University-school scenarios and voices from classroomsRethinking collaboration within the framework of an interuniversity project

  1. Elia Fernández Díaz 1
  2. Prudencia Gutiérrez Esteban 2
  3. Lorea Fernández Olaskoaga 3
  1. 1 Universidad de Cantabria
    info

    Universidad de Cantabria

    Santander, España

    ROR https://ror.org/046ffzj20

  2. 2 Universidad de Extremadura
    info

    Universidad de Extremadura

    Badajoz, España

    ROR https://ror.org/0174shg90

  3. 3 Univeristy of the Basque Country
Zeitschrift:
NAER: Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research

ISSN: 2254-7339

Datum der Publikation: 2019

Ausgabe: 8

Nummer: 2

Seiten: 79-95

Art: Artikel

DOI: 10.7821/NAER.2019.7.372 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Andere Publikationen in: NAER: Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research

Zusammenfassung

Este trabajo recoge el análisis de una propuesta diseñada en el ámbito de la formación inicial del profesorado en tecnología educativa para favorecer la presencia de las escuelas en el contexto universitario. Con el propósito de contribuir a que el alumnado pueda experimentar un aprendizaje en la práctica y reflexivo, diseñamos un proceso de colaboración interuniversitario para promover la interacción y la generación de conocimiento entre iguales. La deconstrucción del proceso, desde un enfoque narrativo, nos ha permitido abrir un espacio para reflexionar sobre las acciones que fomentan la participación e intercambio entre estudiantes de grado de diferentes universidades, repensar el papel de la tecnología en nuestro proceso de colaboración interuniversitaria y potenciar la relación con las escuelas. Superando la instrumentalización de las visitas escolares, consideramos esta relación como fuente de aprendizaje en los procesos formativos vinculados al desarrollo profesional, donde tanto la escuela como la universidad se nutren de aprendizajes de forma recíproca.

