Teachers’ individual learning path development

From the notes of the project meetings with the two participating teachers, I was able to summarize the following reoccurring main themes related to the develop- ment of teachers’ individual learning paths:

• The use of CheckIn -tool was considered useful and purposeful • Peer support and cooperation were considered essential

• An individual path was considered more effective than general pre-deter- mined training sessions

• Lack of knowledge on available digital tools and methods suitable for ed- ucational purposes

• Lack of time

• Inadequate support from managers

CheckIn-tool was considered suitable, as it provided an overall picture of the teacher’s current competence level as well as personalized guidelines for next steps. Both participating teachers considered an individual plan motivating and purposeful as they were able to concentrate on the specific competence areas important to them. Furthermore, the guidelines provided by the tool offered tips and recommendations that encouraged the teachers to proceed with small steps at a time, so that the objectives seemed realistic and achievable. When the de- velopment of digital competence is based on realistic individual needs, according to feedback from TAKK teachers, the threshold of trying something new is low.

Prior to this development work, both participating teachers had participated in various digital trainings arranged at TAKK. Both teachers concluded that although the general trainings were also useful, they did not always meet the specific needs of the teachers. According to the teachers’ feedback, general trainings work well as introductions to certain themes, but after that continuing according to an individual plan is more effective.

Peer support and cooperation was utilized during the development process. The participating teachers discussed and compared their development steps regularly and the project manager arranged regular team meetings, where the develop- ment steps were discussed and evaluated together. The teachers also explained that during the development process they discussed their objectives, activities and experiences with other colleagues in TAKK and received useful feedback, comments and suggestions. Peer support in general was considered important and efficient for the development process.

According to the teachers, lack of knowledge on available digital tools and meth- ods was re-occurring and emphasized at the beginning of the development pro- cess, but not so much towards the end. The participating teachers explained that this was an important factor when beginning to design their individual learning paths, but as the development work progressed their ability to find and select suitable relevant information increased. This was due to cooperation, such as various discussions with colleagues, as well as spending time on finding infor- mation themselves and learning to evaluate which information was suitable and relevant.

Both teachers emphasized the importance of having enough time to concentrate on the development work and on the activities on their learning paths. Here it is important to explain that as part of the development project, the teachers in this case had more time than usually to spend on their learning activities. However, the lack of time was still an issue. Despite the project work, both teachers have normal teaching responsibilities and finding time for development work and CPD- activities was considered a challenge. Although the project manager had allo- cated them time for project activities, acute situations and prioritized work tasks from their own managers sometimes overran the planned project work.

Lack of time was often brought up together with inadequate support from manag- ers. In this context, the teachers explained that inadequate support included the managers’ view on which areas of their work was prioritized. Both teachers agreed that teaching duties always preceded the CPD-activities, as teaching is their main work task. They continued that this is understandable, but if the man- agers portray CPD-activities as less important and additional, it has a negative effect on the teachers’ motivation and enthusiasm for investing in their compe- tence development.

6 RESEARCH RESULTS

As this study included three cases of data collection, the SELFIE-survey, the workshop for TAKK management and the development process of teachers’ in- dividual learning paths, the results were presented above according to each case. However, in order to gain a more clear and coherent understanding of the results a summary is required. I have here compared the relevant results of the SELFIE survey analysis with the results from the teachers’ learning path development and the managers’ workshop, and compiled the results of the entire research as an- swers to the original research questions.

How does the leadership of an organization effect the development of teachers’ digital competence?

According to the results of this research, leadership influences teachers’ level of motivation and commitment to the development of their digital competence. By setting clear guidelines and encouraging teachers forward on their CPD-paths, leadership can promote the digital capacity of the organization. Furthermore, leadership practices play an important role on the success of implementing con- tinuous professional development activities.

Leaders’ communication can reduce change resistance and enhance the devel- opment, as meaning and objectives become clear to everyone. Moreover, under- standing the benefits on both organizational as well as individual level commits the teachers into investing in their competence development. Leaders’ own atti- tude and behavior reflect on teachers and can thus either support or hinder teach- ers’ motivation for personal competence development.

