SUB-CONGRESSES
Thursday 29 August 2024
A one day sub-congress on Thursday 29 August during ISCAR 2024
Participants are able to register for this sub-congress only. The sub-congress can also be attended by participants of ISCAR 2024 (no additional registration required).
Join us during this subconference for an exploration into the theory and practice of Developmental Education, an innovative approach to teaching and learning. Rooted in Cultural-Historical Activity Theory (CHAT), this educational concept gives both teachers and students agency to develop meaningful socio-cultural activities in which learning and development can take place.
In the Netherlands, we have set up a strong network over the past decades where theory, empirical research, and educational practice work together to develop a theory-driven approach to good education. During this subconference, we will delve into how Developmental Education unfolds in early childhood classrooms and the upper grades of primary school. This program gives you a unique insight into the theoretical foundations of Developmental Education, how educational developers translate this theory into a practical concept, tools and strategies, and how teachers and school leaders put this into practice in their daily educational activities.
Continual education and professionalization in Developmental Education
In line with the developmental vision on the development and formation of young children, a developmental approach is also applied in in-service training and professionalization within Starting Blocks and Basic development. This means working with an approach in which there is room for professionals to shape their own development (Van Oers, 2015). To this end, early childhood staff and teachers are challenged and helped to identify the areas in which they can develop further to determine their own development path. The teacher educator helps professionals by providing sources, by watching and participating in the group and by teaching them how they can use the building blocks and ingredients of Starting Blocks and Basic Development to improve their own practice. For adults, as for children, learning is a social process and linked to acting in socio-cultural practices. So they engage with colleagues in their own practice, to further develop and learn together.
Educational innovation through the teacher’s own input is not so much about transfer of theory into practice, but an interaction in which theory and practice benefit from each other. This interaction leads to further development of the teacher’s theory of practice, with which she/he can shape or renew her/his own practice.
The bicycle workshop
Play and learning in early childhood within social-cultural practices
Learning to ride a bike is a social cultural practice in the Netherlands that all small children participate in. That means children get a bike, learn to ride and take good care of their bikes. Lots of interesting activities where all kinds of things can be learned. In many classes a bicycle workshop and/or bicycle store is set up together with children.
In this practical story we show what this means for professionals and children. Their own experiences and questions are the starting point. We show what tools professionals have to build a play story together with children. There is still much to learn in order to participate more and more in the practice of cycling. This requires a mediating role of the professional who aims to develop through this socio-cultural practice. We will show what this means for the children, who develop in meaningful activities in a broad sense. This involves not only knowledge and skills, but also self-confidence and initiative, deliberation and problem solving, etc. Playing in the practice of cycling makes children not only proud and independent, but also skillful to participate in the world with all knowledge needed to do so.
The Fabric Wizards
Learning in sociocultural practices
In group 7/8 (pupils are 11 to 12 years old) of teacher Marjolein ten Cate, the pupils have set up a sewing studio: ‘The Fabric Wizards’. It is a sewing studio with a mission aimed at sustainability. All products, such as bags, backpacks, play cuddles and flag lines are made from existing fabrics and materials.
The group runs the sewing studio together. Decisions are made together and tasks are divided. This creates different working and research groups, such as a production group, a group for finances and public relations tasks.
The group is a very diverse in age, abilities, backgrounds and language skills. Quite a few pupils struggle with behavioral problems. The teacher sees opportunities in the sewing workshop for all pupils struggling with behavioral problems and also sees possibilities to achieve meaningful learning. Head and handwork come together and are used to create zones of proximal development.
The teacher plays a mediating role here, organizing a vibrant community in which instruction and interaction are tailored to the developmental and learning needs of all pupils.
A one day sub-congress on Thursday 29 August during ISCAR 2024
Participants are able to register for this sub-congress only. The sub-congress can also be attended by participants of ISCAR 2024 (no additional registration required).
In this congress round table sessions are planned as break out sessions. During the round tables questions that will be addressed are:
Monique Volman and Annalisa Sannino will join in both rounds both tables and act as discussants. In a dialogue following the round tables they will reflect on the raised questions and issues. The sub-congress day ends with a keynote by Annalisa and afterwards there is the congress dinner.