Bibliographische Referenzen

  • Abdallah, M. M. S. (2017). Towards improving content and instruction of the ‘TESOL/TEFL for Special Needs’ course: an action research study. Educational Action Research, 25(3), 420–437. https://doi.org10.108009650792.2016.1173567
  • Adams, G. (2017). Using a narrative approach to illuminate teacher professional learning in an era of accountability. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 161–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.007
  • Ainscow,M. (2005). Developing inclusive education systems: what are the levers for change? Journal of Educational Change, 6, 109–124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-005-1298-4
  • Alexander, K. L., Entwisle, D. R., & Kabbani, N. (2001). The Dropout Process in Life Course Perspective: Early Risk Factors at Home and School. Teachers College Record, 103(5), 760–822. https://doi.org/10.1111/0161-4681.00134
  • Alonso, I., & Berasategi, N. (2017). The integrated curriculum, university teacher identity and teaching culture: the effects of an interdisciplinary activity. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 6, 127–134. https://doi.org/10.7821naer.2017.7.235
  • Anderson, G. (2017). Participatory Action Research (PAR) as Democratic Disruption: New Public Management and Educational Research in Schools and Universities. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 30(5), 432–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2017 .1303211
  • Arvanitakis, J., & Hornsby, D. J. (2016). Universities, the citizen scholar and the future of higher education. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137538697
  • Beberley, J. (2010). Theses on subalternity, representation, and politics. Postcolonial Studies, 1(3), 305–319. https://doi.org/10.1080/13688799889987
  • Brown, M. (2008). Comfort zone: Model or metaphor? Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 12(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03401019
  • Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge: Harvard. Clandinin, D. J. (2013). Engaging in narrative inquiry. Walnut: Creek, Cal: Left Coast Press.
  • Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1991). Narrative and story in practice and research. In C. Witherell &N.Noddings (Eds.), Stories lives tell: Narrative and dialogue in education (pp. 259–281). New York: Teachers College.
  • Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (2004). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in qualitative research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • Cochram-Smith, M., & Little, S. L. (1993). Inside/outside. Teacher research and knowledge. New York: Teachers College Press. COM. (2007). Improving the Quality of Teacher Education. Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament. Retrieved fromRetrievedfromhttp://eur-lex.europa .eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52007DC0392
  • Cook, T. (2015). Harnessing the power and impact of creative disruption. Educational Action Research, 23(4), 461–464. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2015.1099977
  • Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452230153
  • Cortés, P., Rivas, J. I., & Leite, A. (2016). Education and social change in Spain: from crisis to opportunity. Ethnography and Education, 11(2), 204–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457823.2016.1147971
  • Darling-Hammond, L., Pacheco, A., Michelli, N., LePage, P., Hammerness, K., & Youngs, P. (2005). ImplementingCurriculumRenewal in Teacher Education: ManagingOrganizational and Policy Change. In L.
  • Darling-Hammond& J. Bransford (Eds.), Implementing CurriculumRenewal in Teacher Education: Managing Organizational and Policy Change (pp. 442–478). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • De Oliveira, J., & Gallardo-Echenique, E. (2015). Early Childhood Student Teachers’ Observation and Experimentation of Creative Practices as a Design Processes. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 77–83. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2015.4.122
  • Díaz, R., Lamb, B., Wesch, M., Ito, M., & Gil, F. G. (2012). Expanded Education. Retrieved from http://www.international.zemos98.orgIMG/pdf/expanded_education.pdf
  • Drescher, T. (2017). The Potential of Modelling Co-Teaching in Pre-Service. Education, Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 14(3). Retrieved from http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1764&context=jutlp
  • Edward-Groves, C., & Kemmis, S. (2016). Pedagogy, education and praxis: understanding new forms of intersubjectivity through action research and practice theory. Educational Action Research, 24(1), 177–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2015.1076730
  • Fernández-Díaz, E., Fernández-Olaskoaga, L., & Gutiérrez-Esteban, P. (2017). Collaborative Action Research through technologicallymediated agoras. Educational ActionResearch, 25(1), 56–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2016.1141107
  • Forés, A., Sanchez-Valero, J. A., & Sancho, J. M. (2015). Leaving comfort zone. Dilemmas and challenges in the European Higher Education Space. Tendencias Pedagógicas [Pedagogical Tendences], 23, 205–214. Retrieved from https://revistas.uam.es/tendenciaspedagogicas/article/ view/2080/2178
  • Fouche, C. B., & Chubb, L. A. (2015). Action researchers encountering ethical review: a literature synthesis on challenges and strategies. Educational Action Research, 25(1), 23–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2015.1128956
  • Frymier, A., & Houser, M. (2000). The teacher student relationship as interpersonal Relationship. Communication Education, 58(3), 327–349. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520009379209
  • Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic books.
  • Giroux, E. (2016). Higher Education and the politics of disruption. Entramados, Educación y Sociedad, [Frameworks: Education and Society], 3, 15–26. Retrieved from http://fh.mdp.edu .ar/revistas/index.php/entramados/article/view/1615/1614
  • Hansen, D. T. (2014). Cosmopolitanism as cultural creativity: New modes of educational practice in globalizing times. Curriculum Inquiry, 44(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/curi.12039
  • Harrison, C. (2013). Collaborative action research as a tool for generating formative feedback on teachers’ classroom assessment practice: The KREST project. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 19(2), 202–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2013.741839
  • Hernández-Hernández, F., & Sancho, J. M. (2017). Life histories and narratives about subalternity: Facing the challenge of the intractable in relation with the other. Educar, 54(1), 15–29. https:// doi.org/10.5565/rev/educar.913
