Mapping what matters – an approach to determine curriculum content of in-service teacher training
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/lom.v15i25.128503Nøgleord:
In-service training, digitale kompetencer, directed acyclic graphsResumé
Denne artikel studerer paradokset i, at mere end halvdelen af lærere oplever et misforhold mellem den efteruddannelse, de får, og deres oplevede behov, selvom der er konsensus om, at det er vigtigt at tilpasse indholdet til lokal praksis. Vi hævder, at dette paradoks fortsat eksisterer på grund af mangel på metoder til at indsamle og aggregere behov udtrykt af mange lærere. Artiklen adresserer dette paradoks ved at bruge directed acyclic graphs (DAG’s) til at repræsentere 17 danske læreres efterspurgte indhold til efteruddannelse i digital underviserkompetencer. Vi undersøger, hvordan DAG’en blev brugt og opfattet som redskab til kursusdesignere i udvikling af et konkret efteruddannelsestilbud. Undersøgelsen viser, at DAG’en tilvejebragte vigtige indsigter ved deres valg af indhold, der skulle inkluderes i efteruddannelsestilbudet. Begrænsninger omfattede en opfattet forpligtelse til at bruge al information i DAG'en og en følelse af ikke at have indsigt i lærernes affektive forholdemåder til indholdet i DAG'en.
Downloads
Referencer
Andersen, F. B. (2000). Tegn er noget vi bestemmer… evaluering, kvalitet og udvikling i omegnen af SMTTE-tænkningen. Vol. Splinter af en lærende skole, Århus: Danmarks Lærerhøjskole.
Andersen, A. B., Munk, D. A., & Maksten, J. A. (2020). Kortlægning, planlægning og kulturforandring: et efter- og videreuddannelsesprojekt i et refleksiv praksis-læringsperspektiv. UCN Perspektiv, (7), 51–59. https://doi.org/10.17896/UCN.perspektiv.n7.414
Amiel, T., & Reeves, T. C. (2008). Design-based research and educational technology: Rethinking technology and the research agenda. Journal of educational technology & society, 11(4), 29-40.
Besser, M., & Leiss, D. (2014). The Influence of Teacher-Trainings on In-Service Teachers' Expertise: A Teacher-Training-Study on Formative Assessment in Competency-Oriented Mathematics. North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.
Borko, H. (2004). Professional Development and Teacher Learning: Mapping the Terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), pp. 3-15.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative & mixed methods approaches. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Chrysostomou, S. (2004). Interdisciplinary approaches in the new curriculum in Greece: A focus on music education. Arts Education Policy Review, 105(5), 7-23.
Cobb, P., & Gravemeijer, K. (2008). Experimenting to support and understand learning processes. Handbook of design research methods in education: Innovations in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics learning and teaching, 24, 68-95.
Cobb, P., & Jackson, K. (2021). An Empirically Grounded System of Supports for Improving the Quality of Mathematics Teaching on a Large Scale, Implementation and Replication Studies in Mathematics Education, 1(1), 77-110. doi: https://doi.org/10.1163/26670127-01010004
Doorman, M., Drijvers, P., Gravemeijer, K., Boon, P., & Reed, H. (2013). Design research in mathematics education: The case of an ICT-rich learning arrangement for the concept of function. In T. Plomp & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research – Part B: Illustrative cases (pp. 425–446). Enschede: SLO.
Jaworski, B.. (2003). Research practice into/influencing mathematics teaching and learning development: Towards a theoretical framework based on co-learning partnerships. Educational studies in mathematics 54.2: 249-282.
Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What Makes Professional Development Effective? Results From a National Sample of Teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), pp. 915-945.
Illeris, K. (2011). Kompetence. Samfundslitteratur.
Kallia, M., van Borkulo, S. P., Drijvers, P., Barendsen, E., & Tolboom, J. (2021). Characterising computational thinking in mathematics education: a literature-informed Delphi study. Research in Mathematics Education, 1-29.
Komenda, M., Schwarz, D., Švancara, J., Vaitsis, C., Zary, N., & Dušek, L. (2015). Practical use of medical terminology in curriculum mapping. Computers in Biology and Medicine, 63, 74-82.
Krainer, K. (2014). Teachers as stakeholders in mathematics education research. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 11(1), 49.
Lewis, C., Perry, R., & Murata, A. (2006). How should research contribute to instructional improvement? The case of lesson study. Educational researcher, 35(3), 3-14.
Martin, L., & Umland, K. (2008). Mathematics for Middle School Teachers: Choices, Successes, and challenges. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 5(2), pp. 305-314.
