Issue 1
Jan.  2023
Turn off MathJax
Article Contents
Fang Zheng, Chen Houyu, Chen Chao. Linkage and Recontextualization: Mechanisms of Teacher Learning in Inter-School Professional Learning Communities[J]. Journal of Modern Education, 2023, (1): 30-40.
Citation: Fang Zheng, Chen Houyu, Chen Chao. Linkage and Recontextualization: Mechanisms of Teacher Learning in Inter-School Professional Learning Communities[J]. Journal of Modern Education, 2023, (1): 30-40.

Linkage and Recontextualization: Mechanisms of Teacher Learning in Inter-School Professional Learning Communities

  • Received Date: 2022-12-01
    Available Online: 2023-03-22
  • Publish Date: 2023-01-25
  • How to promote professional learning communities in inter-school collaboration in order to facilitate teacher learning is an important direction for teacher professional development research. The study aims to analyze the mechanisms of teacher learning in inter-school professional learning communities through qualitative research methods. Basic Education Groups are a form of inter-school collaboration in the Chinese context, and the Inter-School Professional Learning Community of Group A was selected as the case for this study. We used interviews with 40 staff members and artefacts (inside and outside the Education Group) for data collection. This study found that boundary objects and boundary crossers mediated teachers' learning across borders in inter-school professional learning communities and that linkage and recontextualization were the mechanisms that enabled teacher learning to take place with the help of mediators. Linkage emphasizes that boundary crossers and boundary objects were connected to each other, that boundary crossers used boundary objects as vehicles, and that boundary objects were developed and used by boundary crossers; recontextualization emphasizes that inter-school interactions supported cross-contextual identification and negotiation, and that inter-school, inter-disciplinary, and inter-level differences facilitate multiple boundary crossings for teacher learning.

     

