Reflecting on pedagogical practices with electronic portfolios.

Ann-Louise DavidsonNadia NaffiConcordia University

Research context

Adoption of Internet technology in society

New knowledge economy -> new logic of education?

Competency based education

Québec context: le renouveau pédagogigue

Evolution of pedagogical approaches

Paradigm of the reflective practitioner (Shön)

Review of literaturePedagogy: Empirical studies and theoretical research based on empirical studies Reganick (1994); Bélair (1995); Gayet (1995); Gauthier (1997); Laplante (1997); Basque, Rocheleau et Winer (1998); Trigwell, Prosser et Waterhouse (1999); Crawford (1999); D’eon, Overgaard et Rutledge (2000); Kember et Kwan (2000); Keyser (2000); Carpenter et Tait (2001); Woods (2001); Yang (2001); Durand et Morin (2002); Gardye, Favreau et Malo (2002); Hébert, Barbeau et Dupuis (2002); Kim et Branch (2002); Landry (2002); Perrenoud (2002); Ghaith, (2003); Hewett (2003); Kulinna et Cothran. (2003); Martel (2003); Roberts (2003); Conole, Dyke, Oliver et Seale. (2004); Gore, Griffiths et Ladwig. (2004); Trigwell et Prosser (2004, 2006); Lindblom- Ylänne, Trigwell, Nevgi, & Ashwin (2006).

Typologies centered around the act of teaching and learning Dans les typologies centrées sur l’acte d’enseignement/apprentissage, certaines typologies sont classées selon le rôle joué par l’ordinateur au sein de la relation pédagogique (Bork, 1985; Jonassen, 1995; Means, 1994; Sauvé, 1984; Taylor, 1980), selon le degré d’autonomie de l’apprenant (Plante, 1984), selon le type de stratégies pédagogiques ou de connaissances visées (Baumgartner & Payr, 1998; de Vries, 2001; Denis, 2003; Paquette, 1993; Séguin, 1997) et selon les étapes du processus d’enseignement (Alessi & Trollip, 1991).

Typologies centered on schoolsDans les typologies centrées sur l’école, certaines typologies sont classées selon les types d’activités d’une école (Aylwin, 1984; Basque et al., 1998; Knezek, Rachlin & Scannell, 1988; Schultz & Hart,1983; Roecks, 1981; Watts, 1981), et une selon les acteurs d’une école (Dubuc, 1982).

Typologies centered on the learnerDans les typologies centrées sur l’apprenant, une typologie est classée selon les impulsions de l’individu à apprendre (Bruce & Levin, 1997), d’autres sont classées selon les fonctions cognitives que l’ordinateur permet d’étendre ou de restructurer (Chacon, 1992; Jonassen, 1996) et selon les étapes du processus d’apprentissage ou de traitement de l’information (Thomas & Boyson, 1984; Iioshi & Hannafin, 1988).

Other sections of the literature review

E-Portfolios

Self-regulation (Zimmerman)

Motivation (Deci Ryan)

Self-efficacy (Bandura)

Research question

How can the use of an electronic portfolio engage teachers in a reflection about their pedagogical practices and their perception of student learning?

Can this reflective process help inform teacher education programs?

*

Recruitment

Done through RÉCIT

Five teachers responded

Three participated for the whole year.

Design

One-on-one interviews

Training session

Focus group at the end of the year

Interview results

Teacher 1(elementary female)

Teacher 2(secondary male)

Teacher 3(secondary female)

Teaching Socio-constructivistproject based

learning

Transmission of knowledge (guide)

Structuredmastery learning

Technology Personal use mostly Non user Proficient

Reflections on usefulness of training

The elementary school teacher received the training alone.Intimidated by the technology.

Frequently called the researcher as she started using ePearl

Received the local RÉCIT’s assistance while she implemented the project.

The secondary school teachers received the training together.One was very critical of the interface and wanted to find the flaws before she started using it.

The other expected ePearl to be a portal.

Didn’t ask for help.

*Ideally, training should coincide with the beginning of a project.

*

Focus group questions

What pedagogical activities did you do with ePearl this year?

How frequently did you do these activities?

How difficult/easy were these activities?

Do you think they had an impact on learning?

Do you think they had an impact on your pedagogical approach?

*

Focus-groups results

Discovery activity

Activity frequency

0 1 2 10

How did the students use PERLE?

Demonstration to other children

Parent access

Project

Knowledge of other programs _

_

_

_

~Grammar correctionTeac

her 1

_

Objectives

Guiding questions

Help

Readers’ journal

Forgot

~

+

+

+

Teac

her 3

_

_

(Planning) Doing (Reflecting)

Journal

Search

~

+

Teac

her 2

Level of difficulty for students

Impact on the learning level_Impact on the pedagogical method

~ +

Original construct analysis divided by teacher

Teacher 1

What is the focus of this slide?

Teacher 2

What is the focus of this slide?

Teacher 3

What is the focus of this slide?

Next steps

For teachers:

Teacher 1: Wants to involve parents more and use more advanced feedback functions

Teacher 2: Needs to formulate objectives and guiding questions for and with learners

Teacher 3: Needs to figure out how to make students more autonomous and start formulating objectives.

Conclusion

Directions for future research and practiceSystemic analysis of classroom dynamic with technology is highly desiredTeacher education programs should focus on developing generic technological competenciesTeachers need accompaniment to teach through self-regulation processes

LimitsNumber of participants One single school boardTransferabilityGeneralizability

Thank you!

•Beaucoup d’impact sur l’approche pédagogique•Peu d’impact sur l’apprentissage•Très difficile

•Correction grammaire

•Fréquemment

•Rarement

•Projets

•Accès parental•Démonstration à d’autres enfants

•Connaissance de nouveaux logiciels

20%

80%

•Beaucoup d’impact sur l’apprentissage•Peu d’impact sur l’approche pédagogique•Facile

Enseignant 1

40%

40%

Enseignant 2

•Beaucoup d’impact sur l’apprentissage

•Fréquemment

•Rarement

•Peu d’impact sur l’approche pédagogique

•Peu d’impact sur l’apprentissage

•Objectifs

•Journal de lecture

•Oublier

•Beaucoup d’impact sur l’approche pédagogique•Questions guide

•Aide

20%

80%

Enseignant 3

•Beaucoup d’impact sur l’apprentissage

•Fréquemment•Peu d’impact sur l’approche pédagogique

•Peu d’impact sur l’apprentissage

•Découverte guidée

•Journal

•Réflections, planifications

•Rarement•Beaucoup d’impact sur l’approche pédagogique

•Recherche

Framework

Social System

Educational System

Representations of the use of ICT

Représentations of Pedagogy

Relationships?

Group

Individual

Framework

Technical Social

Epistemological

Informational

Social System

Educational System

Teacher Centered

Learner Centered

Process Oriented

Product Oriented

Ann-Louise Davidson Ph.D.

Teacher Centered

LearnerCentered

Process Oriented

Product Oriented

Social

Epistemological

Technical

Informational

Representations of the object

Categorisation of the object

Discrimination of object

propertiesSelection

of propertiesChoiceHarmonization

of propertiesChoice

Which use of technology?

For which technological interaction?

Which pedagogical approach? For which pedagogical

objective?

In sum... One participant was very satisfied

Two participants were frustrated and felt powerless...

Assistance given to teachers

Class size

Work habits

Individual differences

Student autonomy

Students’ prior knowledge

Students’ motivation

Students’ collaboration

Proper scheduling of the activities

Frequency of meeting

Coaching, teachers’ technical skills

School facilities

Technical constraints

School culture

Parents’ role

*