The presentation summarized a research project on integrating digital learning tools into lessons, which found that students responded positively overall, enjoyed the variation and independence of digital lessons, and appreciated humor and the personal contributions of teachers, though clarity of instruction and preparation were important for students. The presentation then demonstrated an example digital lesson.

1. Collaboration between
school practitioners and researchers
in R&D-projects
Implications for theory and practice
EAPRIL 2012 - Jyväskylä, Finland

2. Presenters
• Femke Geijsel
Professor of Applied Sciences
Windesheim, University of Applied Sciences
Senior researcher
University of Amsterdam
• Henk Sligte
Senior researcher
Kohnstamm Institute, University of Amsterdam
EAPRIL 2012 - Jyväskylä, Finland

3. Presenters
Two R&D projects:
• Collegial consultation between teachers
Frank Dost: Teacher researcher at Stad and Esch, Meppel
Hennie Brandsma: Professor of Applied Sciences at ECNO, Groningen
• Integrating digital learning methods in lessons
Christiaan de Regt: Teacher researcher at Maerlant Lyceum, The Hague
Daniëlle de Laat: Advisor at AO Consult, Tilburg
EAPRIL 2012 - Jyväskylä, Finland

4. VO-raad=Dutch council for
secondary education
• The VO-raad represents 334 school governing
boards and over 600 schools in secondary
education.
• As a sector organisation VO-raad aims at
quality, development and innovation of the
secondary education sector with 1 million
students, age 12-18, and 120,000 staff
members
• Supports R&D projects +
us here@EAPRIL….

5. Your roles?
Researchers
Teacher educators
Teachers
Advisors
Others

6. Outline
• Introduction: role of research in schools
• Presentation of two R&D projects
• Presentation overarching research
• Discussion
EAPRIL 2012 - Jyväskylä, Finland

7. Introduction:
role of research in schools
EAPRIL 2012 - Jyväskylä, Finland

8. R&D-projects
• Research & Development-projects in secondary schools,
so-called SLOA-projects
• 32 projects in total in period 2010-2013
• Funding of VO-raad meant for the research part, the
schools cater for the development part
• Collaboration between:
school practitioners (teachers, school leaders)
and external parties (researchers, advisors, supervisors)
EAPRIL 2012 - Jyväskylä, Finland

9. R&D-projects
• R&D themes, for example:
– evaluating reading lessons
– interventions in numeracy
– integrating games into lessons
– creating a school for pupils aged 10-14
– developing didactic methods for gifted students
EAPRIL 2012 - Jyväskylä, Finland

10. To the Cases
• Two R&D-projects:
– Collegial consultation between teachers
– Integrating digital learning methods in lessons
EAPRIL 2012 - Jyväskylä, Finland

11. Collegial consultation on
RSG Stad & Esch
A research project on the process and effects
Frank Dost (teacher-researcher) and Hennie
Brandsma (university of Leeuwarden)
EAPRIL Finland
November 28 2012

12. A DUTCH CLASSROOM.
ˆ

13. Collaborative processes
• The university of Groningen provided the observational
instrument (V/d Grift, icalt-instrument)
• The university of Leeuwarden provided the training-
sessions
• The researcher from the university of Leeuwarden
trained the teacher-researchers and supervised the
research-project
• A group of teacher-researchers from the school carried
out the research
• The results of the research were shared with the
teachers of Stad & Esch and other participating schools

14. Background information
• In 2009/2010: school received a negative
inspection report on the pedagogical and
didactical quality of teachers
• Goal: to improve these qualities
• Means: using an observational instrument for
mutual observation and feedback sessions
• Subsidized by SLOA VO-council

15. INTERVENTIONS
• Teachers are trained in using the observational
instrument
• Teachers are trained in giving and receiving
effective feedback
• Each and every teacher is being observed and
observes one or two colleagues
• After the observation there is mutual
consultation on the observed teacher-behaviour
• Plans for improvement are being made

16. EXEMPLARY PART OF THE
INSTRUMENT

17. IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION
• It’s all on the basis of improvement, not from
an accountability-perspective!

