“A writer only begins a book. A reader finishes it.”
Samuel Johnson
This final conclusion merely serves to remind and stress the main highlights of the study, pointing out the learning outcomes from theoretical and empirical parts, as well as to enhance the value and importance of the research.
The principal element of any study is to ask and answer questions. This dissertation possibly opened more questions than initially intended to answer. Nevertheless, in answering the three initial questions, the research attempted to reflect on the core concepts of teacher learning in innovative learning environments in the context of educational reforms and developmental interventions. The reflections produced many interesting points for discussion, primarily the fact that teacher learning is a transversal phenomenon that can be observed at least from the perspective of three layers. The interconnectedness of these layers remains to be discovered by another research endeavour, yet surely the current study provides evidence that teacher learning is an interconnected space between the teaching professional, school, and policy. Already in the literature section the dissertation points out the complex web of theories that in case of teacher learning come together in order to explain the phenomenon at a comprehensive level.
This is made evident through examining learning in adulthood on one side and the necessity to examine workplace learning on the other. Additionally, there is an important element of immediate context as organisational learning is brought into theoretical puzzle-making. These basics are all topped by fundamental theoretical notions of teacher learning as a specific field of academic study, which in a way can be observed from an individual perspective, but also from angles of policy, as well as school leadership and management. This heavily proves the main concluding argument that teacher learning is a complex phenomenon. Hence, in several instances there are theoretical and empirical notions that point out to the need to take teacher learning as comprehensively as imaginable.
An important additional stratum in this research on teacher learning was the context of innovations. Setting teacher learning in innovative learning environments defined the path to exploring the contextual notions more than content of learning through the research, and, in a way, conclusions indeed indicate how the context shapes and influences learning. As the theoretical chapter shows, innovations in schools have been largely perceived with positive connotation, although there is some doubt what innovations actually entail. Both literature and data collected through this study take advantage of the positivist approach to innovation,
193
defining it rather as novel methods of teaching, learning, and organising in schools as contexts.
Hence, innovations have been deemed as new to the specific context and not necessarily as completely original ideas. Furthermore, as it was discussed in some instances through this research, innovations can be also and rather described as methods that support better student learning. This inevitably implies that innovations have to include an element of teacher learning for better student learning, better organisation of learning at a school level, enjoyable and meaningful learning time, and overall comprehensive policy that interlinks factors of better student learning.
While this research gives preference to observing teacher learning as a nested phenomenon, it is indeed possible to observe each layer in an individualised manner as well, and this study has taken advantage of that too. Thus, some of the independent theoretical notions that connect to teacher learning at individual professional level, and at the levels of school community and policy interventions, have been used to explain data and specific occurrences found in the field research. Hence, the notions that teachers continuously learn new elements in their practice with an aim of becoming better professionals were closely tied to the teachers’ ability and motivation for self-directed learning. Working through and with innovative methodologies did allow teachers to re-invent themselves in their profession through finding purpose and joy in what they do. This came hand-in-hand with the feeling of success, which comes both with changing the old traditional ways for new interactive ways of student learning, as well as with becoming more experienced and routinised in the method that works well. Thus, the research clearly suggests that when teachers manage to find a solution for their particular classroom situation and have the time to test it and perfect it, they have the feeling of greater achievement and are closer to being adaptive experts able to balance innovation with efficiency.
It has been signified throughout the dissertation that innovation, regardless of its content, has an important impact on teacher learning. However, data has shown that innovations need to be dealt intelligently and with care. Teachers achieve satisfaction from learning from innovations only when they see the purpose and feasibility in the approach. Therefore, schools that embed innovations are in dire need of leadership that is capable of understanding what practice to borrow or install and when. In short, anything new needs to fit the developmental context of the school and leaders need to be sure they can manage it in a way that allows possible emerging learning relationships to strive rather than to only burden the teachers. This research has attempted to be as convincing as possible when exploring the delicate connection between
194
teacher transformative and developmental learning, and the innovative environment. The ample evidence for this came from the empirical part, although it was already stressed as a theoretical consideration too. Creating learning organisations has to entail trust and collaboration, ownership and transparency of information. Each member of the school community needs to have their place and purpose, and in many cases distributed leadership has made this a viable option in the case study schools. Additionally, continuous reflections concerning the innovative approach, the outcomes it has on students and on teachers, the functioning of the school, and the overall aims of education have been pointed as important conversations that indeed encourage advanced teacher learning in innovative learning environments.
