Employing Community-Based Experiential Learning in Teacher Education [1st ed.] 9789811560026, 9789811560033

Citation preview

Springer Texts in Education

Gary Harfitt Jessie Mei Ling Chow

Employing Community-Based Experiential Learning in Teacher Education

Springer Texts in Education

Springer Texts in Education delivers high-quality instructional content for graduates and advanced graduates in all areas of Education and Educational Research. The textbook series is comprised of self-contained books with a broad and comprehensive coverage that are suitable for class as well as for individual self-study. All texts are authored by established experts in their fields and offer a solid methodological background, accompanied by pedagogical materials to serve students such as practical examples, exercises, case studies etc. Textbooks published in the Springer Texts in Education series are addressed to graduate and advanced graduate students, but also to researchers as important resources for their education, knowledge and teaching. Please contact Natalie Rieborn at textbooks. [email protected] for queries or to submit your book proposal.

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/13812

Gary Harfitt • Jessie Mei Ling Chow

Employing Community-Based Experiential Learning in Teacher Education

123

Gary Harfitt Faculty of Education The University of Hong Kong Hong Kong, Hong Kong

Jessie Mei Ling Chow Faculty of Education The University of Hong Kong Hong Kong, Hong Kong

ISSN 2366-7672 ISSN 2366-7680 (electronic) Springer Texts in Education ISBN 978-981-15-6002-6 ISBN 978-981-15-6003-3 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6003-3 © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721, Singapore

Acknowledgements

The work on which this book is based has come about because of Deans, colleagues, student teachers and community partners who have all contributed their time, vision and support to the establishment of a community-based experiential learning curriculum and culture in our Faculty. We reserve special thanks for Ms. Ivy Chung who has helped to coordinate every single project we have undertaken; she has been at the heart of all the work reported in this book. We would also like to thank two Deans, Prof Steve Andrews and Prof Lin Goodwin for trusting us with leading this innovative contribution to our postgraduate and undergraduate teacher education programmes. Thanks, too, to so many of our teaching colleagues who have walked alongside us and our students. Finally, thank you to all our wonderful student teachers and community partners; none of the transformative work described in this book would have been possible without you and we hope we have accorded your voices and contributions with the respect that you deserve. Last but not least, we acknowledge our families and friends for always supporting our work as teachers. We owe them so much.

v

Contents

1

2

Concepts and Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 Aims of the Book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1.1 A Message to Our Target Audience . . . . . . . . . 1.1.2 How to Use This Book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 Defining Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2.1 Community-Based EL and Service-Learning . . 1.2.2 Teaching Practicum Versus Community-Based EL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2.3 Knowledge Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2.4 The Moral Imperative in Teaching . . . . . . . . . 1.2.5 Reflection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 Defining Community-Based EL: The Theory . . . . . . . . 1.4 Defining Community-Based EL: The Practice . . . . . . . . 1.5 The Context: Curriculum Change in Hong Kong Higher Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transforming Initial Teacher Education Through Community-Based Experiential Learning: An Overview . . . 2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 Themes and Issues: Global Curriculum Reforms . . . . . . 2.2.1 Neoliberalism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.2 Multicultural Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.3 Seeing the Wider Community as a Knowledge Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 Situating Our Proposed EL Model in a Constructivist Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.1 The Constructivist Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.2 Constructivist Pedagogy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4 Our Proposed EL Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4.1 Constructivism and TE: The Lacuna . . . . . . . . 2.4.2 Our Proposed CBEL Model: The Background . 2.4.3 Our Proposed EL Model: The Practice . . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

1 1 2 3 4 4

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

7 8 9 10 11 13

...... ......

14 17

. . . . .

. . . . .

21 21 22 23 24

......

25

. . . . . . .

27 27 28 29 29 30 31

. . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

vii

viii

3

4

5

Contents

2.5 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

34 35

Getting Started: Designing Your Own Community-Based Experiential Learning (CBEL) Initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 Engaging Community Partners as Co-educators . . . . . . . . 3.3 Preparing Students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.1 Alignment of Expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.2 Prior Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.3 Psychological Readiness and Support Mechanism 3.4 Role of Course Tutors/Instructors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4.1 Facilitating Reflections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5 Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5.1 The Input-Process-Output Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5.2 Further Assessment Methods for Consideration . . 3.5.3 Issues in Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.6 Programme Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.6.1 Process of Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.6.2 Ethical Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.7 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

41 41 43 45 45 46 47 47 48 49 50 51 55 55 56 57 57 58

....... .......

61 61

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

63 64 64 69 70 74 74 75 76

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 2 “Out of My Comfort Zone”: The Case for Overseas Language Immersion Programmes for Pre-Service Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2 Overseas Immersion Programmes for Pre-Service Teachers: Benefits and Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

77 78

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 1 Pushing the Boundaries of Community-Based Experiential Learning in Teacher Education Through Innovative and Informal Learning Environments: CBEL in a Marine Theme Park . . . . . . . . 4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2 The Importance of Informal Learning Contexts in Teacher Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3 Background of Our Community Partner . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4 Outlining the Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5 Integrating Reflective Practices into the CBEL Course 4.6 Unpacking Student Teachers’ Experiences . . . . . . . . . 4.6.1 Feedback from Our Co-educators at the Park . 4.7 Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.8 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

79

Contents

ix

5.3 5.4 5.5

Background to the HK–Australia Immersion Programme . . . Organization of the Immersion Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . Core Components of the Australian Immersion Programme . 5.5.1 Monitoring the Programmes in Hong Kong . . . . . . 5.5.2 Understanding Students’ Learning Processes Through Summative Reflections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.6 Sharpening the Reflective Cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.7 Growth Moments at Different Stages of the Programme . . . 5.7.1 Early in the Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.7.2 At the Final Stages of the Programme . . . . . . . . . . 5.8 Conclusions and Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6

7

8

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

80 81 82 84

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

85 86 87 87 89 91 92

. . . . .

. . . . .

. 95 . 95 . 96 . 97 . 100

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 3 Building a Resilient Teaching Force Through Community-Based Experiential Learning . . . . . 6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2 Nurturing Resilience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.1 The Community-Based EL Programme . . . . . . . . . 6.2.2 The Curriculum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3 Eliciting Feedback from Our Student Teachers on Their Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . 102 . . . 104 . . . 105

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 4 Sustaining CommunityBased Experiential Learning Projects Through Student-Led Initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.2 Institutionalising CBEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.2.1 Situating the Current Case Study . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.2.2 Findings and Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.2.3 Motivation for Change Makers . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.2.4 Lessons Learned from the Change Makers . . . . . 7.3 Conclusions and Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

107 107 108 109 109 109 113 114 115

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 5 Understanding the Learning Process of ‘High Performers’ on a Mandatory Experiential Learning Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.2 Constructivism as an Overarching Framework . . . . . . . . . 8.3 Situating This Case Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.4 Understanding Students’ Learning Experiences Through Feedback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

117 117 118 119

. . . . 122

x

Contents

8.5

9

Looking into the Learning Process of the High Performers 8.5.1 Constructing Professional Knowledge . . . . . . . . . 8.5.2 Demonstrating a Growth Mindset . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.5.3 Creating a Learner-Centred Environment . . . . . . . 8.6 Conclusions and Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

124 125 126 127 128 129

Counter-Stories: Lessons Learned from Community-Based Experiential Learning Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.2 The Counter Stories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.3 Challenges of Implementing CBEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.4 Our Experience: A Case Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.5 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.5.1 Course Instructors’ Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . 9.6 Conclusions and Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10 Designing and Facilitating ‘Reflection-on-Action’ and ‘Reflection-in-Action’ in Community-Based EL . . . . . . . . . 10.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.2 Reflectivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.3 The Reflective Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.3.1 Model 1: Four Levels of Reflective Practitioner 10.3.2 Model 2: The Content, Process or Premise(s) Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.3.3 Model 3: The Experiential Learning Model . . . 10.4 Types of Reflections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.4.1 Reflection-on-Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.4.2 Reflection-in-Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.5 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Some 11.1 11.2 11.3

Final Thoughts . . . . . . . . . . Looking Back . . . . . . . . . . . . Process of Change . . . . . . . . Teaching CBEL as Pedagogy: to Know? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.4 Looking Ahead . . . . . . . . . . . 11.5 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

131 132 133 135 137 138 141 143 145

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

149 149 150 151 151

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

153 154 157 157 161 164 165

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171

What Do We Need . . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

172 173 176 177

Appendix A: Course Outline for One Overseas CBEL Project . . . . . . . . 179 Appendix B: Resources in CBEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187

1

Concepts and Context

Abstract

This chapter seeks to achieve two aims. First, it seeks to situate the book by explaining who might benefit from the many specific examples of pedagogical practice in the area of community-based experiential learning (CBEL) outlined in the chapters that follow. Next, it seeks to conceptualize the pedagogical approach to teacher education that is at the heart of this book, namely community-based experiential learning. The characteristics of this community-based approach will be presented through references to other initiatives in institutes of higher education around the world. There is a wide array of terminologies and definitions associated with service-related projects and all seem to have a connection with community, so it is vital to try and weave a path through this maze in order to better unpack these terminologies. This opening chapter will foreground the many examples of teaching and learning described later by outlining the educational landscape on which they have been implemented, namely Hong Kong and Southeast Asia. Keywords




Community-based experiential learning Community engagement engagement Service-learning Higher education




1.1







Civic

Aims of the Book

Institutes of higher education across the globe are adopting CBEL programmes as a pedagogical tool to expose their students to a powerful knowledge space situated within their local communities. This is often done with the aim of nurturing life skills and values such as social justice, empathy, care, collaboration, creativity and © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 G. Harfitt and J. M. L. Chow, Employing Community-Based Experiential Learning in Teacher Education, Springer Texts in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6003-3_1

1

2

1

Concepts and Context

resilience—often described unfairly as ‘soft skills’ but are now being seen as salient competencies for an uncertain and unpredictable twenty-first-century world. The holistic development of all students (school students as well as university students and teacher candidates) is surely visible in various competency frameworks issued by educational authorities around the world. In many of these documents, educators are asked to attend to generic skills and virtues like emotional competence, social awareness, collaboration, empathy, care and honesty. One of the main aims of this book is to show how these skills are even more important in nurturing the personal and professional development of new and beginning teachers. The work and lives of teachers are undergoing tremendous change given the demands placed on education systems to produce graduates who are multiskilled global citizens, characterized by psychosocial competency and a strong sense of social responsibility. This calls for a different approach to preparing the teachers of tomorrow and to look beyond the tried and tested methods of lectures, school practicums and pedagogy courses that still dominate most teacher preparation programmes. We are not suggesting these approaches are necessarily problematic by any means. However, if we are to nurture teachers who possess a deeper knowledge of the community in which they reside and who are able to interrogate their own role in that community, then we require boundary-crossing projects established by teacher education institutes (TEIs) that are embedded in local communities and those which complement more traditional pedagogies such as classroom-based lectures and teaching practicum. Such an approach to teacher education can allow for new teachers to draw on powerful community knowledge in order to become more inclusive and socially connected educators.

1.1.1 A Message to Our Target Audience First and foremost, this book is aimed at teacher educators and practitioners working in teacher education institutes (TEIs) as well as managers who are involved with curriculum design in universities and colleges. It may also appeal to school teachers who are engaged with service-learning projects as part of their work with younger students. We hope that the book can be adapted for use on teacher training courses, workshops or seminars on CBEL, or in related areas. Primarily, it is positioned as a practice book that aims to outline specific examples of pedagogic practice in the area of CBEL and may provide insight and knowledge to colleagues who may be thinking of implementing a CBEL course or curriculum into their own teaching and learning context. These examples of pedagogic practice all come from the first-hand experiences of both authors; we have both been involved in the planning and implementation of each of the projects and initiatives presented in this book. This book does present findings from our small-scale reviews and case studies of the CBEL projects as part of our quality assurance mechanism, but we do not position these as critical analyses or ‘research.’ Instead, we situate this work as part of our ongoing scholarship of the teaching and learning we do in our Faculty; something that Shulman describes as a ‘pedagogical imperative… to inquire into

1.1 Aims of the Book

3

the consequences of one’s work with students… an obligation that devolves on individual faculty members, on programs, on institutions, and even on disciplinary communities’ (2002, p. vii). The projects described in later sections of this book all stem from the Faculty of Education’s decision to make CBEL a mandatory component of its teacher preparation programmes at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at the University of Hong Kong. In 3 years, community-based EL projects have been established locally as well as in China, Australia, Tibet, India, Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Armenia and the United States. We have found it to be a transformative experience from our perspective as teacher educators as well as from the many university students who have participated in these learning opportunities (pre-service and in-service teachers as well as non-education majors too). The work of our students and colleagues in promoting CBEL across our preparation programmes has been acknowledged by the prestigious QS Reimagine Education Awards (the ‘Oscars of Education’) for the Presence Learning and Teaching category (recipients of the Gold award in this category for 2020 for the project ‘Nurturing a twenty-first-century teaching force through community-based experiential education’). We hope that this book with the insights and reflections from our students and details of our first-hand experience of integrating CBEL into teacher preparation programmes provides interested practitioners, teachers and curriculum managers with some constructive advice and insights.

1.1.2 How to Use This Book Each content chapter starts with an abstract, which offers readers a brief, but succinct, introduction to the key topics and terms in the chapter. We do this so that readers can better anticipate the key input and content for each chapter, and this we hope will activate readers’ schema and curiosity. We also include follow-up prompts and puzzles at the end of each chapter as a way of provoking thought and discussion in readers and users of this book. These prompts are framed around salient issues that we experienced in establishing a CBEL framework on our courses, and reflect our own process of learning as we sought to implement CBEL into teacher preparation courses at the Faculty of Education, the University of Hong Kong. Our hope is that the experiences and practices we present in each chapter can contribute to a growing field of research and at the same time inform practice and practitioners in other parts of the world where schools, universities and TEIs are considering adopting a similar approach in their curricula. Each chapter ends with a set of references or key readings which might provoke further inquiry and follow-up. At a professional development workshop for 90 teachers at a Hong Kong secondary school, we invited staff to consider the following terms that are related to the subject of this book and to try and distinguish between them. The activity took considerably longer than we planned because of the wide range of interpretations

4

1

Concepts and Context

offered. It is a useful starting point for this book too, perhaps, and we invite readers to consider them one by one before reading on: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Community-based experiential learning Service-learning Fieldwork Teaching practicum Voluntary work or volunteerism Internships Knowledge space Reflection.

It is certainly not easy to differentiate between the different terms mentioned above. While research continues to show that CBEL projects can be beneficial to both the participants and recipients of community-based service, there are still some salient questions surrounding this particular pedagogical approach and one concerns the definition of CBEL itself. What does it actually mean and what does it look like in practice?

1.2

Defining Terms

1.2.1 Community-Based EL and Service-Learning We are not short of definitions for these two terms, but in many ways these have added to the rather slippery task of defining what we mean by CBEL and service-learning. We choose to define CBEL in this book as a teaching and learning strategy which integrates meaningful, sustained and structured community service with reflective components that are able to enhance students’ learning experience, social awareness and community connectedness. Swick (2001) describes EL as a pedagogical strategy whereby authentic community service is combined with integrated academic learning and ‘offers students opportunities to gain new skills, apply knowledge in challenging situations, and contribute to the life of others in meaningful ways’ (p. 1). In our conceptualization of community-based EL, any project should bring reciprocal benefits to the students participating in the project and to the community partners as well. In such a way it allows both parties to undergo a transformative process, or what Kolb (1984) calls ‘the transformation of experience’ (p. 38). When we refer to community in this book, we are describing a new knowledge space, one which helps to nurture a wide range of learning outcomes in new teachers that are not only limited to academic knowledge and intellectual skills, but also social skills, personal attitudes and civic engagement (Deeley, 2014). We should distinguish between civic engagement and CBEL at this point. The civic engagement movement in higher education stresses the civic role that

1.2 Defining Terms

5

universities play and how teaching and learning activities should address salient social issues while the word engagement signifies the reciprocal partnership between universities and the community (Hartley & Saltmarsh, 2016). Community engagement is widely used to describe community–campus engagement in higher education (Dostilio, 2016). Such a movement can be traced to the rise of service-learning (SL), the growth of Campus Compact in the 1990s and then on to a more recent connotation which integrates services and pedagogy with the establishment of the Association of American Colleges & Universities (AAC&U) contributing to the assessment of civic engagement learning outcomes. There are different orientations of such engagement, namely the democratic orientation (Saltmarsh, Hartley, & Clayton, 2009), the critical orientation (Tinkler, 2010) and the participatory orientation (Minkler & Wallerstein, 2003). For many readers, service-learning might appear to be very similar to CBEL, but it too can be a contentious term. In fact, SL has become an umbrella term in itself— rather like CBEL—and both have been used to cover all manner of learning activities ‘in which a student has intentional learning goals and reflects actively on what he or she is learning throughout the experience.’ (National Society for Experiential Education, 1994). Campus Compact (see https://compact.org/), which was set up by a coalition of college and university presidents in the USA in 1985 in order to advance the civic purposes of Higher Education, defines SL as ‘an educational methodology which combines community service with academic learning objectives, preparation for community work, and deliberate reflection’ (Compact, 2001, p. 5). The American Association for Higher Education (AAHE) puts forward another definition: Service-learning means a method under which students learn and develop through thoughtfully organized service that: is conducted in and meets the needs of a community and is coordinated with an institution of higher education, and with the community; helps foster civic responsibility; is integrated into and enhances the academic curriculum of students enrolled; and includes structured time for students to reflect on the service experience (AAHE, 1993)

Although these definitions make reference to similar qualities such as community needs, academic objectives and structured reflection practices, the term SL has often been employed interchangeably with voluntary work, community service, internships and fieldwork experiences. In sum, these other service activities are all very different experiences and learning tasks, a point noted by Furco (1996) who offers an experiential education continuum that clarifies each service programme (see Fig. 1.1 below). Furco (1996) also describes each service activity as follows and this categorization goes some way to addressing the prompt posed earlier at the start of this section. Community Service: The engagement of students in activities that focus for the most part on the service being provided as well as the benefits the service activities have on the recipients (e.g. providing food to the homeless during the holidays).

6

1

Concepts and Context

Fig. 1.1 Distinction among service programmes taken from Furco, A. (1996)

The students receive some benefits by learning how their service makes a difference in the lives of the service recipients. Volunteerism: The engagement of students in activities where the primary emphasis is on the service being provided and the primary intended beneficiary is clearly the service recipient. Field Education: Provides students with co-curricular service opportunities that are related to, but not fully integrated with, their formal academic studies. Students perform the service as part of a programme that is designed primarily to enhance students’ understanding of a field of study, while also providing substantial emphasis on the service being provided. Internships: Engage college students in service activities primarily for the purpose of providing students with hands-on experiences that enhance their learning or understanding of issues related to a particular area of study. [Academic] Service-Learning: Service-learning programmes are distinguished from other approaches to experiential education by their intention to benefit the provider and the recipient of the service equally, as well as to ensure equal focus on both—the service being provided and the learning that is occurring. (Taken from ‘Service-learning: A balanced approach to experiential education’ by Andrew Furco (1996) in the National Campus Compact’s publication, Introduction to Service-learning Toolkit.) These helpful definitions notwithstanding, Furco (1996) reminds us that CBEL is never static and that every project can move along the continuum at different points and times. So while one project might set out as a clearly defined and structured academic service-learning course or project, it could end up with the students volunteering their time to the community in a completely different manner. While universities across the globe have embraced service-learning and CBEL projects to equip their students with twenty-first-century skills, there has been much less research on how well-mediated community placements can aid with the preparation of teachers and, in particular, on pedagogy and practicum courses for pre-service teachers (Brayko, 2013). We should, therefore, consider another key term included on our earlier list from section 1.1.2 that is often seen as ‘experiential’,

1.2 Defining Terms

7

namely the teaching practicum because it is important to distinguish between the familiar ‘practicum’ and community-based EL placements given that the main focus of this book is to examine the role of the community and community-based EL projects in the preparation of beginning teachers.

1.2.2 Teaching Practicum Versus Community-Based EL In our experience, a typical teaching practicum (usually set in the context of teacher education) is where a candidate or beginning teacher is placed in a school for a fixed block of time to develop his or her pedagogical skills. The teacher candidate is also given responsibility for teaching a class or classes, and is often mentored by school teachers who work in the practicum school and both are visited by a university tutor from time to time for lesson observation and feedback. In the authors’ own Faculty, the teaching practicum (also termed professional practicum) is a professional requirement that enables students to develop professional teaching competencies within a school environment and where teacher candidates are required to integrate theory and practice. Through professional practicum, pre-service teachers commit themselves to six core professional values: belief that all students can learn; care for students; respect for diversity; commitment and dedication to the profession; collaboration, sharing and team spirit; passion for continuous learning; and excellence. The core aspects of students’ performance in the professional practicum include but are not limited to the following: planning for effective teaching and learning; knowledge of the field of study and its acquisition; teaching strategies which motivate student learning and meet diverse student needs; managing learning and interaction in the classroom; and professional orientation. We clearly understand the importance of these practicum models in the development of teachers and acknowledge that every teaching practicum is experiential in the sense that teacher candidates are working in new environments and engaged in authentic practice as student teachers situated in the day-to-day work of a school. However, we are not convinced that this model is a genuine example of experiential learning as seen in the definitions earlier. For one thing, a school placement is usually a very organized ‘institutionalized’ setting and if a new teacher faces any problems or challenges, it is most likely that these concern teaching or classroom management. The presence of supervisors and mentors means that advice is usually available nearby, and student teachers often find themselves in a relatively ‘safe’ environment surrounded by fellow teachers and supported by a structured and formal learning context. The practicum experience may not always offer pre-service teacher candidates the opportunity to acquire new skills (that are unrelated to teaching), or to face ill-defined challenges in their work. In our minds (and practice), CBEL should take student teachers out of their comfort zones and open the door to the acquisition of non-academic skills such as personal values and attitudes as well as an appreciation of community and civic engagement. Crucially, it can also serve as a bridge to the theory–practice divide with the traditional model of college and university-based

8

1

Concepts and Context

teacher education appearing to prioritize the knowledge of universities, or academic knowledge over all others. Teacher candidates are supposed to take this academic knowledge gained on their courses and apply it in field experiences in schools. This model highlights what Clandinin (1995) has referred to as ‘the sacred theory into practice story,’ and it raises an important question about why there needs to be such a dichotomy between a university-based setting for ITE and a non-university-based setting. With this in mind, we maintain that CBEL projects should not be detached from the aims of foundational and methodology courses which typically underpin ITE programmes. Instead, they should be integrated so that the aims of the pedagogical courses and the aims of the CBEL align.

1.2.3 Knowledge Space This concept was also mentioned earlier in the list of terms that required definition. There is a wealth of literature on this aspect of CBEL, and we have drawn on that to position the community-based projects described in this book as a third layer of learning away from more conventional models (campus learning and field experience in schools). Evidence from global research on boundary crossings between organizations and TEIs (see, for example, Edwards, 2010) shows the importance of building new ‘inter-spaces’ between universities and local communities to foster teacher learning (Hartley, 2007). In this way, the community outside the university becomes a powerful and often under-utilized knowledge space and the source of multiple learning opportunities for teacher candidates (Zeichner, 2010). Payne and Zeichner (2017) argue that teacher education should draw on the knowledge and assets of the communities and families that teacher education is preparing teachers to serve. They go on to warn that by ignoring this knowledge space, we risk depriving new teachers access to vital sources of contextual and cultural knowledge that better enables them to support student learning. The focus of this book aligns with the conclusion put forward by Payne and Zeichner (2017) when they suggest that community knowledge is not supposed to replace university-based or school-based knowledge. Instead, there is a need to recognize the expertise that resides in each knowledge domain (universities, schools and local communities), and that all three spaces are important in the preparation of teacher candidates today. It is through a process of sustained engagement with community-based EL that pre-service teachers are afforded the chance to mature into ‘community teachers’ who possess contextual knowledge of the community where they work or live and learn to work more effectively with children and families from diverse backgrounds (Murrell, 2001). These examples of a shifting teaching and learning landscape can also be found in proposed knowledge and competency domains for prospective teachers (Darling-Hammond & Bransford, 2005) which include the application of knowledge aimed at attending to students’ needs, the social purposes of education and issues of diversity in the classroom. We hope that through participation in these CBEL projects, student teachers can better understand real-world environments, better integrate the understanding of

1.2 Defining Terms

9

theory and practice, and broaden their local and global outlook. While we still see the teaching practicum as absolutely vital in honing the pedagogical skills all our young and early career teachers need, CBEL projects offer the chance for our students to witness the global landscape as a powerful new knowledge space where they encounter very different types of learning experiences than they might in traditional practicum models. All of our projects are aimed at developing core skills and values (both personal and professional) that support individuals in the process of becoming a twenty-first-century teacher. With this in mind, our CBEL initiatives span many diverse projects, but every single learning opportunity is designed to allow our students to connect conceptual understanding with classroom practice and shape their beliefs and practices about what teaching means and what it can be. Feedback from student interviews, presentations and reflective journals has demonstrated multiple moments of learning for our student participants and is included in this book. One example has been our students’ inward-looking concerns about pedagogy and individual teaching presence, particularly for those who have been engaged with teaching-related CBEL projects overseas. Through CBEL, we sense that our student teachers have been challenged pedagogically, personally and intellectually with one striking feature being students’ sense of discomfort with new, unfamiliar learning contexts on their CBEL projects. Such disquieting learning contexts have encouraged our students to make cross-cultural comparisons between their home learning environment and the location of their CBEL project. In their reflective journals, students expressed concerns about the danger of ‘short-term volunteering programmes’ in countries like Cambodia and Vietnam along with ‘the trap of volunteerism.’ These reflections also made them re-examine some fundamental beliefs about education with one student teacher casting doubt on whether the answer to every problem in the world is actually the provision of education by outsiders like themselves (‘who are we to tell people how to change or how to receive an education?’) and reflecting on her ‘short-sighted vision on the role of education.’ In these reflections, perhaps, we see the emergence of global citizenship in our young educators. In sum, we maintain that education should not only be confined to classrooms, books, or video demonstrations: a belief that aligns with research on boundary crossings between organizations and TEIs that have long highlighted the importance of building sustained links between universities and local communities to promote teacher learning (Richmond, 2017). This is the knowledge space we seek to provide for our student teachers and which is the focus of this book.

1.2.4 The Moral Imperative in Teaching Our student teachers’ comments on social justice and diversity reveal a much more outward-looking reflection as a result of participating in these community-based learning projects and as a result of developing a culture of CBEL. We are seeing the development of transformative young educators who not only possess crucial

10

1

Concepts and Context

technical skills necessary for a career in teaching, but who also have an understanding of ethical aspects and a knowledge of care that assist in their understanding of teaching as a moral practice as well. We must, therefore, keep in mind that teachers are also human beings, a point well made by Clandinin and Huber (2005) when they say that ‘Teachers teach what they know. Teachers teach who they are. Teachers teach what each situation, each encounter, pulls out of their knowing.’ This understanding of the personal nature of teaching is fundamental to the aims of the work reported in this book. For one thing, it is about being an ‘authentic’ teacher, someone who has a moral purpose and emotional investment as well as an emotional heart (Woods, 1996). The moral value of teaching is also seen in the work of Nel Noddings who reminds us that ‘One who cares must meet the cared—it directs us to attend to listen and to respond as positively as possible.’ (Noddings, 1998, pp. 108–109). In a similar vein, Greene makes the case for new teachers to be more wide-awake to the world for the benefit of their own students: Maxine Greene: ‘A crucial issue facing us is the need to find ways of educating young persons to such sensitivity…As important it seems to me is a matter of wide-awakeness for their teachers…they have to break with the mechanical life, to overcome their own submergence in the habitual…’ (Greene, 1978, p. 46). These are all fundamental qualities of a good teacher, and yet they are not easy to teach. This is why in our own context, we have sought to engage with the community outside of the university to provide our student teachers with a real-world ‘classroom’ full of diverse learning opportunities that can provide prospective teachers with breadth and depth of knowledge. In doing so we adhere to John Dewey’s claim that such ‘… knowledge and understanding render practice more intelligent, more flexible, and better adapted to deal effectively with concrete phenomena of practice…seeing more relations he sees more possibilities, more opportunities. His ability to judge being enriched, he has a wider range of alternatives to select from in dealing with individual situations’ (Dewey, 1938, pp. 20–21).

1.2.5 Reflection Reflection is a fundamental part of our overarching EL infrastructure and all the CBEL projects described in this book include a reflective component. Reflection has been described as the ‘intentional consideration of an experience in the light of particular learning objectives’ (Hatcher & Bringle, 1997, p. 153). In reality, CBEL activities or projects in themselves may not produce learning, but reflecting on those activities most certainly does, so the inclusion of a reflective cycle (before, during and after any project’s completion) serves as the connection between the CBEL project and the academic content of the course at our university. In a number of chapters in this book, we present extracts from students’ written and verbal reflections because they provide evidence of how students interrogated their own role as participants in CBEL, and how they defined and interpreted their experiences and learning process. In many cases, students who fully engage with the

1.2 Defining Terms

11

reflective process display evidence of self-awareness and sensitivity to the world around them reminding us of Maxine Greene’s call for teachers to become more sensitive and alive to the world around them so that they can role model ‘wide-awakeness’ to their students in schools and life (Greene, 1978, p. 46). Our students’ ability to make meaning from their experiences of community-based EL through an integrated reflective process might be seen in this written extract from one student who participated in an overseas project (Cambodia): Although this was different in many ways from my core teaching pedagogy and language education courses, I saw it very much as a coherent extension of my teacher training, because collaboratively planning a 5-lesson curriculum required putting into practise the use of skills and knowledge gained throughout my 5 years at HKU. More than anything, however, I believe I will carry the lessons and experiences on resilience with me into my own classrooms. Value education is becoming increasingly important in schools, and I look forward to finding different methods and materials to incorporate the teaching of skills like empathy and resilience in my everyday classes.

We will later provide a chapter on how we have facilitated reflections like these in our CBEL projects (see Chap. 10), but we also note how it is a complex and totally non-linear process, while at the same time one that is rich in learning and personal development. Most definitely it is not an easy task to facilitate reflection in class, and we recognize that this requires a different skill set than delivering conventional classroom lectures. CBEL is a complex approach to teaching and learning, and it merits very carefully considered approaches to its organization (including the establishment of effective assessment methods, facilitation of reflection in student teachers and relevant evaluation structures) so that organizers and curriculum designers can truly capture the complexity inherent in any CBEL project. No one can say that these projects are easy to arrange or facilitate, but the transformative potential that exists in this type of pedagogy has to make any attempt to integrate CBEL into a TEI curriculum a worthwhile part of our work as educators.

1.3

Defining Community-Based EL: The Theory

Having explored some fairly straightforward terminologies related to CBEL, it is important to take a closer look at the literature on service-learning to mark some important characteristics of any CBEL project. This also reinforces our earlier point about the teaching practicum not always being the best example of CBEL. A useful starting point is the following description of service learning: (Service-learning is)… “a credit-bearing educational experience in which students participate in an organized service activity that meets identified community needs and reflect on the service activity in such a way as to gain further understanding of the course content, a broader appreciation of the discipline, and an enhanced sense of civic responsibility. Unlike extracurricular voluntary service, service-learning is a course-based service experience that produces the best outcomes when meaningful service activities are related to the course material through reflection activities such as directed writings, small group discussions, and

12

1

Concepts and Context

class presentations. Unlike practica and internships, the experiential activity in a service-learning course is not necessarily skill-based within the context of professional education.” (Bringle & Hatcher, 1995)

The above definition demonstrates some key qualitative differences to other types of service in the community and the presence of volunteerism, practicums and internships which are often staples of university life for students. However, in the context of teacher education, we choose to acknowledge the term ‘community engagement’ which stands out in the literature. It is a term employed by Haddix (2015) and the following definition guides the focus of this book and our work with EL on our teacher preparation programmes. Haddix (2015) refers to ‘community engagement’ instead of ‘service-learning’ because of the way SL is seen as having the potential for more negative outcomes, especially when the SL projects are short-term ‘tick the box’ experiences with little depth or commitment. The focus instead should be on more long-term and sustainable commitments between universities and community partners such as centres, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and other advocates of social justice. In her research on preparing community-engaged teachers, Haddix also raises the important question about what happens after student teachers complete any community service project and whether their experiences really help them to develop an identity as becoming teachers (Haddix, 2015, p. 66). The long-term nature of these partnerships between universities, student teachers and community partners is a vital point in our conceptualization of community-based EL. Brown also stresses the importance of sustainability in any relationship between a university and a community partner by recognizing the importance of ‘participation in community, especially in terms of fostering coalitions and creating responsive resources for and with that community’ (2001, p. 5). Another definition that we draw on can be found in Carnegie’s Community Engagement Classification which recognizes higher education’s commitment to community engagement and, in particular, the importance of partnership and reciprocity. Carnegie defines community engagement as ‘the collaboration between institutions of higher education and their larger communities for the mutually beneficial exchange of knowledge and resources in a context of partnership and reciprocity. The purpose of community engagement is the partnership of college and university knowledge and resources with those of the public and private sectors to enrich scholarship, research, and creative activity; enhance curriculum, teaching and learning; prepare educated, engaged citizens; strengthen democratic values and civic responsibility; address critical societal issues; and contribute to the public good.’ (See https://compact.org/initiatives/carnegie-community-engagement-classification/) It is clear that any CBEL project should be a long-term commitment and must be based on reciprocity and a true partnership between a TEI and its community partners. In earlier research on CBEL, Furco (1996) and Sigmon (1979) both suggest that CBEL has to benefit the provider and the recipient of the service and

1.3 Defining Community-Based EL: The Theory

13

that there should be an equal balance between the service being provided and the learning that is developed as a result of participation in any CBEL project. We see any CBEL project as a process of learning and not as a stand-alone product or outcome; this means that we are open to challenges and changes as they emerge through engagement in these projects. When community-based projects work well, there can be some impressive outcomes as Hay (2003, p. 21) suggests: knowledge and understanding (about a specific discipline and community issues), cognitive skills (for example, critical thinking, analysing concepts, patterns and relationships), procedural skills (including information gathering skills, how course-related information can apply to a community issue, communication skills and fluency in presenting information related to community issues), social skills (empathy and concern for the welfare of others, leadership, collaboration and conflict resolution), attitudes, values, empowerment, and personal growth (including self-esteem, personal motivation and self-understanding). To this we would add the knowledge of care (Petker & Petersen, 2014), which can be accessed through well-structured and reciprocal community-based EL projects; this attribute is surely a fundamental part of any teacher’s personal and professional development and also attends to Noddings’ (Noddings 1998) ethic of care in education.

1.4

Defining Community-Based EL: The Practice

There is growing evidence that more and more universities around the world are adopting community-based EL, and a number of boundary-crossing ventures can be found in the literature. In North America, the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) pioneered a national initiative in the form of the Liberal Education and America’s Promise (or LEAP) to better understand high-impact practices in higher education. In its findings (Kuh, 2008), ten high-impact educational practices were highlighted by students and six were found to be ‘experiential’ by nature: learning communities, collaborative projects, global learning, service-learning/community-based learning, internships and capstone projects. Examples from the United States tend to dominate and the work of Campus Compact (see https://compact.org/) stands out, as mentioned earlier. This group now has more than a thousand colleges and universities who act as agents for a more responsible type of citizenship aimed at improving the quality of life in neighbouring communities (https://compact.org/initiatives/service-learning/). Brown University (see https://www.brown.edu/academics/college/swearer/) is another North American university that has excelled in the area of community engagement. At Ball State University in Muncie, Indiana (USA), an interdisciplinary group of university faculty piloted a new model of teacher education whereby students committed to a full community immersion for an entire semester to work toward solving community problems (Zygmunt & Clark, 2016). In another example, the University of Washington, Seattle, developed its Community, Family, and Politics (CFP) strand in teacher education. In this example of drawing on

14

1

Concepts and Context

community knowledge, Community-based educators participated in co-planning and facilitating field seminars for teacher candidates that were inclusive of a broad array of multicultural and multigenerational community members. Outside of the United States, a number of TEIs have made community-based EL a graduation requirement for their pre- and in-service teachers. It can also be seen as a way of responding to government directives on education. A typical example of this practice would be for university teachers and students to connect with local non-governmental organizations (NGOs), charities, government organizations and schools which adopt an alternative approach to education. Evidence of this can be found in South Africa (https://www.uj.ac.za/corporateservices/ads/ServiceLearning) where TEIs have responded to government calls for more integrated and applied knowledge in teacher education by developing an integrated curriculum design that works with practicum schools not only for the clinical experience or work-integrated learning, but also for community-based EL. Education authorities in South Africa also encouraged universities to develop pilot service-learning modules across a range of academic disciplines and to build capacity among community leaders, academics and service providers responsible for these modules and projects. Teacher educators from the University of Johannesburg describe their curriculum innovation whereby community-based EL has been integrated into a four-year foundation phase preparatory programme which is characterized by an ability to respond to the social, civic, economic and moral problems facing society (Petker & Petersen, 2014). In 2001, the Japanese government introduced ‘the Educational Reform Plan for the Twenty-First Century,’ (known as ‘the Rainbow Plan’). Of the seven directives put forward by the authorities, one was aimed at making youngsters more ‘open and warm-hearted—through participating in community service’ (Monbukagakusho, 2002).

1.5

The Context: Curriculum Change in Hong Kong Higher Education

While much has been written on the impact of EL on students’ learning in North American and other Western contexts, there is little research on how it has been employed and with what effect in Southeast Asia though there is growing research carried out on curriculum initiatives in Hong Kong and Singapore (see http://el.edu. hku.hk/; Bridges, et al., 2018; Harfitt, 2018; Harfitt & Chow, 2018; https://www. nie.edu.sg/te21/degree14.html). Some other studies have provided a snapshot of what is emerging in this part of the world in the area of service-learning (see Chan et al., 2019, for a detailed analysis of one local university’s attempt to embed a compulsory service-learning graduation requirement into its 4-year Undergraduate Programme at another Hong Kong university from 2012). The background to the introduction of EL initiatives at universities in Hong Kong can be set against the backdrop of globalization which has been a trigger for much of the educational reform that has taken place in the city since the handover of

1.5 The Context: Curriculum Change in Hong Kong Higher Education

15

sovereignty to China in 1997. Specifically, it can be traced to the implementation of a new 4-year undergraduate degree structure in the 2012/2013 academic year. Prior to this, the duration of university education was based on the British education system, meaning that a higher education course would last for 3 years. The local secondary school system changed, too, with the introduction of a new academic structure in 2009, whereby Hong Kong moved from the old British system of 7 years at secondary school with public examinations at Secondary level 5 (grade 11) and Secondary level 7 (grade 13) towards an education system more in line with practices in China and the United States, with the New Senior Secondary curriculum (or NSS) consisting of 6 years of secondary education (broken into two 3-year blocks of junior and senior secondary education). This new curriculum builds towards one public examination in the students’ final year (the Hong Kong Diploma of Secondary Education [HKDSE]) and this assessment acts as the entrance examination to university. Education reports which preceded these large-scale changes lamented the examination-driven focus of local education and attempted to place more emphasis on the holistic development (academic as well as personal) of school students and to promote a culture of lifelong learning and ‘learning to learn’ (see Hong Kong Education Commission, 2000). With these changes at the school level, universities in Hong Kong also needed to foster changes to address the same issues. The HK Education Commission (2000) laid out a clear definition of aims for tertiary and higher education institutes namely ‘to develop students’ independent and critical thinking, creativity, and ability to learn independently and to explore, in preparation for the mastering of knowledge in a certain discipline; to foster in students an aspiration for self-improvement, a positive attitude towards life and a commitment to their families, their society and their country; and to enhance students’ ability to learn, live and work in a diverse social and cross-cultural environment’ (Thomas & Brown, 2011, pp. 32–33). In one university, the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, all new students from 2012 were expected to successfully complete one 3-credit subject that was deemed to meet service-learning requirements at the university (see Chan et al., 2019). Through carefully designed SL projects students, are invited to take skills and knowledge from their major subjects into community-based activities and learning opportunities. These projects sought to bring together theories and practice for the development of a stronger sense of ethical, social and national responsibility (Chan, et al. 2019). At the University of Hong Kong, HK’s leading tertiary institute, 2012 also saw a major shift in the promotion of teaching and learning practices that would respond to social, cultural, economic and educational concerns. In 2012 the University introduced 6 aims designed to underpin all teaching and learning initiatives on campus. Many of these aims relate to the need for a broader, more holistic undergraduate curriculum mentioned earlier in Education Commission reports: Aim 1: Pursuit of academic/professional excellence, critical intellectual inquiry and lifelong learning • Develop in-depth knowledge of specialist disciplines and professions. • Maintain the highest standards of intellectual rigour and academic integrity.

16

1

Concepts and Context

• Critique and apply received knowledge from multiple perspectives. • Sustain intellectual curiosity and enthusiasm for learning. Aim 2: Tackling novel situations and ill-defined problems • Respond positively to unanticipated situations and problems. • Identify and define problems in unfamiliar situations. • Generate and evaluate innovative solutions to problems. Aim 3: Critical self-reflection, greater understanding of others, and upholding personal and professional ethics • Maintain highest standards of personal integrity and ethical practice in academic, social and professional settings. • Heighten awareness of personal strengths and weaknesses. • Respect individual differences and preferences. Aim 4: Intercultural communication, and global citizenship • Heighten awareness of own culture and other cultures. • Develop cultural sensitivity and interpersonal skills for engagement with people of diverse cultures. • Perform social responsibilities as a member of the global community. Aim 5: Communication and collaboration • Communicate effectively in academic, professional and social settings, making appropriate use of available technology. • Work with others and make constructive contributions. Aim 6: Leadership and advocacy for the improvement of the human condition • Play a leading role in improving the well-being of fellow citizens and humankind. • Uphold the core values of a democratic society: human rights, justice, equality and freedom of speech. • Participate actively in promoting the local and global social, economic and environmental sustainability. Experiential learning was also promoted at the same time across the 10 Faculties at the University of Hong Kong through the development of credit-bearing and non-credit bearing courses. This curriculum initiative drew on the dialectical relationship between knowing and doing as defined by Western and Eastern educationists and philosophers such as John Dewey and Zhu Xi. On its EL website, Hong Kong University (HKU) describes the move towards a culture of EL on campus:

1.5 The Context: Curriculum Change in Hong Kong Higher Education

17

Our short-term goal is to support as many staff and students as possible to design and pilot new opportunities for experiential learning, and to strengthen and expand existing ones. Our medium-term goal is to ensure that all curricula will embed experiential learning in their courses. Our long-term goal, however, is to bring about a paradigm shift in our understanding of learning as experiential so that it becomes not only a guiding principle in the way we design our curriculum, pedagogy and assessment, but also a predominant mode of learning.

(Taken from https://tl.hku.hk/reform/experiential-learning/) More detail about the work done by the Faculty of Education in promoting a compulsory model of CBEL in its teacher preparation courses will be shared in Chap. 2, but there still remains a need for more dissemination of good practice in the field and this book seeks to attend to this. We also acknowledge the importance of researching this growing area of pedagogic practice. For one thing, there may well be differences between how community-based learning is perceived and enacted by students and teacher educators in Southeast Asia compared with Western context because of deep-rooted cultural factors. However, our focus in this book is on highlighting different examples of CBEL which are all characterized by reciprocity, genuine and long-term democratic partnership between the TEI and local, regional and global community partners, and where participants can combine academic knowledge with practical knowledge through the use of reflective prompts and tasks integrated into different stages of the CBEL project or learning task. Some potential follow-up prompts based on the content of this Chapter to be used in class discussions or planning meetings: – How would you define ‘Community-based EL? What should be some of its characteristics? – In the context of teacher education, the teaching practicum is where a candidate teacher is placed in a school for a block of time to develop his or her pedagogical skills by being given responsibility for teaching a class and mentored by school teachers as well as a university tutor. Is this a genuine example of experiential learning? Why or why not? – What might be some of the cultural and contextual differences between Southeast Asia and Western contexts when implementing and practising CBEL on teacher preparation courses?

References American Association for Higher Education (AAHE). (1993). Series on Service-Learning in the Disciplines (adapted from the National and Community Service Trust Act of 1993). Brayko, K. (2013). Community-based placements as contexts for disciplinary learning: A study of literacy teacher education outside of school. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(1), 47–59. Bridges, S. M., Andrews, S. J., Tsui, A. B. M., Chan, C. K. K., Wang, D., Kwan, T. Y. L., & Cheng, M. M. W. (2018). Designing for integration in Initial Teacher Education (ITE) curricula: The Hong Kong Postgraduate Diploma in Education (PGDE). Innovation and Accountability in Teacher Education-The New Space for Collaborative Professionalism.

