H.W. Oolbekkink-Marchand

A breed apart? A comparison of secondary and university teachers' perspectives on self‐regulated learning

Teachers’ perspectives in secondary and higher education have been investigated separately until now, probably owing to the differences expected between these two groups of teachers. In this study similarities and differences between secondary and university teachers’ perspectives on self‐regulated learning were investigated using semi‐structured interviews. The purpose of this study was to improve our understanding of the problematic transition of students from secondary to higher education. Thirty‐six secondary and university teachers from different disciplines were interviewed with the aim of describing the variety in their perspectives. Diverse metaphors about teaching and learning were presented to the teachers during the interviews, with the assumption that this would encourage explication of beliefs. A qualitative analysis of the interview protocols resulted in a codebook with six themes, each containing up to seven categories of description of the variation within each theme. The themes found in the analysis were goals, learning, characteristics of the learning process, students, regulation and instructional activities. All themes and most description categories were found in both groups of teachers. The differences found could be related to a focus on either the learner or the content. University teachers tend to be more focused on variety of content and secondary teachers more on variety between students. The results of this study can make both secondary and higher education teachers aware of their own and other teachers’ perspectives and the possible influence on students’ learning and adaptation in higher education, for instance on pre‐service and in‐service courses.

Understanding the complexity of teacher reflection in action research

Abstract Reflection in action research is a complex matter, as is action research itself. In recent years, complexity science has regularly been called upon in order to more thoroughly understand the complexity of action research. The present article investigates the benefits that complexity science may yield for reflection in action research. This article begins by explicating the sense in which the complexity of reflection in action research involves the role of values and existential knowledge in education. The gap between theory and practice is also explored. On the basis of a number of common features of complex systems (heterogeneous, open, dynamic, non-linear, adaptive, and co-adaptive), the sense in which reflection can be regarded as a complex system is discussed. To this end, the features of complex systems are translated into features of reflection in action research, which, in turn, are illustrated with examples from recent publications on reflection in action research. The aim of this analysis is to make reflection in action research more understandable and manageable. In line with this, it is argued that room for insecurity and unpredictability, combined with an explicit consideration of reflection as a complex system, contributes to the use of complexity as a stimulus for new learning.

Exploring scientific, artistic, moral and technical reflection in teacher action research

Abstract Reflection in action research is a complicated matter because of the many domains of reflection and most significantly, the lack of understanding of these domains of reflection in action research and how these are supported. In this paper, we propose a framework based on four domains of reflection, namely, scientific, artistic, moral and technical reflection. We describe an initial attempt to use this framework in relation to the actual practice of teacher reflection in action research and show that the framework allowed us to map the various domains of reflection that teachers use in relation to their action research. This helped us to gain insight into the differences and the course of reflection in action research. We discuss how the framework – through orientation, differentiation and deepening – might provide support for reflection in action research.