Scaling a Model of Teacher Professional Learning – Harnessing MOOCS to Recreate Deep Learning Conversations

  • Deirdre Butler
  • Margaret Leahy
  • Michael Hallissy
  • Mark Brown
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 515)

Abstract

This paper describes the most recent phase of an innovative model of teacher professional learning that has evolved over a decade (2006 to 2016). Building on the experiences of implementing this face-to-face model, the paper reports on the most recent phase which attempts to harness the emergence of a 4th wave of online learning. The initiative involves the design and development of a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) that potentially enables the massive scaling up of access to this already validated model of teacher professional learning designed to shift teachers’ pedagogical orientations through school focussed, job embedded teacher professional learning. The importance of maintaining key elements, threshold concepts and signature pedagogies in the design of MOOCs for teacher professional learning are discussed. The paper also explores some of the challenges and potential opportunities different MOOC delivery models offer for sustaining the types of collaboration, rich dialogue and ongoing reflection observed in earlier phases of the project.

Keywords

Teacher education 21st century skills Online learning MOOCs 

References

  1. Abrami, P.C., Bernard, R.M., Bures, E.M., Borokhovski, E., Tamim, R.M.: Interaction in distance education and online learning: using evidence and theory to improve practice. J. Comput. High. Educ. 23, 82–103 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ananiadou, K., Claro, M.: 21st century skills and competences for new millennium learners in OECD countries. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. EDU Working paper no. 41 (2009)Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, T., Garrison, D.R.: Learning in a networked world: new roles and responsibilities. In: Gibson, C. (ed.) Learners in Higher Education, pp. 97–112. Atwood Publishing, Madison (1998)Google Scholar
  4. Avalos, B.: Teacher professional development in teaching and teacher education over ten years. Teach. Teach. Educ. 27, 10–20 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bannan-Ritland, B.: Computer-mediated communication, eLearning and interactivity: a review of the research. Q, Rev. Distance Learn. 3(2), 161–179 (2002)Google Scholar
  6. Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M., Rumble, M.: Defining twenty-first century skills. In: Griffin, P., McGaw, B., Care, E. (eds.) Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills, pp. 17–66. Springer, Netherlands (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5_2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blanchette, J.: Participant interaction in asynchronous learning environments: evaluating interaction analysis methods. Linguisti. Educ. (2011). www.elsevier.com/locate/linged
  8. Blayone, T., vanOostveen, R., Barber, W., DiGiuseppe, M., Childs, E.: Democratizing digital learning: theorizing the fully online learning community model. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ. 14(13), 1–16 (2017)Google Scholar
  9. Brookfield, S., Preskill, S.: Discussion as a Way of Teaching, vol. 2. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco (2005)Google Scholar
  10. Butler, D.: Self-determined teacher learning in a digital context: fundamental change in thinking and practice. Unpublished Doctoral thesis, Dublin City University (2004)Google Scholar
  11. Butler, D., Leahy, M.: Microsoft Innovative Schools Program Evaluation: Year Two Report – Ireland, in collaboration with Stanford Research Institute on behalf of Microsoft (2009)Google Scholar
  12. Butler, D., Leahy, M.: Sharing classroom practices: a scalable, sustainable model of teacher professional development for learning in the 21st century. In: Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2011, pp. 1788–1794. AACE, Chesapeake (2011)Google Scholar
  13. Butler, D., Leahy, M.: Moving towards innovation: the development of a sustainable framework for teacher professional learning. In: Shaping the Future: How Technology Can Lead to Educational Transformation (2015)Google Scholar
  14. Darling-Hammond, L.: Reframing the school reform agenda: developing capacity for school transformation. Phi Delta Kappan 74(12), 752–761 (1993)Google Scholar
  15. Downes, S.: Massively open online courses are here to stay. Stephen’s Web, 20 July 2012Google Scholar
  16. Ebben, M., Murphy, J.S.: Unpacking MOOC scholarly discourse: a review of nascent MOOC scholarship. Learn. Media Technol. 39(3), 328–345 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. ETA (European Training Agency). Key Competences (2010)Google Scholar
