Advertisement

Journal of Educational Change

, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 373–402 | Cite as

Collective learning in primary schools and teacher education institutes

  • Jos Castelijns
  • Marjan Vermeulen
  • Quinta Kools
Article
First Online:

Abstract

Many innovations in education are not completed, even if they are well thought out in advance. One of the main causes is the organization’s lack of learning ability, combined with a shortage of teachers’ and students’ ownership with respect to the renewal of ideas and design. In communities of learners, teachers and students collaborate and learn together in order to shape innovations in their daily practice. Their ability to learn collectively is a key factor in developing a learning organization. So far, insights into how processes of collective learning can be designed effectively, and which critical factors play a role, have been based on limited empirical research. This article’s goal is to contribute to the development of these insights, using the results of a study based on 48 cases of collective learning in communities of learners in primary schools and teacher education institutes. The results suggest that although collective learning rarely takes place in most cases, many outcomes are created that affect all community members. This leads to the conclusion that some participants create outcomes, not only on behalf of themselves but also on behalf of others.

Keywords

Collaborative inquiry Collective learning Communities of learners Knowledge creation Professional learning communities 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  2. Bolam, R., McMahon, A., Stoll, L., Thomas, S., & Wallace, M. (2005). Creating and sustaining effective professional learning communities: Research Report No. 637. London: Department of Education and Skills.Google Scholar
  3. Brown, A., & Danaher, P. (2008). Towards collaborative professional learning in the first year early childhood teacher education practicum: Issues in negotiating the multiple interests of stakeholder feedback. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 36, 147–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Castelijns, J., Koster, B., & Vermeulen, M. (2009). Vitaliteit in processen van collectief leren. Samen kennis creëren in basisscholen en lerarenopleidingen. (Vitality in processes of collective learning. Creating knowledge together in elementary schools and teachers training). Antwerpen: Garant.Google Scholar
  5. Chin-ki Lee, J., Zhang, Z., & Yin, H. (2011). A multilevel analysis of the impact of a professional learning community, faculty trust in colleagues and collective efficacy on teacher commitment to students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 820–830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Coalition of Essential Schools. (2012). http://www.alliance.brown.edu/pubs/changing_systems/teach_to_student/ChalkTalk.pdf. Retrieved from the web 16 August 2012.
  7. Cook-Sather, A. (2007). What would happen if we treated students as those with opinions that matter? The benefits to principals and teachers of supporting youth engagement in school. NASSP Bulletin, 91, 343–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cordingley, P., Bell, M., Rundell, B., & Evans, D. (2003). 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.Google Scholar
  9. Cordingley, P., Bell, M., Thomason, S., & Firth, A. (2005). The impact of collaborative continuing professional development (CPD) on classroom teaching and learning. Review study. Centre for the Use of Research and Evidence in Education (CUREE).Google Scholar
  10. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2002). The ‘what’ and ‘why’ of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behaviour. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dixon, N. M. (2000). Common knowledge. How companies thrive by sharing what they know. Boston: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  12. DuFour, R. (2004). What is a ‘‘professional learning community’’? [electronic version]. Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6.Google Scholar
  13. Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2010). Studies of expansive learning: Foundations, findings and future challenges. Educational Research Review, 5, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fielding, M. (2001). Students as radical agents of change. Journal of Educational Change, 2, 123–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fielding, M. (2004). Transformative approaches to student voice: Theoretical underpinnings, recalcitrant realities. British Educational Research Journal, 30, 295–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  17. Garavan, T. N., & McCarthy, A. (2008). Collective learning processes and human resource development. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 10, 451–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gerlak, K., & Heikkila, T. (2011). Building a theory of learning in collaboratives: Evidence from the Everglades Restoration Program. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21, 619–640 (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
  19. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  20. Hannay, L. M., & Earl, L. (2012). School district triggers for reconstructing professional knowledge. Journal of Educational Change, 13, 311–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hargreaves, A., & Shirley, D. (2009). The fourth way. The inspiring future for educational change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin/Sage.Google Scholar
  22. Hipp, K. K., Bumpers Huffman, J., Pankake, A., & Olivier, D. (2008). Sustaining professional learning communities: case studies. Journal of Educational Change, 9, 173–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Katz, S., & Earl, L. (2010). Learning about networked learning communities. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 21, 27–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lockhorst, D. (2004). Design principles for a CSCL environment in teacher training. Utrecht: Utrecht University.Google Scholar