18. THE UNDERLYING RESEARCH
Two questions:
The process: ‘What are the experiences within the
school with collegial consultation and the
observational instrument?’
The effects:
‘To what extent do the teaching behaviours
improve by using collegial consultation.’
• The data needed to answer the question on the
effects are still being analysed.

19. THE RESEARCH PROCESS (1)
The object is a description of the process of
implementation
Method: We interviewed ±20 teachers and school
leaders on the following topics
• Their initial expectations
• The implementation
• Self efficacy
• Motivation
• Plans for the future

20. RESULTS OF THE INTERVIEWS
• Initial enthusiasm and motivation were
reasonably high for collegial consultation
• The use of the instrument for improvement-
purposes was widely supported
• The use of the instrument for assessment-
purposes was widely criticized
• The practical use of the instrument was also
criticized
• Most teachers want to continue with collegial
consultation, but they want to adapt the
instrument

21. THE RESEARCH PROCESS (2)
The object is an inventory of topics with respect
to further professionalization
Method: An online questionnaire for all teachers
Topics:
- Activating the pupils (5 questions)
- Within group differentiation (4 questions)
- Development of learning strategies (6
questions)
- learning behavior of pupils (3 questions)

22. NEED FOR PROFESSIONALIZATION
Learning behavior of pupils 2.4
Within group differtiation 2.2 1-1.66 (no need)
1.67-2.33 (maybe)
Learning strategies 2.1 2.34 -3.00 (certainly)
Didactics for activating pupils 2.3
1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3

23. CONCLUSIONS ABOUT THE NEED FOR
PROFESSIONALIZATION
1. There is a high desire to improve teaching skills
within the teaching community of the school
2. Teachers are interested in improving their skills
with respect to activating pupils and improving
the learning behaviour of pupils
3. There are no differences in the need for
professionalization between sexes, age-groups
and level of experience

24. DISSEMINATION OF THE RESULTS
• Within the broader school community
• Presented to all teachers
• Results are discussed in small groups
• Conclusions were widely accepted and shared
What to do in the future?
• Collegial consultation will be continued as a
standard way of teacher professionalization and
improvement
• The observational instrument will be adapted to
specific school and teacher needs

25. One or two questions?

26. Integrating digital learning tools in lessons
Christiaan de Regt and Daniëlle de Laat
26

27. THIS PRESENTATION
(1) Introduction
• Project goals
• Activities
• Collaboration
(2) Demonstration of a digital lesson
(3) Outcomes
• Design impact research
• Findings
• Conclusions
27

28. PROJECT GOALS
• By using digital learning tools in ‘problem courses’ in
the regular course program and at cancelled classes:
– Providing a solution for cancelled classes;
– Exploiting teacher’s teaching time more efficient
and effective;
– Reducing teacher’s workload;
– Increasing education quality.
• Experiment with digital lessons for three subjects
• Integrate research and development
28

29. ACTIVITIES
• Step 1: Inventory research
Which digital learning tools are available and effective?
• Step 2: Development teaching program
Development of a teaching program with digital lessons, based on
macro- to meso- and micro-design
• Step 3: Implementation of the teaching program
Implementation of the teaching programs on the three participating
schools
• Step 4: Impact research
Research on the effects of digital learning tools on: teaching time,
workload and education quality
• Step 5: Reports and dissemination
Share experiences and knowledge
29

30. COLLABORATION
Collaboration on three levels:
1. Within the school(s)
• Between teachers, education support staff and headmasters
2. Between the schools and the external party (AOC)
• Five meetings with headmasters and AOC
• Collaboration in development (support of teachers and education
support staff by AOC)
• Collaboration in research (involvement of teachers and education
support staff)
3. Within the external party (AOC)
• Researcher and educational expert
30

31. (2) DEMONSTRATION OF A DIGITAL LESSON
• General experiences
• What obstacles are experienced?
• An example of a digital lesson
31

32. GENERAL EXPERIENCES
• Clarity comes first: prepair the students well
• Students often respond positive on digital lessons
• Variation is fun
• Working independently on the computer is very nice
for some individualistic students
• Several small assignments are received more pleasant
compared to a few large assignments
• Students scroll through the digital lesson back and
forth
• Humor is important
• ‘Personal’ contribution of teachers is appreciated
32