18

1

Concepts and Context

Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (1995). A service-learning curriculum for faculty. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 112–122. Brown, D. (2001). Pulling it all together: A method for developing service-learning and community partnerships based on critical pedagogy. Washington D.C: Corporation for National Service. Chan, S. C., Ngai, G., & Kwan, K. P. (2019). Mandatory service learning at university: Do less-inclined students learn from it? Active Learning in Higher Education, 20(3), 189–202. Chan, S. C., Ngai, G., Yau, J., Yuen, W. W., Shek, D. T., & Au, H. S. (2019). Service-learning as a vehicle for youth leadership: The Case of the Hong Kong. In Service-learning for youth leadership (pp. 19–31). Springer, Singapore. Clandinin, D. J. (1995). Still learning to teach. Teachers who teach teachers, 25–31. Clandinin, D. J. & Huber, M. (2005). Shifting stories to live by: interweaving the personal and the professional in teachers’ lives. In D. Beijaard, P. Meijer, G. Morine-Dershimer & H. Tillema (Eds.) Teacher professional development in changing conditions (43–59). Dordrecht: Springer. Compact, C. (2001). Fundamentals of service learning course construction. Providence, RI: Campus Compact National Office. Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Deeley, S. (2014). Critical perspectives on service-learning in higher education. Springer. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier Books Dostilio, L. D. (2016). The professionalization of community engagement: Associations and professional staff. The Cambridge handbook of service learning and community engagement, pp. 113–117. Education Commission. (2000). Reform proposal for educational system in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Education Commission. Edwards, A. (2010). Being and expert professional practitioner: The relational turn in expertise. Dordrecht: Springer. Furco, A. (1996). Service-learning: A balanced approach to experiential education. Building Connections. Greene, M. (1978). Landscapes of Learning, New York: Teachers College Press. Harfitt, G. J. (2018). The role of the community in teacher preparation: exploring a different pathway to becoming a teacher. In Frontiers in Education (vol. 3, p. 64). Frontiers. Harfitt, G. J., & Chow, J. M. L. (2018). Transforming traditional models of initial teacher education through a mandatory experiential learning programme. Teaching and Teacher Education, 73, 120–129. Haddix, M. (2015). Preparing community-engaged teachers. Theory Into Practice, 54(1), 63–70. Hartley, D. (2007). Education policy and the “inter-regnum”. Journal of Education Policy, 22(6), 695–708. Hartley, M., & Saltmarsh, J. (2016). A brief history of a movement: Civic engagement and American higher education. Publicly Engaged Scholars: Next Generation Engagement and the Future of Higher Education, pp. 34–60. Hatcher, J. A., & Bringle, R. G. (1997). Reflection: Bridging the gap between service and learning. College teaching, 45(4), 153–158. Hay, H. R. (2003). The nuts and bolts of a service-learning programme: research in higher education. South African Journal of Higher Education, 17(3), 184–191. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. New Jersey, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Kuh, G. D. (2008). Excerpt from high-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. Association of American Colleges and Universities. Minkler, M., & Wallerstein, N. (Eds.). (2003). Community-based participatory research for health. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

References

19

Monbukagakusho. (2002). Japanese government policies in education, culture, sports, science and technology 2001: Educational reform for the 21st Century. Tokyo, Japan: Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. Murrell Jr, P. C. (2001). The community teacher: A new framework for effective urban teaching. Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1234 Amsterdam Avenue, New York, NY 10027. National Society for Experiential Education. (1994). Partial list of experiential learning terms and their definitions. Noddings, N. (1998). Caring and competence. Yearbook-National Society for the Study of Educaiton, 1, 205–220. Payne, K. A., & Zeichner, K. (2017). Multiple Voices and Participants in Teacher Education. In D. J. Clandinin & J. Husu (Eds.) International Handbook of Research on Teacher Education (pp. 1101–1117). SAGE publishers. Petker, G., & Petersen, N. (2014). Service learning in foundation phase teacher education: Experiential learning opportunities for student teachers. South African Journal of Childhood Education, 4(3), 122–135. Richmond, G. (2017). The power of community partnership in the preparation of teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 68(1), 6–8. Saltmarsh, J., Hartley, M., & Clayton, P. H. (2009). Democratic engagement white paper. New England Resource Center for Higher Education, paper 45. Shulman, L. (2002). Forward. In Pat Hutchings (Ed.), Ethics of inquiry: Issues in the scholarship of teaching and learning (pp. v–viii). The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Menlo Park, CA. Sigmon, R. L., (1979). Service-learning: Three principles. Synergist. National center for service-learning, Action, 8(1): 9–11. Swick, K. J. (2001). Service-learning in teacher education: Building learning communities. The Clearing House, 74(5), 261–264. Thomas, D. & Brown, J.S. (2011). A New Culture of Learning: Cultivating the Imagination for a World of Constant Change: CreateSpace. Lexington, KY: Douglas Thomas and John Seely Brown. Tinkler, B. (2010). Reaching for a radical community-based research model. Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship, 3(2), 5–19. Woods, P. (1996). Researching the art of teaching: ethnography for educational use, London, Routledge. Zeichner, K. (2010). Rethinking the connections between campus courses and field experiences in college-and university-based teacher education. Journal of teacher education, 61(1–2), 89–99. Zygmunt, E., & Clark, P. (2016). Transforming teacher education for social justice. Teachers College Press.

2

Transforming Initial Teacher Education Through Community-Based Experiential Learning: An Overview

Abstract

This chapter examines why community-based experiential learning (CBEL) can be related to initial teacher education (ITE) programmes, and how CBEL can actually enhance a student teacher’s readiness for the classroom. First, a critical examination of issues related to curriculum reform on ITE programmes around the world will be presented and then, based on the conceptual framework of constructivism, we propose a well-structured CBEL model that makes good use of the community as the knowledge space for teacher education in the twenty-first century. This is where we position our own curriculum initiative in the Faculty of Education at the University of Hong Kong. Through these themes, we set out to address salient issues in curriculum reform in ITE and to critically evaluate the significance of these issues, and the impact they have on teacher education in the twenty-first century. Keywords










Curriculum reform Initial teacher education (ITE) Neoliberalism Cross-cultural awareness Constructivism Experiential learning Community knowledge

2.1










Introduction

The chapter is organized around three inter-related components: issues related to global curriculum reform in ITE, the theory of constructivism and its relevance to ITE followed by the authors’ proposed model in CBEL. It sets the groundwork for our work in EL and programmes which we will share in subsequent chapters of this book, and how we relate CBEL to a wider contextual background. A starting point © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 G. Harfitt and J. M. L. Chow, Employing Community-Based Experiential Learning in Teacher Education, Springer Texts in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6003-3_2

21

22

2

Transforming Initial Teacher Education Through …

for this chapter is how teacher education institutes (TEIs) respond to the challenges brought about by global change. This raises the question of what type of teachers are needed for a future which we simply cannot predict. Yet if we consider the importance of preparing our teachers and students for their future rather than our past, then we must think very carefully about our collective response as teacher educators. Challenges brought by globalization call for a paradigm shift in twenty-first-century teacher education. As education occupies a pivotal role in global development, these challenges have important consequences for teacher education (Vijaya Kumari, 2014). Regardless of the crucial role that teacher education plays, however, ITE still relies heavily on a ‘craftsmen model’ with the transmission of knowledge (didactic teaching methods) and observation of experienced teachers. This requires a heavy emphasis on the technical aspects of teaching over the personal development of teachers (Girvan, Conneely, & Tangney, 2016). This craftsmen model of student educators invests a lot in the mastery of subject content knowledge and competence in delivery in teacher development (Akorede, 2014). To truly transform teacher education, student educators must develop important life skills like collaboration and problem-solving that do not merely coat new methodologies on top of the old, but critically transform their understanding of teaching (Snow-Renner & Lauer, 2005). To further internalize new methodologies, teachers need to take a very active role in constructing new meaning through active experimentation and reflection (Supovitz, Mayer, & Kahle, 2000).

2.2

Themes and Issues: Global Curriculum Reforms

Various curriculum reforms in ITE have taken place around the world and over the course of several decades. Global competition in terms of the market economy has been one key driver for critical transformation (Zeichner, 2010a). Cochran-Smith and her team (2015) conducted a systematic review of ITE programmes from 2000 to 2012 and proposed that the transformation of knowledge societies requires skilled workers who can think critically, problem-solve and work in teams. The ‘Delores Report’ (UNESCO, 1996) also highlighted the importance of a radical change in ITE programmes to equip teachers for the twenty-first century meaning that teachers are socially responsible and capable of taking care of very diverse learning needs in a classroom. It was estimated that 10.3 million teachers were entering the profession in 2004 (UNESCO, 2006), so extra attention needed to be paid to the quality of the teaching force instead of focusing on recruitment only. The introduction of National Curricula, league tables for schools, districts and countries, various types of teacher appraisal schemes and the attention given to all-powerful international comparative evaluations of students’ achievement scores such as the ones carried out by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) have all combined to challenge traditional conceptions of

2.2 Themes and Issues: Global Curriculum Reforms

23

autonomy in the teaching profession. The concepts and issues below help illustrate and unpack the reforms taking place in the context of ITE in this era of globalization, followed by some examples of curriculum reforms.

2.2.1 Neoliberalism Stemming from a paradigm of corporatocracy (Sleeter, 2008), neoliberalism refers to the educational reforms that are predominant in the belief systems of the market economy (Costigan, 2013). Under this epistemology, the primary purpose of education is to create a workforce that can maintain a competitive edge in the global market (Cochran-Smith, Piazza, & Power, 2013). This force is influencing education systems that promote neoliberal corporate capitalism around the world (Bates, 2007). Driven by these values, educational reforms focus on accountability, performance indicators and competition of resources for democratic practices (Taubman, 2009). As a result, teacher education is to produce workers who have attained certain skill sets to compete in the global market economy (Hursh, 2008), and many of these reforms emphasize the technical aspects of the teaching profession over philosophy (Jaramillo & McLaren, 2009). It has been possible to see the neoliberal trend of new pathways into teaching such as the Teach First model, which is currently being expanded in England, mirroring similar models like ‘Teach America’ in the United States where students often receive 6 weeks of training from a university provider prior to entering a classroom. Such a practice seems to be built on the belief that teacher candidates develop the rest of their skills, knowledge and understanding whilst ‘on the job.’ Kretchmar and Zeichner (2016) have described this phenomenon in the United States as ‘Teacher Education 2.0’ while educational entrepreneurs who see themselves as ‘reformers’ have labelled their preparatory programmes ‘Teacher Prep 2.0’ to emphasize the innovation they believe underpins this model. Such programmes have also spread to Europe, Central and South America, Asia, Africa and Oceania. Other examples include the ‘No Child left Behind’ legislation, and similar movements in the international teacher education development reinforce the notion that teaching requires only a short period of induction with little attention paid to the long-term development of teachers’ roles and identities, that is, the personal side of teacher development (Tatto, Richmond & Andrews, 2016). Examples A and B below illustrate how accountability shapes teacher education. Curriculum reforms to increase accountability in teacher education (A) Australia The Commonwealth Government controls not only the funding but also curriculum and educational standards of schools and teacher education. Since 2008, students have to take a national assessment: the National

24

2

Transforming Initial Teacher Education Through …

Assessment Program—Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN)—in years 3, 5, 7 and 9 whereas the results will be released in an extremely debatable website, that is, My School (Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority, 2010). The public or anyone interested in the data can access the performance of the schools in these tests. (B) United States Proposed by the Obama administration (2009–2016), ‘Our Future, Our Teachers’ (OFOT) has called for an assessment of teacher education programmes based on three criteria: (1) the achievement gains of the graduates’ K-12 students by measuring the test scores of the students, (2) placement and retention rates of respective programmes and (3) surveys from the graduates and their school principals (U.S. Department of Education, 2011).

The impact of a neoliberal discourse on the new generation is their belief in meritocracy and education as a private good: one’s success is subject to one’s hard work, attitude and education which is to gain a competitive edge over others (Morrison, 2016). However, education is arguably more complex than business; the latter focuses on profits while the former puts emphasis on human relationships and interactions where processes and the public good matter (Bullough Jr., 2014). Accountability is an internal professional responsibility, but not an external demand for auditing (Jenlink, 2017), and the development of teacher identity and the ability to work with diverse student populations are a complex process (Tatto et al., 2016) which should not be evaluated with quantitative means. As such, teacher educators have to understand how the neoliberal mindset of accountability marginalizes subpopulations, and a more democratic accountability system rests on the notion that education is contextually rich and interacts across different social systems (Jenlink, 2017). Student educators who understand this assumption will more likely look into the contexts and be sensitive to this complexity and recognize students from different backgrounds relating to different standards in diverse ways (Kincheloe, 2001). That leads to the rise of multicultural education which will be discussed next.

2.2.2 Multicultural Education No one would deny that classrooms around the world in the twenty-first century are becoming more and more diverse with students coming from a wide range of backgrounds largely due to the forces of globalization. Regardless of changing student demographics, teachers entering the profession are predominantly middle class (Gay, 2000) resulting in an inability to work with students of diverse cultural groups (Malewski, Sharma, & Phillion, 2012). The growing need for multicultural

2.2 Themes and Issues: Global Curriculum Reforms

25

education also stems from a call to bridge the achievement gap across different minority groups and social class backgrounds (see Zeichner, 2010a). Even within those highly democratic knowledge-based economies, opportunities for the most disadvantaged to obtain access to education remain unequal (Thomason, De Bortoli, Nicholas, Hillman, & Buckley, 2011). This is why teachers need to adopt a more culturally responsive pedagogy, modify a curriculum reflective of the cultural backgrounds and create a holistic and supportive school environment for all (Darling-Hammond, 2004). This added component in ITE should not only provide additional knowledge in the curriculum but also nurture an ability in student educators to connect the conditions of others to their own situations (and vice versa), to sensitively reflect different values, experiences and challenges, and interact with diverse students (Koehn & Rosenau, 2002). However, the coursework approach adopted by most ITEs (that is, courses which focus on multicultural education, classroom diversity and methods) cannot help student educators fully explore their deeply rooted ideologies in neoliberal social capital given that their backgrounds tend to be middle class (Rodriguez & Magill, 2016; Zeichner, 2010a, 2010b). In other words, this ‘common isolated-course approach’ which involves teaching the concepts of multicultural education and expecting student educators to provide a ‘quick fix’ for coping with the complicated issues of diversity cannot truly nurture culturally responsive student educators (Ngai, 2004). Instead, they need to explore lives through the lens of their multicultural students and immerse themselves in diverse backgrounds in order to become culturally responsive teachers (Rodriguez, 2009). In responding to these calls, some ITEs have adopted Banks’ Multicultural Education Models (1991) to integrate the four stages into the existing curriculum as a reform of multicultural education in teacher education. There is growing support in adopting international field experiences (Cushner, 2009) or community-based field experiences to work with diverse cultural groups (Boyle-Baise & Sleeter, 2000) to develop cross-cultural competencies among student educators. Mills and Ballantyne (2016) conducted a systematic review of social justice in teacher education over 10 years and concluded that while changing teachers’ beliefs is very difficult, field experiences and service-learning are effective strategies to change participants’ knowledge, beliefs and actions. By organizing various kinds of field experiences, student educators have the chance to develop the identities and roles of teachers beyond the four walls of their regular classrooms and institutionalized settings. It may also be possible through this pedagogic approach to challenge the apprenticeship model (Lortie, 1975) which argues that new teachers tend to follow the examples set for them by their own teachers at the expense of developing new approaches and responses to the many puzzles in teaching and learning.

2.2.3 Seeing the Wider Community as a Knowledge Space The growing emphasis on the community as a salient knowledge space in teacher education stems from the development of greater democratization of knowledge

26

2

Transforming Initial Teacher Education Through …

through building alliances and expertise sharing across the boundaries of schools, universities and the wider community in a non-hierarchical way (Zeichner, 2010a). Zeichner (2010b) adopts the concept of ‘third space’ from hybridity theory and proposes these boundary-crossing community-based learnings where academic knowledge is not seen as ‘the’ authoritative source, and where expertise resides in both schools and communities equally. Also, ITE has long been criticized for its theory and practice divide (Ryan, 2012) with an over-reliance on the acquisition of expert-generated knowledge ‘for’ practice without scrutinizing how this knowledge can inform teachers’ field practice (Cochran-Smith & Zeichner, 2005). Grossman et al. (2009) state that with teaching being such a complex and challenging practice, teacher educators and TEIs ‘…must develop new approaches for preparing ordinary people, in an extraordinarily brief amount of time, to be prepared for the challenge…teacher educators would need to develop their roles as clinical educators, able not only to profess about teaching, in the abstract, but also to…move away from a curriculum that symbolizes the separation of theory and practice through its division into foundations and methods courses toward a curriculum that puts practice at the centre of all endeavors.” As such, new teachers can start their careers with greater readiness having gained important contextual knowledge of the community and are better able to deal with the challenges associated with these contexts (Richmond, 2017). In particular, they are more confident about working in schools which have diverse student populations (Brayko, 2013). Grossman et al. (2009) make a call for TEIs to provide more opportunities for novice teachers to ‘practise’ different instructional routines which they deem central to the core practices of teaching, but in many other studies these practice opportunities are often school-related and involve placing student teachers in underprivileged schools with diverse students and with multicultural curriculum content (see McDonald, Bowman, & Brayko, 2013). These are crucial aspects of a new teacher candidate’s professional development and are often embodied in social justice teacher education programmes which connect schools and TEIs to networks of stakeholders and organizations advocating for children, youth and families (Cochran-Smith, 2010; McDonald & Zeichner, 2008). These practices have been seen as a positive way of introducing new teachers to the relational aspects of teaching and enabling them to better grasp their students’ ‘out of school’ lives and experiences. There is also the benefit of new teachers connecting better with parents, families and related stakeholders in the community who are also committed to educating young children and youth (Sleeter, 2001). The University of Washington’s Elementary Teacher Education Program (ELTEP) reported in McDonald et al. (2013) forged partnerships with different organizations such as neighbourhood community centres to achieve the following goals on its TE programmes: (1) Build connections with community organizations and local schools; (2) Develop a holistic and asset-based view of children and youth; (3) Acknowledge education and learning as a process that occurs in multiple contexts; and (4) View students, families, neighbourhoods and communities at the centre of teaching and education. Through these vibrant and dynamic examples of

2.2 Themes and Issues: Global Curriculum Reforms

27

community-based learning, student teachers have been found to develop the personal side of being an educator. At the same time, they are better equipped to bridge the oft-cited disconnect between theory and practice (Ryan, 2012). Student educators develop a more nuanced understanding of children’s home lives and acquire a more sophisticated comprehension of the construct of diversity itself through community-based learning opportunities. In particular, these placements in ELTEP were found to afford student teachers opportunities to (1) Develop deeper understandings of students and communities; (2) Develop more nuanced understandings of diversity, including intra-group diversity; (3) Examine school from an out-of-school perspective; and (4) Attend to the role of context in learning (McDonald et al., 2013).

2.3

Situating Our Proposed EL Model in a Constructivist Framework

2.3.1 The Constructivist Approach Set against the complex backdrop of globalization and the rising needs of multicultural education, our proposed CBEL model applied in teacher education is developed based on the epistemology of constructivism. Constructivism is widely applied and discussed in educational settings as a theory of learning (Altinyelken, 2011), and constructivists hold a belief in the constructed nature of knowledge. People make sense of their immediate experiences in the world by connecting their prior knowledge about the world and reflecting upon these experiences (Chicoine, 2004). Learning is not about accumulating knowledge. Instead, it is about the process of new experiences that requires learners to change the old mental schema to incorporate newly acquired knowledge (Kohn, 1999). Rote memorization, arguably, then is not an effective approach as it is not connected to any prior knowledge of the learners’ existing schema. In other words, for meaningful learning to take place, learners have to take the initiatives to construct new knowledge by connecting to the existing mental framework of knowledge (Hanley, 1994). Knowledge is not absolute to everyone as it is highly connected to one’s individualized experiences and one’s social context (Chicoine, 2004). Therefore, learning occurs when one plays an active role to construct one’s knowledge whereas teachers create a platform with challenges and coach them in the learning process (Chaillé, 2008). A wide range of benefits are associated with this approach in terms of students’ academic, affective and social growth, which become especially significant in this highly globalized and circular economy (Altinyelken, 2011; Kaufman, 1996). Also, the constructivist approach is highly associated with deep learning (Richardson, 2003). This theory of constructivism is a powerful tool to transform teacher education (Rainer, 2002). Student teachers are not ‘tabula rasa’ (with blank minds) when they enter our classrooms; they come to us with diverse experiences and it is the role of

28

2

Transforming Initial Teacher Education Through …

teacher educators to make good use of this prior knowledge (their previous experiences) to ‘construct’ good educational experiences for them (Dewey, 1938). In this sense, a constructivist’s classroom is highly learner-centred. To further contextualize this, teachers have the responsibility to respond to and interact with the unique social and cultural backgrounds of their pupils. Teachers are then active agents for social change (Clandinin & Husu, 2017). According to Biggs (2003, p. 11), good teaching is based on constructive alignment, namely how teachers support their students’ deep approach to learning through the alignment of teaching methods and assessments to the learning activities stated in the learning objectives. Biggs (2003) argues that students construct meaning through relevant learning activities and that meaning is not the result of a transmission process from teacher to learner; instead, it is something learners have to create for themselves. He goes on to define ‘alignment’ as what the teacher does in terms of setting up a conducive learning environment which lends support to the learning activities put in place to help achieve the desired learning outcomes of any course or programme. In this model for effective teaching pedagogy and assessment, tasks are aligned with learning activities. Indeed, assessment plays an important role in determining what and how students learn, and as Ramsden (1992) puts it, the assessment becomes the curriculum in the eyes of the students taking a course. This is why the assessment tasks must mirror the intended learning outcomes and align accordingly. Another key aspect of Biggs’ (2003) work that resonates with the CBEL work described in this book addresses the contexts in which effective learning can take place. He makes the case for a range of activities that might be organized outside the classroom whereby relevant learning activities such as interactive group work, peer teaching, independent learning and work-based learning can all foster the development of metacognitive skills including ‘those self-management skills that are focused on what the learner does in new contexts’ (Biggs, 2003, p. 94), and the development of strategies to solve problems, learn from experience, learn independently from a lecturer, self-evaluate and self-monitor.

2.3.2 Constructivist Pedagogy Constructivism has important pedagogical implications for the preparation of teachers. Kaufman (1996) proposes that a constructivist learning environment creates a platform for students with (i) autonomy, (ii) chances for peer collaboration, (iii) learner-centred problem-solving, (iv) space for self-observation and evaluation, and (v) reflection. The teachers’ role is not to be a messenger of knowledge or a manager of students’ behaviour. Instead, teachers need to encourage students to play an active role in their learning, structure their lessons based on students’ responses spontaneously, stimulate learning among the peers and also promote curiosity with the learning cycle model (Brooks & Brooks, 1999). As learning takes place in the social context of a classroom, group dialogue among peers is very much encouraged in the learning process (Richardson, 2003).

2.3 Situating Our Proposed EL Model in a Constructivist Framework

29

Connected to this is the importance of seeing learning not as a clearly defined place, but one where it is an ongoing activity. Reflection is a catalyst in this process and students should be provided with opportunities to reflect upon their experiences (Vijaya Kumari, 2014) as we suggested in Chap. 1. King (2000) reminds us that ‘Cultivating good thinking is one of the most rewarding and important outcomes of teaching, for good thinking is a truly generalizable skill that students can use in many contexts beyond the confines of one course, one field of study, or one major decision’ (2000, p. 15). King also reminds us that this is a challenging undertaking (2000, p. 15)—an assertion we wholeheartedly agree with—and it is why we propose a constructivist pedagogy that is student-centred and where problems or learning goals require students’ active engagement usually in authentic settings (Brooks & Brooks, 1999; Chaillé, 2008). Assessment tasks should be feedback-intensive so as to help students engage in reflective learning and deep learning (Chicoine, 2004; Stiggins, 2001). We develop these themes in Chap. 10. Relating constructivism to ITE more explicitly, teacher education thus becomes a powerful form of scaffolding for student educators to teach constructively in their own classrooms (Richardson, 2003). Professional fieldwork practices need to engage student educators actively with ongoing problem-solving tasks in a situated setting (Schon, 1983). Central to this approach, too, student teachers should engage in rigorous and regular reflective thinking (Vijaya Kumari, 2014). Student educators will then become truly autonomous learners through this lifelong learning process (Jasper, 2003). Such continuous reflective practices in ITE are crucial in bridging the gap between theory and practice (Attard & Armour, 2005).

2.4

Our Proposed EL Model

2.4.1 Constructivism and TE: The Lacuna Relatively little is known about how we can help teachers adjust to diverse and ever-changing contexts (Camburn & Han, 2015). Many reforms underscore the new expectations on teachers, so student teachers are required to be highly adaptive and open to change. As Darling-Hammond and McLaughlin (2011) note, teachers have to continuously acquire new skills and perspectives and at the same time unlearn the old practices that they learned to teach. Such ‘vision of practice’ cannot be achieved through a traditional top-down teacher education curriculum model, that is, set within a regular institution with the assumption that learning to teach is reinforced by regular school systems. Instead, teachers learn through active experimentation and reflection as well as through collaboration with peers, but always observe how others learn and then share these observations rather than engage in abstract discussions in a contrived setting (Darling-Hammond & McLaughlin, 2011; Darling-Hammond & Richardson, 2009).

30

2

Transforming Initial Teacher Education Through …

That said, teachers’ behaviour is moulded by their own prior educational experiences too (Calderhead & Robson, 1991; He, Levin, & Li, 2011). So, for teachers whose pre-service training is not constructivist-based, it may be difficult to develop a truly constructivist classroom environment. For real constructivist practices to occur in their classrooms, student educators need to have the opportunity to work collaboratively and across different disciplines, be engaged in EL beyond the campus with structured reflective practices built-in and supported by their teachers (Kaufman, 1996). Interestingly, Cochran-Smith et al. (2015) in their systematic review of papers on ITE claim that even though TEIs promote constructivist approaches in learning, schools are usually organized in ways that support a teaching model based on the transmission of knowledge. A gap between the two systems needs to be bridged, so for student educators to cope professionally and personally in this new era of change ITE truly requires transformation.

2.4.2 Our Proposed CBEL Model: The Background Our proposed model underpins the projects and learning experiences outlined in other chapters of the book. We will start to illustrate our model by drawing on Kolb’s (1984) experiential learning theory (or ELT). As proposed by Kolb (1984), ELT with its roots in constructivism defines learning as a process of altering experiences. There are two dialectic paths of mastering experiences—Concrete experiences and abstract conceptualization and two dialectic paths of transforming experiences—Reflective observation and active experimentation. Such paths create the four-stage learning cycle (see Fig. 2.1): immediate experiences are the basis for learners to observe and reflect. These reflections will then be incorporated into abstract concepts where new learning and insights are to be made (Kolb, Boyatzis, & Mainemelis, 2001). Fig. 2.1 The experiential learning cycle. Adapted from Kolb (1984)

2.4 Our Proposed EL Model

31

ELT highlights the significant role played by experience itself in determining human growth and development (Kolb, 1984). As Kolb and Kolb (2008) point out, learning is defined by the process, and not the outcome. In such a learning process, learners observe, reflect upon conflicts between opposing views of the world and create knowledge that is closely connected between an individual and his or her environment. CBEL as a pedagogy in ITE is not entirely new as Dewey’s (1938) seminal concept of ‘learning by doing’ suggests. From Dewey’s perspective, learning involves a series of creative and productive activities initiated by learners (Garrison, Neubert, & Reich, 2012). However, most of the examples of EL integrated into ITE involves a regular classroom setting with student teachers observing experienced teachers or student teachers teaching and reflecting in a traditional teaching practicum approach (Girvan et al., 2016). In these examples, student teachers spend extended time in school teaching as well as observing and being observed by other in-service teachers. Our approach is completely different. Teacher education needs to draw on expertise from the community with contextual and cultural knowledge that prepares them to provide an education for all (Payne & Zeichner, 2017). What we are arguing for here is a model that allows student educators to enact social action via working with the community (Harfitt & Chan, 2017). Our proposed CBEL model has its roots in a constructivist approach that showcases the process of change within a person, which is a very individual process as stipulated in the ELT model above. The model is not confined by the traditional and institutionalized classroom setting like teaching practicum, but occurs in several formats including problem-based learning, service-learning and internships that go beyond campus (Girvan et al., 2016). The university-based, school-based context and this community are the ‘three knowledge spaces’ to nurture student educators in ITE (Payne & Zeichner, 2017, p. 1105). With structured reflections at the core, our student teachers actively construct their knowledge and become reflective practitioners. Such CBEL connects student teachers to a wider context, namely the community. Student educators, with very structured efforts from the instructors, will have opportunities to work in NGOs locally and internationally, apply what they have learnt in the subject knowledge and pedagogy as student educators, and then reflect upon the learning experiences personally and professionally. Regardless of their disciplines, beginning teachers have the chance to understand learners from diverse backgrounds (Gross & Rutland, 2017). Student teachers who are more informed about the challenges associated with these contexts are more ready to begin their career as educators (Richmond, 2017).

2.4.3 Our Proposed EL Model: The Practice In response to developments at University level (see Chap. 1), our Faculty of Education appointed a small team consisting of a professoriate-level academic staff, a lecturer, an assistant lecturer and an executive officer in late 2016 to implement

32

2

Transforming Initial Teacher Education Through …

community-based EL across a range of teacher preparation programmes including undergraduate programme (for example, a 5-year programme consisting of mostly double degrees between Education and other disciplines such as Language (Chinese and English), Science and Social Sciences) and the shorter Postgraduate Diploma in Education (PGDE) which lasts for 1 year in its full-time mode and 2 years in its part-time mode. The part-time mode is predominantly made up of in-service teachers who work locally in early childhood education, primary and secondary school contexts. Since its establishment in 2016, the Faculty Experiential Learning (EL) team has actively promoted CBEL as a crucial element in teacher preparation programmes across the Faculty of Education, and the chapters which follow in this book all stem from the work carried out in this curriculum initiative in the field of teacher education. We set out from the start to look beyond the programmes and CBEL to imagine why this approach was important and what the long-term benefits might be for participants. Our focus has always been on cherishing the process of learning through a platform of CBEL projects that foster personal and professional development in our student teachers, and bring mutual benefits to the co-creators of knowledge, namely our community partners (Harfitt & Chow, 2018). Studies stemming from this work have reinforced earlier claims about the benefits of CBEL on the personal and professional development of teachers. Bridges et al. (2018) describe how a one-year full-time Postgraduate Diploma in Education (PGDE) was restructured around eight concepts each seen to characterize an effective teacher in today’s complex and multifaceted world. The following concepts underpin the preparation course for pre-service and in-service teachers: a passionate and caring facilitator, a forward-thinking, ethical and reflective practitioner, an innovative teacher, a professional teacher, a lifelong learner, a proactive and engaged collaborator, an adaptive, creative critical thinker and leader, and finally a contextually sensitive, socially engaged and policy-aware educator. In the new programme structure, the curriculum team took the unusual step of integrating a mandatory CBEL block into the one-year course for all full-time teacher candidates. In another study from the same Faculty, Harfitt and Chow (2018) employed a qualitative methodology that included written reflections, semi-structured focus group interviews with 100 pre-service teachers and more than 20 community partners including non-governmental organizations or NGOs. Findings point to tangible gains in key qualities deemed vital for any teacher: ‘learner-centredness,’ ‘critical and creative practitioner’ and ‘reflective practitioner.’ The study also revealed that through a prolonged engagement with community partners, student teachers were able to acquire and articulate transferrable skills which they carried into their subsequent teaching practice. The underlying rationale of the inclusion of a CBEL component in teacher preparation is that tomorrow’s teachers should not only be technically competent; that is a given, but new teachers also need to understand the art of teaching as a moral practice too (Falkenberg, 2007). Although Hong Kong is still a highly examination-driven, society we decided to take the unusual step of making our courses credit bearing, but with no grades or examinations. We wanted students to see the value of these projects from

2.4 Our Proposed EL Model

33

participation and intrinsic engagement with the goals of the learning task (Biggs, 2003) and not because it might lead to a grade or mark or an assessment task that did not mirror the intended learning outcomes of the respective course. This was a contentious decision and some colleagues warned us that we risked losing students’ interest if they were not ‘rewarded’ with grades which could carry towards their grade point average (or GPA). However, the year after we switched from grades to a PASS/FAIL structure, the majority of our EL courses were heavily oversubscribed and to this day no student has criticized the decision. CBEL in our Faculty is a flexible and fluid structure aimed at meeting the diverse needs of students and community partners. At present, this EL initiative is a compulsory part of all our pre-service teacher preparation programmes. Our CBEL projects may be stand-alone credit-bearing electives, or tasks and activities embedded into an existing course. Other projects can be entirely voluntary. Later in the book, we will discuss the implications of making CBEL compulsory, something which has been done elsewhere (see Shek, Ma & Yang, 2019). One of the most interesting features of our own work in this area has been the interdisciplinary nature of the projects as university students from different disciplines and Faculties come together with our own Education majors to collaborate and co-construct knowledge on local and international CBEL courses. These students’ sharing of their experiences of different projects clearly demonstrates how many beginning teachers can grow as individuals through this dynamic and powerful process of learning. The settings for our CBEL projects are overseas and/or situated in Mainland China, but the majority have been established in Hong Kong because we passionately believe that building a bridge between our university and the local community will bring reciprocal and long-lasting benefits to all involved. There are numerous choices open to our students and we make a point in each academic year of encouraging students at freshmen orientations to take on CBEL projects that are unfamiliar to them and which might, therefore, offer the richest possible experience to new student teachers. We want our projects to push student teachers outside their comfort zones so that they come to understand more about their strengths and areas where they need to develop or strengthen. A striking feature of the projects we organize is that they are closely supervised by the EL team, course tutors and by our many community partners. and all of our credit-bearing CBEL projects are underpinned and supported by taught courses which are built around every project. It has never been our wish to adopt a ‘tick the box’ model of sending students on CBEL projects without clearly defined learning objectives and input before and after any task or trip. In one of our projects, for example, our student teachers work as a team to design a school workshop and curriculum to promote child rights and sustainability at an international NGO advocating child rights. After designing the school-based workshop, they then receive comments from their supervisor at the NGO and revise their work before the students run the workshop for real across different local secondary schools. They keep revising and updating the curriculum as they run their workshop in different schools. Such an approach allows student teachers to

34

2

Transforming Initial Teacher Education Through …

integrate knowledge with practice through situated instruction (Chen, 2001). We also offer overseas projects to student educators (details can be found in Chaps. 5 and 6). Overseas CBEL opportunities improve student educators’ awareness of different cultures and nurture their global perspectives in teaching (Dantas, 2007). An improved willingness to work with culturally diverse students is also observed (Malewski & Phillion, 2009). As student educators collaborating and problem-solving in the ill-defined but authentic problem, such ‘situated experience’ creates new learning opportunities for the students (Gross & Rutland, 2017). Through these boundary crossings between the university and the community, student educators develop intercultural competence in a wider context as global citizens with a sharpened sense of social, cultural and political awareness (Gallagher, 2003; Harfitt & Chan, 2017). As mentioned earlier, ongoing reflection is at the core of a constructivist classroom (King, 2000; Schon, 1983; Vijaya Kumari, 2014) and through structured mechanisms such as reflection-in-action and reflection-on-action (Schon, 1983), so the EL that we propose develops reflective thinking in students that is a core lifelong learning competence. Before sending our student teachers into the community, we provide input sessions where reflection and reflective learning stands as one of the fundamental elements (see more input on reflection in Chap. 10). Also, students are required to submit ongoing written reflections throughout the project. Instead of proposing one summative piece of reflection, we second the idea of formative assessment as experiences will lead to growth which is a gradual process (Gross & Rutland, 2017). Structured field experiences are more powerful in nurturing student educators compared with the unguided ones (Darling-Hammond, 2006). By putting the focus on personal reflection as the core assessment for the learning process, the proposed model also bridges the gap of the over-reliance on the transmission of knowledge and lack of personal relevance in ITE (Girvan et al., 2016). It counters the neoliberal discourse that focuses on the outcome and accountability at the expense of quality and process. As teaching is not merely technical, it also involves key ethical aspects that may not be readily derived from everyday lectures (Falkenberg, 2007). Such authentic community-based learning also responds to the pressing concerns on multicultural education where student teachers need to be engaged actively so as to understand the social issues for change of beliefs and actions (Mills & Ballantyne, 2016).

2.5

Conclusion

Good teachers possess academic knowledge and understanding of pedagogy whereas great ones combine these with a range of invisible competencies built on the understanding of student diversity, social awareness and personal competencies like collaborative skills and reflective thinking. Many of these considered to be

2.5 Conclusion

35

excellence in teaching are actually derived from things that are not readily comprehendible to a regular layperson. The proposed CBEL model outlined in this paper with the theoretical underpinnings in constructivism aims to bridge the gap of theory and practice and nurture great student educators who can adapt to all the drastic changes in the twenty-first century. Such an approach somehow is in contrast with similar programmes in Asia where CBEL activities are usually optional or semi-structured. Our approach is built on the traditional curriculum that focuses on subject content knowledge and pedagogy, further directs us to a crucial missing element—the boundary crossing between university and the wider community. With structured planning and guided reflections, student educators develop personal and social competencies that impact not just teacher education but also the field of education as a whole. Some potential follow-up prompts based on the content of this chapter to be used in class discussions or planning meetings – What type of teachers do we need for the twenty-first century? Are they different from the teachers 20 years ago? If so, why and how are they different? – What does this mean for Teacher Education Institutes (TEIs)? How should they respond to these challenges in the face of global change? – What does neoliberalism mean to you? What is its impact on Education in your own context? – How can we better understand our students who come from different backgrounds from us, e.g. a different ethnic group or a different social-economic status? – Who could also take up the role of teacher educators other than academics in TEIs? Explain your choice and reasons.

References Akorede, S. F. (2014). Emerging trends in teacher’s education in the 21st century. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies (JETERAPS), 5(7), 88–91. Altinyelken, H. K. (2011). Student-centred pedagogy in Turkey: Conceptualisations, interpretations and practices. Journal of Education Policy, 26(2), 137–160. Attard, K., & Armour, K. M. (2005). Learning to become a learning professional: Reflections on one year of teaching. European Journal of Teacher Education, 28(2), 195–207. Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2010). My School. Retrieved January, 18, 2018, from http://www.myschool.edu.au/. Bates, R. (2007). Regulation and autonomy in teacher education: System or democracy? In T. Townsend & R. Bates (Eds.), Handbook of teacher education: Globalization, standards and professionalism in times of change (pp. 127–140). Dordrecht: Springer. Banks, J. A. (1991). Teaching strategies for ethnic studies (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Biggs, J. B. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university (2nd ed.). Buckingham: Open University Press/Society for Research into Higher Education. Boyle-Baise, M., & Sleeter, C. E. (2000). Community based service learning for multicultural teacher education. Educational Foundations, 14(2), 33–50.

36

2

Transforming Initial Teacher Education Through …

Brayko, K. (2013). Community-based placements as contexts for disciplinary learning: A study of literacy teacher education outside of school. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(1), 47–59. Bridges, S. M., Andrews, S., Tsui, A. B. M., Chan, C. K. K, Wang, D., Kwan, T. Y. L., Lam, J. W. I., Harfitt, G. J., Chan, C., Law, W. W., Cheng, M. M. W., Yeung, P. S., Cheung, W. M., & Wang, R. K.Y. (2018). Designing for Integration in Initial Teacher Education (ITE) curricula: The Hong Kong Postgraduate Diploma in Education (PGDE), in C. Wyatt-Smith (Ed.), Teacher Education, Learning Innovation and Accountability. Singapore: Springer Publications. Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1999). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. ASCD. Bullough, R. V., Jr. (2014). Toward reconstructing the narrative of teacher education: A rhetorical analysis of preparing teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 65(3), 185–194. Calderhead, J., & Robson, M. (1991). Images of teaching: Student teachers’ early conceptions of classroom practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 7(1), 1–8. Camburn, E. M., & Han, S. W. (2015). Infrastructure for teacher reflection and instructional change: An exploratory study. Journal of Educational Change, 16(4), 511–533. Chaillé, C. (2008). Constructivism across the curriculum in early childhood classrooms: Big ideas as inspiration. Allyn & Bacon. Chen, S. (2001). Constructing a constructivist teacher education: A Taiwan experience. In Y. Cheng, K. Chow, & K. Tsui (Eds.), New teacher education for the future: International perspectives (p. 261–290). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Chicoine, D. (2004). Ignoring the obvious: A constructivist critique of a traditional teacher education program. Educational Studies, 36(3). Clandinin, D. J., & Husu, J. (2017). Mapping an international handbook of research in and for teacher education. In D. J. Clandinin & J. Husum (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 1–21). Cochran-Smith, M. (2010). Toward a theory of teacher education for social justice. In Second international handbook of educational change (pp. 445–467). Springer, Dordrecht. Cochran-Smith, M., & Zeichner, K. M. (Eds.). (2005). Studying teacher education: The report of the AERA panel on research and teacher education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Cochran-Smith, M., Piazza, P., & Power, C. (2013, January). The politics of accountability: Assessing teacher education in the United States. The Educational Forum, 77(1), 6–27. Cochran-Smith, M., Villegas, A. M., Abrams, L., Chavez-Moreno, L., Mills, T., & Stern, R. (2015). Critiquing teacher preparation research an overview of the field, part II. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(2), 109–121. Costigan, A. T. (2013). New urban teachers transcending neoliberal educational reforms: Embracing aesthetic education as a curriculum of political action. Urban Education, 48(1), 116–148. Cushner, K. (2009). The role of study abroad in the preparation of globally responsible teachers. In L. Ross (Ed.), Study abroad and the making of global citizens: Higher education and the quest for global citizenship (pp. 151–169). New York: Routledge. Dantas, M. L. (2007). Building teacher competency to work with diverse learners in the context of international education. Teacher Education Quarterly, 34(1), 75–94. Darling-Hammond, L. (2004). Inequality and the right to learn: Access to qualified teachers in California’s public schools. Teachers College Record, 106, 1047–1085. Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Powerful teacher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Darling-Hammond, L., & McLaughlin, M. W. (2011). Policies that support professional development in an era of reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(6), 81–92. Darling-Hammond, L., & Richardson, N. (2009). Research review/teacher learning: What matters? Educational Leadership, 66(5), 46–53. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier Books. Falkenberg, T. (2007). On the grounding of teacher education in the human condition. The Journal of Educational Thought (JET)/Revue de la Pensée Educative, 245-2.

References

37

Gallagher, S. (2003). Educational psychology: Disrupting the dominant discourse (Vol. 95). New York: Peter Lang. Garrison, J., Neubert, S., & Reich, K. (2012). John Dewey’s philosophy of education. US: Palgrave Macmillan. Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. New York: Teachers College Press. Girvan, C., Conneely, C., & Tangney, B. (2016). Extending experiential learning in teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 58, 129–139. Gross, Z., & Rutland, S. D. (2017). Experiential learning in informal educational settings. International Review of Education, 63, 1–8. Grossman, P., Compton, C., Igra, D., Ronfeldt, M., Shahan, E., & Williamson, P. (2009). Teaching practice: A cross-professional perspective. Teachers college record, 111(9), 2055– 2100. Harfitt, G. J., & Chan, C. (2017). Constructivist learning theories in teacher education programmes: A pedagogical perspective. In International handbook of research on teacher education. SAGE Publisher. Harfitt, G. J., & Chow, J. M. L. (2018). Transforming traditional models of initial teacher education through a mandatory experiential learning programme, Teaching and Teacher Education, 73, 120–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.03.021. Hanley, S. (1994). On constructivism. Maryland collaborative for teacher preparation. He, Y., Levin, B. B., & Li, Y. (2011). Comparing the content and sources of the pedagogical beliefs of Chinese and American pre-service teachers. Journal of Education for Teaching, 37 (2), 155–171. Hursh, D. W. (2008). The rise and potential fall of neoliberalism. In D. Hill, D. Gabbard, & S. Macrine (Eds.), Neoliberalism, education and the politics of inequality (pp. xx–xxi). New York, NY: Routledge. International Commission on Education for the Twenty-first Century, & Delors, J. (1996). Learning, the treasure within: Report to UNESCO of the international commission on education for the twenty-first century: Highlights. UNESCO Publication. Jasper, M. (2003). Beginning reflective practice. Nelson Thornes. Jaramillo, N. E., & McLaren, P. (2009). From the imaginary to the real: Towards a critical teacher education. International Journal of Educational Policies, 3, 5–19. Jenlink, P. M. (2017). Democracy distracted in an era of accountability teacher education against neoliberalism. Cultural Studies$ Critical Methodologies, 17(3), 163–172. Kaufman, D. (1996). Constructivist-based experiential learning in teacher education. Action in Teacher Education, 18(2), 40–50. Kincheloe, J. L. (2001). Developing a curriculum of complexity: Substituting connectedness for fragmentation. In J. L. Kincheloe & D. Weil (Eds.), Standards and schooling in the United States: An encyclopedia (pp. 267–296). Santa Barbara, CA: American Biliogrpahical Center-Clio Press. King, P. M. (2000). Learning to make reflective judgements. In New directions for teaching and learning (Vol. 82, pp. 15–26,). Jossey-Bass Publishers. Koehn, P. H., & Rosenau, J. N. (2002). Transnational competence in an emergent epoch. International Studies Perspectives, 3, 105–127. Kohn, A. (1999). The schools our children deserve: Moving beyond traditional classrooms and “tougher standards”. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (Vol. 1). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Kolb, D. A., Boyatzis, R. E., & Mainemelis, C. (2001). Experiential learning theory: Previous research and new directions. Perspectives on Thinking, Learning, and Cognitive Styles, 1 (2001), 227–247.

