The Italian Small School Toward Smart Pedagogy. A Cross-Reading of Opportunities Provided by the National Operational Program (PON) “For Schools 2014–2020 – Skills and Learning Environments”

  • Giuseppina Rita Jose MangioneEmail author
  • Samuele Calzone


School is increasingly protagonist of a process of renewal that is realized by rethinking the educational and training spaces according to principles supported by technological changes. In this context, a relevant program is the Programma Operativo Nazionale (PON) per la scuola “Competenze per l’apprendimento” (The Italian National Operational Program “For School” – Skills and Learning Environments)) in that it promotes the upgrading of technology facilities and school learning environments, the strengthening of all key competences, and the adoption of innovative didactic approaches through a strong integration of investments funded by the European Social Fund (ESF) for training and skill improvement and the ERDF (European Regional Development Fund) for infrastructure interventions. In this chapter, we present a qualitative and quantitative analysis aiming to understand the dimensions that make it possible to set up a smart teacher training within the Italian small school context. The quantitative analysis will take into consideration the efficacy perceived by the training paths promoted by PON PNSD. Then, a qualitative study was conducted through group interviews administered to teachers of four schools – selected among those who had taken part in the training actions – so as to investigate those elements in the educational path that promote innovation, sustainability, and replicability.


Small school Smart pedagogy Teacher training 


  1. Alpe, Y., & Fauguet, J. L. (2008). Enseigner dans le rural: un «metier» à part?. Travail et formation en éducation, (2).Google Scholar
  2. Bouck, E. C. (2004). How size and setting impact education in rural schools. Rural Educator, 25(3), 38–42.Google Scholar
  3. Calzone, S., & Chellini, C. (2016). Teachers’ training: An empirical study on training needs and digital skills. Form@re – Open Journal per la formazione in rete., 16(2), 32–46.Google Scholar
  4. Cerini, Giancarlo (2017) C’è anche il VISITING per i docenti neoassunti. Available at:
  5. Darling-Hammond, L. (2005). Teaching as a profession: Lessons in teacher preparation and professional development. Phi delta kappan, 87(3), 237–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ferri, P. (2013). La scuola 2.0. Verso una didattica aumentata dalle tecnologie. Parma, OH: Spaggiari.Google Scholar
  7. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The Discovery of grounded theory. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  8. Khan, A. R., Hadi, R. S., & Ashraf, M. M. (2013). The Impact of ICT on Education: A Study on Rural Schools. Communications in Information Science and Management Engineering, 3(8), 367.Google Scholar
  9. Kvalsund, R., & Hargreaves, L. (2009). Reviews of research in rural schools and their communities: Analytical perspectives and a new agenda. International Journal of Educational Research, 48(2), 140–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Mangione, G. R. (2018). Il Laboratorio nel curricolo formativo dei Neoassunti. FORMAZIONE & INSEGNAMENTO. Rivista internazionale di Scienze dell’educazione e della formazione, 15(3), 71–92.Google Scholar
  11. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for integrating technology in teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. MIUR, Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca (The Italian Ministry of Education, University and Research). (2015). Avviso Ambienti Digitali (Digital environments) Notice n. 12810/2015.
  13. MIUR, Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca (The Italian Ministry of Education, University and Research). (2015). Piano Nazionale Scuola Digitale (The Italian national plan for a digital school).
  14. MIUR, Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca (The Italian Ministry of Education, University and Research). (2016). Avviso Snodi Formativi Territoriali (Regional education hubs) Notice n. 6076/2016.
  15. Mottet, G. (1992). Les ateliers de formation professionnelle: une proposition pour les IUFM. Recherche & Formation, 11, 93–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ravotto, P. (2017). DigComp versione 2.1 e DigCompEdu, BRICKS – ANNO 7 – NUMERO 3.
  17. Redecker, C., & Punie, Y. (2017). Digital competence framework for educators (DigCompEdu). Brussels, BE: European Union.Google Scholar
  18. Tarozzi, M. (2008). Che cos’è la grounded theory. Roma: Carocci.Google Scholar
  19. Vayola, P. (2016). I rischi e le opportunità del digitale a scuola. Spunti di riflessione per progettare la formazione dei docenti. Form@re – Open Journal per la formazione in rete, 16(2), 180–193.Google Scholar
  20. Zhu, Z., Yu, M., & Riezebos, P. (2016). A research framework of smart education. Smart Learning Environments, 3(1).

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Giuseppina Rita Jose Mangione
    • 1
    Email author
  • Samuele Calzone
    • 2
  1. 1.National Institute of Documentation, Innovation and Educational ResearchNaplesItaly
  2. 2.National Institute of Documentation, Innovation and Educational ResearchFlorenceItaly

Personalised recommendations