Search results

To determine the effectiveness of the Instructional Technologies and Learning Spaces Special Interest Group (SIG), a study was planned for the 2016–2017 academic year. An anonymous attitudinal survey was designed to help researchers determine the following: if the SIG webinars were useful to their teaching practice; if the participants had positive experiences in the webinars; what participants gained through webinar participation; if the webinar format was easy to use; if the participants intended to continue participating in future SIG offerings; and what gaps in SIG programming might exist. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This mixed method study examines the attitudes of faculty who participated in events hosted by a SIG that was used to support faculty development for the fourth largest system of two-year colleges and four-year universities in the USA.

Results of the study indicate that the methods used by the SIG were well-received by faculty across the state and that the programming was found to be valuable and helpful in informing their pedagogical practice, particularly in online environments.

Given the subjective nature of this study (i.e. mixed methods), some caution should be taken when interpreting the results.

This paper provides insight into a potential method of providing high-quality professional development to faculty at multiple institutions or across large geographic distances, including adjuncts and teaching assistants.

Randall W. Eberts, Ph.D., is the executive director of the W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, Kalamazoo, Michigan.Mary Hatwood Futrell, Ed.D., is president of Education International (EI), headquartered in Brussels, Belgium, and dean of the Graduate School of Education and Human Development at George Washington University, Washington, DC.Bob Harris, M.A., Dip.T (Sec.), (Australia), advanced study at the Institut Universitaire des Hautes Etudes Internationales, Geneva, is a former EI executive director and current senior consultant based in Nyon, Switzerland.Ronald D. Henderson, Ph.D., is the director of the Research Department at the National Education Association, Washington, DC.Rachel Hendrickson, Ph.D., is the higher education coordinator in the Membership and Organizing Department at the National Education Association, Washington, DC.Kevin Hollenbeck, Ph.D., is a senior economist and director of publications at the W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, Kalamazoo, Michigan.Susan Moore Johnson, Ed.D., is Carl H. Pforzheimer, Jr., Professor of Teaching and Learning at the Harvard University Graduate School of Education, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Charles T. Kerchner, Ph.D., is Hollis P. Allen Professor of Education at the Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, California.Julia E. Koppich, Ph.D., is president of Koppich & Associates, an education policy research and consulting firm, in San Francisco, California.Carrie M. Lewis, J.D., is a senior writer-editor in the Government Relations Department at the National Education Association, Washington, DC.Christine Maitland, Ph.D., is a former higher education coordinator for the National Education Association who now works on higher education issues with the NEA’s Pacific Regional Office in Burlingame, California.Christine E. Murray, Ph.D., is a professor in the Department of Education and Human Development and dean of the School of Professions, State University of New York College at Brockport.Diane Shust, J.D., M.S.Ed., is the director of the Government Relations Department at the National Education Association, Washington, DC.Joe A. Stone, Ph.D., is W. E. Miner Professor of Economics at the University of Oregon, Eugene.Wayne J. Urban, Ph.D., is Regents’ Professor of Education in the Department of Educational Policy Studies at Georgia State University, Atlanta.Fred van Leeuwen is the general secretary of Education International, Brussels, Belgium.Maris A. Vinovskis, Ph.D., is Bentley Professor of History, senior research scientist at the Institute for Social Research, and faculty member of the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.Paul Wolman, Ph.D., is a senior policy analyst in the Research Department at the National Education Association, Washington, DC.

This qualitative case study investigated an interdisciplinary expedition in an urban high school (based on the Expeditionary Learning Outward Bound model). The author wanted to understand what happened during an expedition and how the Global History teacher perceived teaching a tested course in an Expeditionary Learning School. Findings indicated the teacher thought the expeditions students engaged in each semester assisted them in developing a sense of global awareness and in making interdisciplinary connections. The teacher also discussed challenges encountered when teaching the Expeditionary Learning curriculum to students who struggled academically. Though 35% of students failed the state Global History and Geography test at the end of the semester, the teacher remained committed to teaching with expeditions. This research highlights the teacher’s perceptions of the benefits and challenges of implementing expeditions in a state-tested course in an urban high school, as well as the need for additional supports for implementing this type of curriculum and preparing students for high-stakes exams.

