Teacher's Developmental Stages of Exploring Thinking Tools in a Blended Learning Environment

The purpose of this study is to examine Chinese, primary school teachers’ developmental stages in blended learning environments when exploring the use of thinking tools (TTs) for improving students’ thinking skills. This study analyzed data using the Trajectory Equifinality Modeling (TEM). TEM is a new qualitative methodology of Cultural Psychology that explores the trajectory of multiple decision-making actions based on time and interaction between social direction and social guidance. TEM clarified that Chinese primary teachers went through the followings five stages: Stage 1: application of TTs, Stage 2: trials of improving students’ reasoning, Stage 3: reflection of the usage of TTs in one year, Stage 4: “Aha” experiences of matching TTs with specific thinking skills (reasoning) and Stage 5: shifting the focus from TTs to reasoning. In Stages 1, 2, 3, and 5, online support was the major turning point and sustaining Lesson Study was the social guidance that promoted teacher inquiry. In Stage 4, face-to-face training triggered the “Aha” experience and multiple viewpoints from the teachers who had experienced using TTs in the training workshop and provided social guidance. Furthermore, attention needed to be paid to how the relocation of the principal and the director of the research group in the school affected teacher’s decision-making.

[1]  Irwin M. Rubin,et al.  Organizational psychology : an experiential approach to organizational behavior , 1984 .

[2]  T. Guskey Professional Development and Teacher Change , 2002 .

[3]  K. Frank,et al.  Factors Affecting Technology Uses in Schools: An Ecological Perspective , 2003 .

[4]  D. Schoen,et al.  The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action , 1985 .

[5]  Fred A. J. Korthagen,et al.  Levels in reflection: core reflection as a means to enhance professional growth , 2005 .

[6]  Kenichi Kubota Applying a Collaborative Learning Model to a Course Development Project. , 1991 .

[7]  Yu-chu Yeh,et al.  Knowledge management in blended learning: Effects on professional development in creativity instruction , 2011, Comput. Educ..

[8]  M. Csíkszentmihályi Applications of Flow in Human Development and Education , 2014 .

[9]  T. Hidaka,et al.  Depicting the Dynamics of Living the Life: The Trajectory Equifinality Model , 2009 .

[10]  Harvey Singh,et al.  Building Effective Blended Learning Programs , 2021, Challenges and Opportunities for the Global Implementation of E-Learning Frameworks.

[11]  K. Begolli,et al.  Analogy and Higher Order Thinking , 2016 .

[12]  Bayram Güzer,et al.  The Past, Present and Future of Blended Learning: An in Depth Analysis of Literature☆ , 2014 .

[13]  Kaye Thorne,et al.  Blended Learning: How to Integrate Online and Traditional Learning , 2003 .

[14]  Harrison Hao Yang,et al.  College Students' Computer Self-efficacy, Intrinsic Motivation, Attitude, and Satisfaction in Blended Learning Environments , 2017, ICBL.

[15]  L. Shulman,et al.  How and What Teachers Learn: A Shifting Perspective , 2004 .

[16]  Jaan Valsiner,et al.  Beyond the Mind: Cultural Dynamics of the Psyche , 2018 .

[17]  Josh McCarthy,et al.  Blended learning environments: Using social networking sites to enhance the first year experience , 2010 .

[18]  Thomas A. Brush,et al.  Student perceptions of collaborative learning, social presence and satisfaction in a blended learning environment: Relationships and critical factors , 2008, Comput. Educ..