Students’ Voices in Schools: a Catalyst for Teacher Development?

Author(s):

Kiki Messiou(presenting / submitting)Mel Ainscow(presenting)

Conference:

ECER 2016

Network:

01. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations

Format:

Paper

Session Information

01 SES 02 B, Student Voice for Professional Learning

Paper Session

Time:

2016-08-23

15:15-16:45

Room:

OB-E2.18

Chair:

Ken Jones

Contribution

Teachers have always faced the challenge of responding to student diversity, especially since migration within countries and between countries has increased (Corak, 2004). At the same time, inclusive education is increasingly seen internationally more broadly as a reform that supports and welcomes diversity amongst all learners (UNESCO, 2009). There is therefore, an increased interest in finding ways to support teachers in their efforts to develop more effective ways to respond to student diversity. This paper presents the findings of a three-year project ‘Responding to diversity by engaging with students’ voices'. The study involved two cycles of collaborative action research carried out by teams of teachers and researchers in three countries (i.e. England, Portugal and Spain) that led to the creation of what we see as an innovative model for teacher development, which aims to support teachers in their efforts to develop inclusive practices. What is distinctive about this model is the merging of two approaches: lesson study and engaging with students’ voices. The paper will focus on the impact of using students’ voices as a catalyst for teacher development. More specifically, it will address the following questions:

- How can teachers develop more inclusive practices by engaging with the views of students?

- What is the impact of an engagement with students’ voices on teacher professional development?

Ways of thinking about teacher development have changed significantly over the last twenty years (Avalos, 2011; Bleicher, 2014), moving away from traditional approaches of involvement in external courses, often deemed to be unrelated to existing teaching practices and the realities of classroom conditions (Butler & Schnellert, 2012; Villegas-Reimers, 2003), with an emphasis on more collaborative approaches that appear to be central for maximising teacher learning. As such, there has been an increasing emphasis on the use of collaborative inquiry to facilitate teacher development in research carried out in a variety of contexts, such as Canada, Europe and the USA (e.g. Bleicher, 2014; Butler & Schnellert, 2012; Fernandez-Díaz, Calvo & Rodriguez-Hoyos, 2014; Horn & Little, 2010; Jaipal & Figg, 2011).

One approach that facilitates collaboration amongst teachers and has been well documented as being a powerful approach for professional development is that of ‘lesson study’, a systematic procedure for the development of teaching that is well established in Japan and some other Asian countries (Hiebert et al., 2002; Lo, Yan, & Pakey, 2005; Stigler & Hiebert,1999). Collaboration is central in lesson study, where teachers work in groups to plan, teach and analyse a lesson, with the aim being to improve the effectiveness of the experiences that teachers provide for all of their students. Usually lesson study relies on the views of teachers (Lewis et al., 2006), taking no account of what the students think. However, our earlier work (see Messiou, 2006, 2012) had led us to believe that engaging with the views of students can be a powerful new factor, not least in creating interruptions that might encourage teachers to think in alternative ways.

Method

The project involved two cycles of collaborative action research with the focus on creating ‘climates of inquiry in communities of practice, often with different stakeholders functioning as co-researchers’ (p. 345, Mitchell, Reilly, & Logue, 2009). In other words, for this project, teachers and other practitioners working in schools, as well as students on some occasions, took the role of co-researchers, supported by team of researchers in eight secondary schools, in the cities of Hull, Lisbon, Madrid and Manchester. During the first cycle of the project each school formed a research team consisting of three teachers. Each team using a framework of seven overlapping steps used the process of lesson study and students’ views to explore how their classrooms could be made more inclusive. The seven steps were: 1. Form a working group, 2. Analyse diversity in the school, 3. Collect the views of students, 4. Plan research lessons, 5. Teach the research lessons, 6. Interview students, 7. Identify implications for practice. At the end of this first cycle the teachers and researchers evaluated the processes collaboratively and came to a new formulation which involved four overlapping steps, as follows: 1. Form research groups 2. Discuss diversity, learning and teaching 3. Plan, teach and analyse research lessons 4. Identify implications for future practice Throughout both cycles, the university researchers took the role of supporting the practitioners colleagues, on the one hand, and on the other hand helped in collecting evidence of various forms, such as observation reports, summaries of meetings, lesson plans and materials, and video recordings. In addition, data were collected through interviews with a sample of the participating teachers and students to gather their views about the process used, and the benefits and challenges associated with this. One of the challenges was to analyse the multiplicity of data in a coherent and trustworthy manner. This was addressed by encouraging triangulation between different kinds of data and dialogue between different perspectives. With this in mind, at the end of each cycle, accounts of practice were developed by the researchers, based on the evidence that had been collected. Initial drafts of these were discussed with the teacher coordinators within the school and refined as a result of their comments. This provided a means of establishing the validity of these accounts and the reliability of the analysis on which they were based, using a member check approach (Lincoln and Guba, 1985).

