Proposal view
| Proposal Type: | Symposium |
|---|---|
| Domain: | Lifelong Learning and Professional Development |
| SIG: | Teaching and Teacher Education |
| Scheduling category: | Continuing professional development in Teachers |
| Type | Submitted Symposium |
| Title | Conditions for teacher professional learning: perspectives from research at the individual, group, o |
| Abstract | This symposium brings together a number of research projects on teacher learning in the context of learning groups or communities at the workplace and the conditions and characteristics that affect such learning. The topic of teacher learning within learning communities receives a growing attention in both practice as well as different research domains, such as network theory, systems theory, educational psychology and research on organisational learning. Central focus of the symposium is on the conditions that are needed for establishing successful professional learning in the context of communities or learning groups. These communities, the conditions needed for successful functioning and teachers learning processes are multi-level in nature. In the symposium, learning and its conditions (both stimulating as well as hindering) are studied at different levels: the individual, the (sub)team, the organisation and the network level. By bringing these projects together, conditions can be linked within and between these various levels. By focusing at different contexts (primary and secondary education) and different types of teachers (student teachers or prospective teachers, beginning teachers and experienced teachers) the stability and variability of teacher learning within learning groups and the stability and variability of conditions needed for this can also be established. This symposium presents work-in-progress from four Ph.D. projects, utilising different methods, with an emphasis on case studies and survey research. This implies that data collection and analysis are in various stages of progress at the moment. However, all studies will be able to present both theory as well as empirical data at the time of presentation. |
| Equipment |
Computer and data projector / beamer |
| Keywords | Continuing professional development in Teachers Initial Teacher Education (Pre service) Professional Development |
| Chairperson list | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First Name | Last Name/Surname | Institution | Country | EARLI Number | |
| Eric | Verbiest | Fontys Polytechnic | Belgium | e.verbiest@fontys.nl | |
| Organiser list | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First Name | Last Name/Surname | Institution | Country | EARLI Number | |
| Theo | Bergen | ESoE | Netherlands | t.c.m.bergen@tue.nl | |
| Discussant list | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First Name | Last Name/Surname | Institution | Country | EARLI Number | |
| Colleen | McLaughlin | University of Cambridge | United Kingdom | cm10009@cam.ac.uk | |
| Paper Details |
|---|
| Paper type | Empirical |
|---|---|
| Title | Learning at the workplace of Academic schools: discrepancies between theory and practice. |
| Abstract | In the Netherlands a recent development in teacher education is the transfer of parts of the (responsibility for the) training of prospective teachers to practice schools. The attention for training within schools has resulted in new cooperative configurations: schools and teacher education institutes together take responsibility for the training of student teachers. One particular and recently emerging configuration is constituted by Academic Schools, in which training within the school is connected with development, reform, and action-research within the school. Because of their novelty, Academic Schools have not yet clearly been conceptualised and the status of their implementation is unknown and may vary, certainly within the Netherlands. According to national and international literature, important characteristics of a powerful workplace learning environment at Academic Schools are definition and commitment, action-research, learning community, coaching infrastructure, and the cooperation of school and teacher education institute. A descriptive, exploratory study was undertaken to define and describe Academic Schools and to investigate to what degree they realise a powerful learning environment at the workplace for student teachers. Four secondary education Academic Schools participated in this study. The Academic School was studied in terms of three different manifestations: a preferred (by respondents) one, an implemented (as observed by researchers), and a perceived (by respondents) one. Data was collected through semi-structured interviews with two school leaders, two supervising teachers and two student teachers within each school, document analysis (school plans, school folders, reports of meetings) and observations (counselling conversations, research community meetings). The results show that schools vary in terms of focus on certain characteristics of the Academic School and degree of implementation and that the realised and perceived manifestations differ from the preferred manifestation |
