Emerging Organizations When Implementing a Collaborative Professional Development Program
In: Implementation and Replication Studies in Mathematics EducationSearch for other papers by Morten Misfeldt in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Andreas Tamborg in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Simon Skov Fougt in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Benjamin Brink Allsopp in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Jonas Dreyøe Herfort in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
In this article, we explore an emerging organization that unfolds during the implementation of a collaborative and practice-oriented professional development program (PD) called Action Learning. In Action Learning, local mathematics supervisors facilitate meetings where mathematics teachers collaboratively discuss and develop interventions in their own teaching. Thereafter, teachers carry out their interventions and are observed by the team, who afterwards provide feedback in an evaluation meeting, thereby taking on a central role in the PD program. Drawing on qualitative interviews of teachers, local supervisors, and school managers and observations of meetings in the PD program, we investigate what roles emerge for local supervisors, and how their contributions are framed by colleagues and school managers. This identifies three simultaneously present logics among the stakeholders, positioning the supervisors in roles as project leaders, academic beacons, and equal coaches, confronting each of them with different and mutually exclusive expectations.
The impact sheet to this article can be accessed at
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
Allsopp, B. B. (2013). Introducing Arc Form: Designing a satisfactory highly non-linear alternative to texts for general-purpose idea development Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Aarhus University, Aarhus.
-
Ball, D. L. (1991). Research on teaching mathematics: Making subject matter knowledge part of the equation. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching: Teacher’s knowledge of subject matter as it relates to their teaching practice (Vol. 2, pp. 1–48). JAI Press, Stamford, CT.
-
Benz, C. (2012). Attitudes of kindergarten educators about math. Journal für Mathematik-Didaktik, 33(2), 203–232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13138-012-0037-7.
-
Besser, M. & Leiss, D. (2014). The influence of teacher-trainings on in-service teachers’ expertise: A teacher-training-study on formative assessment in competency-oriented mathematics. In C. Nicol, P. Liljedahl, S. Oesterle & D. Allan (Eds.), Proceedings of the 38th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education and the 36th Conference of the North American Chapter of the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 129–136). PME.
-
Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033008003.
-
Century, J. & Cassata, A. (2016). Implementation research: Finding common ground on what, how, why, where, and who. Review of Research in Education, 40(1), 169–215. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X16665332.
-
Clarke, A. E. (2003). Situational analyses: Grounded theory mapping after the postmodern turn. Symbolic Interaction, 26(4), 553–576. https://doi.org/10.1525/si.2003.26.4.553.
-
Clarke, A. E. (2009). From grounded theory to situational analysis: What’s new? why? how? In J. M. Morse, P. N. Stern, J. B. Corbin, B. S. Bower, K. Charmaz & A. E. Clarke (Eds.), Developing grounded theory: The second generation. Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA.
-
Cobb, P. & Jackson, K. (2021). An empirically grounded system of supports for improving the quality of mathematics teaching on a large scale. Implementation and Replication Studies in Mathematics Education, 1(1), 77–110. https://doi.org/10.1163/26670127-01010004.
-
Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. http://www.corestandards.org/wp-content/uploads/Math_Standards1.pdf.
-
Eden, C. & Ackermann, F. (2004). Cognitive mapping expert views for policy analysis in the public sector. European Journal of Operational Research, 152(3), 615–630. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00061-4.
-
Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M. & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network, Miami, FL.
-
Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., and Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915–945. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312038004915.
-
Graven, M. (2016). When systemic interventions get in the way of localized mathematics reform. For the Learning of Mathematics, 36(1), 8–13.
-
Hargreaves, A. (2000). Mixed emotions: Teachers’ perceptions of their interactions with students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(8), 811–826. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(00)00028-7.
-
Henriksen, T. D., Buhl, M., Misfeldt, M. & Hanghøj, T. (2011). Har projekter et liv efter deadline? Skoleudvikling fra projekt til forankring [Do projects have a life after the deadline? School development from project to anchoring]. Cursiv, 8, 83–102.
-
Jankvist, U. T., Aguilar, M. S., Ärlebäck, J. B. & Wæge, K. (2017). Introduction to the papers of TWG23: Implementation of research findings in mathematics education. In T. Dooley & G. Gueudet (Eds.), Proceedings of the Tenth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 3769–3775). DCU Institute of Education; ERME.
-
Jankvist, U. T., Aguilar, M. S., Dreyøe, J. & Misfeldt, M. (2019). Adapting implementation research frameworks for mathematics education. In U. T. Jankvist, M. van den Heuvel-Panhuizen & M. Veldhuis (Eds.), Proceedings of the Eleventh Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 4405–4412). Freudenthal Group & Freudenthal Institute; Utrecht University; ERME.
-
Jaworski, B. (2003). Research practice into/influencing mathematics teaching and learning development: Towards a theoretical framework based on co-learning partnerships. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 54(2), 249–282. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDUC.0000006160.91028.f0.
-
Karsenty, R. (2021). Implementing professional development programs for mathematics teachers at scale: What counts as success? ZDM Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-021-01250-5.
-
Krainer, K. (2014). Teachers as stakeholders in mathematics education research. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 11(1), 49–60.
-
Lewis, C., Perry, R. & Murata, A. (2006). How should research contribute to instructional improvement? The case of lesson study. Educational Researcher, 35(3), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X035003003.
-
Loucks-Horsley, S. (1996). Principles of effective professional development for mathematics and science education: A synthesis of standards. NISE brief, 1(1). University of Wisconsin-Madison; National Institute for Science Education, Madison, WI.
