills as more de

cient than those with no teaching experience. It may be that their prior

experience in schools had made them more aware of the skills they still

needed to acquire.

e informants were also asked to evaluate whether they had acquired

enough knowledge about using new technologies and sucient opportu

nity to practice the use of ICT during their university studies (see Table 3).

Table 3. Enough Practice in and Knowledge about ICT during University

Studies

Yes No/Doubtful

Group 1 (no experience) (n

= 22) 3 (13.6%) 19 (86.4%)

Group 2 (with experience) (n

= 22) 2 (9.1%) 20 (90.9%)

Groups 1& 2 (n = 44) 5 (11.4%) 39 (88.6%)

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

144

Only 5 informants out of 44 (11%) were content with the amount of

knowledge and practice they had acquired during their studies, whereas

the remainder, as many as 39 informants (89%) regarded the amount of

practice as insucient, or expressed their uncertainty in some way. ere

was a negligible dierence between Group 1 and Group 2 in this respect:

both those with teaching experience and those without would have liked

to have acquired more knowledge about ICT and more practice during

their university studies, especially during their teacher education. ey

regarded their skills as decient, and therefore the use of ICT as dicult,

which may raise concern in light of the study of Yuen and Ma (2008) who

found that perceived ease of use predicts intention to use.

Benets Connected to Using New Technologies

One question concerned the benets that the students saw in using new

technologies. All students saw at least some benets, and some gave long

lists of (potential) advantages connected to using dierent kinds of learn

ing technologies.

I collected the most frequently mentioned benets for both Group 1 and

Group 2 in Table 4 below. e most commonly noted aspects are listed rst,

the less frequently mentioned are lower on the list. Interestingly, the benets

mentioned by the two groups were very similar. However, some dierences

could be noted between the groups and are marked in italics in Table 4.

Table 4. Benets Connected to Using New Technologies in Teaching and

Learning

Group 1 (no experience) Group 2 (with experience)

1 Motivating & activating

2 More interesting

3 Combines students’ free time and school

4 Makes teachers’ work easier

5 Interactive & social

6 Fast

7 Versatile

8 Modern

1 Motivating & activating

2 Makes teachers’ work easier

3Dierentlearningstylesandspecialgroups

can be taken into account

4 More interesting

5 Combines students’ free time and school

6 Combines ICT & subject knowledge

7 Versatile

145

6 Prospective Teachers and New Technologies: A Study among Student Teachers

What both groups saw as most positive in using learning technologies,

was that it could motivate and activate students. ere were many re

sponses that suggested these benets. “Students would probably be more

motivated if e.g. social media was used more – young people use it daily.

New ways of activating students could be found” (Example 1, Group1).

“Students use these technologies (e.g. social media) in their everyday lives;

the use of technology makes them more motivated, and probably activates

them” (Example 2, Group 2).

Many informants in both groups regarded the use of learning technol

ogy as a way of making teaching and learning more interesting, and saw

it as a good way of combining students’ leisure time and school. Quite a

few students in both groups saw ICT use as versatile and as a means of

making teachers’ work easier: “It probably makes teachers’ work easier as

old chalkboards become history. Versatile materials and versatile teaching

methods can be used” (Example 3, Group 1).

Many of the students with no teaching experience (Group 1) saw

computer-supported teaching and learning as interactive and social, fast

and modern, whereas students with teaching experience (Group 2) noted

other features. Many of them commented positively on the possibility of

considering dierent learning styles (by using sound, visual props, etc.)

as well as adjusting their teaching to various kinds of special groups. ey

also liked the idea of combining ICT and subject knowledge in their own

teaching. “Teaching becomes more visual when ICT is used. At least some

students may nd it easier to learn by means of new technologies. Be

sides, students learn about the subject and about ICT at the same time”

(Example 4, Group 2).

ese comments show that many informants regard the use of ICT

as meaningful, which can be seen as an important factor in continuing

to use learning technologies in their (future) work as teachers (Owston,

2007; Haaparanta, 2008).

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

146

Challenges Connected to Using New Technologies in Teaching

and Learning

Students were very much aware of the challenges that using learning tech-

nologies entails. e most common challenges and problems noted by

informants are listed in Table 5.

Table 5. Challenges Connected to Using New Technologies in Teaching and

Learning

Group 1 (no experience) Group 2 (with experience)

1 Technical problems & complicated soft-

ware

2 Potentially undemocratic (schools &

students)

3 Teachers’ lacking skills

4 Too much time spent using ICT: excess

information; concentration problems

5 Time consuming

1 Technical problems & complicated soft-

ware

2 Potentially undemocratic (schools &

students)

3 Too much time spent using ICT: face-to-

face interaction can suer; social skills

may deteriorate; can cause ICT-addiction

4 Entertainment can become more impor-

tant than education

e complaint most often noted by students in both groups had to do

with problems using technology, related to both hardware and software.

Technical problems were seen as a stress factor due to the amount of time

wasted trying to solve the problem, the frustration caused, and the dif

culty in using some software. e second most common problem that

students in both groups commented on was that increased use of new

technologies could potentially cause inequality. Some schools can aord

the newest equipment and software, others cannot. As Wang and Reeves

(2003, p. 54) state, new technology becomes out-of-date very quickly. is

can cause problems for schools and municipalities that are not well-o.

Not everybody has a computer at home. Besides, computers and

software don’t work properly or teachers can’t use them. There always

has to be a plan B, if technology doesn’t work as it should. Different

schools have different resources for buying equipment. (Example 5,

Group 1)

147

6 Prospective Teachers and New Technologies: A Study among Student Teachers

Very often something doesn’t work properly – there are more prob-

lems with technology than with chalkboards. There is a risk of in-

equality between students, if for example homework must be done

by using a computer. Not all students have the same opportunity of

working with computers, and not all schools have the money to buy

the newest technologies. (Example 6, Group 2)

Many of the informants commented on the problem (both ethical and

practical) that even if everyone is expected to use modern technologies,

there are still schoolchildren and young people who—for dierent rea

sons—do not have a computer at home and who do not use ICT in their

free time. ese students are at a disadvantage compared to “digi-natives.”

is can cause feelings of inferiority and sadness, according to the inform

ants. Some mentioned their own experiences of feeling inadequate, as well

as being laughed at because of problems using ICT. If these informants

are not supported in the acquisition of the necessary skills through formal

courses or by means of informal learning, they probably will not have the

courage to use ICT in their own teaching.

Some of the informants in Group 1 mentioned the lack of skills of

many teachers as a challenge, as well as the problems caused by spending

too much time using technology. According to some students, excessive

use of ICT can lead to concentration problems, “infobesity” (information

overload), and information fatigue. e amount of time spent in dierent

virtual worlds is growing all the time, something that many informants

see as a potential risk factor. ere are children and young people who are

more at home in their virtual realities than in the “real” world.

Children spend a lot of time using computers, at home and at school.

They get information through all possible channels all the time. In

this way, real communication, like looking other people in the eyes

and discussing with them, may suffer. (Example 7, Group 1)

Some of the informants who had teaching experience commented on

the fact that “too much [ICT use] is too much”; ICT-addiction is a real (and

growing) problem, according to these informants. Some were adamant in

stressing the importance of face-to-face interaction between teachers and

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

148

students on the one hand, and between students on the other. Real life

contacts are also important in teaching and learning social skills, an aspect

that was mentioned by some informants. is shows it is important to

nd a balance between new technologies and face-to-face interaction in

education and to use ICT in a way that does not mean isolating students

from each other, but facilitates collaboration between them. Computer-

supported collaborative learning has been suggested as one solution to this

problem (Stahl et al., 2006). “Addiction to ICT, excessive use, can cause

concentration problems, etc. Technology surrounds us wherever we are,

and children use computers anywhere and everywhere. Human contacts

suer” (Example 8, Group 2).

Some informants in Group 2 also commented on the risks of “edutain

ment” (educational entertainment): everything has to be fun nowadays,

and entertainment (funny videos, exciting games, etc.) has become more

important than education. Some respondents queried whether this devel

opment had gone too far.

Special ICT Issues Taken Up by Informants

Surprisingly, many students in Group 1 reected on the conict between

new technologies as a source of loneliness and isolation on the one hand,

and as a social and interactive activity on the other (Table 6).

Table 6. Special ICT Issues Taken Up by Informants

Group 1 (no experience) Group 2 (with experience)

Makes both learning and learners more

social and interactive

vs.

Can be very lonely – everyone uses his/her

own iPad; can cause isolation and lack of

interaction

The money used in new technologies

should be used for other purposes: e.g.,

repairing school buildings, smaller groups,

education of teachers, and class assistants

vs.

If used properly, with reection, can be rel-

evant, social, inspiring, and interesting

149

6 Prospective Teachers and New Technologies: A Study among Student Teachers

Some informants most worried about using ICT in schools commented

on the inherent nature of Finns to be quiet and shy. ey saw the increas

ing use of learning technologies as an additional threat; everyone staring

at their iPad in isolation was mentioned by several informants. “Learning

could become more isolating and lonely, asocial. Why use computers for

communicating when you sit in the same classroom, side by side?” (Ex

ample 9, Group 1).

While many informants without teaching experience were worried

about ICT isolating pupils, the informants with teaching experience were

more concerned about other things. Experiences in dierent schools had

made many of them acutely aware of the problems that several Finnish

schools are dealing with at the moment. ey worried about whether the

money used on ICT would be better used to tackle some of the problems

they had become aware of during their work experience: school buildings

requiring repair, big groups, the need for class assistants, etc. Also, the

necessity to educate teachers came up in the responses.

The money used on new technologies could perhaps be used in a

more useful way. Quite a few school buildings are in need of repair.

It would also be important to get more class assistants and smaller

groups. I think these kinds of things come rst, technology comes

second. (Example 10, Group 2)

However, none of these informants were categorically against using

learning technologies. Instead, they thought ICT use could be inspiring

and interesting, for both teachers and students, and it could also make

learning more social—on the condition that it was used properly and

with reection.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

150

Discussion and Conclusions

e results of this study proved to be quite interesting and also brought

up many things that worry the informants. In this section of the paper, I

discuss some of them. e data I collected include only the responses of 44

informants, which means that the results of my analysis cannot be general

ized to all prospective language teachers. Nevertheless, in my opinion, they

provide valuable new information on the thoughts of university students

about using new technologies in teaching and learning. is information

can also be useful in developing teacher education.

My rst research question was about prospective language teachers’

evaluation of their own skills in using new technologies. e results show

that the lack of ICT skills was experienced as a real problem; there were

many comments from informants about lacking the skills needed to use

ICT themselves. Several student teachers also reported their own expe

riences with not having acquired sucient knowledge and practice us-

ing new technologies during their university studies, not even during

their practicum periods. is is a very interesting comment because all

respondents had compulsory ICT education through their faculty and

their language department. Additionally, these language students have

the option of attending as many elective ICT courses as they desire dur

ing their university studies. Because I have not had the opportunity to

interview these students, I can only speculate about the reasons for these

experiences. It is possible that what they may, in fact, be missing is the

pedagogical component of ICT use, that is, determining when and how

to use technology in teaching and learning.

is issue is something that we, as educators, must take seriously. If

these university students do not feel they are prepared for their “e-future”

(Wang & Reeves, 2003, p. 54) or even for today’s needs, we can hardly

expect them to be capable of supporting their own pupils in learning the

skills necessary in the knowledge society of tomorrow. As computer self-

ecacy aects users’ perceived ease of use, which may further aect their

intentions to use computer technologies in the future (Yuen & Ma, 2008),

it is important to oer student teachers opportunities to practice ICT use.

151

6 Prospective Teachers and New Technologies: A Study among Student Teachers

However, practicing technological skills out of context cannot be seen as

adequate; also the pedagogical aspects of ICT use should be taken into

account (Haaparanta, 2008). Many of the informants expressed a strong

wish to learn more, but they were uncertain as to where to start. One of

the informants, a student who is already working part-time as a teacher,

writes, “I would love to get more skills in and information on this subject,

but I really don’t know where to ask for them.”

My second research question had to do with student teachers’ thoughts

about the use of new technologies in teaching. Many informants seemed

to have mixed feelings about the matter and reected on how to nd a

balance between using new technologies and face-to-face learning. ey

commented on the inappropriate and excessive use of ICT and its pos

sible hazards; for example, it may make pupils more isolated and lonely

and thus lead to decient social skills. ey saw ICT as a useful tool and

a valuable support for teaching and learning, but only on the condition

that it does not replace human contact between pupils on the one hand

and between teachers and learners on the other. Combining ICT use and

collaboration (Stahl et al., 2006) can therefore be seen as important. Some

student teachers were also worried about pupils who do not have a com

puter at home or who nd ICT use dicult or even frightening. ese

pupils obviously need support and encouragement to overcome their fears.

Many of the informants commented on the technical problems that

are connected to new technologies, both computers and software. is

is a real problem that everyone involved in teaching has experience with.

How to solve the technical problems connected to computers and how to

make educational software even more user-friendly, practical, and inspir

ing are questions worth considering. Using e-learning technology should

be experienced as useful so as to make it worthwhile for teachers to start

and keep using it (Haaparanta, 2008).

In my third research question, I was interested in discovering what

benets and problems prospective teachers saw in using new technologies

in schools. e results show that they saw many benets but also several

problems. ey were worried about the fact that dierent schools and mu

nicipalities have dierent economic resources to invest in new technolo-

gies; some schools also have less nancial resources than others to deal with

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

152

the other problems they face. Inequality between municipalities, schools,

and pupils is a real ethical, as well as practical, problem, even in a “model”

country like Finland in terms of modern education. As one of the student

teachers remarked, these things come rst, technology comes second.

As it is now, Education 3.0 still seems to be more of a vision than a

reality (Keats & Schmidt, 2007) in our society, even in higher education

(see Kumar, 2010). It is therefore important to reect on and discuss the

problems and worries indicated by these university students. Especially,

the pedagogical aspects of ICT use seem to require a stronger focus. is

is something that everyone working with student teachers should take into

account, and it is a central issue for future research.

References

Basic Education Act. (628/1998). Retrieved from http://www.nlex./en/laki/kaan-

nokset/1998/en19980628.pdf

Eskola, J., & Suoranta, J. (2003). Johdatus laadulliseen tutkimukseen. Tampere: Vasta-

paino.

FNBE. (2010). Skola 3.0. Helsinki: e Finnish National Board of Education.

Haaparanta, H. (2008). Tietokoneet perusopetuksen opettajan arkipäivässä: Opettajien

työhyvinvoinnin, työuupumuksen ja koulun tietostrategioiden vaikutukset teknologia-

asenteeseen. Tampere University of Technology, Pori. Retrieved from http://URN./

URN:NBN::tty-200903031023

Keats, D. (2009). e road to free and open educational resources at the University of

the Western Cape: A personal and institutional journey. Open Learning, 24(1), 47–55.

Keats, D., & Schmidt, J. P. (2007). e genesis and emergence of Education 3.0 in

higher education and its potential for Africa. First Monday, 12(3). Retrieved from

http://rstmonday.org/issues/issue12_3/keats/index.html

Kohlbacher, F. (2006). e use of qualitative content analysis in case study research.

Forum: Qualitative Social Research / Forum: Qualitative Sozialforschung, 7(1). Retrieved

from http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/75/153

Kumar, S. (2010). e net generation’s informal and educational use of new technolo-

gies. In Education, 16(1). Retrieved from http://ineducation.ca/index.php/ineduca-

tion/article/view/43/505

Moravec, J. (2008). Toward Society 3.0: New futures for human capital development. Re-

trieved from http://www.slideshare.net/moravec/society-3-0-presentation

153

6 Prospective Teachers and New Technologies: A Study among Student Teachers

Owston, R. (2007). Contextual factors that sustain innovative pedagogical practice

using technology: An international study. Journal of Educational Change, 8, 61–77.

Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative

learning: An historical perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of

the learning sciences (pp. 409–426). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Tuomi, J., & Sarajärvi, A. (2004). Laadullinen tutkimus ja sisällönanalyysi. Helsinki:

Tammi.

Van den Ho, R. (2011). Society 3.0. Retrieved from http://www.freebooks.nl/index.

php?page=boekopisbn&isbn=society

Wang, F., & Reeves, T. C. (2003). Why do teachers need to use technology in their

classrooms? Issues, problems, and solutions. Computers in the Schools, 20(4), 49–65.

Yuen, A. H. K. & Ma, W. W. K. (2008). Exploring teacher acceptance of e-learning

technology. Asia-Pacic Journal of Teacher Education, 36(3), 229–243.

Zhang, Y., & Wildemuth, B. M. (2009). Qualitative analysis of content. In B. M. Wil-

demuth (Ed.), Applications of social research methods to questions in information and

library science (pp. 308–319). Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.

155

7 E-Portfolio as a Tool for Guiding Higher

Education Student Growth to Entrepreneurship

E-Portfolio as a Tool for

Guiding Higher Education Student

Growth to Entrepreneurship

Tarja Römer-Paakkanen, Auli Pekkala and Päivi Rajaorko

Abstract

Since European knowledge-based societies are committed to develop indi-

viduals through lifelong learning, citizens require information, guidance,

and counselling more than ever before to make proper education and

career choices and to acquire the right skills for successful adjustment to

their environments (Cedepof 2008, p. 7). We focus on introducing an

entrepreneurship-portfolio (Entre-Pofo) model and preliminary experi

ences of students who have used it. Entre-Pofo is developed to promote

higher education entrepreneurial student learning and growth in entre

preneurship. e theoretical foundation of the Entre-Pofo model lies in

constructive learning that is also the theoretical basis for lifelong learning,

guiding and counselling practices. e Entre-Pofo is also guided by the

holistic counselling model, which considers life to have several intertwin

ing dimensions: education, work and career, and family life.

e paper described action research in which teachers and entrepreneur

ship students construct a rst version of the Entre-Pofo model. Prelimi-

nary experiences show that the model helps the students to manage their

multidimensional learning processes and personalize learning outputs.

Teachers feel that the model “relieves them from teaching” and it helps

them to orientate, motivate, guide, and challenge their students’ learning

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

156

practices. e signicance of this paper is the presentation of the Entre-

Pofo model as a tool to guide students in their lifelong learning processes

towards professional and entrepreneurial growth.

Keywords: ePortfolio, Lifelong Learning, Lifelong Guidance, Counsel-

ling, Growth to Entrepreneurship

Introduction

e need to improve lifelong learning opportunities and lifelong guidance

are the key issues in European-level educational policy. Lifelong learning

acquires a new approach for learning, i.e., a change from teacher-directed

to learner- or self-directed learning. Based on their literature review, Rae

mdonck, van der Leeden, Valcke, Segers, and ijssen (2012, p. 574), de-

ne self-directed learning as “a tendency to take an active and self-starting

approach to work-related learning activities and situations and to persist

in overcoming barriers and setbacks to learning.”

e lifelong learner also needs appropriate tools and support, such as

information and professional guidance. According to Cedefop (2011),

the debate has been concerned with how career management skills can

be exploited in dierent contexts, such as education, working, and free-

time activities. ese skills lead and support a learner’s motivation, con

dence, and self-esteem, as well as a sense of responsibility for self and

career aspirations.

e European Union has dened entrepreneurship as one of the key

competencies of lifelong learning. In that context, entrepreneurship re

fers to an individual’s ability to turn ideas into action. Entrepreneurship

includes creativity, innovation, and risk taking, as well as the ability to

plan and manage projects in order to achieve objectives. According to this

framework, entrepreneurship supports all citizens in everyday life at home

and in society. It helps employees gain awareness of the wider context of

their work and to capitalize on opportunities that arise. It also provides

157

7 E-Portfolio as a Tool for Guiding Higher

Education Student Growth to Entrepreneurship

the foundation for special skills and knowledge that entrepreneurs need

when starting a social or commercial enterprise (European Union 2006).

e recent challenge in lifelong learning and guidance is how to manage

and apply successfully modern information and communications technol

ogy (ICT) to guidance activities (Cedepof , 2011, p. 109). A rapidly chang-

ing environment and society demand changing skills and competences.

erefore, new innovative pedagogical and didactical systems are needed

for employment, self-development, and participation in a knowledge-

based, digital society. It is possible to personalize learning with the new

tools of ICT so that learners become knowledge builders and creators

rather than remain recipients of transmitted knowledge. e European

educational policy on transparency and recognition of qualications and

competences is implemented in ePortfolio. It can be used as digital re

cordings of learning outputs and learners’ products in dierent learning

environments: formal, non-formal, and informal (Commission of the Eu

ropean Communities, 2008, pp. 12–13).

As entrepreneurship education is a central factor in lifelong learning,

entrepreneurial skills should be developed and supplemented at dierent

points in life. It is a question of life management, interaction, self-guided

action, a capacity for innovation, and an ability to encounter change.

Education and training help entrepreneurship evolve into a mode of op

eration in which attitude, will, and a desire to take action combine with

knowledge and advanced competence. In general education, the empha

sis is on positive attitudes, basic entrepreneurial knowledge and skills,

and an entrepreneurial mode of operation. At the secondary level and in

higher education, the knowledge and skills are developed further, includ

ing competencies relating to entrepreneurship (Ministry of Education,

2009). At the higher education level, the primary purpose of entrepre

neurship education should be to develop entrepreneurial capacities and

mindsets (European Commission, 2008, p. 7). e assumption is that

entrepreneurial skills will better prepare students for careers in small and

large organizations alike (Florin, Karri, & Rossiter, 2007, p. 18). In the

context of the universities of applied sciences in Finland, entrepreneurship

education programs can have various objectives.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

158

According to the Finnish Ministry of Education (2009), entrepreneur-

ship education is a much broader concept than entrepreneurship as a

practice of trade. As a concept, it also encompasses training for entre

preneurship. It’s components are an active individual with initiative, an

entrepreneurial learning environment, education and training, and active

and enterprise-promoting policy in society. Entrepreneurship education

generates entrepreneurship at all levels of society and strengthens and

creates business. e goal in entrepreneurship education and training in

higher education is not to entice students into rushing o to become

entrepreneurs, but rather to provide students with tools that enable real

istic self-evaluation and support for student growth to entrepreneurship.

Higher education students also need personal guidance and entrepreneur

ship studies that are based on their personal targets and needs. (Ministry

of Education, 2009.)

In the process of developing our work, we determined that the target

of entrepreneurship education and counselling at higher education can

be expressed as:

a) Developing the entrepreneurial drive, i.e. raising awareness and motiva

tion among students: Motivation to study can also motivate students

to decrease their study time to graduate earlier. Entrepreneurial drive

is also pro-activity and passion that can inuence students so that the

number of students who do not graduate is diminished.

b) Developing students’ entrepreneurial ability to identify and exploit oppor

tunities: ese opportunities are not only business opportunities, but

also opportunities to choose alternative courses, for instance, student

exchange programs, taking part in projects concerning co-operation

with work life and entrepreneurs, or other types of on-the-job learning.

c) Training students in the skills they need to set up a business, to develop an

existing business, and manage its growth. Some students also need skills

to continue their family or other existing business.

In entrepreneurship education programs, students can learn many ben

ecial skills and adopt attitudes that will help them nd their motivation to

learn and graduate, to create their future vision, and to nd their place in

society and the labor market. According to Pittaway and Cope (2007) the

target of entrepreneurship education is not only to create new businesses

159

7 E-Portfolio as a Tool for Guiding Higher

Education Student Growth to Entrepreneurship

and write business plans, new venture planning can simulate entrepre-

neurial learning by creating an environment for experiential, work-based

learning. e literature and practical experience suggests that entrepre

neurship can be taught, and that a creative environment encourages en-

trepreneurial thinking. ey also suggest that guidance and education for

entrepreneurship can stimulate the interest, skills, and condence needed

to take a business idea forward.

Using experience-based teaching methods is crucial when aiming to

develop entrepreneurial skills and abilities. Usually, traditional educational

methods (like lectures) do not inspire students to take risks, be actors in

their learning process, or to develop their entrepreneurial thinking. Hence,

there is a need for more interactive learning approaches, where the teacher

becomes more of a moderator than a lecturer. e European Commission

(2008, p. 8) emphasizes that crossing boundaries between disciplines and

multidisciplinary collaboration are essential elements for building enter

prising abilities. In our previous study (Römer-Paakkanen & Pekkala,

2008), students stressed that dierent assignments do not support learn

ing if they are not embedded in real-life situations. As an example, they

suggested that when writing a business plan in student groups, it would

be better and more eective, in terms of learning outcomes, if at least

one student in the group already had a real business idea. e traditional

lecture format may not be the most eective method because it ignores

the essence of the entrepreneurial process. Traditional approaches to teach

ing may, in fact, inhibit the development of the requisite entrepreneurial

behavior or spirit.

In this paper the focus is to present the Entre-Pofo model as a tool to

be used for reection and guidance by entrepreneurship students. Kyvyt.

ePortfolio service that is developed for Finnish educational institutions is

used as a platform for Entre-Pofo. e service oers students and teachers

versatile tools for creating and developing their own portfolio on the web.

e service is integrated with web-based learning environments (Optima

and Moodle), and at this stage users can register with the service through

the online environments of member organizations. Kyvyt. is a software

as a service (SaaS) platform developed and maintained by Discendum Oy.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

160

e service is based on the open source software, Mahara. Discendum is

an ocial Mahara partner.

By developing an Entre-Pofo model for higher education students, we

aim to help potential entrepreneurs benet from their work experiences,

tacit-knowledge, and family business background to construct their en

trepreneurial identity. Our context is business studies at HAAGA-HELIA

University of Applied Sciences in Finland. Our target group is students at

universities of applied sciences that take part in entrepreneurship studies

or training, as well as the pre-incubator.

Targets of the Research and the Paper

e aim and purpose of this action research process originated from prac-

tice: there is a need for pedagogical models that promote pro-activity,

entrepreneurial spirit, and skills among higher education students. We

also need practical tools to help those students plan and reect on their

professional development and growth in entrepreneurship.

As we had previous experience with several development projects, we

came into this project with a preliminary understanding of the theoretic

baseline for our pedagogical model. As teachers and researchers, we have

extensive experience in guiding and counselling higher education students,

and based on this we decided to approach the problem of constructing

the Entre-Pofo model along with a planning and reecting tool from a

student’s point of view. We therefore invited entrepreneurship students

to take part in the construction work with us.

In this paper we introduce the rst stages of the action research process.

As a result of this ongoing research, we present the rst version of the Entre-

Pofo model. We also introduce preliminary comments and results from

the students and teachers that have been involved with the construction

process and that have also used the pilot version. e rst phases of our

action research project presented in this paper have the following targets:

161

7 E-Portfolio as a Tool for Guiding Higher

Education Student Growth to Entrepreneurship

1) to outline the crucial elements for constructing the Entre-Pofo model,

2) to collect students’ and teachers’ rst comments and experiences of us

ing the Entre-Pofo.

In the next sections, we rst present the theoretic background that

was developed in our previous research projects concerning guidance and

counselling processes in higher education. We then present the action

research process and constructive research approach. As a result of the

rst stage of our research, we present the Entre-Pofo model and rst user

experiences. We also describe how we will continue the project and the

construction work of the Entre-Pofo model in the future.

Main Concepts and Theoretical Background

According to Jarvis (2007, p. 5), human learning is the process of trans-

forming the whole of our experience through thought, action, and emotion

and thereby transforming ourselves as we continue to build perceptions

of external reality into our biography. Jarvis (2007, p. 1) denes lifelong

learning as follows: “Lifelong learning is the combination of processes

throughout a lifetime whereby the whole person – body (genetic, physical

and biological) and mind (knowledge, skills, attitudes, values, emotions,

beliefs and senses) – experiences social situations, the perceived content of

which is then transformed cognitively, emotively or practically (or through

any combination) and integrated into the individual person’s biography,

resulting in a continually changing (or more experienced) person.” Jarvis

also points out that learning always occurs within a social context (Jarvis

2007, p. 12). Merriam (2001, p. 94) points out that “e eld of adult

education has long realized that formal learning activities are just one

mechanism for adult learning. Self-directed learning helped bring to the

fore the importance of the informal learning that occurs as we go about

our daily lives.”