The student agency change lab project as a catalyst of practice development
Siebrich de Vries, July 2024
The Student agency change lab project (a project funded by the Netherlands Initiative for Education Research (NRO), 2023-2027) focuses on the problem that schools in the northern region are faced with the task of providing equal opportunities to pupils in secondary education and students in vocational education. We believe that equity can be promoted by supporting pupils and students to take their own direction and thereby develop (student agency). However, although more and more knowledge in this area is emerging, research and educational practice find each other only sparsely. With this practice-based research project we want to stimulate equity by creating learning environments in which all pupils en students in secondary and vocational education can develop student agency. This requires a learning culture at the schools in which all involved will study existing knowledge with each other and together develop new knowledge on how to achieve equity within these target groups. When equity and student and teacher agency becomes a common topic of discussion in the schools, the expectation is that it will eventually find its way into educational practice. From this shared ambition, which was based on an extensive question articulation, teacher educators, teachers, practice educators and researchers from the schools and teacher training programs work closely together in so-called change labs.
We based this research project theoretically on the CHAT. We also apply a formative intervention based on it, the change lab in which the expansive learning cycle is central. In the project three training schools (two secondary and one vocational) participate, all three forming a change lab with the teacher training program involved (NHL Stenden, University of Groningen and Hanze). In addition, we have a sounding board group with the responsible managers. The change labs have their process in their own meetings, but twice a year the three change labs and the sounding board group meet in a network meeting where there is exchange and sharing. At that time, the sounding board group itself also meets.
Now that the project has completed the first of its four years, there appears to be a central friction noted both by the change labs (how do we interest the management and colleagues in this important and beautiful theme?) and by the sounding board group (how do we get the results from the change labs into the organizations?), namely the linking of the change labs to their own organizations.
From the ambition of connection, we started last Friday, June 28, 2024, with the sounding board group to analyze this friction. This yielded a lot, including the experience that the ambition seemed to be really felt. The next step will be to also model solutions with each other. In this way we are trying to use the sounding board group as a change lab with regard to connecting the change labs to their respective organizations.
The CHAT turns out not to be necessarily easy to apply in practice; participants also find an intervention like the change lab not easy to grasp. On the other hand, the enrichment of the theory is that it also provides tools to analyze what is chafing, and hopefully then take the next developmental step.
Experiences with the guiding of Change Laboratories (Engestrom, 1996) as a method for organizational learning, development and transformation.
Elly Meetsma, Richard Voss, Astrid van Beusekom, Ankie Boelema
We, as inexperienced researchers, used the change lab in organizations trying to support and strengthen the development and the learning of employees who needed to adapt to innovation and changes in their work routine. We each have different experiences. Richard worked with teachers who were searching for their professional room within an organization that became more and more hierarchical. Astrid and Elly both worked in healthcare using a CL in the endeavor to create a new learning department. Ankie set up a CL in a large technical company where the implementation of a new cutting machine caused friction and division between departments, management and employees. To given some insight we elaborate the example of Ankie a little further.
From the involved departments participants were chosen to form a group. The context around the cutting machine was explored and analyzed: the past, the present and the possible future. During several months the collective learning of the group was stimulated and strengthened in biweekly meetings. This CL was successful in many ways: new ways of working were discovered with the help of experiments and the cutting machine was incorporated into the daily work. Participants had a better understanding of the whole production process, became more inventive and took initiatives to improve their work. They were more motivated and energetic and have chosen to continue their biweekly meetings to this day.
All of us worked according to the principles of CL and observed, taped or filmed every session. However, we were not very strict as to its form. And although we all adhered to the principles we did not always use the Activity System as a unit of analysis. One of the reasons for this was that we felt we did not want “to burden” the participants with our research. Some of us were confused about how to combine the roles of coach/facilitator with the role researcher and were unsure how much the participants of the CL should be involved. As researchers we were just starting out, whilst as facilitators and coaches we were more experienced.
