Teacher Development Insights

#### **Chapter 4**

## Perspective Chapter: Implementing Inclusive Education through Informatization – A Case Study on Promotion of MOOCs in Western China

*Ziyan Che, Longkai Wu, Jiumei Yang and Peizhi Mao*

#### **Abstract**

This paper reports on the implementation of Promoting Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) in Western China, an initiative over a span of 10 years aimed at promoting the MOOC education model in the Western region of China, which plays a crucial role in inclusive education, breaking down geographical barriers and empowering individuals to pursue lifelong learning and realize their full potential. By 2022, this Initiative provided 10,000 customized MOOCs to Western universities, benefited over 2300 universities nationwide, engaged 39.3 million students, and trained 250,000 teachers. The Initiative encourages collaboration and knowledge sharing among educational institutions, promoting the development of localized online course content that aligns with the needs and interests of the local community. It also facilitates partnerships between educational institutions and industry stakeholders, fostering regional innovation and entrepreneurship. The analysis focuses on how the development of MOOCs for the Western areas started a journey of inclusive education, resulting in qualitative and quantitatively scaling education opportunities. By presenting the trajectory and outcomes of this Initiative, this paper demonstrates the positive impact of MOOCs in achieving inclusive education while also highlighting the challenges and difficulties encountered in the promotion process.

**Keywords:** MOOC, inclusive education, Informatization, teaching development community, collaborative teaching

#### **1. Introduction**

Education has developed as a result of the development of informatization worldwide. During the past 30 years, the central government has strengthened national and regional network coverage in China. All primary and secondary schools in China have been connected to the network, and half have been equipped with wireless networks by 2020 [1, 2]. However, according to research findings by Paniagua and Istance [3],

it is evident that the pedagogical approach employed in informatized education has a more significant influence on outcomes than the technology itself. Another previous study [4] also reveals that educational informatization is merely a means and tool, and its effectiveness ultimately depends on how we employ it in real-time situations. Regarding device construction, the focal point shall consider not only building hardware and software but also designing pedagogy and distance education resources. Constrained by historical development, natural environment, economic foundation, social conditions, and other factors, there is a significant imbalance in the development of higher education between the Eastern and Western regions of China. The issue of educational equity has become a vital and challenging factor that hinders the development of higher education in China, making the urgent realization of inclusive education through an informatized education initiative.

The emergence of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) in the era of digital education has brought thoughtful impacts and transformations in modern education. MOOCs reshape and recombine globalized high-quality educational resources in entirely new ways through the Internet. Since MOOCs were introduced to China in 2013, MOOCs have had a profound impact on higher education nationwide, garnering significant attention from the Ministry of Education and receiving proactive responses from domestic universities, leading to the rapid development of new forms of education, such as the construction of new online open courses, MOOC platform development, and blended learning.

In the same year, the East-West Universities Curriculum Sharing Alliance (the Alliance) was established, which aimed to cultivate more high-level talents with professionalism, creativity, and international perspectives through cross-school and cross-regional education and teaching platforms. The Alliance promoted the Promoting MOOCs in Western China Initiative (the Initiative), which aimed to bridge the educational gap between Eastern urban and Western rural areas, bringing highquality online courses and educational opportunities to remote and underprivileged communities.

In the past decade of rapid development of the Alliance and the Initiative, universities have made significant progress in constructing and promoting MOOCs, yielding fruitful results. The Alliance has played a unique coordinating role, serving as an essential link among different educational stakeholders, such as the Ministry of Education, universities, online education enterprises, and teaching guidance committees. It has become an efficient collaborative platform for the rapid aggregation of online educational resources and educational power across regions, disciplines, schools, and industries. This paper reports on how the 10 year development journey of the Initiative started a journey of inclusive education, resulting in scaling education opportunities both qualitatively and quantitatively, and provides insights into the future development trends of inclusive education in China.

#### **2. Background**

#### **2.1 Inclusive education**

The concept of inclusive education was initially proposed as a prominent policy imperative concerning children with special educational needs or disabilities, which is advocated as a strategy to eliminate barriers, enhance outcomes, and eradicate discrimination [5]. Later, there have been numerous calls for expanding the concept

*Perspective Chapter: Implementing Inclusive Education through Informatization – A Case Study… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112620*

of inclusive education to higher education, that it is the responsibility of the university to address the needs of students to ensure students' access, participation, and success [5–7].

Thomas [8] put forward the notion that with the gradual integration of historically marginalized collectives in higher education, participation in the university has become more inclusive. These collectives encompass students from diverse nationalities, ages, cultures, socio-economic backgrounds, and abilities. This increasing diversity has prompted research on how higher education institutions adapt to this new landscape. Many studies have focused on non-traditional student groups within the university setting, including those requiring additional support, such as students with disabilities, students from minority cultural groups, and students from low socio-economic backgrounds [9, 10]. Inclusive education asserts the entitlement of all university students to full participation and quality education.

#### **2.2 Higher education disparities in China**

China's higher education system faces significant regional disparities, with universities in the Eastern region generally enjoying better resources and infrastructure than China's Western counterparts. This inequality results in limited access to high-quality educational opportunities for students in the Western region, exacerbating educational disparities and hindering social mobility [11, 12]. This disparity, influenced by historical development, natural environmental, economic foundations, and social conditions, has become a focal and challenging issue hindering the overall advancement of higher education in the country [13, 14]. The issue of educational equity has become a crucial and challenging factor that hinders the development of higher education in China [15]. Meanwhile, addressing the significant imbalance in the development of higher education between the Eastern and Western regions of China is crucial for promoting economic and social progress in both areas.

#### **2.3 Informatization in higher education**

The necessity of education informatization emerges with the development of technology. The development trajectory of education informatization usually follows the sequence from simply using technology and modifying technology to serve the education needs to integrating technology to cover more comprehensive education practices [1]. Informatization refers to the integration of information technology and digital tools in various aspects of education. In higher education, informatization has the potential to enhance teaching and learning processes, improve access to educational resources, and bridge geographical and socio-economic gaps. By leveraging informatization, universities can share their educational resources, including courses and teaching materials, with other institutions, thereby promoting quality and equity in higher education.