In the Finnish education context, lifelong learning means that each

person has sucient opportunities to develop individual knowledge and

skills in various learning environments in all phases of life. e principle

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

162

of lifelong learning is that knowledge and competencies are made visible

and valued regardless of where, when, and how they are acquired (Min

istry of Education and Culture, 2012, p. 15). According to Beynon and

Hareld (2007, p. 43) :“e archetype for lifelong learning is adult edu

cation outside the schooling years through work (e.g. in training courses)

and also for pleasure (e.g. night classes, etc.). It also embraces the kind

of unsupervised, self-motivated learning that is associated with over-a-

lifetime learning of specialist disciplines, hobbies and skills outside the

classroom. ere are reasons to suppose that current technology is well

suited to supporting independent learning activities on the periphery of

established educational frameworks. e environment that best suits the

lifelong learner is then one that contains elements that are constructivist

in spirit, and gives opportunities for learning by building.”

A variety of terms are used in the EU to describe lifelong guidance. In

EU policy literature, lifelong guidance refers to such activities as advis

ing, study and career counselling, competence assessment, and mentor-

ing (Council of the European Union, 2004, p. 2; Cedepof, 2005). e

Council of the European Union (2004) denes general guidance as a

range of activities that enables citizens of any age and at any point in their

lives (lifelong) to identify their capacities, competences, and interests, to

make meaningful educational, training, and occupational decisions, and to

manage their individual life paths in learning, work, and other settings in

which these capacities and competences are learned and/or used (lifewide).

Generally, at the institutions of learning, guidance refers to the study

counselling and to the information and consultation services that aim

to guide the students so that their careers and life plans will be success

ful. e core task of guidance and counselling is to support the personal

growth and development of the guided person (Kupke, 2008, p. 14). In

higher education, institutional guidance can mean study counselling on

various occasions, such as during info sessions, personal meetings, or small

group meetings. It is important that students also receive guidance in

their thesis seminars. ere can be a great deal of variation in the form of

guidance between universities or between faculties. Printed or electronic

study guides, the Internet, and email are used as tools to help in guidance

work. e themes of guidance sessions can be all of the following: brieng

163

7 E-Portfolio as a Tool for Guiding Higher

Education Student Growth to Entrepreneurship

the students, integrating them with the study environment or academia,

and supporting their personal development (Levander, Kaivola, & Nevgi,

2003, pp. 171-173). In this paper and in our studies, we use the terms

guidance and counselling almost as synonyms, depending on the context.

Peavy (1999; 2000) claims that counselling should be a process of as

sisting people to become eligible to participate more fully and with more

meaning in social life. According to Tapio (2011, p. 72), Peavy sees coun

selling as a practical and holistic method of life planning. Also, Onnismaa

(2007, p. 7) describes the fact that the target of counselling is to help the

clients, or students in the educational context of our study, to live lives

that are more balanced with their environment, act in a goal-directed way

and utilize their own facilities.

Guidance and counselling do not mean the same thing as healing, but

they mean that the student and the counsellor, working together, interpret

and clarify the questions that arise when the student makes plans for his

or her life and career. Guidance and counselling do not mean teaching or

advising either. e role of the counselor is often debated. e counselor

should avoid giving ready-made advice or recommendations to the student

(Onnismaa, 2003, 8–9).

In Finland, personal study plans (PSPs) have been widely introduced in

higher education institutions (HEIs) as tool to help engage students in the

completion of their studies as planned and thereby enhance study progress

and, at best, be seen as a valuable addition to a student’s career planning.

e majority of universities of applied sciences (UAS) have also introduced

electronic PSPs (ePSPs) as a system of recognizing prior learning. Group

instructors or tutors carry out annual development and guidance discus

sions with students, during which the ePSPs are completed, taking into

account a student’s career plan, personal life situation, professional growth,

and development of identity and competences. When correctly employed,

the PSP supports the students in the completion of their degree within a

targeted time frame (FINHEEC, 2012, pp. 79–80).

Several denitions of ePortfolio exist, depending on context and use. In

education, the ePortfolio is dened as a digitized collection of a student’s

work and reections, which may include websites, an electronic learn

ing environment, and recorded media. e advantages of the ePortfolio

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

164

compared to a paper-based portfolio are that they are easier to revise and

combine with other materials, are portable (i.e., accessible in a variety

of locations and devices), and can be shared with others. Furthermore,

ePortfolio can pertain to a personal development plan (PDP) and support

lifelong learning (Stefani, Mason, & Pegler, 2007, pp. 17–19).

ere are dierent types of ePortfolios that are based on functional

ity: an assessment portfolio is used to evaluate student performance and

achievements; a showcase portfolio shows learner competencies and work

(e.g., to potential employers); the major role of a development portfolio

is to support a student’s personal development plan (PDP); the reective

portfolio is used for a learner’s self-assessment, evaluation, and reections

(Stefani et al. 2007, pp. 41–43). In some contexts, like in our project, a

process portfolio is used as a combination of the development and reec

tive portfolios. According to Klenowski, Askew and Carnel (2006, p. 268),

key learning and teaching concepts when using portfolios for learning are:

Co-constructivist learning, experiential learning, dialogic learning, reec

tive thinking, self-evaluation, meta-learning, and meta-cognitive skills.

ePortfolios are, on one level, another tool in the armory of e-learning,

i.e., the use of ICT in learning. e pedagogy of ePortfolio use, as well as

the eective use of e-learning, draws on theories of constructivism (Stefani

et al., 2007, p. 57). Constructivism sees learning as a building activity in

which individuals build an understanding of events, concepts, and pro

cesses based on their personal experiences, often supported by interactions

with others (Pritchard, 2007, p. 2). e ePortfolio can be helpful in re

cording authentic learning by allowing students to compile various kinds

of evidence of their learning, e.g., text, audio, video clips, and photos.

ePortfolios stress the issues of lifelong and personalized learning, as well as

student-centered exible learning. Successful uses of ePortfolios underline

the key role of reection, which should be a continuous process throughout

the study period. An ePortfolio with structured reective processes and

mentoring by the teacher will encourage students’ self-aware, self-critical,

and personal development. ePortfolios address the new forms of assess

ment. e advantage of an ePortfolio is that the self-assessment can be

integrated directly with the student work. It also supports approaches to

peer assessment (Stefani et al., 2007.) Two variables that aect the students’

165

7 E-Portfolio as a Tool for Guiding Higher

Education Student Growth to Entrepreneurship

positive attitude towards ePortfolio is that it allows social learning and

gives students the feeling that they have control over their own portfolios

(Garrett, 2011, pp. 197-201).

e previous studies about the use of portfolios show that it may cause

anxiety among students if there is no single method or structure for writ

ing the portfolios. It is necessary to explicit to the students the approach

to learning on which the portfolio work is based. Students’ willingness to

be open and trusting and to expose their strengths and areas for develop

ment to the tutors and peer-students is important (Klenowski et al., 2006,

pp. 277-281). e key issue when using ePortfolios in learning is that the

students have the skills needed to use computers (Hughes, 2010, p. 203;

Chen, Chang, Chen, Huang, & Chen, 2012, p. 123). If the technology

is not user-friendly, the use of a developmental or reective portfolio is

fundamentally aected (Stefani et al., 2007, p. 107; Garrett, 2011, p. 201).

e tutor’s role must shift from theoretician to facilitator. It is important

that tutors and students have respect for each other, and therefore, the

issues of condentiality and ethics should be discussed (Klenowski et al.,

2006, pp. 281-283.)

Entre-Pofo is based on a type of portfolio that is used primarily as a

device for learners to show their skills and competences in various ways,

reect upon their development and learning process, and establish new

learning plans. For teachers and tutors, it is a tool via which to provide

feedback to the students about their development. Entre-Pofo also helps

students to discuss their ideas and plans with their peer students. A port

folio that is truly a story of learning is owned by the learner, structured by

the learner, and told in the learner’s own voice - literally and rhetorically

(Barret & Carney, 2005).

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

166

Framework for the study

e development of the Entre-Pofo model and this paper were guided by

the holistic counselling model (Figure 1). e holistic counselling model

was created in the “Get a life” project, which was coordinated by Finland

Futures Research Centre. e project also provided a practical future-

oriented simulation tool for the students (Römer-Paakkanen 2011).

e holistic counselling model lies on constructivism and on Peavy’s

(2000) socio-dynamic counselling, which is a general method for life

planning and facilitates learning through the use of cultural tools and co-

construction. We also implement Brousseau’s (Brousseau, Driver, Eneroth

and Larsson 1996) pluralistic career theory.

Constructivism views a person as an open system, constantly interact

ing with an environment, seeking stability through ongoing change. e

emphasis is on the process, not on an outcome; there is no completion

of a stage and arrival at the next stage, as in stage-based views of human

development. (Patton and McMahon 2006, p. 4.) e constructivist para

digm is appropriate in entrepreneurship education (Löbler 2006, p. 25)

as well as when constructing an ePortfolio platform for higher education

students (Le 2012, p. 64; Ke & Wu 2010, p. 1355).

Brousseau’s pluralistic career concept framework has four career con

cepts: linear career, expert career, spiral career and transitory career. A

pluralistic denitional framework species explicitly that there are many

ways to dene career success. (Brousseau et al. 1996). Hall and Goodale

(1986) indicate the stages in career development as a line of dierent

periods of life, which they name exploration, trial, establishment, main

tenance (growth, stagnation) and decline. According to Savickas, Nota,

Rossier, Dauwalder, Duarte, Guichard, Soresi, Van Esbroeck, and van

Vianen (2009, p. 2), career development theories and techniques have

faced a crisis because their fundamental assumption of predictability based

on stability and stages is debatable, and therefore, they may no longer be

functional. Indeed, human behavior is not only a function of the person

but also of the environment. ey point out that even if the individual’s

characteristics were stable, the environment is still rapidly changing. ere

167

7 E-Portfolio as a Tool for Guiding Higher

Education Student Growth to Entrepreneurship

fore, theoretical models that emphasize human exibility, adaptability, and

life-long learning are required.

Takanen-Körperich (2008, pp.155-156) constructed Brousseau’s plu

ralistic career concepts by adding two alternative career concepts that she

calls “parallel career concept” and “explorative career concept”. In the

parallel career concept a person can at the same time be active in several

elds and in the explorative career a person has by change found a quite

dierent kind of working life and environment than the educational stud

ies would indicate. Both the parallel career and explorative career should

be introduced to university students as new opportunities – actually many

students already follow the parallel career as they study and work at the

same time.

All life experiences are learning experiences because our work lives, our

family lives, and our community lives are punctuated with incidences of

informal and unplanned learning (Merriam, 2001, p. 94). e holistic

counselling model takes into account that life has several dimensions that

are intertwined: an education path (study counselling), a work and career

path (career counselling and entrepreneurship counselling), and one’s own

life (family, hobbies, and experiences). Collectively, these dimensions de

velop student’s competencies and skills. Work, education, and life paths

should be reected in a person’s future environment and not only in the

current moment or in those few years spent getting an education. e

target of the holistic counselling model is to help higher education stu

dents realize that they themselves can inuence their future, in fact, they

can make their future. According to Godet (2001, 9), “future remains to

be created and it is plural, undetermined and open to a wide variety of

possibilities”.

e model presented in Figure 1 indicates that by learning, develop

ing, doing, challenging, reecting, and planning, students can build their

future so that they have a meaningful career path and can make their

own choices. e active process of planning one’s future also elevates the

entrepreneurial spirit. By following the idea of holistic counselling model

students can be pro-active and plan their future. ey can also reect on dif

ferent study, career, and life path choices within possible future scenarios.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

168

Figure 1. Holistic counselling model (Römer-Paakkanen, 2011).

e holistic counselling model presented in Figure 1 is also based on

the principles of entrepreneurial learning. Entrepreneurial learning re

quires student-centered learning methods, in which the role of a teacher

is to support the student’s learning and development of entrepreneurial

behavior, skills, and attitudes. In general, learning and teaching entrepre

neurship require changes in the roles played by teachers and students in

learning processes (e.g., Jones & Iredale, 2010, p. 13; Kickul and Fayolle,

2007; Kyrö, 2005; Gorman, Hanlon, & King, 1997). Hence, a move

from a teacher-centred learning approach toward student-centred learn

ing is needed. While, in the traditional approach, the emphasis is on the

scope and nature of the content learned, in student- or learner-centred

learning, the emphasis is both on the content and on the nature of the

learner’s process of learning (Carrier, 2007, p. 155; Davidovitch, 2013, p.

331). Knowledge is not transmitted to students, but this type of learning

is often skill-related and aims at personal development (Carrier, 2007, p.

155). e role of a teacher is to facilitate students’ learning through guid

ing students’ understanding during the learning process (Kickul & Fayolle,

I plan

I do

I am

Coaching

Counselling

I reect I learn

I developI challenge

Work and

career

Education

Life

Target:

Good life

Meaningful career

path or enterpre

neurship self-eca-

cy, personal

Future scenarios

169

7 E-Portfolio as a Tool for Guiding Higher

Education Student Growth to Entrepreneurship

2007, pp. 2-7). In higher education, the lecture format should be renewed

and the focus should be on strategies that empower students to take charge

of their own learning. e use of engaging, interactive activities will allow

students to take active roles in the educational process (Hsu & Malkin,

2011, p. 48). In entrepreneurship education, a shift from teacher-centred

to student-centred learning does not mean that business theories or models

become obsolete. Rather, they are applied when students learn by doing.

Knowledge is not seen as an objective substance owned and transferred

by a teacher to students. It is created in students’ active social processes in

action. Hence, knowledge is contextual and subjective (Kyrö, 2005; Kirby,

2007). According to Suonpää (2013, p. 136), the entrepreneurial learning

process can be described as holistic, collaborative, and dynamic, rather than

cognitive, individual, and static. We implement the social constructivist

learning theory, which according to Suonpää (2013, p. 44), is a student-

centred learning approach involving both individual and social aspects

of learning. It assumes that students learn when they socially construct

knowledge in interaction with other students within the context of its use.

e role of the teacher is to create a learning environment that supports

students’ learning and personal development. Students take responsibility

for their learning and others’ learning, and they dene what they learn

and how they learn it. Hence, in this approach, students are capable of

developing their entrepreneurial behaviours, skills, and attitudes. Kirby

(2007, pp. 26–27) suggests that the learning approach implemented in

entrepreneurship education should ensure the following:

· students have ownership of their learning,

· students are involved in problem solving in real-world situations,

· students are encouraged to formulate decisions on data that are im

mediate, incomplete, dubious, and personally generated, and

· students are provided with role models who are involved in both the

learning and assessment processes.

Savickas et al. (2009) identied ve shifts in thinking as being neces

sary to develop a new paradigm for life designing and building: from

traits and states to context, from perception to process, from linear to

non-linear dynamics, from scientic fact to narrative realities, and from

describing to modelling. ese same shifts in thinking are needed when

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

170

enhancing students’ entrepreneurial learning and their growth toward en-

trepreneurship. Wing and Man (2007, p. 317) suggest that entrepreneurial

learning is more than possessing an awareness of learning opportunities,

a willingness to learn, or an accumulation of required experience, skills,

and knowledge. Rather, a competent entrepreneur shall be selective and

purposeful in learning, will learn continuously and in an in-depth manner,

and will actively seek learning opportunities. Wing and Man underline

that entrepreneurs need to transfer what has been learnt from direct and

indirect experience, as well as the experience of others into current use,

and will reect upon the experiences, seeking more in-depth meaning

and reasons for events.

Methodology

In our teacher and researcher group, we had both practical and research

experience in entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship education, study and

career counselling, and e-learning from dierent projects and dierent

points of view. To generate ideas for developing and constructing the Entre-

Pofo model for the professional development of students and for train

ing them in entrepreneurship, we implemented the action research (AR)

methodology and adopted the constructive research approach (CRA).

According to Mertler (2012, p. 14), numerous authors and researchers

have proposed models for the AR process. Because this process is some

what dynamic, models can look dierent from one another but will possess

numerous common elements. AR models begin with a central problem or

topic. ey involve some observation or monitoring of current practice,

followed by the collection and synthesis of information and data. Many

AR processes follow similar steps that include planning, acting, evaluat

ing, and reecting. One example of this process can be found in Bachman

(2001), where he presents a spiral that suggests participants gather infor

mation, plan actions, observe and evaluate those actions, and then reect

and plan for a new cycle of the spiral based on the insights gained in the

previous cycle. AR is a recursive, cyclical process that typically does not

171

7 E-Portfolio as a Tool for Guiding Higher

Education Student Growth to Entrepreneurship

proceed in a linear fashion. e spiral nature of AR was rst presented by

Blaxter, Hughes and Tight (1996, p. 10).

According to Kuula (1999), AR aims to change common practices

and solve dierent kinds of problems. AR involves and activates actors,

requiring participation in the research. e researcher also participates

in the process and is part of the everyday action of the organization. e

researchers bring their own experiences from previous research projects,

practices found in other research, and best practice.

We also follow the CRA proposed by Kasanen, Lukka, and Siitonen

(1993) as a specic opportunity for management accounting research

ers to engage in problem solutions that are relevant to managers (Labro

&Tuomela, 2003). CRA is a problem solving process through which new

constructions are created. e new construction of a model, plan, or

other procedure can provide a more functional solution to managers in

an organization (Kasanen et al., 1993, p. 224). CRA involves seven steps

(Kasanen et al., 1993; Lukka, 2000), which we implemented (Table 1).

e CRA process seems to be quite linear, but in practice the steps do not

follow each other in a chronological way, but move forward, more like an

action research spiral. In our application, the actors (i.e., researchers and

developers as members of the target organization, the students in our case,

as the users of the constructed innovation) work together collectively dur

ing the entire process. e problem area and the creative process emerge

continuously during the construction process.

We started this development project as we realized through our work

that there was a need for a tool to support the personal development of

students and their growth in entrepreneurship. e project group consists

of three teacher-researchers. In workshops (spring 2012) with the students

we determined the level of our understanding about the issue (i.e. ePort

folio and especially Entre-Pofo).

We presented the Kyvyt. ePortfolio service and the idea of Entre-Pofo

to entrepreneurial student groups (a total of 25 students). Nine entrepre

neurship students that took part in the courses began to develop and test

the Entre-Pofo model with our project group. As the students did not

have prior experience with the ePortfolio platform or a working portfolio,

they were given some training and time to become familiar with them. We

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

172

Table 1. The CRA Process That Was Implemented in This Research (modi-

ed from Kasanen et al., 1993 and Lukka, 2000)

Step Stages in CRA Stages in this research

1 Find a practically relevant research

problem that also has potential for

theoretical contribution.

There was a need for practical tools

to help students plan and reect on

their professional development and

growth in entrepreneurship.

2 Examine the potential for long-term

research co-operation with the

target organization(s). Both primary

parties should be committed to

putting signicant eort into the

project.

Both entrepreneurship teachers and

students at our university of applied

sciences are committed to the

development project.

3 Obtain deep understanding of

the topic area both practically and

theoretically.

The researchers had deep pre-

understanding of the topic, both

from their practical work and

from prior research. To gain an

understanding of the students’ point

of view, workshops with the students

were arranged.

4 Innovate a solution idea and develop

a problem solving construction that

also has potential for theoretical

contribution. Conceptualizing

the problem area so that useful

communication between the parties

can take place.

Constructing the existing ePortfolio

service for the Entre-Pofo model in

workshops with the research team

and students.

5 Implement the solution and test how

it works. This is the rst level practical

test (market test) of the designed

construction.

Focus-groups and personal inter-

views for entrepreneurship teachers

and students, inquiry for students.

6 Ponder the scope of applicability of

the solution.

The piloting partners and test groups

are under research.

7 Identify and analyze the theoretical

contribution.

After piloting and testing also the

theoretical contribution is evaluated.

173

7 E-Portfolio as a Tool for Guiding Higher

Education Student Growth to Entrepreneurship

stressed to the students that a portfolio is not only a record of their study

output, but that reection and self-reection on their learning process

over time was actually more important. As there are many potential ways

to build the ePortfolio, it was emphasized to the students that they should

create their own personal Entre-Pofo model to illustrate their personality

and personal development process. Some ePortfolio examples were in

cluded in the Entre-Pofo model sites to provide students with examples

of the many possible ways that their own portfolio could be structured.

To study how our solution (i.e., the Entre-Pofo model) works, we con

ducted focus group and personal interviews and e-mail inquiry for the

students. Also a couple of feedback workshops were arranged. e students

discussed their experiences, and provided feedback and tips for further

development of the Entre-Pofo model.

We will continue this constructive research process by examining and

further developing the Entre-Pofo model with several groups of entrepre

neurship students. Other universities of applied sciences are also interested

to pilot the Entre-Pofo model.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

174

Results of the Project

In this section we rst describe the crucial elements of the Entre-Pofo

model and how we set up the Entre-Pofo sites into the Kyvyt. ePortfolio

service (research task number 1). Afterwards, we present the experiences

and comments obtained so far from the teachers and students involved

in the construction work (research task number 2).

The Crucial Elements of the Entre-Pofo Model and the First En-

tre-Pofo Model

e portfolio learning environment needs to be suciently prepared. A

clear view on portfolio learning lines is crucial for enhancing the intended

outcome in the use of portfolio. (Poortinga & Meeder, 2007). On the

Kyvyt. ePortfolio sites we present the project and principles of the En

tre-Pofo process. ere are also descriptions of Entre-Pofo elements, the

ultimate aims of the portfolio, and some practical information about the

types of documents students should add to their Entre-Pofo and how they

should reect on their learning and professional development.

Entre-Pofo in a nutshell is used by students interested in entrepre

neurship or who want to become entrepreneurs to upload dierent study

documents and completed assignments. ese documents form a portfolio

that demonstrates their knowledge, skills and competencies through their

entrepreneurial growth. Entre-Pofo may contain entrepreneurship study

plans, drafts, reports, diaries and blogs, nal products, and reections. In

addition to written documents, uses can include photos and videos in their

Entre-Pofo. In Kyvyt., there is the template for their curriculum vitae

and Euro pass, in which students can describe their education histories,

work experiences, knowledge, and skills. Students can create and utilize

various portfolios for many purposes. Figure 2 presents the key elements

of the rst version of the Entre-Pofo model, which is based on the holistic

counselling model described above. e students reect and plan their

entrepreneurial growth through ve life dimensions or paths (working

life and entrepreneurship; education; family and life path). By considering

175

7 E-Portfolio as a Tool for Guiding Higher

Education Student Growth to Entrepreneurship

one’s own background, skills, competencies, etc. (i.e. being), by planning,

learning, developing, doing or acting, and challenging the students can re

ect and contribute to their professional and entrepreneurial development.

Figure 2. Key elements and the rst version of Entre-Pofo model.

e constructed Entre-Pofo model includes self-reection tools for stu-

dents. Blogs are useful tools in a student’s reection process. In blogs, stu-

dents can record entries in the form of a learning diary during their courses

Work and career path: Working

life and entrepreneurship Education path Life path

Prior work expe-

riences, learning

at work

Entrepreneurial

behavior and

activities

Educational

background,

prior studies

Family back-

ground

Hobbies and

other free time

activities

Work experi-

ence during

studies: paid

labor, internship,

projects, co-

operation with

business life

Utilizing avail-

able guiding

and counselling

services, seeing

and creating op-

portunities

Personal study

planning, utiliz-

ing the dierent

opportunities

Socialization in

family and in

social environ-

ments

Friends and peer

groups, volun-

tary work and

associations, int.

exchange, social

media etc.

Career Planning/run-

ning own busi-

ness or family

business

Post-graduate

studies

Raising own

family

Networking

ENTREPRENEURSHIP-PORTFOLIO

ePortfolio tools: Videos, texts, social media, photos, blogs, forums etc.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND

GROWTH TO ENTREPRENEURSHIP

CONTINUOUS REFLECTION

With family members, teach-

ers, guides and counsellors,

coaches, student peers, friends,

partners, employers, managers,

colleagues, entrepreneurs, men

tors, etc.

CONTINUOUS SELF-REFLECTION

Being i.e. asking who I am, plan

ning, learning, developing, do-

ing, challenging

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

176

or during their practical training periods. Students are also encouraged to

continuously reect on their entrepreneurial growing process in their blogs.

In order to enhance the students’ reection progress students should be

given clear requirements for their reection tasks (Poortinga & Meeder,

2007). In our project the students are asked to carry out continuous self-

reection mentioned in Figure 2 by being, planning, learning, developing,

doing, and challenging. e dimensions are described in detail in the Table 2.

Table 2. Description of the Continuous Self-Reection Dimensions in the

Entre-Pofo-Model in Figure 2.

Being: This dimension consists of students’ own stories, background, and entrepre-

neurial eorts. They are invited to ask themselves the following questions: Who am I?

What is my background? What are my objectives regarding entrepreneurship? What kind

of entrepreneurial experiences do I have? What kind of success, failure, and try again

experiences have I had? Students are also asked to describe possible business ideas or

their family business background.

Planning: This dimension follows up on the personal development plan (PDP) for entre-

preneurship. Also, potential business ideas are described in this dimension. The PDP

consists of learning and educational background, work experiences, and experiences

in other life areas, like hobbies and free time activities. In this section, students are also

asked to describe their entrepreneurial learning experiences.

Learning: In this dimension students illustrate their entrepreneurship studies, other

study choices, and plans concerning their entrepreneurial growth. One key element is

how the students combine their entrepreneurial learning with other studies they under-

take. They are also encouraged to reect on their entrepreneurial learning in dierent

contexts: at work, within their family, in their hobbies, and with their friends and peer

groups.

Developing: Development in this context means the personal SWOT-analysis relating

to entrepreneurship, professional development, and entrepreneurial identity. The main

idea is to reect on crucial factors that inspire their own entrepreneurial spirit or that

may inhibit their entrepreneurial spirit.

Doing/Acting: In this part of the Entre-Pofo model process, students narrate their en-

trepreneurial path from the very rst plan to the action. They portray and reect on the

concrete actions, e.g., the actions that promote entrepreneurship in their studies and in

their everyday life.

Challenging: Here students self-reect about those things that help them cope with

challenging situations and help them solve problems. They also contemplate the mean-

ing of risk and risk taking.

177

7 E-Portfolio as a Tool for Guiding Higher

Education Student Growth to Entrepreneurship

Student self-reection is a very important element of the Entre-Pofo

process. Moreover, we consider that continuous reection with other ac

tors is signicant and it supports student growth towards entrepreneur-

ship—they can reect with teachers, counsellors, student peers, coaches,

family members, and with other entrepreneurs. ese actors catalyze and

facilitate the reection process for the student by promoting self-assess

ment, e.g., by asking students what they have learned and what they think

they should still learn in the future. e important task these actors have

is to inspire students to collaborate.

Besides continuous self-reection, receiving feedback and the oppor

tunity to reect with others are also important. Conversation with other

course-participants encourages co-construction, developing new ideas and

new understanding of students’ own learning (Klenowski et al. 2006).

Teachers, academic counsellors, entrepreneurship coaches, and other ac

tors can provide feedback and guide students through the process and

through reection within Entre-Pofo in Kyvyt.. e aim is to coach and

motivate students as they progress on their entrepreneurial path. It is also

important that students receive answers to their questions and discuss

their problems with teachers and with student peers. Neither the teacher

nor student peers, nor anyone else has access to the student’s Entre-Pofo

portfolio unless the student makes their portfolio visible.

Interaction with other learners and actors is important in entrepre

neurial learning. Hence, one of the advantages that Kyvyt. oers is the

opportunity to network with other entrepreneurial students and actors.

Any user can create a group at Kyvyt. and can decide whom to invite as

members of that group. Networks can be built for various purposes, e.g.,

for study groups or other interest groups. In a group, students can chat,

participate in a discussion forum, or write a wiki together. ey can also

share dierent documents with each other. In our project an Entre-Pofo

group was created for students from dierent entrepreneurship courses.

rough this group we had the opportunity to communicate with our

entrepreneurship students. In the future our aim is to also invite entre

preneurs and other actors, such as mentors, to this group.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

178

The First Comments and Experiences

From the Students and the Teachers

is is an ongoing project and for the time being, only the rst version of

the pedagogical Entre-Pofo model has been constructed together with the

students during their entrepreneurship courses. e construction work is

continuing, but in this paper we can present some early comments and

experiences provided by students and teachers who took part in the con

struction work of the Entre-Pofo model and who have used the Kyvyt.

ePortfolio tool as part of the model.