38

2

Transforming Initial Teacher Education Through …

Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2008). Experiential learning theory: A dynamic, holistic approach to management learning. Journal of Education and Development, 17(9), 312–317. Kretchmar, K., & Zeichner, K. (2016). Teacher prep 3.0: A vision for teacher education to impact social transformation. Journal of Education for Teaching, 42(4), 417–433. Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Malewski, E., & Phillion, J. (2009). Making room in the curriculum: The raced, classed, and gendered nature of preservice teachers’ experiences studying abroad. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 25(3), 48–67. Malewski, E., Sharma, S., & Phillion, J. (2012). How international field experiences promote cross-cultural awareness in preservice teachers through experiential learning: Findings from a six-year collective case study. Teachers College Record, 114(8), n8. McDonald, M., & Zeichner, K. (2008). Social justice teacher education. In W. Aryers, T. Quinn, & D. Stovall, (Eds.) Handbook of social justice in education. Mahwah, N.J. Lawrence, Erlbaum. McDonald, M. A., Bowman, M., & Brayko, K. (2013). Learning to see students: Opportunities to develop relational practices of teaching through community-based placements in teacher education. Teachers College Record, 115(4), n4. Mills, C., & Ballantyne, J. (2016). Social justice and teacher education: A systematic review of empirical work in the field. Journal of Teacher Education, 67(4), 263–276. Morrison, K. A. (2016). Teaching about neoliberalism and education de/reforms in teacher education courses. Networks: An On-Line Journal for Teacher Research, 18(1). Ngai, P. B. Y. (2004). A reinforcing curriculum and program reform proposal for 21st century teacher education: Vital first steps for advancing K-12 multicultural education. Equity & Excellence in Education, 37, 321–331. Payne, K., & Zeichner, K. (2017). Multiple voices and participants in teacher education. In D. J. Clandinin & J. Husu (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (Vol. 2, pp. 1101– 1116). Rainer, J. D. (Ed.). (2002). Reframing teacher education: Dimensions of a constructivist approach. Rowman & Littlefield Education. Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to teach in higher education. London: Routledge. Richardson, V. (2003). Constructivist pedagogy. Teachers College Record, 105(9), 1623–1640. Richmond, G. (2017). The power of community partnership in the preparation of teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 68(1), 6–8. Rodriguez, A., & Magill, K. R. (2016). Diversity, neoliberalism and teacher education. International Journal of Progressive Education, 12(3), 7–23. Rodriguez, A. (2009). On democracy and critical citizenship. The International Journal of Learning, 16(6), 331–343. Ryan, A. (2012). Integrating experiential and academic learning in teacher preparation for development education. Irish Educational Studies, 31(1), 35–50. Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action (Vol. 5126). Basic Books. Shek, D. T. L., Ma, C. M. S., & Yang, Z. (2019). Transformation and development of university students through service-learning: A corporate-community-university partnership initiative in Hong Kong (Project WeCan). Applied Research in Quality of Life, 1–19. Stiggins, R. J. (2001). Student-involved classroom assessment. Prentice Hall. Sleeter, C. (2001). Preparing teachers for culturally diverse schools: Research and the overwhelming presence of whiteness. Journal of Teacher Education, 52, 94–106. Sleeter, C. E. (2008). Teaching for democracy in an age of corporatocracy. Teachers College Record, 110(1), 139–159. Retrieved from http://www.tcrecord.org. Snow-Renner, R., & Lauer, P. A. (2005). Professional development analysis. McREL Insights. Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning (McREL).

References

39

Supovitz, J. A., Mayer, D. P., & Kahle, J. B. (2000). Promoting inquiry-based instructional practice: The longitudinal impact of professional development in the context of systemic reform. Educational Policy, 14(3), 331–356. Taubman, P. (2009). Teaching by numbers: Deconstructing the discourse of standards and accountability in education. New York, NY: Routledge. Tatto, M. T., Richmond, G., & Carter Andrews, D. J. (2016). The research we need in teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 67(4), 247–250. Thomson, S., De Bortoli, L., Nicholas, M., Hillman, K., & Buckley, S. (2011). Challenges for Australian education: Results from PISA 2009. Camberwell: Australian Council for Educational Research. UNESCO Institute for Statistics. (2006). Teachers and educational quality: Monitoring global needs for 2015 (Vol. 253). UNESCO Inst for Statistics. U.S. Department of Education. (2011, September). Our future, our teachers: The Obama Administration’s plan for teacher education reform and improvement. Washington, DC: U.S. DOE. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/our-future-our-teachers.pdf. Vijaya Kumari, S. N. (2014). Constructivist approach to teacher education: An integrative model for reflective teaching. Journal on Educational Psychology, 7(4), 31–40. Zeichner, K. (2010a). Competition, economic rationalization, increased surveillance, and attacks on diversity: Neo-liberalism and the transformation of teacher education in the US. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(8), 1544–1552. Zeichner, K. (2010b). Rethinking the connections between campus courses and field experiences in college- and university-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1–1), 89–99.

3

Getting Started: Designing Your Own Community-Based Experiential Learning (CBEL) Initiatives

Abstract

While the literature has documented the positive impact of community-based experiential learning (CBEL) on students, most of these studies have focused on the theoretical underpinning of EL and less has been documented for fieldwork practitioners to design and organize their own CBEL initiatives with the aid of practical steps and guidance. This book sets out to illustrate many examples of CBEL in action and subsequent chapters will detail projects that have been part of a compulsory CBEL initiative in our own Faculty of Education. For the focus of the current chapter, we highlight some of the critical steps for course instructors and curriculum leaders to refer to when designing their own EL initiatives. Through examining the rationales behind the different stages in designing a CBEL course, the current chapter outlines a blueprint for teachers, teacher educators and course instructors to follow so that they can apply and incorporate some of the steps into their everyday teaching and to be able to critically evaluate any of the existing CBEL programmes. Keywords

Assessment

3.1


Community engagement
Experiential learning
Rubrics

Introduction

We have gained a lot of experience from teaching ‘regular’ credit-bearing teacher preparation courses in our Faculty over the years. In our context, a typical 6-credit undergraduate course constitutes 12 weeks of 2-h classes (24 h of class time) almost always on campus and classroom-based and with required fixed criteria on the assessment load as well. Student teachers on our double degree undergraduate © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 G. Harfitt and J. M. L. Chow, Employing Community-Based Experiential Learning in Teacher Education, Springer Texts in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6003-3_3

41

42

3

Getting Started: Designing Your Own Community-Based …

programmes are required to complete 300 credits over 5 years upon graduation and these credits are made up of compulsory courses (Faculty and University), and electives (where students can choose their own). As we compare the work involved in these regular credit-bearing courses with our CBEL offerings (which are also 6 credits each), we have noticed some fundamental differences, not least of which is the time commitment and labour-intensive nature of the CBEL initiatives. There is no doubt that facilitating CBEL courses does involve more time and resources. It also requires an important mindset about the nature of learning on these CBEL projects and how students’ learning has to be scaffolded and co-constructed with their peer learners and community partners. In Chap. 2, reference was made to Biggs’ (2003) concept of constructive alignment whereby learning should not be the result of a transmission process from teacher to learner, but something learners should create for themselves. It is worth reminding readers that in this model pedagogy and assessment, tasks are aligned with learning activities. Kolb (1984) also states the importance of learning in real-world situations and outlines a cycle of learning for such an approach: an action which influences experience, a reflection that stems from that action and experience, and then the acquisition of new knowledge and insights because of subsequent reflection and action. John Dewey understands experience as ‘relational, temporal, and continuous’ (Clandinin & Rosiek, 2007, p. 44). It is relational because we are always in relationship with one another and always within social contexts. It is temporal and continuous because experience changes as it develops over time and is always ongoing. In sum, then, real-world or situated experience has been seen to be an important source of knowledge for student teachers (Connelly & Clandinin, 1999); it allows pre-service teachers to acquire vital (but difficult to teach) practical knowledge, attitudes, values and behaviours to accompany their disciplinary and subject-based knowledge in their development as community-centric educators. These theoretical underpinnings have been crucial in our experience of organizing and implementing CBEL courses and projects for our student teachers. So while it is normal for teachers to attend to the learning outcomes of their students in their daily teaching, the essence and (in our view) the beauty of CBEL is quite different—in CBEL, the learning process should be at the core. But it is important to note that learning does not just happen naturally on its own accord by simply experiencing experience as we stated earlier; this is why these types of projects are necessarily more labour intensive for facilitators. For meaningful learning to take place, every experience must be carefully structured and supported through carefully constructed opportunities for reflection, critical analysis and synthesis (AEE, n.d.). Throughout this learning process, students are encouraged to take an active role to problem-solve, collaborate and reflect upon their experiences in order to make sense of it and to connect theory with practice. For course instructors, there are two sets of questions that they might consider when planning CBEL initiatives for the first time (see Fig. 3.1).

3.1 Introduction

43

What/ Why

How

What are the course objectives? What are the issues that your students are expected to tackle? How and why might CBEL help to achieve these objectives?

What could be the most appropriate environment, context and sites for CBEL to take place? How might we assess & evaluate students' learning on these projects?

Fig. 3.1 Special considerations when planning an EL initiative

The ‘what/why’ questions provide a holistic view of the purpose of the course and whether CBEL should be selected as the pedagogy to achieve the intended learning outcomes of the course. The ‘how’ questions specify the learning environment of the CBEL and how assessment should be connected to the intended learning outcomes for the course. Taking these two sets of questions into consideration, course instructors will think more thoroughly about the course objectives, the learning environment and the assessment for the CBEL initiatives before locating the right collaborators and setting up a project that benefits the community partner, the school or the university, and the students who participate.

3.2

Engaging Community Partners as Co-educators

Engaging community partners from NGOs as co-educators allows course instructors on the one hand to locate an authentic platform for EL to take place, and on the other hand to make good use of the expertise the community partners possess (Harfitt & Chow, 2018; Zeichner, 2010). Working with community partners can be a win-win strategy that provides precious opportunities for our students to perform social responsibilities as local and global citizens when they serve alongside volunteers and leaders from the NGO. From this, there should be reciprocal benefits with students and the wider community benefitting from the collaboration. So what are the factors for successful collaboration? Figure 3.2 highlights four important factors to consider when collaborating with community partners. It starts with searching for and identifying relevant EL projects or opportunities. To build a sustainable relationship with community partners, course instructors should bear in mind not only their student teachers’ benefits, but also the community partners’ interests and experience too. For instance, any proposed CBEL initiatives should align with the missions, values and resources with the limitation of the partnering organization and also the skill sets of the student teachers (Gazley, Littlepage & Bennett, 2012; Tinkler et al., 2014). From our own experience, the matching of student teachers to particular community

44

3

Getting Started: Designing Your Own Community-Based …

Fig. 3.2 Process for successful collaboration between Faculty and Community

Search for an EL opportunity

Develop & sustain partnership

Community partners

IdenƟfy right partners

Engage & prepare partners

partners requires a lot of thought; we always invite our community partners to interview or hold informal talks with prospective student teachers so that they can understand one another better. If a community partner is uneasy about taking on a particular student teacher, we respect that decision and look for other more suitable community-based placements for that particular student. When identifying appropriate community partners, what are the crucial qualities that we should pay attention to? Ideally, community partners can take up the role of mentors or facilitators in the student teachers’ learning process and also provide the necessary time and space for our students to challenge their thinking, reflexivity and subsequent personal growth. To engage and prepare our community partners, who we position deliberately as co-educators in our CBEL initiatives, we have learned to provide assistance in the following aspects: recruitment, orientation, training and the establishment of a mechanism of communication as well as a formal agreement to safeguard the interests of the various stakeholders involved in any project. One thing we have been so grateful for has been the willingness of some of our community partners to come to our Faculty for input classes as a way of preparing our student teachers for the work and responsibilities they will undertake at the community-based organization or NGO. This often means community partners coming to campus in the evenings (as most of our classes are held in the evenings) after a long day at work. Yes, such commitment and dedication is also observable to our own student teachers and helps to build rapport, trust and sustainability. To develop and sustain a long-term partnership, the course instructors need to build rapport with the partnered organization through a range of strategies: recognizing community-based organizational events, certificates and thank you letters, listing the names of community partners on course and promotional materials and writing articles about their work in related publications like newsletters, educational

3.2 Engaging Community Partners as Co-educators

45

journals or websites. We have always invited our community partners to Faculty events and we also host annual fairs where different stakeholders can appreciate the breadth and depth of the CBEL experiences (Cooper, Ornell & Bowden, 2010). These annual fairs are also the platform for sharing and networking among community partners and organizations. We will describe these in more detail later on.

3.3

Preparing Students

The unpredictability and ill-defined nature of CBEL is undoubtedly a challenge to our student teacher participants. Yet at the same time, it can also be a tremendous attraction too. While many student teachers have described this pedagogical platform as a life-changing experience, as course instructors, we need to empower our students to be better prepared for the challenges that are inherent in CBEL. This is what we describe as ‘readiness for CBEL’ in our programmes.

3.3.1 Alignment of Expectations As noted, CBEL is very different from regular classroom teaching and learning, and course instructors need to align their expectations with those of their students. First, the intended learning outcomes (ILOs) of the CBEL course should be specified explicitly to the students’ needs as well as how the project deliverables are related to these ILOs. Assessment adopted in this CBEL initiative should be explained to the students clearly. In case there are ethical guidelines or a code of practice from the hosting organization for students to follow, boundaries between different stakeholders should be clearly defined for appropriate behaviour along with the confidentiality of the vulnerable groups that are being served (Zou & Hounsell, 2014). In recent years and with the prevalence of social media, for example, these ethical boundaries have become blurred. A simple example would be taking photographs of young and vulnerable children and then uploading them on to social media platforms; this is often done with good intentions by participants and volunteers because they may want to share a precious memory or raise awareness about a particular issue through that photograph. But these actions can also put the young children and the organizations who are seeking to support them at greater risk. Such cases require careful handling and discussion in class ahead of any CBEL placement and they bring to the fore crucial, ethical and moral questions which we see as valuable teaching and learning opportunities. We also want to engage in continuous dialogue with our student teachers to help them set meaningful goals and relate those goals to the learning processes of the CBEL initiative (Chow, Zou & Yu, 2018). Figure 3.3 below showcases some samples of questions for goal-setting with students.

What they do, who they serve and what you already know about them. What else would you like to know about the organizaƟon?

Write three learning goals you want to achieve by the end of this CBEL project and how these are related to your academic interests, career plan and / or life goals Describe the criteria you would use to evaluate how well you achieve these goals.

Project tasks

Describe the organisaƟon that you will work with.

Getting Started: Designing Your Own Community-Based …

Learning goals

3

Partnered organisaƟon

46

Relate your goals to the project tasks and process. How can you achieve each goal you’ve set? How can the supervisor/ coordinator at the partnered organisaƟon facilitate your learning process?

Fig. 3.3 Goal-setting with students

3.3.2 Prior Knowledge Sometimes it will be helpful for course instructors to collect baseline information through a pre-course survey to better understand student participants’ knowledge, skills and attitudes towards the project deliverables and CBEL experience. This can focus on the content knowledge related to the project tasks. It can also be related to the culture or the target recipients of the service/community that the student teachers are going to work with. After collecting this baseline information, course instructors can then decide whether they need to provide more input prior to the project or address some particular concerns that students have raised that they are not aware of. When we organized a CBEL course that was based in Cambodia, we set an online survey for our enrolled student teachers to complete before our first input session on campus. The survey sought to learn more about their prior knowledge of Cambodia, its history, students’ knowledge of the education system in the country and whether they had visited the country before. We also set a question asking them to set personal and professional goals (as in Fig. 3.3). We collate these individual replies and shape our input sessions around them. We also keep our student teachers’ learning goals until the end of the project, before returning them in class as a trigger for reflection and discussion. Very often this is a deeply emotional moment with student teachers revisiting their learning goals and objectives set 9 months before. This is a further example of the relational, temporal and continuous nature of experience over the course of one CBEL project (Clandinin & Rosiek, 2007) and evidence of just how much student teachers’ learning is shaped by reconstructing experiences and reflecting on them.

3.3 Preparing Students

47

3.3.3 Psychological Readiness and Support Mechanism There are numerous psychological challenges facing student teachers in CBEL (UC-Davis, 2011), and to empower them in the learning process, they should be informed about these challenges. First of all, they should attend to the ill-defined nature of the learning environment in CBEL where they have to take an active role to problem-solve, collaborate, work within a team and engage in continuous reflection. As there are different stakeholders in the whole learning process, it is common to observe a different set of values and priorities that the student teachers have to attend to. Throughout this process, they may encounter challenges which can be practical, social or even personal in nature. In these situations, we stress the importance of communication and support from Faculty as well as community partners and supervisors as this type of help-seeking is surely a critical skill to develop in the wider context of EL and teaching as well. We find it helpful for course instructors to establish a support mechanism across different levels: peer–peer, on-site and from the Faculty. At the peer level, course instructors may arrange student teacher participants and alumni from previous cohorts to share with the incoming participants their experiences of the learning processes involved and some personal tips for successful management of challenges. Formal and informal mechanisms for communication should be stated clearly between students, partnered organizations and course instructors so as to guarantee smooth communication during the CBEL process. We appoint group leaders and give them the responsibility of channelling communication and feedback to us at any point of the CBEL course or project. We also ask student teachers who have completed the project to return the following year and work alongside us in class with new cohorts of student teachers who enroll for CBEL projects. We believe that the teaching profession is also a learning profession and so we seek to promote leadership responsibilities through a ‘student as partner’ (SaP) approach. This is the notion that students learn best when they feel they can contribute their voice and actions to the co-creation of teaching and learning experiences (as all effective teachers do). Teaching and learning is most likely to be successful when teachers and learners work in some kind of mutually respectful partnership, and there is little doubt to us that CBEL projects allow that to happen given the intensive and reciprocal nature of collaboration between tutors and student teachers during the planning and implementation phases. SaP is also a way of providing support to course tutors and alleviating some of the additional work that these time and labour-intensive CBEL projects can bring.

3.4

Role of Course Tutors/Instructors

In a traditional classroom setting, teachers are often the authority of knowledge to students whereas in CBEL, students learn through the process of engaging with a community-based project, from problem-solving and collaborating with each other

48

3

Getting Started: Designing Your Own Community-Based …

as well as from different stakeholders. This means that the course instructor’s role certainly changes. In the context of CBEL, tutors and course leaders are the co-learners with their students, and they facilitate students’ learning by scaffolding and empowering students (Savage et al., 2015). As seen above, positioning our students as partners (SaP) has been one effective way of empowering them throughout the projects, and the responsibilities given to them by our community partners have also helped in this regard. Many of our student teachers have been asked to return to the community organization after the CBEL project has finished which is evidence of the positive impact they have had on the community partners and organizations. These experiences have also given our own student teachers added confidence for their subsequent placement in schools (for teaching practicum), job interviews, scholarships and overseas exchanges. Sustainability has also been achieved through our graduates taking their own school students to the community partner as participants in subsequent years. We have received many comments from our graduates who are now working as full-time teachers in local schools encouraging their new classes and colleagues to connect with the same community partners that they worked with as student teachers. In order to empower student teachers on CBEL courses, tutors might also consider the following: – Co-construct a shared vision of the class. Co-creating a mission statement with every participant in the classroom so as to build a community of learners with autonomy and ownership of the learning process; – Engage student teachers in inter-dependent teams where they have to support and rely on each other to achieve a bigger whole; – Promote reflective practices by structuring ongoing reflective and sharing sessions where students have changes to revisit and evaluate their learning process as active learners. (Adapted from Slavich & Zimbardo, 2012)

3.4.1 Facilitating Reflections Reflection is a critical metacognitive skill associated with deep learning and making sound judgments (King, 2000). To enhance reflective practices in the context of CBEL, tutors have to create and nurture a safe environment for their students to share so that whatever their responses are, they will not feel judged. Therefore, it may be helpful to set some ground rules from the very outset of any CBEL course, e.g. confidentiality, for reflective sharing to occur. For more details on reflections and how these should be built into CBEL courses, please refer to Chap. 10.

3.5 Assessment

3.5

49

Assessment

Some tutors find it particularly challenging to assess the learning outcomes in the context of CBEL because of the fluid nature of the learning process. Before designing effective assessments for CBEL, course tutors need to bear in mind three important issues: (1) CBEL takes place in a diverse setting and there are various forms of ‘experience.’ (2) The learning process is as important as the learning outcome, that is, how students problem-solve and collaborate with each other and with different stakeholders is as critical as what students eventually achieve by the end of the CBEL course (Cooper et al., 2010). (3) It is important for learning tasks to be authentic. This authenticity reflects how real work is conducted in a professional context. There are two types of assessments that course instructors may refer to when designing assessment for CBEL (see Fig. 3.4). Summative assessment is well documented and is often employed as a one-off task at the end of the course usually involving an examination paper, a quiz or a presentation. However, we see formative assessment as being crucial in the context of CBEL as student teachers may need more support from their course tutors in diverse settings, and they can give more timely feedback to their student teachers in return. Formative assessment can serve as regular and ongoing check-in points for both tutors and course participants. It also serves as a valuable channel of communication between course tutors and students during the CBEL project or course. Students are able to demonstrate their ongoing learning and also convey areas of concern or difficulty to the course tutor through formative assessment tasks. This enables students (and course tutors) to adapt and modify approaches during the course whereas a summative assessment at the end of a course or project fails to afford them a chance to reflect on their practice and adapt their work accordingly.

Fig. 3.4 Types of assessment

Types of assessments Formative assessment

Summative assessment

- The ongoing feedback that teachers give to the students so as to guide their own instructions and pedagogy

- The final evaluation that teachers conducted so as to understand how well the students perform against the ILOs

- It is a process

- It is a product

50

3

Getting Started: Designing Your Own Community-Based …

3.5.1 The Input-Process-Output Model Qualters (2010) develops the input-process-output model (Fig. 3.5) to capture the formative and summative assessment in the context of EL. Assessment can start before the CBEL experience. As seen already, one possible approach is to ask student teachers to self-assess their own knowledge, skills and attitudes towards the CBEL project tasks. This baseline information is very useful in terms of helping course tutors to understand student teachers’ perceptions and prior knowledge before any CBEL project. Another approach is to make use of the pre-programme assessment task to help student teachers set goals and objectives for the experiences (refer to Fig. 3.3). During the process, formative assessment allows course tutors to scaffold their students and identify if there are any issues that need to be addressed. Sometimes students may submit their work-in-progress, e.g. a fieldwork report or a reflection for timely feedback from course tutors. After the experience, the tutors may want to conduct a summative assessment for grading (if applicable). Otherwise, they can involve their students in a self-assessment on their knowledge, skills and attitudes again and then compare with the baseline information collected at the beginning. Tutors can also invite the community partner to provide individual feedback to the student teachers. Some more assessment methods will be illustrated in the next section.

Fig. 3.5 The input-process-output model

3.5 Assessment

51

3.5.2 Further Assessment Methods for Consideration Chow et al. (2018) detail different ways of assessment in the context of CBEL. Some of the more frequently used ones are described below (Fig. 3.6). Reflective journal is one of the most common forms of assessment in the organization of CBEL projects. If the CBEL experience lasts for an extended period of time, then it may be helpful to ask participants to submit a few shorter pieces of reflection rather than one single summative piece typically at the end. In this way, students are able to capture and reflect any critical events over time, and teachers at the same time can understand the learning process of students better; at which stage students actually need more support from them. We see critical moments as incidents during students’ participation in CBEL projects that caused them to challenge their own perceptions and thinking, to move away from their comfort zone and to problem-solve or which provided growth moments in their personal and professional development (see Chap. 10 as well as examples reported by student teachers in Chaps. 4–8). To facilitate deep thinking and more critical reflections, teachers need to use effective prompts to help students reflect (for details please see Chap. 10). The levels of reflective behaviour can serve as a rubric for course tutors to evaluate reflections (Learman, Autry & O’Sullivan, 2007). The higher the level, the more critical the reflection appears to be (see Fig. 3.7).

Fig. 3.6 Suggested assessment methods

Reflective journal

Online forum

Fieldwork report/ note

Learning portfolio

survey

Multi - media presentation

52

3

Getting Started: Designing Your Own Community-Based …

Fig. 3.7 Level of reflective behaviour

Online forum allows student teachers to share their experiences and develop a community of learners during any CBEL project. This platform becomes especially useful when they work in small teams at different project sites (and away from their other peers on the course). You may find more details in Chap. 9 but Table 3.1 showcases some criteria for assessing students’ behaviour on an online forum (Nandi, Chang & Balbo, 2009). Learning portfolio is a purposeful collection of work samples that showcase students’ effort, progress or celebrate achievements and competencies in CBEL.

Table 3.1 Criteria for assessing students’ behaviour in an online forum Criteria

Behaviour

Content of contribution

Clarity (low level of clarity–highly articulated) Justification (no justification–justification based on evidence Interpretation (misinterpretation–critical discussion) Relevance (low relevance–high relevance) Prioritization (no prioritization–clear prioritization of information being presented) Breadth of knowledge (narrow and limited knowledge and perspective– wider knowledge and perspectives) Critical discussion of contributions (not engaging in others’ contributions–critical discussions of others’ contributions) New ideas from interactions (no new insights–new ideas developed through interactions) Knowledge sharing (no knowledge sharing–sharing of relevant real-life examples) Encouraging others to participate (no actions to encourage others–actively encourage others to participate Number of posts per week Being consistently active

Interaction quality

Objective measure

3.5 Assessment

53

A portfolio can be physical or electronic and might include project deliverables/samples of work and evaluations by tutors, peers and self, together with reflections. There are several factors that determine the effectiveness of learning portfolios: how tutors coach their student teachers to construct the portfolio, how they can design a clear portfolio structure and provide a sufficient amount of input or experiences for student teachers to reflect upon (Driessen et al., 2005). Extended reading 1 Subject-based examples for learning portfolio: https://www.geneseo.edu/sites/default/files/sites/education/p12resources-portfolio-assessment. pdf Sample of rubrics: http://valenciacollege.edu/academic-affairs/institutional-effectiveness-planning/institutionalassessment/loa/documents/portfoliogradingrubric.pdf

Fieldwork reports/notes can demonstrate the professional work in the field that our student teachers produce in the context of a CBEL project. It is often beneficial to work with the partnered organizations to see the format of report or the requirements of a certain type of professional work so that the actual submission of work from the student teachers will be used in an authentic way by the community partners. This can promote autonomy as well as a sense of ownership from the student teachers and promotes the value of student teachers’ work in the community. Pre/Post-CBEL survey allows course tutors to gather information on the process of change among students in CBEL. It serves as self-reported data that complements the actual project deliverables and can also inform teaching practice. Course instructors may collect qualitative data on how students perceive or reflect on the outcomes of the course in terms of the ILOs or through quantitative data that actually makes use of a scale to assess the growth in the aspects related to the ILOs. For instance, if the CBEL initiative is related to cultural awareness in an overseas country, course tutors may collect qualitative data to see how students perceive the impact of culture on their learning and quantitative data with a scale that actually measures intercultural competence. Multimedia presentation can be structured in the format of a learning festival where students work in small, interdisciplinary teams to showcase and celebrate their learning through the medium of posters which can include multimedia resources such as a photo journey or other visual input. These peer groups can be assigned so to assess different posters to learn from each other and give feedback across the cohort. Table 3.2 showcases some of these examples.

54

3

Getting Started: Designing Your Own Community-Based …

Table 3.2 Different types of multimedia presentations

A student teacher sharing her project deliverables (a video) with peers in the poster conference.

Students are formed into two circles (one inner and one outer) and share about their CBEL experiences in moving pairs with a short PowerPoint presentation.

Students share with each other through the format of a ‘photo journey’

3.5 Assessment

55

3.5.3 Issues in Assessment While we recommend using multiple criteria to understand the diverse learning outcomes of student teachers’ learning in CBEL, it will be beneficial to involve multiple assessors—students’ self-evaluation, peer evaluation, community partners’ feedback and also the course tutors’ set of criteria (where applicable). When assessment involves multiple partners, the assessment criteria have to be communicated clearly and sometimes guidance and training are necessary to prepare different stakeholders for achieving fairness. In our experience, we established an Advisory Board involving Faculty colleagues and invited community partners to provide a quality assurance mechanism and review our assessment criteria and tasks. If there is a need to involve different assessors to evaluate the student teachers’ learning outcomes based on one assessment criteria, consistency across different assessors is going to be an issue. A collaborative approach involving students’ articulation of achievements, community partners’ reports and also the learning evidence collected by the course tutors is important (McNamara, 2013). CBEL requires student teachers’ active participation and ownership over their own learning process, so it is crucial to develop students’ assessment literacy in such processes as well. Articulating the assessment criteria to the students explicitly is a prerequisite, but it is not enough for nurturing assessment literacy among students. We have found they often need more practice and support in order to understand the rationale of different criteria. Students should be involved in the process of assessment—either participating in peer evaluation or having the chance to understand the purpose and the connections between project deliverables and assessment criteria. It is helpful to showcase samples of work and ask students to work as a team to evaluate the work based on the assessment criteria being used (Smith et al., 2013).

3.6

Programme Evaluation

Assessment refers to the measurement of learning outcomes and students’ learning whereas programme evaluation looks into the overall effectiveness of the programme, namely whether the ILOs have been achieved and the quality of the programme design. Programme evaluation is very important for CBEL as it assures the quality of the learning experiences (Fitzpatrick, Sanders & Worthen, 2011). There are some objective criteria which can be used to scrutinize the quality of a CBEL initiative (see Fig. 3.8).

56

3

Getting Started: Designing Your Own Community-Based …

Examples for criteria of good EL programmes

Authenticity of the tasks and the learning (Shulha, Caruthers & environment Hopson, 2010) (HEQCO, 2016) Accurate reflection of reality

A complete cycle of experiential learning theory (concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualisation, active experimentation) (Kolb, 1984)

Fig. 3.8 Criteria for good CBEL programmes

3.6.1 Process of Evaluation A good process of programme evaluation should allow course tutors to reflect on the original programme design and make continuous improvements for the subsequent round of CBEL initiatives. Figure 3.9 showcases the cycle for such process (adapted from HEQCO, 2016). In order to develop the evaluation question, course tutors may need to think carefully about the purposes for evaluation. Whether programme evaluation serves as a needs assessment of a particular context, for better programme implementation or programme effectiveness, the evaluation questions will likely be different. Some common evaluation questions are • In what ways can the programme be improved? • To what extent has the programme achieved its ILOs? and; • How can the programme be modified to serve the needs of the community better? There are different evaluation paradigms for course tutors to consider. A Positivist paradigm looks into objective data through quantitative methods with statistical analysis. The pragmatic paradigm considers what is important by the

Fig. 3.9 Process of evaluation

Develop evaluation question Choose an evaluation paradigm Choose an evaluation tool Collect data and conduct analysis Present results to stakeholders for feedback

3.6 Programme Evaluation

57

evaluator through specific research questions and these are eventually matched with the research methods accordingly. The constructivist paradigm focuses much more on reflection and meaningful dialogue for knowledge building. They encourage the participation of different stakeholders through quantitative, qualitative and even participatory methodology. Evaluation tools are for collecting data and evidence. Course tutors may use the following tools based on the evaluation paradigm: participant observations, surveys, focus group discussions, semi-structured interviews, experimental design, standardized testing, scales and document review (Chow et al., 2018). There are both qualitative and quantitative methods to conduct data analysis. Thematic analysis and narrative analysis are examples of qualitative analysis, and descriptive and statistical analysis are examples for quantitative analysis. Data collected will be very useful for informing practice and different stakeholders involved in the CBEL learning cycle.

3.6.2 Ethical Considerations For a comprehensive programme evaluation to take place, course tutors may need to involve a number of different stakeholders. It thus creates concerns and issues relating to confidentiality and anonymity—whether information collected will be identifiable to others. Many universities and educational bodies now require rigorous ethical considerations before any CBEL course can be offered to students. Also, Rossi et al. (2003) raise the principle of respect in the process of programme evaluation. This means that evaluators must be competent in the way they perform evaluations and show respect for people that they are interacting with. Extended reading 2 Chow, J. M. L., Zou, T. X. P., & Yu, J. Y. Y. (2018). Experiential learning: A guidebook for facilitators. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/HKU_EL_guidebook

3.7

Conclusion

This chapter has highlighted important procedures and issues for course instructors to consider when designing their own CBEL initiatives. Given the fluidity of the context of this type of learning, it will be important for course instructors to take different stakeholders’ perspectives into account when understanding and assessing students’ learning outcomes. By engaging our community partners as co-educators in teacher training, our approach empowers our community partners to bring in the knowledge of the community and at the same time fill in the service gap of the

58

3

Getting Started: Designing Your Own Community-Based …

community where our student educators reside. This engagement model is sustainable and the benefits are reciprocal. Some potential follow-up prompts based on the content of this chapter to be used in class discussions or planning meetings: – Imagine that you want to design a CBEL project with your students. What would your first steps be and why? – What are the most important considerations when implementing a CBEL project? – How do we know if a community partner is a suitable one for our CBEL projects? – Why might CBEL be challenging for your students? – How can we help our students to learn better in community-based projects that are often quite ill-defined and unpredictable? – How would you anticipate the role of the teacher in the wider context of CBEL? Will it be different from the more typical role of a teacher in a regular school or university setting? Why or why not? – Is it easy to assess students in the process of experiential learning? Why or why not?

References Association for Experiential Education (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.aee.org/. Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does (2nd edn.; Buckingham: SRHE & Open University Press). Chow, J. M. L., Zou, T. X. P., & Yu, J. Y. Y. (2018). Experiential learning: A guidebook for facilitators. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/HKU_EL_guidebook. Clandinin, D. J., & Rosiek, J. (2007). Mapping a landscape of narrative inquiry. Handbook of narrative inquiry: Mapping a methodology, 35–75. Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1999). Knowledge, context and identity. Shaping a professional identity: Stories of educational practice, 1–5. Cooper, L., Orrell, J., & Bowden, M. (2010). Work integrated learning: A guide to effective practice. Routledge. Driessen, E. W., Van Tartwijk, J., Overeem, K., Vermunt, J. D., & Van Der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2005). Conditions for successful reflective use of portfolios in undergraduate medical education. Medical Education, 39(12), 1230–1235. Fitzpatrick, J. L., Sanders, J. R., & Worthen, B. R. (2011). Program evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Gazley, B., Littlepage, L., & Bennett, T. A. (2012). What about the host agency? Nonprofit perspectives on community-based student learning and volunteering. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41(6), 1029–1050. Harfitt, G. J., & Chow, J. M. L. (2018). Transforming traditional models of initial teacher education through a mandatory experiential learning programme. Teaching and Teacher Education, 73, 120–129. Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario. (2016). A practical guide for work-integrated learning. Accessed 14 Nov. 2018. https://www.vu.edu.au/sites/default/files/CCLT/pdfs/heqcopractical-guide-wil.pdf.

References

59

King, P. M. (2000). Learning to make reflective judgements. In New directions for teaching and learning (vol 82, pp. 15–26). Jossey-Bass Publishers. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Learman, L. A., Autry, A. M., & O’Sullivan, P. (2007). Reliability and validity of reflection exercises for obstetrics and gynecology residents. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 198(4), 461.e1–461.e10. McNamara, J. (2013). The challenge of assessing professional competence in work integrated learning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(2), 183–197. Nandi, D., Chang, S. & Balbo, S. (2009). A conceptual framework for assessing interaction quality in online discussion forums. In Same places, different spaces. Proceedings ascilite Auckland 2009. Qualters, D. M. (2010). Bringing the outside in: Assessing experiential education. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 124, 55–62. Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2003). Evaluation: A systematic approach. Sage publications. Savage, E., Tapics, T., Evarts, J., Wilson, J., & Tirone, S. (2015). Experiential learning for sustainability leadership in higher education. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 16(5), 692–705. Slavich, G. M., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2012). Transformational teaching: Theoretical underpinnings, basic principles, and core methods. Educational Psychology Review, 24(4), 569–608. Smith, C. D., Worsfold, K., Davies, L., Fisher, R., & McPhail, R. (2013). Assessment literacy and student learning: the case for explicitly developing students ‘assessment literacy’. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(1), 44–60. Tinkler, A., Tinkler, B., Hausman, E., & Tufo-Strouse, G. (2014). Key elements of effective service-learning partnerships from the perspective of community partners. Partnerships: A Journal of Service-Learning and Civic Engagement, 5(2), 137–152. University of California Davis (UC Davis). (2011). 5-step experiential learning cycle definitions. Retrieved from http://www.experientiallearning.ucdavis.edu/module1/el1_40-5stepdefinitions. pdf. Zeichner, K. (2010). Rethinking the connections between campus courses and field experiences in college-and university-based teacher education. Journal of teacher education, 61(1–2), 89–99. Zou, T., & Hounsell, D. (2014). Experiential learning: The ethical dimension. Retrieved from https://www.cetl.hku.hk/teaching-learning-cop/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/wise-assessmentbriefing6.pdf.

4

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 1 Pushing the Boundaries of Community-Based Experiential Learning in Teacher Education Through Innovative and Informal Learning Environments: CBEL in a Marine Theme Park

Abstract

In Chap. 1, it was suggested that the field of teacher education needs to consider carefully the spaces which hold knowledge for pre-service teachers; spaces that can be both transformative and transferrable to their future classrooms and lives. In this chapter, we explore one innovative community-based EL (CBEL) project that focuses on the placement of beginning teachers at Asia’s largest marine theme park located in Hong Kong, a learning context far removed from the traditional university lecture hall. The case study also seeks to focus on two salient questions in the literature, namely where are the places of teacher education and who are the teacher educators on today’s complex and multilayered learning landscape. The chapter provides examples of how pre-service teachers on this project acquired important transferrable teaching and learning skills and knowledge, which also addresses the wider issue of how informal learning contexts might provide teacher education institutes (TEIs) with a knowledge space for nurturing personal and professional skills in new teachers. Keywords




Community-based EL Community knowledge Innovative pedagogy Teacher education




4.1


Informal science learning


Introduction

The work described in this book is built on the premise that the local community acts as a powerful knowledge space for student teachers. First, through the establishment of reciprocal arrangements with community partners, the CBEL initiatives described in this case study serve as a response to two salient questions in teacher © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 G. Harfitt and J. M. L. Chow, Employing Community-Based Experiential Learning in Teacher Education, Springer Texts in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6003-3_4

61

62

4

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 1 Pushing the Boundaries …

education posed by Clandinin and Husu (2017): who are the knowledge holders in our community, and who are the teacher educators in society today? Linked to these puzzles is the need for more research on how carefully structured CBEL projects can actually enhance the more traditional models of teacher preparation which typically consists of a teaching practicum conducted in local schools (Coffey, 2010). Such a focus is timely, perhaps, because many CBEL projects have been seen to develop academic and practical knowledge in beginning teachers (see, for example, Brayko, 2013; Zeichner, Payne, & Brayko, 2015; Fourie, 2003). In this chapter, we highlight how one carefully constructed boundary crossing between our own teacher preparation programmes and a local marine theme park has contributed to the process of knowledge transfer and exchange in novice teachers’ professional development (see also Harfitt & Chow, 2018). This process occurred not just through teachers’ development of pedagogical skills that pertain to classroom practice, but also in the way that this particular community partner (the marine park) benefitted from the knowledge and practices offered by the student teachers. In sum, the boundary crossing between a TEI and a community partner enabled a high degree of reciprocity. It should be stated from the outset that while this case study shines a light on situated learning opportunities for novice teachers through the lens of one particular CBEL project hosted in a marine theme park, it does not seek to generalize the importance of this particular learning site in teacher education. Taken at face value, the link between a marine theme park and a teacher education institute appears rather unusual. In our work to embed CBEL into the teacher preparation curricula at our university, all our community partnerships have been developed to achieve a diverse set of intended learning outcomes. These outcomes include the honing of important pedagogical skills, but the reason for highlighting this particular context is that it is further evidence of how informal learning contexts can support teacher development in that student teachers are taken so far out of their comfort zone with learning and teaching activities being so different from their own subject disciplines. Two key issues underpin this case study and stem from gaps in the literature on how CBEL or situated learning opportunities embedded into initial teacher education (ITE) programmes can foster highly relevant skills and values pertinent to teaching today (Richmond, 2017). In this demonstration of one CBEL project, Asia’s largest marine park (Hong Kong Ocean Park https://www.oceanpark.com. hk/) is positioned as the dynamic learning space or informal ‘classroom’ for student teachers. It is also important to consider why and how informal learning contexts should be part of teacher preparation programmes.

4.2 The Importance of Informal Learning Contexts in Teacher Education

4.2

63

The Importance of Informal Learning Contexts in Teacher Education

The argument goes that students learn more from more formal curricula than informal ones (Wellington & Ireson, 2008) and in the context of teacher education, similar arguments have been put forward by new teachers and teacher educators. But is this always true? When can informal learning contribute just as much as formal learning contexts? There is a growing literature on how students learn in informal settings and away from the traditional classroom context. For example, there has been research on the ways in which museums are used as learning environments and also on the different experiences that individuals have when visiting museums (see Piqueras, Hamza, & Edvall, 2008; Leinhardt, Crowley, & Knutson, 2002). In the science discipline, too, there is a wide body of literature and research on how informal learning contexts can support beginning teachers’ personal and professional development. Informal Science Learning (ISL) has been proposed as a way of promoting learning outside of the classroom. In the UK, for example, studies have been conducted on how children play in science museums and on visits to zoos (see Lucas, McManus, & Thomas, 1986; Falk & Dierking, 1992). Research on these examples of informal learning in science suggests that it can be a powerful approach to arousing students’ interest in science education, but tensions over the time-consuming nature of these activities set against the demands of the formal curriculum have prevented the institutionalization of these practices. Geiger, Swim, Fraser, and Flinner (2017) describe Informal Science Learning Centres (ISLCs) such as zoos, aquariums, national parks, museums and science centres as having the capacity to catalyze civic engagement in current issues like climate change. These informal learning contexts can reach a much wider audience than formal learning contexts (Falk, Reinhard, Vernon, Bronnenkant, Heimlich, & Deans, 2007). They also enable learners to make a deeper and more sustained connection with nature and environmental issues because their experiences are real and situated. Brookfield, Tilley, and Cox (2016) remind us that these benefits also extend to adults and not just school children, and how engagement with informal learning environments such as the ones mentioned earlier can promote curiosity, interest and awareness in science, technology, engineering and in mathematics (or STEM). Another advantage of informal learning contexts like museums, aquaria and zoos is that they are often staffed by professionals who are experts in their particular field whether it be environmental science, anthropology or history. What can prospective teachers learn from these professionals given that they might be from completely different subject disciplines and areas of expertise?

64

4

4.3

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 1 Pushing the Boundaries …

Background of Our Community Partner

As mentioned, this case describes how we entered into a pedagogical partnership between our Faculty and Hong Kong Ocean Park, Asia’s largest marine theme park. Over four decades, the Park has worked hard to develop a strong educational voice as an extract from its website shows: Since its opening in January 1977 as a non-profit organisation, Ocean Park has developed itself to be a world-class attraction connecting people with nature, and gained consistent recognition for its animal husbandry, research and relationship with the community… Ocean Park has remained committed to offering adults and children experiences that blend entertainment with education and conservation.

HK Ocean Park has developed an Academy that focuses on education and conservation. According to the official website, this Academy comprises a group of enthusiastic educators who are all specialists in areas such as marine biology and who are committed to environmental education. All staff receives professional training from the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) and the National Association for Interpretation (NAI), and through their educational engagements (connections to local schools, the education department and other community organizations), the staff promote a ‘passion for learning, passion for life.’ When we first planned this CBEL project with the Park staff it was very clear that they had a dedication and passion for their work and we immediately saw them as important role models that our pre-service teachers should learn from. They were not simply knowledgeable and expert marine biologists—they were educators as well, but educators working with a much more diverse and less knowledgeable public. In our eyes, this was a powerful informal learning space for our student teachers who could, in turn, offer the Park their own knowledge and skills of formal teaching in the shared goal of encouraging visitors to the Park (locals, families, children, tourists and overseas guests) to appreciate and bond with nature and to see themselves as the solution to global issues like marine conservation. This CBEL project was able to integrate our pre-service teachers into a highly specialized professional community at HK Ocean Park, a major organization that holds a mission to promote civic awareness of marine conservation and knowledge about marine animals. As previously stated, the professionals at the Park are mostly marine biologists with little or no actual teaching experience. That is not to underplay their role in educating our own novice teachers, as we will explain shortly.

4.4

Outlining the Project

Our pre-service teachers came from different disciplines, as these CBEL projects were open to all students from across the University. Some of the major subjects represented by more than a hundred pre-service teachers on this project (over

4.4 Outlining the Project

65

3 years) included English Language Education, Chinese Language Education, Early Childhood Education (ECE), Applied Child Development (ACD), Social Sciences, Science, Information Management, Arts, Economics, Liberal Studies, Engineering and Geography. We expected the project to be most popular with Science majors given the theme and mission of the marine park, but students represented almost every other discipline on our teacher preparation programmes. With the exception of the ECE and ACD students, the remaining candidates were being prepared for secondary school teaching in Hong Kong. The pre-service teachers were between 20 and 48 years of age and the majority of them were ethnically Chinese (from Hong Kong). Figure 4.1 outlines the main deliverables in the course (and Table 4.1 gives a visual presentation of what a pop-up narration looks like). Our pre-service teachers were assigned to work in groups (3–4 members) to (a) identify and analyse real-life educational needs of the marine park by carrying out an observation of visitors’ interests through needs analysis. This included discussion and informal interviews with the Park’s guests and observing their behaviour as they visited different areas of the Park. For example, students

Fun fact presentation: Research work related to the chosen animal or conservation issue and present it in an interactive way in the university classroom

On-going reflections: Students are asked to submit two written reflections at predeparture and postprogramme points

Pop-up narration at the Park: Students conduct the narration at the Park for visitors

Final presentation at the Park: Students have to present the final narration and the learning process to all members of the Education team at the Park

Fig. 4.1 Main deliverables of the course

66

4

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 1 Pushing the Boundaries …

Table 4.1 Pop-up narration

A pop-up narration is a type of story-telling that makes use of interactive games, displays or artifacts to illustrate environmental and conservation messages/themes to visitors of the Park. See photographs below

A group of student teachers making use of a puppet show to illustrate a story about manta rays and the marine environment to young children visiting the Park

A group of student teachers explaining the impact of global warming on the habitat of seals and walrus

4.4 Outlining the Project

67

measured the amount of time each visitor spent at an exhibit and what they did at each point (for instance, taking photographs, posing for selfies, reading information boards about particular animals or exhibits, and so on), (b) design and revamp educational programmes by designing pop-up narrations on key conservation themes for visitors to the Park with a goal of enhancing the in-park guests’ experience of particular attractions including endangered species, and (c) deliver conservation messages to educate the public. All the pre-service teachers enrolled on this particular CBEL project were given the opportunity to be mentored by full-time staff members from Ocean Park including some senior marine biologists who had worked at the Park for more than 20 years. Through this collaboration, new teachers were able to contribute their pedagogical knowledge to the Park’s commitment to promoting conservation and awareness about endangered species to local school children, members of the public and overseas visitors. This community placement allowed for our pre-service teachers to

Overview

Course overview at the TEI. OrientaƟon at the Park: custom service training and learning about Park visitors’ interests and needs through Park tours and interviews (needs analysis).