Educational informatization also has the potential to contribute to educational equity in higher education [16, 17]. For instance, within a single institution, educational informatization facilitates equal dialog between teachers and students and strengthens peer interaction and collaboration. Outside one single institution, educational informatization enhances cooperation and communication between education and other sectors or industries, opening up possibilities for communication and collaboration between rural and urban areas and between different schools [15]. Some challenges exist in such collaboration. On the one side, despite these

advancements, educational inequalities still persist in higher education due to factors such as regional economic disparities and disparities in high-quality educational resources [15, 18]. On the other side, it is widely acknowledged that individuals in diverse contexts, such as cities and universities, have a shared desire for an adequate knowledge infrastructure that enhances efficiency and eliminates redundancy. However, despite this recognition, the successful establishment of operational models in this regard has proven to be largely elusive [19], for shortcomings exist, such as high costs, outdated approaches, poor communication, and limited effectiveness. Under these circumstances, not all students are able to benefit from the advantages of educational informatization fully. Therefore, it is of great significance to explore how inclusive education can be achieved in the era of educational informatization.

#### **3. The East-West university course sharing alliance and the promoting MOOCs in Western China initiative**

#### **3.1 Objectives**

The rapid development of technology and the Internet has brought unprecedented challenges and opportunities to higher education, creating conditions and possibilities for the construction of a high-quality inclusive education system. China has been exploring the establishment of a relatively stable mechanism for targeted assistance between developed Eastern regions and underdeveloped Western regions, as well as between high-quality and weak institutions. In 2013, the East-West University Course Sharing Alliance (the Alliance) was established under this context. Under the guidance of the Ministry of Education, the Alliances is a voluntary, non-profit, non-legal entity alliance formed by universities. Its primary objective is to collectively promote the development of high-quality MOOCs in Chinese universities, establish hybrid and blended teaching models based on sharing high-quality courses, facilitate widespread sharing of excellent teaching resources, and drive universities toward a transition from traditional to informalized teaching methods. With the organization of a third-party operational mechanism, the platform serves as the center for teaching services. At the same time, universities actively participate to ensure the enthusiastic involvement of teachers and students [20]. The Alliance supports the improvement of the course teaching quality and talent development in Western universities in China, as well as meeting the demand of the people in the Western regions for sharing high-quality higher education resources. With this strong sense of responsibility and mission, constructing high-quality course resources and focusing on undergraduate teaching in Western universities are key objects of the Alliance's work.

The Promoting MOOCs in Western China Initiative (the Initiative) was proposed by the Alliance in the same year (2013), with the aim of cultivating a greater number of highly skilled professionals with solid expertise and creativity through utilizing cross-school and cross-regional educational teaching platforms "TreeNity" [15]. The Initiative aims to harness the power of educational informatization to promote highquality and inclusive higher education.

#### **3.2 Implementation**

The Alliance operates through an online platform, "TreeNity," allowing universities to upload and share their course materials. Participating institutions

#### *Perspective Chapter: Implementing Inclusive Education through Informatization – A Case Study… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112620*

can access a wide range of courses offered by other universities, enabling students to enroll in subjects that may not be available at their home institutions. Additionally, the Alliance encourages collaborative curriculum development and faculty exchanges, fostering a culture of cooperation among universities.

The Alliance adopts a combined model of flipped classroom and blended learning, which significantly extends classroom teaching, complements the limitations of traditional MOOCs, ensures the quality of learning, and reduces course dropout rates. The flipped classroom model provides students with more excellent learning space by moving the process of knowledge transmission outside the classroom, allowing students to choose the most suitable way to acquire new knowledge. The process of internalizing knowledge is then facilitated within the classroom, promoting communication and interaction among classmates and between teachers and students. Blended learning combines online video-based learning with small-group discussions. Teachers pose questions before class, and students search for information and engage in online learning. Subsequently, small-group discussions occur either in the classroom or through video streaming for inter-school interaction. The teacher concludes the session and deepens the understanding of the topic.

A shared course involves two parties: the offering and enrolling institutions. The lecturer from the offering institution is responsible for guiding the teaching team at their institution to assess the discussion sessions at various teaching locations, respond to student inquiries, and determine the grading criteria for both formative and summative assessments and exams. On the other hand, teachers from the enrolling institution are responsible for managing learning groups in the learning location and overseeing the discussions within the discussion groups. Additionally, each discussion group is assigned a teaching assistant who is responsible for facilitating and reporting the group discussions.

The bellowed section will report on the specific questions as follows:


#### **4. Outcomes and impacts**

#### **4.1 Two phases of initiative development foci**

Large scales, universal nature, and solutions for emergencies characterize the first phase (from 2013 to 2015). In the first phase, the Alliances promoted general MOOC courses in Western China.

The second phase started from 2015 to the present, characterized by tailor-made, minor scales and precise cooperation. In the second phase, universities in the Alliance take the shared master classes as the carrier, the teaching environment platform

service as the basis, the school or college as the unit, and the close cooperation between the course development team and the course selection team as the key.

Through the exploration and practice in the two phases mentioned above, the participating universities in the Alliance have achieved the integration of educational philosophies and university cultures. This has facilitated the widespread sharing of high-quality educational resources among teachers and students. By gradually adjusting the management methods of teachers, students, and curriculum offerings, a new governance model for teaching quality has been established to ensure a considerable level of educational excellence.

#### **4.2 Scales educational opportunities**

By the end of 2022, TreeNity received more than 137 million visits by students who have participated in over 10,000 credit-bearing courses and received credits through the Alliance's shared courses from over 700 universities in the Western region. **Figure 1** shows the number of newly participated universities each year.

The Alliance has organized the participating universities to strengthen the development of high-quality online teaching resources. In the Initiative, the Alliances insist on learning content as the core to strengthen the development and supply of high-quality online teaching resources. **Figure 2** shows the total number of courses built. Among these courses, 179 courses (including 32 courses in 16 universities in the Western region) have been awarded as first-class national online courses.

**Figure 3** shows the number of people taking the courses, indicating that Since the Alliance was established, the total number of courses built and people taking the courses has increased yearly. The overall academic performance of students reported by universities in the Western region has improved significantly.

