35th Annual Conference of the Association for Teacher Education in Europe

1. The Continuous Professional Development of Teachers and Researchers for an Adaptive and Inclusive School 35th Annual Conference of the Associationfor Teacher Education in Europe Budapest, August 28th, 2010

3. The reasons of a new approach: social context • new challenges worldwide (globalization, postmodernism, etc.), • teachers and schools face new requirements and expectations (ad eg. measurement politics) • Hungarian social problems: • hierarchic society – selective school system • strong stereotypes and prejudices in the society – stereotypes and categories in school

4. The reasons of a new approach: insufficient in-service teacher education • slow penetration of some worldwide tendencies in educational theory (gender issues, social constructivism, critical pedagogy etc.) • scarcity of conceptual and theoretical background • divergent concepts: inclusion, adaptivity • in-service TE programs not related to institutions, communities • in-service TE without the mentality of continuous professional development • lack of reflection on the social context

5. Our research and development project:our story future activities goals • studyingtheinternationalliterature • studyvisitabroad • studyingnewadaptive, innovativeinitiativesin Hungary • studying schools in collaboration withthe PLC: • five „adaptive” schools • three-phase casestudy supportingthereflection of the PLC • elaborating a theoreticalframework • elaborating tools for schools to help the PLC • promoting the CPD of teachers in the context of the process of the innovation of their institution • a schoolnetwork of adaptive-inclusiveschools; • promoting of thesharing of adaptivewaysamongthePLCs

6. VALUES: main dimensions of our conceptual framework

7. Adaptivity • new challenges, the expectation of continuous innovation and reflection • adaptive reaction to the context, to the students’ characteristics, innovative, reflective learning in the school community with social responsibility • adaptivity in every institution: • in danger • in a new situation • as a special institution • as a second chance institution • as a popular district school • but lack of reflection and common, tipical answers

8. School as community • individualistic society, democracy, equity, • school not only an institution and an organization but a community with shared goals, with a continuous learning process together (Bergmark, 2009; Stoll – Louis, 2007; Sergiovanni, 1994) • school is situated in the local community like a node in a net (Crowson – Goldring, 2010) • collaboration with the students (school democracy) • opening a community space in block of flats context but with a middle-class mentality

9. Essentialisation of the categiories like SEN and disadvantaged students The categories are regulated by the law but have different interpretations Focus on integration The categories: Relative, a social construction (McLaren, 1995) One aspect of the student’s characteristics New focuses (e.g. homosexual students, dropped out talented students) Diversity Inclusion: school for all children Complex pedagogical understanding of each student as a distinct personality Diversity and fighting against categories

10. ‘Believing in every student’ but inflexible trackings, hierarchy of programmes in a second chance school Focusing on individual characteristics but a very strong social influenceof the SEN category in a special institution Not fighting against the categories but struggling with them BOUNDED BY CATEGORIES No interpretation of diversity Scarce reflection Absence of new categories

11. Method-centeredness in teachers’ thinking and teaching in in-service learning programmes Strong emphasis on individual learning Well-established learning theory Goal and way The theory of social constructivism (Littleton – Häkkinen, 1999) Social, cultural context Different levels of learning Process of learning as participation, interaction, knowledge construction Diversity in the communities Learner’s identity Learning-centeredness

12. Learning-centerednessas a goal and a way in a primary school Supporting self-regulated learning • Relatedness of individual • and grouplearning • instudents’ learning • amongstteachers Everyday knowledge Intrinsic motivation of students Project pedagogy ?

13. Issuesto be consideredaccording to in-service learning • Best practices as we think about them… • Practices on the road • Learning through interaction, participation • Mutuality • A school network as we plan… • Based on professional support • A system of ‘adoption’ • What kinds of incentives can we offer for the schools? Is there a future for school networks?

14. Thank you for your attention! gasko.krisztina@ppk.elte.hu kalman.orsolya@ppk.elte.hu meszarosgyuri.d@gmail.com rapos.nora@ppk.elte.hu

15. References Bergmark, U. (2009): Building an Ethical Learning Community in Schools. Luleå University of Technology, Department of Education, Luleå. Crowson, R.L. – Goldring, E.B. (2010): School Community Relations. In: Peterson, P. – McGaw, Baker – McGaw, Barry (szerk.): International Encyclopedia of Education. Elsevier, Oxford, 106-112. Littleton, K. – Häkkinen, P. (1999): Learning together: Understanding the process of computer-based collaborative learning. In: Dillengourg, P. (szerk.): Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches, Pergamon, Oxford, 20-31. McLaren, P. (1995): Critical Pedagogy and Predatory Culture. Oppositional Politics in a Postmodern Era. Routledge, New York. Sergiovanni, T. (1994): Organizations or communities? Changing the metaphor changes the theory.Educational Administration Quarterly, 30, 214-226. Stoll, L. – Louis, K. S. (2007): Professional learning communities: elaborating new approach. In: Stoll, L. – Louis, K. S. (szerk.): Professional Learning Communities: Divergence, Depth and Dilemmas. Open University Press, 1-13.