  18. Greene, J.A., Oswald, C.A., Pomerantz, J.: Predictors of retention and achievement in a massive open online course. Am. Educ. Res. J. 52(5), 925–955 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Garrison, R.D., Cleveland-Innes, M.: Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: interaction is not enough. Am. J. Distance Educ. 19(3), 133–148 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gulati, S.: Constructivism and emerging online learning pedagogy: a discussion for formal to acknowledge and promote the informal. In: Annual Conference of the Universities Association for Continuing Education - Regional Futures: Formal and Informal Learning Perspectives. Centre for Lifelong Learning. University of Glamorgan (2004)Google Scholar
  21. Hallissy, M.: Building teacher professionalism in teaching-learning interactions between online tutors and learners during synchronous tutorials – a case study from Hibernia College. EdD, Institute of Education (2014). https://www.academia.edu/9427758/Building_teacher_professionalism_in_teaching-learning_interactions_between_online_tutors_and_learners_during_synchronous_tutorials_a_case_study_from_Hibernia_College
  22. Hirumi, A.: A framework for analysing, designing, and sequencing planned elearning interactions. Q. Rev. Distance Learn. 3(2), 141–160 (2002)Google Scholar
  23. Hodges, C., Lowenthal, P., Grant, M.: Teacher professional development in the digital age: design considerations for MOOCs for teachers. In: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, pp. 2089–2096 (2016)Google Scholar
  24. Jobe, W., Östlund, C., Svensson, L.: MOOCs for professional teacher development. In: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, 17 March 2014 in Jacksonville, Florida, USA, pp. 1580–1586. AACE (2014)Google Scholar
  25. Laurillard, D.: Rethinking University Teaching: A Conversational Framework for the Effective Use of Learning Technologies, 2nd edn. Routledge Falmer, New York (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Laurillard, D.: The educational problem that MOOCs could solve: professional development for teachers of disadvantaged students. Res. Learn. Technol. 24(1), 29369 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v24.29369 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Law, N., Chow, A.: Pedagogical orientation in mathematics and science and the use of ICT. In: Law, N., Pelgrum, J., Plomp, T. (eds.) Pedagogy and ICT Use in Schools Around the World: Findings from the IEA SITES 2006 Study. The Comparative Education Research Centre, Hong Kong (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. McGreal, R., Kinuthia, W., Marshall, S., McNamara, T. (eds.): Open Educational Resources: Innovation, Research and Practice. Commonwealth of Learning and Athabasca University, Vancouver (2013)Google Scholar
  29. NCCA (National Council for Curriculum and Assessment): Senior cycle key skills framework, Dublin (2009). https://www.curriculumonline.ie/getmedia/161b0ee4-706c-4a7a-9f5e-7c95669c629f/KS_Framework.pdf
  30. National Foundation for the Improvement of Education: Teachers take charge of learning: transferring professional development for student success (1996). http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED401251.pdf
  31. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD): The definition and selection of key competencies. OECD, Paris (2005). http://www.oecd.org/document/17/0,3343,en_2649_39263238_2669073_1_1_1_1,00.html
  32. Park, Y.J., Bonk, C.J.: Synchronous learning experiences: distance and residential learners’ perspectives in a blended graduate course. J. Interact. Online Learn. 6(3), 245–264 (2007)Google Scholar
  33. Picciano, A.: A critical reflection of the current research in online and blended learning. ELM Magazine, Theme Issue, Issue 4/2014 (2014). http://www.elmmagazine.eu/articles/a-critical-reflection-of-the-current-research-in-online-and-blended-learning
  34. Rovai, A.P.: A constructivist approach to online college learning. Internet High. Educ. 7(2), 79–93 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Salmon, G.: E-moderating: The Key to Teaching and Learning Online. Kogan Pagan, London (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Shear, L., Means, B., Gorges, T., Toyama, Y., Gallagher, L., Estrella, G., Lundh, P.: The Microsoft Innovative Schools Program Year 1 Evaluation Report. Microsoft, Seattle (2009)Google Scholar
  37. Shear, L., Gallagher, L., Patel, D.: ITL Research: Evolving Educational Ecosystems. Microsoft, Redmond (2011)Google Scholar
  38. Warren Little, J.: Inside teacher community: representations of classroom practice. Teach. Coll. Rec. 105(6), 913–945 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Deirdre Butler
    • 1
  • Margaret Leahy
    • 1
  • Michael Hallissy
    • 2
  • Mark Brown
    • 3
  1. 1.Institute of EducationDublin City UniversityDublinIreland
  2. 2.H2 LearningDublinIreland
  3. 3.National Institute for Digital LearningDublin City UniversityDublinIreland

Personalised recommendations