Advertisement

Value Creation in Teacher Learning Networks

  • Daniël van Amersfoort
  • Monique Korenhof
  • Femke Nijland
  • Maarten de Laat
  • Marjan Vermeulen
Chapter
Part of the Research in Networked Learning book series (RINL)

Abstract

Research shows that teacher professional learning is most effective when it is characterised by active engagement of teachers, a direct connection to their daily practice, and high levels of collaboration. Increasingly, networked professional learning is promoted to enable teachers to make better use of the potential of their social context and improve the quality of their learning. This chapter explores value creation in teacher learning networks and investigates how value creation is affected by contextual factors. The study was conducted in two projects that aimed to promote and facilitate teachers’ networked professional learning. The findings showed little difference in teachers’ networked learning activity itself, but substantial differences were found in leadership commitment, time, and opportunity for networked learning and voluntary network participation. Overall, the study shows how creating connections between teachers may lead them to redefine their idea of what learning could be like and reframe the value of their peers for learning. Interestingly, the combination of committed leadership and mandatory network involvement appeared to have helped teachers to have positive networked professional learning experiences.

Keywords

Professional learning School leadership Social learning Teacher networks Value creation 

References

  1. Bertram, R., Paquette, K., Duarte, T., & Culver, D. (2014). Assessing the value created through participating in a graduate studies community of practice. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal, 7(1), 1–14.Google Scholar
  2. Billett, S. (2001). Learning throughout working life: Interdependencies at work. Studies in Continuing Education, 23(1), 19–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Borg, T. (2012). The evolution of a teacher community of practice: Identifying facilitating and constraining factors. Studies in Continuing Education, 34(3), 301–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Büchel, B., & Raub, S. (2002). Building knowledge-creating value networks. European Management Journal, 20(6), 587–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. CAOP. (2017). Statistics labour market education sectors [Statistieken arbeidsmarkt onderwijssectoren]. Retrieved September 25, 2018, from http://www.stamos.nl
  6. Cowan, J. E., & Menchaca, M. P. (2014). Investigating value creation in a community of practice with social network analysis in a hybrid online graduate education program. Distance Education, 35(1), 43–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Croft, J. (2015). Collaborative overreach: Why collaboration probably isn’t key to the next phase of school reform. London: The Centre for the Study of Market Reform of Education Research.Google Scholar
  8. Daly, A. J., Moolenaar, N. M., Bolivar, J. M., & Burke, P. (2010). Relationships in reform: The role of teachers’ social networks. Journal of Educational Administration, 48(3), 359–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Earl, L., & Katz, S. (2007). Leadership in networked learning communities: Defining the terrain. School Leadership and Management, 27(3), 239–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Eraut, M. (2004). Informal learning in the workplace. Studies in Continuing Education, 26(2), 247–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fenwick, T. (2009). Making to measure? Reconsidering assessment in professional continuing education. Studies in Continuing Education, 31(3), 229–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Heron, J., & Reason, P. (2006). The practice of co-operative inquiry: Research ‘with’ rather than ‘on’ people. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), Handbook of action research (pp. 144–154). London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  15. Hodgson, V. (2017). Networked Learning in management and professional development. Aalborg, Denmark. Retrieved September 25, 2018, from http://www.communication.aau.dk/research/knowledge_groups/e-learning-lab/networked-Learning-2017/About+the+keynotes/
  16. Hodgson, V., De Laat, M., McConnell, D., & Ryberg, T. (2014). Researching design, experience and practice of networked learning: An overview. In V. Hodgson, M. De Laat, D. McConnell, & T. Ryberg (Eds.), The design, experience and practice of networked learning (pp. 1–26). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jackson, D., & Temperley, J. (2007). From professional learning community to networked learning community. In L. Stoll & K. Seashore Louis (Eds.), Professional learning communities: Divergence, depth and dilemmas (pp. 45–62). Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Katz, S., & Earl, L. (2006). Creating new knowledge: Evaluating networked learning communities. Education Canada, 47(1), 34–37.Google Scholar
  19. Ketelaar, E. (2012). Teachers an innovations: On the role of ownership, sense-making, and agency (Doctoral dissertation). Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  20. Kyndt, E., Gijbels, D., Grosemans, I., & Donche, V. (2016). Teachers’ everyday professional development: Mapping informal learning activities, antecedents, and learning outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 1111–1150.Google Scholar
  21. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Levin, D., & Cross, R. (2004). The strength of weak ties you can trust: The mediating role of trust in effective knowledge transfer. Management Science, 50(11), 1477–1490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lieberman, A., & Wood, D. (2002). Untangling the threads: Networks, community and teacher learning in the National Writing Project. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8(3–4), 295–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lombard, M., Snyder-Duch, J., & Bracken, C. C. (2002). Content analysis in mass communication: Assessment and reporting of intercoder reliability. Human Communication Research, 28(4), 587–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2013). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
  26. Moolenaar, N. M., Daly, A. J., & Sleegers, P. J. C. (2010). Occupying the principal position: Examining relationships between transformational leadership, social network position, and schools’ innovative climate. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(5), 623–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Muijs, D., West, M., & Ainscow, M. (2010). Why network? Theoretical perspectives on networking. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 21(1), 5–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nahapiet, J., & Goshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Opfer, V. D., & Pedder, D. (2011). Conceptualizing teacher professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 376–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pataraia, N. (2014). The role of networks in supporting academics’ professional development and change in teaching practice (Doctoral dissertation). Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, Scotland.Google Scholar
  31. Prenger, R., Poortman, C. L., & Handelzalts, A. (2017). Factors influencing teachers’ professional development in networked professional learning communities. Teaching and Teacher Education, 68, 77–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. (2003). Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 240–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Scribner, J. P., Hager, D. R., & Warne, T. R. (2002). The paradox of professional community: Tales from two high schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38(1), 45–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Stoll, L., Bolam, R., McMahon, A., Wallace, M., & Thomas, S. (2006). Professional learning communities: A review of the literature. Journal of Educational Change, 7(4), 221–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Timperley, H., Wilson, A., Barrar, H., & Fung, I. (2007). Teacher professional learning and development: Best evidence synthesis iteration. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  36. Vaessen, M. F., Van der Beemt, A., & De Laat, M. (2014). Networked professional learning: Aligning formal and informal. Frontline Learning Research, 2(2), 56–71.Google Scholar
  37. Vrieling, E., Van den Beemt, A., & De Laat, M. (2016). What’s in a name: Dimensions of social learning in teacher groups. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 22(3), 273–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Vygotsky, L. S. (1981). The genesis of higher mental functions. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), The concept of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 144–188). Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  39. Walton, J. (1999). Strategic human resource development. Harlow, UK: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  40. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wenger, E., Trayner, B., & De Laat, M. (2011). Promoting and assessing value creation in communities and networks: A conceptual framework. Heerlen, The Netherlands: Ruud de Moor Centre, Open University.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniël van Amersfoort
    • 1
  • Monique Korenhof
    • 2
  • Femke Nijland
    • 1
  • Maarten de Laat
    • 3
    • 4
  • Marjan Vermeulen
    • 1
  1. 1.Welten Institute, Research Centre for Learning, Teaching, and TechnologyOpen University of the NetherlandsHeerlenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.ROC Leeuwenborgh Maastricht, Leeuwenborgh Institute for Secondary Vocational EducationMaastrichtThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Welten Institute, Faculty of Psychology and Educational SciencesOpen University of the NetherlandsHeerlenThe Netherlands
  4. 4.University of WollongongWollongongAustralia

Personalised recommendations