One important point in AR is that the method recognizes that those

people who take part in the research or project have the knowledge and

ability to understand the phenomena and issues faced (Brydon-Miller,

Greenwood, & Maguire, 2001). In two workshops (4 teachers and 9 stu

dents), and a student survey we asked the project actors to describe their

experiences and provide comments and development ideas after testing

the rst version of Entre-Pofo during spring 2013.

We were particularly interested in the following themes:

· What were the advantages of using the Entre-Pofo model?

· What were the disadvantages of using the Entre-Pofo model?

· What was the general experience and motivation for using Entre-Pofo

at Kyvyt.?

As the target group was restricted, we analyzed the data gathered from

the workshops, personal discussions, and inquiry only by grouping the

data loosely according to the themes mentioned above. At this point in

the process, we do not need any statistical data, but we do need opinions,

experiences from the practical use of the Entre-Pofo model, and the tools

and ideas for further development of the model.

Students and teachers found many advantages in using Kyvyt.. Ac

cording to the students, one important advantage in using Kyvyt. is that

all study documents are saved in the same place. is feature supported

student self-reection, as they were able to return to their earlier docu

ments and reections whenever needed. e Entre-Pofo model makes the

learning and development process more visible and students can examine

their learning process more thoroughly. Students also have access to their

179

7 E-Portfolio as a Tool for Guiding Higher

Education Student Growth to Entrepreneurship

portfolio after they graduate, so it can be lifelong tool they can maintain.

As one student stated: “…In future I can nd my entrepreneurial thoughts

from my Entre-Pofo and I have possibility to return to them also after

graduation.”

For teachers and counsellors Kyvyt. is a convenient channel for com

municating with students about their products and processes. e teachers

and coaches can also exploit the Entre-Pofo-model when evaluating stu

dent competencies and skills. As Kyvyt. enables versatile documentation,

the evaluation is not only based on written documents, but by other means

as well, since the students are able to express themselves using various crea

tive means. Teachers and counsellors are also able to review student learn-

ing processes over a longer period. e role of the teacher becomes more

of a moderator. Students feel that it is an appropriate tool through which

to receive feedback from teachers, counsellors, coaches, and student peers.

In learning management systems like Moodle, the teacher usually only

administers the course. From the student’s point of view, a redeeming

feature of Kyvyt. is that each user administers their own portfolio. e

Entre-Pofo model is a student’s personal learning environment. It is a pro

cess portfolio and a tool for planning and reecting on their professional

development process and lifelong growth in entrepreneurship.

Although our students were concerned about the privacy of their Entre-

Pofo, they recognize that Kyvyt. provides them with new opportunities

to network with other students and actors. One student stated that: “In

my Entre-Pofo I can give someone the reading rights to some of my docu

ments. I have also possibility to network with others.” According to another

student: “I can present my works to others and network.”

One advantage of Kyvyt. from a student’s point of view is that they

can provide a coded link to their Kyvyt. portfolio to potential employers

when applying for a job. When discussing the disadvantages, one ques

tion about security of the system came up. In part because students are

asked to reect on some very personal questions in their Entre-Pofo, they

were very concerned about whether anyone else could see their portfolio.

We emphasized that no one could see their portfolio unless the student

provided access to it.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

180

When using information and communication technology in teaching

and learning, it is important that the technology be easy to use and that

students are taught to use them. It is also essential that students are given

reasons why certain technology is being used. Some of our students learned

to use Kyvyt. very quickly, but others felt the platform was too compli

cated and not easy to use. Here are some comments from the students:

“The platform could be simpler. You have to click many times in order

to get your Entre-Pofo updated.”

“The simple structure would help to learn the use of the platform.

More features could be added later on if needed.”

“Additionally, the teachers and counsellors needed time to become

familiar with the ePortfolio platform and with Entre-Pofo. Our team

has an eLearning expert available to help teachers, counsellors, and

students when they are learning to use Kyvyt. and when creating

their Entre-Pofo. That kind of support was assessed as very valuable.”

“It was very good that we got guidance at the beginning of the port

folio process. It would have been impossible to do anything alone.”

As students already use many dierent web tools in their studies and in

their free time activities, they were not as motivated to learn and adopt a

new tool. One respondent commented that: “Social media is already full.

I do not have motivation to take into use a new web tool again.”

erefore, eort was made to motivate the students to use Kyvyt. and

Entre-Pofo. We held discussions with the students to determine how they

could implement Entre-Pofo and how they could easily link it to other

social media tools like Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter, which students

were already used to using. After having used Kyvyt. for some time, the

students now feel that Kyvyt. has a wide variety of tools that can be used

for demonstrating their competencies and skills.

In our guiding and teaching work, it was our experience that students

are not familiar with reective thinking and self-reection. Our recom

mendation is that they should receive more training and brieng on how

to reect on their learning and entrepreneurship progress. Students do not

181

7 E-Portfolio as a Tool for Guiding Higher

Education Student Growth to Entrepreneurship

necessarily understand the potential and value of ePortfolio. erefore, it

is important to spend some time at the beginning of a student’s portfolio

process to familiarize them with the concept. One student promised that:

“I will take Entre-Pofo into use as soon as I understand the possibilities

of ePortfolio.”

When summing up the experiences of the project so far and based on

the rst user experiences, we can conclude that Entre-Pofo is worth further

development and that it will help entrepreneurship learning over the long

run. It also helps teachers and counselors to follow and encourage many

students in their very personal processes.

Conclusions and Recommendations

e two main goals of this paper were to outline the crucial elements in

constructing the Entre-Pofo model and to collect students’ and teachers’

rst comments on and experiences with using the Entre-Pofo. e most

important contribution of this paper is the rst version of the student-

centered Entre-Pofo model, which can be used in entrepreneurship educa

tion and coaching in higher education.

Entre-Pofo may contain various study documents and completed as

signments, i.e., entrepreneurship study plans, drafts, reports, diaries and

blogs, nal products, and reections. In addition to written documents,

students can include photos and videos in their Entre-Pofo. ey can reect

on and plan their entrepreneurial growth through ve life dimensions or

paths (working life, entrepreneurship, education, family, and life path).

e holistic perspective on the students’ various life dimensions originates

from the holistic counselling model developed in previous research and

development projects. e Entre-Pofo model also follows the thinking

of Savickas et al.’s (2009) life-design intervention model, which endorses

ve presuppositions about people and their work lives: contextual possi

bilities, dynamic processes, non-linear progression, multiple perspectives,

and personal patterns.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

182

e Entre-Pofo model includes self-reection tools, and students are en-

couraged to continually reect with other actors, such as teachers, coun-

sellors, student peers, coaches, family members, and other entrepreneurs.

Even though students are often self-directed when working with their Entre-

Pofo, active engagement in dialogue and collaboration with the counsellor

or teacher and other course-participants followed by reection on these

processes is important. Also, the previous literature underlines the impor

tance of reection with other actors. Students have not necessarily needed

self-reections skills, and therefore, they should be coached in these skills.

e results of our empirical study are still preliminary because the Entre-

Pofo has only been tested with a very limited amount of students. On the

basis of focus-groups and personal interviews for entrepreneurship teach

ers and students, as well as inquiries directed at students, we can already

conclude that the Entre-Pofo model and the ePortfolio in general are

practical tools for supporting students’ growth toward entrepreneurship

and also their personal and professional development. In our research, the

same opinions and developmental needs arose as in previous research and

literature regarding the use of e-portfolios. ePortfolio tools should be easy

to use, and it is important to explain to the students how and why to use

ePortfolio. Networking and reecting with other students and actors are

also very important. If ePortfolio does not meet students’ learning needs or

if learners perceive that they can gain the necessary knowledge in another

way, then the use of ePortfolio fails. Future methods of entrepreneurship

counselling and coaching should take a dynamic approach that encourages

individuals’ imaginative thinking and creativity.

We recommend that ePortfolio tools are introduced to students when

they commence their studies because these tools support the idea of lifelong

learning and counselling. Students should be trained to use the ePortfolio

platform in many ways. At the beginning of the portfolio process, ePortfo

lio tools should be as as simple as possible. Once students have learned to

use the tool, more functions can be adopted. Students should also realize

the importance of peer group reection and therefore provide their peers

with access to their ePortfolios.

According to our students, teachers and counsellors have an important

role in enhancing the use of Entre-Pofo, but teachers and counsellors

183

7 E-Portfolio as a Tool for Guiding Higher

Education Student Growth to Entrepreneurship

should not teach or lecture. Rather, they should act more like facilita-

tors. According to Klenowski et al. (2006, p. 208), this requires a shift

from a receptive-transmission model, in which the teacher is an expert

in a particular eld and provides information to a passive recipient, to a

constructivist and co-constructivist approach. Key learning and teaching

concepts when using portfolios for learning are as follows: co-constructivist

learning, experiential learning, dialogic learning, reective thinking, self-

evaluation, meta-learning, and meta-cognitive skills.

Entre-Pofo model is not bound to business studies, but it can be applied

in any other eld of study to support the personal and professional develop

ment of students. Entre-Pofo can also be introduced in teacher and counselor

education as a tool that facilitates following a student’s professional develop

ment process, especially in entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial

learning. For teacher and counsellor students, the most illustrative way to

become familiar with ePortfolio is to use it in their own studies. Reective

thinking and self-reection are key elements in the portfolio process, and

they can be practiced during teacher and counselor education. Also, in

teacher education, it should be stressed that entrepreneurship education

includes the process of enhancing entrepreneurial behavior and entrepre

neurial learning, not just the creation of a new venture.

So far, the focus of our project and research has been on constructing

the rst version of the Entre-Pofo model. e process has been very inter

esting, challenging, and empowering because the students have also been

involved in the development work. We will continue this action research

and develop the Entre-Pofo model and practical tools further. Our next

step is to introduce Entre-Pofo to larger groups of students, teachers and

counsellors so that we can obtain more information about how these tools

work over a longer period. To do so, we should construct an adequate

instruction manual and train new students and personnel. We also plan

to collaborate with colleagues from other study programs within our own

university and from other universities of applied sciences to ponder the

scope of applicability of the solution. e piloting partners and test groups

are under research. After piloting and testing, the theoretical contribution

can also be evaluated.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

184

References

Bachman, L. (2001). Review of the agricultural knowledge system in Fiji – Opportunities

and limitations of participatory methods and platforms to promote innovation develop-

ment. Berlin: Institut für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaus der

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin. Retrieved February 10, 2014 from http://edoc.hu-

berlin.de/dissertationen/bachmann-lorenz-b-r-2000-12-21/PDF/Bachmann.pdf

Barret, H. & Carney, J. (2005). Conicting Paradigms and Competing Purposes in

Electronic Portfolio Development. Submitted to Educational Assessment, an LEA

Journal, for an issue focusing on Assessing Technology Competencies, July 2005.

Retrieved February 13, 2014 from http://helenbarrett.com/portfolios/LEAJournal-

BarrettCarney.pdf

Beynon, M. & Hareld, A. (2007). Lifelong Learning, Empirical Modelling and the

Promises of Constructivism. Journal of Computers, Volume 2, Issue 3, May 2007,

43-55. Retrieved February 10, 2014 from http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/dcs/

research/em/publications/papers/downloads/100.pdf

Blaxter, L., Hughes, C., & Tight, M. (1996). How to research. Buckingham: Open

University Press.

Brousseau, K.R., Driver, M.J., Eneroth, K. & Larsson, R. (1996). Career Pandemonium:

Realigning organizations and individuals. Academy of Management Executive, 1996,

Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 52-66.

Brydon-Miller, M., Greenwood, D., & Maguire, P. (2003). Why action research? Action

Research, 1(1), pp. 9–28.

Carrier, C. (2007). Strategies for teaching entrepreneurship: what else beyond lectures,

case studies and business plans? In A. Fayolle (Eds.) International Handbook of Research

in Entrepreneurship Education, 1, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited,

pp. 143-159.

CEDEFOP. European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training. (2005).

Improving lifelong guidance policies and systems. Using common European reference

tools. Luxembourg: Oce for Ocial Publications of the European Communities.

Retrieved February 10, 2014 from http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/Files/4045_

en.pdf

CEDEFOP. European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training. (2008).

Establishing and developing national lifelong guidance policy forums: A manual for policy-

makers and stakeholders. Luxembourg: Oce for Ocial Publications of the European

Communities. Retrieved Febraury 10, 2014 from http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/

EN/Files/5188_en.pdf

CEDEFOP. European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training. (2011).

Lifelong guidance across Europe: reviewing policy progress and future prospects. Working

185

7 E-Portfolio as a Tool for Guiding Higher

Education Student Growth to Entrepreneurship

Paper. No 11. Retrieved February 10, 2014 from http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/

EN/Files/6111_en.pdf

Chen, M-Y., Chang, F. M-T., Chen. C-C., Huang, M-J. and Chen, J-W. 2012. Why

do Individuals Use e-Portfolio. Educational Technology & Society, 15 (4), pp 114-125.

Retrieved March 11, 2014 from http://www.ifets.info/journals/15_4/11.pdf

Commission of the European Communities. (2008). Commission Sta Working

Document. e use of ICT to support innovation and lifelong learning for all – A re-

port on progress. Retrieved February 10, 2014 from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/

registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/sec/2008/2629/COM_

SEC%282008%292629_EN.pdf

Council of the European Union. (2004). Draft Resolution of the Council and of the

representatives of the governments of the member states meeting within the Coun-

cil on Strengthening Policies, Systems and Practices in the eld of guidance through-

out life in Europe. Retrieved February 10, 2014 from http://register.consilium.eu-

ropa.eu/doc/srv?l=EN&t=PDF&gc=true&sc=false&f=ST%209286%202004%20

INIT&r=http%3A%2F%2Fregister.consilium.europa.eu%2Fpd%2Fen%2F04%2

Fst09%2Fst09286.en04.pdf

Davidovitch, N. (2013). Learning-Centered Teaching and Backward Course Design –

From Transferring Knowledge to Teaching Skills. Journal of International Education

Research. Fourth Quarter 2013 Volume 9, Number 4. pp. 329-338.

European Commission. (2008). Best procedure project: Entrepreneurship in higher edu-

cation, especially in non-business studies. Retrieved February 10, 2014 from http://

ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sme/les/support_measures/training_education/

entr_highed_en.pdf

European Union (2006). Recommendation of the European parliament and of the

council of 18 December 2006 on key competences for lifelong learning (2006/962/

EC). Ocial Journal of the European Union 30.12.2006. Retrieved February 10,

2014 from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:394

:0010:0018:en:PDF

FINHEEC. e Finnish Higher Education Evaluation Council. (2012). Evaluation

of the Bologna process implementation in Finland Part I: Evaluation of the degree

reform. Part II: e Implementation of the Bologna reforms in Finland from an

international perspective. Publications of the Finnish Higher Education Evaluation

Council. Retrieved February 10, 2014 from http://www.kka./les/1471/KKA612E-

valuation_Bologna_nettiin.pdf

Florin, J., Karri, R., & Rossiter, N., (2007). Fostering entrepreneurial drive in busi-

ness education: An attitudinal approach. Journal of Management Education, 31(1),

pp. 17–42.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

186

Garrett. N. 2011. An e-portfolio Design Supporting Ownership, Social Learning, and

Ease of Use. Educational Technology & Society, 14 (1), pp. 187-202. Retrieved March

11, 2014 from http://www.ifets.info/journals/14_1/17.pdf

Godet, M. 2001. Creating Futures. Scenario Planning as a Strategic Management Tool.

Economica Ltd. Paris.

Gorman, G., Hanlon, D. & King, W. (1997). Some research perspectives on entrepre-

neurship education, enterprise education and education for small business manage-

ment: a ten- year literature review. International Small Business Journal 15(3), pp.

56-77.

Hall, D.T. & Goodale, J.G. (1986). Human Resource Management. Strategy, design and

implementation. London: Scott, Foresman and Company.

Hsu, A. & Malkin, F. (2011) Shifting the Focus from Teaching to Learning: Rethinking

e Role of the Teacher Educator. Contemporary Issues In Education Research – De-

cember 2011 Volume 4, Number 12. pp. 43-50.

Hughes, J. (2010) “But It’s Not Just Developing Like a Learner, It’s Developing as a

Person”. Reections on E-portfolio-based Learning. In Sharpe, R., Beetham, H. &

de Freitas, S. (eds) Rethinking learning for a digital age. How learners are shaping their

own experiences. Routledge. pp. 199-211.

Jarvis, P. (2007). Globalisation, Lifelong Learning and the Learning Society. Sociological

Perspectives. Lifelong Learning and the Learning Society, Volume 2. Routledge. 238 p.

Jones, B. & Iredale, N. (2010). Enterprise as pedagogy. Education + Training, 52(1),

pp. 7-19.

Kasanen, E., Lukka, K., & Siitonen, A. (1993). e constructive approach in manage-

ment accounting. Journal of Management Accounting Research 5, pp. 243–264.

Ke, C. K. & Wu, M. Y. 2010. Adaptive Support for Student Learning in an e-Portfolio

Platform by Knowledge Discovery and Case-based Reasoning. Journal of Software,

Vol. 5, No. 12, December 2010.

Kickul, J. & Fayolle, A., 2007. Cornerstones of change: revisiting and challenging new

perspectives on research in entrepreneurship education. In A. Fayolle (Eds.) Handbook

of Research in Entrepreneurship Education, Vol. 1. A General Perspective. Edward Elgar

Publishing Limited, UK. 320 p.

Kirby, D. (2007). Changing the entrepreneurship education paradigm. In: Fayolle, A.

(Eds.), Handbook of research in entrepreneurship education, Volume 1. Cheltenham,

UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. pp. 21-45.

Klenowski, V., Askew, S. & Carnell E. (2006). Portfolios for learning, assessment and

professional development in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher

Education Vol. 31, No. 3, June 2006, Routledge. pp. 267–286.

Kupke, R-K. (2008). Opinto-ohjaus yliopistossa, Opinnäytetöiden ohjaus. Ohjauksen

kehittämishankkeita ja käytänteitä. Jyväskylän yliopisto. Kasvatustieteiden tiedekun-

ta. Opettajankoulutuslaitos. Ohjausalan Koulutus- ja tutkimusyksikkö. 32 p.

187

7 E-Portfolio as a Tool for Guiding Higher

Education Student Growth to Entrepreneurship

Kuula, A. (1999). Toimintatutkimus: kenttätyötä ja muutospyrkimyksiä. Tampere:

Vastapaino.

Kyrö, P. (2005). Entrepreneurial learning in a cross-cultural context challenges previous

learning paradigms? In P. Kyrö & C. Carrier (Eds.) e dynamics of learning entre-

preneurship in a cross-cultural university context. Entrepreneurship Education Series.

Hämeenlinna: University of Tampere, pp. 25-30.

Labro, E., & Tuomela, T. S. (2003). On bringing more action into management ac-

counting research: Process considerations based on two constructive case studies.

European Accounting Review, 12(3), pp. 409–442.

Le, Q. (2012). E-portfolio for enhancing graduate research supervision. Quality Assur-

ance in Education. Vol. 20 No. 1. 2012 pp. 54-65.

Levander, L., Kaivola, T. & Nevgi, A. (2003). Opiskelijan ohjaaminen. In: Lindblom-

Ylänne, S. & Nevgi, A. (Eds.) Yliopisto- ja korkeakouluopettajan käsikirja. WSOY.

Helsinki., pp. 171-202.

Lukka, K. (2000). e key issues of applying the constructive approach to eld research.

In T. Reponen (Ed.), Management expertise for the new millennium Turku, Finland:

Turku School of Economics and Business Administration. pp. 113-128.

Löbler, H. (2006). Learning Entrepreneurship from a Constructivist Perspective. Tech-

nology Analysis & Strategic Management. Vol. 18, No. 1, February 2006. pp. 19-38.

Merriam, S.B. (2001). Something Old, Something New: Adult Learning eory for

the Twenty-First Century. In Merriam, S.B. New Directions for Adult & Continuing

Education. Spring2001, Issue 89. Jossey-Bass. A Publishing Unit of John Wiley &

Sons. Inc. pp. 93-96.

Mertler, C. A. (2012). Action research: Improving schools and empowering educators (3

ed.). ousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Ministry of Education. (2009). Guidelines for entrepreneurship education. Helsinki: Min-

istry of Education, Department for Education and Science. Retrieved February 10,

2014 from http://www.minedu./export/sites/default/OPM/Julkaisut/2009/liitteet/

opm09.pdf

Ministry of Education and Culture. (2012). Education and Research 2011–2016. A

development plan. Reports of the Ministry of Education and Culture, Finland 2012:3.

Retrieved February 10, 2014 from http://www.minedu./export/sites/default/OPM/

Julkaisut/2012/liitteet/okm03.pdf

Onnismaa, J. (2003). Epävarmuuden paluu. Ohjauksen ja ohjausasiantuntijuuden muu-

tos. Kasvatustieteellisiä julkaisuja. Joensuun yliopisto. Joensuun yliopistopaino.

Onnismaa, J. (2007). Ohjaus- ja neuvontatyö. Aikaa, huomiota ja kunnioitusta. Gaude-

amus. Helsinki.

Patton, W., & McMahon, M. (2006). Constructivism: What does it mean for career

counselling? In: M. McMahon & W. A. Patton (Eds.), Career counselling. Constructiv-

ist approaches. London: Routledge. pp. 3-15.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

188

Peavy, R. (1999). Sosiodynaaminen ohjaus. Psykologien kustannus. Helsinki.

Peavy, R. V. (2000). Sociodynamic perspective and the practice of counselling. Paper pre-

sented at NATCON 2000, Ottawa, Canada, January 2000. Retrieved February 10,

2014 from http://contactpoint.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/pdf-00-18.pdf

Pittaway, L., & Cope, J. (2007). Simulating entrepreneurial learning: Assessing the

utility of experiential learning designs. Management Learning, 38(2), pp. 211–233.

Pritchard, A. (2007). Eective Teaching with Internet Technologies. Pedagogy and Prac-

tice. Paul Chapman Publishing. SAGE Publications.

Raemdonck, I., van der Leeden, R., Valcke, M., Segers, M. & ijssen, J. (2012). Euro-

pean Journal of Training and Development Vol. 36 No. 6, 2012. pp. 572-591.

Poortinga, J. & Meeder, S. (2007). e Use of ePortfolios within Academic Programs. In:

Conference proceedings of ePortfolio 2007 Conference 18th and 19th October 2007,

Maastricht. European Institute for E-Learning (EIfEL). 97-108.

Römer-Paakkanen, T. (2011). Get a life project – Holistic career and entrepreneurship

counselling for university students. ISJ Interdisciplinary Studies Journal, Vol. 1, No. 3

2011 Creating Wellness. Vantaa regional Unit, Laurea UAS.

Römer-Paakkanen, T., & Pekkala, A. (2008). Generating entrepreneurship and new

learning environments from student’s free-time activities and hobbies. e Finnish

Journal of Business Economics, 3, pp. 341–361. Retrieved February 10, 2014 from

http://lta.hse./2008/3/lta_2008_03_a5.pdf

Savickas, M. L., Nota, L., Rossier, R. Dauwalder, J-P. Duarte, M.E., Guichard, J.,Sore-

si, S., Van Esbroeck, R. & van Vianen, A.E.M. (2009). Life designing: A paradigm

for career construction in the 21st century. Journal of Vocational Behavior (2009),

oi:10.1016/j.jvb.2009.04.004

Stefani, L., Mason, R., & Pegler, C. (2007). e educational potential of eportfolios.

Supporting personal development and reective learning. London and New York: Rout-

ledge—Taylor & Francis Group.

Suonpää, M. (2013). Constructing an opportunity centred collaborative learning

model through and for entrepreneurship. Jyväskylä :Jyväskylä University Printing

House. Retrieved February 10, 2014 from https://jyx.jyu./dspace/bitstream/han-

dle/123456789/40740/978-951-39-5032-3_Vaitos01022013.pdf?sequence=1

Takanen-Körperich, P. (2008). Sama koulutus – eri urat. Tutkimus Mainzin yliopistossa

soveltavaa kielitiedettä vuosina 1965-2001 opiskelleiden suomalaisten urakehityksestä

palkkatyöhön, freelanceriksi ja yrittäjiksi. Jyväskylä Studies in Business and Econom-

ics 66. 202p. (English summary pp. 155-156.) Retrieved February 10, 2014 from

https://jyx.jyu.fi/dspace/bitstream/handle/123456789/18652/9789513932619.

pdf?sequence=1

Tapio, J. (2011). Ryhmäohjaus nuoren suoritusstrategioiden muutoksen mahdollistajana

- Motivaatioattribuutioteorian näkökulma koulun luokkaohjaukseen. Tampereen yli-

189

7 E-Portfolio as a Tool for Guiding Higher

Education Student Growth to Entrepreneurship

opisto. Tampere. 243 p. Retrieved February 10, 2014http://tampub.uta./bitstream/

handle/10024/66692/978-951-44-8306-6.pdf?sequence=1

Wing, T., & Man, Y. (2006). Exploring the behavioural patterns of entrepreneurial

learning: A competency approach. Education + Training. 48(5), pp. 309–321.

191

8 Aordance as a Key Aspect in the Creation of New Learning

Aordance as a Key Aspect

in the Creation of New Learning

Susanne Dau

Abstract

is research aims to highlight how dierent places and spaces in under-

graduate teacher education aord student learning and the development of

certain types of knowledge related. e questions this article addresses are:

a) What is the aordance of dierent learning spaces in an undergraduate

blended learning (BL) education?

b) What are the actors’ prerequisites and reported understanding of the

driving forces behind their learning activities in these dierent spaces?

e analysis draws on a conceptual frame of complex aordance of

spaces in a socio-cultural perspective, but also on spaces for both social

and individual knowledge development. rough the analysis of empirical

data gained from a pragmatic mixed-method approach, the role of dier

ent face-to-face and online spaces is investigated; investigations are based

on the understandings of students, lecturers, and practitioners. e major

ndings regard the contribution of spaces to sociality, identity, and refer

ential embodied experiences, which greatly inuence student preferences

and learning activity, as well as knowledge development. It is concluded

that individually and socially constructed learning inuence and are in

uenced by dierent learning spaces. A student’s identity is a prerequisite

to their interaction with spaces, but the borders, artefacts, and possibili

ties of the spaces also contribute to the student’s development of identity.

Development of identity cannot be separated from learning and student

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

192

interaction in learning spaces. A student’s embodied interaction is found

both in reference to experience and in the process of being developed to

wards a ctive future, which is a result of their preferences and engagement.

Keywords: Complex Aordance, Identity, Knowledge Development,

Spaces, Places

Introduction

is research aims to examine how various spaces and places in blended

learning (BL) aord student knowledge development from a user perspec

tive. Exploring the perspective of use of space is paramount to understand-

ing the possibilities and constraints of BL in undergraduate educational

settings. is is of importance to policy makers, administrators, lecturers,

and students.Practical problems of resistance arise when implementing

dierent media as artefacts in education (Åkerlind & Trevitt, 1999; Holley,

2002; Laurillard, 2002; Holley & Oliver, 2010). Although much research

has been conducted in the design and implementation of BL, little at

tention has been given to the culture and to the space- and place-related

behavior prompted by spaces and places of such design and implemen

tation (Crook, 2002). Problems arise that prompt the creation of new

agendas by policymakers and administrators when implementing new

models, e.g., BL. Because it is not always possible to implement these new

agendas without considering the dierent culture and space possibilities

and constraints in question, attention must be given to ways in which

these models may be implemented in a culture-specic, complex context.

I therefore claim that there is a need to investigate the articulation that

dierent spaces oer at a concrete level. Because this article is based on

research into the process of implementing BL in undergraduate teacher

training at a university college in Denmark, the practice-oriented research

question is as follows:

What is the aordance of dierent learning spaces in an undergraduate

blended learning (BL) education, and what are the actors’ prerequisites

193

8 Aordance as a Key Aspect in the Creation of New Learning

and reported understanding of the driving forces behind their learning

activities in these dierent spaces?

