Research Framework
The collaborative, adaptable and multi-pronged nature of the project called for a hybrid research framework which accounted for all three of these elements. Through literature-based research, weekly discussion with the wider team, advisement from the ARI coordinators at UCM, we generated a research approach tailored to both the nature of the project and the data we intended to collect. The methodologies used will be explained below, but the graphic on the right summarises the research philosophies, methodologies, and data collection techniques used throughout the project.
Appreciative Inquiry (AI) Approach
In order to accommodate for the frequent and sustained collaboration between all members of the research team, the Appreciative Inquiry (AI) approach was used as a framework to structure the process. The AI approach is composed of four stages, each encompassing a respective element of collaboration (Bushe, 2012). The first is discovery, in which participants reflect and discuss strengths of the existing organisation, and what could be improved. The second stage is thus clarifying the common dream of the project, which is constituted by the group identifying the common aspirations of the project and an ideal outcome - laying the groundwork for a plan of action. The third stage, developing concrete proposals, is marked by identifying the various paths which can be taken to reach the project's aim. The fourth stage, implementation, refers to the trialling of the various approaches generated in the previous stages. Reflection is the fifth and final stage, in which we use the outcomes to reflect - identify if gaps still exist, determine the 'patches' in curriculum and instruction where the students actively absorbed the information provided, and create new targets based on such observations.
​
Bushe, G.R. (2012) Appreciative inquiry: Theory and critique. In Boje, D., Burnes, B. and Hassard, J. (eds.) The Routledge Companion To Organizational Change (pp. 87-103).
Oxford, UK: Routledge.
Field Study: Passive Observation
We submitted an initial case analysis and project proposal as the conclusion of the first period, on the basis of our experience working with the students, regular communication with our client; and insightful discussion amongst our research team regarding the goals of the project. However, as the second period commenced we found it necessary to establish a systematic framework of observation to replace the informal notes we had been making previously. Our approach was two-prong. Firstly, passive observation of the plenary session and students' initial engagement with the lesson content, and secondly, active data collection in the form of a short series of questions to be integrated into individual instruction. The aim of borrowing the student perspective to passively observe the class was to determine was techniques appeared successful in the attempt to impart content, skills, and attitudes (Stazs et al., 1993). The new type of observation was differentiated the focused, diligently-recorded and undistracted nature of the task.
​
Stasz, C., Ramsey, K., Eden, R., Farris, H., DaVanzo, J. and Lewis, M. (1993) Classrooms at work:
teaching generic skills in academic and vocational settings. Santa Monica, CA: RAND
Corporation, Retrieved from: https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR169.html.
​
​
Action Research
Our entry into the ARI project did not follow the typical structure of the course. Due to the unique nature of the project it was deemed appropriate to straightaway engage with the students, propose and implement lesson plans, and create learning resources - the 'plunge'. The standard of a ‘problem’ in research is the “compound of the generative questions around which all creative and productive activity revolves'”, whereas within teaching the problem is better defined as an ongoing investigation within which analysis, discussion and interventions are focused (Hutchings & Shulman, 1999, pp.10). We promptly generated the terms gaps and patches to conceptualise both targets for intervention in the classroom and proposed intervention. The overarching framework of identifying ‘gaps’ as areas towards which we can direct recommendations, and ‘patches’ as the interventions we implement aligns with the methodology of action research. Action research is composed of several cycles, the duration of which are decided by the researcher, which consist of:
1. Observe
2. Identify issue (gap)
3. Introduce intervention (patch)
4. Review efficacy + continue
5. Review overall success
6. Conclude with direction in which to move forward
​
Arung, F., & Jumardin, J. (2016). Improving the student’s speaking skill through the debate technique. Journal of English Education, 1(1), 70-76. Retrieved from: http://usnsj.com/index.php/JEE/article/view/JEE010
​
Hutchings, P., & Shulman, L. S. (1999). The scholarship of teaching: New elaborations, new developments. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 31(5), 10-15.
Active Data Collection
In order to open an additional channel of communication through which students can thoroughly express their experience, we designed a set of questions to implement during observation. The questions were addressed to pupils in both the physical classroom setting, as well as one-one-one virtual sessions. The format of the questions was informed by the Academic Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ-A), originally designed to be posed directly to students in order to discern how they regulate their academic activity, awareness of themselves as critical learners, and intrinsic motivation (Grolnick & Ryan, 1989). We adapted the existing questionnaire to better fit the needs of the ARI project; transitioning to high-level research paper writing, adapting to digital learning, and academic motivation.
​
Grolnick, W. S., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). Parent styles associated with children's self-regulation and competence in school. Journal of educational psychology, 81(2), 143.
​
​
Reflective Teaching
The search for scholarship literature was two-fold: we sought information both on teaching methodology as well as learning acquisition. As introduced to us in the early stages of the project, the idea of self-reflection in teaching has emerged as a critical step in adapting to class needs. Not only with regards to attention and comprehension, in order to flexibly and appropriately respond, but also in the refinement of our own teaching abilities.