  • Jordan, S., & Kapoor, D. (2016). Re-politicizing participatory action research: unmasking neoliberalism and the illusions of participation. Educational Action Research, 24(1), 134–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2015.1105145
  • Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2013). Participatory action research. Communicative action and the public sphere. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 271–328). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Lafuente, A., & Lara, T. (2013). Situated learning and practices procomunals. RASE Journal, 6(2), 168–177.
  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355
  • Li, X., Kenzy, P., Underwood, L., & Severson, L. (2015). Dramatic Impact of Action Research of Arts-Based Teaching on At-Risk Students. Educational Action Research, 23(4), 567–580. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2015.1042983
  • M., A., & Dubula, V. (2016). Walking the Walk? Critical reflections from an Afro-Irish emancipatory research network. Educational Action Research, 24(1), 115–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2015.1132242
  • Margalef, R., & Pareja, L. (2008). Innovation, Research and Professional Development in Higher Education: Learning fromOurOwn Experience. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(1), 104– 116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2007.03.007
  • McFadden, A., & Smeaton, K. (2017). Amplifying Student Learning through Volunteering. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 14(3). Retrieved from http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/ viewcontent.cgi?article=1710&context=jutlp
  • Miles, M., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Data management and analysis methods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 429–444). London: Sage Publication.
  • Ng, W., Nicholas, H., & Williams, A. (2010). School experience influences on pre-service teachers’ evolving beliefs about effective teaching. Teaching andTeacher Education, 26, 278–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.03.010
  • Niemi, H. (2002). Active learning: a cultural change needed in teacher education and schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 763–780. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(02)00042 -2
  • Nind, M. (2014). What is inclusive research? London/New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.
  • Patton, K., & Parker, M. (2017). Teacher education communities of practice: More than a culture of collaboration. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 351–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate .2017.06.013
  • Pence, H. M., & Macgillivray, I. K. (2008). The Impact of an International Field Experience on Preservice Teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(1), 14–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2007.01.003
  • Price, J. (2001). Action research, pedagogy and change: The transformative potential of Action research in preservice teacher education. Curriculum Studies, 33(1), 43–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270118039
  • Rice, E. H. (2002). The Collaboration Process in Professional Development Schools. Results of a Meta-Ethnography, 1990-1998. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(1), 55–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487102053001006
  • Rivas, J. I. (2014). New identity in teacher education: students’ voices. International Journal of Development and Educational Psychology, 7(1), 487–494. Retrieved from http://www.infad.eu/RevistaINFAD/OJS/index.php/IJODAEP/issue/view/16
  • Rivas, J. I., Leite, A. E., Márquez, M. J., Cortés, P., Prados, M. E., & Padua, D. (2016). Facebook as a virtual place to share learning between groups of students from different universities. RELATEC, Latin American Journal of Educational Technology, 15(2), 55–66.
  • Rowell, L. L., & Hong, E. (2017). Knowledge democracy and action research: Pathways for the Twenty-First Century. In L. L. Rowell, C. D. Bruce, J. M. Shosh, & M. M. Riel (Eds.),The Palgrave International Handbook of Action Research (pp. 63–83). New York: PalgraveMacmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-40523-4_5
  • Sancho, J., & Padilla, P. (2016). Promoting digital competence in secondary education: are schools there? Insights from a case study. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 5(1), 57–63. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2016.1.157
  • Sanz, J., & Gutiérrez, L. (2016). Scientific workshops with children in the early childhood education degree: a model of action research and a university-school initiative. Campo Abierto [Open Field Journal], 35(1), 205–216. Retrieved from http://mascvuex.unex.es/revistas/index.php/campoabierto/article/view/2844
  • Schiro, M. S. (2008). CurriculumTheory: Conflicting Visions and Enduring Concerns. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
  • Sfard, A., & Prusak, A. (2005). Telling identities: In search of an analytic tool for investigating learning as a culturally shaped activity. Educational Researcher, 34, 14–22. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X034004014
  • Sousa, B. (2006). The university in the 21st century: Toward a democratic and emancipatory university reform. In R. A. Rhoads & C. A. Torres (Eds.), The university, state, and market: The political economy of globalization inTheAmericas (pp. 60–100). Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.
  • Sparkes, A. C., & Smith, B. (2008). Narrative constructionist inquiry. In J. Holstein & J. Gubrium (Eds.), Handbook of constructionist research (pp. 295–314). London: Guilford Publications.
  • Stosich, E. I. (2016). Building teacher and school capacity to teach to ambitious standards in highpoverty schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 58, 43–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.04.010
  • Sutherland, L.M., Howard, S., &Markauskaite, L. (2010). Professional identity creation: Examining the development of beginning preservice teachers’ understanding of their work as teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(3), 455–465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.06.006
  • Thomson, P. (2015). Action Research with/against Impact. Educational Action Research, 23(3), 309–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2015.1062235
  • Wiley, D. (2007). On the sustainability of open educational resource. Initiatives in Higher Education. OECD’s Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI). OECD Publishing. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/38645447.pdf
  • Young, I. M. (2000). Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Zeichner, K., & Conklin, H. (2008). Teacher education programs as sites for teacher preparation. In M. Cochran-Smith, S. Feiman-Nemser, & D. J. McIntyre (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Teacher Education. Enduring Questions in Changing Contexts (pp. 269–289). New York: Routledge.