Abstract
This chapter addresses how school leaders can support teachers’ professional learning and technology integration through a learning design perspective. Through this perspective, teachers engage in sensemaking to enact policy through teaching and learning. This can afford an authentic and contextualized approach to teachers’ professional learning. To do this it is necessary for school leaders to create a culture of learning and experimentation. School leaders can do this through fostering teachers’ engagement in contemporary professional learning, such as developing personal learning networks and communities. These can be online or face-to-face in local schools, or a mixture of the two, formal or informal, and structured or unstructured. The chapter highlights that professional learning should be flexible and personalized to teachers’ contexts. This is increasingly possible as teachers have access to diverse networks and communities, which support engagement with a wide range of professionals, resources, and experiences that may not be available in local schools. The chapter concludes with recommendations on how school leaders can employ a learning design perspective to create this includes opportunities for teachers to make sense of technology integration and experiment and continuously learn to support digital technology use in their school context.
References
Allen, C. D., & Penuel, W. R. (2014). Studying teachers’ sensemaking to investigate teachers’ responses to professional development focused on new standards. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(2), 136–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487114560646.
Biddolph, C., & Curwood, J. S. (2016). #PD: Examining the intersection of Twitter and professional learning. In M. Knobel & J. Kalman (Eds.), Literacies, digital technologies, and teachers’ professional development (pp. 195–218). New York: Peter Lang.
Borko, H., Whitcomb, J., & Liston, D. (2009). Wicked problems and other thoughts on issues of technology and teacher learning. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 3–7. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487108328488.
Bulfin, S., Parr, G., & Bellis, N. (2016). Literacy teacher education and new technologies. In C. Kosnik, S. White, C. Beck, B. Marshall, A. L. Goodwin, & J. Murray (Eds.), Building bridges: Rethinking literacy teacher education in a digital era (pp. 119–133). Rotterdam: SensePublishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-491-6_9.
Cameron, S., Mulholland, J., & Branson, C. (2013). Professional learning in the lives of teachers: Towards a new framework for conceptualising teacher learning. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 41(4), 377–397. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2013.838620.
Carpenter, J. P., & Krutka, D. G. (2015). Engagement through microblogging: Educator professional development via Twitter. Professional Development in Education, 41(4), 707–728. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2014.939294.
Chen, Y., Chen, N.-S., & Tsai, C.-C. (2009). The use of online synchronous discussion for web-based professional development for teachers. Computers & Education, 53(4), 1155–1166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.05.026.
Ching, C. C., & Hursh, A. W. (2014). Peer modeling and innovation adoption among teachers in online professional development. Computers & Education, 73, 72–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.12.011.
Cobb, P., & Jackson, K. (2012). Analyzing educational policies: A learning design perspective. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(4), 487–521. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2011.630849.
Curwood, J.S., & Biddolph, C. (2017). Understanding Twitter as a networked field site: Implications for research on teacher professional learning. In M. Knobel & C. Lankshear (Eds.), Researching new literacies: Design, theory, and data in sociocultural investigation (pp. 81–104). New York: Peter Lang.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2013). Getting teacher evaluation right: What really matters for effectiveness and improvement. New York: Teachers College Press. Retrieved from https://books.google.com.au/books?id=fj8SBQAAQBAJ.
Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X08331140.
Desimone, L., Smith, T., & Phillips, K. (2013). Linking student achievement growth to professional development participation and changes in instruction: A longitudinal study of elementary students and teachers in title I schools. Teachers College Record, 1115(5), 1–46.
Desimone, L. M., & Garet, M. S. (2015). Best practices in teachers’ professional development in the United States. Psychology, Society, & Education, 7(73), 252–263. Retrieved from http://repositorio.ual.es/bitstream/handle/10835/3930/DesimoneEningles.pdf?sequence=1.
Dexter, S., Barton, E., Morgan, M. A., & Meyer, J. P. (2016). Relative uses, impact, and possibilities for teachers’ uses of formal, informal, and independent learning to integrate technology. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education international conference (pp. 1195–1202). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Savannah, GA.
Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255–284. https://doi.org/GALE|A221849729.
Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers & Education, 59(2), 423–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.02.001.
Esterman, M. (2013). A historic moment for TeachMeets. Teaching History, 47(2), 51–52.
Gorozidis, G., & Papaioannou, A. G. (2014). Teachers’ motivation to participate in training and to implement innovations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 39, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.12.001.
Howard, S. K. (2013). Risk-aversion: Understanding teachers’ resistance to technology integration. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 22(3), 357–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2013.802995.
Howard, S. K., & Gigliotti, A. (2016). Having a go: Looking at teachers’ experience of risk-taking in technology integration. Education and Information Technologies, 21(5), 1351–1366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9386-4.
Howard, S. K., & Thompson, K. (2016). Seeing the system: Dynamics and complexity of technology integration in secondary schools. Education and Information Technologies, 21(6), 1877–1894. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9424-2.
