Collaborative Staff Development

This article discusses a facilitative and collaborative model of teaching development in higher education. It explores the effectiveness of such a model in the light of the staff (faculty) development literature and the authors' five years of experience in its application through the TRAC (Teaching, Reflection and Collaboration) network facilitated by the Academic Staff Development Unit (ASDU) at the Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Australia.Denise C. Scott received her B.A. and M.Ed.St. from the University of Queensland and is a Lecturer in Teaching and Learning (Higher Education) at the Queensland University of Technology in Australia (QUT). She coordinates the TRAC (Teaching Reflection and Collaboration) Network for the Academic Staff Development Unit at QUT and has a particular interest in the role of collaboration and interaciton in learning. Patricia A. Weeks received her Ph.D. from Queensland University of Technology in the area of Professional Development, and she is a Senior Lecturer in the Academic Staff Development Unit at QUT. She coordinates the Graduate Certificate in Education (Higher Education) offered to lecturers at QUT and also teaches a unit within the course entitled The Reflective Practitioner. She consults on issues related to teaching and learning, and her special interests are in action research, narrative inquiry, and models of reflective practice.     

Reading and writing to learn science: Achieving scientific literacy

A key step in helping students to achieve scientific literacy is to ensure that each school's curriculum supports students' efforts to learn science meaningfully. Educational researchers play a vital role in this step by providing teachers, teacher educators, administrators, and policy makers with information about the creation of a curriculum that supports scientific literacy. In a scientific literacy curriculum, reading and writing can serve as dynamic vehicles for learning science meaningfully. The task of educational researchers is to show how reading and writing can be used most effectively to support science learning. Much of what is done now in schools is based on teacher intuition—good intuition—but intuition nonetheless. What is needed is school-based research to validate and build upon these intuitions. This article is intended to stimulate research on reading and writing to learn science.     

A Technology Integration Education (TIE) Model for Millennial Preservice Teachers: Exploring the Canonical Correlation Relationships Among Attitudes,Subjective Norms,Perceived Behavioral Controls,Motivation, and Technological,Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge (TPACK) Competencies

Intellectual goods can follow the same pattern as physical goods with the product life cycle of birth, growth, maturity, and decline. For the intellectual good of technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK), its birth began with Shulman (1986 Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.[Crossref] , [Google Scholar], 1987 Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). Canonical correlation analysis (CCA) was used to test the relationships among five of the 12 constructs in the technology integration education (TIE) model developed by Holland and Piper (2014 Holland, D. D., &; Piper, R. T. (2014). Technology integration education (TIE) model: Millennial preservice teachers' motivations about technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK) competencies. Journal of Education Computing Research, 51(3), 257–294.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). Based on the patterns of cross-loading correlations, this study found that there were limited correlational relationships between the set of independent variables and the set of dependent TPACK variables. For this pilot study, the sample consisted of 90 elementary education majors and 51 secondary education majors.     

The Oppressor Within: A Counterstory of Race, Repression, and Teacher Reflection

In this paper, I offer my own counterstory of matriculating through a teacher education program as an African American student on a predominately White campus as a reference point for thinking through how racism operates through teacher education’s dominant discourse and practice of teacher reflection. It is an important story to tell primarily because it touches on a largely unexplored dimension of teacher reflection. While the large majority of the literature has focused on how to prepare White preservice teachers to teach in a culturally and racially complex world, little qualitative attention has been given to the preparation of nonwhite students. While there are a few select and important articles that touch on some of the challenges African American students face in predominately White teacher education programs, including covert and overt racism, none focus on how teacher reflection might reproduce these dynamics. Thus what the literature on teacher reflection often suggests is that it is a racially neutral practice. In this essay, however, I suggests otherwise, by providing an intimate and critical look at my process of learning to be a reflective practitioner. The question I seek to grapple with is quite simply, “What does teacher reflection work to repress?”     

Engaging the Business/Industrial Sector in Accessibility Research: Lessons in Bridge Building

This article examines challenges of engaging the business/industry sector in research on the use of information technology to enhance accessibility for people with disabilities in two areas of common interest—to employment and to public and retail services. The data presented arise from the joint effort of two research teams who independently encountered challenges in engaging private sector firms in their respective projects. Using a case study approach, the experiences of both groups were examined for themes representing factors that inhibited collaboration between research and business sectors, and those that enhanced collaboration. Trustworthiness of themes was established by submitting them for critique and feedback to key informants knowledgeable in both business and research. From a social systems theory perspective, findings suggest that the most important differences between research and business systems reside in the meaning of communication each uses, and differences in assumptions about and value placed on factors such as pursuit of new knowledge, the importance of marketability of findings, and so on. Additional complications arise in pursuit of research related to disability. Factors to build on when seeking research collaboration include an understanding of the language and culture of business systems, and the very real possibility of developing disability research into secondary goals that business systems typically pursue once the prime need for profitability has been at addressed (the notion of satisficing). Implications for communication between disability research and business systems are identified.     

How research into healthcare staff use and non-use of e-books led to planning a joint approach to e-book policy and practice across UK and Ireland healthcare libraries

The research goals were to obtain an understanding of who the users of e-books in the NHS are, what they are using e-books for, and when and how they use them. This article presents the methodology used and the findings from the research. It also explores the outputs and next steps from the research, both for the individual countries and collectively. The Five Nations group, (library leads in England, Northern Ireland, Ireland, Scotland and Wales) commissioned research into healthcare staff use and non-use of e-books to understand the behaviours, needs and expectations of healthcare staff and to identify shared challenges around e-books to inform policy and practice.     

Exploring literacy teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs: Potential sources at play

This study explored the antecedents of self-efficacy beliefs for literacy instruction and the relationship of these beliefs to self-efficacy for teaching in general. Factor analysis demonstrated construct validity of the measure of TSELI developed. Moderate correlations between TSELI and the more general TSES suggest that while there is some overlap, they are not the same thing. In a regression analysis, the quality of university preparation, highest level of education, participation in a book club, school level, resources available for classroom books, teachers’ sense of efficacy for instructional strategies and for student engagement all explain variance in TSELI.