#### **4.3 New paradigms of collaborative teaching**

Adhering to taking students' growth as the key point, the Alliance has combined the teaching needs of universities in the Western region and the teaching strengths of

**Figure 1.**

*The growth in the number of participating universities in the Alliance.*

*Perspective Chapter: Implementing Inclusive Education through Informatization – A Case Study… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112620*

#### **Figure 2.**

*The total number of MOOC courses built.*

#### **Figure 3.**

*The number of people taking the courses (thousand).*

each course-building university and taken MOOC teaching reform as a breakthrough to build online, offline or blended classes, creating four new paradigms of collaborative teaching in specialized courses The first is paradigm of synchronous class for specialized courses, such as the online class "Computer Aided Design" between Sun Yat-sen University and Xinjiang University, and the "Inorganic Chemistry" synchronous class between East China University of Science and Technology and Kashi University, which has been in operation for seven semesters. The second is the paradigm of synchronous classes for specialized course clusters, such as the major of Transportation between Southwest Jiaotong University and Tibet University. The third is the paradigm of blended synchronous classes for specialized courses, such as the synchronous pilot class "humanistic geography" launched by East China Normal University and Xinjiang Normal University. The fourth is the paradigm of order-based synchronous classes for specialized courses, such as the synchronize class "Mechanical Design" between the South China University of Technology and

Lanzhou Jiaotong University, during which students from the South China University of Technology and nearly 400 students from Lanzhou Jiaotong University immersed themselves in a live interaction through an online platform.

These four collaborative teaching paradigms were effectively implemented in 2021, with 37 universities offering courses and teaching support. During the spring and summer semesters, these initiatives covered 10 Western schools and 18 courses, while in the fall and winter semesters, they expanded to 15 Western schools and 65 courses.

#### **4.4 Teaching reform service centers**

The Alliance adheres to the trinity construction of the MOOC research and design sites, the teacher communication sites, and the teacher-student interaction sites. In 2016, the Alliance established the first offline station of TreeNity in Beijing, serving as the Initiative's first teaching reform service center. Then, in September 2018, the first center in Western regions was established in Xinjiang. Furthermore, there have been 185 offline teaching reform service centers in 78 cities nowadays, promoting the academic of teaching and learning and building a teaching development community.

**Figure 4** shows the number of teaching reform service centers. Over the past years, the centers have conducted over 50,000 teacher training sessions (over 3000 sessions conducted in universities in the Western region), with more than 250,000 teachers participating (over 30,000 of the teachers are from universities in the Western region).

#### **5. Discussion**

#### **5.1 Enhanced educational opportunities**

The Alliance has significantly expanded the educational opportunities available to students in China's Western region. Compared to traditional MOOCs, experience from the Initiative demonstrates higher completion rates and receives positive feedback on teaching and learning effectiveness from both teachers and students.

**Figure 4.** *Total number of teaching reform service centers.*

*Perspective Chapter: Implementing Inclusive Education through Informatization – A Case Study… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112620*

Through access to courses offered by both Eastern and Western universities, students can study previously unavailable subjects, thus broadening their academic horizons and improving their competitiveness [21].

Also, compared to traditional educational assistance through the dispatch of teachers from Eastern to Western regions, the utilization of remote live interactive classrooms and the implementation of blended cross-institution teaching enhances its efficiency and fosters the promotion of inclusive education.

#### **5.2 Knowledge exchange and collaboration**

This case study emphasizes the role of networks and communities in promoting inclusive education, both online and offline. The Alliance has fostered knowledge exchange and collaboration among participating universities. In the Initiative, the offering institution, providing online teaching resources, and the enrolling institution, providing offline learning management, collaboratively engage students throughout their learning journey. The online and offline networks contribute to the sustained progress of online learning among MOOC participants, addressing the issue of low completion rates in traditional MOOCs [22]. By collaborative carrying out teaching sessions, faculty members have the opportunity to learn from their peers and share innovative teaching methodologies, and what they learn may inspire on their pedagogical skills [23], thereby improving teaching quality.

#### **5.3 Teaching development community**

Inter-university collaboration is facilitated through Internet technologies, enabling effective communication among communities (teaching reform service centers). The Alliance can facilitate research collaborations and launch joint projects by establishing offline teaching development communities, enhancing academic productivity, and promoting trans-regional cooperation. Universities and staff members rely on the communities to innovate the organization of teaching services by integrating online and offline approaches and gradually fostering a conducive academic atmosphere for teaching. Within each region, the community provides comprehensive services for teachers, ranging from online course design, production of educational resources, and management in blended learning to new paradigms of collaborative teaching. UNESCO has also emphasized the crucial role of well-designed, comprehensive, and blended guidance and training for teachers and technical support personnel in successfully managing and promoting the development of MOOCs [24]. The professional development activities could ignite teachers' enthusiasm to actively engage in this Initiative and the reform of intelligent teaching and promote the practice and application of MOOCs within the university. This enables frontline teachers to engage in innovative teaching practices and exchange ideas, thereby facilitating a deep exploration of curriculum development and pedagogical reforms.

#### **5.4 Reduction of educational disparities**

By promoting the sharing of course resources, the Alliance has contributed to reducing educational disparities between Eastern and Western universities. The widespread sharing of high-quality teaching resources, new teaching paradigms, and teaching development training have helped address the shortage of teaching resources in Western China [22]. Students in the Western region now have access to a broader

range of educational resources, narrowing the gap in educational quality and providing them with equal opportunities for personal and professional growth.

#### **6. Conclusion**

The East-West University Course Sharing Alliance and the Promoting MOOCs in Western China Initiative exemplify the potential of informatization in promoting high-quality and inclusive education. By leveraging digital platforms and new paradigms of collaborative teaching, the Alliance has successfully facilitated knowledge exchange, enhanced educational opportunities, and reduced educational disparities between Eastern and Western universities in China. This case study demonstrates the transformative power of informatization in enriching the quality and equity in higher education and advancing the goals of inclusive education, that is, to respond to the needs of all students and to ensure students' access, participation, and success.

The Alliance aims to facilitate knowledge sharing, improve curriculum diversity, and enhance teaching and learning experiences by sharing course resources among participating universities. This collaborative approach fosters a supportive environment for students from different regions, contributing to a more inclusive educational landscape. Through the Alliance's efforts and proven by the Initiative's outcomes, it is anticipated that the benefits of informatization will extend beyond individual universities, ultimately promoting the advancement of higher education as a whole.

The Alliance and the Initiative play a unique and significant role in coordinating the balanced development of education between Eastern and Western regions, maintaining social stability, and promoting national unity. The Alliance and the Initiative have evolved beyond its original concept of Eastern universities supporting Western universities. It has transformed into a platform where universities from the East, Central, and Western regions of China can share high-quality resources and collaborate in exploring the integration of information technology and education reform to fulfill inclusive education. This Alliance serves as a cooperative, sharing, and mutually beneficial platform where educational achievements and reform outcomes are exchanged.

Therefore, the collaborative experience and accomplishments of the Initiative deserve further summarization and broader dissemination. In the future, based on the experience from this case, educational stakeholders such as principals and policymakers may take MOOC teaching reform as a breakthrough to promoting inclusive education. This report lists the following suggestions for future enlightenment.

