Session Information
15 SES 07 A, Trust and Community Visions in Partnerships
Paper Session
Contribution
The suggested presentation will describe findings from the study “DigiSchoolNet – Digital School Development in Networks”, funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research in Germany and carried out at the University of Duisburg-Essen. Against the backdrop of requiring educational systems to enable people to understand and shape current and future societal changes – for example in the increasingly digitalised world or regarding the challenges of sustainable development – the study analyses school development processes in and between schools in networks. Specifically, networks between schools and further (regional) partners (e.g. universities, educational administration, providers of non-formal education) are considered, thus it is analysed how transfer of knowledge or practical examples between schools and their local community is organised and conducted.
International literature shows that networking of schools can contribute to different dimensions of school development. Several practical examples of school networks have been studied (e.g. Brown, 2019; Daly & Finnigan, 2010; Rürup et al. 2015; Jungermann et al., 2018). School networks have been shown to support teaching and learning processes and to positively influence school life (e.g. Czerwanski, 2003). They can foster professional learning of teachers, innovation (Brown, 2019; Berkemeyer et al., 2008;) and help to strategically tackle school development by exchanging knowledge and experiences (Bremm et al., 2017).
The aim of “DigiSchoolNet” is to identify requirements of successful collaborative school networks in the context of digitalisation as part of school development processes. The study is organised in two subprojects (qualitative interview study and egocentric network analysis) and both will be introduced in the presentation. Both parts share common ground as to the theoretical approach of discerning several areas of school development (organizational, instructional, personal, technological; Heinen & Kerres, 2015; Fullan, 2013). Subproject one utilizes content analyses of school documents as well as interviews with key persons in school networks in order to retrospectively identify supporting and hindering factors to school development. The main focus of the presentation, however, will be put on subproject two, which aims at analysing transfer in school networks in a panel design. The theoretical background of this subproject draws on concepts from social network analysis, which in recent years is increasingly used in educational sciences (see e.g. Daly & Finnigan, 2010; Kolleck, 2019). Furthermore, the concept of teacher collaboration is employed, which can take on three forms following Gräsel, Fußangel & Pröbstel (2006): (1) Exchange (as informing each other about professional contents and exchanging materials, (2) division of work (e.g. preparing lessons or exams together) and (3) co-construction (aligning individual knowledge so that new knowledge or common solutions are developed). These forms show increasing levels of goal interdependence and trust and decreasing teacher autonomy.
The objective of this project part is to analyse the relevance of relations and communication structures for transfer processes regarding school development in the context of digitalisation in comparison to education for sustainable development. This approach aims at possible differences in actor constellations, communication and transfer pathways or organisational processes in the two domains. Thus, professional networks of teachers in this context are analysed along the three forms of collaboration in different areas of school development. Changes in such networks will be identified and typical actor constellations in transfer processes can be revealed.
The following main research questions are addressed:
- Which forms of collaboration (exchange, division of work, co-construction) can be observed in the course of time in the school networks and in individual schools?
- In how far can connections between forms of collaboration and areas of school development be observed?
- How and under which conditions is knowledge further transported within the individual schools?
Method
The focussed subproject employs a longitudinal ego-centred network analysis of two school networks focusing on topics of digitalisation and one school network focusing on sustainable development. Four to five schools from each network participate with a minimum of one teacher from each school. A mixed-methods design of social network analysis (Hollstein, 2014) is used, where quantitative data is collected every three months online using an adapted version of the software tool Graphical Ego-centered Network Survey Interface (GENSI) (Stark & Krosnick, 2017). This tool provides graphical support for participants to reduce the burden and make the questionnaire more enjoyable. In the first wave, few socio-demographic items (type of school that ‘ego’ teaches at, seniority, subjects, functions at school, age) and scales on attitudes towards implementing the innovation (information and communication technology education for sustainable development, respectively) in teaching at school were covered additionally. Data is analysed to draw network maps (Perry, Pescosolido & Borgatti, 2018) of teachers over time and look for network structures and features. Furthermore, for the qualitative part in-depth interviews with selected teachers are planned at the end of the project. Cases which seem interesting will be selected from the quantitative data to gain more information on the schools, persons, network relations, and what these meant for the school development process from the teachers’ perspective.