This dissertation has emphasised the significance of context in many instances, and it is important to reiterate that context for teacher learning is not only a school but also a greater national policy perspective. The fact that policy matters for both teacher learning and educational innovations was evident through theory and through the empirical part. As it is known from theory, in cases when teachers do not have enough time to experiment and find appropriate methods, and in cases where they do not feel connected to an innovative measure or have no sense of ownership, teacher learning can become merely repetitive and reproductive, with no means of professional transformation. The analysis points out to the fact that teacher policy needs to find a solid place in a comprehensive educational policy, as it is fairly important to understand the complexity of education from a wide range of angles. For instance, understanding how parents’ status can influence student learning and incorporating this into a policy that enables possibilities for teachers to connect with parents as partners can become extremely beneficial for future student learning. Furthermore, collecting thoughts from teachers as skilled and experienced professionals, together with other educational stakeholders, while devising a new policy tool can be helpful in creating ownership over the novel educational provision which might increase the likelihood of it being implemented in the best possible way in classrooms. It has been noted here that when given liberties, teachers do strive to better their profession and involve innovations, thus a national consultation for the purposes of policymaking could also bring in inspiring thinking of teachers who care to improve their everyday practice. However, probably the most important point from the study in relation to policy mechanisms is teacher time; empirical data abundantly shows that teachers need time to experiment and to gain expertise in new routines and innovations. They need time to collaborate with meaningful outcomes and to prepare innovative classes that fit their contexts.
195
Time is also a very important factor for getting to know students better in order to know what their learning needs are. As for novice teachers, time is also joint by the need to remodel initial teacher education and make it more inclusive, inspiring and innovative. This research has shown that teachers in innovative environment need to invest significantly more time and, even though most of the teachers in this study do not complain about it, this needs to be carefully considered from the policy perspective. The development of schools and sustainability of innovations cannot rely on the teachers’ willingness to work more hours than paid or provisioned, thus a major conclusion does suggest more time and trust in teachers from the perspectives of policymaking.
Finally, as mentioned at the beginning of this chapter, several new questions have risen from this study, and next to the main conclusions, this should be noted as highly significant. The ability to point out new avenues of research proves the relevance and the nexus of this study in the field of educational research. As this research journey ends, one does not simply disembark to an idle and certain terrain but rather boards one of many potential new expeditions to further explore the intricacies of teacher learning in innovative learning environments.
196
References
Amaro, G. (2000). Curriculum innovation in Portugal: The Área Escola - an arena for cross-curricular activities and curriculum development. Geneva: International Bureau of Education UNESCO. Retrieved from http://www.ibe.unesco.org
Ananiadou, K., & Claro, M. (2009). 21st Century Skills and Competencies for New Millenium Learners in OECD (EDU Working paper No. 41). Edu/Wkp (2009)20.
Retrieved from
http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=EDU/WKP(20 09)20&doclanguage=en
Antonacopoulou, E. (2006). Learning, Working and Living: An Introduction. In E.
Antonacopoulou, P. Jarvis, V. Andersen, B. Elkjaer, & S. Høyrup (Eds.), Learning, Working and Living (pp. 1–7). Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Baker, S. E., & Edwards, R. (2012). How many qualitative interviews is enough? Expert voices and early career reflections on sampling and cases in qualitative research.
National Centre for Research Methods Review Paper. Retrieved from http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/2273/4/how_many_interviews.pdf
Bakkenes, I., Vermunt, J. D., & Wubbels, T. (2010). Teacher learning in the context of educational innovation: Learning activities and learning outcomes of experienced teachers. Learning and Instruction, 20(6), 533–548.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.09.001
Bandura, A., & Adams, N. E. (1977). Analysis of Self-Efficacy Theory of Behavioral Change. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 1(4), 287–310. Retrieved from https://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Bandura/Bandura1977CTR-Adams.pdf
Beijaard, D., Korthagen, F. A. J., & Verloop, N. (2007). Understanding how teachers learn as a prerequisite for promoting teacher Teacher learning as a research issue. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 13(2), 105–108.
http://doi.org/10.1080/13540600601152298
Biesta, G. (2012). Giving Teaching Back to Education: Responding to the Disappearance of the Teacher. Phenomenology & Practice, 6(2), 35–49. Retrieved from
http://www.phandpr.org/index.php/pandp/article/viewFile/111/175
Bohnsack, R., Pfaff, N., & Weller, W. (2010). Qualitative analysis and documentary method in international education research. Opladen: Barbara Budrich Publishers.