Students work in teams to conduct mini-research projects and ‘fun-facts’ on the selected species/ animals or the conservaƟon issue. Present their research and their work to Park colleagues at the TEI. First presentaƟon Specialists from the Park and students from the previous cohort aƩend the presentaƟon and give feedback. Students work in teams to come up with a tentaƟve design / outline for their pop-up narraƟon. Small group The course instructors and the Park team oīer support and feedback in small groups at the TEI. consultaƟon

Trial run

Trial run 2

Real-run

Students work in teams to have the first trial run at the University They prepare their props at the Park and make site visits to the areas of the Park where they will present their narraƟves. The course instructors and the Park team provide ongoing feedback. Students have their first trial run at the Park using their props. They observe the work of diīerent teaching teams to observe others' narraƟons. Students then finalise their own groups’ narraƟon aŌer the trial run at the Park.

Students conduct their finalised pop-up narraƟon at their assigned areas of the Park over several weekends (working as Park oĸcials in uniform and interacƟng with the public).

All the members of the educaƟon team at the Park aƩend the presentaƟon and give feedback to student teachers. PresentaƟon The Park chooses to adopt some of the ideas from the student teachers’ narraƟve pop-ups and include them in their own educaƟon campaigns and exhibits.

Fig. 4.2 The Learning processes for students at the Marine Park

68

4

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 1 Pushing the Boundaries …

Table 4.2 Students’ learning process

2. Fun-fact

presentations

by

student

teachers to marine biologists from the Park and the course instructors / tutors at 1. Orientation at the Marine Park – student

the TEI

teachers concepts about conservation and camouflage through a CBEL task

3. First trial run at the TEI – Student teachers employ simple props for their narrative pop-up and receive feedback from peers and marine park staff who visited the class at university 4. Students’ pop-up narration at the Marine Park – student teachers working as Park professionals and interacting with members of the public on conservation issues

4.4 Outlining the Project

69

be exposed to a more authentic experience of peer collaboration and within professional groups; through this arrangement (aimed at fostering reciprocity), the specialists in marine biology from the Park and our student teachers combined to collaborate on situated and pedagogical projects that benefited thousands of Park visitors. Figure 4.2 highlights the support given to our student teachers and shows the collaboration between our own Faculty and the community partner in providing a reciprocal knowledge space for teacher education. It also demonstrates the sequence of the credit-bearing course and the students’ learning processes (Table 4.2). Extended viewing A video demonstration of one of the programmes is described here: https:// youtu.be/A8lu-Zd5hJ8

4.5

Integrating Reflective Practices into the CBEL Course

From the outset of this CBEL initiative, we also sought to make reflection an integral part of the learning process (see Chap. 10 for a more detailed analysis of our reflective practices in CBEL). For this particular project, we encouraged participants to write ongoing journals and post written reflections to an online learning platform throughout the academic year so that we could examine the student teachers’ perceptions at different stages of the course and learning process: before the project, during the project and immediately after the project. This formative approach provided a lens on the process of change in student teachers’ learning. Some reflective prompts were provided to teachers (see below), but most chose to form their own: – Describe some of the successes and challenges you faced when learning in a different context like HK Ocean Park; – Describe your most significant learning experience over the course; – How can your learning experiences at the marine park be transferred to your teaching practicum? – How have your experiences informed you about educational issues taught in your teacher preparation programme? – How has this CBEL project contributed to your personal, social and intellectual development? In addition, we sought our student teachers’ feedback later in the academic year when participants were better able to recognize and understand salient differences and commonalities between their practices in this CBEL and subsequent

70

4

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 1 Pushing the Boundaries …

placements and work in local schools. We also conducted multiple semi-structured interviews with our student teachers to glean information on key aspects of their experience and learning. This was done in the first instance to help us improve the course, but it also became the start of an ongoing research project into the benefits of CBEL on student teachers’ personal and professional development.

4.6

Unpacking Student Teachers’ Experiences

Student teachers’ views were solicited on the following areas: (1) how this CBEL project at the marine theme park informed their understanding of teaching in an informal learning context, and (2) what were some of the transferrable skills they acquired that were found to be useful in their subsequent teaching practice. It was also important to obtain feedback from our community partners at the Park, and we sought to elicit the views on the general experiences of working with our student teachers. Feedback from Park staff was achieved through semi-structured interviews and constituted another qualitative layer to our dataset. Three key themes emerged through these interviews with student teachers’ sense of pedagogical development found to be the core theme: (1) Pedagogical development, including lesson planning and subject knowledge; (2) Role modelling and co-constructing knowledge through collaboration and mentoring (from Park staff and peer support); and (3) Heightened sensitivity to learner-centredness. The next section is organized around the three themes identified above and which appeared to be the overarching themes across the projects organized at HK Ocean Park. Some of the reflective journal and interview data have been bolded for emphasis, but all reflections are verbatim. The following extracts stemmed from the core category in the study’s dataset and point to students gaining some very clear skills and understandings that were transferred into their teaching repertoire following the completion of these CBEL projects at HK Ocean Park. Theme 1: Pedagogical development, including lesson planning and increased subject knowledge I. “This EL experience was rewarding as it allowed me to work with different children and adults coming from different age groups and backgrounds. With the other camp leaders, I learnt the skills that are needed to work with older children and was moved by their passion and energy in leading camps. It was also a perfect opportunity for me to try differentiated learning and do some play based learning practices learned in my lessons back at HKU.” (Student teacher from Science_written response) II. One of the biggest gains I had was my awareness of questioning skills because I had to interact with different visitors. Some were locals from Hong

4.6 Unpacking Student Teachers’ Experiences

71

Kong, some were adults and even elderly citizens but many were young children. I also needed to speak with tourists from other countries so I was challenged many times to set good questions and to present information in a clear and interesting way. I think this was out of my expectation but it certainly gave me practice for my classroom life. (Student teacher from Early Childhood Education_written response) III. “We are English language majors, so we lacked the pedagogical experience of teaching science as well as the subject content knowledge required for marine science. We spent lots of time developing our content knowledge in marine life. We also did a sharing of our findings in the class, and this gradually built up our confidence to teach even though we possessed limited science knowledge. It showed us how our own students have to learn new content very quickly.” (Student teacher from English _interview response) These three extracts seem to highlight the pedagogical development of the novice teachers when reflecting on their experiences of developing subject knowledge in marine science and also consolidating their understanding of academic theories (e.g. differentiation and questioning skills) through teaching in the marine theme park. The following extract also demonstrates how novice teachers sense they were acquiring important knowledge and experience about lesson planning: IV. “We learnt the concept of “spiral curriculum” in one of the input sessions of this EL course. While we learned that scaffolding and coherence of lesson is crucial for students’ learning, it is my first time to experience how powerful such a spiral can be in terms of learning.” (Student teacher from English_interview response) V. “What was surprising us was how our pedagogical knowledge in terms of lesson planning and catering for diversity in abilities and learning styles developed—we designed activities that required students’ kinesthetic participation to keep them on task, different tasks that require audio, visuals and sensory elements that allowed students to develop and experience knowledge in a multi-modal way. We also learned from our experience of teaching practicum in how to use different types of questions and feedback in a more effective way that can encourage students’ participation and free thoughts as well as checking their understanding. This is the power of knowledge transfer and this experience gave us confidence in teaching other non-English subjects or holding non-English related activities and programmes at school in the future.” (Student teacher from English_interview response). The theme of pedagogical development goes to the heart of one of our questions as we started to reflect on this course, namely to what extent CBEL projects situated in informal learning contexts might promote an increased awareness of teaching skills and subject knowledge in student teachers. In these written extracts, it is possible to see in the emphasized highlights how student teachers acquired

72

4

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 1 Pushing the Boundaries …

hands-on experience of learning subject matter completely detached from their own major or discipline and that such knowledge transfer was evident through the CBEL placement at the marine park. One interesting aspect is how student teachers put themselves into the shoes of their future students in order to challenge themselves to acquire new knowledge in a relatively short period of time (see extract III above), and in other extracts it is possible to see how they built upon knowledge acquired from their teacher preparation courses and from experiences in schools (through teaching practicum) to implement specific pedagogical approaches including multi-modality, questioning, attention to diversity and differentiated learning approaches. All these examples of learning about teaching occurred not in a TEI lecture theatre or a school placement, but in an authentic yet informal learning context such as a marine theme park. Theme 2: Role collaboration

modelling

and

co-constructing

knowledge

through

In the following extracts, the student teachers highlight their impressions of mentoring which took place through collaboration with the marine park staff at HK Ocean Park. The impact of this mentoring was a repeated theme: (i) “I was inspired by my mentor’s story of how instead of forming pre-conceived ideas about her visitors, she found out why many mainland Chinese tourists would take lots and lots of ‘commonplace’ photos and videos. The reason turned out to be a noble one—they may share their joy with those at home who didn’t have the privilege to travel.” (Student teacher from Physics_interview response) (ii) “It was a wonderful experience leading the games at small group time and talking to children about how to conserve the ocean. The camp leaders I worked with was very generous at giving me opportunities to lead warm up games, to take children to the bathroom, to lead small group activities through which I was able to work with children closely and to exercise different instructional strategies among the children. l learned a lot about different instructions and the experience has helped me in my own classes at school” (Student teacher from Mathematics working with kindergarten learners_written response). In these reflections, we can see how CBEL has the potential of providing quality and sustained mentoring which is similar to the traditional teaching practicum model where student teachers are paired up with a school mentor. In the case of the first extract student teachers observed that certain teaching qualities stem from simple acts like curiosity and passion. Numerous reflections from our student teachers contained reference to the mentoring that they were exposed to at the marine park and which appeared to bring important and long-term benefits to them.

4.6 Unpacking Student Teachers’ Experiences

73

Taken together, the student teachers were able to note the qualities and mentoring skills in their supervisors and mentors at the Park which then helped them to project their own teaching philosophy and pedagogy in schools during their subsequent teaching practicum. It is one of the reasons we were keen to position our colleagues from Ocean Park as co-educators and equals on this credit-bearing CBEL project. Theme 3: Heightened learner-centredness in our student teachers The notion of learner-centredness was seen to be another dominant feature of our student teachers’ experiences at HK Ocean Park. A tangible concern on the part of the novice teachers for their own students was identified. There also appeared to be a clear empathy towards their position as learners, as these extracts show: (i) “If I were to effectively facilitate students’ learning as a teacher, I need to be student-centred, I need to know my students well and be curious about them just as the staff at the Park are to the visitors no matter where they come from. This story certainly applies to us as educators.” (Student teacher from Physics_interview response) (ii) “As a teacher, we have to change the mindset that ‘we are holding the knowledge and giving them to the students’; teachers ‘merely’ learn knowledge before students and a teacher’s job is to facilitate students’ ability to reach the same level as the teacher, if not surpass the teacher. Every learner is different and I need to recognize that. I must reach out to all my students not just the ones who know the subject well.” (Student teacher from Science_written response). These student teachers’ comments around the theme of learner-centredness are revealing because in many of these CBEL projects, the pre-service teachers did not actually work with school students as they would in more conventional and formal learning contexts such as schools and university classrooms. Instead, they were able to share important conservation messages with tourists and the general public through creative narrative pop-up talks and educational tours about endangered species including giant pandas, red pandas, Chinese salamanders and other themes and topics related to conservation. The transfer of knowledge on how to attend to individual learners and the student teachers’ empathy towards learning and acquiring new knowledge (as these student teachers had to do for their CBEL project) were also interesting to us. Our pre-service teachers seem able to relate the learning at the Park to their own developing role as future educators—in sum the long process of ‘becoming’ a teacher. Such learner-centredness also points to ways in which student teachers might develop their own identity as educators.

74

4

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 1 Pushing the Boundaries …

4.6.1 Feedback from Our Co-educators at the Park Feedback from our partners at the marine park was important to us in terms of reflecting on the outcomes of the different CBEL projects. Fourie (2003) highlights the importance of sustainability when linking students with community projects and universities. An extract from an interview with marine park staff coordinators demonstrates how this project’s learning outcomes were actualized, along with the previously stated aims of reciprocity and mutual benefit: We were inspired by the students and went through the CBEL cycle ourselves together with the students—from having an experience to trying out what we learned. The whole experience was out of our expectation and we also learnt from the course. The CBEL project did not only provide a platform for students to turn theory into practice but also provided an opportunity for our team to review our education programmes and public narrations from a brand new angle.” (Staff at Ocean Park Discovery and Education Department).

An important postscript to this particular case is that the educational programmes and narrative pop-up ideas proposed by our student teachers (none of whom were science majors) were finally adopted by the HK Ocean Park staff for future use in their education department.

4.7

Implications

This chapter throws light on a particular curriculum innovation in teacher preparation that complements the more conventional models of teacher preparation (campus learning and field experience in schools). In particular, we chose to examine one CBEL project established in a setting far removed from a conventional teacher training context and how it was able to inform student teachers’ understanding of teaching and developing skills which they could use in their subsequent teaching practicum. It not only follows on from the work of others in the area of teacher preparation (Brayko, 2013; Payne & Zeichner, 2017; Richmond, 2017), but also adds to the field of learning in informal settings such as zoos, aquaria and museums. Focusing on one particular boundary crossing between a TEI and Asia’s largest marine theme park, this project has contributed to student teachers’ development as educators and as local and global citizens. Perhaps the most impressive benefit was in the knowledge and experience gained by student teachers in the carefully structured CBEL projects outlined in the case study. As evidenced by the students’ qualitative data highlighted earlier, student teachers acquired tangible skills and knowledge from engagement with this informal community-based learning that has been seen as fundamental to effective teaching. Of course, there were challenges along the way with one being the logistical arrangements between our TEI and the marine theme park including communication and scheduling. While a typical university-based class or programme is timetabled ahead of time and allocated a fixed classroom, the community-based ‘classroom’ of

4.7 Implications

75

the marine park was much more unpredictable as student teachers and Faculty staff were not always available for ‘off-campus’ meetings. The nature of an outdoor theme park also meant that inclement weather could prohibit meetings and outings. Nevertheless, the willingness of our student teachers, the marine park staff and the course instructors to give up their own personal time for these projects (often at weekends and after university hours) was noted and gave us a further indication that the projects were intrinsically motivating to them. Through a carefully constructed community-based EL project with this community partner, we believe we achieved an equal distribution of power and leadership, something which is not always seen in school–university partnerships over teaching practicum and mentoring of early career teachers. Our first action when setting up this CBEL component was to forge a positive and mutually beneficial synergy with our community partners and to involve them throughout the process of curriculum design, evaluation and feedback. This was largely successful and through these powerful and positive relationships, we argue that we have been able to contribute more to the question of how CBEL might align better with teacher education and the development of specific teaching skills, while at the same time benefiting the aims and goals of community partners.

4.8

Conclusion

To conclude, evidence from this study presents a pedagogical approach that takes pre-service teachers out of their institutionalized tertiary setting and places them in community settings to acquire meaningful learning experiences and bridge the theory–practice divide. Through this particular CBEL placement with a marine theme park we have seen that the community is a powerful and complementary learning space where beginning teachers encounter different types of teaching and learning experiences than they might in traditional TP models, but where they can also acquire and transfer teaching skills developed on their methodology and theory courses at university. Some potential follow-up prompts based on the content of this chapter to be used in class discussions or planning meetings: – Make a list of the places in your particular context where novice teachers can learn and acquire teaching skills outside of the university classroom or a school setting. – In what ways might some of these places be suitable for new teachers’ development and training? – In what ways might museums, zoos, aquaria and galleries encourage formal and informal learning experiences of individuals, families and school children? – Think of some potential benefits that novice teachers might gain from conducting a CBEL project at a marine theme park? – What are some possible transferrable skills that new teachers could take into their classrooms?

76

4

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 1 Pushing the Boundaries …

Acknowledgements Our thanks go to all the management and staff at Ocean Park Hong Kong who have made these projects possible for our student teachers. In particular, we would like to thank colleagues at the Discovery and Education Department who have given our Faculty and our students so much support and inspiration: Janet, Alan, Orlando, Ting, Rebecca, Vivien and Crystal.

References Brayko, K. (2013). Community-based placements as contexts for disciplinary learning: A study of literacy teacher education outside of school. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(1), 47–59. Brookfield, K., Tilley, S., & Cox, M. (2016). Informal science learning for older adults. Science Communication, 38(5), 655–665. Clandinin, D. J., & Husu, J. (2017). Mapping and international handbook of research in and for teacher education. In Clandinin, D. J. & Husum J. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 1–21). Coffey, H. (2010). “They taught me”: The benefits of early community-based field experiences in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(2), 335–342. Dierking, L. D., & Falk, J. H. (1992). The museum experience. Whalesback Books. Falk, J. H., Reinhard, E. M., Vernon, C., Bronnenkant, K., Heimlich, J. E., & Deans, N. L. (2007). Why zoos & aquariums matter: Assessing the impact of a visit to a zoo or aquarium (p. 24). Silver Spring, MD: Association of Zoos & Aquariums. Fourie, M. (2003). Beyond the ivory tower: Service learning for sustainable community development: Perspectives on higher education. South African Journal of Higher Education, 17(1), 31–38. Geiger, N., Swim, J. K., Fraser, J., & Flinner, K. (2017). Catalyzing public engagement with climate change through informal science learning centers. Science Communication, 39(2), 221–249. Harfitt, G. J., & Chow, J. M. L. (2018). Transforming traditional models of initial teacher education through a mandatory experiential learning programme. Teaching and Teacher Education, 73, 120–129. Leinhardt, G., Crowley, K., & Knutson, K. (2002). Learning conversations: Explanation and identity in museums. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Lucas, A. M., McManus, P., & Thomas, G. (1986). Investigating learning from informal sources: Listening to conversations and observing play in science museums. European Journal of Science Education, 8(4), 341–352. Payne, K., & Zeichner, K. (2017). Multiple voices and participants in teacher education. In Clandinin, D. J. & Husu, J (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education, 2, 1101–1116. Piqueras, J., Hamza, K. M., & Edvall, S. (2008). The practical epistemologies in the museum: A study of students’ learning in encounters with dioramas. Journal of Museum Education, 33(2), 153–164. Richmond, G. (2017). The power of community partnership in the preparation of teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 68(1), 6–8. Wellington, J. J., & Ireson, G. (2008). Science learning, science teaching. New York: Routledge. Zeichner, K., Payne, K. A., & Brayko, K. (2015). Democratizing teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(2), 122–135.

5

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 2 “Out of My Comfort Zone”: The Case for Overseas Language Immersion Programmes for Pre-Service Teachers

Abstract

This chapter describes a compulsory Government-funded language immersion programme for undergraduate (UG) student teachers at a teacher education institute (TEI) in Hong Kong, whereby English-language student teachers spend 8 weeks in Australia during the second year of their teacher preparation programme. Over almost 20 years, this programme has sent more than 1200 pre-service teachers to Australia to provide them with a variety of educational and cultural experiences; the programme involves university-based courses, a week of school attachment in local primary schools, homestay with Australian families as well as cultural excursions and self-study. The UGs all come from a 5-year double degree programme in English Language and Education (BA/BEd) and the programme aims to promote internationalization in the teacher education curriculum. Significantly, the project also includes elements of experiential learning (EL). In most cases (and in our own experience when we initiated these immersion programmes), student teachers’ learning was centred around lectures and classroom activities related to language teaching. However, in modifying our own immersion projects, we have been able to broaden student teachers’ perspectives by arranging for them to shadow Australian teachers during their time in local schools in Brisbane, Queensland. This is their first real exposure to a ‘teaching practicum’ on the double degree programme and helps to shape their evolving identity as professionals. We also build in cultural activities throughout the programme. The case study presented here draws on literature from the field and qualitative data from a decade of organizing such immersion programmes to push the case for including an overseas practicum in teacher preparation programmes. Keywords

Overseas language immersion programmes awareness Reflective practices







Teacher education

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 G. Harfitt and J. M. L. Chow, Employing Community-Based Experiential Learning in Teacher Education, Springer Texts in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6003-3_5




Cultural

77

78

5

5.1

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 2 “Out of My Comfort Zone” …

Introduction

Human mobility has increased dramatically in recent years and is in line with the rapid development of an increasingly globalized world. At the university where this study is situated, one of the strategic aims in learning and teaching is to promote internationalization across the whole undergraduate curriculum. Our university seeks to promote global citizenship and competitiveness with the overarching aim of providing all students with at least one Mainland China and one overseas learning opportunity during their study period. The university website outlines the goal of nurturing globally minded thinkers and leaders, and providing space and opportunity for students to gain exceptional learning experiences outside Hong Kong. It also sets out to extend opportunities for cross-cultural encounters for students and to increase opportunities for them to gain learning experiences overseas. This aligns with the literature on overseas immersion or study abroad programmes, with Cushner (2007) noting the importance of reflecting on the qualities needed by new teachers in today’s ever-changing world. More than ever, there is the need for preservice teachers to have significant cross-cultural experiences that enable them to teach with, work, and continue to learn from people different from themselves. Overseas student teaching can be the catalyst that starts teachers on a path of learning from others; their students, their colleagues, their community, and their world (2007, p. 37).

Santoro and Major (2012) state that ‘the dissonance created by being outside their comfort zone in regard to the physical environment and communication practices’ (p. 318) helps beginning teachers to learn more about people from other cultures. The same authors also demonstrate that an overseas immersion has the potential to foster better appreciation and understanding of second-language (L2) development, with particular emphasis on the homestay experience and interactions with local people. Willard-Holt (2001) notes, too, that ‘while certainly not a replacement for extended cross-cultural experiences’ (p. 516), short-term overseas immersion programmes can result in expanded cultural knowledge, personal growth and interpersonal connections. A possible reason for the increase in overseas teaching experiences is that English as a global language has led to a rising number of teaching positions overseas and teachers applying for positions outside their home countries. For example, the organization Education First (EF) has long established English Language Immersion programmes and provides the following description of these overseas learning opportunities on its website: You are interested in an English immersion program, but where will you go? Singapore? Canada? England? We have English immersion programs in a variety of countries around the world, from South Africa to the USA. No matter which country you choose, you will be able to stay with a host family in their home, or in one of our student residences with classmates from other countries. If you decide on a homestay you will be immersed in the

5.1 Introduction

79

language and culture of your hosts, as you share their day to day life. If you’d prefer to stay with other students, you and your new friends can practice as you explore. Planning the details of your English immersion program is so exciting, begin your journey today! (Taken from https://www.ef.com/wwen/).

5.2

Overseas Immersion Programmes for Pre-Service Teachers: Benefits and Challenges

It is not surprising, therefore, to see more and more initial teacher education (ITE) institutes and scholars seeking to integrate teaching abroad experiences (Kabilan, 2013; Moorhouse & Harfitt, 2019), or ‘international field experiences’ (Pence & Macgillivray, 2008) into their teacher preparation programmes. Research has provided evidence that these overseas teaching experiences can foster students’ personal growth and professional development (Kabilan, 2013; Lee, 2009; Trent, 2011) including increased confidence in teaching, improved interpersonal skills, flexibility, self-efficacy and the development of students’ views towards education and culture. Development of student teachers’ understanding of pedagogical strategies is another benefit (Brindley, Quinn & Morton, 2009). Cushner (2007) suggests that while overseas immersion programmes, in general, are beneficial for all students, they are particularly relevant for pre-service teachers and Trent (2011) explains that ‘teacher identity construction’ (p. 178) has emerged as a salient focus in the research of pre-service teachers’ overseas immersion experiences. Indeed, preparing new teachers to serve culturally diverse students must be seen as an important part of teacher preparation programmes today, especially given our rapidly changing cultural landscape (Howard, 2003). This is why overseas immersion programmes that involve intensely personal experiences in a different culture might have the potential to help pre-service teachers develop dispositions needed to advocate and practice culturally responsive teaching. This type of pedagogy calls for teachers to engage in ‘a cognitive and affective process or activity that (i) requires active engagement on the part of the individual; (ii) is triggered by an ill-defined or unusual situation or experience; (iii) involves examining one’s responses, and beliefs; and (iv), leads to the integration of a new understanding into one’s experience’ (Rogers, 2001, p. 41). The benefits of overseas immersion programmes notwithstanding, there are also potential challenges and disadvantages. One obvious concern is the short-term nature of many programmes. For example, 8 weeks may seem like a long period of time (and many young student teachers in Hong Kong who have not really left home before the immersion programme initially see those 8 weeks as a ‘lifetime’) and a relatively short time frame could disrupt the development of professional identities in our participants (Gleeson & Tait, 2012). Trent (2011) also warns that the development of ‘oppositional stances towards particular types of teachers’ (p. 192) during short-term overseas immersion programmes can be a problem. It is one of the reasons why we spend more time with our own student teachers before,

80

5

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 2 “Out of My Comfort Zone” …

during and after the immersion programme so as to give them the time and space to process their experiences, empathy and critical cultural awareness through sharing and ongoing structured reflection. The case study presented in this chapter provides a range of different reflections and student data from several years of sending student teachers from Hong Kong to Australia for an 8-week language immersion programme (the author has been organizing this programme since 2011 as the course tutor). This allows us to better understand the learning experiences of our student educators and also demonstrates to other potential course tutors, the richness of these learning experiences for students. The student teachers’ experiences have been organized around personal reflections posted to an online platform where only course tutors can access and provide feedback at three points in time: at the start, the middle and post immersion.

5.3

Background to the HK–Australia Immersion Programme

The participants in the immersion programme to Australia (situated in Brisbane, Queensland, and working alongside the Queensland University of Technology and the University of Queensland) are Year 2 UGs from the BA BEd double degree (in Arts and Education) at the University of Hong Kong. The programme is generously subsidized by the Hong Kong SAR Government and is compulsory for all Year 2 student teachers. This means that most pre-service teachers who go to the immersion programme are around 20 years old. The immersion programme takes place in late May and lasts until late July (winter in Australia), and these times are deliberately chosen so as not to clash with academic courses and examinations in Hong Kong. Planning for each immersion programme starts in September with several meetings held throughout the academic year to orientate our student teachers and to prepare them for life in Australia. It is also important to acknowledge our university partners in Australia who host our student teachers; as we have said before, we also position them as co-educators in the process of preparing teachers. Having worked together for more than 20 years, we have developed a relationship based on trust and collaboration and we know our student teachers benefit from that rapport. Evidence of this is seen in the way that many of our student teachers have remained in close contact with course tutors and homestay families in Australia long after their immersion programme finishes. Some continue to return to Australia to visit their ‘second families’ and tutors. Each student teacher is assigned to a homestay family in Brisbane and spends the 8 weeks with this family; students are not allowed to stay with each other in order to maximize the amount of exposure to English (L1) in the homestay context. During their time in Australia, student teachers also visit local Australian primary schools and spend a block of time shadowing a teacher at the school. Throughout the year, participants are also invited to read articles and attend talks about culturally responsive teaching.

5.3 Background to the HK–Australia Immersion Programme

81

Over the years, we have modified the way that we elicit student reflections so as to better scaffold our students’ learning processes overseas. One model was to set a weekly topic or question relating to the overarching aims of the programme and at the end of the immersion period, student teachers would submit 8 reflections (one for each week). But it became clear that some students were waiting until the end of the immersion programme before submitting these reflections and so modifications were made (see Chap. 10 for more details on reflective practices). Currently, all student teachers are required to submit 3 reflections at the start, middle and end of the programme; this has allowed us to capture students’ experiences and thoughts at key points of the programme so that we can also interact and respond to this evidence of learning. We also encourage student teachers to keep a blog or a diary so that they can unpack their experiences of studying in a different university, living with a host family, observing local primary school classes and shadowing a teacher, teaching some English to students, and engaging in cultural tours and activities. The immersion programme is not graded, but it does contain several hurdle requirements including coursework at the host universities and written reflections to Faculty in Hong Kong. The programme, however, stands as a credit-bearing course for all student teachers. At the end of the programme, student teachers are invited to complete a survey and some of the qualitative data in this case study stems from that database.

5.4

Organization of the Immersion Programme

Our Faculty sets up an overseas immersion programme each year for student teachers in Chinese language (students spend 8 weeks in China to develop a deeper knowledge of Putonghua) and English language (where students spend the same amount of time in Australia). Through participation in these overseas programmes, it is hoped that student teachers from both disciplines have the time and space to develop their global awareness, enhance their language proficiency and enrich their professional development as they develop into teachers. Returning to our English immersion programme in Australia, a summary of overarching goals and objectives are presented below along with some of the core components and features of this long-standing immersion programme. (a) Supplementary and continuing professional development in teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language (ESL/EFL), through English; (b) Experience using English in a native English-speaking country; and (c) School experience in Australian schools.

82

5

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 2 “Out of My Comfort Zone” …

More specifically the programme is designed to provide students with: • the opportunity to upgrade their English language skills; • professional development in teaching ESL/EFL; • direct Australian school experience in real classroom settings (primary and secondary school contexts); • insights into current general and English as a second language (ESL)/English as a foreign language (EFL) methodologies in Australia; and • understanding and experience of Australian culture.

5.5

Core Components of the Australian Immersion Programme

(1) Language Enhancement Module (LEM) Courses are centred on integrating all four macro-skills (reading, writing, speaking and listening) through a range of tasks and activities. This module is organized around themes (e.g. Aboriginal Australia, Australian family life and Education in Australia) and is closely integrated with the other elements of the programme— Sociolinguistics, Australian Approaches to Teaching and Learning (AATL), school experience, homestay experiences and the overall immersion experience. Tasks include • Reading: Reading for information and meaning from various genres including newspaper and magazine articles, websites, an Australian play, poetry and youth literature; • Listening: Listening for meaning from movies, TV programs, TV advertisements, songs and interactions with native speakers; • Writing: Reflective writing, writing a magazine article, writing advertisements and writing lesson plans; and • Speaking: Conducting interviews with native speakers, reading a play aloud, making presentations, creating and conducting a quiz and group and class discussions. (2) AATL—Australian Approaches to Teaching and Learning This 15-hour module is designed to provide participants with a theoretical and practical introduction to various components of Australian teaching and learning, introducing key methodological approaches, such as genre pedagogy and language integration across the curriculum; considerations such as learning styles and

5.5 Core Components of the Australian Immersion Programme

83

multiple intelligences and, key initiatives such as critical literacy and multiple literacies. The module is intended to be closely linked to the school experience component, encouraging students to expand their criteria for classroom observations to include identifying cultural values and how they influence classroom practice. (3) Assessment Assessment for this module is based on a 750–1,000 word comparative reflection on an episode or aspect of teaching observed during the school experiences. Examples of possible areas for observation are classroom language, interaction, classroom management, activity selection, student motivation and teaching styles. For this reflection, participants are expected to conduct a short literature review, describe the incident or aspect of teaching they observed, compare with Hong Kong and draw conclusions, demonstrating an ability to evaluate and interpret what they had seen. (4) Language Teacher Skills (LTS) Module The aim of this module is to expose students to planning, teaching and reflecting at a basic level, and in a practical way. It is expected that students can gain insights into sound professional practice, while increasing their professional self-awareness. Topics covered include the following: • • • • • •

Lesson Planning Identifying lesson goals and objectives Communicative tasks and activities Matching tasks and activities to objectives Providing and receiving feedback Using reflective practice as a diagnostic tool and an aid to planning.

(5) School Experience The School Experience Module provides student teachers with a chance to observe how modern teaching methods are put into practice in Australian schools, in a variety of very different contexts. These schools are often different to the schools they might have studied in, or visited previously in Hong Kong, so the students experience a variety of different teaching styles, philosophies and methodologies. One major difference between the two contexts is that in Hong Kong local primary schooling is discipline-based meaning that students are exposed to many subject-specialist teachers, but in Australia primary teachers are responsible for teaching all subjects except physical education and foreign languages. This is a very significant difference for our student teachers to observe and reflect upon because of the very clear

84

5

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 2 “Out of My Comfort Zone” …

differences between the two systems in terms of teacher–pupil rapport and knowledge, and the design and personalization of the classrooms (Australian primary classrooms are more like homerooms with the same class teacher based there). (6) Homestay experience The chance to live with an Australian family is a valuable learning experience for our student teachers. The homestay period allows students to gain first-hand experience of Australian life with the aim of the homestay experience being to give student teachers more opportunities to speak English, to learn more about Australian culture, and to give them a chance to be part of a family group during their stay. In exchange, the students are able to share something about their own culture with their host families. It is important to note that these modules do not only focus on enhancing the participants’ language abilities, but also seek to provide meaningful contexts for participants to use English when discussing issues pertaining to language, language teaching methodologies and sociolinguistics.

5.5.1 Monitoring the Programmes in Hong Kong We spend a year building towards the immersion programme and we meet with the student teachers before, during and after the programme finishes. That means we meet our student teachers early in the first semester so that they have enough time to prepare for the immersion that will take place in the second semester in order to prepare the students to fully immerse in another culture. Some focus on the information given by faculty members and later in the year (close to the student teachers’ departure date) informal sharings by student representatives from past cohorts are also organized so that students learn from their peers’ experiences. During the immersion period in Australia, we pay observational and monitoring visits across different time points to the partner institutions to talk with the student teachers, meet with university tutors and course coordinators there, elicit feedback from the institutions, and with the homestay office staff. This allows for troubleshooting (where necessary) and reflective sessions to be organized with the student teachers on-site. As mentioned, when we started developing our Australian immersion programmes, we established a requirement for student teachers whereby they were asked to complete a portfolio of learning to be submitted at the end of the programme. Some of the reflective prompts over the years are described below and extracted from previous course outlines. We start with the first set of prompts used in 2011. Your Reflective Journal Should Contain: A total of at least 6 short entries (once a week) in a reflective journal (no more than 250 words per entry) of your experiences and observations in relation to one or more of the following topics (Note: Topics are all related to language): Topics:

5.5 Core Components of the Australian Immersion Programme a. b. c. d.

85

Language uses and language awareness; Interaction with homestay families; Cultural experiences, communication and language; Australian English versus other varieties of English

This produced many rich and detailed student reflections and some of these are presented below.

5.5.2 Understanding Students’ Learning Processes Through Summative Reflections Reflection A: “I have improved quite a lot, in terms of my English language uses and awareness. Since I had to speak English every day there to my homestay family, I have no fear of talking in English now. I have had enough writing, listening and speaking practice already. I still remember I used to be very afraid of making mistakes while using a new language, especially when I have to deal with native speakers. I think this is really common among Hong Kong students, though. We are all worried to be teased. Thankfully, my host family was very helpful and encouraging. They always told me, “It’s okay to make mistakes as long as you’re willing to try it. That’s alright, because we all learn from our mistakes.” I have gained so much confidence now. I am really grateful that my spoken English has become more natural and fluent. Learning English in an English-speaking environment is really effective because my English can be improved efficiently by using the language daily. Apart from that, I sincerely love the people that I have met in Australia. They were all really nice and kind. Since my English is not bad, we had quite a lot of cultural exchange. We talked a lot about life and society.

Reflection B: I have also learnt about Australian culture, which differs greatly from the culture in Hong Kong. For example, Australian people are generally more friendly and straightforward. For example, workers at cashiers in supermarkets ask customers how they are doing and have little chats with them. Also, I reckon that the lifestyle in Australia is much healthier than that of Hong Kong. People work less and leave work to go home much earlier than Hong Kong people. This allows them to have more time to relax and do what they enjoy. It also gives people more time to spend at home with their family members. Australians also tend to sleep earlier, while Hongkongers often sleep very late. I hope that I can live a healthier lifestyle in Hong Kong by picking up some of these good habits of Australians. I am really grateful for this experience since it broadened my knowledge of another culture and gave me inspirations from an education system that is really different from Hong Kong. This will definitely take part in shaping me into a professional teacher.

Reflection C: Having immersion in Australia is a life-changing experience. I remember the instructor of the drama lesson said all learning happens outside our comfort zone. I am happy that I am pushed outside my comfort zone, staying in an English-speaking country for two months. That urges me to stretch my linguistic resources, be independent and develop life skills that will certainly be useful in my whole life. I experienced personal growth and language enhancement when I was outside my comfort zone. What helps me survive the eight-week time there was a good host mom who always listened to my grumbles and a

86

5

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 2 “Out of My Comfort Zone” …

secure environment for me to make mistakes. In future, I hope I will be able to guide and help my students to step out of their comfort zone and survive through when learning English. It is by acknowledging students’ strengths, telling them not to be afraid of making mistakes and standing aside to listen to their sharing. Being a good teacher is not easy. Like what my host mum said, he/she has to also be students’ friend, nurse and mother. What a teacher should do is far more than transferring knowledge because he/she has to touch someone’s life as well. This immersion really brings me closer to the field of education, knowing how challenging it could be and how powerful it is to a person’s life. I am not sure if I am able to be such a good teacher, yet those wonderful and enthusiastic educators I have encountered there will be my teaching models. This immersion program was over-all a must have in my curriculum and U-life!

In these three summative reflections, some of the emergent themes include student teachers’ appreciation of their homestay arrangements and how this became a vehicle for cultural exchanges as well as their own language development (Reflections A and C). Student teachers also talk about developing confidence when speaking to native speakers of English and using the language in more communicative ways (Reflection A). Others demonstrate the way that our student teachers have reflected on their own culture and life in Hong Kong as a result of immersing in a different culture and lifestyle (Reflection B). It can also be seen that many of the skills and strategies learned in Australia were transferrable to their own work back in Hong Kong and even in China. As one student put it, the immersion programme was a life-changing experience. In these examples and in numerous others we have read over the years, our student teachers frequently talk about the immersion programme taking them ‘out of their comfort zone’, (as in reflection C), hence the title of this CBEL case study. The reflections also show how student teachers gained insights and inspiration from a lengthy period of time living and learning in another educational context, and these experiences enabled them to develop their professional identity. The three reflections above are representative of the feedback that we received over many years of organizing the immersion programme. Looking at some of the academic components of the immersion programme described earlier, it might be argued that our student teachers could acquire the same knowledge and skills without having to travel to Australia. But it is important to note that it is the ‘overseas’ component that changes the dynamics of the whole programme and makes it more transformative to our students. For example, the reflections above make reference to the cultural and linguistic aspects of the immersive experience in Australia that could never be truly realized in Hong Kong.

5.6

Sharpening the Reflective Cycle

That is not to say that the process is always so easy, or so positive. In every cohort we are also faced with interpersonal conflicts among group members, homestay issues which require a transfer to be made, severe bouts of homesickness, sickness and allergies which student teachers were not expecting, and in one extreme case a

5.6 Sharpening the Reflective Cycle

87

runaway student teacher. This is one of the reasons we decided to modify our requirements for student teachers’ reflections on their learning cycles during the overseas immersion programme and not just at the end. We realized that while the summative reflections were very personal accounts of how student teachers had experienced the programme and their time in a different learning context, their continuous learning cycle and our feedback loop were missing. What we were unable to capture through summative reflections was the ongoing process of students’ learning, including critical incidents as they happened in Australia (see also Chap. 10). With this in mind, we decided to set prompts for the student teachers to respond to at fixed stages of the immersion programme in more recent years. At each stage (three in total) the prompts were the same. The data source in this brief study came from our most recent cohort where we conducted a brief thematic analysis; some findings are presented next. The three reflective prompts that we set for our student teachers are also presented below, and students were asked to submit their responses online and across different time markers. We seek to compare the student teachers’ growth moments between their initial reflections (around week 2) and their final ones (at week 8). – Describe the most difficult moment(s) so far and how you are dealing with it. – Describe a growth moment you have experienced so far. – Describe something that surprised you about yourself during these 8 weeks of immersion.

5.7

Growth Moments at Different Stages of the Programme

5.7.1 Early in the Programme We have witnessed our student teachers undergoing growth moments during the immersion programme. In part, this stems back to our earlier comment about culturally responsive teaching and how student teachers need to develop more resilience. Very often these moments came from personal challenges or a feeling of discomfort as a result of being far removed from the students’ comfort zone. Our students wrote a lot about issues such as self-care including handling everyday challenges in a new city (e.g. getting used to the local public transportation system, daily schedules, maps and road systems). Some comments also attended to their perceived capacity to adapt and to become independent with one student teacher comparing the process of adjustment to ‘growing up.’ The most difficult moment is the difference of habit between Australian and Hong Kong. The sky gets dark very early and we don’t have any night time at all. I think I am trying to tune my timetable and resting time.

88

5

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 2 “Out of My Comfort Zone” …

While the lifestyle here is very different than that in my city, I do experience growth in adapting a less fast-paced lifestyle and time management … I realize people need more unplugged moments and genuine interaction. It is very often that I go home alone from school in Australia. Although I do go home alone from school in Hong Kong too, but it feels so amazing that I can go home, go shopping and go sightseeing by myself in a foreign country. I used to get lost in streets in Hong Kong even I have google map on my hand, now I can go everywhere with the Translink app. And being alone in Australia, I get to do a lot of decisions on my own that my parents won’t be able to help if anything goes wrong. This urges me to think more thoroughly before making any decision and it also urges me to be a responsible and true adult. I feel like I am growing up much faster here.

Also, student teachers’ awareness of interpersonal relationships (blending into a new culture and reaching out for new connections across the class and expanding new social circles) was prominent. For some students, it was the first time they had spoken to their own classmates even though they had been on the preparation programme for 2 years up to that point! Some felt proud and empowered to step out of their relational comfort zones by establishing more self-understanding through new friendships. One of my most difficult moments is that there are some expressions or words that only use in Australia like ‘dad’ jokes, so it might be difficult to understand everything when my homestay family is chatting around. Yet, I would take the initiative to ask my host family about that and will remember the use of it. I would describe it as my growth moment because it was my first time making friends with people who don’t speak English as their first or second language. I did decide that I would try to talk to other classmates … It made me realize that when my academic advisor or my teachers (In Hong Kong University) tell me to expand my social circle, it was indeed for my own good. I have started to enjoy the lessons here. I enjoy talking to new people, make some jokes with them and share things with them… Honestly, it was not that difficult as I thought it would be … And seeing that I can make some new friends, it truly makes me happy in a way I have never felt before.

Through negotiating their own needs within the wider collective group and learning how to cope with disagreements and conflicts in the new homestay conflicts (including following household rules, diet preferences and needs), students started to develop more skills and confidence when expressing their needs and opinions in a new setting, while trusting others to listen and then respond to those needs. I am always very polite or even “over polite”…. I don’t know how to reject something that I don’t like… and express my objection… After staying with my homestay family… I try my best to say what I really think… It is more difficult for me to do so in English which is my second language. I may sometimes misuse the collocation of words or have a wrong word choice but at least I am trying to be true. In the past, I would just blindly follow what I was told and dare not to have further negotiation. I always felt anxious about expressing contrasting views. I was afraid of

5.7 Growth Moments at Different Stages of the Programme

89

instigating conflicts by confronting others with my propositions. Nonetheless, I decided to negotiate with my homestay by justifying my actions with a sensible rationale. At first, I expected my justification would be met with disagreement again. Surprisingly, my homestay expressed understanding over my concerns. The incident has completely changed my approach towards the act of raising contrasting views.

Some students mentioned they had learned to manage their emotions better (meaning perplexity, self-doubt, anxiety and frustration) over being away from their families in Hong Kong. They employed different coping strategies such as reaching out for support, putting issues into perspective, making new meanings, trying new approaches in a more gradual way, feeling in control and developing more resilience to overcome difficulties. Interestingly, one student noted that he/she did not step out of his/her comfort zone because they had to, but because they chose to. Everything was so unfamiliar and new. I did not know what to do and how to feel. How will I cope with this new kind of lifestyle? Will I figure out how to go to different places and get things I need on my own? Will I be independent enough to take care of myself? Will I be able to manage everything? After all, it’s my first time ever being alone in a completely new place … I was not sure if everything will go as planned. I was not sure if I idealised the whole immersion trip and in turn, will be disappointed by myself. I also did not know if I was prepared for it, mentally and physically. The most important growth moments were ones where I stepped out of my comfort zone not because I had to, but because I chose to. It is about doing things that scare me, but I decided to give them a shot anyway. The hardest part was knowing they (my family) were having fun at home together (in HK) and I was thousands of miles away… the fear of missing out. At first, I dealt with it by calling and skyping them regularly. But currently, I’ve been trying my best to have fun with my classmates and exist in the moment. I’ve found that involving myself fully with whatever is happening helps distract me from the homesickness.

5.7.2 At the Final Stages of the Programme Towards the final stage of the immersion programme, student teachers demonstrated a greater sense of efficacy and self-understanding compared with reflections made at the initial stage. Some of the comments that follow show students projecting forwards and engaging with the process of ‘self-discovery.’ The experience allows me to learn how to find proper solutions for chaotic situations or difficult problems within a short period of time. Before the incident, I never realized I could handle horrible situation like this calmly. This strengthened my confidence in myself and I hope I can handle every problem calmly like the way I did in this incident in the future.” [It] has been a journey towards self-discovery. It is only after coming here that I realize that living in Hong Kong has limited my perspective so much. I have been ignorant towards my true self for a long time and I had tried to change myself for others too…. [Also] I did not know that I will be this adventurous one day. I will consider myself a boring person as I am not one to take risks and I also get very anxious when I go travelling because I do not like stepping out of my comfort zone. But I have travelled quite a bit around Queensland… I

90

5

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 2 “Out of My Comfort Zone” …

will be travelling alone around Auckland and Sydney alone for a few days too. I did not think I will ever have the courage to go travelling alone one day.