| Summary | Learning at the workplace of Academic schools: discrepancies between theory and practice. Rationale and theoretical framework Teacher education is under pressure in several countries, including the Netherlands. An important recent development in teacher education is learning at the workplace or training within schools in addition to the ‘traditional’ learning at teacher education institutes. Workplace learning concerns both learning to teach as well as working at the school level. The attention for training within schools has resulted in new shapes of institutional cooperation: both schools and teacher education institutes realise they are jointly responsible for the education of student teachers. According to Buitink and Beijaard (2007), research in the Netherlands has mainly focused on the quality of traditional teacher education routes, rather than on training within schools. In addition to the problems with teacher education, the profession of teaching has shown a tendency of de-professionalism over the last decennia. To encourage the learning of (student) teachers and their professional development, the teaching profession needs to be redefined. Teachers should be involved in educational reforms and gain ‘ownership’ over these reforms (AERA Panel, 2005). In Academic Schools, training within the school is connected to school development, educational reform, and action-research within the school. At this kind of schools the educational practice, the training of (student) teachers, and the action-research should strenghten each other. While the teacher training function of Academic Schools has hardly been investigated, some preliminary studies on the professional development of teachers within these schools provide evidence that teachers in Academic Schools have a more favourable attitude towards research, are more critical towards their own reflection and research skills, but at the same time experience a lack of material and social support for conducting research. It is assumed that Academic Schools realise a powerful learning environment for the training of student teachers. The question that emerges within the above sketched context is which specific conditions are created at Academic Schools for the learning of student teachers. According to national and international literature, important conditions for a powerul workplace learning environment at Academic Schools are definition and commitment, action-research, learning community, coaching infrastructure, and the cooperation of school and teacher education institute. Method In this descriptive and exploratory study, we obtained answers to two research questions: “What does the workplace learning environment at Academic Schools look like, and what are the characteristics of such a learning environment for students science teachers.” To acquire a good image of the workplace learning environment for student teachers at Academic Schools, we used the concept of ‘manifestations’ (Goodlad, 1979). We distinguished three different manifestations of the Academic School: a preferred one (What should the ideal Academic School look like for people concerned in the Academic School?), an implemented one (What does the practical implementation of the mission or vision of the Academic School look like?), and a perceived one (How do people concerned in the Academic School experience the implemented Academic School). We used this theoretical model described above to analyse the school practice (the preferred, implemented, and perceived manifestations) at Academic Schools. Four secondary education schools in the Netherlands participated in this study. Data was collected through semi-structured interviews with two school leaders, two supervising teachers and two student teachers within each school, document analysis (school plans, school folders, reports of meetings) and observations (counseling conversations, research community meetings). The research data were coded and processed with use of the Atlas-ti program. Based on the received research data, four portraits are made. A member check was performed to see whether findings were recognised and validated by the schools. This appeared to be the case. Results and conclusions The results show that schools vary in terms of focus on certain conditions of the Academic School as well as in the degree of implementation of these conditions. Especially the set up of expertise in educational action-research is difficult for teachers at Academic Schools, among others because of the difficult cooperation between schools and teacher education institutes. Nevertheless, this expertise in doing action-research is an absolute condition for the high quality support of student teachers, especially when they are conducting research on their own school practice. Next to the variation in terms of focus on certain conditions of the Academic School and the degree of implementations, the results show that the realised and perceived manifestations of the Academic School differ from the preferred manifestation. References AERA Panel (2005). Studying teacher education: the report of the AERA Panel on research and teacher education. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc. Buitink, J., & Beijaard, D. (2007). Learning in school-based teacher education. In A. Munthe & K. Zellermayer (eds.), Teachers learning in communities, international perspectives (pp.127-137). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Goodlad, J.I. (1979) Curriculum inquiry: the study of curriculum practice. New York: McGraw-Hill. |
| Keywords | Initial Teacher Education (Pre service) |
| Appendices | |