Bransford, J., Derry, S., Berliner, D., Hammerness, K., & Beckett, K. L. (2007). Theories of Learning and Their Roles in Teaching. In L. Darling-Hammond, J. Bransford, P.
LePage, K. Hammerness, & H. Duffy (Eds.), Preparing Teachers for a Changing World: What Teachers should Learn and be Able to do (pp. 40–87). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Caena, F. (2011). Literature review: Quality in teachers’ continuing professional development.
197
Carlo, A., Michel, A., Chabanne, J., Bucheton, D., Demougin, P., Gordon, J., … Valette, S.
(2015). Study on Policy Measures to Improve the Attractiveness of the Teaching Profession in Europe.
Cerna, L. (2013). The Nature of Policy Change and Implementation : A Review of Different Theoretical Approaches. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, 1–31. http://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0242-0
Cervinkova, H., & Kalman, O. (2016). European Doctorate in Teacher Education. Forum Oświatowe, 28(2), 10. Retrieved from http://www.edite.eu/
Cochran-Smith, M., & Demers, K. (2010). Research and Teacher Learning: Taking an
Inquiry Stance. In O. Kwo (Ed.), Teachers as Learners (pp. 13–44). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9676-0
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1999). Relationships of Knowledge and Practice: Teacher Learning in Communities. Review of Research in Education, 24, 249–305.
http://doi.org/10.2307/1167272
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2005). Research Methods in Education (Fifth).
London and New York: RoutledgeFalmer. Retrieved from
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-8527.2007.00388_4.x Czarniawska, B. (2004). Narratives in Social Science Research. Knowledge Creation
Diffusion Utilization, 2, 157. http://doi.org/10.4135/9781849209502
Czippan, K., Varga, A., & Benedict, F. (2010). Collaboration and Education for Sustainable Development. (Support - Partnership and Participation for a Sustainable Tomorrow, Ed.). Retrieved from http://mkne.hu/fajlok/hirek/SUPPORT_Coll-and-ESD-book.pdf Darling-Hammond, L. (1998). Teacher Learning that Supports Student Learning. Educational
Leadership, 55(5).
Darling-Hammond, L., Burns, D., Campbell, C., Goodwin, A. L., Hammerness, K., Low, E.
L., … Zeichner, K. (2017). Empowered Educators: How High-performing Systems shape Teaching Quality around the World. San Francisco: The Standford Centre for Opportunity Policy in Education (SCOPE).
Day, C., Sammons, P., Hopkins, D., Harris, A., Leithwood, K., Gu, Q., … Kington, A.
(2009). The Impact of School Leadership on Pupil Outcomes Final Report. Nottingham.
Retrieved from http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/11329/1/DCSF-RR108.pdf
Day, C., Sammons, P., Stobart, G., Kington, A., & Gu, Q. (2007). Teachers Matter:
Connecting Lives, Work and Effectiveness. (I. Goodson & A. Hargreaves, Eds.).
Berkshire: Open University Press.
De Corte, E. (2010). Historical developments in the understadning of learning. In H. Dumont, D. Istance, & F. Benavides (Eds.), The Nature of Learning (pp. 35–68). Paris: OECD Publishing.
198
de Sousa Ferreira, E. (1974). Portuguese colonialism in Africa: the end of an era. Paris: The Unesco Press. Retrieved from
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0001/000113/011345eo.pdf
Dilshad, R. M., & Latif, M. I. (2013). Focus Group Interview as a Tool for Qualitative Research: An Analysis. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences (PJSS), 33(1), 191–198.
Retrieved from http://www.bzu.edu.pk/PJSS/Vol33No12013/PJSS-Vol33-No1-16.pdf Dohmen, G. (1996). Lifelong Learning: Guidelines for a Modern Education Policy. Bonn:
Federal Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Technology.
