Alla scoperta del processo decisionale dei docenti: Collegando elementi complessi
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7346/sird-022021-p13Parole chiave:
ragionamento pedagogico per l'integrazione delle tecnologie, orientamenti pedagogici, Epistemic Frame Theory, etnografia quantitativa, processo decisionale degli insegnantiAbstract
Insegnare è un’operazione complessa che richiede innumerevoli decisioni prese, a volte, in un battito di ciglia. La recente esperienza dell’insegnamento d’emergenza a distanza, causato dalla pandemia, ha reso ancora più evidente l'importanza della competenza docente nel sostenere anche online apprendimenti significativi. Nonostante in letteratura ci siano vari tentativi di investigare il fenomeno, rimane sfuggente una comprensione organica di come conoscenze, abilità, epistemologie e valori influenzino il ragionamento e le azioni degli insegnanti. Pur riconoscendo il ruolo dei vari singoli fattori, questo articolo sostiene una visione sistemica del processo decisionale docente in contesti tecnologicamente infusi. Viene suggerito l’Epistemic Frame Theory come un modello per integrare sistematicamente l'epistemologia, le competenze, i valori e le conoscenze proprie della comunità professionale docente. Introducendo poi la Quantitative Ethnography e la Epistemic Network Analysis, questo articolo vuole sostenere che le connessioni tra gli elementi dei quadri epistemici dei docenti sono fondamentali, e richiedono metodologie di ricerca che facilitino la modellazione esplicita di tali connessioni. Infine, si introducono due studi come esempi di tali metodologie.
Riferimenti bibliografici
Abbitt, J. T. (2011). An investigation of the relationship between self-efficacy beliefs about technology integration and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) among preservice teachers. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27(4), 134-143.
Allen, J. G., Wasicsko, M. M., & Chirichello, M. (2014). The missing link: Teaching the dispositions to lead. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 9(1), 1-13.
Angeli C., Valanides N., Mavroudi A., Christodoulou A., & Georgiou K. (2015). Introducing e-TPCK: An adaptive e-learning technology for the development of teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge. In C. Angeli, & N. Valanides (Eds.), Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Exploring, developing, and assessing TPCK (pp. 305-317). Boston: Springer.
Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development and assessment of ICT-TPCK: Advances in Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Computers & Education, 52(1), 154-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.07.006.
Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2018). Knowledge Base for Information and Communication Technology in Education. In J. Voogt, G. Knezek, R. Christensen & K.W. Lai (Eds.), Handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education (pp. 397-414). Boston: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53803-7_26-1.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Bartholomew, H., Osborne, J., & Ratcliffe, M. (2004). Teaching students “ideas about science”: Five dimensions of effective practice. Science Education, 88(5), 655-682. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10136
Baylor, A. L., & Ritchie, D. (2002). What factors facilitate teacher skill, teacher morale, and perceived student learning in technology-using classrooms? Computers & Education, 39(4), 395-414. https://doi.org/10.1016/S03601315(02)00075-1.
Chai, C. S. (2010). The relationships among Singaporean preservice teachers’ ICT competencies, pedagogical beliefs
and their beliefs on the espoused use of ICT. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 19(3), 387-400. Christensen, R., & Knezek, G. (2018). Measuring teacher attitudes, competencies, and pedagogical practices in support of student learning and classroom technology integration. In J. Voogt, G. Knezek, R. Christensen, & K. Lai, (Eds.), Second Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education (2nd ed., pp. 357-374). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71054-9
Cox, E., & Laferriere, T. (2019). EDUsummIT 2019 - learners and learning contexts: new alignments for the digital
Age. In P. Fisser & M. Phillips (Eds.), Learners and learning contexts: New alignments for the digital age. International summit on ICT in education (pp. 4-7). https://edusummit2019.fse.ulaval.ca/files/edusummit2019_- ebook.pdf
Crompton, H. (2015). Pre-service teachers’ developing technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) and beliefs on the use of technology in the K-12 mathematics classroom: A review of the literature. In C. Angeli & N. Valanides, N. (Eds.), Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Exploring, developing, and assessing TPCK (pp. 239-250). Boston: Springer.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.
Dennen, V. P., Burner, K. J., & Cates, M. L. (2018). Information and communication technologies, and learning theories: Putting pedagogy into practice. In J. Voogt, G. Knezek, R. Christensen, & K. Lai, (2018). Second handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education (2nd ed., pp. 143-160). Boston: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71054-9.
Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration?, Educational technology research and development, 53(4), 25-39.
