The goal of the paper is to use micro-level analysis of intergenerational learning (IGL below) situations to develop a typology of IGL among teachers, in order to increase our understanding of individual IGL situations as well as contribute to understanding IGL among teachers as an integral phenomenon. The paper first discusses possible approaches to IGL typology creation and then introduces a specific IGL typology based on qualitative research among basic and secondary school teachers in the Czech Republic. The research was opened by participant observation of more and less structured teacher encounters. The observation enabled creating a structure for one-to-one and group interviews, which was additionally adjusted (Johnson, Christensen, 2008). Selecting respondents, we aimed to account for their various degrees of involvement in IGL processes, generational variety and variety in terms of organizational structure. Data from 22 individual and group interviews was analyzed at three levels (open coding designed to identify IGL situations; situation analysis using content, interaction and incentives analysis; grounding the emerging typology in data) The typology we present identifies four IGL types based on their specific features in terms of content and interaction. Five types of intergenerational learning interactions were specified, distinguishing whether they are overt (transmission, imitation, experience) or covert (participation, perception). A second criterion for defining IGL types was the way the learner handled the learning content in question, namely whether they were trying to accept or adjust it. These specifics at the level of content and interaction helped us to define four types of intergenerational learning: accepting IGL, transforming IGL, exploratory IGL and inspiration-driven IGL. Accepting IGL is characterized by significant educator input, predetermining a hierarchical arrangement and the need for selecting contents beneficial to the learner from a different generation. Exploratory IGL is managed by the learner himself and herself, who is selecting segments of common workplace interaction which then become learning content often without the educator knowing. Transforming IGL involves transformation of learning contents offered by the educator, and finally, in inspiration-driven IGL the intergenerational interaction inspires the learner to create new learning contents. The paper concludes with a discussion of potential benefits of viewing IGL through the typology presented. We ask the questions whether the types of IGL may be arranged in a hierarchy and whether IGL is a tool for maintaining the status quo or rather for innovating the school.

Bauer, J., & Gruber, H. (2007). Workplace changes and workplace learning: Advantages of an educational micro perspective. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 26(6), 675-688. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. Eraut, M. (2011). How researching learning at work can lead to tools for enhancing learning. The Sage handbook of workplace learning, 181-197. Illeris, K. (2007). How we learn : learning and non-learning in school and beyond. London: Routledge. Kennedy, A. (2014). Understanding continuing professional development: the need for theory to impact on policy and practice. Professional development in education, 40(5), 688-697. Leshem, S. (2008). Novices and veterans journeying into real-world teaching: How a veteran learns from novices. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(1), 204-215. Novotný, P., & Brücknerová, K. (2014). Intergenerational Learning Among Teachers: An Interaction Perspective. Studia paedagogica, 19(4), 35. Ulvik, M., & Langørgen, K. (2012). What can experienced teachers learn from newcomers? Teachers and Teaching, 18(1), 43-57. Verbiest, E. (2011). Developing professional learning communities. Paper presented at the AERA Conference. Whitehouse, E. B., Fallcreek, S., Whitehouse, C., P. (2000). Intergenerational community schools: a new practice for a new time. Educational Gerontology, 26(8), 761-770.