Expected Outcomes

The analysis of the data illustrated that the whole process adopted in the project had an impact on teachers’ professional development. Above all, it seems that students’ voices was a key factor in terms of teachers’ learning. Through students’ views teachers were able to see alternative perspectives, that might have gone otherwise missed. Though teachers’ collaboration that can be achieved through the use of lesson study is indeed a very powerful aspect for teacher professional development (Cordingley, Bell, Evans, & Firth, 2005), we argue that what is distinctive here, is that teachers do not just collaborate with other teachers, but also with their students. Illustrative examples from the schools will be used in the presentation that demonstrate this point. Finally, the analysis of the processes of the project and the data gathered led to the development of a model for professional development, which involves four interacting processes: ‘engaging with students’ voices’, ‘talking about diversity’ ‘developing inclusive practices’ and ‘learning from experiences’. Central to this model is the idea of engaging with the views of students, a process that should permeate all the processes involved. Our research suggests that it is this factor, more than anything else, that makes the difference as far as responding to learner diversity is concerned. In particular, it is this that brings a critical edge to the process that has the potential to challenge teachers to go beyond the sharing of existing practices in order to invent new possibilities for engaging students in their lessons. Such an approach views students as resources rather than as problems (Ainscow, 1999), and can facilitate teacher professional development in a powerful way.

References

Ainscow, M. (1999). Understanding the development of inclusive schools. London: Routledge. Ainscow, M. (2007). Taking an inclusive turn. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 7(1), 3-7. Avalos, B. (2011). Teacher professional development in teaching and teacher education over ten years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 10-20. Bleicher, R. E. (2014). A collaborative action research approach to professional learning. Professional Development in Education, 40(5), 802- 821. Butler, D. L., & Schnellert, L. (2012). Collaborative inquiry in teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, 1206-1220. Corak, M. (Ed.). (2004). Generational income mobility in North America and Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cordingley, P., Bell, M., Evans, D., & Firth, A. (2005). The impact of collaborative CPD on classroom teaching and learning. In Research evidence in education library. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London. Fernandez-Díaz, E., Calvo, A., & Rodríguez-Hoyos, C. (2014). Towards a collaborative action research in Spain to improve teaching practice. Educational Action Research, 22(3), 397- 410. Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., & Stigler, J. W. (2002). A knowledge base for the teaching profession: what would it look like and how can we get one? Educational Researcher, 31(5), 3- 15. Horn, I. S., & Little, J. W. (2010). Attending to problems of practice: routines and resources for professional learning in teachers' workplace interactions. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 181-217. Jaipal, K., & Figg, C. (2011). Collaborative action research approaches promoting professional development for elementary school teachers. Educational Action Research, 19(1), 59-72. 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. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Lo, M. L., Yan, P. W., & Pakey, C. P. M. (2005). For each and everyone: Catering for individual differences through learning studies. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. Messiou, K. (2006a). Conversations with children: making sense of marginalisation in primary school settings. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 21(1), 39 -54. Messiou, K. (2012). Confronting marginalisation in education: A framework for promoting inclusion. London: Routledge. Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap. New York: The Free Press. UNESCO. (2009). Guidelines for inclusion: Ensuring access to education for all. Paris: UNESCO. Villegas-Reimers, E. (2003). Teacher professional development: An international review of the literature. Paris: UNESCO, Institute for Educational Planning.

Author Information

Kiki Messiou (presenting / submitting)

University of Southampton

Southampton Education School

Southampton

Mel Ainscow (presenting)

University of Manchester, United Kingdom

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 you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.