Dumont, H., Istance, D., & Benavides, F. (2010). The Nature of Learning: Using Research to Inspire Practice. OECD. Paris: OECD Publishing.
http://doi.org/10.1177/105256298701100211
Elkjaer, B., & Wahlgren, B. (2006). Organizational Learning and Workplace Learning - Similarities and Differences. In E. Antonacopoulou, P. Jarvis, V. Andersen, B. Elkjaer,
& S. Høyrup (Eds.), Learning, Working and Living (pp. 15–32). Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ellis, A. K. (2017). The Nature of Educational Innovation. In A. M. Sidorkin & M. K.
Warford (Eds.), Reforms and Innovation in Education (pp. 37–51). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Ellström, P.-E. (2001). Integrating learning and work: Problems and prospects. Human Resource Development Quarterly Winter, 12(4), 421–435. Retrieved from
https://www.mah.se/PageFiles/41319/Ellström 2001.pdf
Ellström, P.-E. (2006). Two logics of learning. In E. Antonacopoulou, P. Jarvis, V. Andersen, B. Elkjaer, & S. Høyrup (Eds.), Learning, Working and Living (pp. 33–49). Hampshire:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Elmholdt, C. (2006). Innovative Learning is Not Enough. In E. Antonacopoulou, P. Jarvis, V.
Andersen, B. Elkjaer, & S. Høyrup (Eds.), Learning, Working and Living: Mapping the Terrain of Working Life Learning (pp. 50–64). Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
ELTE PPK. (2015). „OKOS KÖZNEVELÉS” - Javaslat a Nemzeti Oktatási Innovációs Rendszer stratégiájának kiegészítésére. Budapest. Retrieved from
http://www.ppk.elte.hu/file/noir_hg.pdf
ELTE PPK. (2016). The Learning Teacher. Retrieved December 20, 2017, from
https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https://ppk.elte.hu/file/edite_ejd_h20 20_elte_research_p.docx
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: an activity-theoretical approach to developmental research (First). Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit. Retrieved from http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/Paper/Engestrom/Learning-by-Expanding.pdf
Engeström, Y. (2015). Learning by Expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to
developmental research (Second). New York: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved
199 from www.cambridge.org
Eraut, M. (2000). Non-formal learning and tacit knowledge in professional work. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70 ( Pt 1)(September), 113–36.
http://doi.org/10.1348/000709900158001
Eraut, M. (2007). Learning from other people in the workplace. Oxford Review of Education, 33(4), 403–422. http://doi.org/10.1080/03054980701425706
European Commission. (2004). Common European Principles for Teacher Competences and Qualifications.
European Commission. (2013). Supporting Teacher Competence Development for Better Learning Outcomes. European Commission, Education and Training, 41.
http://doi.org/10.1093/carcin/bgt077
European Commission. (2015). Education and Training Monitor 2015 - Portugal.
Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. http://doi.org/10.2766/011698 European Commission. (2018a). Boosting teacher quality: pathways to effective policies.
Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. http://doi.org/10.2766/069297 European Commission. (2018b). Teachers and school leaders in schools as learning
organisations - Guiding principles for policy development in school education. Brussles.
Retrieved from http://www.inspiringchange.eu/pdf/4.0 Teachers and school leaders in schools as learning organisations FINAL.pdf
European Parliament. (2000). Lisbon European Council 23-24.03.2000: Conclusions of the Presidency. Retrieved from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/summits/lis1_en.htm
Fazekas, Á. (2018). The impact of EU-funded development interventions on teaching practices in Hungarian schools. European Journal of Education, 53(3), 377–392.
http://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12295
Field, J. (2006). Lifelong Learning and the New Educational Order (Second rev). Stoke on Trent: Trentham Books.
Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Giles, C., & Hargreaves, A. (2006). The Sustainability of Innovative Schools as Learning Organizations and Professional Learning Communities During Standardized Reform.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(1), 124–156.
http://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X05278189
Given, L. M. (2008). The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research (Two). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
Godin, B. (2014). Innovation and Creativity: A Slogan, Nothing but a Slogan (Project on the Intellectual History of Innovation No. 17). Montreal. Retrieved from