Balancing between ICT training and reflective practice in teachers’ professional development
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
In-service teachers who engage in training on digital technology in education often have a dual profile: they are novices in terms of technological knowledge but at the same time are expert professionals when it comes to teaching practices. Meeting needs at both levels is not an easy task. Since 2001 INDIRE, an Italian institute for educational research, has been facing this problem in its provision of large-scale national training programs on educational technology. In the past, an inadequate response to technology literacy needs has often been the main cause of high dropout rates. However, in more recent times, participating teachers seem to have gained awareness that integrating ICTs in their teaching goes beyond the mere capacity to use technology; they are now requesting more training on pedagogical aspects and subject-related strategies. In this paper we analyse the case of two INDIRE courses, PON Didatec Base and PON Didatec Avanzato, which in 2012 and 2013 trained approximately fifteen thousand teachers, achieving good satisfaction levels and a significant decrease in dropout rates compared to previous courses.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access)
References
Beauchamp, G., & Parkinson, J. (2005). Beyond the ‘wow’ factor: developing interactivity with the interactive whiteboard. School Science Review, 86(316), 97-103.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
Cerri R. (2005). Saperi disciplinari e mediazione tecnologica. Form@re Expertise didattica e tecnologie, 35. Retrieved from http:// formare.erickson.it/wordpress/it/2005/saperidisciplinari- e-mediazione-tecnologica/
European Schoolnet. (2013). Survey of Schools: ICT in Education. Benchmarking Access, Use and Attitudes to Technology in European Schools. Liege, Belgium: European Union. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/digitalsingle- market/node/51275
Faggioli, M. (2005). Il modello Puntoedu sviluppato da Indire: un incontro tra progettazione e bisogni della scuola .AA. VV.. Quaderni degli Annali dell’Istruzione, 11-41.
Glover, D., Miller, D., Averis, D., & Door, V. (2005). The interactive whiteboard: a literature survey. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 14(2), 155-170.
Ilomäki, L., Kantosalo, A., & Lakkala, M. (2011). What is digital competence. Linked portal. Brussels: European Schoolnet (EUN), 1-12.
Johannesen, M., Øgrim, L., & Giæver, T. H. (2014). Notion in motion: Teachers’ digital competence. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 4, 300-312.
Khan, A. W. (2008). ICT competency standards for teachers. Paris, France: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)?. Contemporary issues in technology and teacher education, 9(1), 60-70.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning – Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Hall, N.J.: Prentice.
Krumsvik, R. J. (2008). Situated learning and teachers’ digital competence. Education and Information Technologies 13(4), 279-290.
Magnoler P. (2012). Prospettive e dispositivi per la professionalizzazione degli insegnanti. In P.C Rivoltella & P. G. Rossi (Eds.), L’agire didattico: manuale per l’insegnante. Brescia, Italia: La Scuola.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. The Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
Mosa, E. (2009). Innovazione scolastica e tecnologie didattiche. Dai corsi di aggiornamento all’assistenza on the job. TD Tecnologie Didattiche, 17(3). doi: 10.17471/2499-4324/297
Parigi, L., & Rossi, F. (2011). ICT and in service teacher training in Italy- blended elearning provided by PuntoEdu. In A. Balanskat & C.A. Gertsch (Eds.), Digital Skills Working Group Review of National Curricula and Assessing Digital Competence for Students and Teachers: Findings from 7 Countries, European Schoolnet. Retrieved from http://archief. kennisnet.nl/fileadmin/contentelementen/ kennisnet/Ict-bekwaamheidseisen/ International-Digital_skills-European_ Schoolnet.pdf
Parigi, L. (2010) L’idea di LIM. L’affordance mediata nel processo di adozione della tecnologia. In A. Andronico, A. Labella, & F. Patini (Eds.), DIDAMATICA 2010. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/439694/ LIdea_Di_LIM._LAffordance_Mediata_Nel_ Processo_Di_Adozione_Della_Tecnologia.
Rossi, P., & Pezzimenti, L. (2012). La trasposizione didattica. In P.C. Rivoltella & P. G. Rossi (Eds.), L’agire didattico: manuale per l’insegnante. Brescia, Italia: La Scuola.
Rossi, P. G., Magnoler, P., & Scagnetti, F. (2012). Professionalizzazione degli insegnanti: dai saperi per la pratica ai saperi della pratica. In AA. VV, Il futuro della ricerca pedagogica e la sua valutazione, Quaderni della rivista Education Sciences & Society (pp. 545-561). Roma, Italia: Armando.
Wastiau, P., Blamire, R., Kearney, C., Quittre, V., Van de Gaer, E., & Monseur, C. (2013). The use of ICT in education: a survey of schools in Europe. European Journal of Education, 48(1), 11-27.