| Authors | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Name | Surname | Institution | Country | EARLI Number | Presenting | |
| Marjan | Vrijnssen-de Corte | ESoE | Netherlands | m.d.corte@tue.nl | * | |
| Perry | den Brok | ESoE | Netherlands | p.j.d.brok@tue.nl | ||
| Marcel | Kamp | ILS/RU | Netherlands | m.kamp@ils.ru.nl | ||
| Theo | Bergen | ESoE | Netherlands | t.c.m.bergen@tue.nl | ||
| Paper type | Empirical |
|---|---|
| Title | Conditions for the quality of primary education teachers’ collective learning at individual and group level. |
| Abstract | Collective teacher learning plays an important role in teachers’ professional development and schools' innovative capacity. Despite this importance, collective learning in schools has been weakly conceptualised and little empirical evidence exists with respect to the contributions of collective learning to the professional development of teachers and the learning of their students. Unclear is how schools stimulate collective learning of their teachers and the conditions that hinder or enhance collective learning. This study has the aim to contribute to the conceptualisation and operationalisation of collective teacher learning. Moreover, we will focus on the conditions that hinder or enhance collective teacher learning in Dutch primary education schools. Collective teacher learning in this study refers to activities that lead to a change in teachers’ cognition and/or behaviour. In the literature many conditions have been suggested that are supposed to affect collective learning in schools. In this study, we distinguish conditions at individual/teacher, group/team and the context level. Based on a literature review and interviews with primary education teachers and school leaders a questionnaire is being developed that aims at measuring the following components of collective teacher learning: learning processes (like experimenting and discussing), learning results (like change in cognition or shared language) and learning conditions (like a will to learn and opportunities to work together). In December 2008 the developed questionnaire will be administered to over a hundred primary education schools in the Netherlands. First, reliability and validity analyses of the questionnaire will be conducted and empirical results of the questionnaire will be compared with theory. Second, descriptive analyses, regression analyses and means analyses (on the conditions, with groups based on the effectiveness of collective learning) will be conducted. In the presentation the developed questionnaire, its validity and reliability and the empirical results will be presented and discussed. |
| Summary | Conditions for the quality of primary education teachers’ collective learning at individual and group level. Rationale and theoretical framework The world around us changes rapidly. To suffice the needs of society, education has to change as well and schools need to learn to adapt. Schools should be able to continuously develop, change and improve to ultimately, become a learning organisation. Teachers play a central roll in this process and have to continuously develop their teacher professionalism as well. Collective learning has been argued to be of major importance for the professional development of teachers and to the innovative capacity in schools. Collective teacher learning in this study refers to activities that lead to a change in cognition or behaviour, or both (Meirink, 2007). However, collective learning has been varied and weakly conceptualised and little empirical evidence exists with respect to the contributions of collective learning to professional development of teachers and the learning of their students. Unclear is how schools (can) stimulate collective learning of their teachers and the conditions that hinder or enhance collective learning. From the literature, a number of conditions has been reported at the individual/teacher level (teachers’ beliefs and knowledge, preferences for learning activities), the school/team level (learning culture, vision) and the context level (organisational conditions, school leadership). Research on organisational learning mostly emphasizes organisational conditions fostering learning (Leithwood & Louis, 1998), but research of for example Kwakman (2003) suggested that personal conditions might be more significant in predicting professional learning activities than task and work environment conditions. Obviously, there are interactions within and between conditions at the individual and group level. However, such interactions have been studied scarcely. The aim of this study is to answer two major questions:
Method To answer these questions a questionnaire for teachers and school leaders was developed. For this purpose first a literature review was conducted as well as semi-structured interviews with teachers and school leaders of primary education schools. The questionnaire aimed at measuring the following components of collective learning: learning processes (like experimenting and discussing), learning results (like change in cognition and shared language), and learning conditions (like a will to learn, shared vision and leadership) of collective teacher learning. The questionnaire consisted of a number of scales representing the components and their subgroups, such as collectivity of goals, transparency of visions, learning skills of the individual and the group and opportunities to work together. Items in the scales were constructed as a Likert-type five-point scale (totally agree – totally disagree). In December 2008 the developed questionnaire will be administered to over a hundred primary education schools in the southern part of the Netherlands. The data will be analysed in a number of ways. First, reliability (Cronbach’s alpha) and construct validity analyses (exploratory factor analyses, scale inter correlations) of the questionnaire will be conducted to check the quality of the questionnaire. Also, empirical results of the questionnaire will be compared with the theoretical model to see if the questionnaire represent what has been found in theory. Second, descriptives (means and standard deviations) will be generated per variable to see what conditions are more and which are less frequent; teachers and schools will be divided into groups of ‘less’ and ‘more’ effective based on the presence of characteristics of collective learning and mean scores on the (presence of) conditions will be determined between the groups to see whether significant differences could be found; regression analyses will be conducted on effectiveness measures with the conditions (at the different levels) as explanatory variables. Results and conclusions Since the data collection is still in progress, we can only report some preliminary results, based on steps in the development process of the questionnaire. Results of the interviews showed that teachers think that important conditions are: time, an organisation structure to facilitate collective activities, a subject that all teachers are interested and motivated for, teachers that are good listeners, teachers who respect each other and accept each others differences. also Interestingly, several teachers mentioned that the collective activity was hindered by another colleague, because he or she acted differently. It seemed that accepting each others differences is not a common process. The questionnaire itself, its empirical results regarding collective teacher learning and the conditions that influence the quality of collective teacher learning will be presented. References Kwakman, K. (2003). Factors affecting teachers’ participation in professional learning activities. Teaching en Teacher Education, 19, 179-170. Leithwood, K., & Louis, K. S. (1998). Organisational learning in schools: an introduction. In K. Leithwood & K. S. Louis (eds.), Organisational learning in schools (pp. 1-14). Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger. Meirink, J. A., Meijer, P. C., & Verloop, N. (2007). A closer look at teachers’ individual learning in collaborative settings. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 13(2), 145-164. |
| Keywords | Professional Development |
| Appendices | |
| Authors | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Name | Surname | Institution | Country | EARLI Number | Presenting | |
| Jannet | Doppenberg | ESoE/Fontys | Netherlands | jannet.doppenberg@fontys.nl | * | |
| Perry | den Brok | ESoE | Netherlands | p.j.d.brok@tue.nl | ||
| Theo | Bergen | ESoE | Netherlands | t.c.m.bergen@tue.nl | ||
| Paper type | Empirical |
|---|---|
| Title | Conditions for teacher professional learning: perspectives from research at the individual, group, organization and network level. |
| Abstract | Sustained change in the day-to-day practice of schools asks for individual and collective learning processes of the teachers, investigating and improving their own practice. Professional learning communities (plc) offer a context for these learning processes and for building capacity in the school. In this study the following researched questions are being addressed: - How can schools be described as professional learning communities? - What interventions contribute to the realisation of essential features of professional learning communities? - Which interventions can be marked as design principles that contribute to the reinforcement of capacities in a professional learning community? In the literature, it is hypothesized that a school should develop into a plc in stages. But empirical evidence also indicates that there are exceptions. We have analyzed the development of professional learning communities and the contribution of interventions to this development from different perspectives: source, strategy, focus, effects and role of the school leader. The study has a descriptive and explorative character. It aims at describing whether a certain conception of development can be recognized in schools and what the contribution of interventions is. A qualitative approach, namely case-study methodology was chosen for this study. Six teams of Dutch primary schools participated. Our results show thatthe development of professional learning communities seems to broaden and deepen. The nature of development can also be typified with the term anchoring. To answer the questions relating to interventions we have used different perspectives to analyze interventions that have been identified in the data. This analysis shows that the school leader is an important factor in the development of the school. |