First, inclusive education should strive for excellence in quality and quantity. It is crucial to establish a consensus on prioritizing education quality while pursuing quantity. Offering institutions within the Alliance should prioritize ensuring highquality instruction and educational resources. At the same time, enrolling institutions should prioritize effective management services. Maintaining high quality should be the foremost consideration while ensuring steady growth in online resources and participating teachers.

Second, it is essential to optimize the overall categorization of shared courses within the Alliance, that is, to refine and diversify the types of courses available for sharing. Participating universities should be encouraged to leverage their respective resource advantages and develop different types of live classrooms and MOOCs. By embracing diverse instructional approaches and course categories, the Alliance can

*Perspective Chapter: Implementing Inclusive Education through Informatization – A Case Study… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112620*

ensure a comprehensive and well-rounded curriculum that caters to diverse learning preferences and individual needs while fostering students' holistic growth.

Third, there is a need to enhance the professional support for participating teachers. The universities can intensify training efforts for teachers involved in the Initiative, helping them acquire the new paradigms of collaborative teaching and enhance their skills and methods in new teaching.

Fourth, it is also essential to enhance students' information literacy. The participating universities need to improve students' digital literacy, including assisting students in mastering technology tools and training them in applying information, enabling them to integrate new information with existing knowledge systems and apply them critically in areas such as critical thinking and problem-solving.

In conclusion, higher education institutions shall be encouraged to utilize sharing and informatization as the key to collaboratively bridging educational gaps, as well as continuously establishing a teaching development community to create a more cohesive and inclusive educational system that benefits students and society as a whole.

#### **Acknowledgements**

Funding: The authors gratefully acknowledge the support provided by the Faculty of Artificial Intelligence in Education at Central China Normal University. This work was supported by the project " Research on the Construction and Application of Intelligent Technology Empowered Learning and Teaching Evaluation Model" (Project Number: CCNUAI&FE2022-03-21).

#### **Author details**

Ziyan Che, Longkai Wu\*, Jiumei Yang and Peizhi Mao Faculty of Artificial Intelligence in Education, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, China

\*Address all correspondence to: longkaiwu@ccnu.edu.cn

© 2023 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

### **References**

[1] Zeng W. An empirical research on China's policy for ICT integration in basic education from 1988 to 2021. Educational Technology Research and Development. 2022;**70**(3):1059-1082

[2] Dong Y, Bi J, Qian S, Bian J, Qiao P. Survey on ICT application development in basic education and strategic adjustment from an international comparison perspective (in Chinese). Open Education Research. 2021;**27**(4):50-58

[3] Panigua A, Istance D. Teachers as Designers of Learning Environments: The Importance of Innovative Pedagogies, Educational Research and Innovation. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2018

[4] Gao S, Li Z, Xiang C, editors. Exploration and practice of the East-West Universities curriculum sharing alliance (in Chinese). In: Global MOOC Conference, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China. 2022

[5] Needs SE. Code of Practice. London: Department for Education and Skills, Chicago; 2001

[6] Moriña A. Inclusive education in higher education: Challenges and opportunities. European Journal of Special Needs Education. 2017;**32**(1):3-17

[7] Doughty H, Allan J. Social capital and the evaluation of inclusiveness in Scottish further education colleges. Journal of Further and Higher Education. 2008;**32**(3):275-284

[8] Thomas L. Developing inclusive learning to improve the engagement, belonging, retention, and success of students from diverse groups.

In: Shah M, Bennett A, Southgate E, editors. Widening Higher Education Participation. United Kingdom: Elsevier, Chandos Publishing; 2016. pp. 135-160

[9] Moriña A, Cortés-Vega MD, Molina VM. Faculty training: An unavoidable requirement for approaching more inclusive university classrooms. Teaching in Higher Education. 2015;**20**(8):795-806

[10] Weedon E, Riddell S. Higher education in Europe: Widening participation. In: Shah M, Bennett A, Southgate E, editors. Widening Higher Education Participation. Kidlington: Chandos Publishing; 2016. pp. 49-62

[11] Cai Z, Zhang H, Wu C, Yang K, Zhang T. Xibu higher education: A research field worthy of attention (in Chinese). Chongqing Higher Education Research. 2021;**9**(1):42-55

[12] Chen H, Zhang Y, Yan G, Dong Y, Lu G, Gao Y. Special topics on talent issues and the development of higher education in western China (in Chinese). Chongqing Higher Education Research. 2020;**8**(6):5-22

[13] Peng Z. A comparative analysis of the regional imbalance in higher education development between Eastern and Western China (in Chinese). Comparative Education Review. 2002;**5**:18-22

[14] Cai W, Gao F. Analysis of influencing factors on the unfairness of Rura compulsory education in west minority regions (in Chinese). Journal of Bingtuan Education Institute. 2009;**19**(2):1-6

[15] Gao S, Li Z, Xiang C. Promoting high-quality and equitable higher

*Perspective Chapter: Implementing Inclusive Education through Informatization – A Case Study… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112620*

education through Informationization: A case study of the east-west university course sharing Alliance (in Chinese). China University Teaching. 2022;**3**:4-10

[16] Ali W. Online and remote learning in higher education institutes: A necessity in light of COVID-19 pandemic. Higher Education Studies. 2020;**10**(3):16-25

[17] Chen Y, Hou AYC, Huang L. Development of distance education in Chinese higher education in perspectives of accessibility, quality and equity under COVID-19. Asian Education and Development Studies. 2022;**11**(2):356-365

[18] Zhou C. Regional development and innovation of educational Informatization from the perspective of educational equity (in Chinese). China Educational Technology. 2012;**3**:43-46

[19] Pearce J, Grafman L, Colledge T, Legg R. Leveraging Information Technology, Social Entrepreneurship, and Global Collaboration for Just Sustainable Development. 2019. Hal-02120513

[20] Li M, Zhang Y, Huang Z. MOOCs are Brewing a New Educational Revolution (in Chinese). China: China Youth Daily; 2013

[21] Guangyong L, Ruolan L, editors. Suggestions and thoughts on improving the teaching ability of teachers in higher vocational colleges under the background of MOOC. In: Journal of Physics: Conference Series. China: IOP Publishing; 2020

[22] Guan H, Gao Q, Zhang M. The allied courses in colleges and universities under the wave of MOOC (in Chinese). Higher Education of Sciences. 2014;**1**:44-52

[23] Wambugu PW. Massive open online courses (MOOCs) for professional

teacher and teacher educator development: A case of TESSA MOOC in Kenya. Universal Journal of Educational Research. 2018;**6**(6):1153-1157