What does the management of TAKK have to do in order for the teachers’ digital competence to develop?

Based on the results of this case study, I have concluded the following concrete steps that will help educational leaders design their strategies and action plans for the development of teachers’ digital competence.

Create / update a digital strategy with clear objectives

• a common understanding on the importance of digital competence • definition of organizational minimum requirements

• a model for individual competence development plan • participate staff, utilize staff’s expertise

Enhance communication

• make the importance and benefits of digital competence clear • communicate the organizational objectives

• show commitment and example

• enable and promote sharing of knowledge and experiences Support the implementation of teachers CPD-activities

• regular development discussions with employees

• support the creation of individual competence development plans • provide time for CPD-activities

7 DISCUSSION

Leading the development of teachers’ digital competence starts from committing to a commonly understood digital strategy. Based on the results of this study, the DigCompEdu -framework was a suitable choice for the main frame of the organ- izational strategy. It also supports the development of individual learning paths, which suit TAKK well as they are congruent with the competence-based learning approach used with students.

Communication was accentuated throughout the research, as it often is in change processes. It was one of the most discussed aspects with both TAKK manage- ment as well as teachers. I agree with both Kotter (1996) and Lewin (1947) that if you want people to change, or take part in changing something, you need to make the reason for the change clear. Furthermore, as the research results indi- cate, I believe that showing example, or rather acting as an example yourself, the chances of reaching the desired change will be improved.

Therefore, Lewin’s (1947) stage of creating motivation and the Kouzes’ & Pos- ner’s (2012) practice of “Inspire a Shared Vision” by can be used as leadership models for the development of teachers’ digital competence. Furthermore, the practice “Enable Others to Act” (Kouzes & Posner, 2012) appears appropriate as it accentuates trust and encourages the leaders to participate the involved parties into cooperating on the shared objectives. The service design research methods used in this study support the benefits of this practice and I consider them well suited for the purpose. Hence, in my opinion, it is crucial to engage the staff mem- bers in a way that the objectives are shared and owned together, not just passed down from above.

The service design workshop for TAKK leaders also generated further actions. Through the workshop, interest and commitment for supporting the development of teachers’ digital competence rose among the leaders. During the research pro- cess, I observed that the previously somewhat abstract responsibility for enhanc- ing teachers’ digital competence development was now accepted as a responsi- bility of each manager. As a result, the TAKK foundation board together with the

board of directors arranged a benchmarking visit to VUC, which is a Danish edu- cational organization and a partner in the case study project. VUC is a n expert in developing educational organization’s digital capacity and can thus be consid- ered as an excellent example to observe.

The results of this thesis also support the practice of developing teachers’ digital competence according to individual learning paths. According to Whitmore’s (2009) coaching theory, leaders should focus on their staff members’ potential, not their performance. In the case of competence development, this supports TAKK’s model of individual learning paths. In practice this means that teachers are not expected to perform equally, but instead follow their own development paths in order to reach their individual potentials. Thus, teachers’ competences should not be compared to each other’s, but to their own perceived maximum potential. In my opinion, elements of the GROW-coaching model (Alexander, 2010) (Whitmore, 2009) could be adapted in the leadership of this process. Phases of the GROW-model can be utilized for example in guiding the teachers to take responsibility of their own development needs, as well as empowering them to modify and develop their learning paths according to changing needs.

From the leadership point of view, it is very important that the leaders are able to monitor and guide the competence development process of their teachers. In ad- dition, the leaders need to have a way of validating the acquired competence. Considering the results of this study and supported by the results of relevant na- tional research introduced in Chapter 3, the next development aspect in TAKK should focus on utilizing learning analytics and digital badges in the teachers’ competence development process.

8 CONCLUSIONS

At the time of this writing, the world is in the middle of the Coronavirus-pandemic. With the abrupt increase of distance learning, the importance and necessity of digital competence has suddenly become one of the key aspects of all education, from basic education to universities.