Lessons learned:
We all have an educational background and have knowledge about the process of learning and development. We tend to naturally hear all voices and sharply observe what happens during meetings. The uncertainty of form and outcome took some getting used to and it was often a challenge to ask the right questions at the right time and to facilitate the learning process without interfering with the contents. Some of us used Double Stimulation as a guiding principle, made it our own and found it helpful. One of the lessons we learned was that reflection is of the utmost importance for our own learning and development, but that it is nonetheless easily skipped in favor of more urgent yet less important matters. We are aware that Engestrom himself does not insist on strictness in form and so we improvised and adapted it to the contexts and to our own experience and this seemed to work for us. However, there is much room for improvement and a need for reflection and to learn from others.
Question: How flexible can we be in form using a Change Lab? What are the experiences of other researchers when it comes to the use of a CL as a method and how do they combine the roles of researcher and coach/facilitator? Is the way in which we used Double Stimulation relatable?
Dance & play to express your experience with CHAT
Marijn Neuman, Bianca Dusseljee, Vera Schuurmans, Menno Wierdsma
At Firda, we do research on the development of agency in students and professionals in the light of sustainability transitions and personal development. For us, CHAT provides practical starting-points and leads for professional development interventions and theoretical insights for research on the development of professional, relational, and career agency. However, as a research group, we repeatedly touch upon the complex character of the academic literature regarding CHAT and agency development. The frequent use of complex ideas and terms makes the theory rich in information and ideas. That, however, also makes using the theory very demanding for us as teacher-researchers and the people we work with, like students and teachers. We frequently search for simpler or better ways to convey the theory to others but feel that we lose the meaning and richness of the theory. .
While discussing Gonzalez-Rey’s review of perezhivanie (Gonzalez-Rey, 2016), we realized that the theory is mostly communicated and discussed in rational or cognitive modalities, such as the large body of academic literature. This appears inconsistent with the theory, which emphasizes human development as a reflexive process of individual and collective development, emotional, social, and cognitive development, lived experience, memory, etc. In terms of how the theory is presented, we do not see the layerdness that is discussed in the content or the theory.
Furthermore, our research on the nature of sustainability transitions and the challenges for our development as people emphasizes the necessity of intertwined and complex development of possible solutions that are, by definition, multi-disciplinary and multi-formed. For instance, Donna Haraway pleads for developing science-art entanglements to tell stories of becoming-with (Haraway, 2016). Like in CHAT, her perspective represents an interactive and relational view on (human) development as opposed to the impoverished perspective on development as something of the individual:
“It matters what we use to think other matters with; it matters what stories we tell other stories with; it matters what knots knot knots, what thoughts think thoughts, what descriptions describe, what ties tie ties. It matters what stories make worlds, what worlds make stories.” (Haraway, 2016, p.12)
These experiences raised the question if and how we can add different modalities of experience to the mostly cognitive or rational modalities that are the focus in academic papers. To that end, we propose a discussion not (directly) in words, but in play (creating figurative artworks with Lego) and dance (feeling moves and movement). Therefore, this round-table discussion will focus on the use of play and movement to express your experience with CHAT and open up our common zone of proximal development.
References
González Rey, F. (2016). ‘Vygotsky’s Concept of Perezhivanie in The Psychology of Art
and at the Final Moment of His Work: Advancing His Legacy’. Mind, Culture, and Activity 23(4):305-14. doi: 10.1080/10749039.2016.1186196.
Haraway, D.J. (2016). Staying with the trouble: making kin in the Chthulucene. Durham: Duke University Press.
Co-creation on the boundary of school and workplace
Frank Blokhuis
MBO Amersfoort has had a practical research center since 2020. The center is a team that conducts practice-oriented research. This means investigating complex issues from educational practice and finding solutions for these issues. The practical research center for Work-Based Learning focuses on the question of how educational companies and learning companies can be strengthened as learning environments. In these learning environments, learning and working come together. Connecting learning and working aligns with the mission and vision of MBO Amersfoort, which emphasizes learning in and based on practice.
Co-creation is an important pillar in the research. Together with stakeholders, the center maps out how they view educational companies and learning companies as learning environments and where opportunities lie to strengthen these environments. Stakeholders include students, practical supervisors, teachers, and managers.