Referring to the development of their teacher identity, these student teachers now appear to sense a closer and stronger identity with their future role and identity as a teacher, and how they had started to think how to equip themselves better for this role. One described having a new-found ‘heart for education.’ Others wrote about seeing their future as having more possibilities than they previously thought. The growth moment I experienced is that I think I learnt more about my course and have a heart for education… I really enjoy doing the assignments like Mojo, Peer teaching, material design and more, [which] changed my perception towards teaching. I can create different fun activities to do with my students instead of just drilling past paper… A teacher can have passion for teaching, they want the best for their students. I have a heart for education especially after the teaching practicum, I had so many feelings after the teaching practicum in a local school here in which there were so many students with special educational needs in the classroom. I think inclusive education is possible in Hong Kong and will bring more good than harm. I started to accept my role as an adult and prepare for taking up responsibilities as an educator. [In the past], I seldom prepare[d] for presentations and did not really care about homework and assignments. However, I can now picture myself as a teacher in few years’ time, and there will no longer be excuses for me to screw up on a lesson and teach a lesson without some planning beforehand. I am sculpting the teacher I want to be and am working towards achieving the standard… I have gained so much from our discussion [with my host mum about teaching] and started to have an outline of what kind of teaching I am going to become. [The experience] makes me start taking care of all my stuff and be responsible to all my decision, but when I reflect at the end of my immersion, I found that not only my actions changed, but also my attitude changes. I used to think I am still a student and not consider myself as a future teacher… However, all the teaching experiences I accumulated on this trip and all the local students I met help me to realize that I need to start preparing myself as a teacher.

Our pre-service teachers also displayed gratitude for the learning experience and also commented on learning how to say goodbye, positioning this as part of a growth process in life at the final stage of the programme. I have to say it was sad for me to leave the homestay but turned out they were not as sad as I was. I cried three times [on the last day]… I did feel I would miss them so much. However, my host mum did not reply to my messages when I went on my trip after the course… I guess my growth moment is about understanding that our values towards one another could be different… I have understood that saying goodbyes is just an unavoidable stage of life and the older we get, the less possible that we can avoid goodbyes. The most difficult moment is to say goodbye to my host family and my other flat-mates. We spent so much quality time together…time could never be frozen, and that is why we should always cherish our time and spend time on someone worthwhile. I anticipated the hardship of departure, which was why I had prioritized to dine at home and had allocated so much time to participate in home stay activities.

5.7 Growth Moments at Different Stages of the Programme

91

It was also evident that the development of conflict resolution skills stood out at this stage, probably because the duration of the immersion programme allowed such skills to grow and mature. In these examples, we can see students wrestling with issues, but choosing to take the initiative to express feelings, convey thoughts and negotiate with different people. I have learnt to voice out my views when I sent messages to another student in my homestay family asking her to keep quiet in late night. I am quite a timid person and I seldom voice out firmly and confidently. This was a moment that I have learnt to be courageous but at the same time polite. I have also learnt to handle problems on my own when there are plenty of occasions that none of my friends can overcome the difficulties for me in life. I always describe myself as an introverted person. I am not very good at expressing my own thoughts and feelings to other persons… The entire atmosphere of the immersion program motivated me to adjust myself and learn how to get along with people… for instance sometimes I might not agree with the attitude and values of a person very much. Yet for the sake of maintaining a positive and friendly relationship with him, I would try to think from different perspectives and, ultimately, appreciate our differences. This kind of process or thinking is certainly difficult, but at the same time crucial … We often organize trips and dates ourselves and this always makes me feel difficult to do as we need to accommodate each other’s needs and desires. It’s often that we have different ideas and they are just incompatible. And I think this difficult moment is helping me to learn how to negotiate and discuss with friends and talk over disputes.

5.8

Conclusions and Implications

The analysis and discussion in this overseas CBEL case study highlight the value of engaging pre-service teachers in culturally and linguistically overseas immersive experiences as part of their long-term process of becoming a teacher. The qualitative data and student teachers’ feedback also allow us to see how we might scaffold students’ learning processes through structured reflections. Student teachers have showcased enhanced self-awareness, peer relationships, professional identity and the wider cultural context in which they were immersed. They also spoke about the transferable skills that might otherwise be difficult to nurture in a more local context. However, this case study draws on one overseas immersion programme with experiences that may be difficult to replicate elsewhere. For example, many of the arrangements described in the chapter such as homestay, school attachments and cultural visits require local assistance and partnership with like-minded universities and community partners. Our programme is also very well established and many of our partners in Australia have worked alongside us for two decades now, which is why we are able to call these overseas partners co-educators in the personal and professional development of our student teachers. That said, evidence presented tend to support the literature that has been presented on overseas immersion and study abroad programmes, particularly for pre-service teachers developing their

92

5

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 2 “Out of My Comfort Zone” …

confidence and identity as teachers. We have also seen evidence of students’ self-reflection that reveal cultural awareness and pedagogical development (Rogers, 2001). Some potential follow-up prompts based on the content of this Chapter to be used in class discussions or planning meetings: – Why do universities and TEIs send their students for overseas immersion programmes? – What are some advantages of overseas immersion programmes for pre-service teachers? Are there any disadvantages that you can think of? – What sort of course work or experiences would you want your own students to have if you were to establish an overseas immersion programme in your own institution? – If you had to design the curriculum, what would be included in your language immersion programme teaching schedule? Why? – If you were to set reflective prompts for your own students going on an overseas immersion programme, what would they be and why? Acknowledgements We would like to express our sincerest thanks to our partners in Australia, the Institute of Continuing & TESOL Education (ICTE) at the University of Queensland (UQ) and the Faculty of Education at the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) for all the support they have given to our student teachers over two decades of organizing the immersion programme described in this chapter. We would also like to thank the HKSAR Government for their generous support of the language immersion programmes for student teachers of English and Chinese in Hong Kong.

References Brindley, R., Quinn, S., & Morton, M. L. (2009). Consonance and dissonance in a study abroad program as a catalyst for professional development of pre-service teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(3), 525–532. Cushner, K. (2007). The role of experience in the making of internationally minded teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly 34(1), 27–39. Gleeson, M., & Tait, C. (2012). Teachers as sojourners: Transitory communities in short study-abroad programmes. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(8), 1144–1151. Howard, T. C. (2003). Culturally relevant pedagogy: Ingredients for critical teacher reflection. Theory into Practice, 42(3), 195–202. Kabilan, M. K. (2013). A phenomenological study of an international teaching practicum: pre-service teachers’ experiences of professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 36, 198–209. Lee, J. (2009). ESL student teachers’ perceptions of a short-term overseas immersion programme. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(8), 1095–1104. Moorhouse, B. L & Harfitt, G. J. (2019). Pre-service and in-service teachers’ professional learning through the pedagogical exchange of ideas during a teaching abroad experience. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2019.1694634. Pence, H. M., & Macgillivray, I. K. (2008). The impact of an international field experience on preservice teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(1), 14–25.

References

93

Rogers, R. R. (2001). Reflection in higher education: A concept analysis. Innovative Higher Education, 26(1), 37–57. Santoro, N., & Major, J. (2012). Learning to be a culturally responsive teacher through international study trips: Transformation or tourism? Teaching Education, 23(3), 309–322. Trent, J. (2011). Learning, teaching, and constructing identities: ESL pre-service teacher experiences during a short-term international experience programme. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 31(2), 177–194. Willard-Holt, C. (2001). The impact of a short-term international experience for preservice teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(4), 505–517.

6

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 3 Building a Resilient Teaching Force Through Community-Based Experiential Learning

Abstract

This case study looks into a very important topic in teacher education, namely, teacher resilience. Given the close connection between teacher resilience and early career attrition, it is important for teacher educators to look into ways to prepare a resilient teaching force. We will share a CBEL project that examines this particular aspect of teacher development, and involves pre-service teachers from Hong Kong participating in a semester-long CBEL programme built around curriculum design in resilience and implementation of this curriculum at a primary school for girls in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. By looking at several cohorts of student teachers’ work with this project, we are able to see how pre-service teachers’ understanding of resilience can be assessed across three separate time points so as to understand the development of resilience among pre-service teachers. We also hope that the case study can allow readers to adopt, apply and develop similar ideas for nurturing resilience in the regular teaching practice. Keywords

Teacher resilience

6.1


Resilient processes
Teacher identity

Introduction

It is important to define what we mean by resilience in the context of teacher education and teachers’ personal and professional development. According to the Oxford dictionary (2018), resilience refers to ‘the capacity to recover quickly from difficulties, toughness’. This definition represents a folk psychology’s understanding of this concept. To be resilient means much more than being able to ‘bounce © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 G. Harfitt and J. M. L. Chow, Employing Community-Based Experiential Learning in Teacher Education, Springer Texts in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6003-3_6

95

96

6

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 3 …

back’ quickly. In fact, theorists and psychologists have been studying this concept as a psychological construct for decades and especially in the context of high-risk populations including at-risk children (Goldstein & Brooks, 2006). Here resilience means the (1) capacity for, (2) process and (3) outcome of successful adaption in setbacks (Bobek, 2002; Brunetti, 2006; Castro, Kelly, & Shih, 2010; Luthar, Cicchetti, & Becker, 2000; Masten, Best, & Garmezy, 1990). Such a refined definition denotes the sophistication of this construct and different approaches complement each other to inform the dynamic and complicated aspects of the phenomenon of resilience (Clara, 2017). To contextualize the construct of resilience in teacher education, let’s look at an example. A resilient teacher has the capacity to mobilize his or her personal or contextual resources amid plenty of challenges. These personal or contextual resources include friends’ support or his or her own knowledge of emotional management. This person will then engage in a dynamic process, where his or her personal and professional context interact, that is to say how this person responds to challenges. Eventually he or she experiences growth, self-efficacy, enthusiasm, commitment and well-being as an outcome (Beltman, 2015). While most of the literature on teacher resilience focuses on the first few years of in-service teachers’ careers (Clara, 2017; Day & Gu, 2014; Gu & Day, 2007; Mansfield, Beltman, Broadley, & Weatherby-Fell, 2016), there is a paucity of research seeking to understand the development of teacher resilience in pre-service teachers and in what ways teacher education might contribute to this development (Hong, 2012; Mansfield el al., 2014; Mansfield et al., 2016). There also exists a gap in explaining how teachers understand resilience or how they perceive what a resilient teacher might look like (Mansfield, Beltman, Price, & McConney, 2012). Teachers’ perception on the construct is surely important given that they have a close relationship with their students (Vance, Pendergast, & Garvis, 2015).

6.2

Nurturing Resilience

Pre-service teachers and teachers in their early years are often reported to be most vulnerable in the literature on why teachers choose to stay or leave the profession (Bloomfield, 2010; Dinham, Chalk, Beltman, Glass, & Nguyen, 2017). In fact, it has been reported globally that 40–50% of early career teachers leave the profession during the first 5 years (Gallant & Riley, 2014) because of stress and burnout (Schlichte, Yssel, & Merbler, 2005) or inadequate pre-service preparation (Demetriou, Wilson, & Winterbottom, 2009). Knowing that resilience is not a trajectory to an end point, but rather an ongoing discursive process, nurturing a resilient preservice teaching force is arguably just as important as empowering in-service teachers’ resilience in the first few years of their teaching. Some studies have examined the success of nurturing resilience in the teaching force. For instance, the success of an online intervention programme on resilience has called for more preventive programmes of this kind to nurture pre-service

6.2 Nurturing Resilience

97

teachers’ well-being (Gardner, 2011). However, as shown in a study by Vance et al. (2015), even when teachers demonstrate tacit knowledge of their own sense of resilience, they cannot relate and apply it in their professional practice when delivering a Social and Emotional Learning programme that is highly related to resilience. Knowing what resilience means may not lead automatically to teachers integrating and applying what they know in their everyday practice. To be resilient requires more than knowing at a cognitive level. As such, teacher educators need to bridge this disconnect between learning about the concept of resilience, nurturing it in others and integrating such skills in themselves. Taking these factors into account, the case study reported here makes use of an overseas CBEL course set in Cambodia to create a platform for pre-service teachers to receive training and support in curriculum design in resilience. Through this, they then implement their own curriculum in a project school in a primary school on the outskirts of the capital, Phnom Penh. This credit-bearing CBEL course posits an integration of cognitive and emotional responses that make the learning process a powerful one (Felten & Clayton, 2011). Through the use of CBEL, we seek to bridge the connection between knowledge, skills and application. We will now describe this particular CBEL project.

6.2.1 The Community-Based EL Programme This study stems from a credit-bearing CBEL course spanning the second and summer semesters (8 months in total) and highlights one of the key approaches that contextualizes the knowledge of teacher resilience in working with a vulnerable target group and carefully incorporating Kolb’s (2014) reflective learning cycle into the course. Student participants learned to integrate academic theories and actively experiment through continuous observation, trial-and-error and reflection. The course instructors worked with a community partner in Cambodia, a ministry overseeing girls’ schools and sheltered homes for children and girls impacted by complex and intertwined issues such as trafficking and poverty. The focus of the course was on co-constructing a curriculum on developing resilience for the school children with the teachers and volunteers of the school by adopting a ‘train the trainers’ model of professional development. Students first received input sessions on curriculum design, resilience and human trafficking at our university in regular timetabled sessions. Then they worked in small teams focusing on one aspect of resilience to design lessons with small group consultation provided to each team by course tutors. The actual implementation of the curriculum took place during a 3-week visit to Cambodia in the summer months, where students collaborated with the school and full-time teachers there. The process The whole programme flow with activities is illustrated in Fig. 6.1. The pictures below showcase some of the learning activities during different stages of this overseas CBEL course.

98

Input sessions at university

On-site visit to Cambodia

Postprogramme sharing

6

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 3 …

The Cambodia partner organisa on and another Hong Kong-based NGO working on comba ng human trafficking were invited to share with our student teachers so that they could develop a cross-cultural comparison on the same issue. The construct of resilience was taught through a few workshops where students had a chance to relate more personally to the concepts through reflec ve games and sharing. For instance, students were invited to use a meline to reflect on 3 cri cal incidents in their lives and how they coped with each challenges or incident. A erwards, they were asked to use the resilience model to analyse their coping strategies. Students were formed into 3 small groups with each group focusing on one aspect of resilience: sense of mastery, social competence and emo onal reac vity. Course tutors provided feedback to their curriculum through small group consulta ons.

A 3- week on-site visit to Cambodia was arranged. Each group of student teachers had the chance to implement their curriculum to one primary school class and a ‘train-the-trainer’ session was organized at the school to share their curriculum with the teachers and school social workers. Students also made cultural visits to museums and famous sites so as to understand the historical and educa onal landscape of Cambodia. Throughout the on-site visit, reflec ve sessions and sharings were structured so that student teachers could connect their experiences and reflect more personally and professionally. They also needed to submit 3 pieces of reflec ons: pre-departure to Cambodia, mid-point in Cambodia and then post-programme.

Student teachers were invited to use photovoice to reflect in the post-programme sharing session. Each student teacher selected three photos that best captured their learning experiences and shared on their choices. The session also invited other teachers and peers who went to Cambodia to a end and offer feedback.

Fig. 6.1 The programme flow

6.2 Nurturing Resilience

99

1. Pre-service teachers share their initial ideas for curriculum design with peers during the input sessions at university.

2. A student teacher-led organization (made up of former participants in the project/alumni) is invited to share their project in Cambodia with the class.

3. Pre-service teachers trial their curriculum/lessons with each other at the school in Cambodia to make final adaptations before actual implementation.

4. Pupils from the school participate in competitive and collaborative games to develop social competencies.

5. Pre-service teachers conduct in-class debriefing sessions with their students after the competitive and interactive games aimed at promoteing a sense of relatedness among peers.

6. Pre-service teachers used a puppet show to highlight and explain basic emotions and concepts.

100

6

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 3 …

6.2.2 The Curriculum The pre-service teachers’ curriculum was developed and based on Prince-Embury’s (2013) Assessing Resiliency in Children and Adolescents (RSCA) with three areas of focus: (1) sense of mastery, (2) sense of relatedness, and (3) emotional reactivity. Our student teachers formed small teams with each team working on one domain. These are described next: Sense of mastery refers to the personal belief that children or youth believe they are competent to accomplish tasks or achieve things. It is the power of ‘I think I can’ that creates a sense of optimism and efficacy in young learners. When they can acknowledge themselves more often and have a greater sense of competence, they are more likely to succeed in a school setting and less likely to develop pathological symptoms. One sample activity that the pre-service teachers developed is a personalized name card for each student in the class. The pre-service teachers first introduced some vocabulary of personal qualities or character strengths through activities: brave, kind, happy, strong… etc. They then distributed blank name cards to each student asking them to design their own name card with one character trait that they identified themselves with (see photo 1 below). Throughout the course, students had to wear that name tag and introduced themselves to others with this name tag. Sense of relatedness denotes the perceived social support one may see. Studies find that relationships with others or relational ability are a mediator to stress. If children or youth can create a ‘what if’ support network, they become more resilient when encountering setbacks or challenges. Sometimes for young learners, it also refers to the ‘charismatic adults’ who believe in the worth of the child (Segal, 1988). Another sample activity from the curriculum designed by the pre-service teachers is the friendship rainbow (see photo 2 below). In order to create a supportive classroom environment, students were required to name one of their character strengths to bring to the classroom. For instance, some students described being friendly, some used the terms cheerful and helpful. On top of the traits, students used their hands to paint a colourful rainbow on a large poster. The friendship rainbow was then used as decoration in the classroom to remind them all of the different character strengths that can be drawn upon on to build a more supportive learning environment. Emotional reactivity describes the threshold of tolerance that one has prior to the emergence of adversity. It also relates to the speed and intensity of a child’s negative emotional response towards a distress. To be resilient, one needs to regulate his/her emotional arousal for adaptability through understanding and awareness of emotions and identifying emotional triggers.

6.2 Nurturing Resilience

101

The pre-service teachers designed a puppet show using different characters and personalities to narrate a story of emotions. In particular, they made reference to the emotions using weather terminology and metaphors. For example, rain implied sadness and thunder was associated with anger. It turned rather abstract emotions and concepts into more solid terms in the minds of their young students as the puppet show unfolded in class.

1. The school students’ name cards with character strengths all designed by themselves.

2. The friendship rainbow designed by the students at the school.

3. The puppet show created by the pre-service teachers to teach emotions.

102

6

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 3 …

Extended Reading: References for developing your own curriculum on resilience: 1. Ketterman, D. (2016). Making Sense of Me. Mastering Mental Health. 2. Leutenberg, E. A. & Liptak, J. J. (2011). The Building Resiliency Workbook. The Wholeperson Stress & Wellness Publishers. 3. Ttofa, J. (2018). Nurturing Emotional Resilience in Vulnerable Children & Young People. Routledge.

6.3

Eliciting Feedback from Our Student Teachers on Their Learning

This case study examines the process of development in resilience among pre-service teachers using a CBEL approach. Pre-service teachers participated in a semester-long project involving input sessions on curriculum design in resilience alongside a 3-week placement to implement their curriculum at a primary school for vulnerable students in Cambodia. Pre-service teachers’ resilience and understanding of resilience were assessed at three different time points across the course and student teachers’ feedback reflects the impact of two learning and teaching approaches, namely, direct classroom-based teaching and experiential learning or CBEL. We set out to learn more about our students’ experiences of this course through a simple question: In what ways do the learning and teaching of resilience through a community-based EL project facilitate reciprocal growth in student teachers and student participants?

Eleven students who enrolled in the course were invited to participate and individual consent forms were signed. Ethical approval for the study was granted at institutional level. Pre-service teachers’ submitted reflections at pre-departure and post-programme were examined and we also arranged focus group discussions (FGDs) at three time points (see Fig. 6.2). Each FGD lasted for around 40–60 min and explored topics including resilience, resilient teachers and coping with challenges in life. Qualitative findings identified three themes of interest and relevance to our overarching question at the start. These included process, coping, personal attributes and understanding the nature of resilience. Qualitative differences across three time points further illustrated the impact of direct teaching of concepts in resilience versus the CBEL process to nurture resilience in others.

6.3 Eliciting Feedback from Our Student Teachers on Their Learning

103

Pre-programme Focus group discussion 1

Pre-departure to Cambodia Post-programme

Focus group discussion 2

Focus group discussion 3

Reflec on 1 Reflec on 2

Fig. 6.2 Data collection timeline

At the first time point, the pre-service teachers demonstrated some basic ideas about what resilience was before the input sessions of the course. They identified having a setback and dealing with it as the core nature of resilience (quote 1). However, the content is detached and non-personalized. Quote 1: I think resilience is the ability to adapt to new or unpredicted events or environments, and to recover quickly from hard or stressful times and situations (Time 1).

Compared with time point one, the understanding of resilience in time points two and three was more solid in terms of the use of vocabulary. There were both similarities and differences across time points two and three. The first salient similarity was that students seemed to realize resilience was a life process, where people make active sense out of it in order to be resilient (quote 2). Another similarity indicates the impact of direct teaching of the concepts—students narrated with rich vocabulary and focused a lot on active coping—support from the social network (quote 3) and personal attributes made a difference in the resilience process that were concepts acquired in the input sessions. Quote 2: You have to learn from the hardship if you want to bounce back. Every hardship contains good learning opportunities. Then you will grow (Time point 2). Quote 3: I used to think resilience means getting over the obstacles or bouncing back to where you used to be. But now I realise one also can rely on others, it’s okay to rely on people around you when you are not okay (Time point 2).

Time point three data highlighted the impact of CBEL on student teachers. It indicated a contextualization of academic theories with personal experiences and reflection in Cambodia; such integration was core to this CBEL. Our pre-service teachers also revisited the nature of resilience with more depth and contexts

104

6

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 3 …

(Quote 4) and reflected how the concept of resilience could be taught in their own work as teachers (Quote 5). Quote 4: After this trip, I realise resilience is not just about personal experience. It can be about social issues or world issues, like war and they can have a deep impact on us, emotionally or psychologically (Time point 3). Quote 5: How you can actually nurture resilience to students? You first have to develop the awareness of such concepts and it then takes time to develop the qualities like sense of relatedness among the peers. It takes longer time than what we did (Time point 3).

6.4

Conclusion

The case study provides some clues about understanding the development of resilience in pre-service teachers through CBEL. Given the fact that resilience is a complex interplay between internal attributes and external factors, a longitudinal methodology allows readers to track and understand the process of change among pre-service teachers and is something to consider on similar courses and programmes. It also provides evidence-based support for using CBEL as pedagogy in comparison with the traditional ‘talk and chalk’ approach to promoting resilience in student teachers through university lectures. It also addresses the research gap in teacher education and resilience. Building a resilient pre-service teaching force will contribute greatly to the achievement for all students (Day & Gu, 2014), so by better understanding the fluid nature of resilience, teacher educators’ awareness and understanding of this construct is the first step to build resilience in them. To help them internalize the learning, CBEL can create the platform for student teachers to experiment and live out the concepts through collaboration and problem-solving during real-life ‘setbacks’ and challenges. Some potential follow-up prompts based on the content of this chapter to be used in class discussions or planning meetings: – Do you consider yourself to be a resilient person? Why or why not? – What characteristics make you think that you are resilient? And what tells you that you may not be? – Have you ever encountered a teacher you considered to be resilient? What qualities does/did this teacher possess? – Why do you think teachers need to be resilient? – Can we nurture resilience through regular classroom activities? What might be some limitations to this approach? – What are the potential advantages of using a CBEL approach to nurture resilience in pre-service teachers? – How might you structure a course around a theme such as resilience and collaborate with a community partner in your own context?

6.4 Conclusion

105

Acknowledgements We would like to thank all the teachers and staff at the Pleroma School for girls in Phnom Penh, Cambodia for partnering with our student teachers and for offering us such a powerful learning space. Also, we would like to express our gratitude to the United Board for Christian Higher Education in Asia for the funding support under the project ‘Developing Resilient Student Teachers by Nurturing Resilience in Others: A Service-Learning Approach in Cambodia’ in 2018.

References Beltman, S. (2015). Teacher professional resilience: Thriving not just surviving. In N. Weatherby-Fell (Ed.), Learning to teach in the secondary school (pp. 20–38). Melbourne, Australia: Cambridge University Press. Bloomfield, D. (2010). Emotions and “getting by”: A pre-service teacher navigating professional experience. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 38(3), 221–234. Bobek, B. L. (2002). Teacher resiliency: A key to career longevity. The Clearing House, 75(4), 202–205. Brunetti, G. J. (2006). Resilience under fire: Perspectives on the work of experienced, inner city high school teachers in the United States. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(7), 812–825. Castro, A. J., Kelly, J., & Shih, M. (2010). Resilience strategies for new teachers in high-needs areas. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(3), 622–629. Clara, M. (2017). Teacher resilience and meaning transformation: How teachers reappraise situations of adversity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 63, 82–91. Day, C. & Gu, Q. (2014). Resilient teachers, resilient schools: Building and sustaining quality in testing times. Routledge. Demetriou, H., Wilson, E., & Winterbottom, M. (2009). The role of emotion in teaching: Are there differences between male and female newly qualified teachers’ approaches to teaching? Educational Studies, 35(4), 449–473. Dinham, J., Chalk, B., Beltman, S., Glass, C., & Nguyen, B. (2017). Pathways to resilience: How drawings reveal pre-service teachers’ core narratives underpinning their future teacher-selves. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 45(2), 126–144. Felten, P., & Clayton, P. H. (2011). Service-learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2011(128), 75–84. Gallant, A., & Riley, P. (2014). Early career teacher attrition: New thoughts on an intractable problem. Teacher Development, 18(4), 562–580. Gardner, S. (2011). Stress among prospective teachers: A review of the literature. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(1), 18–28. Goldstein, S., & Brooks, R. (2006). Why study resilience? In S. Goldstein & R. Brooks (Eds.), The handbook of resilience in children (pp. 3–15). New York, NY: Kluwer. Gu, Q., & Day, C. (2007). Teachers’ resilience: A necessary condition for effectiveness. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(8), 1302–1316. Hong, J. Y. (2012). Why do some beginning teachers leave the school, and others stay? Understanding teacher resilience through psychological lenses. Teachers and Teaching, 18(4), 417–440. Kolb, D. A. (2014). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. FT Press.

106

6

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 3 …

Luthar, S. S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development, 71(3), 543–562. Mansfield, C. F., Beltman, S., Broadley, T., & Weatherby-Fell, N. (2016). Building resilience in teacher education: An evidenced informed framework. Teaching and Teacher Education, 54, 77–87. Mansfield, C., Beltman, S., & Price, A. (2014). ‘I’m coming back again!’ The resilience process of early career teachers. Teachers and Teaching, 20(5), 547–567. Mansfield, C., Beltman, S., Price, A., & McConney, A. (2012). “Don’t sweat the small stuff:” Understanding teacher resilience at the chalkface. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, 357–367. Masten, A. S., Best, K. M., & Garmezy, N. (1990). Resilience and development: Contributions from the study of children who overcome adversity. Development and Psychopathology, 2(4), 425–444. Oxford Dictionaries. (2018). Retrieved December 12, 2018, from https://en.oxforddictionaries. com/definition/resilience. Schlichte, J., Yssel, N., & Merbler, J. (2005). Pathways to burnout: Case studies in teacher isolation and alienation. Preventing School Failure, 50(1), 35–40. Segal, Z. V. (1988). Appraisal of the self-schema construct in cognitive models of depression. Psychological Bulletin, 103(2), 147. Vance, A., Pendergast, D., & Garvis, S. (2015). Teaching resilience: A narrative inquiry into the importance of teacher resilience. Pastoral Care in Education, 33(4), 195–204.

7

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 4 Sustaining Community-Based Experiential Learning Projects Through Student-Led Initiatives

Abstract

As seen in our previous case studies, community-based experiential learning (CBEL) can be transformative to many student teachers’ lives. While many CBEL projects can stand as one-off events (for example, a short summer programme) for a few CBEL programmes it can be challenging to ensure that these projects sustain beyond course level, or promote students’ long-term developmental growth. One way we have found of facilitating this sustainability is through the continued engagement of our student teachers in CBEL projects. This case study reports on a student-led CBEL initiative that is seen to empower student teachers with agency and ownership. We also report the benefits and challenges of such student-led projects, which elevate student teachers’ role to that of facilitator and project leader. Through this, we hope to show readers how student teachers might be motivated to extend their learning in CBEL through the design and implementation of their own community-based projects. Keywords




Empowerment Student-led CBEL initiatives Institutionalizing CBEL

7.1


Student voice
Sustainability


Introduction

Community-based experiential learning (CBEL) has been shown to have a profound impact on students and their learning (McKee, 2016) and also on student teachers’ personal and professional development (Harfitt & Chow, 2018). Many studies have examined this impact including areas such as students’ growth in terms of academic knowledge, skills development and attitudinal changes (Celio, Durlak, & Dymnicki, 2011). However, most studies make use of cross-sectional data and study the one-off or immediate effect of different types of CBEL programmes. © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 G. Harfitt and J. M. L. Chow, Employing Community-Based Experiential Learning in Teacher Education, Springer Texts in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6003-3_7

107

108

7

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 4 …

There are very few studies that scrutinize how the growth and development of students can be sustained over time. That is to say, how students further develop themselves as leaders after completing one CBEL programme and how the benefits and gains can be prolonged post-programme. The case study reported here shares findings from a student-led project, whereby student teachers transformed themselves into leaders and initiated their own follow-up CBEL project after completing our existing credit-bearing CBEL courses based in Cambodia (see Chap. 6).

7.2

Institutionalising CBEL

The internationalization of higher education (HE) has driven the development of CBEL as a pedagogy for preparing undergraduate students to become more engaged global citizens (Intolubbe-Chmil, Spreen, & Swap, 2012). 94% of HE institutes have institutionalized CBEL by establishing at least one unit to look after these types of fieldwork placements (Campus Compact, 2015). While the staff in these units play a central and critical role as change agent leaders for institutionalizing CBEL within HE (Astin & Astin, 2000) there are some issues surrounding this trend including the fact that no particular professional preparation path has been provided for staff and more research in this regard is needed to help inform practice on community engagement in HE (Dostilio, 2017). This trend of institutionalizing EL in HE notwithstanding, experience per se does not guarantee growth and transformation. For transformative learning to take place, reflection needs to play a central and active role. Critical reflection allows students to change their perspectives that result in transformative learning (Mezirow, 1991), whereas CBEL as pedagogy can provide the ideal platform for such a transformation to take place. While the learning outcomes associated with this high impact learning are well documented in the literature (see Deeley, 2014; Celio et al., 2011), a few have looked into the students’ readiness for transformation and students’ continuous application of what they have learned beyond CBEL (Taylor et al., 2018). In other words, what factors promote transformative learning and how can this transformation be sustained over time and in other contexts beyond the programme level? Furthermore, how can prospective teachers learn from these transformative learning opportunities? This case study bridges this gap by looking into student-led CBEL initiatives and sets out to study the transferrable skills inherent in these experiences. Traditional CBEL programmes rely on course instructors as facilitators, whereas student-led CBEL can place student teachers at the core of the experience creation through ownership of the project (Marvell et al., 2013). By designing their own CBEL initiatives, student teachers have to decide what academic theories to apply in this context and how they can facilitate other learners or participants’ reflective learning cycles. Such empowerment creates an increased sense of autonomy in student teachers as learners and as leaders (Coe & Smyth, 2010) and arguably enhances deeper levels of learning (Marvell et al., 2013).

7.2 Institutionalising CBEL

109

7.2.1 Situating the Current Case Study A case study approach (see Yin, 2014) was adopted in this study involving three student teacher participants, who subsequently initiated their own CBEL project in Cambodia. This became the embedded unit of analysis for our case study. The three student participants participated in a faculty organized credit-bearing CBEL course in 2017–2018, where they had the opportunity to learn about the social and cultural landscape of Cambodia. In the following year, they decided to revisit Cambodia themselves, arranged meetings with local partners there and then initiated their own student-led project after securing funding sources from their University and through self-sourced private charity foundations. They formed their own organization called Beyond Belief. This case study examines how structured CBEL has the potential to impact student leaders and sustain development in the local community through student-led initiatives. We sought to examine this issue through two research questions at the outset: – What is the motivation for change makers in the context of CBEL? – What are the lessons we can learn from these students when institutionalizing and sustaining our own CBEL practices? The study draws on reflections and qualitative interview data including the following topics of interest to us as course tutors: (1) the impact of CBEL on the students; (2) the motivation behind the self-initiated projects; (3) any benefits and challenges experienced; and (4) the sustainability of CBEL over time.

7.2.2 Findings and Discussion Four emergent themes were observed: the students’ drive to make an impact, variables that help to smooth out CBEL, perceived growth moments and perspective changes (see Table 7.2). The first and fourth themes helped us understand the first research question (RQ1) on understanding the motives of change makers, whereas the second and third themes responded to the second research question (RQ2) on lessons to be learnt from these change makers.

7.2.3 Motivation for Change Makers The first emergent theme, ‘drive to make an impact’, was a consistent finding among the three student leaders. In particular, they mentioned the core driver for change was the belief that their role and responsibilities could make a difference:

110

7

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 4 …

Table 7.1 The process of building a football pitch as an EL project Extended reading Beyond Belief is a student-led organization that works on small construction projects in Cambodia and supports the whole person development in children of Cambodia. In 2018 Summer, the students conducted their first CBEL project—building a football pitch at Po Banteay Chey Primary and Secondary School in Siem Reap, Cambodia (see Table 7.1). They collaborated with local residents to sustain the project’s impact and through nurturing sportsmanship in children they hoped to develop resilience and community in these young people. Their second project in 2019 worked with the Samart School—Education for Cambodia Organization (E.C.O.) to design and then construct a playground for local children. E.C.O. is an educational centre that offers free education to students living in rural areas, Spean Kaek, 17 km east of Siem Reap, Cambodia Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/beyondbeliefHongKong/

Students working with locals to construct a community football pitch. (continued)

7.2 Institutionalising CBEL Table 7.1 (continued)

The project team using local materials to complete the construction.

The project team with local children immediately after the football pitch was constructed.

111

112

7

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 4 …

Table 7.2 Themes and categories Themes

Categorical properties

1

Drive to make an impact

2

Variables that smooth out CBEL

3

Growth moments

4

Perspective changes

Contributing to sustainability Self-worth from impact Responsibility towards impact Mentorship and coaching Peers as an intellectual resource Significance of reflective practices Feelings of self-doubt Project management issues Intercultural communication between stakeholders Seeing oneself as a global citizen Perceiving the world differently

The kids were so content by playing with a deflated ball but it breaks my heart - seeing them playing with so few resources makes me think that they deserve more - looking at them makes me realize how many resources we have, and the fact that we can actually share it with them motivated us to start this project (quote 1). I realise that the authenticity of being a volunteer is to connect with the community in a sustainable way. To go further, we should also have cultural awareness to make a more thoughtful and feasible plan for the specific community (quote 2).

Change started from something relatively minor. Quote 1 demonstrates how a student’s observation on the unequal distribution of resources became a driver for change. However, these change makers did not perceive CBEL as a temporary service. They realized that their real impact on the community and such prior knowledge came directly from our Faculty’s credit-bearing CBEL course that they had participated in earlier in Cambodia and which had built up high expectations within each of them for their own project. They considered the responsibility behind their actions and carefully considered how their work with the local community in Cambodia could be sustained (quote 2). This explains why they continued their service in the same project site—also located in Cambodia—as they had gained a first-hand experience of appreciating the needs of Cambodian children and how they wanted to sustain their work and its impact beyond the initial project. Another theme that helped explain their motivation is ‘perspective change’. The student (see quote 3) wanted to demonstrate social responsibility as a global citizen: Spreading more seeds of happiness on this simple but happy land – Cambodia - is the main reason reason why I have visited this place over and over again and eventually decided to work on my own project. After visiting the orphanage (on the Faculty course held the previous year), home for disabled kids and kids carrying HIV virus and reading lots of sorrowful accounts of the history of this country, there is a strong calling in my mind which keeps asking me to do something for this lovely place. I would never say I am doing or initiating something to “help” them but rather saying that I am sharing all positive values I have with their people as a global citizen. (quote 3)

7.2 Institutionalising CBEL

113

CBEL appears to have transformed these student teachers’ values and mindsets. Seeing themselves as global citizens created a greater sense of responsibility for these young leaders. Importantly, they were humble enough not to see CBEL as a ‘service’ but instead as a ‘sharing’ with other global villagers.

7.2.4 Lessons Learned from the Change Makers The second emergent theme, ‘variables that smooth out CBEL’, contained important lessons from these student leaders and provided insights on how best to sustain and institutionalize CBEL. The student quote below illustrates this: I think the post-trip reflection and sharing are needed to sustain any CBEL project….. The flow of ideas may guide students to think out of the box to improve the next project or sustain the project…. I decided to serve the underprivileged group in Cambodia more after my first visit mainly because of the calling in my mind which comes from group- and self-reflection sharing (quote 4). Role models encountered in Cambodia: Echo and Karina, how their determination and faith lead them to their path and that somehow shows us how things can actually be possible if you have a willing heart (quote 5). We can always hear from participants from the past and we can learn from them and improve - being able to see what the past students had done really motivated and encouraged us to do it better, and to continue the project (quote 6).

This student leader (quote 4) shared how the on-site reflective sessions structured in the first university-led CBEL project consolidated her intention to continue the community engagement in Cambodia. Critical reflection transforms learning experiences (Mezirow, 1991) and from the above quote, it can be seen that the student had the chance to connect to her inner calling in one of the sharing sessions with classmates and her course tutor and she continued her learning and transformation within the community’s knowledge space. Also, locating the right mentors or role models (quote 5) for students was seen as being just as significant as the project tasks themselves; these mentors were role models who positioned themselves as change agents in authentic and meaningful ways. Peers also served as a valuable intellectual resource to these student teachers as can be seen in quote 6. In this way, students developed greater ownership over knowledge and their learning experiences (Marvell et al., 2013). Another theme we labelled ‘growth moments’ showcases both the difficulties and the turning points that actually helped to transform the student leaders’ experiences and learning. There are a lot of doubts. Loss of passion: Like the previous point, the doubt to the project can actually reduce the passion cos you don’t know whether it is a right thing to do anymore. - Administrative work first-timer, there are a lot of technical difficulties that we encountered. Cultural differences: Cambodian have a different life and working style with us. Like HK people tend to have a fixed schedule and Cambodian are more spontaneous, it could create misunderstanding sometimes (quote 7).

114

7

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 4 …

The project sounded a bit impossible to me at first when our team come across tons of challenges from the beginning to the end. Despite all the ups and downs, we manage to make everything happen and the gains are beyond our expectation. For me, I witness how I try very hard to make the dream of Beyond Belief come true. It absolutely demonstrates the values of sportsmanship. They are persistence, identity, team work, adversity quotient and responsibility as I am the project coordinator. What we have done is exactly what we aim to share with the kids in our project….. The rest of the team also learnt more about volunteerism, global citizenship and cultures (quote 8).

These change makers encountered difficulties in leading their own CBEL projects. Many of these challenges were in fact quite similar to those of the course tutors who organized the first credit-bearing project also in Cambodia. From project management and supervision to doubts at a more personal level, these student leaders had to problem-solve on their own. The power of teamwork and commitment helped them outgrow these difficulties and become more resilient as individuals.

7.3

Conclusions and Implications

As we have seen, CBEL projects can transform student teachers’ development in profound ways. This case study bridges the existing gap in the literature by showcasing how structured and well-designed CBEL can impact on student teachers’ personal and professional development way beyond the period of the CBEL programme. Our student teachers’ own organisation, Beyond Belief, has recently started its fourth project and in each, they have managed to engage other student leaders to continue their community development work in Cambodia. In this sense, they have helped to nurture other student leaders too. It demonstrates the potential of CBEL to nurture student leaders who are committed to sustainable development and engagement with their communities not just in their home cities or countries, but with others too. Because many CBEL projects or programmes can tend to be stand-alone activities for one group of participants at one time point during their studies, the student-led CBEL initiatives proposed here could be of great potential as part of the engagement process that takes learning and leadership beyond programme levels. The learning process of these student teachers contained important lessons for us too as course instructors or administrators aiming to sustain CBEL at an institutional level. Student empowerment and community empowerment are crucial factors in the learning and teaching of CBEL pedagogy (Munter, 2002). From our experiences showcased in this chapter and also other programmes and cases covered in this book, student teachers need to be transformed from a passive receiver of knowledge to an active agent of change in the community. Community should not be just a recipient of service or support, but it should be another active agent engaged in the process of change. By scrutinizing the core variables that smooth out

7.3 Conclusions and Implications

115

CBEL as well as the growth moments among the students, CBEL can be structured and designed to promote sustained and meaningfully engaged citizenry for the public good. Some potential follow-up prompts based on the content of this chapter to be used in class discussions or planning meetings: – How can the benefits of CBEL be sustained over time? Can you think of some approaches to sustain these benefits so that projects and student participation continue beyond the initial project? – What are the causes for students to commit to CBEL projects? What are some motivating forces? – What makes some students more natural leaders in CBEL than others? – What are the potential benefits of empowering students as leaders to lead their own CBEL projects (instead of relying on course instructors)? – What are the potential challenges to this approach? – What things would you change if you were to organize your own CBEL project that maximizes impact on students?

References Astin, A. W., & Astin, H. S. (2000). Leadership reconsidered: Engaging higher education in social change. Battle Creek, MI: W. K. Kellogg Foundation. Campus Compact. (2015). Preparing to accelerate change: Understanding our starting line. Boston. Retrieved from https://kdp0l43vw6z2dlw631ififc5-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wpcontent/uploads/large/2017/03/CC_AnnualSurvey_ExecutiveSummary_FINAL.pdf. Celio, C. I., Durlak, J., & Dymnicki, A. (2011). A meta-analysis of the impact of service-learning on students. Journal of Experiential Education, 34(2), 164–181. Coe, N. M., & Smyth, F. M. (2010). Students as tour guides: Innovation in fieldwork assessment. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 34(1), 125–139. Deeley, S. (2014). Critical perspectives on service-learning in higher education. Springer. Dostilio, L. D. (2017). The professionalization of community engagement. In C. Dolgon, T. D. Mitchell, & T. K. Eatman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of service learning and community engagement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Harfitt, G. J., & Chow, J. M. L. (2018). Transforming traditional models of initial teacher education through a mandatory experiential learning programme. Teaching and Teacher Education, 73, 120–129. Intolubbe-Chmil, L., Spreen, C. A., & Swap, R. J. (2012). Transformative learning: Participant perspectives on international experiential education. Journal of Research in International Education, 11(2), 165–180. Marvell, A., Simm, D., Schaaf, R., & Harper, R. (2013). Students as scholars: Evaluating student-led learning and teaching during fieldwork. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 37(4), 547–566. McKee, R. L. (2016). International service-learning: Common goals and issues among programs across disciplines. Journal of Service-Learning in Higher Education, 5(1). Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

116

7

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 4 …

Munter, J. (2002). Linking community and classroom in higher education: Service-learning and student empowerment. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 10(2), 151–164. Taylor, K. B., Jones, S., Massey, R., Mickey, J., & Reynolds, D. J. (2018). ‘It Just Had to Settle’: A longitudinal investigation of students’ developmental readiness to navigate dissonance and experience transformation through international service learning. The Journal of Higher Education, 89(2), 236–260. Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

8

CBEL in Practice: Case Study 5 Understanding the Learning Process of ‘High Performers’ on a Mandatory Experiential Learning Programme

Abstract

The final case study outlined in this chapter examines university learners’ experiences in a mandatory 6-week community-based experiential learning (CBEL) programme aimed at nurturing the adaptive expertise of student educators at our university. Through semi-structured interviews with high performers in the programme, we aim to shine a light on how student teachers are being prepared as future educators during such a learning process. We use this case study to argue that professional knowledge is significant, but not necessarily sufficient for good teaching. Teachers need to position themselves in a wider context through a process of globalization and be able to personalize their classroom from their students’ perspective; in short, adaptive teaching. This also attends to the development of teachers’ knowledge for teaching rather than just focusing on their knowledge of teaching. This case study also explains how and why some student teachers perform better than others in CBEL programmes and stresses the importance of student feedback in the development of such learning opportunities. Keywords










Adaptive teaching Constructivism Experiential learning Community-based Focus group interview Growth mindset

8.1







Introduction

In this chapter, we revisit what constitutes good teaching and how CBEL can promote in prospective teachers skills and qualities such as adaptive expertise. This can be seen when teachers are responsive to their students’ needs and adapt their © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 G. Harfitt and J. M. L. Chow, Employing Community-Based Experiential Learning in Teacher Education, Springer Texts in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6003-3_8

117

118

8 CBEL in Practice: Case Study 5 Understanding the Learning …

classroom instructions accordingly (Williams & Baumann, 2008). Teachers with adaptive expertise are not just efficient in their teaching; they reflect and make good use of their knowledge of students, environment, pedagogy and themselves to respond to the needs of the ever-changing environment (Brophy, 1992; Lampert, 2010; Vaughn & Parsons, 2013). Adaptive teachers create a highly learner-centred environment (Peterson, 2013) to co-construct knowledge with their students (Parsons & Ward, 2011). Adaptive teachers are true constructivists and they co-construct their classroom learning process with the active participation of their students. Researchers posit this instructional approach as adaptive teaching (Duffy et al., 2008). However, regardless of the significance of such adaptive teaching for teaching professionals (Darling-Hammond, Hammerness, Grossman, Rust, & Shulman, 2005), such a ‘thoughtfully adaptive’ (Duffy, 2002) approach is seldom adopted by teachers generally. In order to nurture more adaptive expertise among teacher educators, Carbonell, Stalmeijer, Könings, Segers, and van Merriënboer (2014) conducted a review on adaptive expertise studies. The team indicated learnings that involved trial and error with creative solutions fostering adaptive expertise. Such practice-based strategies, when carefully paired up with reflections can cultivate not only metacognition, but also self-regulated learning among learners (Timperley, 2013). It enhances teacher educators to critically reflect upon their own practice and examine it from the learners’ perspective and as a problem-solver (Janssen, de Hullu, & Tigelaar, 2008). This case study demonstrates how adaptive expertise might be nurtured through a mandatory CBEL programme by understanding the high performers’ learning experiences. We begin the learning journey with a quick recap of the theoretical background to this CBEL approach.