Martínez-Zarzuelo, A., Roanes-Lozano, E., Fernández-Díaz, M. J. (2016). A Computer Approach to Mathematics Curriculum Developments Debugging. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(12), 2961-2974. doi: https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.02316a
Maurer, R. (2010). Beyond the Wall of Resistance: Why 70% of All Changes Still Fail - And What You Can Do about It. New York: Bard Press.
Misfeldt, M. (2010). 'Forestillet læringsvej'i IT-baserede pædagogiske udviklingsprojekter. Dansk pædagogisk tidsskrift, 58(4), 42-52.
Pang, J. (2016). Improving mathematics instruction and supporting teacher learning in Korea through lesson study using five practices. ZDM, 48(4), pp. 471-483.
Postholm, M. B. (2009). Research and development work: Developing teachers as researchers or just teachers?. Educational Action Research, 17(4), 551-565.
Puentedura, R. R. (201, May 29). SAMR: Moving from enhancement to transformation [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/000095.html
Rømer, T. A. (2019). A critique of John Hattie’s theory of Visible Learning. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 51(6), 587-598. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2018.1488216
Selter, C., Gräsel, C., Reinold, M., & Trempler, K. (2015). Variations of in-service training for primary mathematics teachers: an empirical study. ZDM, 47(1), pp. 65-77.
Sitlington, H., & Coetzer, A. (2015). Using the delphi technique to support curriculum development. Education & Training, 57(3), 306-321. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ET-02-2014-0010
Stigler, J. W. (1998). Video examples from the TIMMS videotape classroom study eighth grade mathematics in Germany, Japan, and the United States. National Center for Education Statistics.
Tamborg, A. L., Dreyøe, J., Nøhr, L. L., Gregersen, M. O., & Allsopp, B. B. (2019). Structures for Mapping Learning Content. In European Conference on e-Learning (pp. 559-XI). Academic Conferences International Limited.
Tamborg, A. L., & Allsopp, B. B. (2018). Mapping situations in implementing learning platforms. I E. Brooks, A. L. Brooks, & N. Vidakis (red.), Interactivity, Game Creation, Design, Learning, and Innovation - 6th International Conference, ArtsIT 2017, and 2nd International Conference, DLI 2017, Proceedings (s. 435-444). Springer Verlag. Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social-Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering, LNICST Bind 229 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76908-0_42
Timperley, H., Wilson, A., Barrar, H., & Fung, I. (2007). Teacher professional learning and development: best evidence synthesis iteration. Wellington: Ministry of Education.
Ullmann, R. (1982). A broadened curriculum framework for second languages. ELT Journal, 36(4), 255-62.
Yoon, K. S., Duncan, T., Lee, S. W.-Y., Scarloss, B., & Shapley, K. (2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement (Issues & Answers Report, REL 2007–No. 033). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs
Downloads
Publiceret
Citation/Eksport
Nummer
Sektion
Licens
Copyright (c) 2022 Andreas Lindenskov Tamborg, Mathias Lund Schjøtz, Anne Brøndum Andersen, Benjamin Brink Allsopp
Dette værk er under følgende licens Creative Commons Navngivelse – Ikke-kommerciel – Ingen Bearbejdede Værker (by-nc-nd).
Artikler publiceret i Tidsskriftet for Læring og Medier er licenseret under en Creative Commons Navngivelse-IkkeKommerciel-IngenBearbejdelse 4.0 Unported Licens.
Forfattere bevarer deres ophavsret og giver tidsskriftet ret til første publicering, samtidigt med at værket er omfattet af Creative Commons Attribution-licensen: Navngivelse – Ikke-kommerciel - Ingen Bearbejdede Værker (by-nc-nd). Læs om licensen på http://www.creativecommons.dk/om/.
---
På LOM.dk kan du endvidere finde artikler fra det nu nedlagte Tidsskrift for Universiteternes Efter- og Videreuddannelse (UNEV). Vær opmærksom på, at der gælder særlige regler for UNEV artikler:
Det er forfatterne og evt. andre ophavsret indehavere, der har ophavsretten til artikler udgivet i UNEV regi, og det er en betingelse for adgang til artiklerne, at brugere anerkender og overholder de juridiske retningslinjer forbundet hermed.
- Brugere må downloade og printe én kopi af en hvilken som helst UNEV artikel mhp. private studier eller forskning.
- Det er ikke tilladt at videredistribuere artikler eller anvende disse til indtægtsdækkede aktiviteter eller kommercielle formål.
- Det er tilladt at distribuere URL’en til UNEV artikler.