| Summary | Conditions for teacher professional learning: perspectives from research at the individual, group, organization and network level. Rationale and theoretical framework In the educational field there is a growing consensus about the important role of the collective of professionals in the schools (Hopkins, 2007).The development of a school-wide capacity to improve the learning of students is a critical factor. Professional learning communities (plc) seem to be able to fulfill the promise of capacity development. Plc’s have therefore become an important topic in school improvement. A plc can be defined in the words of Hord (1997) as a community of continuous inquiry and improvement .Different authors have described the development of plc’s as a phased process. Different phases that succeed each other are distinguished and which typify the development of the school as a plc. It is presupposed that schools develop as plc’s by passing through these phases. Although this idea is attractable, these phase models also have some disadvantages. They suggest a straightforward development of schools through these phases. But schools can also fall back. Besides, these phase models suggest that all characteristics of a plc can all be located in the same phase. But this is also questionable. This study investigates the development of plc’s in primary schools in the Netherlands. Little is known about the development of these kinds of communities in the empirical context of schooling. In this research project the following research questions are being addressed: - How can schools be described as plc’s? - What interventions contribute to the realisation of essential features of plc’s? - Which interventions can be marked as design principles that contribute to the reinforcement of capacities in a plc? An intervention can be described as a planned or unplanned action or event which influences individuals positively or negatively in a change process (Hall & Hord, 2006).Interventions can be typified in different ways, based on the person that initiates the interventions or the aim of the intervention. We have analyzed the development of professional learning communities and the contribution of interventions to this development from different perspectives: source, strategy, focus, effects and role of the school leader. Method Because of the descriptive and explorative character of this study and because of the emphasis on the perspective of individuals in a school, a qualitative research approach was chosen. Within this approach we use a case-study setup. A qualitative case offers the possibility to take the perspective of individuals and schools into account. Swanborn (2000) also states that within a case study attention can be paid to multiple realities. By using a case study methodology we wanted to pay attention to the complex social relations and the interpretations which members of the divers communities gave to interventions and results in relation to the development of the school as a plc. The process of data analysis follows the steps for analyzing qualitative data as have been described by Miles and Huberman (1994). Data about a group of participants has been collected using different data collecting techniques at different moments in time. Six teams of Dutch primary schools participated in the project. Their development as a plc has been considered both retrospective and prospective during the period of a year. By using different interview rounds with teachers and principals in each school, monthly discussions with principals, document analyses and completing logs, insight was gained in the interventions that were carried out in schools to stimulate the development of the school as a professional learning community. The six cases have been selected based on content arguments. Before selecting the case a selection procedure has been formulated in which ‘information richness’ and ‘similar circumstances’ are important. Swanborn (2000; p.60) considers this to be dimensional sampling. Schools that have been selected have a minimal variation in circumstances (literal replication, Yin, 2003). The overall design of this study is one of analytic induction whereby a conceptual framework is first derived from literature and then documented with the help of data. Results and conclusions We have indications that the above mentioned phase models do not suffice. When we consider the development of the plc in the six case schools, we can conclude that not all distinguished capacities have been developed in the same way (both quantitative and qualitative). On one hand, the development of the professional learning community seems to broaden. On the other hand, the development of the professional learning community in the school seems to deepen. The learning of the students and the results of their learning become more central in the teaching process. Lastly, the qualitative development can also be typified with the term anchoring, which points to embedding (conditions of) individual and collective learning in the school policy. To answer the questions relating to interventions we have used different perspectives to analyze interventions that have been identified in the data. This analysis shows that the school leader is an important factor in the development of the school. Many of the interventions carried out in the school are initiated by the school leader. Most of these interventions are directed at developing one of the capacities. Effects of interventions on the capacities have also been identified. Within these interventions there is an emphasis on a normative-reeducative strategy. The results of our cross-case analyses will be presented in the presentation. We will also report on the conceptualization of development of professional learning communities. References Hall, G. & Hord, S. (2006): Implementing change: patterns, principles and potholes. Boston: Pearson Education Inc. 2nd ed. Hopkins, D. (2007): Every school a great school. Realizing the potential of system leadership. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Hord, S. (1997). Professional learning communities: communities of continuous inquiry and improvement. Southwest Educational Development Laboratory, Austin. Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M. (1994): Qualitative Data Analysis: an expanded sourcebook, 2nd ed., Thousand Oaks: Sage. Swanborn, P. (2000): Case-study’s: Wat, wanneer en hoe? Amsterdam/Meppel: Born. Yin, R. (2003): Case study research. Design and methods. 3th ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage. |
| Keywords | Professional Development |
| Appendices | |
| Authors | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Name | Surname | Institution | Country | EARLI Number | Presenting | |
| Mirjam | Timmerman | Fontys University of Applied Sciences | Netherlands | m.timmerman@fontys.nl | * | |
| Eric | Verbiest | Fontys University of Applied Sciences | Netherlands | e.verbiest@fontys.nl | ||
| Peter | Sleegers | University of Twente | Netherlands | p.j.c.sleegers@uva.nl | ||
| Paper type | Empirical |
|---|---|
| Title | The dissemination and use of research-based knowledge in school-university networks. |
| Abstract | For educational systems to provide opportunities for professional knowledge development and educational change they should function as enabling infrastructures. Networks are regarded as enabling infrastructures through which development, dissemination and use of knowledge can take place. In the literature collaborative research is recognized as a pivotal factor in the knowledge processes within such networks. The school-university research partnership is a specific network. This partnership aims at closer integration of research and practice by means of teacher research and can be of benefit to both school and university. In this study postgraduate programs for experienced teachers are considered a good opportunity for developing such partnerships, because those programs are geared to in-service teachers that develop professional knowledge in their own school by means of practice-oriented research. Despite the acknowledged value of school-university research networks, many questions remain unanswered. This study addresses the following research questions: - What knowledge is developed in the practice-oriented research of master’s students and their educators? - In what way is knowledge, developed in the practice-oriented research of master’s students and their educators, disseminated and used within the network of the school, the university and between the school and the university? - What network features inhibit or promote the dissemination and use of knowledge, developed in the research of master’s students and their educators within the network of the school, the university and between the school and the university? A multiple case study design with mixed methods of data collection is used to explore and describe the processes within two cases of school-university research networks in depth. The outcomes of a first interview study, providing results on the way in which research-based knowledge is disseminated and used within a school-university research network and the factors that affect this will be presented. |
| Summary | The dissemination and use of research-based knowledge in school-university networks. Rationale and theoretical framework The continuous development of professional knowledge is regarded as pivotal to changing education and considered a responsibility of the teachers. In promoting such a professional responsibility, higher education institutes should develop effective partnerships with schools, strengthening the links between teacher educators and practicing teachers. However, many questions remain on the nature, processes and outcomes of such school-university networks. For educational systems to provide the necessary opportunities for educational change and professional knowledge development they should function as enabling infrastructures (Fullan, 1999). The last decade, those educational infrastructures are conceptualized in terms of a learning community, learning organization, community of practice or a platform. Such infrastructures can be regarded as networks in which knowledge is accessed on a continuous basis and knowledge development is enabled. The general idea is that this learning capacity is developed on the level of the individual, the group as well as on the level of the network. Therefore, when knowledge development and change should take place on the level of the network, the individual and the group are of crucial importance. However the connection between those three levels remains complex. Recently collaborative (action) research is prompted by various authors (e.g. Reason, 1999; Jackson & Temperley, 2006; Van Swet, Ponte & Smit, 2007) as a promising approach to the development and dissemination of knowledge within a network. The school-university research partnership is a specific network in which research takes a prominent place (McLaughlin & Black-Hawkins, 2007). This network aims for a closer integration of research and practice by means of teacher research and can benefit both school and university. In this study postgraduate programs for experienced teachers are considered a good opportunity for developing such networks, because those programs are geared to in-service teachers that develop professional knowledge in their own school practice by means of (action) research (Van Swet et al, 2007). Despite the acknowledged value of school-university research networks, questions remain on how such networks promote the dissemination and use of research-based knowledge beyond the individual or small groups of teachers. Therefore this study addresses the following research questions: 1.What knowledge is developed in the practice-oriented research of master’s students and their educators? 