1. The Continuous Professional Development of Teachers and Researchers for an Adaptive and Inclusive School 35th Annual Conference of the Association for Teacher Education in Europe Budapest, August 28th, 2010 Krisztina Gaskó Orsolya Kálmán György Mészáros Nóra Rapos Eötvös Loránd University Faculty of Education and Psychology

2. New approach to an adaptive- inclusive school new concept and tools, school network for the continuous professional development (CPD) of teachers Reseach- group in collaboration with teachers our research and development project (financed by the EU) Social- cultural- educational context global, national and local context insufficient in- service teacher education

3.  new challenges worldwide (globalization, postmodernism, etc.),  teachers and schools face new requirements and expectations (ad eg. measurement politics)  Hungarian social problems: hierarchic society – selective school system strong stereotypes and prejudices in the society – stereotypes and categories in school The reasons of a new approach: social context

4.  slow penetration of some worldwide tendencies in educational theory (gender issues, social constructivism, critical pedagogy etc.)  scarcity of conceptual and theoretical background  divergent concepts: inclusion, adaptivity  in-service TE programs not related to institutions, communities  in-service TE without the mentality of continuous professional development  lack of reflection on the social context The reasons of a new approach: insufficient in-service teacher education

5. Our research and development project: our story   studying the international literature  study visit abroad  studying new adaptive, innovative initiatives in Hungary  studying schools in collaboration with the PLC:  five „adaptive” schools  three-phase case study supporting the reflection of the PLC   elaborating a theoretical framework  elaborating tools for schools to help the PLC  promoting the CPD of teachers in the context of the process of the innovation of their institution   a school network of adaptive- inclusive schools;  promoting of the sharing of adaptive ways among the PLCs activitiesgoals future

6. school-concept dimensions of CPD importance, problems what is it? example(s) school as community diversity and fighting against categories adaptivity learning centered- ness VALUES: main dimensions of our conceptual framework

7.  new challenges, the expectation of continuous innovation and reflection  adaptive reaction to the context, to the students’ characteristics, innovative, reflective learning in the school community with social responsibility  adaptivity in every institution: in danger in a new situation as a special institution as a second chance institution as a popular district school  but lack of reflection and common, tipical answers Adaptivity

8.  individualistic society, democracy, equity,  school not only an institution and an organization but a community with shared goals, with a continuous learning process together (Bergmark, 2009; Stoll – Louis, 2007; Sergiovanni, 1994)  school is situated in the local community like a node in a net (Crowson – Goldring, 2010)  collaboration with the students (school democracy)  opening a community space in block of flats context but with a middle-class mentality School as community

9. Diversity and fighting against categories  Essentialisation of the categiories like SEN and disadvantaged students  The categories are regulated by the law but have different interpretations  Focus on integration  The categories: Relative, a social construction (McLaren, 1995) One aspect of the student’s characteristics New focuses (e.g. homosexual students, dropped out talented students)  Diversity  Inclusion: school for all children  Complex pedagogical understanding of each student as a distinct personality

10. BOUNDED BY CATEGORIES Focusing on individual characteristics but a very strong social influence of the SEN category in a special institution Not fighting against the categories but struggling with them Scarce reflection No interpretation of diversity Absence of new categories ‘Believing in every student’ but inflexible trackings, hierarchy of programmes in a second chance school

11. Learning-centeredness  Method-centeredness in teachers’ thinking and teaching in in-service learning programmes  Strong emphasis on individual learning  Well-established learning theory Goal and way  The theory of social constructivism (Littleton – Häkkinen, 1999) Social, cultural context Different levels of learning Process of learning as participation, interaction, knowledge construction Diversity in the communities Learner’s identity

12. Learning-centeredness as a goal and a way in a primary school Everyday knowledge Intrinsic motivation of students Project pedagogy Supporting self-regulated learning Relatedness of individual and group learning a)in students’ learning b)amongst teachers ?

13. Issues to be considered according to in-service learning  Best practices as we think about them… Practices on the road Learning through interaction, participation Mutuality  A school network as we plan… Based on professional support A system of ‘adoption’ What kinds of incentives can we offer for the schools? Is there a future for school networks?

14. Thank you for your attention! gasko.krisztina@ppk.elte.hu kalman.orsolya@ppk.elte.hu meszarosgyuri.d@gmail.com rapos.nora@ppk.elte.hu

15. References Bergmark, U. (2009): Building an Ethical Learning Community in Schools. Luleå University of Technology, Department of Education, Luleå. Crowson, R.L. – Goldring, E.B. (2010): School Community Relations. In: Peterson, P. – McGaw, Baker – McGaw, Barry (szerk.): International Encyclopedia of Education. Elsevier, Oxford, 106-112. Littleton, K. – Häkkinen, P. (1999): Learning together: Understanding the process of computer-based collaborative learning. In: Dillengourg, P. (szerk.): Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches, Pergamon, Oxford, 20-31. McLaren, P. (1995): Critical Pedagogy and Predatory Culture. Oppositional Politics in a Postmodern Era. Routledge, New York. Sergiovanni, T. (1994): Organizations or communities? Changing the metaphor changes the theory.Educational Administration Quarterly, 30, 214-226. Stoll, L. – Louis, K. S. (2007): Professional learning communities: elaborating new approach. In: Stoll, L. – Louis, K. S. (szerk.): Professional Learning Communities: Divergence, Depth and Dilemmas. Open University Press, 1-13.