In Search for the Relationship Between Teachers’ Research Conceptions and Research Integration Practices
Author(s):
Wendy Schouteden (presenting / submitting) Jan Elen An Verburgh
Conference:
ECER 2015
Network:
22. Research in Higher Education
Format:
Paper

Session Information

22 SES 11 D, University Teachers and Their Conceptions, Emotions and Understandings

Paper Session

Time:
2015-09-10
17:15-18:45
Room:
340. [Main]
Chair:
Mariana Gaio Alves

Contribution

The relationship between research and teaching is considered as a defining characteristic of higher education (Healey, 2014). The current literature pays much attention to ways to improve and understand the relationship between research and teaching (Malcolm, 2014). One of the possible factors influencing teachers’ choices to integrate research in their teaching are teachers’ research conceptions (Brew, 2012). Research conceptions are thought to have a powerful influence on teachers’ teaching practices, in particular teachers’ research integration practices (Brew, 2012; Visser-Wijnveen, van Driel, van der Rijst, Verloop, & Visser, 2010). Although research conceptions (e.g., Kiley & Mullins, 2005; Griffioen, 2013) and research integration practices (e.g., Zimbardi & Myatt, 2012; Verburgh, 2013) have been separately well explored, there is a paucity of evidence illustrating direct links between research conceptions and research-integration practices (Authors, 2014).

Building on the ideas of Norton, Richardson, Hartley, Newstead, and Mayes (2005) concerning the relationship between teachers’ teaching conceptions and teaching practices, a framework was elaborated to analyse the relationship between teachers’ research conceptions and teaching practices (Authors, 2014). The framework distinguishes between teachers’ general research conceptions and contextualised research conceptions. General research conceptions are teachers‘ overall ideas about defining attributes of research. Contextualised research conceptions reveal the educational interpretation of the defining research attributes for the students of the teacher. Teachers’ contextualised research conceptions stem from the interaction between general research conceptions and teachers’ specific teaching context. Our study illuminated three categories of general research attributes: Research steps, Qualities of research processes, and Qualities of researchers, each consisting of different subcategories. When teachers considered their students, they reinterpreted their general research conceptions by making two differentiations. They differentiated on the one hand on the level of mastery of the research attributes, distinguishing between understanding or performing research attributes, and on the other hand they differentiated between the target of research attributes, distinguishing between a focus on scientific disciplines or a focus on professional settings.

A classification scheme to identify teachers’ research integration practices is also available. It is based on two perspectives in those practices: a focus on research processes and a focus on research results (Authors, 2014). Eight meaningful research integration practices are distinguished: 1. Facts, 2. Scientific Facts, 3. Research-based facts, 4. Research methods, 5. Segments of research, relevant for students, 6. Segments of research, functional for discipline, 7. Full research study, relevant for students and 8. Full research study, functional for discipline. Results indicate that in their studies students are confronted with very different research integration practices.

While conceptions on the one hand and practices on the other hand can be described, the ultimate question about the relationship between teachers’ research conceptions and their research integration practices remains unanswered. The present study therefore investigates the interplay between teachers’ general and contextualised research conceptions and their research integration practices by studying in an integrated way teachers’ general and contextualized research conceptions as well as their research integration practices. 