ISTE Standards for Teachers. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.iste.org/docs/pdfs/20-14_ISTE_Standards-T_PDF.pdf.
Jones, W. M., & Dexter, S. (2014). How teachers learn: The roles of formal, informal, and independent learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(3), 367–384.
Jones, M., & Dexter, S. (2016). Conceptualizing school-based teacher learning from teachers’ points of view: Holistically leveraging formal, informal, and independent learning activities. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 25(3), 251–268.
Karpova, E., Correia, A.-P., & Baran, E. (2009). Learn to use and use to learn: Technology in virtual collaboration experience. The Internet and Higher Education, 12(1), 45–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.10.006.
Könings, K. D., Brand-Gruwel, S., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2010). An approach to participatory instructional design in secondary education: An exploratory study. Educational Research, 52(1), 45–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881003588204.
Louis, K. S., Leithwood, K., Wahlstrom, K. L., Anderson, S. E., Michlin, M., & Mascall, B. (2010). Learning from leadership: Investigating the links to improved student learning. Center for Applied Research and Educational Improvement/University of Minnesota and Ontario Institute for Studies in Education/University of Toronto, 42, 50.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1.1.91.7990.
Morrison, K., & van der Werf, G. (2016). Large-scale data, “wicked problems”, and “what works” for educational policy making. Educational Research and Evaluation, 22(5–6), 255–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2016.1259789.
Muijs, D., Kyriakides, L., van der Werf, G., Creemers, B., Timperley, H., & Earl, L. (2014). State of the art – Teacher effectiveness and professional learning. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 25(2), 231–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2014.885451.
Oliver, M. (2011). Technological determinism in educational technology research: Some alternative ways of thinking about the relationship between learning and technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(5), 373–384. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00406.x.
Opfer, V. D., & Pedder, D. (2011). Conceptualizing teacher professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 376–407. https://doi.org/10.2307/23014297.
Organization for Economic Collaboration and Development. (2016). What makes a school a learning organisation? Paris. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/education/school/school-learning-organisation.pdf.
Parr, G. (2010). Inquiry-based professional learning: Speaking back to standards-based reforms. Teneriffe: Post Press.
Perrotta, C. (2013). Do school-level factors influence the educational benefits of digital technology? A critical analysis of teachers’ perceptions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(2), 314–327. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01304.x.
Phelps, R., & Graham, A. (2010). Exploring the complementarities between complexity and action research: The story of Technology Together. Cambridge Journal of Education, 40(2), 183–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2010.481259.
Salomon, G. (2016). It’s not just the tool but the educational rationale that counts. In E. Elstad (Ed.), Educational technology and polycontextual bridging (pp. 149–161). Rotterdam: SensePublishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-645-3_8.
Spillane, J. P., Reiser, B. J., & Reimer, T. (2002). Policy implementation and cognition: Reframing and refocusing implementation research. Review of Educational Research, 72(3), 387–431. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543072003387.
Stout, R. T. (1996). Staff development policy: Fuzzy choice in an imperfect market. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 4, 2. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v4n2.1996.
Tallvid, M. (2014). Understanding teachers’ reluctance to the pedagogical use of ICT in the 1:1 classroom. Education and Information Technologies, 21(3), 503–519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-014-9335-7.
Timperley, H., Wilson, A., Barrar, H., & Fung, I. (2007). Teacher professional learning and development: Best evidence synthesis iteration [BES]. Wellington, New Zealand Ministry of Education.
Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2017). Understanding the relationship between teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and technology use in education: A systematic review of qualitative evidence. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(3), 555–575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9481-2.
Trust, T., Krutka, D. G., & Carpenter, J. P. (2016). “Together we are better”: Professional learning networks for teachers. Computers & Education, 102, 15–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.06.007.
Vanderlinde, R., Aesaert, K., & van Braak, J. (2015). Measuring ICT use and contributing conditions in primary schools. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(5), 1056–1063. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12282.
Vangrieken, K., Meredith, C., Packer, T., & Kyndt, E. (2017). Teacher communities as a context for professional development: A systematic review. Teaching and Teacher Education, 61, 47–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.10.001.
Wei, R. C., Darling-Hammond, L., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and abroad. Dallas, National Staff Development Council.
Zhang, S., Liu, Q., Chen, W., Wang, Q., & Huang, Z. (2017). Interactive networks and social knowledge construction behavioral patterns in primary school teachers’ online collaborative learning activities. Computers & Education, 104, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.10.011.
Zheng, B., Warschauer, M., Lin, C.-H., & Chang, C. (2016). Learning in one-to-one laptop environments: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Review of Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316628645.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Section Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this entry
Cite this entry
Howard, S.K., Curwood, J.S., McGraw, K. (2018). Leaders Fostering Teachers’ Learning Environments for Technology Integration. In: Voogt, J., Knezek, G., Christensen, R., Lai, KW. (eds) Second Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education . Springer International Handbooks of Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53803-7_35-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53803-7_35-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-53803-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-53803-7
eBook Packages: Springer Reference EducationReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Education