This time has proven us that the needs and practices of digital competence can change rapidly. For example, in TAKK a teacher training on basic digital compe- tences that was still relevant at the beginning of the year, is now in need of rather substantial updating. Changes in the operating environment and rapid technolog- ical development require also educational leaders quick reacting as well as an ability to adjust their operations accordingly. New ways of teaching, innovative learning methods and different digital tools need to be experimented and evalu- ated in order to match the changing needs. It is the responsibility of the manage- ment to make sure that the conditions for agile experimenting are in order.

An essential factor contributing to the success of experimenting and introducing new technological methods and tools is teachers’ digital competence. This, in turn, requires the leaders enabling of continuous development of teachers’ digital competence according to their individual learning objectives, supported by coop- eration and sharing of good practices. It is crucial that the development of teach- ers’ digital competence starts at the organizational level, so that the CPD-activi- ties are rooted in the organizational development. Based on the results of this research, arranging the necessary resources for CPD-activities while encourag- ing and showing example, the leaders of educational organizations can create an inspiring environment that motivates teachers to integrate continuous digital com- petence development as a natural part of their every-day operations.

REFERENCES

Ahvenjärvi, H. 2016a. TAKK Vuosikertomus 2016: Ketterää digikehittämistä. Read 11.2.2020. http://vuosikertomus.takk.fi/onnistumisen-tarinat-2016/ket- teraa-digikehittamista/

Ahvenjärvi, H. 2016b. Osaamisen kehittäminen muutoksessa. Blog posting. Pub- lished 6.6.2016. Read 10.2.2020. https://puhti.word- press.com/2016/06/06/osaamisen-kehittaminen-muutoksessa/

Ahvenjärvi, H. 2017. Tutkimus- ja kehittämisyhteistyötä. Blog posting. Published 19.5.2017. Read 10.2.2020. https://puhti.wordpress.com/2017/05/19/tutkimus-ja- kehittamisyhteistyota/

Alexander, G. 2010. Behavioural coaching – the GROW model: In Passmore, J. (Ed.), Excellence in Coaching: the industry guide. London; Philadelphia: Kogan Page Limited.

Benington, H. 1983. Production of large computer programs. IEEE Annals of the history of computing. IEEE Educational Activities Department, vol. 5.

Bowen, G. 2009. Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method. Western Carolina University. Qualitative Research Journal. Vol. 9. No 2. Pages 27-40.

Davis, F.D. 1986. Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically Testing New End-user Information Systems Theory and Results. Sloan School of Manage- ment, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Denzin N. & Lincoln Y. (Eds.) 2000. Handbook of Qualitative Research. 2nd edi- tion. London: Sage Publication Inc.

DigCompEdu Check-In. n.d. EUSurvey. European Commission. Read 7.12.2019.

https://ec.europa.eu/eusurvey/runner/DigCompEdu-A-EN

Eskola, J. & Suoranta, J. 2014. Johdatus laadulliseen tutkimukseen. Tallinna: Vastapaino.

European Commission. 2018. Digital Education Action Plan. Read 8.2.2020.

https://ec.europa.eu/education/education-in-the-eu/digital-education-action- plan_en

European Commission. 2007. Key competences for lifelong learning: a European reference framework. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the Euro- pean Communities.

Haukijärvi, I. 2016. Strategizing Digitalization in a Finnish Higher Education Insti- tution: Towards a thorough strategic transformation. Computer Science. Tampere University. Acta Universitatis Tamperensis; 2181, Tampere University Press. Doctoral thesis.

Interaction Design Foundation. n.d. Service Design. Read 27.4.2020.

https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/topics/service-design

Jalava, U. & Virtanen, P. 1998. Tietoa luova projekti - polku oppivaan organisaa- tioon. Helsinki: Kirjayhtymä.

Joint Research Centre. European Commission. Read: 6.1.2020. https://ec.eu- ropa.eu/info/departments/joint-research-centre_en

Kampylis, P., Punie, Y. & Devine, J. 2015. Promoting Effective Digital-Age Learn- ing - A European Framework for Digitally-Competent Educational Organisations.

