Исследование функций преподавателей в процессе обучения студентов в онлайн-курсе о педагогическом использовании информационных и коммуникативных технологий

В статье исследуются функции преподавателей в процессе обучения в онлайн-курсе с целью формирования навыков преподавания с применением цифровых технологий студентами педагогических вузов и учителями норвежских школ. В статье также рассматривается, как участие студентов в процессе обучения влияет на функции преподавателей в данном процессе. Онлайн-встречи студентов с преподавателями наблюдались и записывались. Встречи были направлены на развитие понимания студентами экзаменaционного задания. Данные (4,5 часа видеозаписи) были проанализированы с использованием метода коммуникативного анализа. Результаты анализа показали, что преподаватели выполняли четыре основные функции: 1) начинали учебный процесс; 2) выясняли идеи студентов по выполнению экзаменационного задания; 3) помогали студентам в формировании их концептуального понимания; 4) обобщали и структурировали понимание студентами основных концепций. Данные функции педагогов возникли в ходе совместного обучающего процесса преподавателей и студентов. Активное участие студентов в процессе обучения было особенно заметно, когда они проявляли инициативу и открыто делились своими идеями по выполнению экзаменационного задания. Преподаватели, в свою очередь, играли важную роль в обсуждении идей и вопросов студентов, возникающих в совместном процессе обучения. Таким образом, активное участие студентов оказало влияние на педагогические функции преподавателей онлайн-курса. При таком подходе диалектическое взаимодейсвие между студентами и преподавателями является важным и одним из основных аспектов обучения в онлайн-среде.