[24] Patru M, Balaji V. Making Sense of MOOCs: A Guide for Policy-Makers in Developing Countries. France and Canada: UNESCO and Commonwealth of Learning; 2016

#### **Chapter 5**

## Flexible Pedagogies during the Educational Disruption in Bicol, Philippines: Developing Practice-Informed Framework

*Rebecca Rosario O. Bercasio*

#### **Abstract**

The COVID-19 pandemic has tremendously changed the educational landscape worldwide. Education has drastically shifted from face-to-face instructional delivery to flexible learning modalities. At the center of this shift in the modalities are the teachers. This chapter analyzed the teachers' experiences in implementing flexible pedagogies in Bicol, Philippines, during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2021 using the SWOT analysis design, and they proposed a framework that explains the implementation of flexible pedagogies in a disruptive situation. Teachers' experiences reveal flexible schedules and availability of different platforms as among the strengths, and poor internet and lack of teacher support as weaknesses. Learning new technologies for pedagogical purposes and participating in community of practice for sharing resources are noted as opportunities. Leakage of tests and unavailability of experts to critique and validate lessons and materials before actual use, are among the threats. The proposed practice-informed framework for flexible pedagogies covers six factors that are character, context, content, condition, competence, and collaboration. All these factors relate closely to the use of innovative technologies to continue the delivery of learning amidst educational disruption. This proposed framework can serve as a guide in improving the implementation of flexible pedagogies.

**Keywords:** COVID-19 pandemic, flexible pedagogies, technologies in education, framework building, teachers, students, Philippines

#### **1. Introduction**

The unprecedented global crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly changed the educational landscape worldwide. Education across levels, even in countries with advanced school systems, has encountered challenges that affect the key players—the learners, the teachers, the school managers, the parents, and the governments. The United Nations [1] considers this COVID-19 pandemic as responsible for creating the largest disruption of education systems in history, affecting

nearly 1.6 billion learners in more than 190 countries and all continents and leading to the closures of schools and other learning spaces that have impacted 94 percent of the world's student population, up to 99% in low and lower-middle income countries. Additionally, UNESCO [2] estimates that 24 million additional children and youth (from pre-primary to tertiary) may drop out or not have access to school next year due to the pandemic's economic impact alone. These challenges need to be addressed to minimize the adverse effect of the pandemic on the global educational system since education has a critical role in attaining sustainable development [3]. In these critical times during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to UNESCO countries should:

*"provide alternative modes of learning and education for children and adolescents who are not in school at both the primary and secondary levels and put in place equivalency and bridging programmes, recognized and accredited by the state, to ensure flexible learning in both formal and non-formal settings, including in emergency situations" [4].*

Given the tremendous risk of the COVID-19 pandemic, conventional face-to-face is either not allowed by the authorities or remains impractical, if not intolerable. Thus, there is a need to adopt flexible learning to ensure that though regular in-school classes are disrupted, the learning is undisrupted. According to Lee and McLoughlin [5], flexible learning is a

*"set of educational approaches and systems concerned with providing learners with increased choice, convenience, and personalization to suit their needs. In particular, flexible learning provides learners with choices about where, when, and how learning occurs by using various technologies to support the teaching and learning process."*

Flexible learning requires a balance of power between institutions and students and seeks to find ways in which choice can be provided that is economically viable and appropriately manageable for institutions and students alike [6]. The main types of flexible learning include accelerated study, part-time or extended study, workbased study, distance learning, and blended learning [7].

Closely related to flexible learning, flexible pedagogies may refer to ways of considering approaches to teaching and learning that enable such student choices [8]. Furthermore, Gordon [8] elaborates that flexible pedagogies and technology may be regarded as natural partners—flexible learning can be provided by and supported through technology, while conversely, technology can encourage flexible approaches to the delivery and assessment of learning. To Huang et al. [9], flexible pedagogies mean a learner-centered educational strategy that provides choices from the main dimensions of study, such as time and location of learning, resources for teaching and learning, instructional approaches, learning activities, and support for teachers and learners.

To ensure that teaching and learning continued despite the disruption caused by the COVID-19 outbreak, new models and methodologies for flexible teaching and learning needed to be established quickly. As the approaches and methodologies change alongside with the widespread adoption of technologies in education, teachers are expected to continue serving as learning facilitators [10, 11]. Consequently, they are confronted with a variety of technological, social, pedagogical, and cognitive challenges. Among the challenges encountered by the teachers include:

*Flexible Pedagogies during the Educational Disruption in Bicol, Philippines: Developing… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113300*


Notwithstanding the challenges that may be involved in flexible learning, literature reveals its benefits such as helping meet the needs of a diverse range of students, enabling part-time study that could be attractive for sponsors, allowing students to combine work, study and family, enabling students to develop skills and attributes to successfully adapt to change [18], facilitating a higher proportion of class time interacting, collaborating and engaging with the lesson content [19], improved learning outcomes resulting from evidence-based and technology-enabled teaching methods, more choices in different kinds of learning, more scheduling options, enhanced personalization of degree programs, more just-in time learning options for career learners, improved learning experiences, including more experiential and community-based learning options, more global learning options, and more open content—learning materials are often free and not restricted to students registered in a degree program [20].

In the context of the challenges to education brought about by the pandemic, and the challenges and opportunities in flexible learning and flexible pedagogies, there is a strong need to determine the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats in implementing flexible pedagogies based on the teachers' experiences. Likewise, it is important to develop a framework for flexible pedagogies that is based on this analysis of the teachers' experiences, challenges, observations, and insights.

#### **2. Methodology**

#### **2.1 Research method**

This research used a qualitative method to analyze the implementation of flexible pedagogies in the eight dimensions [9]. This analysis was conducted using SWOT analysis. SWOT analysis is used to address issues and is an important source of information in education [21]. It is a flexible model that can be incorporated with newer approaches and techniques [21, 22]. As a method in research, it is used as the method of research in the studies of Stotler [23], Sharma and Singh [24], Rios [25], Kenan et al. [26], Sarhan et al. [27], Pan and Su [28] to investigate different areas and issues in education. In this study, SWOT analysis was conducted to identify the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats in the implementation of flexible pedagogies in Bicol, Philippines based on the teacher's experiences.

This study also used the developmental research method. Developmental research refers to the systematic study of designing, developing, and evaluating instructional

programs, processes, and products and often serves as a basis for model construction and theorizing [29]. In this study, this was used to develop a model or framework that explains the factors affecting the implementation of the flexible pedagogies based on the results of the SWOT analysis captured by the teachers' experiences related to the eight dimensions [9], which can be considered as a practice-informed framework [30].

