Supporting development by facilitation in action research Anette Olin, Karin Rönnerman Göteborg University, Sweden Rachel Jakhelln, Torbjørn Lund Tromsø University, Norway

Teachers’statements on facilitation The facilitator has been very good (knowledgeable, good listener, focused on the topic). Didn't know what the facilitation would contain but came from every occasion with new thoughts and insights in my rucksack.

Got good help to focus on what was important, to narrow when work was sprawling. And to get going when it felt tough – got inspiration. Very good for finding and keeping focus but still get more angles of approaches and ways of thinking.

Has been valuable to put words on what you are working with and that others have been listening and commenting. That the facilitator has conducted/lead the developmental work forward. The facilitator has asked questions that has made me come up with solutions. Very “learnable”.

Question to guide our analyses Can specific features/elements be discerned? What are the common features in the three cases? Can facilitation be understood by using different rationalities?

Case 1: Course in AR Start in practice Use experiences from practice Use theory and tools from social science View the workplace as a place for improvement Collaboration with others Learning and improvement goes hand in hand

Two tracks Litterature/theory The idea and theoretical standpoints for AR Different perspectives of quality and development Action/Practical work Tools Analyse Documentation Facilitation Reflection(individual and collective)

Theoretical knowledge Tools Analyse Practical knowledge Questions Experiences Action

Teachers in groups of eight Facilitation seven times during one year Four lectures during one year Carrying through a project Time for doing action research Present the project for other teachers in the municipality

Facilitating groups of teachers Elucidate the participants expectations on the meeting Be able to see different perspectives Use the journal in facilitating All participants have equal right to time and room Reflection Theory oriented

Facilitating Collegial knowledge Journal writing personal knowledge Documentation Communicative knowledge School improvement

Case 2 Facilitating new Teachers up North Professional Qualification in the Tension between Education and Work

Background Critic of the teacher education  what professionalism imply for teachers  focused on isolated subjects, not seeing these as an integrated part in the construction of a teacher practise and a teacher identity The new teachers experience a practice shock The schools are not concerned about caretaking of newly certified teachers.

Organization of the facilitation Attendance is optional The new teachers get a local mentor – an experienced colleague – local guidance group The school are facilitated by a supervisor from one of the Teacher educations in the region Guidance and facilitation in common meetings/sessions among all the participants in the region

Distance to practice is shaped by: Different meetings and guidance situations (new – new/ experienced – experienced/ new – experienced – teacher trainer) Writing papers based on practice experiences and theoretical reflection (discussed in the guidance) Reading literature Professional discussions on the Internet All the participators, new as experienced, are offered a 10 ECTS educational program: Professional development through experience and guidance

Experiences The structured meetings shapes both reflection and action Contribute to inclusion of the new teacher The experienced teacher are seeing her own organisation in a new perspective The different meetings strengthen the participants

Case 3: Action research through dialogue conferences and networks More than 130 school leaders 4 communities (region) 4 researchers Period: Action research based on -dialogue conferences and -network activities

2. Dialogue conference 1.Dialogue conference 3. Dialogue conference 4. Dialogue conference Qualifying school leaders to handle the new school reform (School development, Leadership) Action learning Dialogue based Experience based Networksoriented Network meeting 1 Network meeting 2 Network meeting 3 Knowledgebuilding and action

Basic ideas for conferences; Oriented towards ideals for democratic communication Structured communication

Researcher vs practitioner Plenum(2 hours)ConceptsReflection on ongoing activity in the project, new concepts Practitioner vs practitioner Heterogene (diff schools)groups( 1 hour) Ideas and concepts Monitoring Practitioners vs plenum Plenum (1 hour) Followed by questions Ideas and reflection Monitoring Discussant Practitioner vs researcher Homogeneous schoolgroups (4-6 hours) Reflection Planning Facilitating in groups or networkgroups Basic activities during the conferences Who meets? Voices About what? Facilitator

Dialogue conference as an arena for expanding reflection talkingreading writing perspectives Structuring, focusing critical

How are ideas from constructing conferences/dialogues transformed into school leader`s practice? How can this result in school development according to the New School Reform in Norway?

Action research; dialogue conferences Challenge 1: How to handle the facilitor`s work in dialogue conferences? A ) as a program coordinator B) as a facilitator in smaller groups Challenge 2: How to monitor the activity while at the same time run the activity?

Common features in the three cases Structured communication Supporting their school development Based on experiences from their ongoing projects Oriented towards democratic dialogues Facilitator - a model for facilitating Closeness – distance - closeness Groups of teachers/school leaders

Facilitation as: Master-apprenticeship model creation instructive Mutual peer guidance Supporting Confirming

Dimensions in facilitating Technical rationality Communicative rationality Critical rationality

Questions to discuss: Other ways to analyze facilitating? Is facilitating in AR specific compared to facilitating in general?