1. Berge, Z.L., Changing instructor’s roles in virtual worlds. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 2008. 9(4): p. 407—414.
2. Liu, X., et al., Exploring four dimensions of online instructor roles: A program level case study. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 2005. 9(4): p. 29—48.
3. Martin, N., N. Kelly, and P. Terry, A framework for self-determination in massive open online courses: Design for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 2018. 34(2).
4. Curtin, J.L., Teaching versus facilitating in leadership development: Trends in business. Journal of Leadership Education, 2002. 1(1): p. 58—67.
5. Mulholland, J. and C. Turnock, Learning in the workplace: A toolkit for facilitating learning, and assessment in health, and social care settings. 2012: Routledge.
6. Wise, D., Teaching or Facilitating Learning? Selecting the Optimal Approach for Your Educational Objectives and Audience. Journal of Extension, 2017. 55(3): p. n3.
7. Margaryan, A., M. Bianco, and A. Littlejohn, Instructional quality of massive open online courses (MOOCs). Computers & Education, 2015. 80: p. 77—83.
8. Singh, A.B. and A.I. Mørch, An analysis of participants’ experiences from the first international MOOC offered at the University of Oslo. Nordic journal of digital literacy, 2018. 13(01): p. 40—64.
9. Skrypnyk, O., et al., Roles of course facilitators, learners, and technology in the flow of information of a cMOOC. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 2015. 16(3).
10. Kesim, M. and H. Altınpulluk, A theoretical analysis of MOOCs types from a perspective of learning theories. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2015. 186: p. 15—19.
11. Bates, A., Teaching in a Digital Age—Second Edition. Vancouver, BC: Tony Bates Associates Ltd. 2020.
12. Gil-Jaurena, I. and D. Domínguez, Teachers’ roles in light of massive open online courses (MOOCs): Evolution and challenges in higher distance education. International Review of Education, 2018. 64(2): p. 197—219.
13. Ross, J., et al., Teacher experiences and academic identity: The missing components of MOOC pedagogy. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 2014. 10(1): p. 57—69.
14. Engeness, I., et al., Use of videos in the Information and Communication Technology Massive Open Online Course: Insights for learning and development of transformative digital agency with pre- and in-service teachers in Norway. Policy Futures in Education, 2020. 18(4): p. 497—516.
15. Engeness, I. and M. Nohr, Engagement in Learning in the Massive Open Online Course: Implications for Epistemic Practices and Development of Transformative Digital Agency with Pre-and In-Service Teachers in Norway. Cultural- Historical Psychology, 2020. 16(3): p. 71—82.
16. Alvarez, I., T. Guasch, and A. Espasa, University teacher roles and competencies in online learning environments: a theoretical analysis of teaching and learning practices. European Journal of Teacher Education, 2009. 32(3): p. 321—336.
17. Chen, Y., et al., Facilitating students’ interaction in MOOCs through timeline-anchored discussion. International Journal of   Human—Computer   Interaction,   2019.   35(19): p. 1781—1799.
18. Thomas, G. and S. Thorpe, Enhancing the facilitation of online groups in higher education: a review of the literature on face-to-face and online group-facilitation. Interactive Learning Environments, 2019. 27(1): p. 62—71.
19. Foroughi, A., MOOCs: The Enduring Importance of” Teacher Presence”. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 2016. 16(6): p. 76.
20. Watkins, J., L.Z. Jaber, and V. Dini, Facilitating Scientific Engagement Online: Responsive Teaching in a Science Professional Development Program. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 2020: p. 1—22.
21. Baran, E., A.-P. Correia, and A. Thompson, Transforming online teaching practice: Critical analysis of the literature on the roles and competencies of online teachers. Distance Education, 2011. 32(3): p. 421—439.
22. Bawane, J. and J.M. Spector, Prioritization of online instructor roles: implications for competency-based teacher education programs. Distance education, 2009. 30(3): p. 383— 397.
23. Martin, F., et al., Award-winning faculty online teaching practices: Course design, assessment and evaluation, and facilitation. The Internet and Higher Education, 2019. 42: p. 34—43.
24. Maor, D., The teacher’s role in developing interaction and reflection in an online learning community. Educational Media International, 2003. 40(1—2): p. 127—138.
25. Huang, Q., Examining Teachers’ Roles in Online Learning. 2018.
26. Martin, F., C. Wang, and A. Sadaf, Facilitation Matters: Instructor Perception of Helpfulness of Facilitation Strategies in Online Courses. Online Learning, 2020. 24(1).
27. Brinkley-Etzkorn, K.E., Learning to teach online: Measuring the influence of faculty development training on teaching effectiveness through a TPACK lens. The Internet and Higher Education, 2018. 38: p. 28—35.
28. Hidalgo, F.J.P. and C.A.H. Abril, MOOCs: Origins, Concept and Didactic Applications: A Systematic Review of the Literature (2012—2019). Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 2020: p. 1—27.
29. Sfard, A., On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational researcher, 1998. 27(2): p. 4—13.
30. Siemens, G., Teaching in social and technological networks. Connectivism. Recuperado de http://www. connectivism. ca, 2010.
31. Vygotsky, L.S., Thought and language. Rev. and expanded ed. ed. Myslenie i reč’, ed. A. Kozulin, E. Hanfmann, and G. Vakar. 2012, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
32. Daniels, H., Vygotsky and pedagogy. 2016: Routledge.
33. Arievitch, I. and A. Stetsenko, The Quality of Cultural Tools and Cognitive Development: Gal’perin’s Perspective and Its Implications. Human Development — HUM DEVELOP, 2000. 43: p. 69—92.
34. Engeness, I. and A. Edwards, The Complexity of Learning: Exploring the Interplay of Different Mediational Means in Group Learning with Digital Tools. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 2017. 61(6): p. 650—667.
35. Engeness, I., What teachers do: facilitating the writing process with feedback from EssayCritic and collaborating peers. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 2018. 27(3): p. 297— 311.
36. Engeness, I., PY Galperin’s Development of Human Mental Activity: Lectures in Educational Psychology. 2021: Springer.
37. Engeness, I. and A. Lund, Learning for the future: Insights arising from the contributions of Piotr Galperin to the cultural-historical theory. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 2020. 25: p. 100257.
38. Stetsenko, A., Critical Challenges in Cultural-Historical Activity Theory: The Urgency of Agency. Cultural-Historical Psychology, 2020. 16(2): p. 5—18.
39. Stetsenko, A., The transformative mind: Expanding Vygotsky’s approach to development and education. 2017: Cambridge University Press.
40. Jefferson, G., Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. Pragmatics and Beyond New Series, 2004. 125: p. 13—34.
41. Derry, S.J., et al., Conducting video research in the learning sciences: Guidance on selection, analysis, technology, and ethics. The journal of the learning sciences, 2010. 19(1): p. 3—53.
42. Hall, R. and R. Stevens, Interaction analysis approaches to knowledge in use, in Knowledge and Interaction: A Synthetic Agenda for the Learning Sciences M.L. A.A. diSessa, N.S. rown, Editor. 2015, Routledge. p. 88—124.
43. Jordan, B. and A. Henderson, Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice, in Conversation Analysis: Studies from the first generation, G.H. Lerner, Editor. 1995, NL: John Benjamins: Amsterdam. p. 39—103.
44. Mercer, N., Sociocultural discourse analysis: analysing classroom talk as a social mode of thinking. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice, 2004. 1(2): p. 137—168.
45. Linell, P., Rethinking language, mind, and world dialogically : interactional and contextual theories of human sense- making. Advances in cultural psychology, Constructing human development. 2009, Charlotte, N.C: Information Age Publ.
46. Linell, P., Approaching dialogue: Talk, interaction and contexts in dialogical perspectives. Vol. 3. 1998: John Benjamins Publishing.
47. Engeness, I., Teacher facilitating of group learning in science with digital technology and insights into students’ agency in learning to learn. Research in Science & Technological Education, 2020. 38(1): p. 42—62.
48. Maclellan, E., Shaping agency through theorizing and practising teaching in teacher education. The SAGE handbook of research on teacher education, 2017: p. 139—142.

PlumX

Метрики публикации