#### **2.2 Setting of the study**

The study was conducted in the Bicol Region, the fifth region out of the 17 regions in the Philippines. The data gathering for the key informant interview (KII) and focus group discussion (FGD) was conducted from April 12, 2021 to May 26, 2021.

#### **2.3 Respondents and key informants**

The participants for the KII consisted of 20 full-time teachers from the elementary, junior high school, senior high school, college, and graduate levels during the COVID-19 pandemic. The participants in the FGD consisted of 15 teachers from different levels. The inclusion criteria are as follows: (1) Full-time teachers, (2) Taught during the COVID-19 pandemic through flexible modality, (3) The school where assigned is in Bicol, Philippines, and (4) Willing to participate voluntarily in interviews or FGDs.

#### **2.4 Data gathering strategies and tools**

Key informant interviews were conducted using digital platforms such as Zoom, Messenger, and Facebook. The interviews were done synchronously for some key informants and asynchronously for others, depending on their preferences. The focus group discussions were done virtually using Zoom. The SWOT analysis was used to determine the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats in implementing flexible pedagogies based on the teachers' experiences. Additionally, this study also used expert critiquing and validation of the proposed framework on flexible pedagogies.

The data-gathering tools consisted of the validated researcher–made interview guide, FGD guide questions, and SWOT Matrix. The interview guide was designed and developed guided by the handbook entitled Facilitating Flexible Learning During Educational Disruption: The Chinese Experience in Maintaining Undisrupted Learning in the COVID-19 Outbreak [9]. The interview guide consisted of eight questions about the teachers' experiences, challenges, observations, and insights related to the eight dimensions, explicitly dealing with the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of implementing flexible pedagogies in Bicol, Philippines. Probing and follow-up questions were raised to clarify or to ask key informants to elaborate on their responses. Actual interviews were conducted using three languages: English, Filipino, and *Bikol* (the vernacular in Bicol, Philippines). The questions for the FGD focused on the teachers' experiences showing the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats in the implementation of flexible pedagogies covering the different dimensions. The SWOT Matrix is a tool for situation analysis that helps to identify organizational and environmental factors and considers both internal (strengths and weaknesses) and external (opportunities and threats) dimensions [31]. The SWOT analysis was done by examining the responses of the teachers for each of the eight dimensions of flexible pedagogies to the interview and FGD, and then grouping these responses under strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. One SWOT Matrix is used for each of the eight dimensions of flexible pedagogies. Then, a review

*Flexible Pedagogies during the Educational Disruption in Bicol, Philippines: Developing… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113300*

of the SWOT analysis results was collaboratively conducted with five randomly selected KII participants.

The proposed framework on flexible pedagogies was submitted to experts for critiquing and validation. Specifically, the development of the framework was done following these steps: (1) Collecting data from the FGDs and interviews, SWOT analysis, and reading of references and related literature, particularly on flexible pedagogies; (2) Creating the framework, which includes discussion and visual representation; (3) Critiquing of the draft framework two times by expert validators; and (4) Revision of the proposed framework.

#### **2.5 Analysis of data**

The data yielded by KIIs and FGDs were mapped in the SWOT Matrix. The analysis of data on the teachers' experiences, challenges, observations, and insights was conducted following the SWOT analysis design. This SWOT analysis was done for each of the eight dimensions of flexible pedagogy [9] and was reviewed to check its veracity.

#### **3. SWOT analysis of the implementation of flexible pedagogy**

The COVID-19 pandemic outbreak in 2020 and the lockdowns that followed it prompted education systems worldwide to quickly transform how they approach teaching and learning [32, 33]. With inadequate preparation, teachers were compelled to transition to online education, negatively impacting implementation quality [34, 35]. At such a period characterized by uncertainty, stress, and social distancing [36], many barriers must be overcome so as for innovative technologies to be successfully integrated into educational systems, and these barriers stem from three main factors [37]: (1) Most technologies were not initially designed for learning and teaching, so creating unique models and strategies for their use in education systems is necessary; (2) Technology changes quickly, necessitating constant updating of the models and strategies; (3) Most decision-makers and educators lack specialized training in technology-supported pedagogies, requiring an extensive amount of support in assimilating and utilizing it.

In Bicol, Philippines, the teachers' experiences, challenges, observations, and insights on the implementation of flexible pedagogies reveal valuable information in the eight different dimensions, namely, where and when learning occurs; what and how students learn; how to deliver instruction; what strategies are used to organize learning activities; what type of learning resources should be provided; what technologies are useful; when and how to provide assessment and evaluation; what kind of support and services should be offered to students and instructor. These experiences, challenges, observations, and insights reveal the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats in the implementation of flexible pedagogies from the teachers themselves amidst the numerous technologies applied in education (see **Table 1**).

#### **3.1 Strengths in the implementation of flexible pedagogies during the COVID-19 pandemic**

Implementing flexible pedagogies in the Bicol, Philippines, during the COVID-19 pandemic has strong points that should be sustained. The strong points regarding the place and time of learning and what and how students learn include flexibility in

schedule, flexibility in modality, and focusing on the most essential learning outcomes or competencies. Most teachers reported that they hold sessions flexibly during the specific official schedule and during their preferred time, provided that the students are informed and available depending on the situation, considering power interruption or internet disconnection. One teacher (high school) explained,

*"Although there is less physical activity, I have come to like the flexible time because it allows me to do other tasks, especially if I am conducting an asynchronous class."*

Another teacher (college) narrated,

*"For flexible learning, I cannot literally be late except when there is internet disconnection or weak internet. If I am disconnected during the synchronous session, I shift to asynchronous modality. We flip the e-classroom. Students can read the posted materials, view the video clips, or study the presentation. We can discuss it in the succeeding meeting, but we will do it fast. Of course, a few students may encounter problems connecting, so we will still discuss."*

#### Another teacher (elementary) shared

*"We do flexible learning through modules combined with online classes. We only meet once a week. During the discussion, we tackle the salient points, and I clarify if there are questions. In the Department of Education (DepEd), we only have the most essential learning competencies, so the coverage is reduced."*

The flexibility in schedule and modality and focus on the most essential learning outcomes or competencies suggest that the work of the teachers during the COVID-19 pandemic became bearable and manageable. Flexibility implies the freedom to adjust schedules and modes of instructional delivery, and therefore it enabled the teachers to fulfill their roles when the conventional class set-up was disrupted. Moreover, reducing the competencies to be covered means reducing the load on the teachers and students. Incidentally, this partially addressed the observed crowded or overloaded curriculum in basic education that is challenging to fully cover within the approved number of school days.

