Teacher Roles in the Blended Classroom – Swedish Lower Secondary School Teachers’ Boundary Management between Physical and Virtual Learning Spaces

Year 2018, Volume: 6 Issue: 12, 222 - 246, 03.12.2018

Annaliina Gynne Marcus Persson

https://doi.org/10.18009/jcer.442499

Cited By: 4

Abstract

The purpose of the study is
to explore how Swedish lower secondary school teachers manage blended learning
environments, established through using a specific learning management system
(LMS) application. In the study, four teachers were followed during a
four-month (n)ethnographic fieldwork. Based on analyses of data from
video-recordings and observations in physical and virtual classrooms, the study
examines teachers’ practices of integrating and segmenting the two classroom
domains. In order to unpack the realms of these practices, the study employs
affordance and boundary theories. Through the analysis of participants’
boundary practices and their use of communicative affordances in and across
space and time, four teacher roles, enacted and emerging through teaching
practices, are presented. The paper concludes with a discussion of how
participants’ engagement with virtual and physical learning environment compels
teachers to reflect upon their preferred teacher role in the new
multidimensional classrooms.

Keywords

Blended classroom, affordances, boundary work, chaining, teacher role

Teacher Roles in the Blended Classroom – Swedish Lower Secondary School Teachers’ Boundary Management between Physical and Virtual Learning Spaces

Abstract

The purpose of the study is to explore how Swedish lower secondary school teachers manage blended learning environments, established through using a specific learning management system (LMS) application. In the study, four teachers were followed during a four-month (n)ethnographic fieldwork. Based on analyses of data from video-recordings and observations in physical and virtual classrooms, the study examines teachers’ practices of integrating and segmenting the two classroom domains. In order to unpack the realms of these practices, the study employs affordance and boundary theories. Through the analysis of participants’ boundary practices and their use of communicative affordances in and across space and time, four teacher roles, enacted and emerging through teaching practices, are presented. The paper concludes with a discussion of how participants’ engagement with virtual and physical learning environment compels teachers to reflect upon their preferred teacher role in the new multidimensional classrooms.

