Reorienting Teacher Education to Address Sustainable Development Through WikiQuESD

Chapter

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to reveal how a newly advanced concept “WikiQuESD” could be utilized as a scaffolding hypermedia tool to enhance preservice teachers’ education for sustainable development (ESD) project-based learning. Through a naturalistic study, based on a group of 30 undergraduate students revealed that the use of WikiQuESD allowed preservice teachers to design and upload interactive ESD projects online through collecting, assessing, and integrating digital material available in the Web. They could also brainstorm, share, and discuss their project ideas, while the instructor could make comments and monitor the development process. These results imply that the learning power of the WikiQuESD and Wiki technology in general can transform teachers from software users to hypermedia authors.

References

  1. Åhlberg, M. (2004). Concept mapping for sustainable development. In A. J. Cañas, J. D. Novak &. M. González (eds.), Concept Maps: Theory, Methodology, Technology. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Concept Mapping, Vol. 1 (pp. 34-44). Pamplona, Spain.Google Scholar
  2. Aubusson, P., Steele, F., Dinham, S., Brady, C. (2007). Action learning in teacher learning community formation: Informative or transformative? Teacher Development, 11(2), 133–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brandt, C. (2008). Integrating feedback and reflection in teacher preparation. ELT Journal, 62(1), 37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brush, T. A., & Saye, J. W. (2002). A summary of research exploring hard and soft scaffolding for teachers and students using a multimedia supported learning environment. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 1(2), 1–12.Google Scholar
  5. Carley, K. (1993). Coding choices for textual analysis: A comparison of content analysis and map analysis. Sociological Methodology, 23, 75–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Clarke, M. (2004). Reflection: journals and reflective questions: a strategy for professional learning. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 29(2), 11–23.Google Scholar
  7. Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research design. Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  8. Davis, J.N. (1997). Computer and L2 reading: Student performance, student attitudes. Foreign Language Annals, 30(1), 58–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Delors, J. (1996). Learning – The treasure within. Report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the twenty-first century. Paris: UNESCO Publ.Google Scholar
  10. Dewitt, S. L. (1996). The current nature of hypertext research in computers and composition studies. Computers and Composition, 13(1), 69–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dodge, B. (1998). WebQuests: A strategy for scaffolding higher level learning. Paper presented at the National Educational Computing Conference, San Diego, June 22-24, Retrieved 22 January 2011 from http://webquest.sdsu.edu/necc98.htm.
  12. Ellis, G., & Weekes, T. (2008). Making sustainability ‘real’: Using group-enquiry to promote education for sustainable development. Environmental Education Research, 14(4), 482–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Evans, J. (2006). Building bridges: Reflections on the problem of transfer of learning in mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 39(1–3), 23–44.Google Scholar
  14. Everett, J. (2008). Sustainability in higher education: Implications for disciplines. Theory and Research in Education, 6(2), 237–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goodfellow, J., & Sumsion, J. (2000). Transformative pathways: Field-based teacher educators’ perceptions. Journal of Education for Teaching: International Research and Pedagogy, 26(3), 245–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Grundy, S. (2003). Curriculum: product or praxis?. Athens: Savvalas (in Greek).Google Scholar
  17. Huckle, J. (2010). ESD and the current crisis of capitalism. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 4(1), 135–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jonassen, D. H. (1996). Computers in the classroom: Mindtools for critical thinking. Columbus, OH: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  19. Jonassen, D. H., & Reeves, T. C. (1996). Learning with technology: Using computers as cognitive tools. In D.H. Jonassen (ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 693–719). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  20. Jonassen, D., Howland, J., Moore, J., & Marra, R. (2003). Learning to solve problems with technology: A constructivist perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merril Prentice Hall (2nd ed.).Google Scholar
  21. Kostoulas-Makrakis, N., & Makrakis, V. (2008). Interculturality and education for a sustainable future. Heraklion: E-media University of Crete (in Greek).Google Scholar
  22. Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  23. Lawale, S., & Bory-Adams, A. (2010). The decade of education for sustainable development: Towards four pillars of learning. Development, 53(4), 547–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Liaw, S. S., Huang, H. M., & Chen, G. D. (2007). Surveying instructor and learner attitudes towards e-learning. Computers and Education, 49(4), 1066–1080.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Liou, H. C. (2001). Reflective practice in a pre-service teacher education program for high school English teachers in Taiwan, ROC. System, 29, 197–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Makrakis, V. (2006). Preparing United Arab Emirates teachers for building a sustainable society. University of Crete: E-Media publications.Google Scholar
  27. Makrakis, V. (2008). An instructional design module of ICT that empowers teachers to integrate education for sustainable development across the curriculum. In C. Angeli & N. Valanides (eds.), Proceedings of the 6th Panhellenic Conference with International Participation on Information and Communication Technologies in Education (v.1, pp. 391–398). University of Cyprus.Google Scholar