8.2

Constructivism as an Overarching Framework

In Experience and Education, Dewey (1938) proposes that every learner has a ‘creative mind’ and can actively construct meaning from the environment. Constructivists believe that a learner is an active creator of knowledge as they make sense of the environment by relating it to their internal experiences. Knowledge is not a static concept as it comes from the learner’s interaction within the environment (Ultanir, 2012). Learners’ beliefs, emotions and prior knowledge will all come to play an active role in shaping future experiences and such an interaction will determine the quality of experiences for a learner. This quality is intrinsically connected and will have a long impact on future learning (Carver & Enfield, 2006). Dewey (1938) also tells us that the highest purpose of education is to nurture human potential with the social aim that it develops a fair society. Given the noble aim of educators who possess the ‘dignity of his calling’ as a ‘social servant’ (1898), he or she will be a facilitator who can address learners’ idiosyncratic needs and helps them connect to the wider community around them (Samuel, 2015). In this regard, educators do not just transmit knowledge to their students; they are adaptive

8.2 Constructivism as an Overarching Framework

119

teachers who nurture ‘curricular spaces’ by putting the needs of the students at the centre of their work (Parsons & Vaughn, 2016). While the institutional context of schools plays an important role in impacting knowledge, it must also provide learners with multiple opportunities to construct their own meaning and collaborate with their peers (Garrison, Neubert, & Reich, 2012). Learning is not confined to any institutions. Instead, real learning is accomplished by all types of experiences that can promote critical thinking, self-directed learning and alternative experiences (Dewey, 1998). CBEL that takes place beyond a regular classroom can bridge such a gap. As we have seen CBEL is characterized by the ‘resolution of the dual dialectic of action/reflection and experience/abstraction’ (Passarelli & Kolb, 2012). Learning is an active process where knowledge is created through the transformation of experiences with reflection and observation being crucial elements (Kolb, 1984). Aligning with Dewey’s concept of an educator as a type of ‘social servant’, CBEL can attend to the needs of social justice in this highly globalized and diverse society (Gross & Rutland, 2017). Taking a more global perspective, CBEL as a type of pedagogy has gained much credence in higher education. Within the context of teacher preparation, CBEL has been widely employed as teaching-related activities, but most notably in the form of teaching practicum (TP) and fieldwork (Djonko-Moore & Joseph, 2016; Girvan, Conneely, & Tangney, 2016). The community-based engagement as a mandatory programme component represents a rather under-researched approach. While professional practice (or TP) has been well researched and supported, community engagement as a mandatory approach is seldom examined in the field. Grounded in a constructivist approach, we have argued throughout this book that CBEL within ITE should not be limited to the traditional classroom or lecture hall setting, but rather set up to bridge the theory and practice divide by focusing on engagement within the world (Thomas & Brown, 2011). Adopting this line of argument, student teachers will need to construct their own professional knowledge and development beyond the boundary of the conventional classroom and develop their adaptive expertise through this process.

8.3

Situating This Case Study

As part of an ongoing reform at the University of Hong Kong, our university regulations stipulate what CBEL is and how significant it is for tertiary education: Experiential learning refers to the kind of learning that requires students to tackle real-life issues and problems by drawing on theoretical knowledge that they have learnt in the formal curriculum…. Dealing with real-life problems requires students to integrate knowledge within and across disciplines, to go beyond technical considerations, and to take into account social and human factors that come into play. It is in these situations that students put theoretical knowledge to the test, gain a deeper understanding of theories and, most importantly, construct knowledge. Senate Paper, HKU, January 2012

120

8 CBEL in Practice: Case Study 5 Understanding the Learning …

Aligning with major curriculum reform in teaching and learning at University level, the Postgraduate Diploma in Education (PGDE) of the Faculty of Education at the University has integrated a compulsory CBEL component since 2016 (see Bridges et al., 2018), making BOTH professional practicum AND a situated CBEL placement core programme components in the promotion of holistic personal and professional development. The PGDE programme is a 1-year full-time diploma programme. In our Faculty, there are a total of nine major subjects in the full-time programme (Chinese language, English language, Mathematics, Liberal Studies, Economics, Biology, Chemistry, Physics and Early Childhood Education). Under a new curriculum structure in 2016, student teachers have been required to complete a 6-week CBEL placement at a local or overseas community-based organization and then complete an 8-week professional practicum (or TP) at a local school in the second semester. Both stand as credit-bearing graduation requirements. Many teacher education institutes (TEIs) have adopted CBEL as an optional elective or integrate situated learning in the form of a teaching practicum; that is, most student educators complete their teacher training within regular school settings without any community-based engagement. Therefore, our innovation seeks to promote a mandatory approach to connect student educators to a wider community and nurture adaptive expertise. We suggest that it is the mandatory nature of these CBEL initiatives in teacher education that makes the experiences outlined in this book arguably more relevant to the global debate on teacher training (see Darling-Hammond, 2012). Whilst acknowledging that terms like service-learning, etc. are commonplace around the globe, too often research on CBEL suffers from a bias because the learners and participants volunteer for the programme. While CBEL and service-learning components of teacher training programmes are far from new (see Brayko, 2013), we seek to answer the question of what happens when an institution compels more than a thousand pre-service and in-service teachers to undertake a mandatory CBEL component as part of a revised teacher training programme. On the compulsory CBEL block in the PGDE programme, student teachers form interdisciplinary teams that work on educational tasks under the supervision of NGO community partners. As learning is perceived as the interactive process between the learner, his or her peers and the environment eventually leading to knowledge creation (Passarelli & Kolb, 2012; Ultanir, 2012), such a learning process in the community allows student educators to take an active role to integrate what they have learnt in the university classroom, construct new knowledge as well as reflect on their role as educators. It connects theory with practice and simultaneously encourages them to develop adaptive expertise through active problem-solving via ill-defined, but authentic problem-scenarios. It is timely to describe some specific CBEL projects that have been established as a way of achieving the above aims (see photos in Table 8.1). For instance, some students were placed at a science and technology NGO that focuses on the design and implementation of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) workshops to local primary and secondary school students. Some student

8.3 Situating This Case Study

121

Table 8.1 Photos of sample CBEL projects

1. Student teachers conduct STEM workshops with local primary school students at a science and technology NGO.

2. Student teachers promote child rights in secondary school workshops and talks.

122

8 CBEL in Practice: Case Study 5 Understanding the Learning …

teachers completed their CBEL block at an NGO responsible for promoting child rights and worked on devising a mobile workshop that articulated and demonstrated the issue of climate change at different secondary schools around Hong Kong of different bandings.1 Other students worked at a local marine theme park and designed a pop-up narration on the subject of endangered species such as giant pandas and red pandas in order to promote conservation issues to the general public (see Chap. 4). These projects were intended to make good use of student educators’ knowledge and skills by actively applying knowledge acquired in their University classrooms. An example would be students’ knowledge of how to motivate school students and design lessons and then incorporate them into their workshops or how to make rather dry scientific knowledge more accessible to younger learners and non-specialists. Through similar projects, we set out to nurture student educators’ adaptive expertise through active problem-solving, team collaboration and structured reflections.

8.4

Understanding Students’ Learning Experiences Through Feedback

Upon the completion of the CBEL projects, we collected both quantitative and qualitative data to better understand our student teachers’ learning experiences. At one level, an online survey was sent to all the student educators for self-evaluation. Prompts included a self-evaluation on different programme objectives, support from partnered-organizations and also the overall learning experience (see Table 8.2). The survey also included some open-ended questions aimed at tapping into the most valuable aspect(s) of the CBEL projects and their suggestions and recommendations for future projects. The online survey presented an overall trend and general perceptions of student educators to our CBEL projects. However, in order to understand the learning process of the high performers in different CBEL projects, we also conducted semi-structured focus group interviews. Compared with typical quantitative approaches such as online surveys, our qualitative approach allowed us to dig deeper into the students’ learning experiences so as to obtain a more nuanced understanding of their learning. This way we were able to ask follow-up questions when receiving interesting comments from student teachers. For instance, as mentioned by student B (Table 8.3), she expected to have more close collaboration between her teaching and NGOs in the future; having a focus group interview granted us a chance to ask follow-up questions and in this context, we could ask the student what kind of collaboration she expected and why. The group setting of these interviews inspires more spontaneity among student teachers and course tutors conducting the inquiry (Brinkman & Kvale, 2015).

1

Schools are classified into three bandings in Hong Kong according to their academic level.

8.4 Understanding Students’ Learning Experiences Through Feedback

123

Table 8.2 The overall learning experience in student teachers’ CBEL placements

Table 8.3 Sample quotes from open-ended questions The most valuable aspects of the CBEL projects Student “I am able to observe students with different learning ability due to the A characteristic of my school. From this I can see how my mentor adjust her teaching style according to the learning diversity.” “This CBEL really gives me a glimpse of how it is to work in a NGO. For this, I Student B am really grateful. This really is a memorable experience for me. And I am sure this is only the starting point and there would be more close collaboration between my teaching and NGOs in the future.” Suggestions for future practice Student Adding breaks before and after the CBEL block—so students can prepare for class C the following week and reflect on work done Student Revamping some of the current placements and adding new ones so that students D have more choices

8 CBEL in Practice: Case Study 5 Understanding the Learning …

124

Thus, we approached our student educators after their CBEL placements and purposive sampling was adopted to recruit high-performing students from each CBEL project as a way of achieving a wide representation of learning experiences and input. We interviewed 11 students with each focus group interview lasting no longer than 60 min. During the interviews, participants discussed the nature of their project, their general experiences, lessons learnt as a student educator and suggestions for the programme. All interviews were conducted in the language that the participants felt most comfortable with (English or Cantonese, the first language of most participants in our programmes). It is important to note that there are some special considerations when employing such a qualitative approach. Collecting qualitative data through interviewing students depends on the trust and rapport developed between the researchers and the student educators. It is important to remember that we had dual roles here; as researchers and as course tutors. Student teachers need to feel safe to share some of their internal experiences that might incur some negative emotions and that means we need to be sensitive enough to moderate the responses. The student teachers should have the right to stop any time if they feel uncomfortable in the interviewing process.

Extended Reading

The research process of the study is detailed in another publication: Chow, J. M. L., & Harfitt, G. J. (2018). Experiential Learning Within Teacher Education Programmes: A Qualitative Approach to Evaluating Student Teachers’ Learning and Understanding Its Benefits. SAGE Research Methods Cases.

8.5

Looking into the Learning Process of the High Performers

The data analysis generated four main themes (see Table 8.4). These were: Professional knowledge, learner centredness, personal and social responsibilities, and challenges and improvement. These reflect the core common factors which were demonstrated in the high performers of this mandatory CBEL programme.

8.5 Looking into the Learning Process of the High Performers

125

Table 8.4 Overview of themes and sample quote Theme

Sample quote

Professional knowledge Challenges and improvement

“We need to understand our students, we need to understand what they’re comfortable with, and what they’re not comfortable with” “So my fear was “how am I going to communicate with them?” Body language? Yes, we can, but not to an extent if you have to understand somebody’s problems, you need to speak to them. So I wasn’t able to speak to them, so that was one fear which I had” “(CBEL allows you) to put yourself in the shoes of a student to experience how to learn” “The sisters speak in a compassionate way, like giving them the empathy which is required, and it’s very important to speak to them, to understand what they’ve gone through”

Learner centredness Personal and social competencies

8.5.1 Constructing Professional Knowledge Professional knowledge represents the major and core theme from the whole analysis. In fact, it represents almost one-third of the whole data units as narrated by these high performers about their learning experiences in our CBEL programme. Professional knowledge is seen as the foundation of good teaching (Fairbanks et al., 2010). What’s more, professional knowledge as the core theme also indicates that CBEL beyond regular classroom settings provides a valuable platform for student teachers to apply what they have learnt at university. The knowledge acquired by these student teachers, as reflected in our interview data, includes an integration of academic theories in the CBEL context, more thorough understanding of school environment, development of teacher identity and different kinds of skills that are all related to teaching and learning. It echoes the fact that adaptive teachers have to possess a variety of knowledge bases (Parsons & Vaughn, 2016). One high performer reflected on her learning experiences to contextualize abstract academic theories (e.g. Bloom’s taxonomy, scaffolding, and motivation) acquired on her PGDE courses based at the University: And you know, in September, during the inquiry learning lessons, we have learnt the Bloom’s taxonomy and also the scaffolding, those kinds of theories, but how to apply into our lesson plan, I think it (the EL project) gives me more authentic experience. Like how to break down the abstract concepts into smaller pieces for students to master the conceptual knowledge.…. For example, I designed some tables and graphs for students to fill in, and students can fill in their observation easily. So the students’ learning motivation can grow stronger, I think it’s quite challenging but it’s also rewarding. (Focus Group 3)

These high performers are the ‘creative mind(s)’ (Dewey, 1938), who appear able to connect their prior knowledge as educators and construct new professional knowledge through the authentic but ill-defined problem tasks provided by community-based NGOs. One student, by drawing on his understanding of the weaknesses in the current education system, reflected upon the role of a future educator:

126

8 CBEL in Practice: Case Study 5 Understanding the Learning …

We need to understand our students what they’re comfortable with, and what they’re not comfortable with. And most of the parts, we have to tackle things they are not comfortable with. And I see a lot of teachers, a lot of schools actually, they don’t focus on the things that students are not comfortable with, they only focus on the things students are comfortable with, that the schools are comfortable with, which is probably drilling for good grades. But as a school, as an educator, as a teacher, it’s about the whole package, you know, the students come into school for the whole experience of being a student, not just drilling for exams. If all they have to do is drilling for exams, they don’t have to go to schools. Everyone, they can just go to the tutoring centers, and just do practice. (Focus Group 5)

Teachers as ‘social servant(s)’ (Dewey, 1938) requires student educators to understand our students from a wider social perspective. One student teacher reflected on his role as an educator in a fast-changing society and how CBEL awoke in him the call to be more adaptive as a teacher: My CBEL experience helped me learn something that cannot be learnt in a regular school environment. I believe that education has been changing, so as the classrooms, our students and even our society. The pace is so fast that no one can know it so clearly about what is going on. What we can do, as a teacher, we have to develop skills on top of our pedagogic skills…. Therefore, we need to develop a sense of awareness about everything so as to equip ourselves to adjust to this fast changing world, as everything is changing. (Focus Group 2)

8.5.2 Demonstrating a Growth Mindset The second core theme represents the challenges faced by high performers. Higher performers do well, not because their path is easier than others, but because of the way they perceive challenges and how they seek improvement. This demonstrates a core attitudinal difference—the growth mindset—where they see challenges as opportunities to grow and learn (Dweck, 2008). Such an attitude makes a huge difference upon setbacks. One student shared how he learnt from the challenges he had faced and how he demonstrated a desire and a passion for learning: I think what my challenges are definitely was that the learning opportunities just didn’t necessarily present themselves. That we have to always look for them, and I mean people are not there to help you learn, or necessarily teach you, it’s just that you’re there, you have the opportunity to be there, and you have to keep your eyes open for learning opportunities. That’s what I found, that you can always learn a whole lot just watching them, observing and listening the things… Yeah I mean there are many different ways, I mean how people treat each other in the office, and whether they’re helpful or not, you know, people in the staff canteen, you know, this kind of stuff. So for me, I definitely learn a lot about the organization, after my time there. I thought it’s really important to keep my eyes open. (Focus Group 1)

Also, the high performers with a growth mindset tend to see things with a higher degree of flexibility. Such flexibility is central to the adaptability and adaptive teachers have to modify teaching plans according to different situational variables (Vaughn & Parsons, 2013). These high performers do not criticize programme

8.5 Looking into the Learning Process of the High Performers

127

arrangements. Instead, they are able to provide constructive feedback. For instance, one project did not share a regular work schedule and the student recommended having the same schedule with the staff for better integration with the partnered organization. They do not see themselves as passive learners in the environment. They see their active role in co-constructing holistic learning experiences as the following extract shows: It’s good to think, what kind of a mode that we want to have, and what kind of relationship we want to have with (the organization). Our experience when we said we were kind of considered as part of their staff, but actually we weren’t really part of their staff during the six weeks. I would say we were more like an out-source, maybe they outsource this part to us, and we were to do as we solve it, something like that. So, was this the intention to start with? I don’t know, right. Or there could be another model, during the six weeks, would we be really their staff, that we have to show up, follow their kinds of working hours, that’s a different mode. And of course, when you do that, you can also really get into, being able to experience their working culture, so, would that be something that HKU was looking for? (Focus Group 5)

8.5.3 Creating a Learner-Centred Environment Central to Dewey’s constructivist theory is the theme of learner centredness in the process of learning (Dewey, 1998). Students do not come to the classroom as a tabula rasa (a blank slate). They have prior experiences to draw on and belief systems that may influence their perceptions of learning. Therefore, in order to nurture a learner-centred environment, educators have to understand the perception of their students. One high performer reflected on this significance: You need to know your students, just like that one of the sessions with (this theme park), one of their leaders, who shared her experience with some mainland visitors. She noticed that how they would always like to take many pictures, more than most people. Many more than… repetitive… not necessarily relevant for most of us. The thing is, she didn’t stop there. She was very curious about why this was the case. She actually wanted to find out more. Turned out that a lot of these visitors, this is their first overseas trip, and actually the fact that they could come was already a privilege because many of their relatives back home, they never get the chance to go. So what they are doing is that they are taking pictures so that they could go back and share with these relatives, so that they may rejoice together. So I thought that was a very, you know, it’s very easy for me to judge– “oh look at those people, what are they doing? Alright, they’re taking these pictures”. It’s very easy for me to do that, which is a shame, because actually these people, they are trying to bring back something, so that other people back at home who don’t share the privilege would be able to also enjoy and rejoice with them. So, I’m sure there’s gonna be a lot of the cases like that, even in my teaching career. You know, maybe I assume something about my students. But the important thing here is being able to understand what’s driving their behavior, what’s driving their attitude, right? So, and there’s gonna be students of different nationality and I need to respect them, rather than bringing my judgement to my first class. (Focus Group 5)

128

8 CBEL in Practice: Case Study 5 Understanding the Learning …

This group of adaptive teachers showcases a reflective stance. One student teacher shared how an educator can use ‘self’ to motivate the students to learn. It highlighted the significance of teachers’ role as a facilitator in a learner-centred environment, which is arguably more important than knowledge transmission in a more traditional and passive way: I realized how teachers’ role can influence students’ learning in field trips. For instance, there was one field trip that I observed a substitute teacher who was not familiar with the students and you saw that the students were not paying attention to her instructions at all. In our PDGE programme, we learnt that teachers are role models of the students even when you go to outings, you will be the role model, which is something very important. There was another field trip I happened to observe another teacher who had knowledge in plants and she would bring the ‘green heroes’ to study the plants together. You actually witnessed that those students were so much more attentive to this teacher and I recognized teachers’ passion had a great impact on students. (Focus Group 4)

8.6

Conclusions and Implications

While ITE focuses a lot on the development of expertise knowledge, the process of how student educators actually learn has tended to be overlooked (Cochran-Smith & Zeichner, 2005). This case study provides important information on how student teachers co-construct knowledge with their peers beyond the classroom and excel, as active learning requires synergetic interaction between the learners and the immediate environment (Passarelli & Kolb, 2012). It provides evidence that CBEL can be an influential platform for student teachers to bridge theory with practice, develop adaptive expertise as an educator and understand teaching and learning from a wider social aspect. This knowledge-in-action is core in constructivist theories of teaching and grows insignificance in our fast-changing globalized world. Additionally, it is claimed that few school teachers are adaptive teachers (Parsons & Vaughn, 2016), which makes CBEL a more impactful platform to nurture adaptive expertise. Good teachers are ‘social servants’ (Dewey, 1898), who place students’ perspectives and their needs as a top priority and create a highly responsive learning environment. As Darling-Hammond & Bransford (2005) remind us, what defines teaching as a profession is not just subject matter knowledge or pedagogy, but also the ‘knowledge of learners and their development in social context’. By addressing students’ needs and being aware of diversity in the classroom, these reflective and adaptive educators are not merely teaching the curriculum, they are also nurturing students holistically. Regarding attitudinal aspects, the growth mindset that promotes resilience among these high-performing educators on becoming professional teachers should be reinforced in teacher preparation programmes. As suggested by Fairbanks et al. (2010), we need to broaden our views on the process of teacher education and look into factors that describe how some teachers respond to pressures with more strengths than others. One critical aspect of a growth mindset is that it allows students to see ability as something fluid as they look for continuous development (Dweck, 2008). This growth mindset helps these high performers to become

8.6 Conclusions and Implications

129

life-long learners, a crucial element in teachers’ skills set for the twenty-first century. Also, student teachers role model resilience from their own resilient teachers (Henderson & Milstein, 2003). Some potential follow-up prompts based on the content of this chapter to be used in class discussions or planning meetings: – How do you define good teachers? Take some time to write down the qualities you can think of. – Now relate that to your personal experiences of teaching and/or learning. Think about the best teachers you have met in your life. What made them stand out? – Think of the best learning experience in your life. Describe the setting, the instructor or teacher and how you felt as a learner during that experience. – Did the instructor or teacher adopt a teacher-centred or learner-centred approach? Which one did you prefer and why? – How can we collect meaningful feedback from our students to improve our projects? – Why do some students perform better than others in the context of CBEL?

References Brayko, K. (2013). Community-based placements as contexts for disciplinary learning: A study of literacy teacher education outside of school. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(1), 47–59. Bridges, S. M., Andrews, S., Tsui, A. B. M., Chan, C. K. K., Wang, D., Kwan, T. Y. L., Lam, J. W. I., Harfitt, G. J., Chan, C., Law, W. W., Cheng, M. M. W., Yeung, P.S., Cheung, W. M., & Wang, R. K.Y. (2018). Designing for Integration in Initial Teacher Education (ITE) curricula: The Hong Kong Postgraduate Diploma in Education (PGDE), in Wyatt-Smith, C. (Ed.), Teacher Education, Learning Innovation and Accountability. Singapore: Springer Publications. Brinkman, S., & Kvale, S. (2015). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Brophy, J. (1992). Probing the subtleties of subject-matter teaching. Educational Leadership, 49(7), 4–8. Carbonell, K. B., Stalmeijer, R. E., Könings, K. D., Segers, M., & van Merriënboer, J. J. (2014). How experts deal with novel situations: A review of adaptive expertise. Educational Research Review, 12, 14–29. Carver, R. L., & Enfield, R. P. (2006). John Dewey’s philosophy of education is alive and well. Education and Culture, 22(1), 55–67. Cochran-Smith, M., & Zeichner, K. M. (Eds.). (2005). Studying teacher education: The report of the AERA panel on research and teacher education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Darling-Hammond, L. (2012). Powerful teacher education: Lessons from exemplary programs: John Wiley & Sons. Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Darling-Hammond, L., Hammerness, K., Grossman, P., Rust, F., & Shulman, L. (2005). The design of teacher education programs. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 390–441). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: The Macmillan Company. Dewey, J. (1898). Evolution and ethics. The Monist, 321–341. Dewey, J. (1998). Experience and Education. The 60th, Anniversary Ed., Lecture Part. Kappa Delta Pi, International Honor Society in Education. Djonko-Moore, C. M., & Joseph, N. M. (2016). Out of the classroom and into the city: The use of field trips as an experiential learning tool in teacher education. SAGE Open, 6(2), 2158244016649648.

130

8 CBEL in Practice: Case Study 5 Understanding the Learning …

Dweck, C. S. (2008). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House Digital, Inc. Duffy, G. (2002). Visioning and the development of outstanding teachers. Reading Research and Instruction, 41, 331–344. Duffy, G. G., Miller, S. D., Kear, K., Parsons, S. A., Davis, S., & Williams, B. (2008). Teachers’ instructional adaptations during literacy instruction. In Y. Kim, V. Risko, D. L. Compton, D. K. Dickinson, M. K., Hundley, R. T. Jimenez, K. M. Leander, & D. W. Rowe (Eds.), 57th Yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 160–171). Oak Creek, WI: NRC. Fairbanks, C. M., Duffy, G. G., Faircloth, B. S., He, Y., Levin, B., Rohr, J., & Stein, C. (2010). Beyond knowledge: Exploring why some teachers are more thoughtfully adaptive than others. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1–2), 161–171. Garrison, J., Neubert, S., & Reich, K. (2012). John Dewey’s philosophy of education: An introduction and recontextualization for our times. Springer. Girvan, C., Conneely, C., & Tangney, B. (2016). Extending experiential learning in teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 58, 129–139. Gross, Z., & Rutland, S. D. (2017). Experiential learning in informal educational settings. International Review of Education, 63, 1–8. Henderson, N., & Milstein, M. (2003). Resiliency in schools: Making it happen for students and educators. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Janssen, F., de Hullu, E., & Tigelaar, D. (2008). Positive experiences as input for reflection by student teachers. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 14, 115–127. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. NewJersey, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Lampert, M. (2010). Learning teaching in, from, and for practice: What do we mean? Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1–2), 21–34. Parsons, S. A., Vaughn, M. (2016). Toward adaptability: Where to from here? Theory Into Practice, 55, 267–274. https://doi.org/10.1080.00405841.2016.1173998. Parsons, S. A., & Ward, A. E. (2011). The case for authentic tasks in content literacy. The Reading Teacher, 64, 462–465. Passarelli, A. M., & Kolb, D. A. (2012). Using experiential learning theory to promote student learning and development in programs of education abroad. Student learning abroad: What our students are learning, what they’re not, and what we can do about it, 137–161. Peterson, D. S. (2013). Balanced, differentiated teaching: Explicit instruction, scaffolded support, and active student responding. In B. M. Taylor & N. K. Duke (Eds.), Handbook of effective literacy instruction (pp. 88–105). New York, NY: Guilford. Samuel, F. A. (2015). Human fulfillment and education: A critique of Dewey’s philosophy of education. Religion & Education, 42(1), 99–117. Thomas, D., & Brown, J. S. (2011). A new culture of learning: Cultivating the imagination for a world of constant change (Vol. 219). Lexington, KY: CreateSpace. Timperley, H. (2013). Learning to practise: A paper for discussion. Auckland: The University of Auckland. Ultanir, E. (2012). An epistemological glance at the constructivist approach: Constructivist learning in Dewey, Piaget, and Montessori. International Journal of Instruction, 5(2), 195–212. Vaughn, M., & Parsons, S. A. (2013). Adaptive teachers as innovators: Instructional adaptations opening spaces for enhanced literacy learning. Language Arts, 91(2), 81–93. Vaughn, M., Parsons, S. A., Burrowbridge, S. C., Weesner, J., & Taylor, L. (2016). In Their Own Words: Teachers’ Reflections on Adaptability. Theory Into Practice, 55(3), 259–266. Williams, T. L., & Baumann, J. F. (2008). Contemporary research on effective elementary literacy teachers. Yearbook of the National Reading Conference, 57, 357–372.

9

Counter-Stories: Lessons Learned from Community-Based Experiential Learning Projects

Abstract

While the literature on community-based EL (CBEL) has tended to demonstrate the positive impacts of experiential education on participants and on communities, this chapter attends to a research gap in the field by examining qualitative data from students and curriculum leaders across multiple faculties to elucidate and reflect upon the inherent challenges of EL within a curriculum context. Findings reveal that for mandatory CBEL to succeed and sustain at the institutional level, the university must address different sets of concerns that face students and curriculum leaders. By articulating these concerns, this chapter contributes to the dialogue on institutionalizing CBEL and outlines important lessons on how to support different stakeholders in the context of EL in higher education. It starts with some of the lessons that the authors have learned from leading a mandatory CBEL initiative within the context of multiple teacher preparation programmes. It is hoped that these experiences will provide guidance to other practitioners, who may be working on similar EL projects in their own professional contexts. The chapter concludes with a brief case study based on a university-wide study of how CBEL was perceived by student participants and teachers. Through this case, it is hoped that readers can recognize the significance of the challenges that are all part of CBEL and to understand more about the effect of these challenges on the institutionalization of CBEL. Keywords













Higher education Asia Community-based EL Challenges Institutionalizing EL

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 G. Harfitt and J. M. L. Chow, Employing Community-Based Experiential Learning in Teacher Education, Springer Texts in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6003-3_9

131

132

9.1

9

Counter-Stories: Lessons Learned from Community-Based …

Introduction

While much of the literature has demonstrated the positive impact of EL (Celio, Durlak & Dymnicki, 2010; Coker, et al., 2017; Cooper, 2014; Eyler, et al., 2001; Gaia, 2015; National Survey of Student Engagement [NSSE], 2007), less is known about the challenges faced by different stakeholders in the diverse situations which arise through the process of implementing and sustaining CBEL (Cooper, 2014). We argue that as a profession it is important to reflect and learn from our own experiences, including successes and mistakes. This reflection and learning is critical for institutionalizing and sustaining CBEL as pedagogy. The previous chapters have presented several cases of CBEL projects that have been highly effective in capturing and highlighting student teachers’ learning outcomes and shining a light on their professional and personal growth through the process of participating in CBEL projects. The chapters also demonstrated tangible transferrable skills that the student teachers were able to articulate and carry with them into their subsequent teaching practicum (TP) and full-time careers as teachers. These included greater awareness of the community, collaboration skills through working with other student teachers and community partners, an appreciation of how interdisciplinary projects can benefit student teachers’ own subject knowledge, communication skills through having the opportunity to present and deliver workshops and talks relating to the work of the respective community partners and the chance to engage in lesson planning through the design of materials and teaching aids that were used to convey important messages and themes to the wider public from the community organizations that student teachers were attached to. At the same time, each project brought its own challenges and issues which required careful analysis and reflection. We start with arguably the most difficult question of all that was raised through our CBEL initiative; namely, the implications and consequences of making CBEL mandatory on all our pre-service teacher preparation programmes. This is such an important question for any institution when thinking about integrating CBEL into existing programme structures. On our courses, we have been able to look at this issue from two very different perspectives. While one CBEL programme was compulsory from the outset (for student teachers on the full-time and part-time Postgraduate Diploma in Education, PGDE, courses), other CBEL initiatives on our Undergraduate (UG) programmes were optional or voluntary up until the start of 2019–2020 when they, too, became compulsory. The following reflections and feedback all came from our PGDE students and demonstrate some of the perceptions that student teachers had towards a compulsory model of CBEL. The following comments were part of summative and evaluative feedback given to the University on our courses by new graduates from the 1-year teacher preparation course. We see these as powerful and significant counter-stories to the feedback and reflections presented in the previous chapters.

9.2 The Counter Stories

9.2

133

The Counter Stories

Reflection Extracts 1 Why can’t I just learn to teach by teaching in a school? Surely the more I teach the better I will be as a teacher… To teach properly I need to have more classroom practice here…I came here to learn to teach not to do charity or service work. I believe it has very little connection to my future career and I think the CBEL block wastes valuable time which should be spent in schools learning from teachers and observing lessons. CBEL should be scrapped immediately. Stop wasting our time. I appreciated the trip and the work that we did but my honest answer to whether it helped me to become a teacher is definitely negative. Cambodia is Cambodia and Hong Kong is Hong Kong. What can I learn there that will help me here? To teach I need to have more classroom practice here…I came here to learn to teach not to do charity or service work. Do not ask PT student teachers to take part in Community-based experiential learning. Instead make it optional so that students can get extra credits if they want to. Reduce the assessment demands. It was seriously time consuming and an extra burden rather than anything enjoyable or stimulating for myself as well as many other classmates of mine. We are too busy already so EL just adds to our load. I felt like I was forced to work extra hours to what I am already doing as a professional. It didn’t add anything that I didn’t know already.

They are honest and to the point, but they made for some very uncomfortable reading at the time we received them. These extracts emerged from written feedback which came from the full-time students (1-year FT programme) and part-time (2-year in-service teachers) and there is no doubt that making a CBEL programme compulsory for in-service teachers is extremely challenging given the already heavy workloads of the teachers concerned. This is still an unclear area with ‘significant disagreement’ for universities to explore so as to make it compulsory (Dienhart, et al., 2016). Some of the comments, however, were from full-time pre-service teachers and these views are perhaps more disquieting because they demonstrate an embodied knowledge about teaching which appears quite rigid and fixed. An obvious example is the view that the only way to become an effective teacher is to teach and teach again in a classroom context. This echoes with the content in Chap. 2 on the neoliberal discourse, where teacher education is more concerned about training certain skill sets to compete in the global market economy when compared with personal skills or qualities (Hursh, 2008). Such views are important, nonetheless, as they show there is still a great deal of work to do in convincing student teachers that teaching is not only about the development of technical skills. As we have tried to

134

9

Counter-Stories: Lessons Learned from Community-Based …

argue, it is not enough to focus only on knowledge of teaching; knowledge for teaching is just as important. The issue of how some new teachers do not always share the same outlook as policymakers, universities and curriculum designers about integrating social, ethical and moral aspects into their learning cycle is important. Such feedback could be seen as discrepant voices and put to one side, but we have learned to embrace them and engage with them. They are valid examples of teachers’ personal practical knowledge and they give great insight into the type of educator that person is likely to become. When deciding whether to make CBEL compulsory or not, several factors have to be considered. There is no doubt that making this pedagogy compulsory can arouse negative feelings from student participants and Faculty colleagues. For example, from our own experience, it is not only student teachers who hold different views towards the mandatory nature of CBEL projects. As Harfitt (2018) notes, to a few Faculty colleagues the compulsory nature of CBEL for PGDE FT students meant that valuable time was being taken away from “real teaching” in their lecture rooms and classes. This mirrored the view of the student teachers earlier who claimed that the only way to learn how to teach was to actually practice teaching in school or university, again and again. It is, perhaps, a worry when such a view comes from teacher educators challenged with the task of preparing twenty-first-century teachers, and who surely need to be more adaptable and flexible in the face of a diverse and ever-changing educational landscape. When we are preparing teachers to become global citizens and who are more sensitive to their own community’s needs it surely helps if the teacher educators themselves are equally open-minded and engaged with the world outside of their own classrooms. A number of colleagues also expressed concern about the workload of these CBEL projects and there is a definite tension between the labour intensive, ‘hands-on’ nature of these situated learning projects set up outside of the university walls and the demand on many colleagues to get tenure and promotion. In some cases, these CBEL courses are seen as a threat to more traditional and controllable teaching modes such as a typical course of input lectures followed by a written assignment or a group presentation. There is no doubt that such a course is easier and more manageable for tutors and course instructors. Worryingly, some primary and secondary school heads and mentors have told us that CBEL is a waste of time and resources with one school leader arguing that his school’s sole responsibility was to secure the highest possible academic grades for his pupils and that it was not the school’s duty to serve the community or even the development of novice teachers. Such a view shows the range of deep-seated beliefs about how best to nurture tomorrow’s students and teachers. A final constraint to such innovations is that colleagues may feel that they lack the expertise or knowledge to organize these types of learning experiences for students because they also involve ongoing communication with outside stakeholders including community partners and NGOs. This is a genuine concern to some colleagues, but we argue that we were also in the same position starting out with a blank canvas when we first envisioned CBEL in our Faculty. One of the obvious ways to address this experience gap is through professional development

9.2 The Counter Stories

135

sharings but also (as in our case) nurturing and encouraging colleagues who wanted to offer their own projects. This has led to an increase in the number of CBEL projects we have been able to offer students teachers and widened the scope in terms of disciplinary focus. For teachers, well-structured CBEL requires lots of negotiation and scaffolding, and of course resources and time commitment. These factors undoubtedly stand out as challenges (Gibson, et al., 2011) to any course director or curriculum leader. Teachers, as the facilitators of these CBEL projects, are also co-learners in the process (Savage, et al., 2015), which is quite different from the traditional lecture-based contexts where they are often positioned as the main source of authority. In fact, in the context of higher education, many teachers are hired based on their research profile and not necessarily for their pedagogical skills (Estepp, Roberts & Carter, 2012). Given that teachers are often the link between subject knowledge and their students (McLaughlin et al., 2005), continuous professional development for teachers is crucial (Bender, 2007; Kuit, Relay & Freeman, 2001; Leibowitz, 2014) and this is especially true in the context of CBEL where many of the learning outcomes need to be unfolded with different stakeholders (Zhang et al., 2013). Faculties are encouraged to provide space and time for colleagues to promote their own CBEL courses and initiatives; such curriculum innovation and renewal can have a powerful impact on Faculty and help to bridge subject disciplines and interests. Researching their practice and scholarship of learning should also be important considerations for colleagues who engage in these curriculum initiatives. Our experience has been a mixed one in these regards, but we maintain that the benefits of CBEL for our student teachers outweigh some of the more negative responses and feedback from different participants and colleagues. We continue to make the case for CBEL projects believing that they are one important way of achieving our goal of preparing twenty-first centuries who are caring, reflective and collaborative cultivators as well as competent technicians in their own subject or discipline. It is up to individual institutions to decide on the approach that best meets the needs for their own students, but we do not regret our decision to make CBEL compulsory because it has been a transformative experience for us as well as the students who have participated in the courses we have offered.

9.3

Challenges of Implementing CBEL

Regardless of the growing significance of CBEL in higher education, there are still multiple challenges for teachers as well as students in such novel, complex and diverse learning contexts. As we said in an earlier chapter, not all experiences are educative according to Dewey (1938). A meaningful CBEL programme does not arise merely from the presence of a community partner-site to host the project or task. The quality of learning will also be determined by the physical and social environment and the peer relationships (Kolb & Kolb, 2005). For instance, a learner’s prior knowledge and experience, the group characteristics or dynamic and

136

9

Counter-Stories: Lessons Learned from Community-Based …

even the situational variables like any unanticipated events could create unforeseen challenges for both learners and course instructors (Ewert & Sibthorp, 2009). For students, the CBEL classroom showcases interdisciplinary learning similar to situated, real-world learning which can be fundamentally different from the compartmentalized learning often seen in regular classrooms; students’ learning processes and outcomes are often more fluid and less predictable in CBEL (Wurdinger, 2005). In a more traditional classroom setting, students probably need to prepare the subject content and submit learning tasks to teachers regularly whereas in CBEL students need to problem-solve, work in teams and draw on the knowledge of different stakeholders they encounter through CBEL. For sure, the uncertainties associated with CBEL can create distress among students and some of these experiences can be emotionally draining, especially when students’ personal values are confronted (Deeley, 2010). There are also ethical concerns if student teachers cannot adapt to novel learning situations (Bordelon & Philips, 2006). The cultural shock and cognitive dissonance mean that teachers require extra support and guidance when preparing and unpacking should the CBEL project involve a different cultural setting or group (Intolubbe-Chmil, Spreen & Swap, 2012). As seen, these challenges again point to the need for teachers’ continuous professional development for adopting CBEL as pedagogy We have also shown how reflection is a bridge between experience and learning and this has been widely adopted as both an assessment and a tool to understand the learning processes inherent in of CBEL (Harvey, 2016) and yet, teachers often lack the necessary training and sensitivity to adopt it effectively (Cowan, 2014; Ryan, 2010). As there is a growing demand for institutions to look for tangible returns of investing in students’ learning (Tomlinson, 2008), adopting CBEL as pedagogy has placed new burdens on teachers making continuous professional development crucial for the successful institutionalization of CBEL (see Chap. 10 for a more detailed look at reflection). A considerable gap exists between ‘the rhetoric of global and international education and the reality of institutional activities and outcomes’ (Olson, Green & Hill, 2005). At the institutional level, the successful implementation of community-based EL relies on strong leadership and a collaborative effort among different stakeholders (Selin, Schuett & Carr, 2000). However, there is a paucity of data on the experiences and perceptions from those Faculties, who have sustained such important work (Chan, Ngai & Kwan, 2017; Cooper, 2014). Hou (2009) studied one faculty’s programme effort in CBEL and reflected notable challenges faced by professors and students. They included tremendous time commitment and student anxiety. In our own context, we earlier reported that some faculty members held a negative view towards our own CBEL because it did not align with their own views on how best to prepare teachers for full-time work in schools (Harfitt & Chow, 2018). So, while much of the research conducted in the area of CBEL provides important theoretical insights, they can sometimes remain rather abstract and a contrast to the actual practice (Thomas, 2008). More research and dialogue in this regard will help inform practice, sustain and institutionalize EL as pedagogy in higher education.

9.4 Our Experience: A Case Study

9.4

137

Our Experience: A Case Study

This section grew out of a study that aimed to map our university’s experiences in institutionalizing CBEL by making it a mandatory requirement for all undergraduates. It is based on interviews with curriculum leaders and students across ten faculties and tapped into their experiences and perceptions of these CBEL initiatives. The authors investigate unforeseen consequences and the impacts of CBEL (both positive and negative), but specifically the challenges faced by teachers and students and the lessons to be learned thereon. With growing interest in this CBEL engagement (Bringle & Steinberg, 2010; Harfitt & Chow, 2018), the study shines a light on lessons learned from tensions that can arise between different stakeholders involved in the process of setting up and implementing a mandatory CBEL programme. The voices of curriculum leaders and students also provide invaluable insights allowing for learning processes between different stakeholders to be scrutinized and triangulated. With the literature stressing the need for more empirical evidence to help understand the actual challenges faced by different stakeholders in CBEL, this case study aims to reduce the knowledge gap by unpacking some lessons from tensions identified between teachers and students in the process of institutionalizing CBEL at our own university in Hong Kong. Two main research questions underpinned this case: 1 2

What are the challenges faced by students and curriculum leaders in the context of community-based EL and how can the two perspectives be bridged? What lessons can be learned that will assist universities in shaping communitybased EL for its students?

The research team employed purposive sampling to invite 11 curriculum leaders for interviews; each represented the 10 faculties across the university and were pioneer instructors of CBEL projects. The team then recruited undergraduate students via email and posters, to participate in semi-structured focus group discussions. Semi-structured interview is a well-regarded approach in qualitative research (Packer, 2010). Eleven one-on-one semi-structured interviews were conducted with the curriculum leaders, each lasting approximately 60–90 min. Participants represented a balanced mix of genders across ten academic disciplines. Fifteen semi-structured focus group interviews, each lasting around 6080 min in duration were conducted with 40 students coming from 7 faculties. The interviews addressed five key areas: (1) Motivation, (2) Personal experiences, (3) Challenges and coping, (4) Impact, and (5) Constraints (for teachers only). Data sources came from topic (3) Challenges and coping and (5) Constraints respectively. Our research team analysed the data using an inductive and iterative approach (Patton, 2002). Several rounds of close reading were conducted separately among the research team to avoid confirmation bias. Open coding was employed in the first round of the coding process. An additional round on axial coding was allowed for verifying and re-grouping the codes among the researchers. Constant comparison

138

9

Counter-Stories: Lessons Learned from Community-Based …

among the team was then performed throughout the analysis to reach consensus in the final coding framework for the credibility of findings (Mays & Pope, 2000). Thematic categories were subsequently formed.

9.5

Results

Students’ perspectives Three core themes emerged from the student data to demonstrate the challenges experienced by the students who had taken part in compulsory CBEL. They are: adjustment to novel situations, interpersonal issues and lacking particular skills (see Table 9.1). Adjustment to novel situations The first emergent theme represented almost half of the data reported and signified the most critical challenge in the students’ eyes. It took the students lots of conscious effort to adjust to novel situations. They experienced a range of adjustment issues in this ill-defined setting. As reflected by student 4, knowledge was clearly defined in university, and as such, they experienced dissonance when witnessing the discrepancy in CBEL. They also encountered cultural shock (Student 1), language barriers (Student 2) and lots of uncertainties at the project sites (Student 3). Such an authentic setting brought in the real impact that would pressurize them (Student 5). Interpersonal issues The second emergent theme, interpersonal issues, reflected the very different nature of CBEL from classroom-based learning: students mostly received subject content knowledge at university but in CBEL, they needed to learn by collaborating with different stakeholders, namely, supervisors, their peers and local communities. The interpersonal challenges reported in Table 3 further illustrated this point at two levels: working with peers (Students 8 and 9) and colleagues/supervisors (Students 6 and 7). There was a relational side in EL as learning took place when students co-constructed knowledge with the immediate social environment. They developed a sense of self-awareness when they had to confront or accommodate individual differences. Such interpersonal competence might be harder to develop in regular classrooms. Lacking particular skills The ill-defined nature of community-based CBEL also called for new skills development from students as demonstrated in the third emergent theme. Many of them found out that they did not have any prior knowledge or skills required to

9.5 Results

139

Table 9.1 Qualitative data of student participants (text bolded for emphasis) Student

Types of EL

Quote

Theme 1: Adjustment to novel situations 1 Exchange programme in The German system is very different. I know nothing Germany about it, for example, I don’t know that I don’t even need to do any presentation at all. No one tells me anything and I don’t know where to seek advice. All these uncertainties create lots of anxiety and I felt very disoriented and don’t know what to do 2 A cross-disciplinary EL We went to Vietnam for building a library. The local programme in Vietnam engineers told us what we needed to do and they are all Vietnamese. The interpreters were not there all the time and we understood not even one single word so we tried to answer randomly (Student 2 joined a cross-disciplinary CBEL programme in Vietnam) 3 A service-learning trip in In reality, the project site is totally different from Vietnam what we imagine. Then you realize there are so many differences so you have to change your original planning a lot in order to fit in the kids’ needs. We then cannot rely on the materials we prepared before the trip, so we learn how to make use of the immediate environment to be our teaching materials 4 A research internship In your undergraduate (study,) everything is black or white, and maybe only one or two ways to solve a problem. But in the research, you have more than 10 ways to resolve it. Most ways cannot work so you need to find yourself (way out) 5 Internship at a clinical In CBEL, that’s more real-life experience, and the psychologist’s office work that we do actually matters, that can have real-life consequences and impacts. And at university, the assignment doesn’t necessarily mean to bring about impacts on students or schools. So at workplace, you are more pressured to perform better because it has real consequences Theme 2: Interpersonal issues 6 A credit-bearing And I don’t have a good communication with my internship programme supervisor in the organization. Her evaluation on my performance carried 6 credits so I just do what she asked me to do because of the grade 7 Internship programme Maybe my soft skills are not that good as I studied science in secondary school and engineering at the undergraduate level. I seldom received any soft skills training and I never studied business. So when I went to a workplace I was not familiar with the business practice and their communication skills…. And I had to learn not to be afraid to ask and you had to observe more to see what is ‘appropriate’ (continued)

140

9

Counter-Stories: Lessons Learned from Community-Based …

Table 9.1 (continued) Student

Types of EL

Quote

8

Service-learning trip via an international NGO

9

A cross-disciplinary service trip in Vietnam

How to get along with others and match the schedule of your teammates, especially when theirs do not align with yours. When you get along with others, you have to observe their personality and understand their thinking and their background. Then you can minimize conflicts with them I am a very practical and efficient person. I want to do things fast but when you work with a team, it involves lots of explanations to get things done. Then I have to be very patient because I cannot do it the pace that I want

Theme 3: Lacking particular skills 10 A cross-disciplinary service trip in Vietnam

11

Internship programme

12

Internship programme

When you were overseas, you had to be very independent and coped with everything yourself. In Hong Kong, you were taken care of by your family but in CBEL, you had to do everything yourself and including very tedious things. It made you feel very bad as you have to cope with everything every single second. So you have to learn how to manage your time to deal with very tedious stuff I was the only graphic designer for the company. When I first went there, I only knew about Photoshop and then I had to learn everything. I had to find out the final answer myself. It was tough! The hardest part is when I was stuck that I know what they want but I don’t know how to do it. In classroom, there’re people teaching you and you don’t have much to do but just to understand it. And in CBEL, it’s much harder… You had to learn something new within a very short period of time so your peers were very important. What you had to do at this NGO was very creative and you even had to do this workshop at secondary schools. Throughout my whole university life, I had never done anything so practical and that would be used by real people

complete certain service tasks (Students 11 and 12) while others struggled with self-care and independence (Student 10). The ill-defined nature of CBEL stretched the students’ potential by pushing them out of their comfort zone to problem-solve and acquire new skills.