-
Martin, L. & Umland, K. (2008). Mathematics for middle school teachers: choices, successes, and challenges. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 5(2), 305–314.
-
Maurer, R. (2010). Beyond the wall of resistance: Why 70% of all changes still fail – and what you can do about it. Bard Press, Portland, OR.
-
Misfeldt, M., Fougt, S. S., Tamborg, A. L. & Haugsted, M. T. (2014). Evaluering af fagdidaktisk kompetenceudvikling: Aktionslæringsforløb og Sommeruniversitet 2013 [Evaluation of subject didactic competence development: Action learning courses and Summer University 2013]. Aalborg University, Aalborg.
-
Nielsen, L. T. (2012). Teamsamarbejdets dynamiske stabilitet. En kulturhistorisk analyse af læreres læring i team [Dynamic stability of team collaboration. A cultural-historical analysis of teachers’ learning in teams] [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Aarhus University, Aarhus.
-
Nilsen, P. (2015). Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks. Implementation Science, 10, Article number 53. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0242-0.
-
Pang, J. S. (2016). Improving mathematics instruction and supporting teacher learning in Korea through lesson study using five practices. ZDM Mathematics Education, 48(4), 471–483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-016-0768-x.
-
Pinto, A. & Koichu, B. (2021). Implementation of mathematics education research as crossing the boundary between disciplined inquiry and teacher inquiry. ZDM Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-021-01286-7.
-
Plauborg, H., Andersen, J. V. & Bayer, M. (2007). Aktionslæring. Læring i og af praksis [Action learning. Learning in and from practice]. Hans Reitzels Forlag, Copenhagen.
-
Postholm, M. B. (2009). Research and development work: Developing teachers as researchers or just teachers? Educational Action Research, 17(4), 551–565. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650790903309425.
-
Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of innovations. Free Press of Glencoe, Glencoe, IL.
-
Selter, C., Gräsel, C., Reinold, M. & Trempler, K. (2015). Variations of in-service training for primary mathematics teachers: An empirical study. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47(1), 65–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0639-2.
-
Shear, L., Gallagher, L. & Patell, D. (2011). ITL research findings: Evolving educational ecosystems. ITL Research.
-
Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004.
-
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411.
-
Sølberg, J., Bundsgaard, J. & Højgaard, T. (2015). Kompetencemål i praksis – et tilbageblik på projektet KOMPIS. MONA 2015 (2), 46–59.
-
Stigler, J. W. (1998). Video examples from the TIMMS videotape classroom study eighth grade mathematics in Germany, Japan, and the United States. National Center for Education Statistics.
-
Tamborg, A. L. (2021). Improving mathematics teaching via digital platforms? Implementation processes seen through the lens of instrumental genesis. ZDM Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-021-01282-x.
-
Tamborg, A. L. & Allsopp, B. B. (2018). Mapping situations in implementing learning platforms. In A. L. Brooks, E. Brooks & N. Vidakis (Eds.), Interactivity, Game Creation, Design, Learning, and Innovation – 6th International Conference, ArtsIT 2017, and 2nd International Conference, DLI 2017 (pp. 435–444). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76908-0_42.
-
Tamborg, A. L., Allsopp, B. B., Fougt, S. S. & Misfeldt, M. (2017). Mapping the logics in practice oriented competence development. In T. Dooley & G. Gueudet (Eds.), Proceedings of the Tenth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 3873–3880). DCU Institute of Education; ERME.
-
Wilkins, J. L. M. (2008). The relationship among elementary teachers’ content knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and practices. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11(2), 139–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-007-9068-2.
-
Yoon, K. S., Duncan, T., Lee, S. W. Y., Scarloss, B., and Shapley, K. (2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement (Issues & Answers Report, REL 2007 – No. 033). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/southwest/pdf/rel_2007033.pdf.
-
Zehetmeier, S. & Krainer, K. (2011). Ways of promoting the sustainability of mathematics teachers’ professional development. ZDM – The International Journal of Mathematics Education, 43(6–7), 875–887. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-011-0358-x.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 495 | 151 | 16 |
| Full Text Views | 44 | 3 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 115 | 4 | 0 |
Emerging Organizations When Implementing a Collaborative Professional Development Program
In: Implementation and Replication Studies in Mathematics EducationSearch for other papers by Morten Misfeldt in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Andreas Tamborg in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Simon Skov Fougt in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Benjamin Brink Allsopp in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Jonas Dreyøe Herfort in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
In this article, we explore an emerging organization that unfolds during the implementation of a collaborative and practice-oriented professional development program (PD) called Action Learning. In Action Learning, local mathematics supervisors facilitate meetings where mathematics teachers collaboratively discuss and develop interventions in their own teaching. Thereafter, teachers carry out their interventions and are observed by the team, who afterwards provide feedback in an evaluation meeting, thereby taking on a central role in the PD program. Drawing on qualitative interviews of teachers, local supervisors, and school managers and observations of meetings in the PD program, we investigate what roles emerge for local supervisors, and how their contributions are framed by colleagues and school managers. This identifies three simultaneously present logics among the stakeholders, positioning the supervisors in roles as project leaders, academic beacons, and equal coaches, confronting each of them with different and mutually exclusive expectations.
The impact sheet to this article can be accessed at
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 495 | 151 | 16 |
| Full Text Views | 44 | 3 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 115 | 4 | 0 |