  28. Makrakis, V. (2010a). The challenge of WikiQuESD as an environment for constructing knowledge in teaching and learning for sustainable development. Discourse and Communication for Sustainable Education, 1(1), 50–57.Google Scholar
  29. Makrakis, V. (2010b). Strategies to reinforce the role of ICT in teaching and learning for sustainability. In M. Witthaus, K. Candless & R. Lambert (eds.), Tomorrow Today (pp. 169–171). Leicester: Tudor Rose.Google Scholar
  30. Makrakis, V. (2011). ICT-enabled education for sustainable development: Merging theory with praxis. In M. Youssef & S.A. Anwar (eds.), Proceedings of the 4th Conference on e-Learning Excellence in the Middle East (pp. 410–419). Hamdan Bin Mohammed e-University, Dubai, UAE.Google Scholar
  31. Mezirow, J. (2003). Transformative learning. Athens: Metaixmio (in Greek).Google Scholar
  32. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  33. Neo, M., & Neo, K. (2001). Innovative teaching: using multimedia in a problem-based learning environment. Educational Technology & Society, 4(4), 19–31.Google Scholar
  34. Novak, J. D., & Cañas, D. A. (2008). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them. Technical Report IHMC CmapTools 2006-01, Rev 01-2008, Florida. Institute for Human and Machine. Retrieved 12 March 2011 from http://cmap.ihmc.us/Publications/ResearchPapers/TheoryUnderlyingConceptMaps.pdf.
  35. Novak, J. D. (1990). Concept mapping: A useful tool for science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 937–949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Paas, L. (2008). How ICTs can support education for sustainable development: Current uses and trends. Retrieved 12 March 2011 from http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2008/ict_education_sd_trends.pdf.
  37. Pilling-Cormick, J. (1997). Transformative and self-directed learning in practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 74, 69–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Priest, A.M., & Sturgess, P. (2005). But is it scholarship? Group reflection as a scholarly activity. Studies in Learning, Evaluation, Innovation and Development, 2(1), 1-9. Retrieved 12 March 2011 from http://www.sleid.cqu.edu.au/viewissue.php?id=6.
  39. Raymond, A. (1997). The use of concept mapping in qualitative research: A multiple case study in mathematics education. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 19(3), 1–28.Google Scholar
  40. Rode, H., & Michelsen, G. (2008). Levels of indicator development for education for sustainable development. Environmental Education Research, 14(1), 19–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sockman, B., & Sharma, P. (2008). Struggling toward a transformative model of instruction: It’s not so easy!. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(4), 1070–1082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sterling, S., & Scott, W. (2008). Higher education and ESD in England: A critical commentary on recent initiatives. Environmental Education Research, 14(4), 386–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sterling, S. (2001). Sustainable Education: Revisioning, Learning and Change. Totnes: Green Books.Google Scholar
  44. Stiler, G. M., & Philleo, T. (2003). Blogging and blogspots: An alternative format for encouraging reflective practice among preservice teachers. Academic Research Library, 123(4), 789–798.Google Scholar
  45. Stewart, T., Maclntyre, W., Galea, V., & Steel, C. (2007). Enhancing problem-based learning designs with a single e-learning scaffolding tool: Two case studies using challenge FRAP. Interactive Learning Environments, 15(1), 77–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tella, A., & Adu, E. (2009). Information Communication Technology (ICT) and curriculum development: the challenges for education for sustainable development. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 2(3), 55–59.Google Scholar
  47. Tobias, S. (2010). Generative learning theory, paradigm shifts, and constructivism in educational psychology: A tribute to Merl Wittrock. Educational Psychologist, 45(1), 51–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Vanhear, J., & Pace, P. J. (2008). Integrating knowledge, feelings and action: Using vee heuristics and concept mapping in education for sustainable development. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability, 10, 42–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. UNESCO Netherlands National Commission (2008). Culture and sustainable development: Executive summary. Netherlands National Commission for UNESCO.Google Scholar
  50. UNESCO (2005). Guidelines and Recommendations for Reorienting Teacher Education to Address Sustainability, UNESCO Education for Sustainable Development in Action. Technical Paper No 4, Retrieved 12 March 2011 from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001433/143370e.pdf.
  51. UNESCO (2006). Higher Education for Sustainable Development Education. UN Decade, 2005-2014- Section for Education for Sustainable Development (ED/PEQ/ESD). Paris: UNESCO Publ.Google Scholar
  52. Wals, A.E.J. (2009). A mid-DESD review: Key findings and ways forward. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 3(2), 195–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wals, A., & Blaze Corcoran, P. (2006). Sustainability as an outcome of transformative learning. In J. Holmberg & B. E. Samuelsson (eds.), Drivers and Barriers for Implementing Sustainable Development in Higher Education (pp. 103-110). UNESCO Education for Sustainable Development in Action Technical Paper N°3.Google Scholar
  54. Williams, G. (2004). Evaluating participatory development: tyranny, power and (re)politicization. Third World Quarterly, 25(3), 557–579.Google Scholar
  55. World Commission on Environment and Development (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Yang, S.-H. (2009). Using blogs to enhance critical reflection and community of practice. Educational Technology & Society, 12(2), 11–21.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Primary EducationUniversity of CreteCreteGreece

Personalised recommendations