9.5 Results

141

9.5.1 Course Instructors’ Perspectives In contrast to issues raised by the students, teachers’ challenges reflected on their roles as curriculum leaders and any tensions experienced amid the curriculum reform. The three emergent themes from the dataset were found to be the following: adequacy of resources, assessment and student motivation, and recognizing and promoting CBEL (see Table 9.2). Adequacy of resources The most dominant theme, not surprisingly, involved obtaining resources required to organize CBEL. More than half of the units of analysis fell into this category. Course tutors needed to prepare standard lectures and learning materials for delivery in their regular classrooms. By contrast, the CBEL ‘classroom’ was more fluid and less controlled. Teachers had to manage project sites, work with partner organizations and give diverse support to students to enable them to succeed. The difficulties narrated here also implied the commitment and passion of these curriculum leaders. Assessment and student motivation Planning a meaningful CBEL programme involves not just resources but also well-structured curriculum efforts that are able to monitor students’ ongoing learning as reflected in the second emergent theme. Assessment is still a major concern (Teacher D). Also, the fluid nature of these CBEL projects required lots of students’ initiative and teaching strategies to continue motivating them to learn (Teacher E & F). These curriculum leaders struggled to help the students identify with the values behind the activities. The data here provided concrete ideas on professional development for teachers in adopting CBEL as pedagogy. Recognising and promoting EL The third theme was ‘recognising & promoting CBEL’, which pointed to a need for more appropriate policies to support and sustain successful curriculum reform. Regardless of the effort spent at the University level on CBEL, these curriculum leaders’ voices showcased a strong sense of ownership, which was a significant success factor in curriculum reform. However, they faced difficulty in promoting CBEL projects when not only students but also some teaching colleagues did not recognize its intrinsic value.

142

9

Counter-Stories: Lessons Learned from Community-Based …

Table 9.2 Qualitative data of teachers (text bolded for emphasis) Teacher Quote Theme 1: Adequacy of resources A It is very labour intensive, very time consuming, but I think it’s time well spent. I think this is a very important part of learning. And I think the impact on me should not be the hindrance of students getting to do it B There are many potentially meaningful overseas learning opportunities for students. But it takes lots of time to negotiate, develop mutual trust and set up the appropriate platform that could actually support and scaffold students’ learning with overseas partners. That involves lots of resources and time at faculty level, or even at the University level has to support C …that links to funding. We can’t pay for some of the things that we want to do, and students don’t have the money that makes them to afford it (sic). And there’s only limited amount of funding for different sources…. If you can build a culture, and a platform, where students are also part of that platform, then I think it has a longterm sustainable impact, that’s what I like to see Theme 2: Assessment and student motivation D We do have a framework for the curriculum that’s constructively aligned, but I suppose the topic we’ve chosen tends to be hard one to assess. Sometimes the outcomes … we really want these practitioners to behave professionally, which is hard to assess and measure. I think we are still struggling a bit to measure that. I think it’s easier to measure their understanding of professionalism, and to describe situations … the understanding part is easier. But we want the understanding can be translated to positive actions, that’s still a bit of struggle. Looking at the literature doesn’t have a good answer, as it’s so contextualized, so many variables to it E Our CBEL programmes so far are non-credit bearing. The good thing is that it allows lots of flexibility. However, sometimes it is very hard to maintain students’ motivation — they enjoy the experience but when they come back to Hong Kong and have to do the hard work, they will be losing the motivation. We have to think of many ways to structure the programme to motivate them to continue participating F Within one CBEL programme, some students made a major impact while some just want to get the credits. You will wonder how you could motivate those passive ones to learn better—how to let them know all the soft skills developed will be important to them and how to motivate them to break their comfort zone to grow Theme 3: Recognizing and promoting CBEL G We need to work on how to foster the link between EL and the rest of the curriculum because there are still some colleagues, they see it as an extra curriculum and see it as something gets in the way, time consuming, for us and the students. They don’t know how to link it with students’ learning in the class…. I know there’s a link and we have to work on how to show our colleagues and our students… Some students just want to focus on their GPAs and it’s safe to focus on the GPAs by doing regular courses H Attitude. Both teachers and students are sceptical because it is not traditional and they don’t know how to position EL in the curriculum…. Traditional way of teaching is decreasing in getting students’ attention. In overseas universities, they have a director of EL to guide the teachers on how to add in EL elements and how to promote it… Our generation is born with iPhone, iPad they are living under distraction and you cannot expect them to switch things when they learn which is very different from their upbringing and that’s why I think EL will become popular and worldwide

9.6 Conclusions and Implications

9.6

143

Conclusions and Implications

A wealth of evidence in the literature showcases the impact of CBEL on student success at the tertiary level, but the learning processes involved is almost always overlooked. This chapter has addressed the research gap by examining the challenges faced by course tutors and students in such a context. First, the aforementioned data from the case study across 10 Faculties allows us to triangulate perspectives and provide a more solid foundation upon which to draw lessons and insights on institutionalizing CBEL. Here students were seen to focus on affective needs and skill deficits whereas course tutors were more concerned about resources, assessments and institutional development. Such divergent views are key; while student participants’ difficulties call for more guidance from their course tutors, before departure, during and after the CBEL process strongly suggest the importance of continuous professional development for course tutors. While their voices call for more support, having a policy is not enough for the successful implementation of CBEL at the university level. Instead, course tutors need more concrete support in terms of sustainable resources and acknowledgement. A dialogic and continuous communication across three levels, that is, students, teachers and also university administrators will not only help narrow the gap, but also smooth out the process of institutionalizing CBEL. Scaffolding and evaluating the learning process in CBEL continue to be challenging. Our student data reflects their struggles and encounters with skill deficits. CBEL may create lots of discomforts, but it also offers potential for deep learning and growth (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2005). However, self-awareness or competence does not come naturally and certainly not without guidance. For transformative learning to take place, a safe and non-judgmental environment is crucial (Chapman, McPhee & Proudman, 1995) and teachers have to make use of ‘teachable moments’ to empower their students by developing a sense of accomplishment and control over their ability to impact the community (Levesque-Bristol, Knapp & Fisher, 2010). As the emotional architects in CBEL, course tutors should be skilled at tapping into their own experiences to inform their students. This reciprocity allows for a dynamic exchange of emotional experiences between tutors and their students (Carson & Domangue, 2013); this is how course tutors can become ‘co-learners’ (Savage, et al., 2015) with their students. As can be seen, these challenges and tensions have placed new demands on course tutors and they will benefit from continuous professional development too. As reflected by the curriculum leaders in the study, teachers also have difficulties in measuring the learning outcomes of their students and motivating them to learn during CBEL projects whereas students repeatedly report sensitivity over how their CBEL work is graded. The diverse nature of CBEL makes traditional types of assessment difficult for students and for teachers. As the experience and the reflection period are two distinct stages that lead to learning (Fenwick, 2003), course tutors should motivate their students to learn through reflection. That said, relying on a single piece of reflection as the assessment has long been criticized

144

9

Counter-Stories: Lessons Learned from Community-Based …

(Macfarlane & Gourlay, 2009; Ryan, 2011; Ulusoy, 2016). This requires tutors to think out of the box in terms of assessing and supporting this multilayered learning process by employing multi-modal reflections with structured ongoing support that allows continuous and timely feedback and exchange among stakeholders (Hatcher, Bringle & Muthiah, 2004). Professional development is considered to be ‘the single most important’ variable contributing to students’ success (The Carnegie Foundation, 2008). As Fink (2003) suggests, ‘if we can find ways to identify and create learning experiences that students and others can agree are truly significant, we will have made important progress in our effort to improve the quality of higher education’. To promote and sustain CBEL development at institutional level requires university support and transformation (Butin, 2003). As part of the reality in organizing these structured, but labour-intensive CBEL courses in research institutes, such programmes rely upon the commitment of individuals and the availability of university funding and support (Bennet, et al., 2016). To sustain programme development among these individuals, incentives and reward structures (Abes, Jackson & Jones, 2002; Hou, 2009; Leibowitz, 2014) should also be addressed, specifically to ensure that the tenure process incorporates the components of teaching, research and service (Cooper, 2014). In other words, these curriculum leaders’ committed efforts should be formally acknowledged within the university, not only due to the programmes’ impacts, but also as a way to sustain the development of CBEL at institutional level. Some potential follow-up prompts based on the content of in this chapter to be used in class discussions or planning meetings: – As a course instructor/teacher, what are your concerns about running learning CBEL project for your students? – In your experience, what are some common challenges faced by the students when taking part in a CBEL project? – How can teachers scaffold students’ learning process in responding to the above-mentioned obstacles? – How can you better manage students’ expectations prior to the learning journey in a CBEL project? – When students return from an overseas CBEL trip, do you find it necessary to unpack their learning process and experiences? Why? – As a course instructor of CBEL, what kind of support would you want to receive from university/school administrators? Acknowledgements Special credits also go to Dr. Tracy Zou and Ms Janet Yu for their contribution to this research project.

References

145

References Abes, E., Jackson, G., & Jones, S. (2002). Factors that motivate and deter faculty use of service learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 9(1), 5–17. AEE (Association for Experiential Education) (n.d.). What is experiential education? [online resource]. Retrieved 21 March 2018 from http://www.aee.org/what-is-ee. Bender, C. J. G. (2007). Pathways of change for integrating community service-learning into the core curriculum. Education as Change, 11, 127–142. Bennett, D., Sunderland, N., Bartleet, B. L., & Power, A. (2016). Implementing and sustaining higher education service-learning initiatives: Revisiting young et al.’s organizational tactics. Journal of Experiential Education, 39(2), 145–163. Bordelon, T. D., & Phillips, I. (2006). Service-learning: What students have to say. Active Learning in Higher Education, 7(2), 143–153. Bringle, R. G., & Steinberg, K. (2010). Educating for informed community involvement. American Journal of Community Psychology, 46, 428–441. Butin, D. W. (2003). Of what use is it? Multiple conceptualizations of service learning within education. Teachers College Record, 105, 1674–1692. Carson, R. L., & Domangue, E. A. (2013). The emotional component of service-learning. Journal of Experiential Education, 36(2), 139–154. Chan, S. C., Ngai, G., & Kwan, K. P. (2017). Mandatory service learning at university: Do less-inclined students learn from it?. Active Learning in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10. 1177/1469787417742019. Chapman, S., McPhee, P., & Proudman, B. (1995). What is experiential education? In K. Warren (Ed.), The theory of experiential education (pp. 235–248). Dubuque: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company. Coker, J. S., Heiser, E., Taylor, L., & Book, C. (2017). Impacts of experiential learning depth and breadth on student outcomes. Journal of Experiential Education, 40(1), 5–23. Cooper, J. R. (2014). Ten years in the trenches: Faculty perspectives on sustaining service-learning. Journal of Experiential Education, 37(4), 415–428. Cowan, J. (2014). Noteworthy matters for attention in reflective journal writing. Active Learning in Higher Education, 15(1), 53–64. Deeley, S. (2010). Service learning: Thinking outside of the box. Active Learning in Higher Education, 11(1), 43–53. Dewey, J. (1938). The theory of inquiry. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Wiston. Dienhart, C., Maruyama, G., Snyder, M., Furco, A., McKay, M. S., Hirt, L., & Huesman, R. (2016). The impacts of mandatory service on students in service-learning classes. The Journal of social psychology, 156(3), 305–309. Estepp, C. M., Roberts, T. G., & Carter, H. S. (2012). An experiential learning model of faculty development to improve teaching. NACTA Journal, 56(1), 79. Ewert, A., & Sibthorp, J. (2009). Creating outcomes through experiential education: The challenge of confounding variables. Journal of Experiential Education, 31(3), 376–389. Eyler, J., Giles, D., Stenson, C., & Gray, C. (2001). At a glance: What we know about the effects of service-learning on college students, faculty, institutions and communities, 1993–2000 (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: Learn and Serve America National Service Learning Clearing house. Fenwick, T. (2003). Learning through experience: Troubling orthodoxies and intersecting questions. Melbourne, FL: Krieger Publishing. Fink, L. D. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Gallant Ho Experiential Learning Centre (n.d.) Retrieved October 27, 2017, from http://ghelc.hku.hk/. Gaia, A. C. (2015). Short-term faculty-led study abroad programs enhance cultural exchange and self-awareness. International Education Journal: Comparative Perspectives, 14, 21–31. Gibson, M., Hauf, P., Long, B. S., & Sampson, G. (2011). Reflective practice in service learning: Possibilities and limitations. Education and Training, 53(4), 284–296.

146

9

Counter-Stories: Lessons Learned from Community-Based …

Harfitt, G. (2018). The role of the community in teacher preparation: exploring a different pathway to becoming a teacher. Frontiers in Education 3. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2018.00064. Harfitt, G., & Chow, J. M. L. (2018). Transforming traditional models of initial teacher education through a mandatory experiential learning programme. Teaching and Teacher Education, 73, 120–129. Harvey, M., Coulson, D., & McMaugh, A. (2016). Towards a theory of the ecology of reflection: Reflective practice for experiential learning in higher education. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 13(2), 2. Hatcher, J. A., Bringle, R. G., & Muthiah, R. (2004). Designing effective reflection: What matters to service-learning? Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 11(1), 38–46. Hou, S. (2009). Service learning + new master of public health student = challenges for professor. International Journal of Teaching & Learning in Higher Education, 20(2), 292–297. Hursh, D. (2008). Neoliberalism. Knowledge and power in the global economy: The effects of school reform in a neoliberal/neoconservative age. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates. Intolubbe-Chmil, L., Spreen, C. A., & Swap, R. J. (2012). Transformative learning: Participant perspectives on international experiential education. Journal of Research in International Education, 11(2), 165–180. Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of management learning & education, 4(2), 193–212. Kuit, J. G., Relay, G., & Freeman, R. (2001). Experiences of reflective teaching. Active Learning in Higher Education, 2(2), 128–142. Leibowitz, B., Bozalek, V., Van Schalkwyk, S., & Winberg, C. (2014). Context matters: The professional development of academics as teachers in South African higher education. Higher Education, 69(2), 315–330. Levesque-Bristol, C. B., Knapp, T. B., & Fisher, B. J. (2010). The effectiveness of service learning: It’s not all what you think. Journal of Experiential Education, 33(3), 208–224. Macfarlane, B., & Gourlay, L. (2009). The reflection game: Enacting the penitent self. Teaching in Higher Education, 14, 455–459. Mays, N., & Pope, C. (2000). Assessing quality in qualitative research. British Medical Journal, 320(7226), 50–52. McLaughlin, M., McGrath, D. J., Burian-Fitzgerald, M. A., Lanahan, L., Scotchmer, M., Enyeart, C., & Salganik, L. (2005). Student content engagement as a construct for the measurement of effective classroom instruction and teacher knowledge. In Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montréal, Quebéc. National Survey of Student Engagement. (2007). Experiences that matter: Enhancing student learning and success: NSEE 2007 annual report. Bloomington: Center for Postsecondary Research School of Education, Indiana University Bloomington. Olson, C. L., Green, M. F., & Hill, B. A. (2005). Building a strategic framework for comprehensive internationalization (Vol. 1). American Council on Education. Packer, M. (2010). The science of qualitative research. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2005). Allport’s intergroup contact hypothesis: Its history and influence. In J. F. Dovidio, P. Glick, & L. Rudman (Eds.), On the nature of prejudice: Fifty years after allport (pp. 262–277). Malden, MA: Blackwell. Savage, E., Tapics, T., Evarts, J., Wilson, J., & Tirone, S. (2015). Experiential learning for sustainability leadership in higher education. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 16(5), 692–705. Selin, S. W., Schuett, M. A., & Carr, D. (2000). Modeling stakeholder perceptions of collaborative initiative effectiveness. Society & Natural Resources, 13(8), 735–745.

References

147

Ryan, M. (2010). Improving reflective writing in higher education: A social semiotic perspective. Teaching in Higher Education, 16(1), 99–111. Ryan, M. (2011). Improving reflective writing in higher education: A social semiotic perspective. Teaching in Higher Education, 16, 99–111. Slavich, G. M., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2012). Transformational teaching: Theoretical underpinnings, basic principles, and core methods. Educational Psychology Review, 24(4), 569–608. Teaching and Learning. (n.d.). Retrieved October 29, 2017, from https://tl.hku.hk/tl/#aimsug The Review. (n.d.). Retrieved April 4, 2018, from https://www4.hku.hk/pubunit/review/2016.pdf. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. (2008). Basic skills for complex lives: Designs for learning in the community college. A report from strengthening pre-collegiate education in community colleges (SPECC). Stanford, CA: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Thomas, G. (2008). Preparing facilitators for experiential education: The role of intentionality and intuition. Journal of Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning, 8(1), 3–20. Tomlinson, M. (2008). ‘The degree is not enough’: Students’ perceptions of the role of higher education credentials for graduate work and employability. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 29(1), 49–61. Ulusoy, M. (2016). Field experiences in teacher education: the perceptions and qualities of written reflections. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(5), 532–544. Wurdinger, S. D. (2005). Using experiential learning in the classroom: Practical ideas for all educators. Rowman & Littlefield Education. Zhang, G., Shea, G., Zeller, N., et al., (2013). Toward a better understanding: A 360-degree assessment of a service-learning program in teacher education using Stufflebeam’s CIPP Model. In V. M. Jagla, J. A. Erickson, & A. S. Tinkler, (Eds.), Transforming teacher education through service-learning. IAP.

10

Designing and Facilitating ‘Reflection-on-Action’ and ‘Reflection-in-Action’ in Community-Based EL

Abstract

This chapter looks into one of the most important concepts in the context of experiential learning: reflection. Reflection constitutes the bridge that spans experiences and meaning; it serves as an indispensable tool for understanding the learning experiences of our student teachers, who participate in community-based EL (CBEL). In this chapter, we analyse the reflective process through the use of different models and share different types of approaches that help to facilitate students reflection based on the literature in the field as well as our own personal experiences as course instructors for different CBEL programmes. We also discuss the pros and cons of each approach so that potential course instructors and practitioners might have a more informed choice when they are making decisions on selecting different reflective tools to scaffold their own students’ learning process. We also aim to help readers differentiate the various stages of the reflective process. Some sample reflections will also be disseminated so as to help readers contextualize the reflective process and better understand qualitative differences. Keywords










Reflection-on-action Reflection-in-action Critical reflection Sound judgment

10.1

Introduction

‘We do not learn from experience. We learn from reflecting on experience’ (Dewey, 1933). Reflection is arguably the most important link between experience and meaning and has been widely adopted as a form of assessment as well as a tool for better understanding the complex learning processes of CBEL in higher education © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 G. Harfitt and J. M. L. Chow, Employing Community-Based Experiential Learning in Teacher Education, Springer Texts in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6003-3_10

149

10 Designing and Facilitating ‘Reflection-on-Action’ …

150

(Harvey, Coulson, & McMaugh, 2016). Reflectivity, namely, the ability to reflect, is seen as one of the most important professional competencies in teachers (Bognar & Krumes, 2017). That point notwithstanding, there is little consensus on its definition and on how reflectivity can be nurtured and even assessed (Clarkeburn & Kettula, 2012; Lundgren & Poell, 2016; McArdle & Coutts, 2003). One clear definition of reflectivity is that it refers to an action that examines ‘critically the assumptions underlying our actions, (and) the impact of those actions…from a broader perspective’ (Cunliffe, 2016, p. 748). We have also been informed by the work of King (2000), who describes a seven-stage model of reflective judgment for students and which aims at helping faculty members to understand the steps that students often take to achieve such judgments (pre-reflective, quasi-reflective and reflective thinking). King’s model outlines ‘a developmental progression that occurs between childhood and adulthood in the ways that people understand the process of knowing and the certainty of knowledge claims and in the corresponding ways that they justify their beliefs’ (2000, p. 15). That said, in this chapter and throughout our CBEL projects, we have drawn on the work of John Dewey and Donald Schön believing that their work fits best with the context of teacher preparation and education. As Dewey (1938) has pointed out, while education comes from experience it is not true to say that all experiences are educative. Experience does not guarantee that meaningful learning takes place, and this surely applies to the ill-defined environments that often make up the learning contexts of CBEL. Indeed the impact of learning through CBEL is not always measurable, or even observable which means it needs to be ‘uncovered indirectly’ through different stakeholders (Zhang et al., 2013). In this chapter, we argue for an approach that scaffolds students’ learning process in the context of CBEL; one that incorporates both reflection-on-action and reflection-in-action (Schön, 1987) with multi-modalities and structured ongoing support (Hatcher, Bringle, & Muthiah, 2004). Reflection can be presented through different modalities: written, oral or even visual tools to facilitate the meaningful reflective process (Moffatt, Barton, & Ryan, 2016). We start by examining the term ‘reflectivity’.

10.2

Reflectivity

As mentioned earlier, the term reflectivity has been given multiple definitions. In the field of experiential learning, Kolb (2014) proposes a learning cycle where CBEL approaches can construct new ways of thinking and doing through participants reflecting on a concrete experience during their CBEL projects. These reflections then trigger actions and responses that can be transferred to other situations and contexts by formulating and testing out practical knowledge, attitudes, behaviour and skills within real-world situations such as teaching contexts. Schön (1983) argues that learning from reflection allows students to access ‘important opportunities to think about what they are doing’ and grants them further

10.2

Reflectivity

151

opportunities to avoid ‘narrowness and rigidity’ in their actions (p. 61). In his seminal work, Schön (1983) notes that reflectivity can take place through retrospective self-reflection on one’s own actions through a process of critically examining possible alternative actions and responses to any given situation and outcome; this is reflection-on-action. However, Schön also tells us that reflection does not only happen after a person has engaged with an action or doing. Instead, it can occur simultaneously in one’s action as reflection-in-action which might be seen in very simplistic terms as ‘on the spot’ problem-solving. It is argued that both approaches to reflection can afford student teachers the opportunity to engage continually in reflecting on and thinking critically about the educational processes they are experiencing (past, present and future) and better consider the implications of their work in facilitating transformative interactions with other student teachers and colleagues in schools.

10.3

The Reflective Process

The reflective process which is qualitative by nature can also be differentiated by quantity in terms of levels with the highest being related to deep learning and involving the transformation of the learner (Laird, Seifert, Pascarella, Mayhew, & Blaich, 2014). The depth of such a process is characterized by an ability to articulate the experiences with flexibility (Moon, 2004), whereas the transformation could mean the change of values, beliefs or assumptions (Harvey et al., 2016). Several models have been developed to illustrate this meta-cognitive learning process (Mathieson, 2016) and before we share different reflective tools we want to introduce three models that can assist readers in understanding what the reflective process looks like.

10.3.1 Model 1: Four Levels of Reflective Practitioner The first model stemmed from Larrivee’s (2008) research on defining levels of reflective practice in teachers. The model is characterized by four levels (Fig. 10.1): Level 1 Pre-reflection tends to be a reaction to teaching scenarios without much reflection from teachers; Level 2 Surface reflection refers to a teacher’s perspective focusing on what works; Level 3 Pedagogical reflection shifts to the students’ side and looks into the impact on students’ learning; and Level 4 Critical reflection focuses on the long-term implication of teaching which is more learner-centred. Reflective practice is believed to be developed in linear stages from the progression of level 1 stage (the lowest) to level 4 (the highest) as teachers move from being ‘novice’ to ‘expert’ (Larrivee, 2008). Teaching goes beyond everyday classroom practice and connects to the wider perspective of society. Therefore, the higher level of reflective practitioner demonstrates a broader view by including an important ethical dimension (Larrivee, 2006). In other words, this model showcases

152

10 Designing and Facilitating ‘Reflection-on-Action’ …

Pre-reflection Teachers react to the classroom situation

No adaptation of teaching

Surface reflection Teachers are concerned with what works

Rather descriptive approach

Pedagogical reflection Teachers reflect on educational goals and connect theories with practice

Critical reflection Teachers reflect on moral and ethical implications

Self-reflection is crucial

Fig. 10.1 Four levels of reflective practitioner. Adapted from Larrivee (2008)

the level of reflective thought that course instructors may bear in mind in understanding the quality of students’ reflection as well. It is important to differentiate between pedagogical reflection and critical reflection in this model. We will now contextualize these two types by presenting some examples of reflective writings. Both reflections below stemmed from student teachers immediately after their own experience of a CBEL programme in our Faculty had ended. Student 1: I am surprised that educational theories can be used in the community-based EL programme. On the first day, I had already been asked to create an educational model for guiding students to propose research questions, identify primary and secondary sources, and analyse and verify the collected data. And then I gave a presentation to the target audience in Workshop 1. Making use of the skills in my Liberal Studies teaching methodology course (at university), I introduced students to ways for collecting first-hand data in the field and to verify information like using multiple sources. I was glad that students were interested in my presentation and found it very helpful. Some of them even kept taking pictures. My hard work to develop the educational theories and prepare the teaching materials paid off. Helping students learn new knowledge gave me a sense of achievement. Teaching is really a happy and rewarding job.

10.3

The Reflective Process

153

Student 2: Through the course of these reflections, I have had the chance to think about many aspects of education, culture and society. As educators, we are trying to shift and influence society through the mechanism of schooling. But for true change to occur, it must occur everywhere and in synchronization. If institutions in Hong Kong wish to develop talent and spur innovation, they should look to their own houses too. Talent and inspiration may not operate on a fixed schedule. If it does, it may not be the fixed schedule of the institution. Human capital is not simply a factor of production. Individuals are unique and creative. People work in different ways. Providing even a modicum of flexibility and awareness to individual needs can go far to creating a fertile work environment. Yet even the institutions espousing such innovation do not practice what they preach, particularly in Hong Kong where ‘traditional’ values are espoused. Attendance is valued over participation. So how can we be training students to be creative, innovative free thinkers, when their employers have such stringent, archaic and feudal expectations of the terms of their employment? In what way can they express their creativity and independence in a stifling corporate culture? The change needs to happen on all levels, not just education. As we are learning from our Week #7 course readings on inquiry-based learning (at university), is the role of education simply to mold individuals to function in an industrial society? Is that maybe why our education system in Hong Kong mirrors the local corporate culture? In these extracts, it can be seen that Student 1 has demonstrated pedagogic reflection. This student teacher showcased a good understanding and integration of how he was able to apply what he learned in the teaching training programme set in the community-based EL context and reflected upon the role of a teacher and the sense of satisfaction from the work done. Student 2 can be seen as an example of critical reflection, however. While this student teacher also related what he learned in the teacher training programme, he was also able to critically reflect from a wider perspective by considering the role of educators and the limitations of the current education system in Hong Kong.

10.3.2 Model 2: The Content, Process or Premise(s) Model Mezirow (1991) proposed that to reflect means to critically evaluate the ‘content, process, or premise(s)’ of oneself so as to give meaning to a particular experience. In many ways, this aligns with John Dewey’s earlier description of experience. Content reflection refers to the description of the problem, while process reflection is the problem-solving process and premise reflection goes to the underlying assumptions (Mezirow, 1991). Cranton (2006) further contextualizes these three types of reflection by asking the following questions to guide a learner through the reflective process (Fig. 10.2).

10 Designing and Facilitating ‘Reflection-on-Action’ …

154

Content reflecƟon

What is happening here?

Process reflecƟon

Premise(s) reflecƟon

How did this come to be?

Why is it important to me?

Fig. 10.2 The content, process or premise(s) model. Adapted from Mezirow (1991) and Cranton (2006)

Based on Mezirow and Cranton’s model above, course instructors can then design reflective prompts to scaffold students’ ongoing reflection. The following prompts are some examples to show how tutors and course instructors can support student teachers to reflect upon the content, process and the premises. Content: – What is the social issue/topic under investigation? – Name one important observation today. – Share one inspiring idea that you have learned about the issue. Process: – Share one strength of yours or one strategy you employed that contributes to the learning process. – What was everyone’s role in the collaboration and how can it be better? – In which activity were you most and least engaged? Why? Premise(s): – Why do you think this social issue/topic is important and in what ways is this relevant to you? – What if more people were aware of this topic and what changes might it bring to society? – How can we have a bigger impact as a __________ (stakeholders’ point of view)?

10.3.3 Model 3: The Experiential Learning Model Kolb’s model (1984) of critical reflection is probably the best known in the field of experiential learning: Experience, reflective observation, conceptualization, and experimentation (Fig. 10.3). In this model, learning is continuous and draws upon the experiences of the learners. Reflection and learning start from capturing

10.3

The Reflective Process

155

Fig. 10.3 Kolb’s experiential learning model. Source http://www.learningtheories.com/experientiallearning-kolb.html

Concrete experience

Testing in new situations

Kolb's EL Cycle

Observation & reflection

Forming abstract concepts

experience, or ‘concrete experience’ and ‘forming abstract concepts’ then transforming such experience by ‘reflective observation’ and ‘testing in new situations’. Immediate experiences are the basis for reflective observation with these reflections then forming into abstract concepts for new and subsequent implications of action. Such implications are actively tested for guiding new experiences (Kolb, Boyatzis, & Mainemelis, 2001). Based on Kolb’s model, Gibbs (1988) developed a structured debriefing that is able to help course instructors go through the EL cycle using six steps: (1) description, (2) feeling, (3) evaluation, (4) analysis, (5) conclusion, and (6) action plan. Course instructors can guide students’ critical reflection by guiding their learners through these stages (see Fig. 10.4). Sample prompts to guide student teachers to reflect through this reflective cycle are demonstrated below: Description: – Share three important pieces of work you have done during your CBEL experience. – Describe your team and how you worked together on the projects and tasks at your CBEL site. Feelings: – Have there been ups and downs during your CBEL? What were they? How did they make you feel? – How did these moments affect your learning process?

10 Designing and Facilitating ‘Reflection-on-Action’ …

156

AcƟon plan: If it happened again what would you do

Conclusion: What else could you have done

Analysis: Why do you think that happened

DescripƟon: What happened?

Feelings: What were you thinking/ feeling

EvaluaƟon: What was good/ bad about the experience

Fig. 10.4 Gibb’s (1988) reflective cycle

Evaluation: – What were the good and bad moments? Can you identify one key or critical learning moment and describe it? – How would you evaluate your team’s performance? Analysis: – What has been the impact of this CBEL project on you? – What suggestions would you make to bring about a deeper and wider impact through this CBEL? Conclusion: – Name one thing that you might do differently if you had the chance to undertake this CBEL project again. Elaborate on this. – What was your most significant learning from the CBEL experience?

10.3

The Reflective Process

157

Action plan: – How can you apply what you have learned in this project to other contexts?

10.4

Types of Reflections

To nurture reflectivity in our student teachers, course tutors need to employ various tools and provide ample opportunities and space for student teachers to think on their own (Bognar & Krumes, 2017). To develop this habit of mind, we may need to draw on key theories. In this next section, we are going to introduce different types of reflective tools and also present some of the advantages and disadvantages associated with each approach. One particular aspect we need to bear in mind is that the course tutors’ role in nurturing their student teachers’ reflective behaviour might be very different from the approaches taken in a regular classroom to achieve the same goal. In CBEL, course tutors are facilitators, but they are also co-learners in the process (Savage, Tapics, Evarts, Wilson, & Tirone, 2015). They are expected to disclose more of their personal feelings and ideas through the process of learning and not just to focus on academic outcomes. The same process also means that tutors need to attend to the personal development of their learners (Wurdinger & Carlson, 2010). As seen earlier, we can categorize reflections into two types using Schön’s (1987) model: reflection-on-action and reflection-in-action (Table 10.1). To recap, the first type denotes that the students revisit their experiences after any action or doing, while the second type signifies how learners might reflect during the learning process. We then present some possible means of achieving these reflection types on CBEL courses.

10.4.1 Reflection-on-Action 10.4.1.1 Reflective Journals Reflective journals appear to be the most widely used approach in reflection (Moon, 2004). However, critics have claimed that reflective journals might actually reinforce ‘behavioral conformism’ (Macfarlane & Gourlay, 2009) instead of engaging learners with critical reflection. For instance, course instructors may sometimes try to improve students’ reflective writing by providing them with ‘model’ samples of Table 10.1 Types of reflections

Reflection-on-action

Reflection-in-action

• Reflective journal • Photovoice

• Online forum • On-site debriefing

158

10 Designing and Facilitating ‘Reflection-on-Action’ …

writing. Such a move might overly direct the learner to what makes a ‘good’ reflection (Ryan, 2011). Ulusoy (2016) studied 2400 reflective journals written by 75 students and found that they had mostly written technical entries with only a small percentage of work reaching a transformative level of reflection. This seems to justify a call for extra support in promoting students’ reflective processes through their written work. Whether students achieve deep learning through writing a reflection is not guaranteed, especially when students are required to submit only one single piece of reflection. This was evidenced in our own work on promoting language immersion programmes in Australia, where for several years we adopted a practice of asking student teachers to complete written reflections after they had returned to Hong Kong. This seemed sensible in some ways as it gave our student teachers more time to process their experiences over 8 weeks (the length of the immersion programme). But the result was often a fairly superficial description of what the student teachers had done during their time in Australia with little critical self-reflection on key moments of the programme that might have shaped or transformed them. This was likely due to the fact that certain moments of the immersion experience might have been glossed over or re-shaped because of the lengthy gap between the experience and the reflection. Upon talking to graduates of this programme, we also found out that some students completed all their reflections only after returning to Hong Kong and had not considered the reflective prompts or questions during their stay in Australia (see Chap. 5). Taking all this into account, we proposed an ongoing approach whereby students are required to submit reflections spanning different stages during their immersion experience in Australia. This approach has allowed us to see our student teachers’ experiences and their subsequent reflections as a continuum and not as a summative exercise. At each time point (after 2 weeks, mid-way and the days immediately after their return to Hong Kong) the reflective prompts are the same: • Describe the most difficult moment(s) of your experience so far and how you are dealing with it, • Describe a growth moment you have experienced so far, • Describe something that surprised you about yourself during these 8 weeks in Australia. By incorporating different learning goals, we have found prompts to be helpful for students to frame and reframe their learning experiences across these three stages of their CBEL experiences (Ash & Clayton, 2004). Some prompts we employ with our student teachers are provided here and each aims to scaffold their reflective process: (a) What are some of the personal and professional challenges you anticipate on this CBEL project and how have you prepared for it? (Pre-departure) (b) What do you most hope to learn over the next few weeks of this CBEL project? (Pre-departure)

10.4

Types of Reflections

159

(c) To what extent is the CBEL opportunity based on the disadvantage of others? Or your own privilege? (Pre-departure) (d) What are some of the successes and/or challenges you have faced when learning in a different learning context (away from lecture room)? (Mid-way) (e) What was the most significant learning over the past 2 weeks? (Mid-way) (f) How has your experience helped to inform you about educational or social issues/theories that you may have learnt in classroom? (Mid-way) (g) How has the CBEL project contributed to your personal, social and intellectual development? (post-programme) (h) Is the impact of your work temporary or sustainable and long-term? Does it challenge some of the forces that created the need for an NGO in the first place? (post-programme) (i) To what extent does the work you are doing address inequalities or social injustices? (post-programme). Another approach we adopt to trigger transformation in student teachers’ reflective process is to invite students to examine critical incidents in their CBEL process (Cope & Watts, 2000). Going through a critical incident analysis can help students revisit a problematic event that led to transformation, especially when the students can gain insights and relate these to a wider context for future applications. These critical incidents are usually key moments in a student teacher’s experience or learning process where they experienced a growth moment or transformation. In our experience, we have seen student teachers describe critical incidents as times when they achieved something that they did not feel they were capable of such as giving a presentation to a new audience or organizing an event. Others have included moments when student teachers got lost or scared during overseas CBEL projects and had to use their own initiative to resolve the problem. Some reflections, too, have been about relationships (harmonious and fractured) that have led to a deeper understanding about self, others, collaboration, trust and responsibility. Harris, Bruster, Peterson, and Shutt (2010) describe the steps for a critical incident analysis and course tutors can also make use of these to engage their own learners in critical reflection: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i)

Identifying the event. Describing the contextual background that leads to the critical event. Visualizing the episode. Using the five Ws (who, what, when, where, why) to state the event. Recognizing the personal viewpoint and possible bias. Making inferences for why it happened. Drawing conclusions based on evidence and inferences. Evaluating future actions. Transferring and relating them to professional repertoire.

160

10 Designing and Facilitating ‘Reflection-on-Action’ …

10.4.1.2 Photovoice From our experience some student teachers may well reflect, but they do not always know how to best articulate their reflections. As reported in the literature, critical reflection is more often observed in some disciplines like social science or humanities, but not in others (Kreber, 2005). Lundgren & Poell (2016) conducted a meta-analysis of the literature on critical reflection and concluded that the articulation of critical reflection across professional settings can be diverse. In order to enable all learners to reflect, multi-modalities are necessary. Coined by Wang and Burris (1997), photovoice originally represented the voices of the underprivileged, unnoticed or unrepresented by society. Photovoice not only provides a platform where students construct new meanings through observing the immediate environment, also when students caption the photos, they spontaneously engage in the reflective process (Behrendt & Machtmes, 2016). Some students may simply lack the ‘narrative competence’ in written form (Henderson, Hogan, Grant, & Berlin, 2003) and thus such modality enables all students to convey their reflections creatively and vividly. Our experience as course instructors for a Cambodia-based CBEL project helps to illustrate the power of photovoice. By asking students to select three photos that captured the most significant learning experiences in one of our post-trip sharing and reflection sessions, students revisited their photo journey and reflected upon their whole learning process. The images are very different from a written reflection and they offered the class the chance to relive the emotionally charged experiences on-site and allowed student teachers to revisit these moments and relate to them personally. Such an approach includes all learners in the sharing and the establishment of a sharing circle makes the exercise democratic and non-hierarchical. Such a perspective also empowers course instructors to better understand their students’ experiences in diverse ways and at the same time helps to nurture a learner-centred community that is personalized and safe for students to narrate their own stories and learn from each other. The following photo taken close to a slum community in Phnom Penh, Cambodia showcased one student’s sharing. Sandy selected a photo (Photo 10.1) that she took when visiting the slum and shared the following comment (verbatim from the recording of the student teachers’ sharing): I visited the garbage slum in Cambodia. Seeing lots of kids’ bright smiles and their vigor for life, I was surprised that without any concept of time or so-called achievements, they were still so much happier than I was. Time itself is not as linear as I first thought. We constantly try to weigh life with how much we have accomplished. But what matters in life is happiness. True happiness does not come from anything external. It comes from ourselves: listening to our own voice and being brave enough to do what we really want to do. Another example that can showcase the power of photovoice is through a final course presentation or capstone. Here student teachers are required to work in teams to create a photo journey that best represents the various themes and experiences from their CBEL projects. In one example (also from a Cambodian CBEL project),

10.4

Types of Reflections

161

Photo 10.1 One photo selected by student teacher Sandy (pseudonym)

our student teachers formed into three groups and focused on three themes: namely, cultural aspects, aspects related to teaching and learning and any visits paid to the NGOs there. Such themes heightened students’ cultural awareness and developed a vivid cultural context that is normally out of reach in a more traditional and summative written reflection. We also found this approach to be a powerful storytelling process by making use of photo images. The captions for the photo journey in Cambodia demonstrated the quality of the reflections (see Photo 10.2).

10.4.2 Reflection-in-Action 10.4.2.1 Online Forum Although some academics challenge the value of social media to foster critical thinking, it is seen to enhance multiple perspectives and input among peers that can also exceed what is possible in traditional classrooms (Novakovich, 2016). We propose using one of the web 2.0 tools, namely, an online forum as an educational platform for critical reflections. It allows students to solve common problems collaboratively, address shared concerns and critically reflect through a synchronous interaction among peers (Bennett, Bishop, Dalgarno, Waycott, & Kennedy, 2012; Cho, Lee, & Jonassen, 2011; Guthrie & McCracken, 2014; Miyazoe & Anderson, 2010). Also, when students are engaged in community work through their CBEL setting, their course tutors’ support is not always immediately available, and therefore making such a platform more useful (Yilmaz & Keser, 2016).

162

10 Designing and Facilitating ‘Reflection-on-Action’ …

Photo 10.2 Photo with captions written by students in a post-programme sharing session

Our experience stemmed from a community-based project internship programme that aimed to nurture shared leadership skills (see Chow & Lam, 2015). Every summer around 50 students collaborated in teams at different local community partners’ organizations to work on authentic service tasks. These tasks included research work, curriculum design and also cultural conservation tours, etc. Our students were required to participate in an online forum to reflect on their practical experiences and the learning that was derived from them. The forum was structured around three areas and students were required to initiate a discussion thread and then respond to their peers: (a) Problem-solving corner: questions and discussion related to adaptation in work environment, project tasks or personal and social competencies as shared leaders (b) Critical incidents: sharing of key events/issues that showcase self-awareness, multiple perspectives involved and reflect in a broader context (c) Personal growth and sharing: sharing of learning process with images, poem or stories. We found that some rules and guidelines helped to maintain a ‘secure intellectual and emotional spaces’ in this online community (Guthrie & McCracken, 2014). Similarly, we specified some guidelines for students so that they could better gear their responses in the forum: (a) Problem-solving corner: students should ask follow-up questions (when necessary), give practical suggestions or direct to related resources (websites, books or journal articles… etc.);

10.4

Types of Reflections

163

(b) Critical incidents: ask follow-up questions for clarification, generate multiple perspectives in the situation or relate to personal experiences that resonate with others’ sharing; and, (c) Personal growth and sharing: appreciate others sharing and demonstrate how the learning challenges own thinking and belief. Although the forum received very positive feedback from students as it offered mutual support, solutions for different kinds of problems in a timely manner and some personal sharing which generated very heated discussions among peers, the forum itself had some limitations. For instance, the social nature of the environment can prohibit disagreement (Friesen & Lowe, 2012) meaning that students find it easier to agree with one another than disagreeing (Chang & Chang, 2014). This aligns with our observation that a tendency to agree is contradictory to being critical. Also, as the programme intended to nurture shared leaders, the social environment of the forum actually undermined reflections related to team process and team collaboration. That explains why we propose using multi-modal reflections that can supplement each approach. For this case, on-site sharing/mid-way evaluation with small groups of students can help them reflect at a more personal level.

10.4.2.2 On-site Debriefing CBEL programmes can often take place in an ill-structured environment where the course tutor’s role is very different from the traditional type of lectures offered in schools and university settings. While the former focuses more on meaning-making through experience, the latter is often on the transmission of knowledge. Tutors play a key role in enhancing students’ reflective processes through CBEL because they have to be a facilitator walking alongside their students in order to develop a learning community that allows members to interact and synergize (Ricca, 2012; Senge, 2006). On-site debriefing sessions with students during EL is another reflection-in-action approach that facilitates a dialogic process among the students and the teachers (Moffatt, Ryan, & Barton, 2016) and helps develop a good team spirit and cohesion among participants and thus contribute to a safe and secure learning environment. Citing the Cambodia CBEL project above as an example, student teachers were required to visit orphanages for young children and adolescents diagnosed with HIV in the capital city, Phnom Penh, as part of the project. It was the first time our student teachers had come into contact or worked with young people diagnosed with HIV and those few days with the orphans were emotionally charged for our whole cohort of students. The on-site debriefing sessions provided a natural platform for students to reflect and release their emotions. Some of the prompts for the debriefing session are listed below: (a) What did you observe today and how did you feel about it? (b) What have you realized through this process and why was that significant to you? (c) Did anything make you feel uncomfortable in the process? Why? Why not?

