Teacher Roles in the Blended Classroom – Swedish Lower Secondary School Teachers’ Boundary Management between Physical and Virtual Learning Spaces

The purpose of the study is to explore how Swedish lower secondary school teachers manage blended learning environments, established through using a specific learning management system (LMS) application. In the study, four teachers were followed during a four-month (n)ethnographic fieldwork. Based on analyses of data from video-recordings and observations in physical and virtual classrooms, the study examines teachers’ practices of integrating and segmenting the two classroom domains. In order to unpack the realms of these practices, the study employs affordance and boundary theories. Through the analysis of participants’ boundary practices and their use of communicative affordances in and across space and time, four teacher roles, enacted and emerging through teaching practices, are presented. The paper concludes with a discussion of how participants’ engagement with virtual and physical learning environment compels teachers to reflect upon their preferred teacher role in the new multidimensional classrooms.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Blended classroom, affordances, boundary work, chaining, teacher role

Teacher Roles in the Blended Classroom – Swedish Lower Secondary School Teachers’ Boundary Management between Physical and Virtual Learning Spaces

Keywords:

Blended Classroom, Affordances, Boundary work, Chaining, teacher role,

PDF

___

ReferencesAkkerman, S. & Bakker, A. (2011). Learning at the boundary: An introduction. International Journal of Educational Research, 50 (1), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2011.04.002
Ashforth, B. E., Kreiner, G. E. & Fugate, M. (2000). All in a Day’s Work: Boundaries and Micro Role Transitions. Academy of Management Review, 25 (3), 472–491. https://doi.org/10.2307/259305
Bagga-Gupta, S. (2002). Explorations in bilingual instructional interaction: A sociocultural perspective on literacy. Journal of the European Association on Learning and Instruction, 5 (2), 557-587. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0959-4752(01)00032-9
Bagga-Gupta, S. (2004). Visually oriented language use. Discursive and technological resources in Swedish Deaf pedagogical arenas. In M. V. Herreweghe & M. Vermeerbergen (Eds.), Sociolinguistics in European Deaf Communities. Vol 10. The Sociolinguistics in Deaf Communities Series, (pp.171-207). Washington DC: Gallaudet University.
Bagga-Gupta, S. (2014). Languaging: Ways-of-being-with-words across Disciplinary Boundaries and Empirical Sites. In Paulasto, H., Riionheimo, H., Meriläinen, L. & Kok, M. (Eds.), Language Contacts at the Crossroads of Disciplines. (pp.89-130). Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Barton, D. & Lee, C. (2013). Language online. Investigating Digital Texts and Practices. London: Routledge.
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Engeness, I. & Edwards, A. (2017). The Complexity of Learning: Exploring the Interplay of Different Mediational Means in Group Learning with Digital Tools. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 61 (6), 650-667. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2016.1173093
Engeström, Y., Engeström, R., & Kärkkäinen, M. (1995). Polycontextuality and boundary crossing in expert cognition: Learning and problem solving in complex work activities. Learning and Instruction, 5, 319–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(95)00021-6
Evans, S. K., Pearce, K. E, Vitak, J. & Treem, J. W. (2017). Explicating Affordances: A Conceptual Framework for Understanding Affordances in Communication Research. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 22, 35-52. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12180
Ferdig, R., Cavanaugh, C. & Freidhoff, J. (2012). Lessons learned from blended programs: Experiences and recommendations from the field. Vienna, VA: iNACOL.
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston, Mass: Houghton Mifflin.
Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended learning systems: Definition, current trends, and future directions. In C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham (Eds.), The Handbook of Blended Learning: Global Perspectives, Local Designs (pp. 3–21), San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
Hagström, T. & Hanson, M. (2003). Kompetens för flexibelt arbete. Förnyelse på svenska arbetsplatser – balansakter och utvecklingsdynamik. Ed. Linda Wilhelmson (pp.153-178), Stockholm: Arbetslivsinstitutet.
