Negotiating teacher educators' beliefs about blended learning: Using stimulated recall to explore design choices

IF 4.2 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Bram Bruggeman, K. Hidding, K. Struyven, B. Pynoo, A. Garone, J. Tondeur
{"title":"Negotiating teacher educators' beliefs about blended learning: Using stimulated recall to explore design choices","authors":"Bram Bruggeman, K. Hidding, K. Struyven, B. Pynoo, A. Garone, J. Tondeur","doi":"10.14742/ajet.7175","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Teachers’ beliefs about education influence practice and vice versa. Teacher educators should be particularly attuned to the association between educational beliefs and practice. Teachers’ beliefs about education have been widely studied, but investigating how a team of teacher educators put a shared vision on blended learning into practice is less researched. Blended learning practices are subject to the four design aspects of incorporating flexibility, stimulating interaction, facilitating the learning process, and creating an affective learning climate. This qualitative study investigates a team of experienced blended learning teacher educators from two perspectives: their beliefs about blended learning, and how these beliefs are realised in practice. Seventeen screencast stimulated recall interviews revealed: (1) teacher educators express evaluative beliefs about deep and meaningful blended learning and descriptive beliefs about online flexibility and face-to-face interaction, and (2) how these beliefs are realised in practice by flexible online facilitation of learning processes, profound face-to-face interaction, and providing authentic learning experiences. Furthermore, as a result of the association between beliefs about blended learning and practice, the areas of refining student feedback, improving online structure and increasing interaction in online learning materials emerged for professional growth. Finally, recommendations are made for blended learning practitioners and teacher educators.\nImplications for practice or policy:\n\nTeacher educators hold evaluative beliefs about deep and meaningful blended learning and descriptive beliefs about online flexibility and face-to-face interaction.\nDeep and meaningful blended learning is promoted by flexible online facilitation of learning processes, profound face-to-face interaction, and providing authentic learning experiences.\nAreas for professional growth are refining student feedback, improving online structure and increasing interaction in online learning materials.\n","PeriodicalId":47812,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Educational Technology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australasian Journal of Educational Technology","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.7175","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Teachers’ beliefs about education influence practice and vice versa. Teacher educators should be particularly attuned to the association between educational beliefs and practice. Teachers’ beliefs about education have been widely studied, but investigating how a team of teacher educators put a shared vision on blended learning into practice is less researched. Blended learning practices are subject to the four design aspects of incorporating flexibility, stimulating interaction, facilitating the learning process, and creating an affective learning climate. This qualitative study investigates a team of experienced blended learning teacher educators from two perspectives: their beliefs about blended learning, and how these beliefs are realised in practice. Seventeen screencast stimulated recall interviews revealed: (1) teacher educators express evaluative beliefs about deep and meaningful blended learning and descriptive beliefs about online flexibility and face-to-face interaction, and (2) how these beliefs are realised in practice by flexible online facilitation of learning processes, profound face-to-face interaction, and providing authentic learning experiences. Furthermore, as a result of the association between beliefs about blended learning and practice, the areas of refining student feedback, improving online structure and increasing interaction in online learning materials emerged for professional growth. Finally, recommendations are made for blended learning practitioners and teacher educators. Implications for practice or policy: Teacher educators hold evaluative beliefs about deep and meaningful blended learning and descriptive beliefs about online flexibility and face-to-face interaction. Deep and meaningful blended learning is promoted by flexible online facilitation of learning processes, profound face-to-face interaction, and providing authentic learning experiences. Areas for professional growth are refining student feedback, improving online structure and increasing interaction in online learning materials.
协商教师教育工作者关于混合学习的信念:使用刺激回忆来探索设计选择
教师对教育的信念影响着实践,反之亦然。教师教育者应该特别注意教育信仰和实践之间的联系。教师对教育的信念已经得到了广泛的研究,但调查教师教育工作者团队如何将混合学习的共同愿景付诸实践的研究较少。混合学习实践受四个设计方面的约束,即融入灵活性、激发互动、促进学习过程和创造情感学习氛围。这项定性研究从两个角度调查了一组经验丰富的混合学习教师教育工作者:他们对混合学习的信念,以及这些信念是如何在实践中实现的。17次受筛选刺激的回忆访谈显示:(1)教师教育者表达了对深度和有意义的混合学习的评价信念,以及对在线灵活性和面对面互动的描述性信念,以及(2)这些信念是如何在实践中通过灵活的在线学习过程促进、深刻的面对面互动,以及提供真实的学习体验。此外,由于对混合学习和实践的信念之间的联系,出现了完善学生反馈、改善在线结构和增加在线学习材料互动的领域,以促进专业发展。最后,对混合学习从业者和教师教育工作者提出了建议。对实践或政策的影响:教师教育工作者对深度和有意义的混合学习持有评价信念,对在线灵活性和面对面的互动持有描述性信念。灵活的在线学习流程、深入的面对面互动以及提供真实的学习体验,促进了深度和有意义的混合学习。专业成长的领域是完善学生反馈,改善在线结构,增加在线学习材料中的互动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Australasian Journal of Educational Technology
Australasian Journal of Educational Technology EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
7.30%
发文量
54
审稿时长
36 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信