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/10.10- 80/15391523.2010.10782551
Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers & Education, 59, 423-435. https://doi.org/- 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.02.001.
Feng, Y. & Hew, K. (2005). K-12 teachers’ pedagogical reasoning in planning instruction with technology integration. In C. Crawford, R. Carlsen, I. Gibson, K. McFerrin, J. Price, R. Weber & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2005—Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 3173-3180). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
Fenstermacher, G. (1986). Philosophy of research on teaching: Three aspects. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 37-49). New York: Macmillan.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behaviour: An introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley.
Gee, J. P. (2001). Reading as situated language: A sociocognitive perspective. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 44(8), 714-725. https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.44.8.3
Gencturk, E., Gokcek, T., & Gunes, G. (2010). Reliability and validity study of the technology proficiency self-assessment scale. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 2863-2867.
Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. North-eastern University Press. Graham, C. R. (2011). Theoretical considerations for understanding technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers & Education, 57(3), 1953-1960.
Green, T. F. (1971). The activities of teaching. McGraw-Hill.
Gudmundsdöttir, S. (1988). Knowledge use among experienced teachers: Four case studies of high school teaching. [Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University].
Harris, J. B., & Hofer, M. J. (2011). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in action: A descriptive study of secondary teachers’ curriculum-based, technology-related instructional planning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(3), 211-229. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2011.10782570
Harris, J., & Phillips, M. (2018). If there’s TPACK, is there Technological Pedagogical Reasoning and Action? In E. Langran & J. Borup (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2051-2061). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
Hazzan, O. (2003). Prospective high school mathematics teachers’ attitudes toward integrating computers in their future teaching. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35, 213-246.
Heitink, M., Voogt, J., Verplanken, L., Van Braak, J., & Fisser, P. (2016). Teachers’ professional reasoning about their pedagogical use of technology. Computers and Education, 101, 70-83. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.com-pedu.2016.05.009
Hew, K. F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(3), 223-252. Hunter, M. (1979). Teaching is decision making. Educational Leadership, 37(1), 62-67.
James, M. C., & Scharmann, L. C. (2007). Using analogies to improve the teaching performance of preservice teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(4), 565-585.
Kim, S. (2016). Relationships between preservice secondary mathematics teachers’ beliefs, knowledge, and technology use [Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia]. https://getd.libs.uga.edu/pdfs/kim_somin_201605_phd.pdf Kimmons, R., & Hall, C. (2016). Toward a broader understanding of teacher technology integration beliefs and values. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 24(3), 309-335.
Knezek, G., & Christensen, R. (2016). Extending the will, skill, tool model of technology integration: Adding pedagogy as a new model construct. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 28(3), 307-325.
Knezek, G., & Christensen, R. (2018). The evolving role of attitudes and competencies in Information and Com- munication Technology in education. In J. Voogt, G. Knezek, R. Christensen, & K. Lai (Eds.), Second Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education (2nd ed., pp. 239-254). Boston: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71054-9
Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2005). Teachers learning technology by design. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 21(3), 94-101. https://doi.org/10.1080/10402454.2005.10784518
Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2008). Introducing TPCK. In AACTE Committee on Innovation and Technology (Ed.), Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for educators (pp. 3-29). American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education and Routledge.
Koh, J., & Frick, T. (2009). Instructor and student classroom interactions during technology skills instruction for facilitating preservice teachers’ computer self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 40, 221–228. Kramarski, B., & Michalsky, T. (2010). Preparing preservice teachers for self-regulated learning in the context of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 20(5), 434-447, https://doi.org/434-447. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.05.003
Leatham, K. R. (2006). Viewing mathematics teachers’ beliefs as sensible systems. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9(1), 91-102.
Lloyd, C. A. (2019). Exploring the real-world decision-making of novice and experienced teachers. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 43(2), 166-182. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2017.1357070
Loughran, J. (2013). Pedagogy: Making sense of the complex relationship between teaching and learning. Curriculum inquiry, 43(1), 118-141. https://doi.org/10.1111/curi.12003
Loughran, J. (2019). Pedagogical Reasoning: The foundation of the professional knowledge of teaching. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and practice, 25(5), 523-535. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2019.1633294 Loughran, J., Keast, S., & Cooper, R. (2016). Pedagogical reasoning in teacher education. In J. Loughran, & M. L. Hamilton (Eds.), International Handbook of Teacher Education (pp. 387-421). Boston: Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0366-0_10
McDonough, A., & Clarke, D. (2003). Describing the practice of effective teachers of mathematics in the early years. International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 3, 261-268.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for integrating technology in teacher knowledge. Teachers college record, 108 (6), 1017-1054. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
Munby, H. (1982). The place of teachers’ beliefs in research on teacher thinking and decision making, and an alternative methodology. Instructional science, 11(3), 201-225.