In this article I will briey introduce Danish policy intentions and

the European inuence on the design of BL at University College North

(UCN) in Denmark. is is followed by a description of the spaces of BL

related to the eld investigated and the derived theoretical questions. A

theoretical frame concerning aordance and knowledge development re

lated to space is described as the foundation of investigation into the ques-

tions raised. Next, the empirical research methodology is described. e

ndings are presented at two levels: 1) the pregurative and congurative

analyses, and 2) the regurative interpretation from the derived ndings of:

· Spaces of sociality and connectivity and the referential classroom

· Disruption space and space of the future

· Non-space

e ndings are then briey discussed, followed by the conclusion

to both the empirical and theoretical questions investigated. e policy

level and the described curriculum are strategic levels that inuence the

conditions that shape the praxis level of implementation. erefore, I

will briey introduce some of the policies behind the increased focus on

BL and ICT in teacher education in Denmark and Europe, as these are

pushing towards a more exible ICT-oriented type of teacher education.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

194

Danish Educational Trends

Danish Policy Intention

In the last decade, teacher education in Denmark has been exposed to several

reform events, the most recent of which focused on teacher competences. A

new Nordic school and the intention to create a full time school to extend

regular classroom hours have been highly debated in the media recently. A

central aspect of these reforms is improved, extended use of information and

communication technology (ICT) and the creation of a exible frame for

education and learning (e Government, Municipalities and the Danish

Regions, 2013). e Danish Technology Council recommends that further

attention be paid to applying ICT competences in teacher education as

part of the pedagogical practice in dierent courses (Teknologirådet, 2011,

p. 6). ese recommendations and reforms concern new ways of using

existing learning spaces and places and the activation of new spaces for

educational activities in an attempt to full the requested competences for

lifelong learning and challenges in a globalized world. Although culture is

mentioned as a central aspect, there seems to be no explicit consideration

as to how to acknowledge culture and simultaneously renew it.

European Policy Inuences on Blended Learning at UCN

Supported by the European Social Fund (ESF), the intentions behind more

exible education at UCN were implemented in four areas of bachelor

education programs at UCN, including the teacher education program.

e ESF supports the intention of the Lisbon Strategy to create “e

most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world

of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater

social cohesion” (European Union Parliament, 2010, I.5, p.1), which was

extended by the plan for 2020 (European Commission, 2010). e im

plementation of models of BL is therefore a minor part of a larger strat-

egy, not only in the development of Danish education programs, but also

economic growth in Europe.

195

8 Aordance as a Key Aspect in the Creation of New Learning

Spaces of Blended Learning

e investigated educational spaces are the educational stations, the stu-

dent’s home, the municipal schools during the periods of internship, and

the classrooms at UCN. e educational stations are single technology-

rich classrooms placed in rural areas, creating additional possibilities for

students living there. ese possibilities include access to videoconferences

and a space for student’s cooperation with peers from the area.

e strategic papers at UCN describe exibility as BL. BL combines

face-to-face classroom methods with computer mediated activities (Garri

son & Vaughan, 2008; Graham, 2006) and is regarded as benecial (Singh,

2003, p. 53). Students learn, at least partially, through online delivery of

content and instruction, with some element of student control over time,

place, path, and pace. Additionally, they learn at a supervised brick-and-

mortar location away from home (Stake & Horn, 2012). e design of BL

has been developed through lectures in teacher education at UCN. e

designed model of BL in teacher education is progressive and subject to

continuous development, as formative evaluation by lectures and students

provides a continuous inuence on the models. e model describes how

courses should be blended (Christensen & Kristensen, 2012), but does

not, as a strategic paper, provide any description of the impact of assump

tions and attitudes. Although research has investigated attitudes towards

implementing ICT as a key element (Lawton & Gerschner, 1982) and the

connection between attitudes and implementation of ICT (Marshall &

Cox, 2008, Christensen 1997, 2002), limited research seems to have been

conducted concerning the ways in which the presumptions, prerequisites

and references of students and teachers interact with spaces. “Space is often

a neglected aspect of learning” (Poutanen, Parviainen, & Åberg, 2011, p.

293). e signicance of new learning spaces and places is not easily ap

plicable in education, especially when the aordances of spaces and iden-

tity processes are neglected in the investigation of new BL environments.

In order to identify a clear link between the use of ICT and the extent

of learning, however, much more sensitive measures and instruments

are needed. Such tools need to reect the interrelated affordances/

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

196

constraints in settings and the way in which they are manipulated

relative to the students’ prior abilities. (Kennewell, 2001, p.112).

As illustrated, the analysis of the practical problem calls for a more

theoretical approach to investigating the question of space inuence when

implementing BL and extended use of ICT. I argue that the concept of

aordance can be a relevant theoretical frame that makes a more adequate

and precise contribution towards what is at stake when problems arise in

implementing new spaces and places in education. At the same time, aor

dance is a theoretical concept that is interrelated with the concept of spaces,

learning, and knowledge development in educational settings, especially

complex aordance. is leads to a more theoretical research question:

How can aordance conceptualize the constraints and possibilities in dif

ferent learning spaces related to processes of knowledge development?

A conceptual frame regarding aordance of spaces in learning and the

concept of knowledge development are therefore the theoretical founda

tion of my analysis of the empirical data, which consequently results in an

answer to the theoretical question. An introduction and argumentation

of the selected theoretical frame follows.

197

8 Aordance as a Key Aspect in the Creation of New Learning

The Theoretical Framework

e theoretical frame consists of interrelated and interdependent concepts

of spaces, knowledge development and aordance. is interrelationship

claim is based on an epistemological understanding of knowledge and

cognition as situated. is includes idea that no activity, such as learning,

identity development, or knowledge development, can be seen indepen

dently of the physical context, activities, culture, and language. e use

of concepts and a theoretical approach in the interpretation of empirical

data is, in this research, mainly founded on social constructivism. Learning

is what is intended, and it is a process of knowledge development among

individuals, communities (Illeris, 2013), and organizations (Nonaka &

Konno, 1998). Knowledge development inuences and is inuenced by

identity, and the processes of knowledge development are embedded in

socially situated contexts (Illeris, 2011, 2012). us, the process of learn

ing aects and interferes with the aordance of spaces. To illustrate this,

a conceptual description of an aordance is presented in the following

paragraph.

Aordance Related to Spaces

Aordance relates to processes, activities, surroundings, environment, ar-

tefacts, people, and the past, present, and future. Aordance is also the

catalyst that shapes the conditions of learning and knowledge development

spaces. Gibson introduced the concept of aordance: “e aordances of

the environment are what it oers the animal. What it provides or furnish

es, either for good or ill” (Gibson, 1979, p.127). Aordance points in two

directions, to the environment and to those who observe these (Gibson,

1979, p. 129). A distinction can be made between simple aordance, as

seen by Gibson, and a more complex type of aordance, as described by

Turner (2005). For instance, Norman’s (1990) use of aordance diverges

from Gibson’s conceptualization. Norman denes aordance as something

that possesses both actual and perceived properties. He divides aordance

into real, perceived, and intentional aordance (Norman, 1988). A further

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

198

extension of complex aordance unfolds in a more sequential breakdown

of false aordance, correct rejection, hidden aordance, and visible af

fordance (Gaver, 1991). Aordance has been linked to the concept of

mediating artefacts (Cole, 1996), but also to more expansive notions of

boundary objects between users and designers (Bødker & Christiansen,

1997), and to boundary objects, both between and within the community

of the practice of designers and users (Wenger, 1998). A more physical

and embodied orientation of aordance is espoused by Storegen (2000),

Heft (1989), and Dohn (2009). Dohn (2009) argues, in line with Heft,

in favor of a Merleau-Ponty-inspired approach. Dohn describes knowl

edge as embodied and embedded. Aordance plays a role in the meaning

of a situation. Dohn relates aordance to the use of ICT in learning and

mentions that a web camera, for instance, can constitute part of the back

ground situation. e use of a web camera aords a certain bodily behav-

iour and limitation (Dohn, 2009, pp. 162–163). Space is determined by

the person’s physiology and experience, knowledge, and skills required in

the social-cultural context in which the person is involved (Dohn, 2009,

p.164). Chemero (2003) includes a relational dimension to aordance and

both he and Ingold (2000) propose a view of overcoming the dichotomy

of subject-object relation. Ingold argues that, in addition to embodiment,

enmindment also occurs when the body and mind are disseminated in the

same way, and take part in the same process of activity in the environment

(Ingold, 2000, pp. 170–171). us, aordance seems to be dependent

on the context in which physical, mental, and conceptual arrangements

exist. Aordance contains both general and individual predispositions in

the use of artefacts. Familiarity with contexts and artefacts is described

by Turner in relation to Heidegger’s concept of the referential whole in

humans (Turner, 2005). Aordance is therefore not independent of either

disposition, of culture, or the use of objects associated with embodied tacit

knowledge and nested routines (Dohn, 2009).

e holistic approach to the concept of aordance described by In

gold (2000) and Dohn (2009) and the relational approach described by

Chemero (2003) seem to embrace the notion of a complex approach,

which was also welcomed by Turner (2005). Although their contributions

to the complexity take dierent points of departure (social anthropology,

199

8 Aordance as a Key Aspect in the Creation of New Learning

phenomenology, and ecological psychology), they all contribute to a bal-

anced and more extended complex view of the concept, which also forms

the basis of the analyses referred to in this article. As claimed by Ingold,

research must examine how people perceive, think, act, learn, and remem

ber within the contexts in which they occur (Ingold, 2000, p. 171). is

will be the focal point of this article. In addition, Dohn’s (2009) recom

mendation to examine the question of what a learner does not do, contrary

to our expectations, and why, will be taken into consideration in order to

identify whether a student uses background aordance, or as Chemero

describes it, the transactions, as a basis for non-action (Chemero, 2003).

e concept of aordance does not directly unfold the specic meaning

of learning and knowledge development as a matter of concern. How

ever, because a main learning outcome in teacher education is students’

knowledge development, as well as the achievement of competences for

the knowledge development of the profession, I will describe the relation

ship below.

Knowledge Development Related to Spaces

Knowledge development coincides with the concept of learning and can-

not be separated from the context in which it emerges (Illeris, 2011).

Nonaka & Konno (1998) refer to the concept of ba as a space concept

related to knowledge management and development. Ba exists at many

levels and is a shared space, whether physical, virtual, and/or mental.

Ba provides common ground for advancing individual and/or collective

knowledge. Knowledge nests in ba; separated from ba it turns into infor

mation. Knowledge creation is a spiralling process of interaction between

explicit and tacit knowledge that leads to the creation of new knowledge,

as pointed out in socialization, externalization, combination, and inter

nalization (SECI). e four types of ba correspond to the four stages of

the SECI-spiral process: 1) originating ba, where people share feelings,

experiences, and mental models; 2) interacting ba, where individuals share

mental models, but also reect on their own, e.g. through dialogue; 3)

cyber ba is a place of interaction in a virtual world rather than in the real

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

200

world and time, and it represents the combination phase; and 4) exercis-

ing ba supports internalization, e.g. through training. e use of Nonaka

and Konno’s (1998) concept of ba and knowledge creation expand the

concept of spaces and places, including the notion of their relationship

with knowledge development and thereby learning. is is accomplished

not only by individuals in their environments, but also by the idea that

space is more than a psychical, psychological, and social environment

with dierent aordance. us, activities are related and interrogated in

ba in a more procedural ow. I will argue that the exact concept of ba as

an analytic optic is essential to the revelation of the aordances of spaces

in teacher education, as the demands for the professional education of

teachers are concerned with student competences in the further and con

tinuous development of their profession as described in the curriculum

(Studieordningen for læreruddannelsen, 2012).

e above theoretical frame is the foundation for the interpretation

and derived ndings. e extended concept of complex aordances in

this article oers a nuanced approach to the investigation of the possibili

ties and constraint of the spaces, as well as an answer to the empirical and

theoretical research questions. Since knowledge development and spaces

are key aspects in the eld of education, the interpretation of complex

aordance must necessarily be undertaken in light of this. e intertwin

ing of the concepts from the analysis and interpretation of empirical data

gives rise to a new cohesion at both practical and theoretical levels. In the

next section I describe the empirical methodology.

201

8 Aordance as a Key Aspect in the Creation of New Learning

Empirical Research Methodology

My investigations were based on a mixed method approach, as dierent

data collection approaches seem to be the best way to grasp complex aor

dance. e design included a survey, focus group interviews, and observa-

tions among participants at a practice level, in an eort to reect the level

of complexity. e pragmatic mixed method was chosen because the com

bination of dierent approaches in design is fruitful (Hoshmand, 2003)

when answering a research question. e mix contributed to discovering

the express meaning (Dewey, 1948, 1920) of BL in teacher education.

Empirical data (Table 1) were collected from students during their rst

semester of a BL education. All students were requested to participate in

the survey (N = 32), and 21 students completed the online survey after

two rounds with online reminders. However, one explanation of the lack

of full participation in the survey may be that the students were occupied

with trying to adapt to a new learning environment. e topic in the

survey included three main areas: students’ prerequisites for participation

in a BL education (for instance, their experiences with the use of Web

2.0 technologies), students’ understanding of and preferences regarding

learning, and nally, their use or plan of use of the educational stations.

e survey was pilot tested with four students prior to implementation.

e focus group interviews were conducted among all (N = 4) lecturers in

the rst year of the blended education. e purpose was to gain knowledge

of their experiences and perspectives on three main issues: blended learning,

learning/knowledge development, and places/spaces. Eight students were

selected as a representation of both genders and variation in residence after

enrolment in the program. All four mentors were invited to participate in a

focus group interview, two of whom participated. Internship supervisors were

selected from one municipal school; all four supervisors of rst-year students

were invited, but only two participated due to illness and workload. Ethical

issues regarding the focus group interviews were considered. Well-known

locations were selected for the interviews to create comfort. All informants

were aware of the purpose of the investigation, the obligation to secrecy, and

the ability to withdraw at any time. In the interaction during the interview, it

was ensured that all were equally heard. All interviews were fully transcribed.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

202

Two observation studies were carried out at UCN; all students and the four

lecturers voluntary participated in evaluation sessions. One additional ob

servation study was conducted at the municipal school where the above-

mentioned internship supervisors were employed and students participated

during their rst internship. e purpose of these observations was to supply

other empirical data with more situated knowledge of everyday life at UCN

and in the internship. Desktop studies were used to gain knowledge of online

activities. For a more detailed overview of the data collection, see Table 1.

Table 1. The Mix of Data Collection Methods

Data

Collection

Partici-

pants

Invited

Partici-

pants

Number

of Partici-

pants (n)

Time -

Duration Period

Place of

Collec-

tion –

Context

Survey –

question-

naires

using the

Likert

scale

Students

at teacher

blended

education

All stu-

dents

enrolled in

blended

education

(age 19 to

21years)

(N = 32)

n = 21

66%

Time

spent on

question-

naires

estimated

at 20 min

in the pilot

study

October

2013

On-line

question-

naires –

SurveyEx-

act

Focus

group

interview 1

Students

rst se-

mester

Select

students

(N = 8)

n = 8

100%

1.5 hr 28.11.12 UCN –

meeting

room

Focus

group

interview 2

Lecturers

at UCN

blended

education

All lectur-

ers con-

nected

to the

blended

teacher

education

(N = 4)

n = 4

100%

1.5 hr 04.12.12 UCN –

meeting

room

Focus

group

interview 3

Supervi-

sors at

municipal

school

Supervi-

sors

n = 2

50%

30 min 04.03.13 Municipal

school

meeting

room

203

8 Aordance as a Key Aspect in the Creation of New Learning

Data

Collection

Partici-

pants

Invited

Partici-

pants

Number

of Partici-

pants (n)

Time -

Duration Period

Place of

Collec-

tion –

Context

Focus

group

interview 4

Mentors

at local

educa-

tional

stations

All 4 men-

tors

N=2

50%

1 hr 28.01.13 UCN

meeting

room

Observa-

tion 1

Students

and

lecturers

All 4

lectur-

ers and all

students

100% 2 hr 26.10.12 UCN

classroom

Observa-

tion 2

Students,

lecturer,

and

supervi-

sors

6 stu-

dents, 1

lecturer,

and 2 su-

pervisors

100% Two 1 hr

sessions

of tripar-

tite talks

and 1 hr

of student

lecture of

sixth grade

students

16.01.13 Municipal

school,

meet-

ing room,

teachers’

room,

classroom

Observa-

tion 3

Students

and

lecturers

All 4

lectur-

ers and all

students

100% 2 hr 12.04.13 UCN

classroom

Desk top

study

Students

and lectur-

ers

All stu-

dents and

lecturers

using the

learning

manage-

ment

system;

It’s-Learn-

ing

100% Continu-

ously

01.09.12–

01.05.13

Online

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

204

e concrete approach relied on primary sequential analysis in which

the quantitative data from the survey were collected prior to the qualitative

data. e qualitative data had a dominant status (Burke & Onwuegbuzie,

2004). e quantitative data were used as a foundation for the qualitative

data, because the quantitative data derived from the survey primarily re

garded student prerequisites of participating in blended teacher education.

e pragmatic design approach was followed by a pragmatic critical

hermeneutic analysis and interpretation using the threefold mimesis as a

process of mimesis 1 (preguration), mimesis 2 (conguration), and mi

mesis 3 (reguration) (Ricoeur, 1984, pp.54–71). Ricoeur’s hermeneutics

addresses the interpretation of the emplotment and peculiar reordering

of the action of humans in mimesis 2, which leads to an interpretative

identity akin to specic time and space. Ricoeur draws causal connec

tions between events of the past and excludes tenses of present and future

(Ricoeur, 1985, p. 64). us, data are collected at specic in situ times

in the students’ BL process, which are listed in Table 1. However, the ex

periences expressed are retrieved from the informants’ past and processed

afterwards. e interpretation of the text is taken into another present

space-time by adding congurative structures that point forward into the

future via regurative perspectives on the case studied.

e use of the mimetic interpretative hermeneutical approach con

tributes to a holistic and future-oriented interpretation. is is achieved

by unfolding the experienced aordance of spaces and further through a

distancing from preguration and emerged plots towards a more ctive

reguration, without neglecting space and time. However, it must be said

that it is primarily the sequentially and structurally methodological grip

on the levels of interpretations that is used here because a larger narrative

and phenomenological approach is omitted. Table 2 illustrates the mimetic

analytic and interpretative process:

205

8 Aordance as a Key Aspect in the Creation of New Learning

Table 2. The Process of Analysis and Interpretation

Empirical Data Preguration Conguration Reguration

Survey Pure data from

survey

Tendency and areas

of interest with sta-

tistically signicant

athematic analysis

Use of new naming

and framing as a dis-

tancing from the pre-

gurative through the

congurative towards

the ctive future. A

critical distancing

where explanation,

e.g. by theoretical in-

terpretation, is added.

It is an interpretation

towards a more com-

plex understanding.

It is also a movement

both backwards and

forwards between the

levels of preguration,

conguration, and

reguration.

Focus group

interviews

Pure data from

emerged narratives

– full transcript (103

pages single spaced

font size 11)

Plots of interest de-

rived from the pure

data and linked to

both the parts and

the whole

Observation

studies

Pure data from eld

notes

Thematic areas of

interest as a sort of

plot

Desk top studies Background data as

they emerge on the

learning platform

Discussions and

postings as elements

of interest picked

from the on-going

correspondence-a

selective approach

Findings

A schematic overview (Table 3) of the analysis of data derived from focus-

group interviews, students, and lecturers, is here divided into the processes

of mimeses 1 and 2, followed by some interpretation at the mimesis 3

level. Because lectures and students are the main actors in the specic pe

riod investigated, only ndings from these informants are included due

to the article’s scope.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

206

Table 3. Analysis: Mimeses 1 and 2

In-

form-

ants

Spaces: Face-to-

Face, Online, and

Conceptual Mimesis 1—Preguration

Mimesis 2—De-

rived Plots in Con-

guration

Lecturers

Face-to-face

spaces as origi-

nating ba, inter-

acting ba, and

exercising ba

“We have a design that builds on be-

ing present, then we experiment with

something that’s not” (p. 3)

“There is a lot of apprenticeship in it … it

demands ‘live’ presence because fac-

ets would never appear if it wasn’t done

inphysicalpresence”(p.4)

“…Becauseit’saboutrelations...”(p.4)

“… But commitment is there ... when

youareinthesameroom,it’sjust

more” (p.15)

Spaces of sociality

and connectivity

and the referential

classroom space

On-line spaces

as cyber ba

“..theybegintogetsometoolstodoit

(teach)indierentways”(p.8)

“..that,theytryitandgetittransmitted

to the municipal school” (p. 8)

“It’s a digital pencil case” (p. 9)

“Theyareopentowardsthatweb2”

(p.14)

“The video transmitted instruction…

it becomes…like watching television…

theyaresittinganddoingalotofother

stu”(p.31)

A toolbox and a

disruptions space

Educational sta-

tions

(no ba)

“We don’t need them … what would

theyusethemfor?...theyalllivein

Aalborg”(p.21)

“Peacebewiththem”(p.21)

“Softwareandhardware,youmust

haveitathome”(p.20)

It’s out of touch with the concept of

exibility”(p.23)

The non-space

Issues of identity

as originating ba

“Wedomanytasks,wheretheyinvolve

the self” (p. 19)

“The education is a formation process”

(p. 13)

“Itcouldbethatyouhavetothinkyour-

selfasastudent...anidentityofbeinga

student”(p.22)

“It’saprocessofsociality”(p.25)

Spaces of sociality

and connectivity

207

8 Aordance as a Key Aspect in the Creation of New Learning

In-

form-

ants

Spaces: Face-to-

Face, Online, and

Conceptual Mimesis 1—Preguration

Mimesis 2—De-

rived Plots in Con-

guration

Students

Face-to-face

spaces

as originating ba

and interacting ba

“As a lecturer mentioned…what hap-

pensbetweenthelecturesisactually

more important than what happens in

lectures”(p.27)

“...to be present as a teacher… it’s about

beingpresentintheclassroom”(p.12)

“..hereatUCNyoureallyhavetotake

responsibility”(p.32)

“I have chosen to be a teacher because

I want to be present with the pupils”

(p. 13)

“Tosithere,alsosocially...Ilearnmore”

(p.29)

Spaces of sociality

and connectivity

and the referential

classroom space

On-line spaces

as cyber ba

”…butinfrontofyourcomputer(at

home) there are a lot of other things

thatseemmoreimportanttoyou”(p.

32)

“The interaction disappears, it’s not real

instruction”(p.10)

“You can’t talk to him (lecturer), it

doesn’tworkandyouaredisconnect-

ed” (p. 11)

“It´s the future (ICT) … look of what the

childrendointheirleisuretime”(p.42)

“AtUCNyouare100%focused,while

athomeyouareonly10%”(p.32)

A disruptions

space and a space

of the future

Educational sta-

tions (no ba)

“We aren’t introduced … we don’t know

much about it” (p. 33)

The non-space

Issues of identity

and the sociality

as originating ba

“It’smoresocialtomeet”(p.12)

“I want to have a class that I can meet

with, and get some social relations”

(p. 33)

Spaces of sociality

and connectivity

At the mimesis 3 level, the theoretical concepts will extend the analysis,

as the concepts of aordance, spaces, and knowledge development can add

some explanatory elements to this level of reguration. is is also where

other empirical data from the survey and observation studies are included

in the interpretative process of proximity and distancing.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

208

Spaces of Sociality and Connectivity and

the Referential Classroom Space

Face-to-face spaces, but also certain parts of virtual space, e.g., Skype, can

have some related elements of sociality, although some scepticism exists. If

learning cannot be separated from the context in which it takes place, as

Illeris (2013) argues, then it becomes essential to consider how participants

comprehend this. As one lecturer noted: “e distancing that occurs as

soon as people are not in the same physical space, it does something to

us” (lecturers, p. 14).

is quotation illustrates a perceived negative aordance of the on

line space compared to face-to-face spaces. e preference for face-to-face

instruction emphasizes its aective inuence. Moreover, students high

lighted the meaning of sociality in face-to-face interaction: “It means a

lot that social cohesion is present, this is where good academic learning

can take place” (students, pp. 27–28).

is illustrates a strong relationship between an internal psychological

process of acquisition and an external interaction process between the

learner and the learner’s social environment, as Illeris (2013) also stresses.

e connection between the students´ knowledge development and social

ity is related to group work: “e social is … important... yes, just when

you connect with each other. is is best done when ‘sitting’ in a group”

(students, pp. 27–28).

A preference for cooperation with peers is also signicant in the survey

(74%). e dierence between sociality in face-to-face spaces and online

spaces appears in the use of body language and the ability to read each

other when face-to-face. “Firstly, I just think there are many things with

body language ... there is a lot more face-to-face … misunderstandings

(on-line) when you ... cannot see how he reacts to it, like when you ‘read’

other people” (students, p. 9).

In this quotation, aordance is dependent on culture and the use of as

sociated objects, as well as embodied tacit knowledge and nested routines

(Dohn, 2009). It is a matter of how familiar people are with reading each

other. Consequently, the referential whole discloses both embodiment

209

8 Aordance as a Key Aspect in the Creation of New Learning

and enmindment. Like the lecturers, students question the online social

learning space.

I really need the social part and I think it (online media) destroys that...

but can social media not also limit the social? ... If I was not sitting

... you could go to a cafe instead ... there are some, who are more

busy making status updates (on Facebook) than being with people

(students, pp. 35–36).

Aordance oered can be either positive or negative (Gibson, 1996,

p. 27), and in this quote the association seems to be negative. e design

of BL and the included artefacts are therefore boundary objects (Wenger,

1998), both between and within the community of lecturers as designers

and students as users. Here, the borders of social transaction are related

to the online activities, or as Dohn (2009, pp. 162–163) describes it, a

part of the background situation, where the online activities aord cer

tain bodily behavior and limitations. is critique of online media seems

interesting, as almost all students make daily use of social media (e.g.,

Facebook). However, the use of these media might relate to other types of

aordance regarding personal networks and not educational aairs. e

experienced embodiment and enmindment of the use of online media is

within another referential frame and not perceived as real aordance in

relation to educational sociality. e perceived aordance seems rather

connected to well-known settings such as classrooms and instructional

education, which is also emphasized in the survey by 79% of the students.

e priority of physical presence as a foundation for learning is similar to

that of Nonaka and Konno (1998), who adopt the knowledge develop

ment process as the starting point in which sociality is the foundation.

is makes it a space of originating ba and belonging, where people can

share feelings, experiences, and mental models and also a space where

commitment emerges. “It is a committed unit that ... to be present or to

know each other” (students, p. 14).

e tendency to consider the physical study room as a space that re

quires study activities among both teachers and students might indicate

that the physical space aords activity linked to knowledge development,

or at least a commitment to engage. is aordance does not appear in

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

210

the networked online space in equally optimal ways. Apparently, a room’s

environment and culture clearly inuences the activities. Experiences are

embedded and occur in a specic room (Ingold, 2000) and as a student

indicated: “When you come here (UCN), then you are committed, you

are at school” (students, p. 32).

As revealed in the third observations study, students claim that so

ciality is a prerequisite, not only for the study group, but also in class.

is referential frame of commitment as a component of the preference

of communities of practice is also signicant in the survey (79%). is

acknowledgement of ba as a fundamental space to generate knowledge

seems to be a general emphasis, as it is a recurrent theme in interviews,

observation studies, and in the survey.

Disruption Space and Space of the Future

Computer locations aect the use of online activities. An example is that the

home study place aords many other activities than sitting behind a screen.

“ere are a lot of other things that seem more important” (students, p. 32).

Enmindment and embodiment of the in situ mediated activities (In

gold, 2000) make the nested routines of home a boundary object between

computer mediated study tasks and everyday tasks at home. e back

ground situation of the home place involves the social-cultural context in

which the student is involved, as Dohn (2009) also stressed. e nested

routine in the home inuences the presence aordance. A student claim

they are only 10% focused at home but are 100% focused at UCN de

mands attention. e dierent spaces of sociality demand acknowledge-

ment that knowledge development is contextualized and relatively space

and activity dependent. Disruptions also appear in online instruction, e.g.

in the case of technical problems. As a student mentions: “… it doesn’t

work and you are disconnected” (students, p. 11).

is might illustrate that perceived aordance could become percep

tions of ill aordance, as the sense of aordance can change if several

episodes of disconnection and perceived non-aordance occur. Another

problem appears when embodied experiences of looking at a screen call

211

8 Aordance as a Key Aspect in the Creation of New Learning

for other activities: “e video transmitted instruction ... it becomes like

watching television … they sit doing a lot of other stu” (lecturers, p. 31).

e referential whole of the situation that involves nested routines of

television watching, leads to activities being carried out away from the

attended aordance.

