06 SES 17, The Tried and Trusted or Designing for Innovation? Risks, Benefits and Participation in Developing Innovative + Flexible Educational Facilities Part 2
Symposium continued from 06 SES 16
The transition from traditional classrooms and teaching to co-teaching in Innovative Learning Environments (ILE) involves a range of interdisciplinary stakeholders including architecture, education, management and psychology. Strategic priorities, educational leadership factors, policy debates and even public and political opinions also influence the development and implementation of innovative learning environments (OECD, 2017). Yet, there is limited knowledge about how key stakeholders in the educational system perceive these essential changes to their work environment and professional practice (Schabmann et.al, 2016). There are risks associated with not hearing teachers’ voice, as teachers are required to transform their practice, and their perspectives also contribute to the development of well-informed evaluations (Earl & Timperley, 2015) and a holistic evidence base (Bourke & Loveridge, 2013). Teachers carry much of the risk inherent in the transition from traditional classroom approaches to ILEs, and a key element of this risk is ‘opening up’ to constant negotiation and collaboration around teaching practice. The study reported here has captured teacher perceptions of the non-cognitive skills (personal attributes, skills and dispositions) underpinning teacher collaboration in an ILE and how these impacted on their professional practices and qualities. In committing to collaborative practice, teachers are vulnerable to criticism, emotional upsets, communication problems, power imbalances and other inherent personal or interpersonal challenges. Whilst these conditions do pose risks for teacher wellbeing and self-efficacy, they also present opportunities for exceptional professional and personal growth. The study participants were 48 teachers from different primary schools in an educational jurisdiction spanning regional and rural areas in NSW, Australia. The participants had all worked in single-teacher traditional classroom contexts and, at the time of the study, they worked as co-teachers in ILEs. A mixed-methods approach to the inquiry utilised an online survey and, later, follow-up focus groups. The resulting quantitative data, from some of survey questions, was descriptively analysed, and qualitative data analysis (coding and theme identification) was applied to open-ended survey responses and the focus group discussions. The results have highlighted increasing requirements for interpersonal skills, communication, teamwork and problem solving between teacher colleagues, changes that were unanticipated and difficult to navigate without specific support, suggesting that this domain of transformation in teacher work requires more focus in school leadership and policy initiatives. Teacher wellbeing and the important role of critical reflective practice are implicated. Further, the findings suggest the need for more research about development of teachers’ interpersonal and intrapersonal skills in the workplace.
Bourke, R., & Loveridge, J. (2013). A scientist-practitioner model for inclusive education: Supporting graduate students to conduct systematic reviews for evidence-based practice. New Zealand Journal of Teachers’ Work, 14 (1), 4-24 Earl, L. & Timperley, H. (2015). Evaluative thinking for successful educational innovation. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 122. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5jrxtk1jtdwf-en Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2017). The OECD Handbook for Innovative Learning Environments. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264277274-en Schabmann, A., Popper, V., Schmidt, B. M., Kühn, C. Pitro, U. & Spiel, C. (2016). The relevance of innovative school architecture for school principals. School Leadership & Management, 36(2), 184-203. doi:10.1080/13632434.2016.1196175
00. Central Events (Keynotes, EERA-Panel, EERJ Round Table, Invited Sessions)
Network 1. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Network 2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Network 3. Curriculum Innovation
Network 4. Inclusive Education
Network 5. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Network 6. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Network 7. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Network 8. Research on Health Education
Network 9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Network 10. Teacher Education Research
Network 11. Educational Effectiveness and Quality Assurance
Network 12. LISnet - Library and Information Science Network
Network 13. Philosophy of Education
Network 14. Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research
Network 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Network 16. ICT in Education and Training
Network 17. Histories of Education
Network 18. Research in Sport Pedagogy
Network 19. Ethnography
Network 20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Network 22. Research in Higher Education
Network 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Network 24. Mathematics Education Research
Network 25. Research on Children's Rights in Education
Network 26. Educational Leadership
Network 27. Didactics – Learning and Teaching
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- 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.