33. WHAT OBSTACLES ARE EXPERIENCED?
• First lesson hour of the day is inconvenient
• Technical problems
• Ignorance colleagues
• Lesson outcome not always clear
• Students want to ask questions ánd get an answer
• Unclarity provides problems quickly
• Lack of ready made digital learning material
• It is difficult to make a lesson far in advance
• It takes much time to make a digital lesson
33

34. 34

35. Avete pueri puellaeque!
Welcome to your sixth
digital lesson Latin.
In this lesson we complete
the dativus. We will
prepare us for the written
test of Friday the 13th.
35

36. Introduction
This lesson consists of seven parts:
A. Shows the homework for the next lesson.
B. Is the Latin translation of Text 6A that you have made.
This will be checked by yourself!
C. Shows what pupils of other schools have done with
the hero Aeneas.
D. Some little assignments, including the dativus
E. Shows a video with two really critical parents.
Recognizable? Try to understand the meaning of the
Latin expressions.
F. Consists of little exercises for the written test
G. The evaluation of this lesson
36

37. A. Homework
For the next regular lesson Latin, you
must have done the things below.
When you are finished with the assignments of
thís lesson, you can start with them.
• Learning the Latin words lesson 6 (2x)
• Getting familiar with the rows of the noun and
pronoun (with the dativus)
Good luck with your preparations!
37

38. B. Translation Tekst 6A. Check yourself
1. Venus prepares a trick/ devises a list.
2. She calls Amor, her son and tells him:
3. ‘Son, I beg you, help me!
4. I am planning to deceive queen Dido.
5. The boy Ascanius is getting ready to go to Carthago
6. and brings gifts to the queen.
7. I dedicate this to you now:
8. You, take the appearance of Ascanius and go to town.
9. Go to the queen and awake love for Aeneas
10. in her heart.
11. I will take care of the boy Ascanius.’
12. Amor obeys the goddess.
13. He puts his wings of, takes the appearance of Ascanius and goes to town.
14. Already he approaches the palace.
15. Meanwhile, Venus puts Ascanius to a deep sleep.
16. Then she lifts the boy out of bed and carries him to the mountains.
17. There, he dreams between/ among fragrant flowers
38

39. C. Aeneas Troianus est
The main character Aeneas who we are reading about now, is a well
known historic / mythical figure. That is why we will see him in many
different stories and artworks.
The pupils CKV (cultural art forming) on the Stedelijk Gymnasium in
Den Bosch have imitated his flight from Troy in a very original way.
They took Text 3A from Vivat Roma! as a starting point.
The title of their video is ‘Aeneas Troianus est’, since this is in the Latin
text. However, the pupils have made a huge language error. Do you
recognize the error?
Click the link below to start the video:
klik hier
39

40. D. Two little assignments with the dativus
Attention: the next two sheets contain the noun-schedules
1. Translate and put into plural:
a. Mihi cenam parat. d. Filius excipit me.
b. Femina tibi donum dat. e. Te saluto.
c. Servus ei non paret. f. Eum relinquis.
2. Fill in the correct form of the personal pronoun:
a. Anchises ..... (eis, eas) amat.
b. Patres quaero, sed ..... (eas, eos) invenire non possum.
c. Aeneas hospitem videt et ..... (eae, eam, eum) recognoscit.
d. Didonem Aeneas amat et ..... (eam, ei, eis) flores dat.
e. Servae ..... (eis, ea) mensas tegunt.
40

41. D.1 Appendix I The noun
In the schedule below, you will find the noun that you already had to
learn. All case endings are in bold.
Case Group 1 Group 2 Group 3
nom ev puella servus bellum pater mater nomen
dat ev puellae servo bello patri matri nomini
acc ev puellam servum bellum patrem matrem nomen
nom mv puellae servi bella patres matres nomina
dat mv puellis servis bellis patribus matribus nominibus
acc mv puellas servos bella patres matres nomina
41

