Developing University Teachers’ Identity

This report presents the results of the 7^thstage of the longitudinal research performed at two universities during 2004-2015. The main goal of the longitudinal research was to investigate educational possibilities for the development of the intercultural communication (Bruneviciute and Veckiene, 2004; 2009; Bruneviciute et al., 2010). One of the previous – the 4^th stage of the study – focused on the analysis of the practical activity of the intercultural/interdisciplinary team, striving to improve education programs and organizational practice. The main goalof the 7^th stage of the research was to investigate educational and practical possibilities for the development of intercultural communication, highlighting the development of the identity of University teachers – tutors of Problem-Based Learning (PBL) – as learning group members.

The concept of the Learning Professional Organization (Hargreaves, 2003), as a possible strategy for meeting challenges of the multidisciplinary knowledge society, was used for research design. We focused on tutors’ competence in a) the intercultural communication and collaboration to balance learning and social support processes, and b) permanent reflection on the group and team work experience. Since the different professional experience makes the process of collaboration challenging, but also increases knowledge about the PBL tutors’ identity, the problem of the lack of practical development of University teachers as team members, as leaders, as supervisors, and as tutors emerges.

Within the context of the paradigm of learning, the concept of learning as the pickup and reproduction of information is replaced by that of an interactive dynamic process of searching, where investigation and interaction with the environment leads to the birth of new understanding (Mac Farline, 1995; Greene et al., 1973.). The aim of teaching is the guidance of the learning process in an educational environment through the creation and improvement of effective and efficient learning-maintaining conditions.

Any innovation is uncertain, fragile, political, and imperialistic. It is most likely to flourish where conditions allow flexibility, quick action and intensive support, and coalition formation, and to grow in organizations that have integrative structures and cultures emphasizing diversity and multiply structural linkages both inside and outside the organization. Such organizations are better connected with the key external resources and operate in a favorable institutional environment. Interdisciplinary teams and transdisciplinary networks are essential in this context.

Berger, P. L. and Luckman, T. (1999). Socialinės tikrovės konstravimas. Vilnius: Pradai. (Social Construction of the Reality) (in Lithuanian). Bourdieu, P. (1994), Language and Symbolic Power, Cambridge Brodner, P. (2009). Sustainability in Knowledge-based companies. Creating SustainableWork Systems. Routledge, London and New York. R. Brunevičiūtė; N. Večkienė; L. Kyburienė. (2010). Model of the Socially Integral Teaching/ Learning Environment in Classroom. The annual conference on Research ECER 2010. Helsinki, Finland. R. Brunevičiūtė, N.P. Večkienė. (2009). The Factors of the Environment of Studies: 20 Years of Transformation in Lithuania. The annual conference on Research ECER, 2009. Vienna, Austria. Bruneviciute, R., Veckiene, N. (2004). Creation of the environment for learning to communicate in an intercultural team. European Conference on Educational Research University Crete. Coleman, J.S. (2005). Socialinės teorijos pagrindai. Vilnius: Margi raštai. Dominelli L. (2004). Social Work: Theory and Practice for a Changing Profession, Polity Press, Cambridge. Foucault, M. (1972). The Archaeology of Knowledge. London: Routledge. Mac Farlane. (1995). Future Patterns of Teaching and Learning. The changing university? , SRHE. Gendron, B. (2004). Why Emotional capital Matters in Education and in Labout Market? Toward and Optimal Expoitation of Human Capital and Knowledge Management. Les Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques, serie range, 113 p. 35-60. Hargreaves, A. (2003). Teaching in the Knowledge Society, education in the age of insecurity. Open University Press. Kira, M., Van Eijnatten, F.M. (2009). Sustained by Work: Individual and Social Sustainability in Work Organizations. Creating Sustainable Work Systems. Routledge, London and New York, 233-247. Kolb, D., A. (1984). Experiential Learning. Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Večkienė, N., Eidukevičiūtė, J. (2005). Inter-disciplinary Teams and Transdisciplinary Networks for Child and Family Inclusion: the Relevence of European Theory to Lithuanian Practice. Social Work with Families, Children and Young People in Europe, 51-169. Večkienė, N., Večkys, V. (2003). Social Exclusion in the Process of Transition: Lithuanian case. – Old and New Poverty in Post-communist Europe. Challenges for Social Work. Jagiellonian University, Krakow, p. 71-85.