In the dimensions of instructional delivery, strategies to organize learning activities, and learning resources, the identified strong points include the availability of different platforms in teaching, teachers' collaboration in developing learning activities, availability of different materials on the internet to suit the strategies, accessible open educational resources, sharing of learning resources or sources of the learning resources by colleagues. A teacher (college) mentioned,

*"There are different platforms that I use: Zoom, Google Meet, Messenger, and Facebook room for synchronous discussion."*

#### Similarly, another teacher (college) said,

*"We use the same syllabus for the course. We prepare collaboratively and then share the different materials and assessment tools. This collaboration among teachers is helpful because it reduces the time needed to prepare the materials and assessment tasks for the whole course."*


*Flexible Pedagogies during the Educational Disruption in Bicol, Philippines: Developing… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113300*


#### **Table 1.**

*Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats in the implementation of the flexible pedagogies.*

Another teacher (high school) said,

*"Most of the references I use are from the internet. I goggle free materials, PDFs, and open educational resources, which I can use for different learning tasks. I also download educational videos from YouTube to make the instructional delivery interesting. Sometimes, my colleagues share some materials or websites where I can access some relevant materials."*

Another teacher (college) said,

*"We do not have an online library, so we cannot access materials from the library. But some of my co-teachers share some internet sources which can help me in my lessons."*

#### Another teacher (high school) said,

*"For the second half of the year, we do not have modules anymore. So, I have to prepare LAS (learning activity sheets), so I usually google for references and resources to make the LAS."*

#### *Flexible Pedagogies during the Educational Disruption in Bicol, Philippines: Developing… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113300*

The teachers' experiences succinctly show that the current digital technologies used for teaching and learning significantly helped during the COVID-19 pandemic. The use of the internet, free applications or software, and learning resources were crucial tools used by teachers in instructional delivery. It can be discerned from their stories that they realized that there was a necessity to take advantage of these digital tools in order to connect with the learners and make learning possible. Since it was a period of adjustment in the use of digital tools, teachers learned to collaborate and share materials. Such collaboration and sharing led to a meaningful professional connection that was strengthened during a time when physical interaction was restricted. This can be seen as a genuine concern for colleagues, the learners, and the school. The difficult times during the COVID-19 pandemic prompted teachers to find ways to fulfill their functions through collaboration and sharing.

For the sixth dimension, the useful technologies, the good points noted are: Applications being used such as Google Classroom, Gmails/emails, Messenger, and Facebook are free; the software is user-friendly; and there are available tutorials. The teachers' responses show that almost all teachers that use synchronous and asynchronous sessions utillize multiple applications and different platforms to connect with the students. One teacher (from high school) shared,

*"I use the LMS provided by the school. We use Aralinks. We use Zoom for synchronous discussion. We also use Gmail. I also connect with students and parents through mobile phone and Messenger."*

Another teacher (high school) mentioned,

*"We use Google Classroom and Google Meet. Then we also use Gmail and then Messenger. In fact, we have a group chat with students. We also have a group chat with parents."*

The COVID-19 pandemic paved the way for the use of technologies to an extent like never before. Although technologies have been used for educational purposes before the COVID-19 pandemic, their utilization during the pandemic was phenomenal. Practically, the teachers were able to fulfill their teaching functions because of these technologies. Social media, emails, and other online platforms became common means to deliver instruction across different levels. As noted, the use of these technologies became fully mainstreamed in education in the region, which enabled the continuing of teaching and learning even when schools were closed.

Regarding assessment and evaluation, one good point noted was that assessment focuses only on the most essential competencies/ outcomes. Since the coverage was reduced, focusing only on the most essential learning competencies, the assessment tasks were also reduced, capturing only the most essential competencies or learning outcomes. One teacher (college) narrated,

*"I reduced the number of requirements, but these requirements will already allow the integration of the different specific skills and content knowledge. In this way, I am able to address the different learning outcomes without the unnecessary repetition of assessment tasks."*

#### Another teacher (elementary) said,

*"The learning tasks indicated in the modules are repetitive, so what I did was to prepare my own. I decided to reduce the learning tasks and reduce the number of items."*

#### Another teacher (high school) narrated,

*"Some modules are returned without answers. I need to return the modules to the students and make them perform the assessment tasks. Due to this experience, I decided not to adopt everything in the module. I choose some of the assessment tasks. Sometimes, I prepare my assessment tasks so that the students will not be overwhelmed by the several assessment tasks."*

The reduced coverage of the curriculum due to the adoption of the most essential competencies led to reduced coverage of the assessment. With reduced assessment, the teachers needed less time to prepare the assessment tools and to check and score the student's outputs. The reduced assessment tasks and requirements for the different subjects incidentally addressed the unnecessary and redundant assessments since the focus was on the most essential competencies. This decrease in the task of the teachers evoked positivity and reduced work concerns during such an extremely challenging time when they, too, had personal and familial concerns to take address.

For the eighth dimension on support and services to teachers and learners, the identified good points include the availability of school heads and department heads/ coordinators for a virtual consultation and the provision of academic-related support regarding sample modules and instructional materials. Several teachers reported having a group chat for their schools and their department or grade level, allowing virtual connections. They can connect with their school heads, department heads, or grade/ year level coordinators on these platforms. Additionally, they are allowed to connect privately with their immediate supervisors. One teacher mentioned,

*"If I have concerns, I send a message to the principal, and I receive a response. I can ask questions, request help or give feedback through Messenger."*

Another teacher narrated,

*"It is easy to connect to the department head; she is responding promptly."*

The experiences of the teachers during the COVID-19 pandemic show that the school officials rose to the challenge by making themselves available to the teachers. Even when the schools were closed, the connections between and among the school heads and officials, and teachers continued through the use of various social media platforms. The difficult situation served as a precursor to both professional and personal connections which sustained the teachers in fulfilling their responsibilities, helped in clarifying concerns, and even in enhancing their knowledge and competencies in various academic-related concerns.

Flexible pedagogies and technology are natural partners which means that technology can support the implementation of flexible pedagogies and can encourage

*Flexible Pedagogies during the Educational Disruption in Bicol, Philippines: Developing… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113300*

flexible methods for the delivery and assessment of learning [8]. The availability of technologies and the context or situations created by them allow the teachers to gain experiences such as flexibility in schedule, availability of materials on the internet such as open educational resources and free applications, and even making consultations with school officials possible virtually.