Reflection Training in Teacher Education
Throughout our classroom experiences we have found that reflection often occurs subconsciously and intuitively, but these valuable conclusions can be easily missed if not subsequently recorded. This phenomenon is founded within the report by Gün (2011) which discusses the necessity for ‘reflection training’ in teacher education programmes. Gün posits that reflection is most valuable when the individual is able to look critically at their teaching, through several lenses; capturing such reflection in multiple forms, such as in collaborative discussions, in addition to in writing. In the context of the Porta Mosana project, there were three entities involved from whom we received feedback that directly observed our lessons: Casper (the client), our intern partner, and the students in the classroom. Gün specifies several strategies to use in order to ensure effective self-reflection. Firstly, strive for a distinction between making general conclusions about the lessons conducted or the interactions had with students, and develop a critical awareness of what techniques are implemented in each lesson and why different specific stylistic decisions are made. To summarise a key point of introspection: focus on ‘what’ and ‘why’ questions that allow the team to address methodological considerations of teaching and have a deeper understanding of their actions, intentions, and reasoning. Comments on teacher’s performance should promote progress by “providing input but refraining from taking over” (pp.127). Our client unintentionally adhered to this suggestion for the first part of the project - by allowing us to generate our own lesson plans and realise the instruction whatever way we see fit. Moving forward, setting aside specific time each lesson and week for feedback allowed the client to provide us with regular constructive comments regarding both our presence in the classroom, as well as verbal presentation skills and our dynamic in front of the class.
​
Gün, B. (2011). Quality self-reflection through reflection training. ELT journal, 65(2), 126-135.
Self-Monitoring
Traditional mentoring refers to a “developmental partnership” in which a more knowledgeable figure shares perspective, knowledge, skills and information with a mentee. The value of mentoring is its ability to generate unique opportunities for collaboration and problem solving. Self-mentoring is a strategy for conducting oneself in unknown environments - fostering skills of creativity, innovation and leadership. Practicing self-mentoring allows the individual to accept responsibility for professional growth, developmental of individual skills, and applying professional networking to further support goals. The framework of self-mentoring is composed of four stages. Self-awareness is the first stage, which involves generating awareness about the teacher’s environment, as well as their own strengths and weaknesses in that setting. The first stage is also constituted by identifying both the hidden and expectations in the environment. Stage 2 is self-development, in which the teacher must gather their personal and professional expectations. The second stage overlaps with the first, but is differentiated on the basis that the teacher must also generate measurable strategies and an implementation timeline. The third stage is reflection, whether that is internally, with involved peers, or collaborators not directly involved with the project. The fourth and final stage is self-monitoring, in which the teacher embarks on the continual process of improving.
​
Carr, M. L. (2015). Teacher leaders and the art of self-mentoring. The power of teacher leaders: Their roles, influence, and impact, 31, 42.
Dialogical Self Theory
When leading a class, one must make constant adjustments to the environment and its demands. Be that the behaviors of the students, their repeatability, their responses or even glitching technology, fire-drills or other normal yet frustrating impediments. It is often these minute adjustments that can dramatically alter the tone and success of a class. Therefore, it is important for teachers to try to distill their perceptions and reactions to determine a) when they arise b) what results c) how this response can help to make better adjustments in future classes. While there are obvious signs of transition to the outside observer, such as cues via hand gestures or tonal/volume shifts, the root of these transitions occur in the mind's eye of the teacher. The internal discussions, or dialogue, that occurs throughout a teacher’s lesson can be actively reflected upon to extract “nuggets” of insight. The Dialogical Self Theory helps to properly record and develop these reflections. The idea of the theory is that different voices share interpretations and reactions which together comprise the narrative of the class.
As visualized below, the theory comprises of 1) the externally displayed movements and 2) the internal intuitive responses that are often not spoken aloud. The former tend to be more choreographed, while the internal more vulnerable and emotion based. By reflecting on the interplay of emotions and internal dialogue with the composed/produced external dialogue that occur along the “transformational space”, the teacher may locate pivotal moments of adjustment (nuggets). Of course, these two voices originate and reflect the single entity of the teacher - and therefore, are hard to separate from each other. In addition, it can be difficult to discern what is perceived from what has actually occurred and to learn from subtle and fleeting moments of transition that may be hampered by nerves or confusion. Thus, by reflecting on the different thoughts, behaviours, responses and dialogues, a teacher may be better able to understand his/her projection in class.
​
Meijers, F., Lengelle, R., & Kopnina, H. (2016). Environmental identity and natural resources: a dialogical learning process. Resources, 5(1), 11. DOI:10.3390/resources5010011
Reflecting...
As with any reflection, emotion and vulnerability are essential yet difficult aspects to articulate. Thus, the applied version of the model illustrates Tessa’s transformation from self-doubt to reassurance. As Tessa worked through the model, reflecting on the environment, behaviours, senses, emotions and both said and felt dialogues - she was able to identify sources of confidence. For example, along the transformational space, Tessa identified the people in the room and was able to shift her perception of them from sources of pressure and expectation, to sources of encouragement and support. Had Tessa not utilized this model, she may indeed have “succeeded” in accomplishing the presentation along the boundary experience. However, she would not have succeeded in strengthening her perception of competency and may well have found herself just as unsure and self-critical for her next presentation as she had felt in the beginning of this one. This is because it is often the internal dialogue that reigns dominant on guiding a teacher’s perceptions of class, as the internal narrative out survives the boundary experience itself. Thus, self reflection through the Dialogical Self Theory model is a great tool to regulate both performed words and internal thoughts.