Niederhauser, D. S., & Lindstrom, D. L. (2018). Instructional technology integration models and frameworks: Diffusion, competencies, attitudes and dispositions. In J. Voogt, G. Knezek, R. Christensen, & K. Lai, (Eds.), Second Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education (2nd ed., pp. 335-356). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71054-9
Niederhauser, D. S., & Perkmen, S. (2008). Validation of the intrapersonal technology integration scale: Assessing the influence of intrapersonal factors that influence technology integration. Computers in The Schools, 25(1-2), 98-111.
Niess, M., & Gillow-Wiles, H. (2017). Expanding teachers’ technological pedagogical reasoning with a systems pedagogical approach. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(3), 77-95. https://doi.org/- 10.14742/ajet.3473
Nilsson, P. (2009). From lesson plan to new comprehension: exploring student teachers’ pedagogical reasoning in learning about teaching, European Journal of Teacher Education, 32(3), 239-258.
Oshima, J., & Shaffer, D. W. (2021). Learning analytics for a new epistemological perspective of learning. Information and Technology in Education and Learning, 1(1), 11-11. https://doi.org/10.12937/itel.1.1.Inv.p003 Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Kopcha, T. J., & Ertmer, P. A. (2018). Information and communication technology di- spositional factors and relationship to information and communication technology practices. In J. Voogt, G. Knezek, R. Christensen, & K. Lai, (Eds.), Second Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary
Education (2nd ed., pp. 309-334). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71054-9.
Pajares, F., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Self and self-belief in psychology and education: A historical perspective. In J. Aronson (Ed.), Improving academic achievement: Impact of psychological factors on education (pp. 3-21). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Peterson, R., & Treagust, D. F. (1992). Primary pre-service teachers’ pedagogical reasoning skills. Research in Science
Education, 22(1), 323–330.
Phillips M., Siebert-Evenstone A., Kessler A., Gasevic D., Shaffer D.W. (2021) Professional Decision Making: Reframing Teachers’ Work Using Epistemic Frame Theory. In: Ruis A.R., Lee S.B. (Eds.) Advances in Quantitative Ethnography. ICQE 2021. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol. 1312. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-67788-6_18
Phillips, M. (2016). Digital technology, schools and teachers’ workplace learning: Policy, practice and identity. London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-52462-1
Phillips, M., Koehler, M., & Rosenberg, J. (2017). TPCK/TPACK research and development: Past, present, and future directions. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(3), 1-8, https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3907 Phillips, M., Kovanovi , V., Mitchell, I., & Gaševi , D. (2019). The influence of discipline on teachers’ knowledge and decision making. In B. Egan, M. Misfeldt, & A. Siebert-Evenstone (Eds.), Advances in Quantitative Ethno- graphy: First International Conference, ICQE 2019 Madison, WI, USA, October 20-22, 2019 Proceedings (1st ed., pp. 177-188). (Communications in Computer and Information Science; Vol. 1112). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33232-7_15 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33232-7_15
Richardson, K. W. (2009). Looking at/looking through: Teachers planning for curriculum-based learning with technology [Doctoral dissertation]. https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.25774/w4-vc0b-ea89
Rizhaupt, A. D., Huggins-Manley, A. C., Dawson, K., Agadi-Dogan, N., & Dogan, S. (2017). Validity and appropriate uses of the revised technology and perceptions survey (TUPS). Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 49(1-2), 73–87.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (2011). Toward professional development for teachers grounded in a theory of decision-making. Zdm, 43(4), 457-469.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
Seufert, S., Guggemos, J., & Sailer, M. (2021). Technology-related knowledge, skills, and attitudes of pre- and inservice teachers: The current situation and emerging trends. Computers in Human Behavior, 115, 106552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106552
Shaffer, D. W. (2006). How computer games help children learn. Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230601994 Shaffer, D. W. (2012). Models of situated action: Computer games and the problem of transfer. In C. Steinkuehler, K. D. Squire, & S. A. Barab (Eds.), Games learning, and society: Learning and meaning in the digital age (pp. 403-433). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139031127.028 Shaffer, D. W. (2017). Quantitative Ethnography. Madison: Cathcart Press.