Students do, however, acknowledge the importance of the use of online

spaces as an issue for the future, and they are also all familiar with the use

of social media such as Facebook. As the survey illustrates, 91% use social

media every day. Familiarity with the use of Facebook results in the use of

the media as a tool for information exchange and for clarifying the content

of a study task. e tendency towards the use of the space as cyber-ba can

be said to be in its initial phase. But if only used for information, knowledge

separates from ba (Nonaka & Konno, 1998). But the media becomes part

of relational aordance, which seems more obvious in face-to-face interac

tions. Students (71%) also perceive aordance as possibilities for studying

independently of time and space. But at the concrete level, it is less clear how

this is achieved. However, students appear to be open-minded towards the

potential aordance: “ey are open towards that Web 2.0” (lecturers, p.14).

is open-minded attitude might be the foundation for crossing the

boundary between the designer and student in implementing BL. e

notion of online media as a toolbox, as mentioned by one lecturer, might

simplify the concept of mediating the artefact, but on the other hand, it

is closely related to the concept of aordance as Gibson(1996) describes

it, namely that aordance is what it provides or furnishes.

The Non-Space

As illustrated by the survey, the educational stations are places of non-use

(0%). A reason for the neglected possibilities of educational stations might

be that students seem to be unaware of their existence: “We don’t know

much about it” (students, p. 33).

is kind of hidden aordance (Gaver, 1991), might indicate that the

intentional aordance (Norman, 1990) of places related to educational

stations might exist with administrators, but is neither real nor perceived

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

212

in practice, as Norman (1988) appropriately points out. In this respect, a

lecturer notes: “Peace be with them” (lecturers, p. 21).

us a correct rejection of the place, cf. Gaver (1991), emerges, as there

is no visible mediating artefact for the processes of learning and knowledge

development. ere are also experiences of contradiction between inten

tions and reality “because it is the internet connection which distributes it

… so there is … contrast … to establish a physical place (training station),

and say it is exible” (lecturers, p. 31).

Another issue that highlights this contradiction is that students, as an

aspect of their own development process and shaping of their identity,

choose to move from district areas to the city, where UCN is located. “…

but if you are 19 years old ... you just adjust to this and move to where

your education is” (Student focus group interview, p. 38). “It is typical,

well ... they always do (students) ... move to Aalborg” (Lecturers, p. 31).

e relocation of students to the city and UCN indicates that during

this period of their life (age 19 to 21) students prefer to extend their social

network. Networks are part of the task in shaping a new identity as un

dergraduate teacher students and their future identity as teacher, which is

achieved by moving closer to the physical education environment. Similar

ly, students seem to associate face-to-face participation with an aordable

learning environment and also familiarity with a well-known background.

Aordance therefore appears relational (Chemero, 2003). Knowledge is

embedded in this shared ba at UCN, and accessibility seems to be gained

from moving closer to this social and cultural setting. e physical set

ting provides space for reection as well as dialogue. In this way, it aords

externalization of tacit knowledge at UCN as a space of interacting ba.

Figure 1 illustrates the collation of results. e gure shows how com

plex aordance can conceptualize the constraints and possibilities in dier-

ent learning spaces related to processes of knowledge development. us,

it is an illustration of the answer to the theoretical questions raised at the

beginning of this article.

213

8 Aordance as a Key Aspect in the Creation of New Learning

Figure 1. Results of how dierent kinds of aordance relate to spaces of

knowledge development.

In Figure 1, the knowledge development process is connected to spaces

at the center of the gure. As this research highlights, there are empirically

signicant ndings that originating ba is the learning space with the highest

perceived aordance. Students and lecturers nd this space to be highly

intertwined with interaction ba (bold arrow in the gure). Cyber ba to a

lesser extent (thin arrow) follows some use of tools and some information

exchange, but it is also a space that may prompt for non-intended use,

such as doing other things that have no relevance to study, dependent on

the physical space. Although there are potential aordances in cyber ba,

the appearance of constraints in the space seem to have consequences for

exercising ba, especially when students begin work in a municipal school.

is is why there is no obvious arrow between these two spaces. is de

mands attention, as knowledge development, and consequently learning,

is dependent on the use of all spaces when implementing BL. Additionally,

the level of signicant priority that students place on sociality in originat

ing ba calls for an increased awareness of this area as a point of departure

when implementing new initiatives.

Interaction

Originating

Exercising

Cyber ba

Perceived, embod-

ied, real, intended,

social, cultural, rela

tional aordances

Real aordance

Pre- and postiden-

tities as aordances

Referential

aordance

Intended

aordance, but no

real or perceived

aordance

Non-intended

aordance

Potential

aordance

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

214

Discussion

Although this empirical study consists only of a small sampling from

one university college in Denmark and therefore cannot provide scope

for generalization, it points towards some general aspects that should be

considered when designing BL in teacher apprenticeship education. e

theoretical juxtaposition of aordance and knowledge development (Fig

ure 1) constitutes a conceptual frame of relevance when designing educa-

tion in the future.

e strength of the methodological approach lies in the connection be

tween the three levels of mimesis and knowledge development described

by the model of SECI. is reected explication of prior tacit knowledge

from experienced socialization in the past becomes, in the actual con

temporary context at the focus group interview, externalized. Informants

combine their knowledge in a common space. In this way, it is a pregura

tion, as well as an internal verbal combination. A further combination is

made by the author in terms of the conguration of the written data. In

the regurative phase, time has moved from the emerged data in the past

towards new discourses in the rewriting. ese new perspectives pointing

forwards can support both informants and researchers on making further

interpretations and internalizing new knowledge in future practice. ere

by, knowledge might develop continuously in the eld investigated. It is

a process that continues and is, in principle, innite. e strength of this

interpretation is in the arguments and evidence that support it, and the

nal consensus of those who are knowledgeable in the area. Furthermore,

this interpretation is not limited to perspectives emerging from inform

ants. Rather, it adds new perspectives on the eld investigated.

As the design methods in this research are primarily based on data from

expressed notions, nothing signicant can be said about the actual behav

ior in the dierent spaces, only about the informants’ perceptions of this.

However, perceived understanding is also of interest, as it is related to the

perceived and experienced aordance.

215

8 Aordance as a Key Aspect in the Creation of New Learning

e signicance of the research results regarding aordances coincides

with a similar study of students in undergraduate radiography education,

which was carried out in parallel with this study (Dau, 2013a).

Conclusion

e questions raised in this article was: What is the aordance of dierent

learning spaces in an undergraduate BL education and what are the actors’

prerequisites and reported understanding of the driving forces behind their

learning activities in these dierent spaces?

e ndings illustrate signicant coherence between concepts of knowl

edge development and space aordance. is stresses the ndings of soci-

ality, identity, and referential structures intertwined and interrelated with

spaces of learning (Figure 1).

e constraint and possibilities for student learning, as described under

the three levels of mimesis, are fundamentally linked to the aordance,

especially perceived aordance, as a basis for action and learning, closely

dependent on the space in which this takes place. Dierent spaces aord

dierent actions or even non-actions in non-spaces, but primarily, the

referential frame by the individual and social activities of student and

lecturer and embodiment and enmindment is a foundation for knowledge

development. Identity has an important feature in perceived aordance

and connected actions (Dau, 2013b).

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

216

Implications and Recommendations

Complete awareness of complex aordance has not really been taken seri-

ously in the eort to set new agendas for the development and learning

management systems of education. e lack of acknowledgement of com

plex aordances, in spaces and culture, among individuals and communi-

ties and the relationships, as well as interactions among these, reduces the

role and inuence of both humans and artefacts. is neglect of essential

dimensions may cause failures at the policy level, administration level, and

concrete praxis level. is is why the model described in Figure 1 is rec

ommended as a framework for consideration when planning educational

changes, because it is essential to the knowledge development of students.

Knowledge development is a key goal in undergraduate education as well

as in lifelong learning and economic growth.

e recommendation that follows from this empirical research is that

policy makers must acknowledge the inuence of complex aordances

on learning, for good or bad. e success of implementation depends

on situated real and perceived aordance. Policy makers must rethink

policies and extend the policy of concepts to the policy of space, since

the referential whole of classroom settings, as nested routines for certain

traditional learning, can impose limitations on development. For young

er students, the solution is not the implementation of local well-known

school environments as educational stations. Rather, recommendations

must address changes in school environments at university colleges, and

perhaps at upper secondary and municipal schools. It is recommended that

ordinary physical classrooms be replaced with rooms for sharing, inter

action, cyber extra-action/outer-action, and experimentation/exercising.

Knowledge development processes may be better facilitated through these

ba spaces. is rethinking of policy, including spaces of aordance that

maintain the valuable social space, can be the foundation for real change

and success in the implementation of BL.

217

8 Aordance as a Key Aspect in the Creation of New Learning

References

Åkerlind, G. S., & Trevitt, C. (1999). Enhancing self-directed learning through edu-

cational technology: When students resist the change. Innovations in Education and

Teaching International, 36(2), 96–105.

Burke, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research para-

digm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26.

Bødker, S., & Christensen, E. (1997). Scenario as springboards in CSCW design. In: G.

C. Bowker, S. L. Star, W. Turner, & L. Gasser (Eds.), Social science, technical systems

and cooperative work (pp. 217-233). Laurence Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.

Chemero, A. (2003). An outline of a theory of aordance. Ecological Psychology 15(2),

181–195.

Christensen, B., & Kristensen, S. M. (2012). Model for Flexvid i læreruddannelsen.

Anvendelse af blended learning i læreruddannelsen i UCN. In H. J. Stausgaard & C.

H. Jensen (Eds.), FlexVid: Fleksible arbejdsformer i videregående uddannelser. Køben-

havn: Books on Demand.

Christensen, R. (1997). Eect of technology integration education on the attitudes of teach-

ers and their students. University of North Texas. Retrieved from http://courseweb.

unt.edu/rhondac

Christensen, R. (2002). Eects of technology integration education on the attitudes of

teachers and students. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(4), 411–433.

Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology. USA: Harvard University Press.

Crook, C. (2002). e campus experience of networked learning. In C. Steeples &

C. Jones (Eds.), Networked learning: Perspectives and issues (pp. 293– 308). London:

Springer.

Dau, S. (2013a, November). e importance of sense of coherence when implementing

blended learning environments. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the London

International Conference on Education (LICE), London (pp. 113–118).

Dau, S. (2013b, November). When design meets identities: A case study of blended learning

in undergraduate educations. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 6

International

Conference of Education, Research and Innovation, Seville, Spain.

Dewey, J. (1948, 1920). Reconstruction in philosophy. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Dohn, N. B. (2009). Aordances revisited: Articulating a Mearleau-Pontian view. Inter-

national Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 4(2), 151–170.

European Commission. (2010). Press release: Europe 2020 Commission proposes new

economic strategy in Europe. Retrieved from http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-

10-225_en.htm

European Union Parliament. (2010). Lisbon European Counsel 23 and 24 March presi-

dency conclusions. Retrieved from http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/

docs/pressdata/en/ec/00100-r1.en0.htm summits/lis1_en.htm

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

218

Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Frame-

work, principles, and guidelines. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Gaver, W. W. (1991). Technology aordances. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on

Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 79–84). New York: ACM Press.

Gibson, J. J. (1979). e ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton

Miin.

Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended learning systems: Denition, current trends, and future

directions. In C. R. Graham & C. J. Bonk, (Eds.), Handbook of blended learning:

Global perspectives, local designs (pp. 3–21). San Francisco: Pfeier Publishing.

Heft, H. (1989). Aordances and the body: An intentional analysis of Gibson’s ecological

approach to visual perception. Journal of Social Behaviour, 19, 1–30.

Holley, D. (2002). Which room is my virtual seminar in please? Education and Train-

ing, 44(3), 112–121.

Holley, L. T., & Oliver, M. (2010). Student engagement and blended learning: Portraits

of risk. Computers & Education, 54 (2), 693–700.

Hoshmand, L. T. (2003). Can lessons of history and logical analysis ensure progress in

psychological science? eory and Psychology, 13(1), 39–44.

Illeris, K. (2011).Towards a contemporary and comprehensivetheory oflearning. In-

ternational Journal of Lifelong Education, 22(4), 396–406.

Illeris, K. (2012). Læringsteoriens elementer – hvordan hænger det hele sammen? In: K.

Illeris, (Ed.), 49 Tekster om læring. Frederiksberg: Nayana Press, Samfundslitteratur.

Illeris, K. (2013). Transformativ læring og identitet. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur.

Ingold, T. (2000). e perception of the environment. Essays on livelihood dwelling and

skill. New York: Routledge.

Kennewell, S. (2001). Using aordances and constraints to evaluate the use of in-

formation and communications technology in teaching and learning. Jour-

nal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 10(1–2), 101–106. DOI:

10.1080/14759390100200105

Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching: A conversational framework for the

use of learning technologies (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.

Lawton, J., & Gerschner, V. T. (1982). A review of the literature on attitudes towards

computers and computerized instruction. Journal of Research and Development in

Education 16(1), 50–55.

Marshall, G., & Cox, M. (2008). Research methods: eir design, applicability and

reliability. In J. Voogt & G. Knezek (Eds.), International handbook of information

technology in primary and secondary education (pp. 983–1002). New York: Springer.

Nonaka, I., & Konno, N. (1998) e concept of ‘ba’: Building a foundation for knowl-

edge creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 40–54.

Norman, D. A. (1988). e psychology of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.

219

8 Aordance as a Key Aspect in the Creation of New Learning

Norman, D. A. (1990). e design of everyday things. New York: Doubleday.

Papert, S. (2001). Invited Address in OECD Report, Learning to change: ICT in schools

(pp. 104–112). Paris: OECD/CERI.

Poutanen, P., Parvianen, O., & Åberg, L. (2011). Conditions for self-organizing and

creativity in blended learning environments. On e Horizon, 19(4), 286–296.

Ricoeur, P. (1984). Time and narrative. Vol. 1. Trans. K. McLaughlin & D. Pellauer.

Chicago and London: e University of Chicago Press.

Ricoeur, P. (1985). Time and narrative. Vol. 2. Trans. K. McLaughlin & D. Pellauer.

Chicago and London: e University of Chicago Press.

Singh, H. (2003). Building eective blended learning programs. Educational Technol-

ogy, 43(6), 51–54.

Stake, H., & Horn, M. B. (2012): Classifying K–12 blended learning. Innosight In-

stitute. Retrieved from http://www.innosightinstitute.org/innosight/wp-content/

uploads/2012/05/Classifying-K-12-blended-learning2.pdf

Storegen, T. (2000). Aordances and events. Ecological Psychology 12(1),1–28.

Teknologirådet. (2011). Skole og medier– it-understøttelse af læring: Anbefalinger fra en ar-

bejdsgruppe under Teknologirådet. Teknologirådet, København. Retrieved from http://

www.tekno.dk/pdf/projekter/p11_skole_og_medier/p11_Rapport_Skole_og_me-

dier-it_understoettelse_af_laering.pdf

e Government, Municipalities and the Danish Regions (2013). Regeringen, K. L. &

Danske Regioner. Digital velfærd nye muligheder for velfærdssamfundet: Debatoplæg

om den kommende fællesoentlige strategi for digital velfærd. Social Børne og Integra-

tions Ministeriet. Retrieved from http://eng.uvm.dk/~/UVM-EN/Content/News/

Eng/2013/~/media/UVM/Filer/Udd/Dagtilbud/PDF13/130319%20Digital%20

velfaerd%20marts%202013.ashx

Studieordningen for læreruddannelsen (2012), UCN. Retrieved from http://www.ucn.

dk/Forside/Uddannelser/L%C3%A6rer/Studieordning.aspx

Turner, P. (2005). Aordance as context. Interacting with Computers 17, 787–800.

Vrasidas, C., & McIsaac, M. S. (2001). Integrating technology in teaching andteacher

Education: Implications for policy and curriculum reform. Educational Media Inter-

national, 39(2–3), 127–132.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. New York: Oxford University Press.

Getting along

with Dierent Learners

Part III

223

9 Conicting Ideas on Democracy and Values

Education in Swedish Teacher Education

Conicting Ideas on

Democracy and Values Education in

Swedish Teacher Education

Björn Åstrand

Abstract

A decade ago, less than 25% of students in four teacher education programs

in Sweden had positive feelings towards their studies in values education.

e majority of the students claimed that they had learned the basic

concepts, but felt that those concepts were not clearly dened (Frånberg,

2006, p. 151). Consequently, roughly 4 out of 5 students felt that they

had not been suciently prepared for their role of instilling values in their

students. e newly reformed teacher education program was accompa

nied by an increased ministerial emphasis on values education, but it is

unclear what impact it had (Zackari, 2000, p. 11). Studies indicate signs

of improvement, but those studies are not fully comparable, so there are

good reasons to address these issues again (Åstrand, 2013a). e fact that

the majority of students report ambiguity in their understanding of the

main concepts of values education suggests there may be varied under

standing of the central concepts among teacher educators. e primary

aim of this article was to study understandings of and approaches to core

terms in Swedish teacher education that relate to democracy and values

education. Following that, the analysis also takes into account changes in

legislation, policy and reform.

Keywords: Sweden, Teacher Education, Democracy, Values Education,

Parry, Constructive Education, Reconstructive Education

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

224

Introduction: Historical Perspectives

Teacher education and other professionally-oriented programs in higher

education share a common tension between changes in their respective

professional elds and changes in the higher education process itself. is

study draws attention to Swedish teacher education as a part of Swedish

higher education. Key trends, tensions and conicts in academia relating

for example to disciplines, organization, autonomy, purpose and size are

well described elsewhere (C.f Arum & Roksa 2011, Becher & Trowler

1989, Berdahl 1990, Bok 1986, 2003, 2006, Christensen & Eyring 2011,

Kerr 2001, Kirp 2003, Loss 2012, McNay 2006, Pielke 2007, Rothblatt

2003, 2007, Shapiro 2005, Stevens 2008). As teacher education as an

area of professional preparation has a multiple interface with the Swedish

school system an introductory overview and analysis of recent change and

aligned interpretations is provided below. (Åstrand, 2014)

Divergent Pictures of Swedish School History

Democracy and values education in Swedish teacher education must be

viewed historically, and two dierent versions of the changes that have

occurred emerge, depending on the choice of chronological perspective.

Shorter historical perspectives tend to take the establishment of a com

prehensive school system as the point of departure and embody a par-

ticular understanding of school roles in society. e high level of rhetoric

regarding the importance of establishment of a nine years comprehensive

school contrasts with the rather slow process of planning in the 1950s

and implementation in the 1960s (Husén, 1989). To a large extent, the

implementation was carried out as long-term trials due in part to a lack

of political consensus and to diverse local conditions (Richardson, 2010,

p. 114; Marklund, 1980, pp. 8, 231). e standardization of nationally

equivalent schools to allow equal opportunities emerged in the 1970s.

225

9 Conicting Ideas on Democracy and Values

Education in Swedish Teacher Education

Rapid societal change and problems with implementation led to fre-

quent curricular reforms in the 1960s, but the rate of reforms slowed in

the 2000s. Debates during the 1970s about democracy in society and the

curriculum of 1980 claried the need for pupils “to practice democratic

ways of decision-making” in school (Larson & Westerberg, 2011, p. 114).

At the end of the 1980s, policy changes required reforms for decentrali

zation, deregulation, and market solutions to school problems (Lundahl,

2005). e model that emerges in a short historical perspective is typically

a centralized school system that provides equal opportunities.

In an extended historical perspective, beginning with the establishment

of compulsory schools in 1842, another picture emerges. Local control of

schools predominated, and it was not until after the First World War that

time spent in schools became nationally standardized (Edgren, 2012, p.

104; Richardsson, 2010, p. 103). Compulsory primary school was a local

responsibility and was not a school for all children, but rather for those who

would not receive an education otherwise. e establishment of the com

prehensive school in the 1960s led to the decline of parallel schooling and

private alternatives, and by the end of the 1980s less than 0.5% of pupils

attended such schools (Husén, 1989). e comprehensive school reform also

increased governmental responsibility for schooling, and education became

highly centralized. Rapid change came in 1989 with the transfer of respon

sibility for schools to local municipalities. us, from a longer historical

perspective, the Swedish school system is characterized by local responsibility

and local conditions, together with private alternatives and parallel tracks.

Table 1. Two Historical Perspectives of Developments in the Swedish

School System

Period Typical Atypical

Shorter historical

perspective

1945–2012

Centralism

Public responsibility and

ownership

Uniformity/Equivalence

Decentralism

Private initiatives

Variation/Dierentiation

Longer historical

perspective

1842–2012

Decentralism

Private initiatives

Variation/Dierentiation

Centralism

Public responsibility and

ownership

Uniformity/Equivalence

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

226

Divergent Pictures of Swedish School Reforms

It is claimed that the Swedish school system is currently in its most pro-

found reform period since the establishment of public schooling. e 2006

shift in government brought about a new Education Act, a reformed upper

secondary school, new educational programs for principals, new teacher

education, new curricula, new syllabuses, a new grading system, and new

assessment criteria. Teacher education programs have gone through an

accreditation process, and a new system for teacher careers has been im

plemented, together with a system for teacher licensing. ese reforms

are intended to better prepare individuals for the labor market and to

strengthen Sweden as an internationally competitive nation. e recent

reforms mirror a narrative that the once great school system of much higher

quality than today’s schools must be restored.

Included in that narrative is, however, a cause for concern due to the

traditional high sensitivity in education to international trends (Waldow,

2008, 2009; Nilsson, 1987, 1989; Husén, 1989, p. 353). After the Second

World War, it is claimed that “essentially [it was] Sweden that led the way,

becoming the model for Norway, Denmark and Finland” (Telhaug et al.,

2006, p. 252) and that “Sweden was the trailblazer and model” (Antikain

en, 2006, p. 230). Currently, it is debated whether the initiatives taken in

Sweden are appropriate and questions have been raised as to when results

may become evident (SOU, 2013, p. 30). e current reforms perhaps

draw on what is referred to as “faith-based policy,” (policy that does not

rely on evidence, rather belief and faith in the correctness of the policy)

both when it comes to the historical narrative as well as contemporary

analysis (Jones, 2012, p. 329; Ravitch, 2010, p. 113; Kornhall, 2013).

According to critics, the reforms are inappropriate, and their results can

be seen in a continued decline in international comparisons (for example

Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), Trends in Math

ematics and Science (TIMSS) and Programme in International Reading

Literacy Study (PIRLS)).

Reforms in recent years have primarily supported direct teaching and

student learning by focusing on teacher competence, clear and transpar

227

9 Conicting Ideas on Democracy and Values

Education in Swedish Teacher Education

ent steering documents, and revised structures of upper secondary schools

to improve graduation rates and entrance into the labor market, together

with increased monitoring, assessments, grading, evaluations, and inspec

tions. Reforms enacted around 1990 were directed towards changing the

system by allowing parental and student choice in school, market initia

tives, and competition, together with decentralized accountability and

local responsibility. ese initiatives considerably changed fundamental

conditions for education and teaching and learning in such a way that

it was considered the most profound reform period since the nineteenth

century (Ball, 2007, p. 185; Labaree, 2010, p. 13). e extent of those

reforms “transformed the Swedish school system from being one of the

most centrally planned among OECD countries into one of the most de

centralized systems allowing for wide choice of school types” (Klitgaard,

2007, p. 182; Lundahl, 2005, p. 147; Lundahl, 2010). is observation

has recently been reinforced by Levin (2013). In an analysis of segrega

tion, decentralization, dierentiation, and individualization, the national

agency for schools, Skolverket, found the situation alarming and called

for change (Skolverket 2009, 2012, 2013; Jönsson, 1996; Arnesen &

Lundahl, 2006, p. 297).

Changes in primary and secondary education usually mirror the in

teractions between transformative forces in society that permeate schools

and directly or indirectly impact tertiary education as well. e role of

compulsory schooling has changed and the sheer size of the higher educa

tion sector in contemporary society has inevitably changed its role. Levin

notes, “e result of [an] increasing number of persons who pursue higher

education as [a] result of comprehensive secondary school reforms is that

postsecondary institutions are increasingly taking the role of stratication

that was traditionally undertaken by the secondary school” (Levin, 1978,

p. 448). An important observation is that higher education seems not to

have continued this analysis or fully explored its own responsibilities other

than those directly related to qualifying students for employment. Con

sequently, the past decade has witnessed an emphasis on employability,

rather than fulllment of wider educational purposes aiming at realizing

the individual’s full potential, developing critical thinking, integrity and

other essential capabilities for the role as an active citizen in a democratic

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

228

society and a responsible member of a global world and local communi-

ties. (Åstrand 2013b, c.f Chan 2013)

Teacher education must adjust to changes in the teaching profession,

such as changes in schools, but must also navigate changes in higher

education. e focus of this study, democracy and values education, was

chosen because these themes are assumed to be sensitive to changes in the

eld. e aim of this study was to describe key conceptual understand

ings within teacher education institutions and to try to contextualize and

understand divergences in relation to educational reforms and shifting

policy and legislation during a signicant period of change.

A core concept in this study is the Swedish term fostran. When applied

to the upbringing of children, it usually refers to intentional initiatives to

shape their morality, attitudes, and ways of thinking and feeling, together

with their will, including values, priorities, and opinions. Hence, the Swed

ish term fostran diers from the English fostering in the sense that the

latter refers to a neutral promotion of something undened by the term

itself where the Swedish fostran denotes by itself aspects of socialization and

with that included dispositions. e term fostran is not fully synonymous

with education, and when applied to the school context, it also refers to

particular values. e use of fostering in this text includes those meanings.

229

9 Conicting Ideas on Democracy and Values

Education in Swedish Teacher Education

Theoretical Perspectives

According to Becher and Trowler (2001), “Change [in higher education]

is for the most part small-scale, steady and persistent” and is caused by

institutional ambitions rather than the growth of the discipline (p. 100).

One might ask, what does that look like in reality? Can change be visible

within blurred concepts that echo less functional terminology? For now,

however, we leave aside questions of whether these situations can be un

derstood as stages in the evolution of paradigms (Becher & Trowler, 2001,

p. 33). e perspective applied in this study views insecurity, diversity,

and conicts within an academic eld or in relation to an educational

program, not as signs of a problem, but as an ongoing negotiation and an

indication of progress.

For many years, research in education has demonstrated the conse

quences of schooling. e role of schooling for societal reproduction can

be perceived as intentional or unintentional as well as clearly visible or

barely detectable. In Democracy and Education, Dewey (2011) begins by

emphasizing a perspective of “renewal of life by transmission” and ad

dresses questions about how knowledge is accumulated and transferred

between generations (p. 5). For others, reproduction is a societal process

for transferring power and wealth. is study focuses on the intersection

between societal reproduction and individual qualication, socialization,

and subjectication in terms of democracy and values education. From

a societal perspective, values education related to democracy can be un

derstood in terms of ideological reproduction. A liberal and democratic

society mandates schooling that attempts to instill within students certain

values and dispositions that favor democracy. From an individual perspec

tive, values education can be understood as a process through which an

individual becomes more familiar with their own values and becomes

socialized in a way that strengthens personality, identity, and self-esteem.

Biesta (2010) suggests three functions of education for the individual:

qualication, socialization, and subjectication. ese processes prepare

an individual for work and a life shared with others, and they promote

a mature sense of identity. Others, mainly in the sociological tradition,

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

230

have pointed out how education operates on a societal level in terms of

control and reproduction (Young, 1972; Swartz, 2002). In the American

context, the tension between qualication and control (discipline) also

took a slightly dierent path worth mentioning. Levin (1978) claimed

that there was a visible tension between

the reproduction needs of the capitalist production [as it] require[s]

highly unequal educational outcomes while the ideology of the edu

cational system tends to inspire expectations and policies of greater

equality and schooling expansion to satisfy the aspirations for social

mobility. (p. 436)

He also argued that much of the history of education is due to these

“tensions and struggles between liberal political forces pressing for equal

ity and the economic ones pushing for inequality” (Levin, 1978, p. 439).