Hansen, A. L. (2005). Kommunikative praksiser i visuelt orienterte klasserom: En studie av et tilrettelagt opplegg for døve lærerstudenter. Trondheim: NTNU, Norges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige universitet, Dept. for Languages and Communication Studies. Doctoral dissertation.
Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (1983). Ethnography: Principles in Practice. London: Tavistock.
Hayes, N. (1997). Theory-led thematic analysis: social identification in small companies. In Hayes, N. (Ed.) Doing Qualitative Analysis in Psychology (pp.93-114), Hove: Psychology Press.
Kennewell, S. (2001). Using affordances and constraints to evaluate the use of information and communications technology in teaching and learning. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 10 (1-2), 101-116. https://doi.org/10.1080/14759390100200105
Kjällander, S. (2011). Designs for Learning in an Extended Digital Environment. Case Studies of Social Interaction in the Social Science Classroom. Stockholm University: Stockholm.
Kozinets, R. V. (2010). Netnography. London: Sage.
Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the New Media Age. London: Routledge.
Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality. A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London: Routledge.
Kress, G. & Bezemer, J. (2009). Knowledge, creativity and communication in education: multimodal design. In C. Jewitt (Ed.) Beyond Current Horizons. Futurelab.
Kreiner, G. E., Hollensbe, E. C. & Sheep, M. I. (2009). Balancing Borders and Bridges: Negotiating the Work-Home Interface via Boundary Work Tactics. Academy of Management Journal, 52 (4), 704-730. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.43669916
Lamont, M. & Molnár, V. (2002). The Study of Boundaries in the Social Sciences. Annual Review of Sociology, 28 (1), 167–195. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.28.110601.141107
LeCompte, D. & Schensul, J. J. (2013). Analysis and Interpretation of Ethnographic Data: A Mixed Methods Approach. Lanham: AltaMira Press.
Linderoth, J. (2012). Why gamers donʼt learn more. An ecological approach to games as learning environments. Journal of Gaming and Virtual Worlds, 4 (1), 45-62. https://doi.org/10.1386/jgvw.4.1.45_1
Looi, C. K., Wong, L. H., So, H. J., Seow, P., Toh, Y., Chen, W. et al. (2009). Anatomy of a mobilized lesson: learning my way. Computers & Education, 53 (4), 1120–1132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.05.021
Messina Dahlberg, G. & Bagga-Gupta, S. (2013). Communication in the virtual classroom in higher education: Languaging beyond the boundaries of time and space. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 2 (2), 127-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2013.04.003
Nacu, D. C., Martin, C. K., Pinkard, N. & Gray, T. (2016). Analyzing educators’ online interactions: a framework of online learning support roles. Learning, Media and Technology, 41 (2), 283-305. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2015.975722
Nippert-Eng, C. E. (1996). Home and Work: Negotiating Boundaries through Everyday Life. Chicago: University Chicago Press.
Norberg, A. (2017). From blended learning to learning onlife: ICTs, time and access to higher education. Umeå: Umeå University.
Norman, D. (1988). The Psychology of Everyday Things. New York: Basic books.
Riesch, H. (2010). Theorizing Boundary Work as Representation and Identity. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 40 (4), 452–473. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.2010.00441.x
Roschelle, J. & Pea, R. (2002). A walk on the WILD side: How wireless handheld may change computer-supported collaborative learning. International Journal of Cognition and Technology, 1 (1), 145-168. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijct.1.1.09ros
Saldana, J. (2009). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Selander, S. & Kress, G. (2010). Design för lärande – ett multimodalt perspektiv. Stockholm: Nordstedts Akademiska Förlag.
Sotillo, S. M. (2000). Discourse functions and syntactic complexity in synchronous and asynchronous communication. Language Learning & Technology, 4 (1), 82–119.
Swedish National Agency for Education. LGR 11. Curriculum for the compulsory school, preschool class and the recreation centre. Stockholm: National Agency of Education. Retrieved from: https://www.skolverket.se/publikationer?id=2575
Tapio, E. (2013). A nexus analysis of English in the everyday life of FinSL signers: a multimodal view on interaction. Doctoral thesis. Jyväskylä: Jyväskylä University Printing House.
Zerubavel, E. (1991). The Fine Line. New York: Free Press.