Competence development and teaching practice 165

Whereas the first LE revealed little evidence of competence development in teaching with Web 2.0 tools (see section 5.1.1), the results from the questionnaire of the second LE show that most participants’ perceived that their competence had developed. They reported that they felt more competent and confident in using web 2.0 tools in their teaching practice and in managing online collaboration with their pupils (see section 6.2.2). This perception is supported by the analysis of the forum messages, as discussed above, which suggests that cognitive development did take place. The results also indicate that the participants interpret such competence in terms of having

the appropriate pedagogical knowledge, skills and aptitude/attitude to use the tools effectively to support pupil learning. Their interpretation of competence is very much in line with the definition used in EU policymaking (EU, 2004) and with that used in this research. Moreover, in linking their own competence development to improved pupil learning, they are reflecting the view of Guskey (2002) that teachers’ practice is heavily influenced by how they perceive it will influence the learning outcomes of their pupils.

The interviews showed that participants’ perceptions had changed during the course of the second LE from mainly expecting to learn about the tools and how they might be used in teaching, to actually seeing how they can be used; either directly through practical experience or indirectly by reading and discussing the experiences of their peers. Their perceptions before the LE started may have been conditioned by their previous experience of teacher training, the majority of which focuses on acquiring formal knowledge, mainly from experts and mostly out of context (Boyle et al., 2004). Whereas the results suggest that their actual experience reflected more situated learning (Lave and Wenger, 1991), producing knowledge-in-action (Schön, 1987) in the context of their everyday teaching practice. Most importantly, they perceived this as being beneficial for their learning – the interviews show that the LE provided opportunity to try out ideas with pupils and gave them experience to which they could later refer in their discourse with their peers in the final reflection. However, such opportunity came at a price and the feedback from the questionnaire and interviews reinforced the considerable investment that the school teachers needed to make, balancing their busy teaching with the extra demands of the LE. Yet, despite the extra length of the LE, in order to accommodate the additional practice and reflection activities (34 days compared with the 11 days of the first LE), a similar number of participants completed all activities and obtained a certificate as had with the shorter first LE (108 participants or 76%, compared with 110 or 71% for the first LE). These results demonstrate the value of engaging school teachers in continuous professional development (CPD) that provides direct and immediate benefit for their teaching practice, and they concur with other research which shows that teachers are often willing to invest considerable time in such online CPD and in professional communities if they perceive immediate benefit (Bolam et al., 2005; Duncan-Howell, 2010).

The results suggest that by seeing the impact of what they were doing on their pupils’ learning, the school teachers increased their self confidence, were motivated to keep learning and gained belief in the value of applying the tools. During the interviews and in the messages posted in the final reflection, the participants spoke with passion

about their positive experience. They talked about increased creativity and engagement, and of their ability to better connect with their pupils and understand their learning needs. These results accord with Guskey’s (2002) alternative model of teachers’ CPD, which assumes that teachers need to witness evidence of benefits

before their attitudes will change and with Hargreaves’ (1998) view that teaching is an

emotional practice.

The results of the questionnaires and interviews indicate that participants’ competence and confidence in online collaboration developed in a similar manner in both LEs. However, for the second LE there was a noticeable change in their reflections on the

value of collaboration, with collaboration generally perceived as having been more

successful. When it was not successful, the participants were more sanguine and were often able to articulate why, providing suggestions for how it might be improved in the future. By seeing the wider consequences of their development beyond the individual learning experience, the school teachers are better able to deal with new situations, their attitude and aptitude are influenced positively (Vescio et al., 2008), and they become more competent as opposed to simply becoming more skilled. The participants had reflected-on-action (Schön, 1987), had demonstrated deliberation and metacognition (Eraut, 1995) and were able to make connections from a specific experience to the wider social practice implications (Lave and Wenger, 1991).

As discussed in the literature review, section 2.3.3, competence is associated with skills, knowledge, aptitudes and attitudes (EU, 2002). Competence development is associated with critical thinking, metacognition and what Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1999) refer to as knowledge-of-practice. The research suggests that the changes implemented in the second LE had a positive impact on the development of the school teachers’ competence and on the application of what they were learning in their teaching practice. The perception of some participants that their competence had developed concurred with the coding of their online messages which suggested cognitive development and critical thinking. The positive change in attitude of some participants was illustrated in their interviews. The development of some participants’ understanding of the consequences of their learning for their teaching practice was illustrated by the discussions in the final reflection activity. As with the first LE, the cognitive activities supported the school teachers to develop knowledge-for-practice (Cochran-Smith and Lytle, 1999), giving them the technical skills they need to effectively use the tools. However, in the second LE, the addition of a period for teachers to apply what they were learning in their classrooms complemented this with the development of applied knowledge-in-practice, associated with the ‘artistry of practice’ (1999, p.262) and the ability to deal with less familiar situations. Finally, the

addition of a reflection activity at the end of the second LE encouraged the school teachers to develop meta knowledge-of-practice, by connecting their own experience and development to the larger social, cultural and political issues associated with teaching. This process involves a spiral of knowledge development in which understanding evolves in a dynamic critical discourse, as peers comment, challenge and build upon each others’ reflections.

The next section uses the findings of the second cycle to offer answers to the research questions and conclusions on the research.