42. D.2 Appendix II The personal pronoun
Below you can find a schedule with the personal pronouns, including the
translations.
case 1st person 2nd person 3th person
nom ev ego = me tu = you is = he ea = she id = it
dat ev mihi = (to) me tibi = (to) you ei = (to) him/ her/ it
acc ev me = me te = you eum = him eam = her id = it
nom mv nos = we vos = you ei = they eae = they ea =they
dat mv nobis = (to) us vobis = (to) you eis = (to) them
acc mv nos = us vos = you eos = them eas = them ea = them
42

43. E. Koefnoen
You may know them. Those people that per se want their child to go to
gymnasium. Two well known actors from the satiric program Koefnoen play
such a married couple that at all costs wants to place their beloved
‘offspring’ on gymnasium.
The rector, yet classical trained, is quite overwhelmed. By citing Latin
spells, he tries to respond the parents as good as possible.
A. Watch the video and give a definition of the following statements:
1. pro forma
2. nolens volens
3. cum laude
B. The parents made at least two errors in Latin. Which?
Click hier for the video
43

44. F. Practice question for the written test
about lesson 6
I Translate the words below and give what is asked for:
1. paulatim = 5. sidus (+pl) =
2. distribuere = 6. adire =
3. lectus = 7. postremo =
4. flos (+pl +sex) = 8. ubique =
II Translate the verb forms below correctly:
1. convenit =
2. mandate =
3. pares =
4. expellunt =
5. incipio =
44

45. F. Continuation
III Complete the schedule below:
nom ev nox
dat ev animo
acc ev lumen
nom mv
dat mv
acc mv regias
translation night light
45

46. F. Answers practice-written test
1.: little by little, distribute, bed, flower(flores, m), star (sidera), go
to, finally, everywhere
2.: he comes together, dedicate(s)!, you obey, they expel, I start
3.:
nox regia animus lumen
nocti regiae animo lumini
noctem regiam animum lumen
noctes regiae animi lumina
noctibus regiis animis luminibus
noctes regias animos lumina
night palace heart, soul light
46

47. G. Evaluation
• Write your evaluation of this lesson on the
separate sheet that you will get from the
supervisor
• Do you have questions about the (teaching-)
material, write them in your notebook!
So long!
47

48. (New Year 2011 in the Via del Corso, Roma) >end<
48

49. Spring, here we come !
49

50. (3) OUTCOMES
• Impact research
• Design impact research
• Findings
• Conclusions
50

51. DESIGN IMPACT RESEARCH
The research consists of three moments of measurement:
• First measurement -> Impact measurement
– Depth interviews and extensive questionnaire students
• Intermediate measurement (after lessons)
– Short questionnaires after each lesson
– Observations by teachers
51

52. OVERALL FINDINGS
• Average report marks
– Digital lessons: 6,5
– Regular lessons: 7,1
This difference is significant*
• How can this be explained?
Compared to the regular lessons, the students stated about
the digital lessons significant less often that:
– the lesson was prepared well by the teacher;
– they had learned new things;
– the assignments were clear;
– the lesson was interesting.
52

53. FINDINGS BY SCHOOL
• Opinion about digital lessons
– All students were in advance positive about digital lessons
– Afterwards only at one school were the students more positive about
digital lessons.
• Computers more fun then books
• Variety in different kind of assignments and tools was appreciated
• Ability to work at your own pace
• Silence during the lessons
• Discussion about digital lessons during regular lessons -> adaptation of next lesson
– Ict can make a lesson more fun, but not if all lessons are digital
• Teacher appears indispensable factor
• Ict-facilities not always okay  Irritation and lost time
53

54. CONCLUSIONS
• The expected effects are limited realized. The use of digital
learning tools does not automatically lead to:
– efficient and effective use of teaching time;
– replacement of cancelled lessons;
– lower pressure and higher job satisfaction among teachers.
• The successful use of digital learning tools is strongly
dependent on the parameters of the Four in Balance model
(Kennisnet):
– Vision
– Expertise
– Digital learning materials
– Ict infrastructure. 54