  25. Lomos, C., Hofman, R. H., & Bosker, R. (2011). The relationship between departments as professional communities and student achievement in secondary schools. Teacher and Teacher Education, 27, 722–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lundy, L. (2007). Voice is not enough. Conceptualising article 12 of the United Nations convention on the rights of the child. British Educational Research Journal, 33, 927–942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Marks, H., & Louis, K. S. (1999). Teacher empowerment and the capacity for organizational learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35, 707–750.Google Scholar
  28. Mittendorf, K., Geijsel, F., Hoeve, A., De Laat, M. F., & Nieuwenhuis, L. (2006). Communities of practice as stimulating forces for collective learning. Journal of Workplace Learning, 18, 298–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Onderwijsraad, (2008). Opbrengstgericht werken en het wegwerken van tekorten (National Eduational Council: Data driven teaching and making up arrears). Den Haag: Onderwijsraad.Google Scholar
  30. Opfer, V. D., & Pedder, D. (2011). Conceptualizing teacher professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 81, 376–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ponte, P. J., Ax, J., Beijaard, D., & Wubbels, T. (2004). Teachers’ professional development of professional knowledge through action research and the facilitation of this by teacher educators. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 571–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Putnam, L. L. (2010). Communication as changing the negotiation game. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 38, 325–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schildkamp, K., & Kuiper, W. (2010). Data informed curriculum reform: Which data, what purposes and promoting and hindering factors. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 482–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Scribner, J., Cockrell, K., Cockrell, D., & Valentine, J. (1999). Creating professional communities in schools through organizational learning: An evaluation of a school improvement process. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35, 130–160.Google Scholar
  35. Simons, R. J., & Ruijters, M. C. P. (2001). Work-related learning: Elaborate, expand and externalize. In W. J. Nijhof & L. F. M. Nieuwenhuis (Eds.), The dynamics of VET and HRD systems (pp. 101–114). Enschede: Twente University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Stoll, L., Bolam, R., McMahon, A., Wallace, M., & Thomas, S. (2006). Professional learning communities: A review of the literature. Journal of Educational Change, 7, 221–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tengland, P. A. (2008). Empowerment: A conceptual discussion. Health Care Analysis, 16, 77–96. doi: 10.1007/s1072800700673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Van den Akker, J., Gravemeijer, K., McKenney, S., & Nieveen, N. (2006). Educational design research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  39. Van den Bossche, P., Gijselaars, W., Segers, M., Woltjer, G., & Kirschner, P. (2011). Team learning: Building shared mental models. Instructional Science, 39, 283–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Van Strien, P. J. (1986). Praktijk als wetenschap. Methodologie van het sociaal-wetenschappelijk handelen. (Methodology of acting based on social sciences). Assen: Van Gorcum.Google Scholar
  41. Van Veen, K., Zwart, R., Meirink, J., & Verloop, N. (2010). Professionele Ontwikkeling van leraren. Een reviewstudie naar effectieve kenmerken van professionaliseringsinterventies van leraren. Teacher professional development. A review of studies on effective characteristics of teacher professionalization interventions. Leiden: ICLON/Expertisecentrum Leren van Docenten.Google Scholar
  42. Verbiest, E. (2008). Scholen duurzaam ontwikkelen. Bouwen aan professionele leergemeenschappen. (Developing sustainable schools. Building professional learning communities). Antwerpen: Garant.Google Scholar
  43. Verbiest, E., & Vandenberghe, R. (2002). Professionele leergemeenschappen. Een nieuwe kijk op permanente onderwijsvernieuwing en ontwikkeling van leerkrachten. School en organisatie. (Professional learning communities. A new perspective on permanent education innovation and development of teachers). Schoolleiding en Begeleiding, 1, 57–86.Google Scholar
  44. Vermeulen, M., Castelijns, J., Kools, Q., & Koster, B. (2012). Measuring student teachers’ basic psychological needs. Journal of Education for Teaching: International research and pedagogy, 38, 453–467.Google Scholar
  45. Vermunt, J. D., & Verloop, N. (1999). Congruence and friction between learning and teaching. Learning and Instruction, 9, 257–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Vescio, V., Ross, D., & Adams, A. (2008). A review of research on the impact of professional learning communities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 80–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wong, J. L. N. (2010). What makes a professional learning community possible? A case study of a Mathematics department in a junior secondary school of China. Asia Pacific Educational Review, 11, 131–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jos Castelijns
    • 1
  • Marjan Vermeulen
    • 2
  • Quinta Kools
    • 3
  1. 1.Teacher Education InstituteDe Kempel University of Applied ScienceHelmondThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Teacher UniversityOpen University of the NetherlandsHeerlenThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Teacher Education InstituteFontys University of Applied ScienceTilburgThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options