Method

Overall, the study is characterized as a series of four case-studies in one educational setting. In order to initially reduce complexity while at the same time acknowledging context-specificity, data were collected by means of semi-structured interviews, with 4 teachers in a specific bachelor programme. All teachers were active in the same institution and the same bachelor programme, scaled at level 6 in the ISCED 2011, that targets business. Business can be characterized as a soft-applied science (Biglan 1973). Each interview started with introductory questions about participants’ teaching and research experiences and responsibilities. Next, similar to our previous study (Authors, 2014), participants were asked to individually draw a person doing research. Afterwards they were invited to explain their drawings to the interviewer. The interviewer asked questions that helped the participant to discuss general research attributes. Then participants were asked to specify the meaning of the discussed general research attributes for their students. They are asked to explain what they want their current students to know or to be able to do after graduation in this particular program. In this phase participants’ contextualised research conceptions are discussed. Next, teachers are asked to select a relevant module, i.e. a module in which research-related goals have some importance. Teachers were encouraged to describe the selected module in detail by specifying what the students do in the module, what the nature is of the materials, how feedback is organized, what the role is of assessment, how students collaborate, what actions the teacher takes to inform and support the students. Different teaching practices and inherent teaching goals are discussed. Finally teachers are asked to describe how they would organize and implement that module in an ideal world where they could focus only on students’ learning. Finally, reasons why this ideal module cannot be provided are discussed. Teachers are invited to reflect on factors that would help them to deliver the ideal module. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed using a grounded theory approach (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). After a within-case analysis, taking the individual teacher as the unit of analysis, a cross-case analysis was performed to analyse the interplay between teachers’ general and contextualised research conceptions and their research integration practices (Miles & Huberman, 1994). For the analysis the previously developed coding scheme for distinguishing research conceptions as well as the coding scheme for distinguishing research integration practices are used.

Expected Outcomes

With respect to the outcomes the study is to reveal (a) differences between teachers with respect to their general research conceptions, while some will stress research steps others will highlight characteristics of the researcher; (b) differences between teachers’ contextualized research conceptions that relate to teachers’ goals with students and their assessment; (c) rather limited variation in research integration practices with a focus on discussing research results (3. Research- based facts) and on research methods/skills (4. Research methods or 5. Segments of research, relevant for students); (d) an absence of a clear relationship between teachers’ general research conceptions and their actual research integration practices, and (e) some but no explicit relationship between teachers’ contextualized research conceptions and their research integration practices, (f) a clear impact of teachers’ educational conceptions on their research integration practices, with a more student-oriented conception linked to a stronger focus on students’ research activities and (g) an impact of educational policy rules at the level of the institution on their research integration practices.

References

Authors, (2014). Brew, A. (2012). Teaching and research: New relationships and their implications for inquiry-based teaching and learning in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 31, 101-114. DOI:10.1080/07294360.2012.642844 Griffioen, D. M. E. (2013). Research in higher professional education: A staff perspective. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam. Healey, M., Jenkins, A., & Lea, J. (2014). Developing research-based curricula in college-based higher education. York: The Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/heinfe/developing_research-based_curricula_in_cbhe_14.pdf Heggen, K., Karseth, B., & Kyvik, S. (2010). The relevance of research for the improvement of education and professional practice. In S. Kyvik & B. Lepori (Eds.), The research mission of higher education institutions outside the university sector (pp. 45-60). Dordrecht: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4020-9244-2_3 Kiley, M., & Mullins, G. (2005). Supervisors’ conceptions of research: What are they? Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 49, 245-262. DOI:10.1080/00313830500109550 Kyvik, S., & Lepori, B. (2010). Research in higher education institutions outside the university sector. In S. Kyvik & B. Lepori (Eds.), The research mission of higher education institutions outside the university sector (pp. 3-21). Dordrecht: Springer. DOI:10.1007/978-1-4020-9244-2_1 Malcolm, M. (2014). A critical evaluation of resent progress in understanding the role of the research-teaching link in higher education. Higher Education, 62, 289-301. DOI: 10.1007/s10734-013-9650-8 Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. An Expanded sourcebook (2 ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage. Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Verburgh, A. (2013). Research Integration in Higher Education: Prevalence and Relationship with Critical Thinking. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. KU Leuven, Leuven. Visser-Wijnveen, G. J., van Driel, J. H., van der Rijst, R. M., Verloop, N., & Visser, A. (2010). The ideal research-teaching nexus in the eyes of academics: Building profiles. Higher Education Research & Development, 29, 195-210. DOIi:10.1080/07294360903532016 Zimbardi, K. & Myatt, P. (2014). Embedding undergraduate research experiences within the curriculum: a cross-disciplinary study of the key characteristics guiding implementation, Studies in Higher Education, 39 (2), 233-250. DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2011.651448

Author Information

Wendy Schouteden (presenting / submitting)
KU LEUVEN
Centre for Instructional Psychology and Technology
LEUVEN
Jan Elen
KU LEUVEN, Belgium
An Verburgh
KU LEUVEN, Belgium

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.