"Trick or Treat?" Designing and Facilitating a Self-Study Research Group in the Country 2 Context

• In Event: 65.070 - Translating and Transforming Self-Study Into Languages Other Than English

Abstract

Objectives
S-STEP reflects an 'international project in progress'. Inspired by its aspiration and outcomes, we established a self-study research group in country 2-- the first of its kind. None of the participating TEs had been expected to be active researchers before, aiming to publish their work in academic or professional journals. This is typical of the professional lives of many country 2 TEs. To outbalance the limited research expertise, this project included two experienced academic researchers (the presenters of this paper).
This paper reports on a systematic study of the design and facilitation of this self-study research group. By documenting and interpretatively discussing the development of the group, we aim to further our understanding of the conditions for successful S-STEP research and the affordances and constraints of local contexts to enact its goals.
Framework
Since its ideas had not yet been widely disseminated in this country, this study started with a systematic review of the S-STEP literature. Based on our review, we defined self-study as a research approach which focuses on one’s own practice; for this reason it privileges the use of qualitative research methods; collaborative interactions play a central role in the research process; and its validation is based on trustworthiness (authors, submitted). This definition served as the foundation of our work in the research group.
Furthermore, the rationale of the facilitation was based on four broadly shared theoretical principles on how research groups can be meaningfully organized as a means for professional development and scholarship. These general principles were translated in a series of propositions (‘if…then…’) making clear the implications these held for facilitators’ interventions.
Methodology
Research data included audiotapes of the group meetings, TEs’ and facilitators’ journal-writing, written reports on the meetings between the facilitators, and document analysis. First, we systematically reconstructed the actual facilitation practice and its outcomes in a matrix. Second, we conducted a qualitative content analysis of the matrix looking for indications or changes in the TEs’ or facilitators’ stance toward the project.
Findings
First, the results indicate that systematically and collaboratively investigating questions of practice meant that TEs work in unusual ways on an, for them, unusual agenda. If tensions arise, TEs tend to prioritize their practice grounded in their commitment and responsibility to student teachers.
Second, our analysis highlights that adjacent to the structural working conditions (e.g., staff positions, time) of the teacher training institute, the accordance between individual TEs’ normative beliefs and that of the organization proved to be a crucial determinant in the process (cultural working conditions). Finally, these new collaborative formats for scholarship and professional development not only involve organizational challenges, but also epistemological (‘what kind of knowledge do we aim for?’) and political questions (‘aren’t we installing a hierarchy between practitioners and academic researchers?’) which ultimately touch upon the heart of self-study.
Significance
Contextualized analyses of cases like ours provide exemplary illustrations of what the enactment of the general ideas of S-STEP looks like in particular instances of practice, what factors influence that enactment and the possible outcomes.

Authors

• Eline Vanassche, Catholic Universiteit Leuven

• Geert Kelchtermans, University of Leuven