Kananen, J. 2012. Kehittämistutkimus opinnäytetyönä: Kehittämistutkimuksen kirjoittamisen käytännön opas. Jyväskylä: Jyväskylä University of Applied Sci- ences.

Koramo, M., Brauer, S. & Jauhola, L. 2018. Digitalisaatio ammatillisessa koulu- tuksessa. Opetushallitus. Raportit ja selvitykset 2018:9.

Kotter, J. P. 1996. Leading Change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Kotter, J.P. 1995. Leading Change, Why Transformation Efforts Fail, Harvard Business Review.

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. 2012. The Leadership Challenge: How to make extraordinary things happen in organizations. 5th edition. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Lewin's change management model. 1947. Understanding the three stages of change. Read 14.3.2020. https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/new- PPM_94.htm

OECD. 2016: Innovating Education and Education for Innovation. The Power of Digital Technologies and Skills. OECD Publishing, Paris.

Ojasalo, K., Moilanen, T. & Ritalahti, J. 2014. Kehittämistyön menetelmät: Uu- denlaista osaamista liiketoimintaan. 3rd edition. Helsinki: SanomaPro.

Oksanen, T. 2017. EloRiihi kokoontui digiohjauksen äärelle TAKKiin. Blog post- ing. Published 22.3.2017. Read 10.2.2020. https://puhti.word- press.com/2017/03/22/eloriihi-kokoontui-digiohjauksen-aarelle-takkiin/

Reason, B., Løvlie, L. & Brand Flu, M. 2016. Service Design for Business. A Practical Guide to Optimizing the Customer Experience. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

Redecker, C. 2017. European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educa- tors: DigCompEdu. Punie, Y. (ed). EUR 28775 EN. Publications Office of the Eu- ropean Union, Luxemburg.

Ruhalahti, S. & Kenttä, V. 2017. Ammatillisen koulutuksen digitalisaatio ja työelä- mäyhteistyö: ”Opeilta ja ohjaajilta löytyy intoa uusille poluille”. Opetushallitus. Raportit ja selvitykset 2017:18.

Schein, E. 1992. Organizational Culture and Leadership. 3rd edition. Jossey- Bass, San Francisco.

Scherer, R., Siddiq, F. & Tondeur, J. 2019. The technology acceptance model (TAM): A meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach to explaining teachers’ adoption of digital technology in education. Computers & Education. Vol. 128. Pages 13-35.

Stickdorn, M., Hormess, M., Lawrence, A., & Schneider, J. 2018. This Is Service Design Doing: Applying service design thinking in the real world. Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly Media. 1st edition.

This is service design methods – Research Method. Published 19.8.2019. Read 28.4.2020. https://medium.com/@hummingbirdsday/this-is-service-design-meth- ods-1-research-method-d2d6480d2138

Tuomi, J. & Sarajärvi A. 2018. Laadullinen tutkimus ja sisällönanalyysi. Uudistettu laitos. Helsinki: Kustannusosakeyhtiö Tammi.

Whitmore, J. 2009. Coaching for Performance: GROWing Human Potential and Purpose: The principles and practice of coaching and leadership. 4th edition. Nicholas Brealey Publishing.

Confidential internal references:

SELFIE report. 2017. Tampereen Aikuiskoulutuskeskus. Internal document. Read 30.4.2020. Retrieved from M-Files.

TAKK organization chart. 2020. Updated 4.3.2020. Internal document. Read 7.3.2020. Retrieved from M-Files.

TAKK presentation slideshow. 2019. Updated 9.12.2019. Internal document. Read 22.2.2020. Retrieved from M-Files.

TAKK process chart. 2019. Internal document. Read 10.2.2020. Retrieved from M-Files.

TAKK’s strategy for 2019-2021. 2018. Updated 10.6.2019. Internal document. Read 22.2.2020. Retrieved from M-Files.