Expected Outcomes
The “DigiSchoolNet” study with its two subprojects is intended to gain information about school development processes organised in school networks in a comprehensive manner. It thereby focuses on current societal change processes which pose new challenges on educational systems and are currently high up on the (international) political agenda. Findings from seven waves of the longitudinal network analysis will be presented, which allow for insights into teachers’ professional networks, their size and composition, e.g. regarding homophily and multiplexity of relations (meaning to identify in how far relations in the different forms of collaboration differ or are maintained with the same persons). The presentation will close with discussing how these findings can provide insights into transfer, communication and collaboration processes in networks and inside individual schools and can inform about important actors in implementing innovations at schools. By combining network maps and interviews reflecting on the relations at the end of the three-year project insights can be gained into how relations and important actors have supported or hindered school development from the teachers’ perspective. Such information is useful for other schools on their way to implementing change and for educational policies. The project therefore offers transferable understandings and informed knowledge to help schools and school networks in all of Europe tackle societal changes as current and future challenges for school development by drawing on one of their most valuable resources: teachers and their everyday interactions. On another note, the project also heeds the increasing demand for innovative mixed-method studies in educational research (Völcker, 2019).
References
Berkemeyer, N., Bos, W., Manitius, V., & Müthing, K. (2008). „Schulen im Team “: Einblicke in netzwerkbasierte Unterrichtsentwicklung. Unterrichtsentwicklung in Netzwerken. Konzeptionen, Befunde, Perspektiven, 19-70. Bremm, N., Eiden, S., Neumann, C., Webs, T., van Ackeren, I., & Holtappels, H.G. (2017). Evidenzbasierter Schulentwicklungsansatz für Schulen in herausfordernden Lagen. In: V. Manitius & P. Dobbelstein (Hrsg.), Schulentwicklungsarbeit in herausfordernden Lagen. Waxmann Verlag, 140-158. Brown, C. (2019). Exploring the current context for Professional Learning Networks, the conditions for their success, and research needs moving forwards [version 2; peer review: 5 approved]. Emerald Open Research, 1, doi:10.12688/emeraldopenres.12904.2. Czerwanski, A. (2003). Schulentwicklung durch Netzwerkarbeit. Erfahrungen aus den Lernnetzwerken im Netzwerk innovativer Schulen in Deutschland“. Gütersloh: Verlag Bertelsmann-Stiftung. Cress, U., Moskaliuk, J., & Jeong, H. (Eds.). (2016). Mass collaboration and education (16). New York, NY: Springer. Daly, A.J.; Finnigan, K.S. (2010). A bridge between worlds: Understanding network structure to understand change strategy. Journal of Educational Change, 11, 111-138, doi:10.1007/s10833-009-9102-5 Fullan, M. (2013). Stratosphere: Integrating technology, pedagogy, and change knowledge. Toronto: Pearson. Gräsel, C., Fussangel, K., & Pröbstel, C. (2006). Lehrkräfte zur Kooperation anregen – eine Aufgabe für Sisyphos? Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 52(2), 205-219. Heinen, R., & Kerres, M. (2015). Individuelle Förderung mit digitalen Medien–Handlungsfelder für die systematische, lernförderliche Integration digitaler Medien in Schule und Unterricht. In Bertelsmannstiftung, Individuell fördern mit digitalen Medien (S. 96–156). Hollstein, B. (2014). Mixed methods social network research: an introduction. In S. Domínguez & B. Hollstein (Eds.), Mixed methods social networks research. Design and applications (pp. 3-34). New York: Cambridge University press. Jungermann, A., Pfänder, H. & Berkemeyer, N. (2018). Schulische Vernetzung in der Praxis. Wie Schulen Unterricht gemeinsam entwickeln können. Münster: Waxmann. Kolleck, N. (2019). The emergence of a global innovation in education: diffusing Education for Sustainable Development through social networks. Environmental Education Research, 1-19, doi:10.1080/13504622.2019.1675593 Perry, L.P., Pescosolido, B.A., & Borgatti, S.P. (2018). Egocentric Network Analysis. Foundations, Methods, and Models. New York: Cambridge University Press. Rürup, M., Röbken, H., Emmerich, M., & Dunkake, I. (2015). Netzwerke im Bildungswesen. Eine Einführung in ihre Analyse und Gestaltung. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Stark, T.H. & Krosnick, J.A. (2017). GENSI: A New Graphical Tool to Collect Ego-Centered Network Data. Social Networks, 48, 36–45. Völcker, M. (2019). The Quality of ‘Good’ Mixed Methods Research: Development and Discussion of an Orientation Framework. In J. Lüdemann & A. Otto (Eds.), Triangulation und Mixed-Methods. Reflexionen theoretischer und forschungspraktischer Herausforderungen (pp. 74-99). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
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.