Shaffer, D. W., Hatfield, D., Svarovsky, G. N., Nash, P., Nulty, A., Bagley, E., Frank, K. A., Rupp, A. A. & Mislevy, R. (2009). Epistemic network analysis: A prototype for 21st-century assessment of learning. International Journal of Learning and Media, 1(2), 33-53. https://doi.org/10.1162/ijlm.2009.0013
Shavelson, R. J. (1973). The basic teaching skill: Decision making. Stanford Center for Research and Development in Teaching. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED073117
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Paradigms and research programs for the study of teaching. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (3rd ed., pp. 3-36). Macmillan.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning, 2(1), 1-9. http://itdl.org/journal/jan_ 05/article01.htm
Smart, V. L. (2016). Technological pedagogical reasoning: The development of teachers’ pedagogical reasoning with technology over multiple career stages [Doctoral thesis, Griffith University]. https://www120.secure.griffith.edu.au/rch/items/b658444f-8e00-4c61-9b95-a3b19c62d545/1/
Smart, V., Sim, C. & Finger, G. (2015). Are teachers lost in thought with technology? Moving from pedagogical
reasoning to technological pedagogical reasoning. In D. Rutledge & D. Slykhuis (Eds.), Proceedings of the society for information technology & teacher education international conference (pp. 3418-3425). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
Starkey, L. (2010). Teachers’ pedagogical reasoning and action in the digital age. Teachers and Teaching, 16(2), 233- 244. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13540600903478433
Stefaniak. J., Luo, T., & Xu, M. (2021). Fostering pedagogical reasoning and dynamic decision-making practices: a conceptual framework to support learning design in a digital age. Educational Technology Research Development, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-09964-9
Thagard, P. (2000). Coherence in thought and action. MIT Press.
Trevisan, O. (2019). Student-teachers’ pedagogical reasoning in technological pedagogical content knowledge design tasks: A cross-country multiple case study in initial teacher education institutions [Doctoral dissertation, Università degli Studi di Padova]. Padova Digital University Archive. http://paduaresearch.cab.unipd.it/12362/
Trevisan, O., & De Rossi, M. (2020). Student teachers’ pedagogical reasoning in TPCK-based design tasks. A multiple case study. In V. Grion, & G. Cecchinato (Eds.), QWERTY special issue: From the Teaching Machines to the Machine learning: opportunities and challenges for Artificial Intelligence education, 15(2), 68-84.
Vannatta, R. A., & Fordham, N. (2004). Teacher dispositions as predictors of classroom technology use. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(3), 253–271. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2004.10782415. Webb, M. (2010). Models for exploring and characterising pedagogy with information technology. In A. McDougall, J. Murnane, A. Jones & N. Reynolds (Eds.), Researching IT in Education: Theory, Practice and Future Directions (pp. 91-111). London: Routledge.
Webb, M. E. (2002). Pedagogical reasoning: Issues and solutions for the teaching and learning of ICT in secondary schools. Education and Information Technologies, 7(3), 237-255.
Wilson, S., Shulman, L., & Richert, A. (1987). 150 Different ways of knowing: Representations of knowledge in
teaching. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Exploring teachers’ thinking (pp. 104-124). London: Cassell Educational Limited.
Wray, D., Medwell, J., Fox, R., & Poulson, L. (2000). The teaching practices of effective teachers of literacy. Educational Review, 52(1), 75-84. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131910097432
##submission.downloads##
Pubblicato
Come citare
Fascicolo
Sezione
Licenza
Copyright (c) 2021 Ottavia Trevisan, Michael Phillips, Marina De Rossi
TQuesto lavoro è fornito con la licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione 4.0 Internazionale.
Gli autori che pubblicano su questa rivista accettano le seguenti condizioni:
- Gli autori mantengono i diritti sulla loro opera e cedono alla rivista il diritto di prima pubblicazione dell’opera, contemporaneamente licenziata sotto una Licenza Creative Commons – Attribuzione che permette ad altri di condividere l’opera indicando la paternità intellettuale e la prima pubblicazione su questa rivista.
- Gli autori possono aderire ad altri accordi di licenza non esclusiva per la distribuzione della versione dell’opera pubblicata (es. depositarla in un archivio istituzionale o pubblicarla in una monografia), a patto di indicare che la prima pubblicazione è avvenuta su questa rivista.
- Gli autori possono diffondere la loro opera online (es. in repository istituzionali o nel loro sito web) prima e durante il processo di submission, poiché può portare a scambi produttivi e aumentare le citazioni dell’opera pubblicata (Vedi The Effect of Open Access).