2.In what way is knowledge, developed in the practice-oriented research of master’s students and their educators, disseminated and used within the network of the school, the university and between the school and the university? 3.What network features inhibit or promote the dissemination and use of knowledge, developed in the research of master’s students and their educators within the network of the school, the university and between the school and the university? Method A multiple case study design with mixed methods of data collection is used to explore and describe the processes within two cases of school-university research networks in depth. Each case of a school-university research network consists of three sub-networks: the network within school, the network within the university and the network between the school and university (i.e. master program). In this study two rounds of semi-structured interviews are conducted in both cases to gain insight in the perceptions of the network members with respect to research questions 1, 2 and 3. The respondents for the interviews were selected by snowball sampling. The snowball sampling started by asking the involved educator researcher to designate other network members who can provide insight in how research knowledge is disseminated and used within their network. Firstly, within both cases three group interviews will be conducted (November 2008) with members of the three sub-networks. The data of these interviews will be analyzed and subsequently compared to the insights from other research; especially similar studies in the Network Learning Communities (e.g. Earl, Katz, Elgie, Ben Jaafar, & Foster, 2006). The outcomes will guide the design of the interview topic list and the coding list for data-analysis in the next round of individual interviews. Secondly, individual interviews will be conducted in March 2009 to gain deeper insight in the perceptions of the network members with respect to research questions 1, 2 and 3. For this purpose 12 network members will be selected from each case (four from each sub-network). Data-analysis will take place within each separate case. Results and conclusions This interview study will give a first insight into the perceptions of network members towards the way research-based knowledge is disseminated and used within both cases of a school-university research network and the network features that inhibit or promote this. Firstly, the outcomes in both cases will provide insight in what people learn through the research of master students and their educators (research question 1). Secondly, the outcomes will provide insight in the way this research-based knowledge is shared within the school or university within both cases (research question 2). Thirdly, the outcomes will provide insight in how people use this knowledge within their school or university (research question 3). Finally, insight is gained in the network features that inhibit or promote the sharing and use of research-based knowledge within the two cases. The outcomes will provide insight in network features, like: purpose, relationships, collaboration, leadership (formal and distributed), accountability (internal and external) and capacity building (for professional development). Literature Earl, L., Katz, S. Elgie, S. Ben Jaafar, S. & Foster, L. (2006). How network learning communities work: volume 1- the report. Toronto: Aporia Consulting Ltd. Jackson, D. & Temperley, J. (2006). From professional learning community to networked learning community (Congress Paper). International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement (ICSEI). McLaughlin, C. & Black Hawkins, K. (2007). School-university partnerships for educational research-distinctions, dilemmas and challenges. Curriculum Journal, 18(3), 327-341. Reason, P. (1999). Integrating action and reflection through co-operative inquiry. Management Learning, 30(2), 207-226. Swet, J. van, Ponte, P. & Smit, B. (eds.) (2007). Postgraduate programmes as platform: a research-led approach. Rotterdam/Taipei: Sense Publishers. |
| Keywords | Continuing professional development in Teachers |
| Appendices | |
| Authors | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Name | Surname | Institution | Country | EARLI Number | Presenting | |
| Frank | Cornelissen | ESoE/Fontys | Netherlands | l.cornelissen@fontys.nl | * | |
| Jacqueline | van Swet | Fontys University of Applied Sciences | Netherlands | j.vanswet@fontys.nl | ||
| Douwe | Bijaard | ESoE/TUe | Netherlands | d.beijaard@tue.nl | ||
| Theo | Bergen | ESoE/TUe | Netherlands | t.c.m.bergen@tue.nl | ||