The NEA began its ascent as a political force slowly. In the early 1960s, NEA leaders had rejected efforts to create a political role for the Association. In fact, in 1960, NEA leaders – sensitive to members’ desire for an organization focused on professionalism – summarily rejected a suggestion to adopt a theme of “Every Teacher a Politician” (Berube, 1988).

The public has long been led to believe that the connection between teacher unions and quality education is negligible or even a contradiction in terms. For an example of that view, one barely needs to go beyond the title of a 1996 U.S. News & World Report cover story, “Why Teachers Don’t Teach.” The story essentially tells the public that the teacher unions bear most of the blame, that they have used their money and muscle to preserve their own privileges and to stave off efforts at reforms aimed at improving educational quality. The two major teacher unions, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and the National Education Association (NEA), are the main targets of this criticism.

A successful, multigeneration manufacturing family business, with progressive human resources policies, weighs the pros and cons with family owners and company employees of selling the business to meet the challenge of global competition.

The purpose of this paper is to illustrate the plans for and implementation of critical dramatic inquiry with middle school youth. The authors also provide a theoretical frame for understanding dramatic inquiry as an embodied, persuasive and reflexive practice that can inform and transform the ways youth and their teachers experience their own and others’ worlds. Throughout, the authors argue for the centrality of imagination in youth literacies and critical inquiry.

Working with Stetsenko’s (2008) concepts of contribution and agency, the authors considered the different ways youth “found [their] place among other people and ultimately, [found] a way to contribute to the continuous flow of sociocultural practices” (p. 17). Further, the authors considered Stetsenko’s (2012) reference to moral philosophy and the idea that “humans are understood as being connected with the world precisely through their own acts – through what has been termed “engaged agency” in moral philosophy (Taylor, 1995, p. 7)”. The authors read and annotated documents, noting key moments in the videos where youth collaborated in “finding a place among other people” and became “connected with the world […] through their own acts”.

The authors identified three ways dramatic inquiry orients youth in time-space, offering addresses and possibilities for answerability that direct their actions toward critical, ethical questions: creating a life through embodied positioning, reflecting on action through transformation of representations and establishing a direction for one’s own becoming through persuasion and answerability. These three modes of contributing to a dramatic inquiry extend current research and thought about drama by pointing to specific contributions to and purposes for action in drama experiences.

This work represents a single two-session workshop of teacher research with middle school youth engaged in dramatic inquiry, and is, therefore, the beginning of a conceptual framework for understanding dramatic inquiry as critical sociocultural practice. As such, this work will need to be developed with the aim of extending the dramatic inquiry work across several days or weeks, to trace youth insights and subsequent actions.

Critical literacy educators who want to implement dramatic inquiry will find clear descriptions of practices and an analytic framework that supports planning for and reflection on social change arts-based experiences with youth.

The authors argue that educators who aim to support youth actions, in relation to multiple viewpoints and possible futures, need to pose imagined and dramatized addresses to which youth can imagine and embody possibilities and express possible answers (Bakhtin). Based on Stetsenko’s transformative activist stance, the authors argue that drama-based experiences disrupt the everyday so youth may collectively explore and contribute to an emerging vision of equity and belonging.

Few studies have engaged Stetsenko’s transformative activist stance as a way to understand learning, social change and the role of imagination. This study describes and explores a unique instantiation of process drama informed by critical sociocultural theory.

This is a theoretical paper that examines the interplay between individual and collective capabilities and competencies and value transactions in collaborative environments. The theory behind value creation is examined and two types of value are identified, internal value (shareholder value) and external value (value proposition). The literature on collaborative enterprises/network is also examined with particular emphasis on supply chains, extended/virtual enterprises and clusters as representatives of different forms and maturities of collaboration. The interplay of value transactions and competencies and capabilities are examined and discussed in detail. Finally, a model is presented which consists of value transactions and a table that compares the characteristics of different types of collaborative enterprises/networks. It is proposed that this model presents a platform for further research to develop an in‐depth understanding into how value may be created and managed in collaborative enterprises/networks.