Taken together, the impact of education on these understandings of

schooling is of the highest importance and teachers are key players. us,

teacher education becomes of paramount importance in this regard. But,

as touched upon earlier, there are problems with teacher education that

motivates an explorative study of the concepts in teacher education pro

grams regarding democracy and values education.

is study is part of a larger explorative study. (Åstrand 2013a) ere

fore, the research questions in the current work are quite narrow. How

democracy and values education is understood, carried out, and received

in teacher education is particularly interesting because it relates to and

reveals dierent educational traditions and cultures in higher education.

e understanding of democracy and values education also sheds light

on attitudes of autonomy and submission and reveals aspects that are

perceived as unproblematic, neutral, and politically correct. It also il

lustrates how teacher education can be understood in terms of its role in

society. Further, it underscores thought on the relationship between epis

temological understanding and pedagogical strategies, as well as notions

on the formation of an individual during their period of studies. All of

these issues constitute future challenges for higher education. In relation

to the historical and theoretical perspectives outlined above, the research

questions in this work focus on: a) the formal position of democracy and

231

9 Conicting Ideas on Democracy and Values

Education in Swedish Teacher Education

values education in steering documents for schools and teacher education

together, b) the conceptual understanding of democracy and values educa

tion in teacher education, and c) epistemological positions and educational

strategies among educators and leaders in Swedish teacher education.

Methodology

e rst part of this study uses traditional document analysis to identify the

position of democracy and values education in Swedish schools and teacher

education. e second part draws upon open-ended and semi-structured

interviews with 45 teachers and leaders at 12 higher education institu

tions. e informants were selected through a two-stage process after the

institutions were selected (described below). Leaders at these institutions

were approached and asked to participate. Two kinds of informants were

sought: academic and administrative leaders and active teacher educators.

e focus of the inquiry was claried, and it was left to the institutions

to appoint participants. All institutions responded positively, but the dis

tinction between academic and administrative leaders did not regularly

match local notions of their organization. At one institution, the leaders

asked subordinates to replace them.

More than 25 higher education institutions provide teacher education

in Sweden, but there are no independent, single-mission institutions that

are typically described as a teacher education institution. e term teacher

education institution refers here to the organizational structure responsible

for the teacher education program within a higher education institution;

(or when the term institution is used, it refers directly to teacher education).

Although this study was not primarily designed to fully satisfy the

criteria for quantitative representation, inclusion of various forms of in

stitutions was required in order to obtain a variety of participants. A rst

priority was that the number of graduates from the institutions repre

sented a majority of an annual cohort of teacher students (after fullling

all other criteria, the nal selection covered approximately 60% of an an

nual cohort). e selected institutions represented both large institutions

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

232

and small, meaning that the total numbers of students in all disciplines

ranged from just 200, to more than 40,000. e size of teacher education

programs varied as well, ranging from less than 50, to more than 1,000

graduates. e number of teacher education students as a percentage of

all students attending institutions also ranged from a tiny fraction to one

third or more of the entire student body.

e year that institutions were inaugurated was considered; thus the

sample includes institutions that are only a few decades old, to ones that

are hundreds of years old. A wide geographical spread was included, as

well as institutions having single and multiple campuses. e selection

also included an institution that had distinguished itself through greater

student recruitment with non-traditional backgrounds. Institutional sta

tus (university versus university college) has been accounted for, as was the

designation of an institution as either specialized or general.

Interviews were conducted at participating institutions. Most inter

views were with a single person, but some were conducted with two or

more persons together, and each interview lasted about an hour. Most

interviews had a positive atmosphere in which the interviewee felt free to

express their opinions. An indication of this was that I was frequently cor

rected or something was added when I summarized. Another indication

was the repeated, spontaneous expression of appreciation and feelings of

importance and inspiration. It must be noted, however, that I was not an

anonymous researcher to the majority of the interviewees, as I have played

a visible role in national teacher education.

e interviews were, of course, not conducted in a contextual vacuum.

But my understanding is that the very idea of a neutral or objective inter

view is a fallacy. In fact, just by asking persons to articulate their opinions

changes the object of a study. My approach was to maintain an awareness

of this and to be open and transparent regarding the background, purpose,

and my personal context, such that meetings with informants could be as

understandable and honest as possible. I agree with Kvale in his discussions

about guiding questions; the problem is not the use of guiding questions,

but rather the low frequency with which deliberate guiding questions are

used (Kvale, 2001, p. 145). Informants and institutions were anonymized

with a random number assigned to each person and institution; a U nota

233

9 Conicting Ideas on Democracy and Values

Education in Swedish Teacher Education

tion for was used for respondents from a university, and UC was used for

respondents from a university college.

To support the explorative approach, an interview protocol was de

signed to guide the inquiry into key areas, thus aiming at providing an

understanding of the relation of core concepts to teaching and learning.

e interviews also attempted to focus on problem descriptions, strategies,

and key ideas regarding teacher education as an activity within the higher

education system. e protocol secured the coverage of those themes, but

it also provided opportunities to return to issues from slightly changed

perspectives due to ambitions to establish a more secured empirical ground

for deeper analysis. e analysis of transcripts was inspired by a bottom-up

strategy anchored in grounded theory thinking (Newby, 2010, p. 487). In

rst stage the author familiarized himself with the interviews by making

full transcriptions. In a second stage thematically arranged collections was

created providing opportunities to make concepts mapping distinguishing

shifting understandings and relationships. irdly, interrelationships of

dierent themes of conceptual understandings were tentatively analyzed

and described (not presented here, c.f Åstrand 2013b) and discussed in

relation to teaching.

e study also draws upon document analysis of rather conventional

type, aiming at describing change in key documents (like legislation, policy

etc.) that operates on at a general level and that assumingly impacts on

individual understandings of concepts relating to democracy and values

education and the notions of what kind of institutional assignment teacher

preparation has.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

234

Findings

e primary focus of study is to describe the current understanding of

teaching in relation to democracy and values education in teacher educa

tion. As an explorative study, the focus is not to evaluate to what degree

an institution may be providing programs that are more or less success

ful in their ambitions. Instead, the purpose is to identify dierences in

positions, understandings, and strategies. us, it is necessary to briey

describe how democracy and values education are formulated in legislation

and elsewhere with regard to schools and teacher education.

Formal Position of Democracy and Values Education in the Swed-

ish School System and Teacher Education

Teacher education is more or less in continuous reform. In 2001 and

again in 2011, profound national reforms were implemented in Sweden.

Over the span of that decade, the Degree Ordinance was also reformed

due to criticism in the 2005 national evaluation; the structure of teacher

education was changed in 2007 as a result of the Bologna Process and the

introduction of learning outcomes. ese national initiatives were in ad

dition to local reform initiatives. Given the extent of the reform process,

it is less important to identify particular aspects that are associated with

one or another program than it is to understand what teacher education

represents as a whole going forward from 2010.

A main dierence between the two main design models of 2001 (TE01)

and 2011 (TE11) is their approach to general educational studies. e

TE01 program was structured in three main parts (A general eld of edu

cation; An educational area; A specialized educational area). (U00.023,

p. 1-2) e part focused on general education should include “cross dis

ciplinary subjects studies,” but there was no prescribed content for this

part, such as educational psychology or foundations in education (c.f

HEO, Appendix 2: Qualication Descriptor, Teacher degree, 2001). e

Higher Education Act states that institutions shall promote sustainable

235

9 Conicting Ideas on Democracy and Values

Education in Swedish Teacher Education

development, equality, and international awareness (HEA 1992, 1 Ch.

5§). General objectives for study programs cover aspects of a student’s

development of autonomy, integrity, critical thinking abilities, etc., but

there is nothing explicitly related to democracy and values education (HEA

1992, 1 Ch. 8-9§). TE11 was restructured and was more centralized. It

relabeled general educational studies to educational science studies with a

rather detailed content description. TE01 was, in this respect, a bare canvas

to be painted, while TE11 describes in detail seven thematic areas. e

rst theme covers the “history of the school system, its organization and

conditions as well as the core educational values, including fundamental

democratic values and human rights” (HEO 2011, Appendix 2: Quali

cation descriptor, Teacher degree, 2011). With TE11 came prescribed

content, together with a focus on school educational values, democratic

values, and human rights.

Relevant learning outcomes in TE01 required that students be able

to “communicate and anchor the values in society and democracy” and

“to prevent and counteract discrimination and violation of children and

students” (HEO, Appendix 2: Qualication Descriptor, Teacher degree,

2001). 2001). is was partially extended in TE11, but this and other

learning outcomes became secondary to subject knowledge. TE01 had a

general requirement for knowledge and competence “to be able to realize

the purpose of schools” (HEO, Appendix 2: Qualication Descriptor,

Teacher degree, 2001). A decade later, this was changed to “knowledge

and competence for independent work as a teacher” and “subject knowl

edge required for the professional tasks as a teacher” (HEO, Appendix

2: Qualication Descriptor, 2011). e higher expectations for subject

knowledge results in a decrease in emphasis on democracy and values

education, despite the fact that the Degree Ordinance for TE11 includes

requirements that students be able to

demonstrate the capacity to make assessments in educational pro-

cesses on the basis of relevant scientic, social and ethical aspects

with particular respect for human rights, especially children’s rights

according to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and sustaina

ble development. (HEO, Appendix 2: Qualication Descriptor, 2011)

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

236

e debate on democracy and values education in schools has gone on

for decades. After the Second World War until the 1980s, the Education

Act stipulated that the purpose of schooling was student “acquisition of

knowledge and development of skills” and, together with the responsi

bilities of families, to promote children’s development into “harmonious

people” who are socially responsible citizens (Education Act 1962, 1 Ch

§1). With the reformed curricula in the 1980s, the perspective shifted to

view schools as part of society, mirroring “a democratic understanding of

society and humanity [in which] humans are active and with agency, crea

tive and in search for knowledge, [and] able in collaboration with others

to understand and enhance individual and shared living conditions” (Na

tional Board of Education 1980, p.13). It was stated that schools should

fostra (c.f above) and that schooling should not only transmit knowledge,

competences, and values, but also actively transform and develop knowl

edge, competences, and values.

is trend of increasing emphasis on democracy and values continued

into the 1990s and found its nal expression in the 1994 revised school

curriculum. e new design included a revised layout that set the tone in

the main heading: “Foundational values and tasks of the school”; beneath it

was the second-level heading, “Foundational values” and the following text:

Democracy forms the basis of the national school system. The Edu-

cation Act (1985:1100) stipulates that all school activity should be

carried out in accordance with fundamental democratic values and

that each and every one working in the school should encourage

respect for the intrinsic value of each person as well as for the envi

ronment we all share (Chapter l, §2). The school has the important

task of imparting, instilling and forming in pupils those fundamental

values on which our society is based. (National Board for Education,

1994/2006, p. 3)

e importance of democracy remained the same, but the focus on

values became more pronounced. In 2010, curricular reforms again ap

peared to reduce the importance of teaching democracy in schools. e

earlier statement on school activities being “carried out in accordance with

fundamental democratic values” was exchanged for the following two lines:

237

9 Conicting Ideas on Democracy and Values

Education in Swedish Teacher Education

“e Education Act (2010:800) stipulates that education in the school

system aims at pupils acquiring and developing knowledge and values. It

should promote the development and learning of all pupils, and a lifelong

desire to learn” (National Board for Education, 2011, p. 9).

Changes over the past decade are apparent in the governmental pro

posals for TE01 and TE11. In TE01, the analysis was anchored in a for-

ward- and outward-looking perspective in which emergent knowledge

of societal and globalization processes was crucial for contemporary and

future Swedish society and demanded “communication and dialogue be

tween humans together with a tentative and examining approach” (Prop.

1999/2000:135, p. 5).

In addition, the proposition emphasized that edu-

cation and development of new knowledge was central to democracy and

citizen participation in society, and that teachers were key agents in this

“transformation into a learning society.” A decade later, the point of de

parture was markedly dierent. e proposal for TE11 also acknowledged

that “education can help people to develop their attitudes, knowledge and

skills to make well grounded decisions.” (Prop. 2009/2010:89, p.8) But

the overall perspective drew mainly on current problems in schools and

shortcomings in teacher education. e reforms emphasized teaching skills

and subject knowledge.

Two historically dierent traditions relate to this study. One tradition

has roots in the post-war period and focuses on democratic aspects of

schooling, taking a more activist approach. e second tradition tends

to focus more narrowly on subject knowledge and the importance of the

schooling of an individual, rather than a societal perspective.

Conceptual Understanding and Notions on Educational Aims

Democracy can be understood in a variety of ways. Among the inform-

ants there were more formal and functional perspectives, together with

more normative perspectives (not necessarily mutually exclusive). us,

educators do accentuate the importance of a more formal knowledge and

suggest that teachers need to know things like how government works,

how citizens are granted rights, and how they are supposed to participate

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

238

in elections, exert inuence, and be involved in participatory processes

at their workplace, etc. (16U; 20UC; 18U; 23U; 10UC). It is felt that

teachers also need to possess “familiarity with the political system, how it

works and with what happens if it does not work properly” (16U). Another

aspect of this more functionalistic approach is the emphasis on student

participation in decision-making in education, regardless of whether it

is a normal part of the teacher education program or a component of

preparatory learning exercises for their future roles as teachers. In other

words, “to experience what it means to have inuence and to participate

in the educational processes and the shared work can be viewed as a way of

dealing with democracy and a preparation for working life” (5U; 25UC).

Democracy as a concept is also presented as a set of values, a way of

living, and a desirable approach in interpersonal relations. Democracy is

what teachers (and teacher educators) must “preach” and promote (21U).

Democracy is “everything … it is about how we understand each other, it

is about behavior and how we approach each other” and “being responsive

to each other and trying to take the other’s perspectives” (27U; 13U). ese

approaches and values are understood as essential for society, education,

and becoming a teacher. Another aspect is democracy’s perishable nature;

it is something that must be nurtured, otherwise it will disappear and is

something “we have to reconquer repeatedly” (19UC).

A normative notion of education can be held together with a more

functional understanding, and the normative approach exists in conjunc

tion with values education. In curricula and educational policies, values

education plays an important role, but its emphasis has changed over

time. In 1999, the Swedish ministry of education declared a year of values

education during which the fundamental values that had been articulated

in the curriculum of 1994 were to be accentuated (Zackari & Modigh,

2000, p. 11).

It is beyond the scope of this study to describe the complete list of

foundational values as used in the Swedish educational context. In the

context of purposes for values education, the interviewees seemed to mir

ror two rather polar interpretations of the aims for values education. One

group understands the term foundational values to represent a xed set of

values; the other group focused on values as something that needs to be

239

9 Conicting Ideas on Democracy and Values

Education in Swedish Teacher Education

dened. ese two positions relate to the dierent understandings of what

kind of impact values education is supposed to have on student teachers.

Some teacher educators believe that they have an obligation to teach and

promote democracy as part of their responsibility as a civil servant who

is active in a public business and regulated by law. One educator recalled

that he usually challenges his students to make up their minds on whether

they are prepared to take on this obligation by saying that teachers have “a

mission of indoctrination” (23U; 13U; 24U; 10UC; 1U). is notion of

values education tends to include a combination of a xed understanding

of what the values are and an ambition for inculcating them in students.

But it also conrms that the public role as a teacher “sets limits as to how

much personal resonance there can be” (17U).

A second position argues that the most important part is not the inculca

tion of certain values, but that students become aware of their individual

priorities, i.e., “you have to start with yourself” (15U). Programs have “to

strengthen the individual by providing opportunities for self analysis…one

has to develop an enhanced self understanding” and students, by “having

a seat in the hot chair, will necessarily reect upon who they are” (7U).

is more reective and individualizing position is related to a third

understanding that draws upon the same logic but is more academic in

nature. e main aspect here is to equip students with certain analytical

and critical skills and competences that foster integrity and autonomy,

together with the capability of reecting upon various values and related

problems, rather than carrying certain values. “Teacher education’s rst

priority is to instill a critical reective perspective on values education,

not to transmit certain values,” and is “to teach them to think and reect,

not to teach them to pity one another” (2U; 3U).

ese three ideas or positions are somewhat mutually exclusive, but in

some cases they are linked aspects of teacherhood, which can be dicult

for students to navigate and balance. One must struggle with when and

where to be a teacher who defends a xed and obligatory set of values and

when and on what issues it is appropriate to articulate personal opinions.

e student teacher must ask what impact their scientic training has in

this respect and how they should proceed by using both their heart and

their head.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

240

Ascribed Importance

In general, it is understood that democracy and values education are im-

portant aspects of teacher education programs, the process of becoming a

teacher, and teaching itself. It is, according to the informants, “our blood”

and “what you are supposed to have internalized as a teacher” (20UC;

1U; 27U; 13U). ere are several current metaphors that state democracy

and values education are a foundational aspect of society, a linchpin for

schooling, the blood, the soul, and a nucleus in becoming a teacher and

that these values permeate, or should permeate, teaching and learning.

Democracy and values education are perceived as being of high im

portance in general, but with a slightly dierent orientation in dierent

contexts: for society as a whole, schooling, teacherhood, and becoming a

teacher. In addition, there are indications of divergent approaches within

specic disciplinary traditions. According to some interviewees, the dis

cussions are livelier in such subjects as social science, history, etc., but

less so in language studies, mathematics, and science. Aligned with this

are diverse ideas as to whether democracy and values education should

be integrated into all subjects. To some, this is desirable and feasible, but

for others it is neither.

e articulated importance is not matched by any particular initiative

to strengthen this area. Such are generally absent and the high esteem

of democracy and values education do not appear to have had any im

pact on design. ere are signs of a readiness within some institutions

to take ambitions for democracy and values education to a higher level.

One institution established local objectives in addition to the nationally

prescribed objectives as a means of taking increased responsibility for

the area. Another institution has elaborated plans for a teacher program

geared towards this area. ese are examples of serious attempts to advance

teaching and learning in relation to democracy and values education, but

they are not common.

241

9 Conicting Ideas on Democracy and Values

Education in Swedish Teacher Education

Epistemological Approaches to Democracy and Values Education

Important questions to ask are what the relationship is between values

and knowledge and whether there is a knowledge side and a values side

of content in this area. is is particularly important because dierent

epistemological positions can inuence program design, as well as actual

teaching. In areas of Swedish teacher education, there exists a shared skep

ticism towards the possibility of distinguishing aspects of content along

those lines. In addition, there is a hesitant approach towards a hierarchical

understanding. More generally, it seems to be understood that knowledge

and values are interlinked and that this emphasizes the inclusion of “action

and agency and the reciprocity among aspects” of what it is to know some

thing (26U). Others make the distinction between values and knowledge,

and that content, such as what constitutes a democracy, includes things

that students simply need to “know” and therefore, make it possible to

test students by fairly traditional means (23U). For some who share this

epistemological position, it is believed to be insucient within teacher

education to teach this way because democracy and values are not primar

ily about knowing, but are “something you have to internalize dierently,”

and it includes a readiness to act accordingly (6U).

Approaches to Educational Objectives

Epistemological positions relate to the question of whether teacher edu-

cation involves two parallel objectives, one knowledge oriented and one

value and democracy oriented. If so, it must be determined whether they

are in conict.

Approaches to educational objectives, regarding focus on knowledge

acquisition and/or promotion of democracy and values, appear to be in

conict (13U). Some interviewees argue that teacher education has both

objectives, and some are prepared to understand the expectation to pro

mote democracy and certain values as an assignment to foster teacher

candidates as well as other students: “all programs have a task to foster

students” (9U; 16U; 12U; 22UC). For others, neither teacher education

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

242

nor higher education generally has such a task. One teacher educator had

developed a pedagogical approach in which teachers and students in the

program take on roles as principals and teachers in a school as an oppor

tunities for inquiry into fostering education (19UC; 11UC).

For those hesitant about the idea of two objectives, there was no concern

regarding their mutuality. For others, though, there existed dierent op

portunities and one position acknowledged that there is a conict between

those objectives, either in principle or due to institutional tradition and

internal aairs (4U). A common understanding is that there is no conict,

but that in practice democracy and values education are often relegated

to second place. According to others, however, these two tasks are “not at

all in conict” and “not independent from each other,” as “you cannot do

one without the other” (10UC; 27U; 8U).

us, the eld appears to be characterized by an ambiguity between

whether teaching towards acquisition of subject knowledge has priority

over deliberating, fostering, inculcating, or even communicating democ

racy and values (or vice versa). In both cases, the standpoint seems to be

related to personal association with specic academic subjects that may

relate to a kind of tribes-and-territory approach, as well as the enduring

debate on what constitutes relevant content in a teacher education pro

gram. Positions on whether these tasks are mutually exclusive or exist in

a synergy appear to be grounded in the same philosophy.

Variety and divergence emerge in a three-fold pattern: both objectives

exist in synergy, both objectives exist in conict, or there is only a knowl

edge-focused objective. Conicting attitudes in the area are palpable. De-

mocracy and values education are held in high esteem, but indications

point towards a reluctance to launch initiatives to support such educa

tion. Notions about the purpose of democracy and values education are

scattered between whether teaching should aim towards a more academic

approach or to inculcate certain values. Finally, the pattern includes dif

ferent epistemological positions on learning and knowing, as well as on

educational ideas regarding the compatibility of what can be termed as

the qualifying aspect of teacher education (as oriented towards acquisi

tion of knowledge) and its more socializing and subjectication aspects

(as oriented to, or including, democracy and values education).

243

9 Conicting Ideas on Democracy and Values

Education in Swedish Teacher Education

Conclusions, Discussion,

and Recommendation

Olof Palme, the legendary Swedish prime minister, was the minister in

charge of education at the end of the 1960s. He claimed that education

was a “spearhead into the future” and that “schools are key to abolish class

society” (Nilsson 1989, p. 357; Norberg, 2003, p3.). Decades later, the

current minister of education, Jan Björklund, put forth the arguments

that “if Sweden shall be in the front among knowledge nations we have

to be among the best in math and technology” and that “if Sweden shall

be a successful industrial nation in the 2000s then industry has to be pro

vided with qualied labor force.” (Björklund, 2008a, 2008b) e contrast

between the perspectives is striking; societal perspectives colored by class

logic versus individual knowledge acquisition as a means for industrial

competitiveness. During changing times it is appropriate to bring dier

ent ideas to the table. e point made here is not the shift from one idea

to another, but rather the fact that historically, dierent ideas can exist

in parallel with each other within educational organizations. Ideas can be

internalized, endorsed, or just acknowledged dierently.

In a time pre-occupied with PISA-scores, Biesta calls for the purpose

of education to be reconsidered (Biesta, 2010, p. 26). According to him:

“e question of purpose, the question as to what education is for, should

actually be a central and ongoing concern within educational practice,

policy and research” (Biesta, 2010, p. 3). is is not an easy task and he

has “come to the conclusion that many of those working in education lack

a vocabulary to raise questions about the aims and the ends for education

and, in relation to this, often also lack real opportunities for asking such

questions” (Biesta, 2010, p. vii).

e purpose of Biesta’s research is to facilitate the discussion by outlin

ing useful parameters as a framework for the discussion (Biesta, 2010, p.

19). Hence, he points to the traditionally established three primary func

tions of education: qualication, socialization, and subjectication, and

concludes that we must acknowledge that the purpose of education is a

composite question. In this sense, the discussion of quality in education

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

244

is impossible without acknowledging “the dierent functions of education

and the dierent potential purposes of education.” Given this, discussion

about quality in education is according to Biesta only meaningful if we

recognize that these three functions are integrated in such a manner that

when “we engage in qualication, we always also impact on socialization

and on subjectication” and similarly “when we engage in socialization, we

always do so in relation to particular content and, therefore, link up with

the qualication function and impact upon subjectication,” an observa

tion that is instrumental to this study (Biesta, 2010, p. 22)

is theory draws attention to the fact that changes in one aspect of edu

cation policy do impact other aspects. Such a shift has occurred; strength-

ening of the qualifying function of schools and stressing employability in

higher education has aected socialization and subjectication, which are

functions related to democracy and values education.

It seems relevant to address the variety and ambiguity of concepts and

understandings in the area from another perspective as well. e above

quotations from the two noted politicians relate to their more fundamen

tal notions of society and strategies for change. In one respect, they both

educationalize societal ambitions. If Palme wanted to abolish class society,

other targeting strategies are available for use; and if Björklund wanted to

strengthen Sweden as an industrial nation, other, more direct, strategies

are available. In the end, however, both men transformed the problem

into something that was possible to deal with in an educational context.

Politicians and educationalists express dierent ambitions for schooling.

Parry (1999) proposes a distinction between constructive and reconstructive

political education, which is a useful analytical framework for this study.

According to Parry, there are discernable “family resemblances” among a

number of “thinkers” and “political theorists” when it comes to thinking

about education (1999, passim). From his point of view, there are a number

of “utilitarians, certain conservatives and defenders of ‘realist’ democracy”

who take the constructive or redirective position and “communitarians

and participatory democrats” who take the reconstructive or regenerative

position. (Parry 1999, p.23, 29)

245

9 Conicting Ideas on Democracy and Values

Education in Swedish Teacher Education

Table 2. Constructive and Reconstructive Education (Parry 1999)

Constructive (Redirective) Reconstructive (Regenerative)

- Realizable by non-radical reform.

- A less thorough shift, even though it

might bring about signicant political

change.

- Takes human nature and interests largely

as a given.

- The task of education is typically to

redirect the goals towards perceived

national priorities.

- Requires qualitative changes in economic,

social, and political structures of a nation.

- Aims to bring about a qualitative change

in the mind-set of a generation in order to

eect a similar change in political attitudes

and behavior.

- Seeks to produce “new” persons and

transform their priorities and ways of

understanding the world

e changed formal position concerning democracy and values educa-

tion within the steering documents has been described above, together

with the discourse among educators and leaders in teacher education

through the interviews conducted in this study. In the analysis the fol

lowing elements was focused:

· the importance ascribed

· conceptual understandings

· purpose and desired outcome

· epistemology

· approaches to educational objectives.

A typology based on these elements related to Parry’s theory and mir

roring a reconstructive model might consist of: a) holding the area in high

regard; b) having a conceptual understanding of democracy that could

impact individuals and society at large (such as a normative understanding

of democracy); c) a desired outcome, including inculcation of prescribed

democratic values; d) an epistemology that connects knowing and learning

to both values and readiness for action; and e) an approach to educational

objectives that understands the more knowledge-oriented assignment for

schools in a synergistic relation to the democratic one, and vice versa. A

more constructive type would contain much of the same estimation of

the area, but would tentatively take epistemological positions that are less

integrative and tend to dierentiate or distance the two tasks from each

other. Such an approach would also include the idea that students need

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

246

to get in touch with themselves as individuals and develop an academic

capability for interpreting and understanding values, rather than internal

izing certain prescribed values.

Such an analysis suggests that the reconstructive concept more closely

resembles the ideas in the welfare state and strong society context and ts

with Palme’s view. e constructive approach is indicative of the impact of

the neoliberal turn in society and education. It is possible that the vagueness

in the discourse has to do with a slow and less-articulated shift that has oc

curred in stages. Traditional academia, with its discipline-oriented approach,

internal priorities, and understanding of the societal role of higher education,

along with ideas about the desired eects on students in the 1970s, appeared

to harbor professional programs as teacher education. With inspiration from

Parry, we can understand the shift in educational policy during the period as

rst a radicalization into a reconstructive model, a shift that later on turns

into a constructive approach. Such a shift in a structure such as academia,

a non-consensus oriented business, would most likely allow for parallel

perspectives to persist and would continue having an impact through indi

viduals striving for one or another point of view. ese would be reinforced

by ongoing societal discussions concerning the state-of-the-art in schools,

rather than addressing the purpose of schooling in an articulate manner.

is analysis is plausible, but only tentatively so. It rests upon assump

tions about what is more radical and what is less so when it comes to

political schooling. Such assumptions are contextual and relational and

therefore notoriously dicult to pin down. Nevertheless, the framework

that allows such an analysis points towards a critical issue for education

in a liberal state, a state that grants individuals the freedom to develop all

kinds of ideas and beliefs, and a state that is neutral in every respect but

one: it can never be neutral about its own neutrality in this respect (Parry,

2003, p. 39; Rawls, 1971, p. 199). e task to reproduce values supporting

such a (liberal) state appears to be as essential as conicting. is political

dimension of teacher education is as important as other aspects, and the

ndings here suggest that educators and leaders struggle signicantly with

this task to make sense of it in an academic context that usually avoids tak

ing an ideological stance. at kind of assignment makes teacher education

vulnerable and invites criticism due to conicting political perspectives.