55. Overarching Research
Wouter Schenke
wschenke@kohnstamm.uva.nl

56. Overarching research
Research question:
What is the nature of cross-professional collaboration
between teachers, school leaders, educational
researchers/advisors in R&D-projects in terms of:
• reasons to collaborate
• division of tasks
• communication: structure and culture
Schenke, Volman, Van Driel, Geijsel, & Sligte (2012). De aard van cross-professionele
samenwerking in O&O-projecten in het voortgezet onderwijs. Pedagogische Studiën
EAPRIL 2012 - Jyväskylä, Finland

57. Theoretical background
• Cross-professional collaboration:
A situation in which participants of different backgrounds
work together to reach their goals
• R&D-projects provide a way to
connect their corresponding worlds
Akkerman & Bakker (2011), Coburn & Stein (2010)
EAPRIL 2012 - Jyväskylä, Finland

58. Cross-professional collaboration
School leader
Educational
researcher/
advisor
Teacher
researcher
EAPRIL 2012 - Jyväskylä, Finland

59. Theoretical background
• R&D-projects offer opportunities to:
– ... bridge the gap between theory and practice
– ... have a better use of research results
– ... perform research in an ecological valid setting
• Reasons to collaborate in R&D-projects
– Legitimating an innovation at school
– Stimulating professional development of teachers
– Agreement on reasons to collaborate?
Broekkamp & Van Hout-Wolters (2007), Cochran-Smith & Lytle (1999), Geijsel (2010),
Hora & Millar (2011), Volman (2008)

60. Theoretical background
• Division of tasks
– Who is project leader?
– Researchers share their research expertise
– Researchers become supervisors and/or advisors as well
– Teachers become teacher researchers by training and
performing research
– School leaders become data-driven and stimulate a research
culture
– Who is in control in research at school?
Coburn & Stein (2010), Van de Ven (2007), Wagner (1997)

61. Theoretical background
• Communication
– Structure: meeting structure, time investment, means of
communication
– Culture: open-ended conversation
Edwards (2012), Engle (2010), Geijsel & Van Eck (2011)
EAPRIL 2012 - Jyväskylä, Finland

62. Method
• Interviews with participants of 12 case studies
• Collection of documents, such as reports
• Within-site analysis
• Cross-site analysis
• Audit
Miles & Huberman (1994)
EAPRIL 2012 - Jyväskylä, Finland

63. Results
Reasons to collaborate:
• 9 out of 12 projects have congruent goals:
same interests of internal and external parties
• 3 out of 12 projects have additional goals of
researchers.
For example: selling information of a new instrument
EAPRIL 2012 - Jyväskylä, Finland

64. Results
Division of tasks
Number of Development tasks: Research tasks: Teacher researchers School leader active
projects who is in control? who is in control? present? in research tasks?
I School School Yes Yes
III School School and Yes Yes
external party
III School and School and Yes Yes
external party external party
II School and School and No Yes
external party external party
II School and External party Yes No
external party
I School External party No No
EAPRIL 2012 - Jyväskylä, Finland

65. Results
Communication structure
Number of Meetings Time investment
projects Internal External School leader Teacher External party
V Overall project group with internal High High High
and external participants
III Internal project Researcher High High High or low
group
I Internal project Researcher Average Low Average
leader
III Overall steering group with internal Low Low High
and external participants
High = > 200h. Average = 100-200h. Low = < 100 h. on a yearly basis
EAPRIL 2012 - Jyväskylä, Finland

66. Stad and Esch Results
In control:
Four types of collaboration:
School
A. Ownership of project lies with the school
and researcher supports the school
B. Interests and tasks of school practitioner
and researcher are intertwined
C. Researcher advises steering group; no
teacher researchers at school
D. Researcher has additional interests in Researcher
project and controls research
Maerlant Lyceum

67. Results
Types of collaboration
Types Number of Reasons to collaborate Division of tasks Communicati
projects on
Congruent Additional Development Research Time invest-
reasons reasons tasks: in tasks: in ment school
control control
A IV + - School School and High
external party
B III + - School and School and High
external party external party
C II + - School and School and Low
external party external party
D III - + School and External party Average
external party

68. Discussions
• The practical and scientific value of
cross-professional collaboration:
– On project-bound collaboration
– On the level of the school organisation
– On the professional sector as a whole
EAPRIL 2012 - Jyväskylä, Finland