Keywords

Blended Classroom, Affordances, Boundary work, Chaining, teacher role

References

• ReferencesAkkerman, S. & Bakker, A. (2011). Learning at the boundary: An introduction. International Journal of Educational Research, 50 (1), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2011.04.002
• Ashforth, B. E., Kreiner, G. E. & Fugate, M. (2000). All in a Day’s Work: Boundaries and Micro Role Transitions. Academy of Management Review, 25 (3), 472–491. https://doi.org/10.2307/259305
• Bagga-Gupta, S. (2002). Explorations in bilingual instructional interaction: A sociocultural perspective on literacy. Journal of the European Association on Learning and Instruction, 5 (2), 557-587. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0959-4752(01)00032-9
• Bagga-Gupta, S. (2004). Visually oriented language use. Discursive and technological resources in Swedish Deaf pedagogical arenas. In M. V. Herreweghe & M. Vermeerbergen (Eds.), Sociolinguistics in European Deaf Communities. Vol 10. The Sociolinguistics in Deaf Communities Series, (pp.171-207). Washington DC: Gallaudet University.
• Bagga-Gupta, S. (2014). Languaging: Ways-of-being-with-words across Disciplinary Boundaries and Empirical Sites. In Paulasto, H., Riionheimo, H., Meriläinen, L. & Kok, M. (Eds.), Language Contacts at the Crossroads of Disciplines. (pp.89-130). Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
• Barton, D. & Lee, C. (2013). Language online. Investigating Digital Texts and Practices. London: Routledge.
• Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
• Engeness, I. & Edwards, A. (2017). The Complexity of Learning: Exploring the Interplay of Different Mediational Means in Group Learning with Digital Tools. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 61 (6), 650-667. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2016.1173093
• Engeström, Y., Engeström, R., & Kärkkäinen, M. (1995). Polycontextuality and boundary crossing in expert cognition: Learning and problem solving in complex work activities. Learning and Instruction, 5, 319–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(95)00021-6
• Evans, S. K., Pearce, K. E, Vitak, J. & Treem, J. W. (2017). Explicating Affordances: A Conceptual Framework for Understanding Affordances in Communication Research. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 22, 35-52. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12180
• Ferdig, R., Cavanaugh, C. & Freidhoff, J. (2012). Lessons learned from blended programs: Experiences and recommendations from the field. Vienna, VA: iNACOL.
• Gibson, J. J. (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston, Mass: Houghton Mifflin.
• Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended learning systems: Definition, current trends, and future directions. In C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham (Eds.), The Handbook of Blended Learning: Global Perspectives, Local Designs (pp. 3–21), San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
• Hagström, T. & Hanson, M. (2003). Kompetens för flexibelt arbete. Förnyelse på svenska arbetsplatser – balansakter och utvecklingsdynamik. Ed. Linda Wilhelmson (pp.153-178), Stockholm: Arbetslivsinstitutet.
• Hansen, A. L. (2005). Kommunikative praksiser i visuelt orienterte klasserom: En studie av et tilrettelagt opplegg for døve lærerstudenter. Trondheim: NTNU, Norges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige universitet, Dept. for Languages and Communication Studies. Doctoral dissertation.
• Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (1983). Ethnography: Principles in Practice. London: Tavistock.
• Hayes, N. (1997). Theory-led thematic analysis: social identification in small companies. In Hayes, N. (Ed.) Doing Qualitative Analysis in Psychology (pp.93-114), Hove: Psychology Press.
• Kennewell, S. (2001). Using affordances and constraints to evaluate the use of information and communications technology in teaching and learning. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 10 (1-2), 101-116. https://doi.org/10.1080/14759390100200105
• Kjällander, S. (2011). Designs for Learning in an Extended Digital Environment. Case Studies of Social Interaction in the Social Science Classroom. Stockholm University: Stockholm.
• Kozinets, R. V. (2010). Netnography. London: Sage.
• Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the New Media Age. London: Routledge.
• Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality. A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London: Routledge.
• Kress, G. & Bezemer, J. (2009). Knowledge, creativity and communication in education: multimodal design. In C. Jewitt (Ed.) Beyond Current Horizons. Futurelab.
• Kreiner, G. E., Hollensbe, E. C. & Sheep, M. I. (2009). Balancing Borders and Bridges: Negotiating the Work-Home Interface via Boundary Work Tactics. Academy of Management Journal, 52 (4), 704-730. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.43669916
• Lamont, M. & Molnár, V. (2002). The Study of Boundaries in the Social Sciences. Annual Review of Sociology, 28 (1), 167–195. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.28.110601.141107
• LeCompte, D. & Schensul, J. J. (2013). Analysis and Interpretation of Ethnographic Data: A Mixed Methods Approach. Lanham: AltaMira Press.
• Linderoth, J. (2012). Why gamers donʼt learn more. An ecological approach to games as learning environments. Journal of Gaming and Virtual Worlds, 4 (1), 45-62. https://doi.org/10.1386/jgvw.4.1.45_1
• Looi, C. K., Wong, L. H., So, H. J., Seow, P., Toh, Y., Chen, W. et al. (2009). Anatomy of a mobilized lesson: learning my way. Computers & Education, 53 (4), 1120–1132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.05.021
• Messina Dahlberg, G. & Bagga-Gupta, S. (2013). Communication in the virtual classroom in higher education: Languaging beyond the boundaries of time and space. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 2 (2), 127-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2013.04.003
• Nacu, D. C., Martin, C. K., Pinkard, N. & Gray, T. (2016). Analyzing educators’ online interactions: a framework of online learning support roles. Learning, Media and Technology, 41 (2), 283-305. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2015.975722
• Nippert-Eng, C. E. (1996). Home and Work: Negotiating Boundaries through Everyday Life. Chicago: University Chicago Press.
• Norberg, A. (2017). From blended learning to learning onlife: ICTs, time and access to higher education. Umeå: Umeå University.
• Norman, D. (1988). The Psychology of Everyday Things. New York: Basic books.
• Riesch, H. (2010). Theorizing Boundary Work as Representation and Identity. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 40 (4), 452–473. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.2010.00441.x
• Roschelle, J. & Pea, R. (2002). A walk on the WILD side: How wireless handheld may change computer-supported collaborative learning. International Journal of Cognition and Technology, 1 (1), 145-168. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijct.1.1.09ros
• Saldana, J. (2009). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Selander, S. & Kress, G. (2010). Design för lärande – ett multimodalt perspektiv. Stockholm: Nordstedts Akademiska Förlag.
• Sotillo, S. M. (2000). Discourse functions and syntactic complexity in synchronous and asynchronous communication. Language Learning & Technology, 4 (1), 82–119.
• Swedish National Agency for Education. LGR 11. Curriculum for the compulsory school, preschool class and the recreation centre. Stockholm: National Agency of Education. Retrieved from: https://www.skolverket.se/publikationer?id=2575
• Tapio, E. (2013). A nexus analysis of English in the everyday life of FinSL signers: a multimodal view on interaction. Doctoral thesis. Jyväskylä: Jyväskylä University Printing House.
• Zerubavel, E. (1991). The Fine Line. New York: Free Press.