247

9 Conicting Ideas on Democracy and Values

Education in Swedish Teacher Education

ese ndings suggest that there is a need for a broader deliberation

on those issues in schools, in teacher education, and in higher education

institutions. Such deliberation should advisedly be informed by com

parative studies that take dierent professions into account, as well as

education in dierent countries and regions. In addition, ndings point

to the need for all teacher education programs to reect upon how they

can best communicate with their students in this respect and facilitate

the cooperation of teachers to promote the objectives of democracy and

values education. Educational policy is somewhat of a moving target, and

consensus is not to be viewed as the rst priority; rather, it is to support

this ongoing conversation with research and development of a coherent

and appropriate terminology.

Acknowledgment

is is in part a collaborative study with the Living History Forum that

holds a governmental appointment to promote democracy in relation to

history and historical thinking.

References

Antikainen, A. (2006). In search of the Nordic model in education. Scandinavian Journal

of Education, 50(3), 229–243.

Arum, R. & Roksa, J. (2011). Academically adrift, Limited Learning on College Campuses.

Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Arnesen, A.-L., & Lundahl, L. (2006). Still social and democratic? Inclusive education

policies in the Nordic welfare states, Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research,

50 (3), 285-300.

Åstrand, B. (2013a). En demokratisk utbildning för ett demokratiskt samhälle – per-

spektiv på demokrati- och värdegrundsfrågor i den svenska lärarutbildningen (A De-

mocratic Education for A Democratic Society – Perspectives On Democracy and values

Education in Swedish Teacher Education, manuscript, forthcoming).

Åstrand, B. (2013b) Diversity and homogeneity: notions on the role of higher education

in democratic societies. Paper presented at the 10th International Workshop on Higher

Education Reform (HER) in Ljubljana, Slovenia, 2-4 October 2013.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

248

Åstrand, B. (2014). Svensk skola i ett nordiskt perspektiv: observationer och perspektiv.

In Balle, T. et al. (Eds.). (2014). Nordisk pædagogisk tradition?Mellem Grundtvig og

Ny Nordisk Skole, Odense: Syddansk Universitet, (GYMNASIEPÆDAGOGIK, Nr.

94, Januar, 2014).

Ball, S. J. (2007). Education plc: Understanding private sector participation in public

sector education. New York: Routledge

Berdahl, R. (1990), Academic Freedom, Autonomy and Accountability in British Uni-

versities, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 15,Issue no 2.

Becher, T., & Trowler, P. R. (2001). Academic tribes and Territories (2nd ed.). Buck-

ingham: e Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.

Biesta, G. J. J. (2010). Good education in an age of measurement: Ethics, politics and

democracy. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.

Björklund, J. (2008a, March 27). Pressrelease Folkpartiet, March 27th.

Björklund, J. (2008b, December 9). Pressrelease Folkpartiet, December 9th.

Bok, D. (1986), Higher Learning, Cambridge, Mass: Cambridge University Press

Bok, D. (2003), Universities in e Marketplace: e Commercialization of Higher Educa-

tion, Princeton: Princeton University Press

Bok, D. (2006), Our Underachieving Colleges - A Candid Look at How Much Students

Learn and Why ey Should Be Learning More, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Chan, R. Y et al. (2013), What is the purpose of higher education? Comparing institu-

tional and student perspectives for completing a U. S. Bachelor’s degree in the 21st

century. Roundtable paper presented at the annual Association for the Study of Higher

Education (ASHE) conference, November 2013.

Christensen, C. M. & Eyring, H. J. (2011). e Innovative University: Changing e

DNA of Higher Education From Inside Out, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Dewey, J. (2011). Democracy and education, (1916). LaVergne, TN: Simon & Brown.

Edgren, H. (2012). Folkskolan och grundskolan. In E. Larsson & J. Westerberg, (Eds.),

Utbildningshistoria, Lund: Studentlitteratur, 103-120

Education Act, (1962). SFS 1962:319.

Hadenius, K. (1990). Jämlikhet och Frihet. Politiska mål för den svenska grundskolan.

Uppsala. Almqvist & Wiksell International.

Frånberg, G.-M. (2006). Lärarstudenters uppfattning om värdegrunden i lärarutbild-

ningen. Tidskrift för lärarutbildning och forskning, 13(1), 125-170.

HEA. (1992) Higher Education Act 1992:1434

HEO. (2001). Higher Education Ordinance, Appendix 2: Qualication Descriptor,

Teacher degree.

HEO. (2011). Higher Education Ordinance, Appendix 2: Qualication Descriptor,

(Degree of Bachelor of Arts/Science in Early Years Education; Degree of Bachelor/

249

9 Conicting Ideas on Democracy and Values

Education in Swedish Teacher Education

Degree of Master of Arts in Primary Education; Degree of Master of Arts/Science in

Secondary Education)

Husén, T. (1989). e Swedish School Reform – exemplary both ways, Comparative

Education, 25(3), 345–355.

Jones, D. S. (2012). Masters of the universe. Hayek, Friedman, and the birth of neo-

liberal politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Jönsson, I., & Arnman, G. (1996). Segregation och svensk skola – en tillbakablick och

reektion över framtiden. In G. Andersson, (Ed.), Egensinne och mångfald. Från 19

sociologer till Bengt Gesser. Lund: Arkiv Förlag

Kerr, C. (2001). e Uses of the University. Fifth Edition, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard

University Press.

Kirp, D. L. (2003). Shakespeare, Einstein and e Bottom Line: e Marketing of

Higher Education, Cambridge Mass: Harvard University Press

Klitgaard, M. B. (2007). Why are they doing it? Social democracy and market-oriented

welfare state reforms, West European Politics, 30(1), 172–194.

Kornhall, P. (2013). Barnexperimentet – svensk skola i fritt fall. Stockholm: Leopard förlag.

Kvale, S. (2001). Den kvalitativa forskningsintervjun. Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Labaree, D, F. (2010). Someone has to fail: e zero-sum game of public schooling. Cam-

bridge: Harvard University Press.

Larsson, E., & Westerberg, J. (2011). Utbildningshistoria – en introduktion. Lund: Stu-

dentlitteratur

Levin, H. M. (1978). e dilemma of comprehensive secondary school reforms in

Western Europe. Comparative Education Review, 22(3), 434–451.

Levin, H. M. (2013, March 26). Vouchers in Sweden: Scores fall, inequality grows

[Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://dianeravitch.net/2013/03/26/the-swed-

ish-voucher-system-an-appraisal/

Loss, C. P. (2012). Between Citizens and e State: e politics of American higher

Education in e 20

Century, Princeton: Princeton University Press

Lundahl, L. (2005). Swedish, European, Global. I World Yearbook of Education 2005.

London

Lundahl, L. et al. (2010). Settings things right? Swedish upper secondary school reform

in a 40-year perspective. European Journal of Education, 45(1), 49–62.

McNay, I. (Ed.). (2006). Beyond Mass Higher Education: Building On Experience, Maid-

enhead: Open University Press

Marklund, S. (1980), Skolsverige 1950-75, 1. 1950 års reformbeslut. Stockholm: Liber.

National Board for Education. (1980). Curriculum for the compulsory school, (Lgr 80).

Stockholm: Liber Utbildningsförlaget.

National Board for Education. (1994, reprint 2006). Curriculum for the compulsory

school (LpO 94). Stockholm: Liber Utbildningsförlaget.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

250

National Board for Education. (2011). Curriculum for the compulsory school (Lgr 11).

Stockholm: Liber Utbildningsförlaget.

Newby, P. (2010). Research methods in education. Harlow: Longman.

Nilsson, I. (1987). En spjutspets mot framtiden – en analys av de svenska enhets- och

grundskolereformerna i utländsk vetenskaplig litteratur 1950-1980. Lunds univer-

sitet.

Nilsson, I. (1989). “A Spearhead into the Future” – Swedish comprehensive school re-

form in foreign scholarly literature 1950-80. Comparative Education, 25(3), 357–362.

Norberg, H. (2003). Skolmisslyckande – hur gick det sen? Expertgruppen för studier i

oentlig ekonomi (ESO). Stockholm: Finansdepartementet.

Parry, G. (1999). Constructive and reconstructive political education. Oxford Review

of Education, 25(1– 2), 23–28.

Parry, G. (2003). Citizenship education: Reproductive and remedial. In A. Lockyer, B.

Crick, & J. Annette (Eds.), Education for Democratic Citizenship, Issues of eory and

Practice. Ashgate: Aldershot.

Pielke, R. A. Jr. (2007). e Honest Broker: Making Sense of Science in Policy and

Politics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Prop. 1999/2000:135. En förnyad lärarutbildning, Governmental proposition.

Prop. 2009/2010:89. Bäst i klassen – en ny lärarutbildning, Governmental proposition

Ravitch, D. (2010). e death and life of the great American school system: How testing

and choice are undermining education. New York: Basic Books.

Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice (10th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Richardson, G. (2010). Svensk utbildningshistoria: Skola och samhälle förr och nu.

Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Rothblatt, S. (2003). e Living Art: Comparative and Historical Reections on Liberal

Education, Washington: Association of American Colleges and Universities

Rothblatt, S. (2006). Education’s Abiding Moral Dilemma. Merit and Worth in Cross-

Atlantic Democracies, 1800-2006, Oxford: Symposium Books

Shapiro, H. T: (2005). A Larger Sense of Purpose. Higher Education and Society. Princeton:

Princeton University Press

Skolverket (2009), Vad påverkar resultaten i svensk grundskola? En kunskapsöversikt

om betydelsen av olika faktorer

Skolverket (2012). Likvärdig utbildning i svensk grundskola? En kvantitativ analys av

likvärdighet över tid, Rapport 374

Skolverket (2013), Skolverkets lägesbedömning 2013, Rapport 387, Stockholm: Skol-

verket.

SOU 2013:30. (2013). Det tar tid – om eekter av skolpolitiska reformer, (Delbetän-

kande av Utredningen om förbättrade resultat i grundskolan). Stockholm: Statens

oentliga utredningar.

251

9 Conicting Ideas on Democracy and Values

Education in Swedish Teacher Education

Stevens, M. L. et al, (2008), Sieve, Incubator, Temple, Hub: Empirical and eoretical

Advances in the Sociology of Higher Education, Annual Review of Sociology, Vol 34

Swartz, D. (2002). Social reproduction. In D. L. Levinson, J. Peter, W. Cookson & A.

R. Sadovnik (Eds.), Education and sociology: An encyclopedia (pp. 551-5577). New

York: Routledge Falmer.

Telhaug, A. (2006). e Nordic model in education: Education as part of the political sys-

tem in the last 50 years. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 50(3), 285–300.

U00.023, (2000). A New System of Teacher Education, Ministry of Education and Sci-

ence, Fact Sheet, (August 2000), Stockholm: Regeringskansliet.

Waldow, F. (2008). Utbildningspolitik, ekonomi och internationella utbildningstrender

i Sverige 1930-2000. Stockholm: Stockholms universitets förlag.

Waldow, F. (2009). Undeclared imports: Silent borrowing in educational policy-making

and research in Sweden. Comparative Education, 45(4), 477–494.

Young, M. F. D., (Ed.). (1971). Knowledge and control: New directions for the sociology

of education. London: Collier-Macmillan Publishers.

Zackari, G., & Modigh, F. (2000), Värdegrundsboken. Om samtal för demokrati i skolan.

Stockholm: Regeringskansliet/Utbildningsdepartementet.

253

10 Demands and Challenges: Experiences of Ethiopian Rural School Teachers

Demands and Challenges:

Experiences of Ethiopian Rural

School Teachers

Kati Keski-Mäenpää

Abstract

Rural schools in Ethiopia are characterized by high drop-out rates, a lack

of teaching materials, and low learning achievements. is study exam

ines the experiences of teachers who work in such schools and emphasizes

that their work can make signicant contributions to the development of

education in Ethiopia. e paper seeks to answer a question: ‘How do the

teachers perceive their work situation and how could this be improved?’

e ndings show that according to teachers’ opinion the current principal

challenge is the tension between strict curriculum requirements, associ

ated with annual testing, and follow-up, while the government insists that

teaching should be more student centered.

Keywords: Rural Schools, Sub-Saharan Africa, Teacherhood

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

254

Introduction

My rst day in Kambata School: I walk through the gate to large school

yard. Grass is growing high, older students play volleyball and smaller

ones run by bare foot. There must be hundreds of them! They are

not wearing uniforms. Later I hear that the dean and teachers have

made the decision not to demand that families buy uniforms. Parents

are farmers and it would be impossible for them to buy uniforms for

all children. In that case they could not send all children to school.

Good decision! (Diary, October 10, 2011)

Ethiopia has the most limited access to education of any country in Sub-

Saharan Africa, although the situation has improved greatly over the last

few years. About 90% of children start school, but only 20% achieve their

primary-school certicates. ere are many reasons for drop out—having

to help at home, getting married, being unable to purchase a uniform, etc.

(Lasonen 2005; Mulkeen 2006). Drop-out rate is slightly lower for boys

than it is for girls. Concerning regional variation, the highest drop-out

rate is observed in the Somali region. (MoE 2012).

Beginning in 2000, the government of Ethiopia began to spend more

on education than ever before (World Bank, 2005, p. 32). e Education

for All Global Monitoring Report (UNESCO, 2012) indicated that the

proportion of children not attending primary school had decreased dra

matically from almost 60% (2001) to 20% (2010). Despite these achieve-

ments, there are still more than three million of out-of-school children

in the primary age group that have never enrolled or that have dropped

out of school (MoE 2012). e worst situation is with disabled children.

For example only 2-3 % of deaf or blind children have access to school.

Reasons for that are the attitudes towards disabled children and lack of

suitable school services (Keski-Mäenpää, 2013; MoE 2012).

It remains dicult to get children to school at the correct age and to

have them progress to completion the school. 87,6 % of boys and 82,5%

of girls are at school at the age of 7 and the amount rises to 90,9% (boys)

and 87,7% (girls) at the age of 8 (MoE, 2012). Starting school late corre

lates with drop-out and is one of the major barriers to achieving primary

255

10 Demands and Challenges: Experiences of Ethiopian Rural School Teachers

education (MoE 2012). Reasons for starting school late are long distance,

health and nutritional status and un-awareness of the importance of send

ing children to school in a timely manner. Also child labor is common

both in rural and urban areas of the country. (Lasonen, 2005; Mulkeen,

2006; MoE 2012.)

e educational gap between rural and urban areas can be described as

drastic. Richer city households are able to spend signicantly more money

on education, thereby providing children with better quality schooling.

is includes private schooling or private tuition (UNESCO, 2012). Rural

schools have very modest buildings (often made of clay). However, chil

dren often lack text-books and teachers lack the instructional materials.

Student-teacher ratios are very high. In addition, HIV/AIDS infection is

likely to increase. It will inuence the already serious teacher shortage (La

sonen, 2005, p. 10). e rural population constitutes 84.4% of Ethiopia’s

total population (World Bank, 2012).

Many reports on rural teaching environments in Sub-Saharan Africa

have appeared, but very little has been written on teacher perceptions of

how such environments impact teaching and learning. Often, the analysis

or statistical research does not reect dierences between urban and rural

areas. Sometimes, information from rural areas is even excluded because of

complications in collecting data from remote, hard to reach areas (Buckler,

2011; Mulkeen, 2006).

After living for more than six years in Ethiopia, I became interested

in the teaching standards of Ethiopian teachers. I had read many articles

about great improvements in access to schools, but I needed to hear about

teacher experiences directly. e purpose of this paper is to present the

voices, feelings, and perspectives of rural school teachers.

is paper examines the challenges in the rural schools of Ethiopia. It

seeks answers to questions about major challenges in rural schools and

how these challenges impact teaching and teachers’ work at the schools.

e paper begins by dening the conceptual framework of the research.

e Ethiopian school system, a relevant new policy termed CPD (dened

later), and school development theories are briey described. Next, the

research method and ndings are presented. In the conclusion, I discuss

the tensions between the new CPD policy and the requirements of the

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

256

strict curriculum and follow-up system, noting that this poses problems

in the minds of teachers.

Contextualisation: Schooling in Ethiopia,

Rural Schools’ Problems

General education in Ethiopia consists of 8 years of primary education

and 2 years of general secondary education, which is followed by 2 years

of upper secondary education. Primary education is split into grades 1-4

(primary rst cycle) and grades 5-8 (primary second cycle). Preschool

education lasts for 2 years and is for children aged 4–6 years. It is not

compulsory. Only 11,7% of children attend the pre-primary education

and they are mostly in urban areas. e ocial age of entry into primary

school is 7 years. Many children start school later. is often results in

early drop-out and lower levels of educational attainment (MoE 2012).

Even today, not all children are sended to school. In total, 63,4% of

primary aged children (age group 7-12) and 70,1% of lower secondary

aged children (age group 13-16) attend the school. Drop-out is more com

mon in rural areas. Feredes and Erulkars (2009, pp. 7–8) interviewed girls

who had never been to school, and explored why this was occurring. More

than half of all girls (57%) reported that their families could not aord

schooling. Family disapproval (15%) was next, followed by the burden of

domestic responsibilities (10%). Six percent of the girls reported that no

school was within easy access of their home. Other reasons for not attend

ing school included marriage (3%), death of parents (2%), lack of interest

(2%), and illness (2%). As almost 50 % of adults work in agriculture and

forestry, children are needed at home. ey help parents in the elds or

take care of younger siblings.

Children in rural areas are considered dicult to educate (Mulkeen,

2006) because of minimal parental encouragement, demands on their

time, and the perception that the curriculum is not related to everyday

life. Most parents are farmers and many are illiterate. e literacy rate of

257

10 Demands and Challenges: Experiences of Ethiopian Rural School Teachers

adults aged 15 years and over is only 30% (UNICEF, 2010). Teachers

report that parents often do not understand the importance of education

for their children and regular attendance at school. Even when parents

understand the importance of schooling, they may be unable to support

their children in learning. Parents in rural areas often have low levels of edu

cation and may not value schooling. Many rural households are depend-

ent on children for help, especially at harvest, but schools usually operate

rigid schedules, both in terms of school hours and term dates (Mulkeen,

2006). Child labor is one of the major impediments that aect children´s

school attendance. 42% of rural children and 29,1 of urban children tell

that combining work and schooling aects their schooling (MoE 2012).

Families are vulnerable because droughts are frequent and they are thus

often unable to purchase uniforms, notebooks, and pencils. Families in

rural areas are big; there may be 6 to 10 children in a family. Uniform

requirements inhibit attending school (Grieve, 2009, p. 159), especially

in rural areas. Most schools require children to wear uniforms. e EFA

report (UNESCO, 2012) found that cost was the primary reason that

parents did not enroll children in school or took them out of school.

Although school fees have been formally abolished in Ethiopian govern

mental schools, unocial fees are still levied (UNESCO, 2012).

Rural schools are usually owned and controlled by the government.

ey have strict curricula and teachers make annual, weekly, and daily

lesson plans. A “Woreda” advisor from the district education oce visits

monthly or more often.

Working as a teacher at Sub-Saharan schools is challenging. Schools are

over-crowded and under-resourced, teacher housing is insucient, and

salaries are low (Buckler, 2011).

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

258

New Approach to Education:

Continuous Professional Development

Many African countries, including Ethiopia, have made substantial pro-

gress towards improving access to primary education. e Ethiopian gov-

ernment has worked hard to attain millennium goals. Educational access

has improved greatly, but quality remains a major challenge. Low levels

of educational quality negatively impact learning outcomes.

e Ethiopian Ministry of Education (MoE) has emphasized the need

to develop teaching quality (MoE, 2009) and launched a new approach

to education, referred to as Continuous Professional Development (CPD)

and is targeted at primary and secondary school teachers, leaders, and su

pervisors. e idea is to promote more active learning, problem-solving,

and student-centered teaching, rather than rote learning and lecturing.

CPD seeks to enhance student achievement (MoE, 2009). Ethiopian

schools, like other schools in Sub-Saharan countries, have a long history

of rote learning, copying, and lecturing. e new policy statement has

raised many concerns among teachers.

It is mandatory that teachers embrace the new policy. e verbs “must”

and “have to” are repeated many times in the 39 pages of the plan. e

CPD framework states: “CPD is a compulsory requirement for those

who teach in all Ethiopian educational establishments. It is the civic and

professional duty of all educators to engage in Continuous Professional

Development,” (2009, p. 12) and later, “All Ethiopian schools are required

to produce School Improvement Plans in order to improve the quality of

teaching and learning. CPD is an essential part of school improvement”

(MoE, 2009, p. 14).

e overall aim of the new policy is to improve student achievement.

e policy also seeks to improve classroom teacher performance. e

policy emphasizes a “career-long process of improving knowledge, skills

and attitudes, centered on the local context and particularly classroom

practice” (MoE, 2009, pp. 15-16).

CPD methods are described in a document that is given to all schools

and includes examples. e document mentions that teachers should plan

259

10 Demands and Challenges: Experiences of Ethiopian Rural School Teachers

lessons together; conduct demonstration lessons, workshops, and action

research; and engage in team teaching. ”Woreda” (the district education

oce) and sub-city education ocers are responsible for monitoring and

evaluating the CPD activities of schools. Teachers are also required to

maintain a portfolio with a record of their CPD activities (MoE, 2009,

p. 39). “Each school teacher must take part in planned CPD activities for

a minimum of sixty hours each year” (MoE, 2009, p. 26).

Serbessa´s (2006) research in Ethiopia showed that although policy em

phasizes innovative teaching and learning, traditional lecture methods still

dominate most classrooms. Rote learning and teacher centered learning

methods were observed in this study. Lessons followed the same pattern.

Teachers taught certain subjects by writing notes on the blackboard. Stu

dents copied the text to their note books. If the teacher asked questions,

they were closed-ended; students were able to answer the questions only

with one word, and only one option was correct. Open-ended questions

were not used.

School Developments

Ministry of Education has worked hard to develop schools in Ethiopia.

According to the goals of EFA access to schools has improved. Study books

have been printed with the help of World Bank and other organizations.

Still the learning achievements are remaining low.

According to Buckler (2011) not enough attention has been paid to

the training needs of teachers in rural areas. Attention has been paid to

improving access to schools, but training, recruiting, and retaining good

quality teachers is still a major challenge in Sub-Saharan Africa. Pre-service

and in-service teacher education is increasingly recognized as the key to

achieving good quality education for all children. Meaningful teacher edu

cation policies are critical for developing good quality teacher education

programs (Buckler, 2011), and Ethiopia has risen to face this challenge

by creating the new CPD policy.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

260

Professional development programs like CPD (Continuous Profession-

al Development) are systematic eorts to bring change in the classroom

practices of teachers, in their attitudes and beliefs, and in the learning

outcomes of students (Guskey, 2002). CDP has emphasized the improve

ment of learning outcomes as a main goal.

Often, like in Ethiopia, teachers are required to take part in professional

development by government or other authority. Still most of them report

that they engage in these activities because they want to become better

teachers (Guskey, 2002.) Also in Kambata-school teachers were highly

willing to attend all the meetings and workshops we had during my visits.

For them, like teachers in Guskey’s research, becoming a better teacher

means enhancing student learning outcomes. ey need advice on how to

use active and student centered teaching methods in their day-to-day work.

According to Guskey, development programs that fail to address these

needs are unlikely to succeed. Knowing the theories is not enough, teach

ers need concrete and pragmatic advice on how to improve their students’

achievements, or like in this research, how to use new teaching methods.

According to Guskey (2002) the three major goals of professional develop

ment programs are change in the classroom practices of teachers, change in

their attitudes and beliefs, and change in the learning outcomes of students.

Signicant change in teachers´ attitudes and beliefs occurs primarily after

they gain evidence of improvements in student learning. e CDP program

has been proposed to teachers in 2009. e theories of active teaching meth

ods are now widely known, but they are not in practical use yet. erefore

improvements accomplished by use of active methods are not evident yet.

As a comparison, child-centered pedagogical reform has been under

taken for example in India, where government primary schools sought to

reform dominant modes of textbook-based, rote-oriented, authoritarian,

and didactic instruction, with the promise of more child-friendly, demo

cratic learning environments. Research by Sriprakash (2010) showed that

child-centered models do not always impact higher level learning and he

questioned whether national and global development goals of providing

quality education for all can be achieved through child-centered pedagogic

reforms. At least methods should be contextualized to the local culture,

not brought from abroad.

261

10 Demands and Challenges: Experiences of Ethiopian Rural School Teachers

Method

Data for this paper has been collected during several visits at Kambata

school. It was collected using group-interviews and observations in one of

a rural government school in South-West Ethiopia. Kambata School (the

name has been changed), had 1,400 students and 38 teachers. e teachers

were 22 to 65 years of age. A few of the oldest teachers had been teaching

locally since their graduation and the youngest ones had just graduated

from teacher training college. One of the youngest teachers trained dur

ing the summer for a master’s degree; a few teachers had bachelor degrees;

most of the teachers had taken college-level training. ere were 12 female

teachers and 26 male teachers.

Teachers whose comments I am using in this paper are (names are

changed):

Almaz – female-teacher, lower cycle

Gennet – female-teacher, upper cycle

Tekle – male-teacher, lower cycle

Dawit – male-teacher, upper cycle

Asefa – male-teacher, upper cycle

Bekele – male-teacher, upper cycle

e students are principally from agricultural families with 6 to 10 chil

dren. e area is mainly Christian. e Kambata School is typical, similar

to other rural government primary schools in the area. Older buildings

of Kambata School are made of clay and newer ones of cement. Newer

buildings have electricity for part of the day. e school has no running

water or internet connection.

All teachers from both the primary and secondary schools were inter

viewed in three groups using semi-structured interviews. Some themes had

been predetermined, but many emerged during the interviews. Informal

discussions with teachers (for example, during coee breaks) also yielded

data. e eldwork was carried out during 2011 and 2012, with several

extended visits to Kambata School (a total of three months).

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

262

Young teachers were the most willing to provide information and three

of them became key contributors to this research. At rst the school princi

pal was present at most discussions because he seemed to take a particular

interest in my work and probably control the issues I wanted to talk about.

Usually, he either participated in the discussion or simply listened, but

on one occasion, he asked me not to continue an interview because I was

asking excessively sensitive questions about teacher corruption. Because

I wanted to interview teachers privately, I did later interviews in school

library, and the principal did not attend them.

All interviews and group discussions were recorded. Most discussions

were in Amharic, but some were in English. Some discussions in homes

or classrooms were not recorded, but I made eld notes. I also took eld

notes during lessons.

A participatory ethnographic method was used in this research. It in

cludes participant observation, which means observing subjects and es-

tablishing a place in natural setting in order to investigate, experience

and represent the social life and social processes that occur in that setting

(Emerson, Fretz & Shaw; 2010, 352). Becoming a participant inquires

considerable time in the eld, doing what the subjects do, eating what

the subjects eat, noting, recording, thinking, learning and gaining trust

(Rock, 2010, 32). My aim was to understand the reality where rural school

teachers work and live. I needed to become one of the community and an

active participant of the school, and this method was suitable for that. I

wanted to put myself in my ”participants’ shoes” and one way to do that

was to work as a substitute teacher at the Kambata school.

On of the teacher was sick today and I substituted him... There were

64 students in the class room (8th grade) and I had to teach math for

them. Content of the lesson was very challenging, all of the students

did not have their own books and all I could use was a black board

and a chalk. But they were listening silently, behaving really nicely and

answering my questions. But yes, I missed calculators and teacher

guidance book a lot! (diary 13.1.2014)

Observation and participation are characteristic features of the ethno-

graphic approach (Rock, 2010, 4) and through participation I got infor-

263

10 Demands and Challenges: Experiences of Ethiopian Rural School Teachers

mation I could not have found only through interviews. I visited teach-

ers´ homes, went to see newborn babies and lunch several times with the

teachers. I saw that ethnographic research is not passive or neutral. It is

interactive and creative, selective and interpretive (Rock, 2010, 30). When

I arrived to Kambata school I never knew what kind of data I would get

and in what kind of situations. Would it be interview in the rest room or

conversation outside middle of students?

