University-Based and Non-University-Based Teacher Educators Learning Together Through Collaborative Action Research

• In Event: Using Evidence-Based Practice to Improve Education in Underdeveloped Regions: Four Empirical Studies from One Longitudinal Project in China

Proposal

As part of a large project on evidence-based educational practice and improvement in China, this study examines how four university-based teacher educators (UBTEs) and 52 non-university-based teacher educators (NUBTEs) engage in a semester-long professional development program on collaborative action research (CAR). Guided by the theory of evidence-based practice (Yates, 2012) and gradual release of responsibility (Fisher & Frey, 2008), the program consists of three consecutive sessions. In the first session – “We Do (我们做),” the UBTEs shared CAR’s core idea, guiding principles, and main procedures with the NUBTEs. The UBTEs also used their own experiences to model how to do CAR. In the second session – “You and We Do Together (我们你们一起做),” the UBTEs guided the NUBTEs to conduct the first round of CAR in groups. Each group strived to tackle one practical problem facing the NUBTEs by analyzing the problem, formulating a plan, putting the plan into action, and evaluating the effectiveness of the action. In the third session – “You Do (你们做),” the NUBTEs pinpointed a new problem based on the first round and independently addressed the problem through another round of CAR. The UBTEs intentionally stepped backward and provided assistance only when necessary.

We generated four sources of empirical data to manifest the participating teacher educators’ professional learning. To examine the NUBTEs’ professional learning, we administered a pre- and post-PD questionnaire survey to all the participating NUBTEs to capture their perceptional changes regarding CAR. We also collected materials reflecting the NUBTEs’ professional learning (e.g., video-recorded PD sessions, group meeting minutes, CAR reports) and conducted one-on-one interviews with nine purposefully sampled NUBTEs with diverse backgrounds. As researchers and the UBTEs, we organized three reflective conversations throughout the PD program, focusing on how we formed new beliefs, knowledge, and skills through this boundary-crossing experience.

Three main findings have emerged from our recursive and thematic analysis of the research data. First, the program has improved the NUBTEs’ commitment to, knowledge about, and abilities of doing practitioner inquiry. Second, the PD also helped the UBTEs see concrete meanings about doing CAR with the NUBTEs and crafted practical strategies for leveraging CAR as a venue to seek professional learning and growth together with NUBTEs. Third, both NUBTEs and UBTEs encountered several challenges in their learning together, including the lack of time for in-depth collaboration, the systematic divide (i.e., cognitive, linguistic, institutional, and cultural) between the work and learning of UBTEs and NUBTEs, and the inherently unequal power relationships between NUBTEs and UBTEs. These challenges suggest practical implications for bettering the norms, contents, formats, and environments of future PD programs for teacher educators.

The research findings contribute Chinese empirical evidence to the ongoing international discussions on teacher educators’ professional learning and development (Ping et al., 2018), highlight the importance of teacher educators learning together across boundaries (Thomson et al., 2022), and showcase the potential of CAR as a boundary object in bringing teacher educators from different sites to learn together in practice-based, inquiry-oriented, and collaboratively-advanced PD programs (Bergmark, 2020).

Author

• Wei Liao, Beijing Normal University