EVALUATION OF ONLINE COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE ENVIRONMENTS FOR PRESERVICE TEACHER EDUCATION: MOTIVATORS, BARRIERS, AND OU

1. EVALUATION OF ONLINE COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE ENVIRONMENTS FOR PRESERVICE TEACHER EDUCATION: MOTIVATORS, BARRIERS, AND OUTCOMES Bahar BARAN 21 May- 2007

2. INTRODUCTION Background • Teachers’ professional development • Knowledge management • Online communities of practice

3. INTRODUCTION Problems and significance • Limitation of obtaining practice from the field, • Lack of examples to use technology in classrooms, • Unknown motivators which force members to participate online communities, • Lack of studies about voluntary participation • Methodological limitations.

4. INTRODUCTION Purpose and research questions • The aim of the study is to reveal motivators, barriers and outcomes of online communities of practice environments • What are the dynamics of two online communities of practice environments in preservice teacher education? • How do preservice teachers evaluate these two environments? • How do preservice teachers behave in two environments? • What are the critical factors influencing amount and quality of participation?

5. METHODOLOGY • Qualitative research • Case study • Two cases • Case-1: • Case-2:

6. June May April 2006 March February January December November October September 2005 August July June May April Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 METHODOLOGYThree main phases

7. METHODOLOGYThe environment • The Professional Development Circle (PDC) (in Turkish, Mesleki Gelişim Çemberi (MGÇ)) http://mgc.metu.edu • a digital library which includes activities, lesson plans or articles, • a video component which includes recordings from real classroom environments, • a forum and • communication tools

8. Subpages Mainpage, Library, Videos, Communication, Forum, About us Sign in module Username Password Sign up, Enter Discussion plan

9. METHODOLOGYSampling • Three different universities • Middle East Technical University(METU), • Canakkale 18 Mart University (COMU), • Ankara University (AU)

10. METHODOLOGY:Phase 2 (Case-1)

12. METHODOLOGY:Phase 3 (Case-2)

13. MethodologyData collection • Reflection reports (at the end of the term) • Observations • Interviews with 6 participants (2 from each university) • e-mails which were sent to e-list (discussion e-mails)

14. Methodologytrustworthiness Strategies • The presence of the researcher • Descriptive presentation of the data collection and analysis • Mechnically recorded data • Prolong engagement in the field • Informant choices • Triangulation Reflection reports Interviews Discussion e-mails

15. CONCLUSION Tools Videos, listserv vs Scientific materials, library part of the PDC, listserv Subject Mandating preservice teacher vs Voulunteer preservice teacher Object Knowledge sharing Outcome Better understanding of practice Rules The researcher centered academic rules vs Emergent, Community defined norms • Division of Labor • Comment writer and Lesson plan producer • vs • Discussant, material sharer, lurkers Community A group of preservice teachers vs Experienced teachers, academicians, preservice teachers

16. Outcomes • Being knowable about practice • Having different perspectives and ideas • Real life cases • Beholding novel teachers’ experiences • Not repeating the faults of video teachers • Visiting various teachers’ classrooms • Obtaining knowledge about new curriculum • Learning different topics • Belief modification • Proofing their ideas related to practice owing to experienced teachers.

17. Subject- Tool- Object Subject- Division of Labor- Object Subject- Rules- Object Subject- Community- Object Conclusion Sub Triads Sub activity systems

18. Motivators Inter-personal Supporting own university students’ ideas or defending oneself, Gaining reputation, Sincerity in the environment, Questions and answers. Collectivism. Personal Getting more responsibility, Self confidence and having wide ranging knowledge, Sociable personality Readiness level for life long learning, Having diverse ideas, Citations from original comments, Transmission of prior knowledge. Desire to learn something, Altruism. THE MOTIVATORS Environmental Quality of materials, Advantage of the Internet environments.

19. Barriers Personal Not wanting to enter a fight, Lack of time. The idea “max benefit minimum effort”, Hesitate to misdirect, Not repeating the same things, Unwillingness and involuntary participation, Unread prior comments, Low priority in their life. • Inter-personal • Feeling availability of others (fear of being criticized by others, not wanting to seem clueless), • Academic information practice duality, • Departmental diversity. THE BARRIERS Environmental Familiarization with ICT and glitches, Internet access and computer availability, Asynchronous communication, Design of the study.

20. Implications on practitioners in preservice teacher education? • Teaching to apply some aspects of learning theories to real classroom environments, • Creating a discussion environments which preservice teachers will obtain different perspectives and ideas, • Creating environment similar to real life cases: • Letting preservice teachers obtain novel teachers’ experiences, • Teaching not repeating the same faults in video cases, • Letting preservice teachers visit various teachers’ classroom. • Diffusion of an innovation, • Teaching uncovered new teaching topics, • Changing preservice teachers’ beliefs on teaching practice, • Letting preservice teachers’ proofing their ideas on teaching practice owing to experienced teachers.

21. Proposals • The activity theory framework provided a good theoretical lens • If the participants participated voluntarily in the Phase 2, what would have been the results of the study? • a taxonomy which allows the measure value of comments can be developed to reveal to the richness of comments in web based/ supported discussions. • The design of video cases was also promising to investigate • A comparision of video cases and teacher can be conducted • Instructors and teachers opinion can be investigated.

22. Questions / Comments