One aim of ethnographic research is to produce descriptions that explain

the world that has been researched to others (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw,

2010, p. 352). e Ethiopian and European contexts dier greatly. Here,

I will try to bring some insights and feelings of the Ethiopian context to

readers by referring to my eld diaries. is will hopefully aord a deeper

understanding of the issues. Field notes are always selective. I chose to in

clude notes that seemed signicant at the time and omitted other matters

that did not seem signicant (Emerson, 2010, p. 353).

e analysis is based on ethnographic content analysis and consist of

interviews, eld-notes and discussions. Analysis happened in all stages of

research. Pre-analysis has happened on the eld already while I was do

ing eldnotes and discussing with teachers. It continued in Finland while

I was reading and coding the data. I had also a chance to discuss with

Ethiopian colleagues in Finland and I could ask their opinions about my

analysis. It deepened my understanding of the issue. I also discussed about

my analysis with the Kambata school teachers. According to Rock (2010;

37) it is good to present the analysis to one´s subjects because it is their

lives that one is reporting and one may have got things wrong.

Analysing has not been linear, but more like a cycle and a long, slowly

developing and deepening process. Ethnographic research is more a con

tinuation of eldwork rather than a transparent record of past experiences

in the eld. e experiences and feelings of the researcher are connected

with an area of knowledge and cultural analysis. (Tedlock 2000, 455.) My

feelings and thoughts are part of data as well as interview material. I was

lucky to be able to return back to the school many times. When I read

the data at home, new questions emerged from it and I could continue

the discussion later. I made the questions for the data, but also questions

emerged from these data.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

264

Ethnographers´ lives are embedded within their eld experiences in

such a way that all of their interactions involve moral choices. (Tedlock

2000, 455.) I reected my role at the school in all stages of research. Of

ten it was not clear whether I was a researcher or a friend. When I started

my research my role was clear, I was someone from abroad conducting

research. All teachers were told about the research and how data would be

collected. ey knew I was a researcher, but during the weeks and months

of contact, I became more like a colleague and resource person, often

asked to provide feedback on lessons and describe the Finnish mode of

teaching. e present research was later transformed into action research

and I became more of a supervisor or advisor. I always felt very welcome.

One teacher told me,

When you are here, we become better teachers. We try to plan better

lessons and we are more active. You give us feedback and also we

give feedback to each other’s more than before. I feel we are devel

oping professionally during those weeks when you are here. (Almaz)

In the analysis I coded dierent themes and tried to nd connections

between them. I saw that the culture and demands of it are linked with

many challenges at school. is became central founding in the analysis.

emes emerging from the data were:

1) Classroom challenges

2) Working environment

3) Status challenges

4) Expectations of the government. is was indicated to currently be the

most challenging issue. I will present these challenges in subsequent

sections.

265

10 Demands and Challenges: Experiences of Ethiopian Rural School Teachers

Results

Classroom Challenges

Class-room walls are made of brown clay; the oor is dust. The front

wall has a chalk-board but there are no posters or other material on

the walls. There is one small window. There is no electricity; is the

light adequate for children with poor eyesight? Are there any such

children here? Children sit incredibly close to each other; there are

78 in all. Each group of ve seems to share a book. The children are

silent and wait for the teacher to begin the lesson. (Diary 11.10.2011)

During the rst weeks of observation, it became obvious that the lack

of teaching material poses great challenges for both teachers and students.

is was also the most common issue mentioned in teacher interviews. e

student-book ratio is 5:1. e only teaching materials used in class-rooms

are a black-board and chalk. Lack of teaching materials aects student

achievement. When ve students share a book and take it home in turns,

they cannot eectively study at home after school. In Ethiopia, most of

the families in rural areas do not have books or computers.

e teachers remark that lack of teaching materials is a constant and

major problem. Teaching without proper material is dicult:

We have shortages of books. What we have here are outdated books.

It is impossible to get books for students and teachers. The number of

text books and the students is very different. Teachers are struggling

and doing their best to use the limited source. (Gennet).

If there were books, they were not always suitable for rural schools.

“e books are prepared for the urban students. But the rural students

don’t even spell. So the book content is far from their capacity. And this

is causing problems on the teaching process” (Gennet).

Lack of teaching materials in combination with high student numbers

promotes use of one-sided teaching methods. e use of methods involv

ing student activity is challenging because schools do not have any extra

material wherein students could nd information by themselves. ey do

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

266

not have access to the internet. Kambata School has a library with a few

dozen books, but they are mostly old school text books.

e World Bank has become aware of the lack of teaching materials

and has stated that the government should ensure that schools receive the

human and nancial resources they need. Classroom facilities and school

numbers must be consistently and routinely addressed. Vulnerable groups

should receive the assistance needed to participate in schooling (World

Bank, 2005, p. 29).

Working environment

Getting to school and teaching are challenging for many rural school

teachers because of long distances from home to school, lack of transpor

tation, and job exhaustion. e Kambata School is made of clay and in

the dry season, classrooms are very dusty. It is usual for neither water nor

electricity to be available.

Especially in our area teachers of rural schools do not have a place for

a rest. They come far away. Other ofce workers have a tea break at

10 o’clock. But teachers don’t. They just go to their teaching directly

without any rest. (Tekle).

Teaching in ill-ventilated classrooms containing 80– 100 students is

exhausting. e dry season temperature is often very high. Teachers de

scribe the teaching and learning environment as quite discouraging, es-

pecially during the afternoon shift (Negash, 2006, p. 33). Schools are

overcrowded; more than 20% of government primary schools have more

than 900 pupils, and about 25% of government secondary schools have

more than 2,500 students (World Bank, 2005, p. 34). Rural schools are

more crowded than urban schools.

Some people come by bus from far away and half of the way they take

a walk to get in to the school. The government policy command to

teach the whole day, but that is too difcult to do. Some people get

here even before they eat their breakfast. There is nothing provided

to refresh them and the job is overloaded. (Tekle)

267

10 Demands and Challenges: Experiences of Ethiopian Rural School Teachers

A previous report (Gemeda et al., 2013) found that teachers in Ethiopia

felt overloaded because of long travel distances, no opportunity for rest,

and long working hours. Today, policy training sessions have been added

to the workload; teachers often have many non-teaching responsibilities.

Status Challenges

e salary of teachers is low compared to that of other educated groups.

is aects their ability to eat adequately and dress appropriately. ere

are other eects:

Teachers don’t have capacity to build their own house. Because of

that they are facing problem in marriage. They can’t marry whom they

choose. In our area someone has to have his own house to marry

someone. Otherwise he is no going to be chosen by female. (Dawit).

Interviewees mentioned that previously, teachers had been viewed as

professionals and had enjoyed a high status in the community. e cul

ture had accorded respect to teachers and older people. is situation has

changed due teacher poverty.

Teachers are not respected by the community anymore. Farmers and

merchants have a better capital than teachers. So people undermine

them. Even the students do not respect them. Students in the class

need to be superior, because they have better dresses, mobile … In

this situation teachers cannot tolerate to teach here and they move

to South Africa and Sudan. They can get a better life there. (Dawit)

The rural teachers earn a salary of 100-150 euros a month depend

ing of their education level. That money is not enough to cover the

monthly house expenses. It is not enough even to by one quintal

of teff (local grain). Economical problem causes stress to the teach

ers. The gap between teachers and other people has caused loss of

condence. (Asefa).

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

268

Expectations of the Government

Teachers felt stressed because the government unrealistically expects that

they will follow-up with each student. e number of students in classes

makes this impossible:

At grade one there are 80 to 90 students. Reaching those 90 students

is teachers’ burden. He can’t reach all those students. One teacher

teaches ve subjects each class. Teaching all ve subjects and evalu

ating each student’s performance is difcult. Each book has annual,

monthly and weekly plans. Teacher has to nish the book at the

end of the semester. Following up each student and assessing their

achievements is a big stress. Actually the problem is the policy. It is

difcult to apply the policy. Just for the sake of survival we have to

accept the policy even if following the students is impossible. (Dawit)

Teachers were often unwilling to discuss policy or government, but

mentioned the demands of government many times during the conversa

tion: “Teachers try to satisfy the interest of the government policy and

their own career” (Asefa).

Government has stressed the need to develop country-wide teaching

methods that are more student-centered. Indeed, in countries such as

India, child-centered education has been advocated to address low stu

dent retention and low achievement in rural government primary schools.

Pedagogic renewal in Indian primary schools has sought to replace the

dominant modes of textbook-based, rote-oriented instruction that are

authoritarian and didactic with more child-friendly, democratic learning

environments. (Sriprakash, 2010,p. 297.)

is situation raised many concerns in teachers: “I know it is a good

idea, to teach children in student centered way, but I have no idea how to

do it. Well, I know it in theory, but how to do it in practice?” (Dawit), and

We have had theoretical courses about how to use Student-Cen-

tered-Teaching methods, but we have never seen anybody to really

use it. It is difcult just to begin teaching in a new way. Our method

is writing on the black board and students hear that and forget it

after a while. (Asefa)

269

10 Demands and Challenges: Experiences of Ethiopian Rural School Teachers

Teachers are teaching the same way than they have been taught in their

own school time. According to Brown (2004) the most resilient teach

ers´ conceptions of teaching come from memories of their own schooling

and observations of their own teachers. e teachers know the theory of

student-centered teaching but feel that it is dicult to teach that way rather

than lecturing: “Yes, I have got courses of student centered methods. It is

good idea, to make students more active. We are trying to implement the

idea. But it is hard” (Bekele).

According to the interviewees, one obstacle inhibiting use of student-

centered teaching is the fact that the culture hinders the use of debate and

questioning of teacher opinions. In Ethiopian culture, a teacher serves as

an authority. Teacher-centered methods reinforce that role.

How could I use debate or discussion as a teaching method? I should

know the goal, where the discussion certainly ends. If students ask

me very difcult questions, I cannot say that I don’t know the answer.

In our culture teacher has to have the knowledge. (Tekle)

Most teachers like the idea of student-centered teaching, but they do

not know how to apply it. Some are not interested in the idea, but still

feel they have to obey governmental policy. “We have to do what is told.

e teacher is still working as much as he can but do not have mental

freedom” (Asefa).

e Ethiopian government expects teachers to use student-centered

teaching methods that were never used to teach the teachers. e curricu

lum lists detailed outcomes for each subject and formal annual tests are

held. Test results are used to rank schools. Teachers are challenged when

asked to cover the entire subject content. “We can’t teach anything outside

of curriculum. First, time is not enough, because we have to cover every

thing in the curriculum. Secondly, supervisors are following our teaching.

We are not allowed to teach outside of curriculum” (Bekele).

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

270

Discussion

Ethiopian schools face many challenges, most of which are more serious

in rural areas. In this research, I have related how teachers at Kambata

School view the lack of teaching materials, low salary and status, workloads,

and the expectations of government. ese challenges are interlinked. For

example, a lack of teaching materials and large class sizes hinder fulll

ment of the expectations of government that student-centered pedagogy

will be introduced.

Teacher-centered teaching methods have been used in Ethiopia, as well

as in other Sub-Saharan countries, for decades. Figure 1 summarizes the

challenges faced by rural schools. We see that the teaching context in rural

areas of Ethiopia do not support child-centered teaching methods, but do

support teacher-centered teaching methods.

Figure 1. Summary of the challenges faced by rural schools.

Lack of material. Teaching material is often not available and students

cannot get information from the internet or textbooks. It is easier to lec

ture than to nd or make extra sources of information.

CultureClass size

Lack of

material

Teacher

centered

teaching

method

Curriculum,

annual tests

271

10 Demands and Challenges: Experiences of Ethiopian Rural School Teachers

Class sizes. When almost 100 students sit in any class, it is easier for a

teacher to lecture rather than to employ group work.

Culture. e teacher has traditionally been seen as a source of “correct”

information. It is not appropriate to argue, debate, question, or doubt

the knowledge of a teacher. If a teacher lectures, the authoritarian status

is maintained.

Curriculum. e curriculum is rigid and very detailed. A teacher must

“cover the content” and has little time for discussion, group work, or any

thing else. Teachers are not allowed to teach outside of the curriculum.

ey are monitored by inspectors.

Serbessa (2006) lists obstacles that must be overcome if student-centered

methods are to be used in Ethiopia. ese include the traditions of teaching

and bringing up children. Other obstacles include the lack of resources,

such as institutional and learning resources, teacher expertise, curricular

materials appropriate for active learning, and student experience in actively

participating in the teaching and learning processes.

Student-centered methods encourage students to be active and to de

bate, even to criticize. In Ethiopian culture, however, children are taught

to fulll, without question, any request made by an older person. Attain

ment of obedience and politeness are the overriding goals when bringing

up children. e traditional forms of education and upbringing do not

facilitate employment of active learning (Serbessa, 2006). In the work of

Serbessa (2006), 89.2% of teachers and 89.7% of students considered

that student roles were limited to listening to lectures, note-taking, and

responding to questions when they were posed. Children who are brought

up to be silent unless addressed, consider talking without being asked as

impolite and disrespectful (Serbessa, 2006).

Gemeda, Fiorucci, and Catarci (2013) recently explored the nature of

professional development in Ethiopian secondary schools from the per

spective of teachers. e results were similar to those of the present work.

Teachers feel they are forced to implement the governmental program.

CPD had been planned at the ministerial level:

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

272

We don’t have any say in the direction and content of the programme.

We don´t have a clear idea about the CPD. – We are simply told, “do

it because it is useful.” We don’t have any option expect to accept

it. (Gemeda et al., 2013, p. 7).

As we see, professional autonomy of teachers in Ethiopia is very low.

Teachers are told what to teach, how to teach and what material they should

use. ey do not have freedom to choose the content of lesson, because

they have to cover the content of their subjects and curricula is extremely

rigid. Teachers are not allowed to discuss certain issues, such as political

questions, with the students, if the teachers’ views do not represent the ide

ology of the government. Follow-up by government is strict and constant.

According to Hargreaves and Fullan (2012, 82) restricting teachers´

autonomy drives them to compete instead of collaborate, and makes the

work of teaching unappealing. Pearsons and Moormaw (2005) showed

that as general teacher autonomy increased so did empowerment, pro

fessionalism and job satisfaction in all teaching levels. ey claim that

if teachers are seen as professionals, they should have the same kind of

freedom to prescribe the best treatment for their students as doctors or

lawyers do for their patients and clients. Autonomy of Ethiopian teachers

is not yet researched maybe because it is one of the sensitive issues teachers

and especially principals are not willing to discuss due to political reasons.

273

10 Demands and Challenges: Experiences of Ethiopian Rural School Teachers

Conclusions

As we know, reasons for the poor implementation of child-centered meth-

ods in practice are large class sizes, a centrally designed curriculum, and

an authoritarian culture; these do not support use of student-centered

teaching methods. Before such pedagogy can be used eectively, struc

tural changes are necessary. If student-centered teaching methods are de-

manded, curriculum reform is imperative. Curricular materials should be

re-written to involve activities processing the new material and linking

that material to what a student already knows. Tasks should be related to

challenges in the real world and be contextually meaningful. ey should

not simply emphasize facts, but oer opportunities for self-assessment,

peer discussion, and teacher feedback (Serbessa, 2006).

e overall aim of CPD is to improve achievement levels of Ethio

pian students (MoE, 2008, p. 15). Teaching has but one goal: good an-

nual test results that yield a good ranking. Does the new method simply

seek to have students learn curriculum better or to develop thinking and

problem-solving skills? From the example of India, we can see that child-

centered pedagogical reforms do not always provide higher quality teach

ing (Sriprakash, 2010). Similar tensions between competence pedagogic

ideals and the conditions and cultures of schooling have been reported in

research beyond the Indian context (Vavrus, 2009; Barrett, 2007).

Can student-centered teaching pedagogy simply be transferred from

country to country? Or would it be better to develop a more contextual

ized culture-based teaching method? Ethiopia, like other African coun-

tries, has vast cultural and natural resources that could be used in teach-

ing. For example, outdoor education is still very unfamiliar in Ethiopia,

but it could certainly be used in a rural context. One teacher at Kambata

School had produced a leaet about traditional ways to make food from

the false banana tree. He said: “Many of our students do not know how

to make our own traditional food. Now we can use this material also at

schools.” (male-teacher, upper level.) is is a good sample of how to use

cultural context in teaching.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

274

Smaller teacher-student ratios would enable working group discussion.

Active learning requires that classrooms have enough space to allow ap

propriate seating arrangements. e current class size exceeds 80 students

in many rural schools (Serbessa, 2006). Dialogue and discussion dur

ing class are not part of the present teaching culture because their use

challenges traditional culture norms, whereby a teacher is considered to

be an authority. Contextualized and applied approaches to learning and

teaching, and co-designing of teaching with teachers may produce more

sustainable results.

Teachers will lack commitment to student-centered pedagogy if they

feel this is simply a new governmental demand that they are forced to

obey. Pedagogy should be developed with input from all stakeholders in

an open and transparent environment (Negash, 2006, p. 51). Teachers

are torn by two disparate requirements: they are to develop new teach

ing skills and at the same time fulll the demands of government. ese

challenges place great pressure on teachers. “e teachers try to satisfy the

interest of the government policy and their own career” (Male-teacher,

upper cycle). Teachers should be given appropriate training, not only on

facts, but also about active learning methods. Before they can implement

such methods, they should experience an active learning situation. Simply

knowing a method does not mean that the method can be used without

practice and guidance.

ere is a need to highlight the voice of rural teachers. Ethnographic

research could be a suitable tool for policy makers to provide insights into

how policy might be better designed to meet the needs of all teachers, not

only urban teachers. Certainly there is a need for policy makers to know

more about the lives of rural teachers. (Buckler, 2011). Action research

is widely known among Ethiopian teachers. It could be a suitable tool to

create and test new, active and culturally contextualised teaching methods,

not by foreigners or policy makers, but Ethiopian teachers themselves.

275

10 Demands and Challenges: Experiences of Ethiopian Rural School Teachers

References

Barrett, A. M., (2007). Beyond the polarization of pedagogy: models of classroom prac-

tice in Tanzanian primary schools. Comparative Education, 43(2), 273-294.

Brown, G. T. L. (2004). Teachers´ conceptions of assessment: implications for policy

and professional development. Assessment in Education, 11 (3), 301-318.

Buckler, A. (2011). Reconsidering the evidence base, considering the rural: Aiming for

a better understanding of the education and training needs of Sub-Saharan African

teachers. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(3), 244-250.

Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (2000). Handbook of qualitative research. Sage publica-

tions.

Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (2010). Participant observation and eld-

notes. In ed. P. Atkinson, A. Coey, S. Delamont, J. Loand, & L. Loand, (Eds.),

Sage handbook of ethnography (pp. 352–368)

Ferede, A., & Erulkar, A. (2009). Adolescent girls in urban Ethiopia: Vulnerability & op-

portunity. Addis Ababa: Population Council.

Gemeda, F. T., Fiorucci, M., & Catarci, M. (2013). Professional development in ed-

ucation: Teachers’ professional development in schools: rhetoric versus reality. DOI:

10.1080/19415257.2012.759988

Grieve, T. (2009, May). Child wellbeing and education in Ethiopia: exploring access to

Educational Research for Development. Volume I. Addis Ababa: College of Education,

Addis Ababa University.

Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional Development and Teacher Change. Teachers and

Teaching: theory and practice, Vol. 8, No. ¾, 2002.

Hargreaves, A. & Fullan, M. (2012). Professional Capital. Transforming Teaching in Every

School. Teachers College Press.

Keski-Mäenpää, K. (2012). Puhuvat kädet. Mirja Himasen ja Mekonnen Mulatin työ

kuurojen parissa Etiopiassa. Helsinki: Suomen Lähetysseura.

Lasonen, J., Kemppainen, R., & Kolawole, R. (2005). Education and training in Ethiopia:

An evaluation of approaching EFA goals. Jyväskylä: Institute for Educational Research.

MoE (2009). Continuous professional development for primary and secondary school teach-

ers, leaders and supervisors in Ethiopia: e framework. Ministry of Education.

MoE (2012). Study on Situation of Out of School Children (OOSC) in Ethiopia. Ministry

of Education and UNICEF - Ethiopia Country Oce.

Mulkeen, A. (2006). Biennale on education in Africa. Teachers for rural schools: A challenge

for Africa. Libreville, Gabon: Association for the Development of Education in Africa.

Negash, T. (2006). Discussion paper 33. Education in Ethiopia. From crisis to the brink of

collapse. Uppsala: Nordiska Afrikainstitutet.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

276

Pearson, L. C. & Moormaw, W. (2005). e Relationship between Teacher Autonomy

and Stress, Work Satisfaction, Empowerment, and Professionalism. Educational Re-

search Quarterly, Vol. 29.1, 38-53.

Rock, P. (2010). Symbolic Interactionism and Ethnography. In ed. P. Atkinson, A.

Coey, S. Delamont, J. Loand, & L. Loand, (Eds.), Sage handbook of ethnography

(pp. 26–38)

Sriprakash, A. (2010). Child-centered education and the promise of democratic learn-

ing:Pedagogic messages in rural Indian primary schools. International Journal of

Educational Development 30(4), 297–304.

Serbessa, D. D. (2006). Tension between traditional and modern teaching-learning

approaches in Ethiopian primary schools. Journal of International Cooperation in

Education, 9(1), 123–140.

Tedlock, B. (2000). Ethnography and ethnographic representation. In ed. N. K. Denzin

& Y. S. Lincoln, Handbook of qualitative research. Sage publication.

UNESCO. (2012). Youth and skills. Putting education to work. EFA Global Monitor-

ing Report 2012. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/

leading-the-international-agenda/efareport/reports/2012-skills/

UNICEF. (n.d.). Statistics: Ethiopia [Data le]. Retrieved from http://www.unicef.org/

infobycountry/ethiopia_statistics.html

Vavrus, F. (2009). e cultural politics of constructivist pedagogies: Teacher education

reform in the United Republic of Tanzania. International Journal of Educational De-

velopment, 29(3), 303–311.

World Bank. (2005). Education in Ethiopia: Strengthening the foundation for sustainable

progress. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-6226-6

World Bank. (2012). Data: Ethiopia [Data le]. Retrieved from http://data.worldbank.

org/country/ethiopia

277

Author biographies

Jasminka Čekić Marković is the Director and a Researcher at the Centre

for Education Policy in Belgrade, Serbia, with longstanding expertise in

education practice and policy of the education system in both Serbia and

the SEE region. Her main elds of interest are teacher education, voca

tional and adult education and training.

[email protected]

Susanne Dau is a Ph.D. Student at Aalborg University’s Faculty of Hu

manities HCCI, Denmark. She is also a Lecturer at University College

North, Denmark and a Co-researcher at UCN department of Research

and Development. Her research interests include blended learning in un

dergraduate education, learning and knowledge development and qualita-

tive and mixed methods. Her current main tasks are research, educational

development and teaching.

[email protected] and [email protected]

Anne Huhtala is a University Lecturer at University of Helsinki, Finland.

Her research interest areas are identity formation, narratives, second lan

guage learning, subject teacher education and university students.

anne.huhtala@helsinki.

Kalle Juuti, Ph.D (in education), is a University Lecturer in Physics Edu

cation at the Department of Teacher Education, University of Helsinki,

Finland. His researchis focused on students’ interest in school science and

science teachers’ professional development. He engages in educational

design research as a methodological approach.

kalle.juuti@helsinki.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

278

Kati Keski-Mäenpää is a Doctoral Student at the Department of Teacher

Education at Jyväskylä University, Finland.

[email protected]

Tiina Korhonen, M.Ed., is the Vice Headmaster at the Koulumestari

School in Espoo, Finland and manages the Learning Center Innokas.

Korhonen is currently working on her doctoral thesis on the use of ICT

in home and school collaboration at the University of Helsinki. Her pro

fessional interests lay in the wide landscape of 21

century learning and

school practice development, with special focus on the support opportu

nities oered by ICT.

tiina.korhonen@espoo.

Minna Kukkonen, M.Ed., is a Teacher in Koulumestari School, Coor

dinator and Educator in Learning Center Innokas, Espoo City, Finland.

Her research at the University of Helsinki focuses on school partnership

and collaboration by using ICT. She is interested in developing school

culture and students’ participation.

minna.a.kukkonen@helsinki.

Jari Lavonen, PhD, is the Head of the Department and a Professor of

Physics and Chemistry Education at the Department of Teacher Educa

tion, University of Helsinki, Finland. He has been researching science

and science teacher education for the last 25 years, especially the topics:

science curriculum, student interest and motivation in science and the use

of ICT in Science education.

jari.lavonen@helsinki.

Jari Multisilta is the Director of CiceroLearning Network in University

of Helsinki, Finland and a Professor ofMultimedia in Tampere Univer

sity ofTechnology,Information Technology at Pori, Finland. Currently,

hisresearch interests include networked andmobile learning, mobile social

media, mobile video storytelling, and mobilesocial video applications.

He was a Visiting Fellow at Nokia ResearchCenteron 2008-2009 and

Nokia Visiting Professor 2012. Multisilta hasalso been a Visiting Scholar

at Stanford University, H-STAR Instituteseveral times in2007 - 2014.

jari.multisilta@helsinki.

279

Author biographies

Hannele Niemi, Ph.D, is a Professor of Education (1998 ) at the Faculty

of Behavioural Sciences, University of Helsinki. Finland. She has been the

Vice Rector (2003- 2009) at the University of Helsinki. Her main research

interest areas are teachers’ professional development, moral education, and

technology-based learning environments. She has been invited as Doctor

or Professor of Honoris Causa in Finland, Romania and Singapore.

hannele.niemi@helsinki.

Auli Pekkala, Ph.D. (Econ.), M.Sc. (Sport Sciences) is a Senior Lecturer

at HAAGA-HELIA University of Applied Sciences, Finland. Pekkala’s

PhD. Dissertation (2011) was entitled Mastery as Capital - How Growth

into the Elite Athlete and Mastery Capital Advances the Growth into En

trepreneurship (University of Jyväskylä Studies in Business and Econom-

ics). Her main interests, research areas and projects concern counselling,

entrepreneurial learning, career and capital in higher education.

auli.pekkala@haaga-helia.

Jelena Radišić, PhD is a Researcher at the Institute for Educational Re

search in Belgrade (Serbia), with extensive experience in the eld of edu-

cational eectiveness, school improvement, teachers’ everyday classroom

practices, professional development, and educational change. In her work

she employs both quantitative and qualitative research methods.

jr[email protected]

Päivi Rajaorko, M.Ed., works as a Project Manager for eLearning at

HAAGA-HELIA, Finland. Her main responsibilities and research inter

ests are the pedagogical use of information technology, social media and

eportfolios in learning, teaching and counselling.

paivi.rajaorko@haaga-helia.

Tarja Römer-Paakkanen, PhD., is a Principal Lecturer at HAAGA-HE

LIA University of Applied Sciences and an Adjunct professor at Jyväskylä

University School of Business and Economics. Römer-Paakkanen is su

pervisor for several PhD students in entrepreneurship. Her own research

areas are entrepreneurship education, entrepreneurial families and family

entrepreneurship. At present she is in charge of projects on entrepreneur

ship education and pedagogy in higher education.

tarja.romer-paakkanen@haaga-helia.

Crossing Boundaries for Learning – through Technology and Human Eorts

280

Sormunen, Kati, M.Ed., is a Special Education Teacher in Koulumestari

School, Espoo, and a Project Researcher at the Department of Teacher

Education, University of Helsinki, Finland. Herexpertiseis in using tech

nology in education, team teaching, inclusive education and personalized

learning and teaching.

kati.sormunen@helsinki. 

Björn Åstrand, PhD, is a Senior Lecturer and Dean at Karlstad University,

Sweden. Åstrand served as the Dean for Umeå School of Education 2005-

2011 and is currently the Dean at the Faculty Board for Teacher Educa

tion and Educational Science at Karlstad University. His main research

interests relate to early modern history, history of education as well as to

contemporary education (higher education, teacher education, history

education, education systems etc.).

[email protected] and bjorn.astr[email protected]