10 Designing and Facilitating ‘Reflection-on-Action’ …

164

(d) What was the impact on you as a person and as a student educator/(profession according to discipline) (e) Name one person in your group that you want to thank. Why? What did they do? (f) Name one thing you felt grateful for during this time. (g) Name one thing you can consider changing when you return to your home city and why; and, (h) How can you sustain this new mindset/belief when you return to your home city? Oral reflection allows the dialogic process between participants (Moffatt et al., 2016) and it is possible to create a community of learners with mutual trust and support. For reflections to go in-depth and become more personal in such a dialogic process, the participants have to feel safe and confident enough to share which is why the tutors’ role and willingness to facilitate this type of environment are so important. In fact, the experiences become more powerful when the facilitation process takes into account the social and emotional dynamics of the group while at the same time acknowledging the complex and holistic nature of the learning (Beard & Wilson, 2006). In our experience, some of the student teachers became very emotionally charged through their encounter with the orphans, especially as it was the first time they had worked with such vulnerable groups of children. It was an experience completely detached from any experience they could have had in their home environment or city (in our case, Hong Kong). Our role as facilitators was to prepare them mentally before the experiences and when we conducted the on-site debriefing with them; we gave them ample chance to share their emotions and garner mutual support. It was also an important outlet for us as we shared many of the feelings displayed by our student teachers. In particular, we can also empower our students by creating a sense of control where they can actually make a positive change in society and in their own communities as teachers-to-be (Levesque-Bristol, Knapp, & Fisher, 2010).

10.5

Conclusion

While reflectivity stands as one of the most significant life-long learning skills and one that is closely linked to resilience, we agree that not every experience can develop critical reflection or facilitate a meaningful reflective process. For critical reflection to take place, it needs to be multi-modal with structured ongoing support given by course instructors and tutors. Some of the approaches suggested in this chapter have helped to improve fieldwork practice in our CBEL and facilitated the development of reflective practitioners, something crucial in the context of teacher preparation. The quality of reflection is closely connected to the quality of the learning experiences and rapport and trust developed between student teachers and

10.5

Conclusion

165

course tutors during the learning process is crucial for facilitating in-depth reflective practices and sustained habits. Some potential follow-up prompts based on the content of this chapter to be used in class discussions or planning meetings: – Are you a reflective person? Can you share some examples to show how? – Why is reflection important in the context of community-based EL and teacher education? – How do we reflect upon an experience? How does reflection help us learn better? – Can we ‘teach’ reflection? If not, how can we nurture a habit of reflection in our students? – How can we scaffold student teachers to reflect during or after an experience? – How can we support our students to write a reflection that involves deeper thinking? In other words, how can we engage our students in critical reflection? – How can we engage students who are less expressive in writing in critical reflection? – Can you name some more creative ways to help these students reflect better? – When students are feeling overwhelmed with their experiences, what you can do as a teacher to support them?

References Ash, S. L., & Clayton, P. H. (2004). The articulated learning: An approach to guided reflection and assessment. Innovative Higher Education, 29(2), 137–154. Beard, C. M., & Wilson, J. P. (2006). Experiential learning: A best practice handbook for educators and trainers. Kogan Page Publishers. Behrendt, M., & Machtmes, K. (2016). Photovoice as an evaluation tool for student learning on a field trip. Research in Science & Technological Education, 34(2), 187–203. Bennett, S., Bishop, A., Dalgarno, B., Waycott, J., & Kennedy, G. (2012). Implementing Web 2.0 technologies in higher education: A collective case study. Computers & Education, 59, 524– 534. Bognar, B., & Krumes, I. (2017). Encouraging reflection and critical friendship in preservice teacher education. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 7(3), 87–112. Chang, Y. J., & Chang, Y. S. (2014). Assessing peer support and usability of blogging in hybrid learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 22(1), 3–17. Cho, Y. H., Lee, J., & Jonassen, D. H. (2011). The role of tasks and epistemological beliefs in online peer questioning. Computers & Education, 56(1), 112–126. Chow, J. M. L., & Lam, S. F. (2015). Nurturing leadership and changing student mindset through meaningful community service: The HKU service leadership internship. In Promoting service leadership qualities in university students (pp. 67–81). Springer Singapore. Clarkeburn, H., & Kettula, K. (2012). Fairness and using reflective journals in assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 17, 439–452. Cope, J., & Watts, G. (2000). Learning by doing: An exploration of experience, critical incidents and reflection in entrepreneurial learning. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 6, 104–124. Cranton, P. (2006). Understanding and promoting transformative learning: A guide for educators of adults. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

166

10 Designing and Facilitating ‘Reflection-on-Action’ …

Cunliffe, A. L. (2016). Republication of “On becoming a critically reflexive practitioner”. Journal of management education, 40(6), 747–768. Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. DC Heath and Company. Dewey, J. (1938). The theory of inquiry. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Wiston. Friesen, N., & Lowe, S. (2012). The questionable promise of social media for education: Connective learning and the commercial imperative. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 28(3), 183–194. Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods. Oxford: Further Education Unit, Oxford Brookes University. Guthrie, K. L., & McCracken, H. (2014). Reflection: The importance of making meaning in e-service-learning courses. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 26(3), 238–252. Harris, A. S., Bruster, B., Peterson, B., & Shutt, T. (2010). Chapter 3: Becoming critically reflective. In A. S. Harris, B. Bruster, B. Peterson, & T. Shutt (Eds.), Examining and facilitating reflection to improve professional practice. USA: Rowman & Littlefield. Harvey, M., Coulson, D., & McMaugh, A. (2016). Towards a theory of the ecology of reflection: Reflective practice for experiential learning in higher education. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 13(2), 2. Hatcher, J. A., Bringle, R. G., & Muthiah, R. (2004). Designing effective reflection: What matters to service-learning? Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 11(1), 38–46. Henderson, E., Hogan, H., Grant, A., & Berlin, A. (2003). Conflict and coping strategies: A qualitative study of student attitudes to significant event analysis. Medical Education, 37(5), 438–446. King, P. M. (2000). Learning to make reflective judgments in new directions for teaching and learning (Vol. 82, pp. 15–26). Jossey-Bass Publishers. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Kolb, D. A. (2014). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development New Prentice-Hall. Kolb, D. A., Boyatzis, R. E., & Mainemelis, C. (2001). Experiential learning theory: Previous research and new directions. Perspectives on Thinking, Learning, and Cognitive Styles, 1(8), 227–247. Kreber, C. (2005). Reflection on teaching and the scholarship of teaching: Focus on science instructors. Higher Education, 50, 323–359. Larrivee, B. (2006). The convergence of reflective practice and effective classroom management. In C. Evertson & C. Weinstein (Eds.), Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues (pp. 983–1001). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Larrivee, B. (2008). Development of a tool to assess teachers’ level of reflective practice. Reflective practice, 9(3), 341–360. Lundgren, H., & Poell, R. F. (2016). On critical reflection: A review of Mezirow’s theory and its operationalization. Human Resource Development Review, 15(1), 3–28. Macfarlane, B., & Gourlay, L. (2009). The reflection game: Enacting the penitent self. Teaching in Higher Education, 14, 455–459. Mathieson, L. (2016). Synergies in critical reflective practice and science: Science as reflection and reflection as science. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 13(2), 4. McArdle, K., & Coutts, N. (2003). A strong core of qualities—A model of the professional educator that moves beyond reflection. Studies in Continuing Education, 25, 225–237. Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Miyazoe, T., & Anderson, T. (2010). Learning outcomes and students’ perceptions of online writing: Simultaneous implementation of a forum, blog, and wiki in an EFL blended learning setting. System, 38(2), 185–199.

References

167

Moffatt, A., Barton, G., & Ryan, M. (2016). Multimodal reflection for creative facilitators: An approach to improving self-care. Reflective Practice, 17(6), 762–778. Moffatt, A., Ryan, M., & Barton, G. (2016). Reflexivity and self-care for creative facilitators: Stepping outside the circle. Studies in Continuing Education, 38(1), 29–46. Moon, J. A. (2004). A handbook of reflective and experiential learning: Theory and practice. Psychology Press. Novakovich, J. (2016). Fostering critical thinking and reflection through blog-mediated peer feedback. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(1), 16–30. Laird, T. F. N., Seifert, T. A., Pascarella, E. T., Mayhew, M. J., & Blaich, C. F. (2014). Deeply affecting first-year students’ thinking: Deep approaches to learning and three dimensions of cognitive development. The Journal of Higher Education, 85(3), 402–432. Levesque-Bristol, C. B., Knapp, T. B., & Fisher, B. J. (2010). The effectiveness of service learning: It’s not all what you think. Journal of Experiential Education, 33(3), 208–224. Ricca, B. (2012). Beyond teaching methods: A complexity approach. Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education, 9(2), 31–51. Ryan, M. (2011). Improving reflective writing in higher education: A social semiotic perspective. Teaching in Higher Education, 16, 99–111. Savage, E., Tapics, T., Evarts, J., Wilson, J., & Tirone, S. (2015). Experiential learning for sustainability leadership in higher education. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 16(5), 692–705. Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books. Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization. London, UK: Random House Publishing Group. Ulusoy, M. (2016). Field experiences in teacher education: The perceptions and qualities of written reflections. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(5), 532–544. Wang, C., & Burris, M. A. (1997). Photovoice: Concept, methodology, and use for participatory needs assessment. Health Education & Behavior, 24(3), 369–387. Wurdinger, S. D., & Carlson, J. A. (2010). Teaching for experiential learning: Five approaches that work. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education. Yilmaz, F. G. K., & Keser, H. (2016). The impact of reflective thinking activities in e-learning: A critical review of the empirical research. Computers & Education, 95, 163–173. Zhang, G., Shea, G., Zeller, N., et al. (2013). Toward a better understanding: A 360-degree assessment of a service-learning program in teacher education using Stufflebeam’s CIPP model. In Jagla, V. M., Erickson, J. A., & Tinkler, A. S. (Eds.), Transforming teacher education through service-learning. IAP.

Some Final Thoughts

11

Abstract

In this chapter, we examine some of the most salient and largely unresolved issues that are still connected with the adoption of community-based experiential learning (CBEL) on Teacher Education programmes. In the CBEL projects described throughout this book, we have drawn on different examples, some local and some overseas. We have not selected these as ‘perfect’ models of CBEL in action, but as evidence of curriculum initiatives aimed at rethinking the way teachers might be prepared for a long and satisfying career in the classroom. These CBEL projects have also raised issues that may resonate with other EL practitioners and teacher educators who are also attending to different approaches in preparing the teachers of tomorrow. One of these issues surrounds the pedagogy of CBEL and how it can be best organized in higher education and then taught to student teachers. We then turn to current gaps in the research on CBEL in teacher education and how further scholarship of this crucial aspect of teaching and learning can be better understood. Keywords

Mandatory EL

11.1


Pedagogy
Research opportunities

Looking Back

As mentioned earlier, experiential learning opportunities have been provided to students in higher education for decades, and particularly so in the United States. In Hong Kong and Asia CBEL is a relatively new approach aimed at broadening the mindset of young undergraduates who are facing new challenges in the shape of an increasingly unpredictable and changing global landscape, socially, culturally and © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 G. Harfitt and J. M. L. Chow, Employing Community-Based Experiential Learning in Teacher Education, Springer Texts in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6003-3_11

169

170

11

Some Final Thoughts

economically. In Chap. 1, we stated that the aim of introducing CBEL into our teacher preparation programmes at the Faculty of Education, the University of Hong Kong was targeted at nurturing long-term personal and professional growth in our student teachers. We wanted to see our student teachers graduate with a high degree of competence in classroom teaching, but who were also passionate, caring, collaborative, resilient and community-centred teachers. We situated CBEL as a signature pedagogy that would help student teachers to develop their communication and problem-solving skills as well as being more wide-awake to the world (Greene, 1978) and exponents of lifelong learning. We also wanted to ensure that the CBEL projects did not only benefit our own students, but that they brought long-term and sustainable impact on our community partners who we deliberately positioned as co-creators of our students’ knowledge. Several lessons have been learned from the experiences of establishing a culture of CBEL described in this book and the coming sections seek to address some of these lessons. In Chap. 9, we addressed the question of whether CBEL projects should be a mandatory graduation requirement on teacher preparation programmes. In that section, we presented counter-stories that represented a pushback against the establishment of CBEL as a compulsory part of a student teacher’s learning in our Faculty. We stated that we have learned to embrace these more negative comments, but have worked hard to try and understand and unpack them so that we can better respond to similar views and opinions in the future. In many ways, the pushback came from student teachers and colleagues who had a more embodied view of how best to prepare teachers and this is certainly not a new phenomenon. But overall, we sense that our student teachers’ feedback from has been considerably more positive than negative. This makes us believe that positioning CBEL as a mandatory part of our TE programmes was the right thing to do in our own context, but it is up to other curriculum leaders and TEIs to carefully look at their own students’ and communities’ needs before making a similar decision. The following extracts show that to some student teachers CBEL can promote their professional development as well as make them better citizens and community members. Four Reflection Extracts This CBEL experience was rewarding as it allowed me to work with different children and adults coming of different age groups and backgrounds. With the other camp leaders, I learnt the skills that are needed to work with older children and was moved by their passion and energy in leading camps. It was also a perfect opportunity for me to try differentiated learning and do some play based learning practices learned in my lessons back at university. To be honest, I was not very interested in the EL project because I would rather attend the lessons in HKU or teaching in real classroom, so that I get some ‘real experience and knowledge’ about the education. I thought the EL project is kind of worthless to exist since it does not really benefit to my learning or related to education. However, my mind has changed a lot….I learned many things which benefit to my teaching in

11.1

Looking Back

171

the future or even in my entire life. I learned to be a better teacher, a better person in the future. From this experience, not only did it provide me with exposure and hands-on experience working with children from low socio-economic backgrounds, I learned that they are not much different from other children and are all able to be motivated and engaged when we find things that interest them, even if it’s in English. I also learned that I should have more confidence in myself as a teacher; I often feel anxious when working in new environments with new groups, not knowing whether I may be able to tackle the challenges that I may face, but after this experience, it has also shown that I have the ability to work with a wider age range and different socio-economic backgrounds. I have learnt how to be a more flexible person as only when we know how to change the idea immediately, we can be a quicker problem solver. Out of the classroom, we no longer facing ‘text’. Everything in front of us is real. No more theorems, no more assumptions but come with endless problems and challenges. But that’s exactly how we learn through this experiential learning, learn from experience. Indeed, teaching doesn’t only teach of knowledge but also the holistic growth of the student. Their virtue is far more crucial than just knowledgeable. To be honest, I would like the way to learn from experiences rather than to learn from reading those abstract theories. To be a life-long learner, to be a better me.

The positive feedback on our mandatory CBEL projects has outweighed the more negative comments from student teachers and the above examples are, perhaps, useful illustrations of what happens when students do engage well with carefully structured and managed community-based projects. The above reflections point to clear and tangible transferrable skills that our student teachers have taken from CBEL projects to their own teaching and each student teacher is able to point to specific growth moments as a result of being involved with the EL curriculum. In the reflections, we also see student teachers’ recognition of their own personal growth and change as well as professional development.

11.2

Process of Change

One challenge we have experienced is in the relatively short time-frame of some programmes, especially with regard to the one-year postgraduate teaching diploma (PGDE). In the diagram below, the holistic integration of theory and practice on our PGDE programmes is presented as a continuous cycle (see Fig. 11.1) and CBEL is supposed to fit seamlessly into the rest of the taught curriculum (see Bridges, et al., 2018). However, this is undoubtedly a challenge and depends on successful integration and collaboration across several levels of the course that are often coordinated and taught by different teacher educators and which occur at different stages of the course.

172

11

Some Final Thoughts

Fig. 11.1 Curriculum design at the PGDE level, HKU

At undergraduate level (UG), there is arguably more time for student teachers to process their experiences and to engage in long-term reflection on their growth as educators and teachers. On most of our UG programmes, student teachers have 5 years to graduate and this means that they can engage in a wide number of courses and learning experiences that have a cumulative effect. A difference between the two preparation models can be seen in the fact that while one UG CBEL project can last for a year or more, the entire PGDE FT programme is around 10 months long (September–June). Our CBEL projects at UG level are probably where we have seen some of the most impressive transformations in the development of young student teachers from different disciplines.

11.3

Teaching CBEL as Pedagogy: What Do We Need to Know?

It is important to consider how best to prepare new Faculty colleagues to help organize a CBEL project and this is certainly not an easy thing to do. As we mentioned in earlier chapters, most universities now place greater emphasis on the development of research profiles when compared to curriculum and teaching initiatives like CBEL. We have already outlined and exemplified some of the ways that teachers and course facilitators can approach CBEL pedagogically. For instance, we described and detailed some important considerations and steps for course instructors to examine when designing their own CBEL initiatives in Chap. 3. We also highlight the significance for course instructors to walk alongside

11.3

Teaching CBEL as Pedagogy: What Do We Need to Know?

173

their students as much as they can before, during and after CBEL projects (for details, please refer to Chaps. 4–7 where we contextualize the learning process through different CBEL programmes and also see Appendix A for a complete sample course outline that has been badged on students’ graduation transcripts as a ‘communicatively intensive course’ (CiC) by our university. Assessment of students’ work has also been mentioned in Chap. 3, as has the importance of integrating reflective opportunities into any project or course (see Chap. 10). We have also noted the importance of teachers demonstrating their own commitment to the aims of CBEL through positioning themselves as co-learners in the process. We have made the case for promoting long-term collaborative projects with community partners and avoiding as far as possible the tendency to rely on ‘tick the box-type’ one-off projects. Through a long-term partnership with NGOs and community partners, there is a stronger chance of achieving cumulative benefits through reciprocity. Our CBEL courses have been enriched by the coming together of students and teachers from different disciplines and we would argue for greater interdisciplinary collaboration when offering similar projects in other institutions. We have also benefitted from having our work and projects reviewed by external examiners during programme reviews and yearly reports on students’ performance. Another way of securing feedback and advice on our initiatives has been to disseminate our student teachers’ work at international research conferences on Teacher Education and enter competitions such as the QS Wharton Reimagine Education categories for educational innovation. Locally, it has been important to share our work and rationale with local bodies such as the Education Bureau in Hong Kong (EDB) and inter-university conferences and networks. Teaching is a learning profession and all these different ways of securing quality external feedback, advice and constructive criticism have helped us to build momentum and to keep revising and rethinking our work in CBEL.

11.4

Looking Ahead

While there are more than a thousand research papers on CBEL today, there is still a need to understand more about this very different type of pedagogy if we are to better articulate its benefits to stakeholders such as policymakers and education authorities. In the wider context of Experiential Learning, there are still some prevalent concerns about its legitimacy. Research has shown how CBEL projects can assist students in the development of prosocial behaviours as well as an enhanced sense of belonging and empowerment, but what about the long-term effects of CBEL? While much of the research has tended to look into the programme impact of CBEL, a few studies look beyond that programme level and investigate longitudinal benefits and sustained impact on the teachers, community partners and communities in which they serve (Taylor, et al., 2018). We definitely need more empirical evidence in this regard.

174

11

Some Final Thoughts

It would be helpful, too, to better understand the impact of CBEL on communities and on community partners because while many papers focus on the impact that participation in CBEL can have on students (through mainly qualitative studies such as surveys, interview data or teachers’ self-reports, etc.), there remains a need for in-depth, longitudinal studies on the impact of CBEL on the community partners that play such an important role in this type of pedagogy (Harfitt, 2018). How does CBEL as a signature pedagogy contribute to the development of the community as a whole and how might this development be sustained? Are universities open to greater collaboration with community partners (Payne et al., 2017) and what would that mean for student learning and capacity building in the community? While the benefits of CBEL on students’ personal and professional development have consistently been seen as positive, there have been very few attempts to gauge the voice of community partners on how CBEL might mediate teaching and learning processes. To illustrate this, d’Arlach, Sanchez & Feuer (2009) note that very few studies have actually examined how the recipients of service actually view that service. In our own work, we have elicited the views of our community partners (see Harfitt & Chow, 2018) and some feedback is included below. Both extracts, for example, highlight the reciprocity that was achieved through collaboration with these partner organizations; a most welcome finding showing that the CBEL projects supported our student teachers’ learning as well as the work of the NGO hosting them. Extract 1 from Community Partners working with our student teachers We are really impressed by the students for their creativity and their problem solving skills. Especially their flexibility because they actually have to change their presentation skills and the way they present information to connect and engage with different participants with different needs and backgrounds. I think they have very good communication skills and show skills which are particularly important this century. We have actually adopted many of the students’ ideas for our educational programmes and they have been very successful.

(Feedback from staff at HK Ocean Park) Extract 2 We are very grateful to work with these student teachers. They contributed a lot to our work and our mission. The CBEL course did not only provide a platform for students to turn theory into practice, but also provided an opportunity for our team to review our education programmes. It was a powerful experience for us as well I think. We look forward to working with more student educators from your Faculty.

(Feedback from an NGO working in Cambodia with underprivileged children and victims of trafficking). Some of our community partners noted that a few student teachers lacked knowledge of social issues (seen as critical for twenty-first-century teachers) while others needed to develop key personal and professional skills (such as communication skills, decision-making skills and time management skills). This affirms that

11.4

Looking Ahead

175

the developmental process for teachers is a complex one, but also that feedback on teaching and teachers does not only have to come from school-based or university-based educators. Other findings from our engagement with student teachers and community partners point to the need for CBEL projects to be sustainable, transformative and progressive. They suggest that carefully structured projects that draw on the ‘funds of knowledge’ (Gonzalez et al., 2013) embedded into the community have a positive impact on the development of teacher identity and core attributes relevant to teaching including passion, subject knowledge and resilience. Throughout this book, we have attempted to show how community partners, partner universities and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) should be positioned as ‘co-educators’ and powerful knowledge holders in the complex but compelling process of teacher preparation. The community has been seen as a context containing rich “funds of knowledge” provided by its members (Gonzalez, Moll & Amanti, 2013) and this paper seeks to better understand some of those funds. But the paucity of research on the partners’ voice in CBEL seems like a major omission in the literature given the role that many community partners and NGOs play in the CBEL opportunities afforded to students. Morton and Bergbauer (2015) call for a ‘shared, stronger community that we look for over time (which) includes greater mutual knowledge of one another and softening of the boundaries between campus and community’ (2015, p. 27). The same authors also make the point that when examining a ‘problem’ in society then the problem needs to be positioned outside people, the community and the university, and that it should only be addressed through dialogue across different boundaries and via reflective practices (Morton & Bergbauer, 2015, p. 28). Zeichner (2010), too, makes a call for a ‘third space’ where teacher educators, student educators and community partners come together to promote a powerful form of situated learning for better teacher education. In this book and in many others on CBEL and service-learning, too, there are countless examples of community-based projects. But which approaches in particular and which combinations of approaches might have the most significant impact on learners? More research that critically examines the processes which occur within CBEL will definitely help inform fieldwork practice and theory. In Chap. 7, we explored the sustainability of growth on students beyond programme level through student-led initiatives, and the long-term effects of CBEL also deserve attention. We have seen some very positive outcomes for our student teachers but we have often wondered whether there was a particular aspect of the course or perhaps a combination of practices within the project that triggered the most impact. In sharing our experiences of introducing mandatory CBEL initiatives in teacher preparation, we hope that we might contribute to a wider sharing of practices in CBEL and service-learning internationally. This field of study needs to learn from the sharing of good practices and to build on previous studies that have taken place around the world. In the area of teacher education, there exists a growing body of research on how CBEL can address the question of how best to prepare twenty-first-century teachers in different parts of the world (see Brayko, 2013; Guillen & Zeichner, 2018; Harfitt

176

11

Some Final Thoughts

& Chow, 2018; Richmond; 2017; Zeichner, 2010). However, as seen earlier, there is still a need for more longitudinal studies of how CBEL might better inform subject knowledge and transferrable skills for new teachers joining the profession. Important areas of teacher education such as identity and a sense of resilience could also be examined to see if CBEL might play any part in facilitating these essential qualities in new teachers. Too often in TE, research has focused on the voice of teachers and students only, believing that their insights and observations offer the most important source of data when examining an educational puzzle. When research has included the student voice in educational settings, the results have been extremely helpful and Rodgers (2006) cites John Dewey’s (1938) concept of reflective thinking to urge educators to become more ‘alive’ to their students’ thinking, affect and learning (p. 211). In the same way, we seek to embrace the voice of community partners and stakeholders in NGOs, who host and mentor our student teachers on a mandatory CBEL block on UG and PG teacher preparation courses. By listening to the community voice in a much more systematic way, we hope to better unpack the complex ways in which ‘community engagement’ (Haddix, 2015) and knowledge drawn from the community can inform the process of teacher education.

11.5

Conclusions

We believe that there is more potential for building capacity between universities and community partners or NGOs (Payne & Zeichner, 2017) and stress the need for greater research in this growing area of CBEL. The voice of the community in the development of our teachers of tomorrow is a valid and insightful source of information. It acts as another strand of knowledge, which cannot be provided by schools or by universities and which goes to the heart of the underlying message in this book, that as the role of teachers becomes ever more complex and important, TEIs must reconsider the ways they prepare future teachers. It will be their job to serve the communities that our future students and their families are all part of and which contain so much knowledge that can enhance teachers’ professional and personal growth. Some potential follow-up prompts based on the content of this chapter to be used in class discussions or planning meetings: – If you were establishing a CBEL curriculum in your own institution would you make it compulsory for all your students? Why or why not? – What might be some of the consequences of a mandatory CBEL programme? – How would you best prepare a new Faculty colleague to help organize or run a CBEL initiative at your university or institution?

References

177

References Brayko, K. (2013). Community-based placements as contexts for disciplinary learning: A study of literacy teacher education outside of school. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(1), 47–59. Bridges, S. M., Andrews, S., Tsui, A. B. M., Chan, C. K. K., Wang, D., Kwan, T. Y. L., Lam, J. W. I., Harfitt, G. J., Chan, C., Law, W. W., Cheng, M. M. W., Yeung, P. S., Cheung, W. M., & Wang, R. K. Y. (2018). Designing for Integration in Initial Teacher Education (ITE) curricula: The Hong Kong Postgraduate Diploma in Education (PGDE), in Wyatt-Smith, C. (Ed.), Teacher Education, Learning Innovation and Accountability. Singapore: Springer Publications. D’Arlach, L., Sanchez, B., & Feuer, R. (2009). Voices from the community: A case for reciprocity in service-learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service-Learning, Fall, 5–16. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier Books. Gonzalez, N., Moll, L. C., & Amanti, C. (Eds.). (2013). Funds of Knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities and classrooms. New York, NY: Routledge. Greene, M. (1978). Landscapes of Learning. New York: Teachers College Press. Guillen, L., & Zeichner, K. (2018). A university-community partnership in teacher education from the perspectives of community-based teacher educators. Journal of Teacher Education, 69(2), 140–153. Haddix, M. (2015). Preparing community-engaged teachers. Theory into Practice, 54, 63–70. Harfitt, G. J. (2018). The role of the community in teacher preparation: Exploring a different pathway to becoming a teacher. Frontiers in Education: Teacher Education. Harfitt, G. J., & Chow, J. M. L. (2018). Transforming traditional models of initial teacher education through a mandatory experiential learning programme. Teaching and Teacher Education, 73, 120–129. Morton, K., & S. Bergbauer, (2015). A Case for community: Starting with relationships and prioritizing community as method in service-learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, Fall, 18–31. Payne, K., Zeichner, K., Clandinin, D., & Hukka, J. (2017). Multiple voices and participants in teacher education. Handbook of research on teacher education, 2. Richmond, G. (2017). The power of community partnership in the preparation of teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 68(1), 6–8. Rodgers, C. R. (2006). Attending to student voice: The impact of descriptive feedback on learning and teaching. Curriculum Inquiry, 36, 209–237. Taylor, K. B., Jones, S., Massey, R., Mickey, J., & Reynolds, D. J. (2018). ‘It Just Had to Settle’: A longitudinal investigation of students’ developmental readiness to navigate dissonance and experience transformation through international service learning. The Journal of Higher Education, 89(2), 236–260. Zeichner, K. (2010). Rethinking the connections between campus courses and field experiences in college- and university-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1–1), 89–99.

Appendix A Course Outline for One Overseas CBEL Project

Course title: Developing resilient student teachers by nurturing resilience in vulnerable groups in Cambodia Course code: BBED6792 Course coordinator: Dr. Jessie Chow Course instructors: Dr. Jessie Chow & Dr. Gary Harfitt Credit weighting: 6 Target number of participants: 12 Duration: Semester 2 + Summer Time: Second semester (lectures and input sessions before and after the main project trip) Course description: The course sets out a sustainable relationship with a rural school in Cambodia, which houses children impacted by trafficking and poverty. The focus will be on co-constructing a curriculum on resilience for the children there with the teachers and volunteers of the school by adopting a ‘train the trainers’ model of development. It is found that teachers’ resilience enhances their job satisfaction and teaching effectiveness, and at the same time, allows teachers to nurture resilience in their own students to cope with the challenges of the twenty-first © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 G. Harfitt and J. M. L. Chow, Employing Community-Based Experiential Learning in Teacher Education, Springer Texts in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6003-3

179

180

Appendix A: Course Outline for One Overseas CBEL Project

century. The current program highlights one of the key approaches that contextualizes the knowledge of teachers’ resilience in working with the vulnerable group and carefully incorporates Kolb’s (2015) learning cycle into the program. Student teachers learn to integrate academic theories and actively experiment through continuous observation, trial-and-error and reflection. Course learning outcomes (CLOs) and alignment with Programme learning outcomes (PLOs): Upon successful completion of this course, students should be able to:

1.

2. 3.

4.

CLOs

Alignment with PLOs

Nurture young student educators with an heightened awareness of resilience, critical thinking, communications and problem-solving skills Design and pilot a curriculum on resilience as well as document project piloting experiences for reflection Exchange ideas and experiences with team members and partners, resolve differences, mutually enhance personal/professional development and accomplish tasks through collaboration Develop student educators with a sense of social awareness and perform social responsibilities

3, 4

2 5, 6

1, 3, 5

Course teaching and learning activities (TLAs) Course teaching and learning activities (TLAs)

Teacher-Student Face-to Face Contact (CT) hours1

Study Load (SL) hours (estimates)1

Alignment with CLOs

Interactive lectures and sharing sessions Experiential learning project Reflection tasks, multimedia presentation(s) Total

25

40

1, 2, 3, 4

135 h (approx. 3 weeks for overseas projects)

50

2

30

1, 2, 4

1

160

120

For a 6-credit course, the total no. of teacher-student face-to-face contact (CT) hours should be 24, and the total no. of CT hrs and Study Load (SL) hours added together should be in the range of 120 to 150.

Appendix A: Course Outline for One Overseas CBEL Project

181

Course content and major topics Dates

Session topics

Session 1 30 January 2019

Understanding Resilience & human trafficking This introductory session gives an overview of experiential learning project and addresses key issues in conceptualizing, designing and implementing a curriculum on resilience This session helps participants understand relevant social issues within the Cambodia context, analyse the needs that they may have and propose ethical solutions for the community Resilience in Action This session further consolidates the concepts of resilience with curricular activities. Students will have the chance to work in small groups to design activities Sharing from students in the past cohort Students who join the programme in the previous year will come to share with them their curriculum Supervised planning meeting 1 Students will work in small teams under the supervision of course instructors on curriculum planning and sharing with the class what they have planned Supervised planning meeting 2 Students will work in small teams under the supervision of course instructors on curriculum planning and sharing with the class what they have planned Pre-departure meeting Students have to finalize their programme materials and further briefing about the trip will be provided Cambodia—Resilience in action

Session 2 20 February 2019

Session 3 27 February/March 6, 2019 Session 4 27 March 2019

Session 5 17 April 2019

Session 6 29 May 2019 July 2019 (3 weeks) Session 7 18 July 2019

Post-project sharing

Required/recommended readings/ online materials: 1. Abu-Sada, C. (Ed). (2012). In the eyes of others: How people in crises perceive humanitarian aid. USA: MSF-USA http://www.msf.org/sites/msf.org/files/msfin-the-eyes-of-others.pdf 2. Henderson, N., & Milstein, M. (2003). Resiliency in schools: Making it happen for students and educators. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press. 3. Resiliency resource site index. (n.d.). Retrieved April 26, 2017, from http:// www.embracethefuture.org.au/resiliency/index2.htm 4. Werner, E. E., & Smith, R. S. (2001). Journeys from childhood to midlife: Risk, resilience, and recovery. Cornell University Press.

182

Appendix A: Course Outline for One Overseas CBEL Project

Assessment Tasks/Activities2 Type of Assessment Tasks/ Activities

Weighting in final course grade (%)

Alignment with CLOs

Reflective Writing: (1) Individual learners’ ongoing reflections on learning (3 entries minimal, each entry at least 400 words, including those on their understandings of target communities/social groups, learning/teaching, personal development, ethical issues, intercultural communication or project impact, etc.) (2) Materials and/or artefacts (e.g. lesson plans, curriculum documents, task sheets) prepared for the project and related to project documentation (e.g. video recordings, pictures, etc.). and (3) Curriculum submitted to the community partners (shared among participants who are in the same project) Multimedia presentation (20-minutes + Questions and Answers): Students will prepare and present their projects and project experiences multimedia presentation (in groups)

50

2, 4

50

2, 3, 4

Assessment Task 1: Reflective writings (50%) You should write a minimum of 3 reflections during the learning process and submit via the Moodle. Each reflection should be at least 400 words; however, you are encouraged to express your ideas fully rather than attend to word count. At least one reflection should be completed before you embark on your trip, and at least one should be completed after you return. Your reflections may address the following topics, but you are encouraged to write on other topics you feel are important and significant in your learning: Pre-trip (5 June 2019) • Your motivation for joining the course and trip, your hopes and aspirations for learning, your challenges and concerns. • Your growing understanding of the concept ‘resilience’, the target community’s needs and sociopolitical context of their need.

2

You are encouraged to use diverse forms of assessment so that there is a good balance of different forms of assessment in a curriculum.

Appendix A: Course Outline for One Overseas CBEL Project

183

During trip (5 July 2019) • Your reflections on the community’s learning and your personal learning on resilience. • One or more critical incidents reflecting ethical issues or intercultural communication you encountered and what you learned about yourself, the community, the service trip and more widely, education in a globalized society. Post-trip (20 July 2019) • Your most significant learning. • How you have changed as a person, as a prospective education professional. • How your experience has influenced your understanding of teaching and learning. Your reflections should be personal, critical and exploratory, with ample details and evidence from your experience. Your supervisor will read, and if relevant, respond to your reflections in the coming months. DUE DATES: These reflective writings should be posted on your individual blog/forum on the course moodle during the year.

184

Appendix A: Course Outline for One Overseas CBEL Project

Grade Descriptors for Reflective Writing ←——————————PASS——————————! ←……FAIL……! Addressing the Prompt or Research Question

Identifies and addresses clearly the main question(s) or prompt being posed in your reflection and the subsidiary, embedded or implicit aspects, addressing their relationships with each other

Identifies and addresses the main question(s) or prompt being posed in the reflection and most of the subsidiary, embedded or implicit aspects

Identifies and addresses the main question(s) or prompt being posed in the reflection and some of the subsidiary, embedded or implicit aspects

Identifies part of the main question(s) or prompt being posed in the reflection and a few of the subsidiary, embedded, or implicit aspects but only addresses them partially

Lacks an understanding of what the reflective question or prompt requires

Intellectual Engagement with Experiences, Knowledge and Practice

Reflections consistently demonstrate informed, thoughtful and sustained engagement with a broad range of relevant experiences, theories and issues (where appropriate). The writer draws insightful connections between the experiences and other related issues in the students’ knowledge of related theory and practice. Points are well supported through the use of evidence

Reflections mostly demonstrate informed and thoughtful engagement with a broad range of relevant experiences, theories and issues (where appropriate). The writer draws connections between the experiences and other related issues in the students’ knowledge of related theory and practice. Points are generally supported through the use evidence

Reflections mostly indicate informed intellectual engagement with concepts, theories and issues but not always with sufficient depth, breadth or understanding. The writer draws rather simplistic connections between the experiences and other related issues in the students’ knowledge of related theory and practice. Points are generally supported through the use of evidence

Reflections indicate some intellectual engagement with concepts, theories or issues but mostly at a superficial level. The writer draws simplistic connections between the experiences and other issues in the students’ knowledge of related theory and practice. There is a lack of evidence in support of points made

Reflections reveal an absence of intellectual engagement with concepts, theories or issues. Writings are irrelevant or superficial. No attempt to link experiences and other related issues to the students’ knowledge of related theory and practice. Viewpoints are poorly articulated and unsupported or supported

Personal Development

Develops extensive and highly perceptive self-understandings from reflective postings. Is able to draw upon personal examples in everyday life in connection with experiences described. Consistently demonstrates a willingness and ability to subject own beliefs, values and behaviours to critical scrutiny and an openness to change

Develops perceptive self-understandings from reflective writings. Demonstrates a willingness and ability to subject own beliefs, values and behaviours to critical scrutiny and an openness to change

Develops some perceptive self-understandings from reflective writings. Generally disposed to scrutinizing own beliefs, values and behaviours, but not always in a sufficiently critical manner. Shows some openness to change

Develops some limited self-understandings from reflective writings. Shows willingness to examine own beliefs, values and behaviours but mostly without sufficient questioning of them. Occasionally it shows openness to change

No evidence of the development of self-understanding from the reflective writings. Unwilling or unable to scrutinize own beliefs, values and behaviours. Shows no openness to change

(continued)

Appendix A: Course Outline for One Overseas CBEL Project

185

(continued) ←——————————PASS——————————! ←……FAIL……! Mechanics

The reflections show evidence of diligent editing and proof-reading and a desire to make the reflections accessible to a reader. The language contains very few, if any, errors in grammar and vocabulary

The reflections show evidence of editing and proof-reading and a desire to make the reflections accessible to a reader. The language is generally accurate but contains a few systematic errors in complex grammar and vocabulary

The reflections show an attempt to edit and proof-read. The language is mostly accurate, and errors, when they occur, are mainly in complex grammar and vocabulary. Errors are distracting but the overall meaning is still intelligible

The reflections are fragmented and/or inconsistent. The language is sufficient for meaning to be understood with effort. However, the language contains frequent errors in simple and complex grammar and vocabulary that are distracting

The reflections are missing some entries. Errors in language and vocabulary are so frequent and distracting that the journal is largely incomprehensible

Assessment Task 2: Multimedia presentation (50%) Students will present their projects and project experiences though a multimedia presentation in groups of 3-5. This presentation should include a short video/film* of approx. 3 min per video in which the group captures some of the salient features or highlights of the project. This video/film can (if groups wish) focus on participants’ experiences and reflections before, during and after their respective project(s). Your entire presentation should be 20 min long and all members must participate. This will be followed by 5 min of Q&A. Your presentation will be video-recorded. DUE DATES: *The video will be given to the Gallant Ho Centre for Experiential Learning for dissemination on campus at HKU. Please include your names on the video so that you receive the credit for this work. An additional informal session may also be scheduled for sharing with the wider university community. Grade Descriptors for Group Presentations ←——————————PASS——————————! ←……FAIL……! Evidence of teamwork and collaboration

Group members clearly work as a team to ensure that each member of the group provides equal input in the planning and delivery of the presentation. Clear evidence of co-planning and collaboration is noted. Initiative is taken to support other groups’ oral presentations through active listening and enthusiastic, respectful intellectual discourse

Group members mostly work together as a team to ensure that each member of the group provides equal input in the planning and delivery of the presentation. Some evidence of co-planning and collaboration is noted. Initiative is taken to support other groups’ oral presentations by being present and responding as listeners

Group members generally work together as a team to provide a coherent organization of their presentation, including its planning and delivery. Some evidence of co-planning and collaboration is noted. Demonstrates the support of other groups’ oral presentations by attending their presentations, but lacks engagement as an audience member

Group members show a lack of organization in the planning and delivery of the presentation and there is little evidence of co-planning or collaboration. Does not show up to support the presentations of other classmates

Group members offer a disjointed presentation without any equal input in the planning and delivery of the presentation. There is no evidence of co-planning or collaboration. Does not show up to support the presentations of other classmates

(continued)

186

Appendix A: Course Outline for One Overseas CBEL Project

(continued) ←——————————PASS——————————! ←……FAIL……! Understanding, Analysis, Synthesis, and Application of Knowledge and Practice

Consistent perceptive and critical engagement with chosen issues and themes based on a comprehensive articulation and re-telling of experiences, related concepts and theories; the analysis, synthesis and application of knowledge and practice is consistently clear and effective

Generally, perceptive and critical engagement with chosen issues and themes; some shortcomings in understanding and re-telling of experiences, related concepts and theories, but the analysis, synthesis and application of knowledge and practice is mostly clear and effective

Occasional perceptive and critical engagement with chosen issues and themes, but essay tends toward the rather superficial articulation of relevant experiences, concepts and theories, with some inaccuracies in the analysis, synthesis and application of knowledge and practice

Very limited critical engagement with chosen issues and themes; rarely goes beyond the description of experiences, impaired in parts by considerable inaccuracies

No critical engagement with chosen issues, and themes. Presentation characterized by serious inaccuracies and misunderstandings

Argumentation and use of Supporting Evidence

Examines the question/ issue/problem from a range of perspectives. Overall logic is clear. Premises or evidence strongly support conclusions. Arguments fit together with evidence drawn from own experiences, research and/or readings and build a compelling case

Examines the question/ issue/problem from most of the important perspectives. Expresses own position and provides clear supporting evidence from own research and/or readings. Argumentative structure is clear and logical, but some arguments are underdeveloped or some considerations are overlooked

Some important perspectives or issues are not recognized. Not all relevant arguments and counter-arguments are fully examined. Own supporting evidence may be lacking. Offers own position but reasoning is sometimes impaired by weak, emotive or inconsistent argumentation

Examines things from a single perspective. Only minimal examination of relevant arguments and counterarguments is made and there is little attempt to include own supporting evidence from research and/or readings. Offers own position, but the arguments are not put forward explicitly and not well supported

Arguments are confused and illogical. Student fails to present and defend a coherent position. Offers own position, but arguments are flawed, disorganized or difficult to identify or understand. Arguments and content are not supported by own research and/or readings

Delivery and mode of presentation

Presenter(s) adhere strictly to time limits set. Presenter(s) engage the audience at all times through the use of eye contact, gestures, variation in voice, attractive and professional-looking multimedia tools. Spoken language is always accurate, comprehensible, fluent and precise. Pronunciation is clear at all times. Any grammatical errors are infrequent and do not draw the listener’s attention

Presenter(s) adhere strictly to time limits set. Presenter(s) engage the audience through the use of eye contact, gestures and variation in voice, attractive and professional-looking multimedia tools, although one or two of these could be done better in places. Pronunciation is generally clear. Any grammatical errors are infrequent and only rarely draw the listener’s attention

Presenter(s) may be slightly off the time limits set. Presenter (s) engage the audience most of the time through the use of eye contact, gestures, variation in voice, attractive and professional-looking multimedia tools, although one or two are ineffective. Spoken language is generally comprehensible and fluent but not always accurate and precise. At times, strain is placed on the listener, especially because of hesitations and/ or pronunciation and grammar

Presenter(s) may be significantly off the time limits set. Presenter(s) attempt to engage the audience some of the time through the use of eye contact, gestures, variation in voice, attractive and professional-looking multimedia tools, but with limited effectiveness. Language is often inaccurate and imprecise and occasionally incomprehensible but most of the main arguments can be followed with effort

Presenter(s) do not adhere to the time limits set. Presenter (s) seem to make little attempt to engage the audience using eye contact, gestures, variation in voice, attractive and professional-looking multimedia tools. All are ineffective throughout the presentation. Language is mostly incomprehensible and many of the main arguments are unclear, especially because of pronunciation and grammar

Appendix B Resources in CBEL

Online resources Association for Experiential Education: http://www.aee.org/ Chow, J.M.L., Zou, X.P., & Yu, Y.Y. (2018). Experiential Learning: Guidebook for Facilitators. HKU. Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/HKU_EL_guidebook EL handbook 2018–19: http://el.edu.hku.hk/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2018/08/ EL-handbook_2018-19_final.pdf Experiential Learning Office, Hanover College. https://oel.hanover.edu/internships/ Haynes, C. (2007). Experiential learning: Learning by doing. http://adulteducation. wikibook.us/index.php?title=Experiential_Learning_Learning_by_Doing Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (2016). A Practical Guide for Work-integrated Learning. https://www.vu.edu.au/sites/default/files/CCLT/pdfs/ heqco-practical-guide-wil.pdf University of California Davis (UC Davis). (2011). 5-step experiential learning cycle definitions. http://www.experientiallearning.ucdavis.edu/module1/el1_405stepdefinitions.pdf Website for CBEL, Faculty of Education: http://el.edu.hku.hk Video resources Good practice in CBEL Faculty of Education: https://learning.hku.hk/expl/education.mp4 Faculty of Engineering: https://learning.hku.hk/expl/engineering.mp4 Faculty of Medicine: https://learning.hku.hk/expl/medical.mp4 Videos of CBEL projects CBEL CBEL CBEL Ocean

for UG: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuJ5GC4iQRw project in Cambodia: https://youtu.be/M4jQzRkQ8MA project in Cambodia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_fU8Vsqhlc Park Experiential Learning Project: https://youtu.be/A8lu-Zd5hJ8

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 G. Harfitt and J. M. L. Chow, Employing Community-Based Experiential Learning in Teacher Education, Springer Texts in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6003-3

187

188

Appendix B: Resources in CBEL

CBEL for PGDE (FT): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHdnoxgu5CI CBEL for PGDE (PT): https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v= 34DxeQF5rFc Poster conference for PGDE (PT): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= 7lQNjXLp2e0 Engaging with community partners: https://youtu.be/k80STPyw1rs