  • loading
  • [1]
    杜芳芳. 英国中小学校际合作研究及对我国共同体办学模式的启示[J]. 基础教育, 2021, 18(4): 94-102. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZHJY202104012.htm
    [2]
    ARMSTRONG P W, BROWN C, CHAPMAN C J. School-to-school collaboration in England: A configurative review of the empirical evidence[J]. Review of education, 2021, 9(1): 319-351. doi: 10.1002/rev3.3248
    [3]
    SUN M, LIU J, ZHU J, et al. Using a text-as-data approach to understand reform processes: a deep exploration of school improvement strategies[J]. Educational evaluation and policy analysis, 2019, 41(4): 510-536. doi: 10.3102/0162373719869318
    [4]
    ARMSTRONG P. Effective school partnerships and collaboration for school improvement: a review of the evidence[R]. London: Department for Education, 2015.
    [5]
    教育部基础教育司. 《关于进一步激发中小学办学活力的若干意见》[EB/OL]. 教育部官网. (2020-09-24)[2021-01-19]. http://www.moe.gov.cn/fbh/live/2020/52485/sfcl/202009/t20200924_490272.html.
    [6]
    张爽. 基础教育集团化办学的模式研究[J]. 教育研究, 2017, 38(06): 87-94. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JYYJ201706011.htm
    [7]
    LIU J. Building education groups as school collaboration for education improvement: a case study of stakeholder interactions in District A of Chengdu[J]. Asia pacific education review, 2021, 22(3): 427-439. doi: 10.1007/s12564-021-09682-0
    [8]
    WEBSTER-WRIGHT A. Reframing professional development through understanding authentic professional learning[J]. Review of educational research, 2009, 79(2): 702-739. doi: 10.3102/0034654308330970
    [9]
    BASSET D, LYON G, TANNER W, et al. Plan A + Unleashing the potential of academies[R]. London: The Schools Network and Reform, 2012.
    [10]
    AINSCOW M, CHAPMAN C, HADFIELD M. Changing education systems: a research-based approach[M]. London: Routledge, 2019.
    [11]
    MUIJS D. Improving schools through collaboration: a mixed methods study of school-to-school partnerships in the primary sector[J]. Oxford review of education, 2015, 41(5): 563-586. doi: 10.1080/03054985.2015.1047824
    [12]
    方征, 高洁, 内生式增量: 松散教育集团中的渐进性制度变迁[J]. 全球教育展望, 2022, 51(11): 29-41. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-WGJN202211003.htm
    [13]
    DÍAZ-GIBSON J, CIVÍS M. Redes socioeducativas promotoras de capital social en la comunidad: un marco teórico de referencia[J]. Cultura y educación, 2011, 23(3): 415-429. doi: 10.1174/113564011797330270
    [14]
    DÍAZ-GIBSON J, ZARAGOZA M C, DALY A J, et al. Networked leadership in educational collaborative networks[J]. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 2017, 45(6): 1040-1059.
    [15]
    KATZ S, EARL L. Learning about networked learning communities[J]. School effectiveness and school improvement, 2010, 21(1): 27-51. doi: 10.1080/09243450903569718
    [16]
    PRENGER R, POORTMAN C L, HANDELZALTS A. The effects of networked professional learning communities[J]. Journal of teacher education, 2018, 70(5): 441-452.
    [17]
    POORTMAN C L, BROWN C. The importance of professional learning networks[A]. Networks for learning[M]. London: Routledge, 2018: 10-19.
    [18]
    HORD S M. Professional learning communities: Communities of continuous inquiry and improvement[M]. Austin, Texas: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory, 1997.
    [19]
    STOLL L, BOLAM R, MCMAHON A, et al. Professional learning communities: A review of the literature[J]. Journal of educational change, 2006, 7(4): 221-258. doi: 10.1007/s10833-006-0001-8
    [20]
    VANGRIEKEN K, MEREDITH C, PACKER T, et al. Teacher communities as a context for professional development: A systematic review[J]. Teaching and teacher education, 2017, 61: 47-59. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2016.10.001
    [21]
    PRENGER R, POORTMAN C L, HANDELZALTS A. Factors influencing teachers' professional development in networked professional learning communities[J]. Teaching and teacher education, 2017, 68(1): 77-90.
    [22]
    KATZ S, EARL L. Learning about networked learning communities[J]. School effectiveness and school improvement, 2010, 21(1): 27-51. doi: 10.1080/09243450903569718
    [23]
    POORTMAN C L, BROWN C, SCHILDKAMP K. Professional learning networks: a conceptual model and research opportunities[J]. Educational research, 2022, 64(1): 1-18. doi: 10.1080/00131881.2021.2013127
    [24]
    AKKERMAN S F, BAKKER A. Boundary crossing and boundary objects[J]. Review of educational research, 2011, 81(2): 132-169. doi: 10.3102/0034654311404435
    [25]
    郑鑫, 尹弘飚, 王晓芳. 跨越教师学习的边界[J]. 教育发展研究, 2015, 35(10): 59-65. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SHGJ201510014.htm
    [26]
    AKKERMAN S, BRUINING T. Multilevel boundary crossing in a professional development school partnership[J]. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2016, 25(2): 240-284. doi: 10.1080/10508406.2016.1147448
    [27]
    叶菊艳, 卢乃桂, 曹钰昌, 谢欣荷. 教师跨界学习研究: 概念、现状与展望——"跨界教育实践中的教师学习与发展国际研讨会"综述[J]. 教师发展研究, 2022, 6(03): 116-124. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JSFJ202203015.htm
    [28]
    AKKERMAN S F, VAN EIJCK M. Re-theorising the student dialogically across and between boundaries of multiple communities[J]. British Educational Research Journal, 2013, 39(1): 60-72.
    [29]
    ENGESTRÖM Y. Enriching the theory of expansive learning: Lessons from journeys toward coconfiguration[J]. Mind, culture, and activity, 2007, 14(1-2): 23-39. doi: 10.1080/10749030701307689
    [30]
    LEVINE T H. Tools for the study and design of collaborative teacher learning: The affordances of different conceptions of teacher community and activity theory[J]. Teacher Education Quarterly, 2010, 37(1): 109-130.
    [31]
    STAR S L, GRIESEMER J R. Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39[J]. Social Studies of Science, 1989, 19(3): 387-420. doi: 10.1177/030631289019003001
    [32]
    STAR S L. This is not a boundary object: Reflections on the origin of a concept[J]. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 2010, 35(5): 601-617.
    [33]
    WENGER E. Communities of Practice and Social Learning Systems[J]. Organization, 2000, 72: 234.
    [34]
    ENGESTRÖM Y, ENGESTRÖM R, KÄKKÄINEN M. Polycontextuality and boundary crossing in expert cognition: Learning and problem solving in complex work activities[J]. Learning and instruction, 1995, 5(4): 319-336. doi: 10.1016/0959-4752(95)00021-6
    [35]
    LEVINA N, VAAST E. The emergence of boundary spanning competence in practice: Implications for implementation and use of information systems[J]. MIS quarterly, 2005, 29(2): 335-363. doi: 10.2307/25148682
    [36]
    王晓芳. 从共同体到伙伴关系: 教师学习情境和方式的扩展与变革[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2015, 33(03): 43-52. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HDXK201503006.htm
    [37]
    GUILE D. The concept of "recontextualization": Implications for professional, vocational and workplace learning[J]. Learning, culture and social interaction, 2019, 23: 100343. doi: 10.1016/j.lcsi.2019.100343
    [38]
    OMONA J. Sampling in qualitative research: Improving the quality of research outcomes in higher education[J]. Makerere Journal of Higher Education, 2013, 4(2): 169-185.
    [39]
    GLASER B G, STRAUSS A L. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research[M]. New York: Routledge, 2017.
    [40]
    CHARMAZ K. Constructing grounded theory[M]. London: sage, 2014.
    [41]
    GLASER B G. Theoretical sensitivity: advances in the methodology of grounded theory[M]. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press, 1978.
  • 加载中

Catalog

    通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
    • 1. 

      沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

    1. 本站搜索
    2. 百度学术搜索
    3. 万方数据库搜索
    4. CNKI搜索

    Tables(4)

    Article Metrics

    Article views (595) PDF downloads(32) Cited by()
    Proportional views
    Related

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return