The professorship bases its research on a number of theoretical foundations. Looking at the research questions of the professorship, learning environment, co-creation, and design are important concepts. We will briefly address these and some others.
Goodyear (2001) describes a learning environment as the socio-cultural, physical, and social environment in which people can learn. Others refine this by noting that there are social, substantive, instrumental, temporal, and spatial aspects to a learning environment (Zitter & Hoeve, 2012; Zitter, 2021).
Bouw (2021) distinguishes different types of learning environments that can be placed on a continuum from school to work. Where school and work are most intertwined, there is a hybrid learning environment. Educational companies and learning companies can be placed on this continuum.
Strengthening learning environments at the boundary of school and work is closely linked to designing learning environments. Aspects of a learning environment can be used as perspectives for designing (Carvalho & Goodyear, 2018; Zitter, 2021).
Looking at learning environments from these perspectives can help strengthen them.
Dimensions for learning also help in looking through learning environments and searching for opportunities to come to reinforcement. One dimension is that of acquisition – participation: acquiring knowledge – integrating into a community. Another is that of constructed – realistic: under safe conditions – in reality (Zitter & Hoeve, 2012; Zitter, 2021).
Focusing on strengthening is one thing, the intention is to achieve sustainability of the reinforcement that has been initiated.
Co-creation helps with this. It is a process in which relevant stakeholders systematically and from a position of equality actively arrive at multiple diagnoses and solutions to an educational issue (definition professorship, 2021).
The professorship aims to achieve impact through its research in four ways: development of education (change), of products (creation), of knowledge (understanding), and of colleagues (professionalization) (derived from Andriessen, 2019).
Looking back, we can say that the approach we used has provided insights into educational companies as learning environments. Together with co-researchers, we have identified leverage points for strengthening these learning environments: the desired changes.
Engaging in co-creation meant that stakeholders could dialogue with each other to identify desired changes. The changes that emerged in this way were seen by them as a win for all involved parties. Where there is intensive contact and collaboration from all parties involved, an energetic network is created that fosters movement and development: working together as a key.
Bridging Theory and Practice in Developmental Education; a theory-driven educational concept that uses CHAT to innovate educational practice in the Netherlands
Innovation & research in vocational education:
Congruency and consistency in theory and practices
08:00-09:00
Registration, coffee & tea
08:00-09:00
Registration, coffee & tea
09:00-10:00
Keynote Marjolein Dobber
09:00-10:00
Keynote Marjolein Dobber
10:00-10:30
Morning break with coffee & tea
10:00-10:30
Morning break with coffee & tea
10:30-11:00
Introduction on the sub-conference & getting to know each other
Bea Pompert & Chiel van der Veen
10:30-11:00
Introducation on sub-conference theme
Marco Mazereeuw & Martijn van Schaik
11:00-12:00
30 years of Developmental Education in primary schools: Theoretical Foundations and practical applications
Chiel van der Veen
12:00-13:15
Lunch break
12:00-13:15
Lunch break
13:15-14:00
Continual education and professionalization in Developmental Education
Bea Pompert & Levineke van der Meer
13:15-14:45
Round table round 1: two cases per table
14:00-14:45
The bicycle workshop: Developmental Education in Early Childhood classrooms
Levineke van der Meer
13:15-14:45
Round table round 2: two cases per table
14:45-15:15
Afternoon break with coffee & tea
14:45-15:15
Afternoon break with coffee & tea
15:15-16:00
The fabric wizards: Learning in socio-cultural practices in the upper grades of primary school
Marjolein ten Cate & Tessa Kruijer
15:15-16:00
Reflections
Monique Volman & Annalisa Sannino
16:00-16:45
Reflection & wrap-up: implications for your own research and/or educational practice?
Chiel van der Veen, Bea Pompert & Marjolein ten Cate
16:00-16:45
Wrap up
Marco Mazereeuw & Martijn van Schaik
16:45-17:00
Transit
16:45-17:00
Transit
17:00-18:00
Plenary keynote
17:00-18:00
Plenary keynote
18:00-21:00
Dinner (optional, additional charge)
18:00-21:00
Dinner (optional, additional charge)