"Communicative spaces in action" - experiences of developing group mentoring for ict implementation in teaching and learning in higher education

• Authors: Vesa Korhonen
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

This paper explores how a group mentoring solution for university teachers' professional learning and ICT use in teaching was implemented in one research university in Finland and how this guidance model was developed through the action research cycles. The starting point of the action research was to make the processes of information and knowledge sharing in the academic community more visible and to examine how to better support university teachers for adopting ICT in teaching and learning. The project provided communicative spaces for knowledge sharing through series of group mentoring workshops in two pilot departments during one academic year. The applied knowledge sharing and group mentoring model is a combination from Propp's (1999) CIP model and from Nonaka's and others' (2000) knowledge creation scheme. The paper presents the strategies used for constructing and piloting the group mentoring model and discusses some of the key obstacles what emerged when guiding the collective information and knowledge sharing in the academic work and teaching culture.

Keywords

EN

group mentoring; guidance model; information and knowledge sharing; ICT in teaching and learning; university teachers; action research

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: Studies for the Learning Society
• Year: 2012
• Volume: 2
• Issue: 2-3
• Pages: 87-98

Dates

published

2012-01-01

online

2012-05-11

Contributors

author

Vesa Korhonen

• University of Tampere, Finland

References

• Anderson, T., Varnhagen, S. & Campbell, K. (1998). Faculty Adoption of Teaching and Learning Technologies: Contrasting Earlier Adopters and Mainstream Faculty. The Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 28(2-3), 71-98.
• Austin, Z. (2005). Mentorship and mitigation of culture shock: foreign-trained pharmacists in Canada. Mentoring and Tutoring, 13(1), 133-149.
• Becher, T. (2001). Academic Tribes and Territories. Intellectual Enquiry and the Cultures of Disciplines. Ballmoor: Society for Research into Higher Education.
• Bereiter, C. and Scardamalia, M. (1993) Surpassing Ourselves. An Inquiry into the Nature and Implications of Expertise (Chicago, IL, Open Court).
• Borgatti S. P. & Cross R. (2003). A Relational View of Information Seeking and Learning in Social Networks. Management Science, 49(4), 432-445.[Crossref]
• Boud, D. (2006). Creating a space for reflection. In: D Boud, P. Cressey & P. Docherty (Eds.) Productive reflection at work. London: Routledge, 158-169.
• Burchell, H. & Dyson, J. (2005). Action research in higher education: exploring ways of creating and holding the space for reflection. Educational Action Research, 13(2), 291-300.
• Carr, W. & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: education, knowledge and action research. London: Falmer.
• Carr, W. & Kemmis, S. (2005). Staying critical: Becoming Critical in retrospect. Educational Action Research, 13(3), 347-358.
• Cowan, J., George, J. W. & Pinheiro-Torres, A. (2004). Alignment of Developments in Higher Education. The International Journal of Higher Education and Educational Planning, 48(4), 439-459.
• Durrington, V. A., Repman, J. & Valente, T. W. (2000). Using Social Network Analysis To Examine the Time of Adoption of Computer-Related Services among University Faculty. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(1), 16-27.
• Fleming, S., Shire, J., Jones, D, Pill, A. & McNamee, M. (2004). Continuing Professional Development: Suggestions for Effective Practice. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 28(2), 165-177.
• Gappa, J. M., Austin, A. E. & Trice, A. G. (2005). Rethinking Academic Work and Workplaces. Change, 37(6), 32-39.
• Granovetter, M. (1983). The Strength of Weak Ties: A Network Theory Revisited. Sociological Theory, 1, 201-233.
• Hakkarainen, K., Palonen, T., Paavola, S. & Lehtinen, E. (2004). Communities of networked expertise: professional and educational perspectives. Amsterdam: Elsevier/Pergamon.
• Herrera, C., Vang, Z. & Gale, L. Y. (2002). Group Mentoring: A Study of Mentoring Groups in Three Programs. Philadelphia: P/PV Public/Private Ventures.
• Ives, C., McWhaw, K. & De Simone, C. (2005). Reflections of Researchers Involved in the Evaluation of Pedagogical Technological Innovations in a University Setting. The Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 35(1), 61-84.
• Kemmis S. (1988). Action research. In: JP. Keeves (ed) Educational research, methodology, and measurement. An international handbook. Pergamon: Oxford, 42-48.
• Kemmis, S. (2006). Participatory action research and the public sphere. Educational Action Research, 14(4), 459-476.
• Korhonen, V. (Ed.) (2007). Changing Learning Environments in University. (In finnish: author's translation). Tampere: Tampere University Press.
• Mullen, C. A. (2000). Constructing Co-Mentoring Partnerships: Walkways We Must Travel. Theory into Practice, 39(1), 4-11.
• Newton, J. & Goodman, H. (2009). Only to connect: Systems psychodynamics and communicative space. Action Research, 7(3), 291-312.[WoS]
• Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge Creating Company: how Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Nonaka, I. & Konno, N. (1998). The Concept of ‘Ba’: Building a Foundation for Knowledge Creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 40-54.
• Nonaka, I., Toyama R. & Konno, N. (2000). SECI, Ba and Leadership: a Unified Model of Dynamic Knowledge Creation. Long Range Planning, 33(1), 5-34.
• Park, P. (2006). Knowledge and Participatory Research. In: P. Reason P & H. Bradbury (Eds.) Handbook of Action Research. London: Sage, 83 - 93.
• Pedro, F. (2005). Comparing Traditional and ICT-Enriched University Teaching Methods: Evidence from Two Empirical Studies. Higher Education in Europe, 30(3-4), 399-411.
• Propp, K. M. (1999). Collective information processing in groups. In: L. Frey, D. S. Gouran, & M. S. Poole (Eds.) Handbook of group communication theory and research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 225-250.
• Reder, M. & Gallagher, E. V. (2006). Transforming a teaching culture through peer mentoring. To Improve the Academy: Resources for Faculty, Instructional and Organizational Development, 25, 327-344.
• Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. London: Temple Smith.
• Smith, J. O., Whitman, J. S., Grant, P. A., Stanutz, A., Russett, J. A. & Rankin, K. (2001). Peer networking as a dynamic approach to supporting new faculty. Innovative Higher Education, 25(3), 197.
• Somekh, B. (2005). Action Research: A Methodology for Change and Development, Buckingham: Open University Press.
• Sorcinelli, M. D. & Yun, J. (2007). From Mentor to Mentoring Networks: Mentoring in the New Academy. Change, 39(11-12), 58-61.
• Wiessner, C. A. & Sullivan, L. G. (2007). Constructing Knowledge in Leadership Training Programs. Community College Review, 35(2), 88-112.
• Wang, J. & Odell, S. J. (2002). Mentored Learning to Teach According to Standards-Based Reform: A Critical Review. Review of Educational Research, 72(3), 481 - 546.
• Wicks, P. G. & Reason, P. (2009). Initiating action research: Challenges and paradoxes of opening communicative space. Action Research, 7(3), 243-262.[WoS]
• Wong, S.-S. (2003). Investigating collective learning in teams: The context in which it occurs and the collective knowledge that emerges from it. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 63(9).

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/v10240-012-0008-z