#### **3.2 Weaknesses in the implementation of flexible pedagogies during the COVID-19 pandemic**

Despite the strong points offered by flexible pedagogies, there are also weaknesses accompanying the implementation of the flexible learning modality. According to UNESCO [2], the number of children, youth, and adults not attending schools or universities because of COVID-19 was soaring. Governments all around the world have closed educational institutions in an attempt to contain the global pandemic. The strong measures of social distancing and lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic have led to significant changes in social relationships, which, for many people, have created feelings of isolation and loneliness [38].

Regarding the place and time of learning and what and how students learn, the following weak points are noted: distractions at home, inadequate work space, and lack of good devices for some teachers and students. Most teachers said that they conducted classes in their room or bedroom where lack of space is a significant problem. One teacher said,

*"It is difficult to identify as a teacher and a private person. Work and household chores. Also, my workspace at home is small, and I need to share it with my kids, who also have their online class."*

The economic challenge in the country means that families do not have separate rooms for everyone; thus, there was the use of shared rooms or spaces for educational purposes by the different members of the family. Distractions in small spaces or shared spaces are, therefore normal occurrences. It was also noted that the teachers lacked good and reliable devices and internet while some lessons and topics were not adequately discussed because of time constraints. A teacher narrated,

*"At first, it was difficult; during summer vacation, I really worked on the modules. I did it little by little, for example, having the video clips embedded in the topics and simulations and games all added to the activities because it is really difficult to adjust."*

Physical exhaustion on the teacher's part is another downside of the new pedagogy. The teachers have faced significant stressors concerning their work as the pandemic required a sudden shift to remote learning. They were called upon to support student's academic development and well-being throughout this shift as they also navigate adversity and stress in their lives [39]. One teacher had to say,

*"I spend more than eight hours a day preparing materials on the computer, and I find myself taking breaks for lunch or short meals just to rest my eyes. Another weakness of this kind of learning is the different distractions at home."*

One teacher narrated,

*"One of the parents caught my attention, and according to her, the child is not submitting the requirements and found out that the child is addicted to computer games. So, in this kind of learning, we should closely supervise and constantly communicate with our learners."*

Teachers did not have high-quality devices to use for instructional delivery. This can be partly explained by the high cost of these devices and the limited financial capacity of many teachers. The laptops provided by the government were reported to be of inferior quality as these did not function well and did not last long. The same can be said of the students whose parents' financial capacities are inadequate to provide them with the necessary devices. Succinctly, the socio-economic factors underlie this identified weakness in the lack of high-quality devices.

The dimensions such as instructional delivery, strategies to organize learning activities, and learning resources include weak points such as disruptions in internet connection, late release of the modules, some activities are boring to some students, similar strategies being used oftentimes, some modules and materials contain errors, and some teachers need to spend their personal money for the learning resources. One teacher had to say,

*"We take much time in looking for resources or gathering appropriate resources that would be helpful."*

Also, some teachers are not yet knowledgeable about different teaching platforms. One teacher mentioned,

*"My experience as a teacher during this pandemic is a period of discovery. During the pre-pandemic phase, I was not equipped with distance set-up knowledge. It was challenging for me to absorb the important guidelines and learn the different processes so I could carry out my lessons in the set-up."*

#### Another teacher (elementary) said,

*"My challenge is I don't know how to write modules, so what I did is to search and to ask the help of my companions in preparing modules, and it took me three days just to design one module. For the second semester, I used Google classroom. The problem was my learners since I was handling grade five; they don't know how to use it."*

A teacher (college) narrated,

*"We take so much time looking for resources to gather appropriate resources that would be helpful only if the university can provide."*

The switch to emergency remote teaching (ERT) impacted the teachers' ability to support hands-on competency development due to inequitable student access to tools, materials, and resources, affecting student motivation and engagement [40].

The instructional delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic was a response to an emergency, and therefore, the school system was not totally ready for the changes and challenges. The internet connectivity in the region and even in the whole country was

#### *Flexible Pedagogies during the Educational Disruption in Bicol, Philippines: Developing… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113300*

generally weak, with several areas or places with almost no available connections. The instructional materials like modules were late and erroneous and some activities were noted as uninteresting to the learners and with repetitive strategies. This unpleasant experience with the instructional materials can be explained by the inadequate time involved in the development of instructional materials. Despite their financial limitations, the teachers were forced by the circumstances to spend personal money for the printing of modules for the learners and even for the home visits. These weaknesses added to the concerns of the teachers thus making their work challenging.

Regarding the technologies, the weak points include regular power interruptions, intermittent internet connection, old or outdated devices, and improper use of the technology. One teacher said,

*"What I usually do is since my learners inform me ahead of the scheduled brownouts and add to that is the intermittent internet connection, so I postponed the supposedly synchronous classes that we will have. That is one of the most frustrating parts as a teacher."*

Another teacher (elementary) said,

"I send the modules online and no printed copies. The experiences encountered [is] complicated online than teaching in a face-to-face set-up."

Some teachers, especially those at a late age, are not yet knowledgeable about technology. One teacher said,

*"I'm not that techie, so I really have to study with the assistance of my kids. It is really frustrating at first, so stressful. It is difficult to adjust and teach using different kinds of platforms."*

Another teacher said,

*"I did all this with someone's help. My two daughters also help me in attending virtual meetings and even in uploading materials."*

With these identified weak points, it is important to develop the teacher's digital skills, equip schools with the necessary computer hardware and software, and conduct more research on psychological factors contributing to teachers' willingness to use technologies for remote teaching in the pandemic and beyond [41].

The regular power interruptions and the poor interconnectivity in the region adversely affected the implementation of flexible learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. These concerns were beyond the control of the teachers and even of the school officials. These could be addressed with the strong political will of the government, both at the national and local levels, and by service providers of the internet. With limited competition in the industry in the region, internet services were generally problematic yet expensive. The old and outdated devices can be explained by the limited financial resources of the school and of the teachers themselves who experienced difficulty purchasing up-to-date devices. The improper use of different technologies for educational purposes can be attributed to the lack of proper training of the teachers. The schools did not have comprehensive capacity-building activities on the use of the different technologies before the COVID-19 pandemic. Teachers reported they resorted to tutorials, self-learning, or consultation with younger colleagues who Are more skilled in the use of technologies even before the global health crisis.

In assessment and evaluation, the weak point lies in the reliability and trustworthiness of students' outputs. One teacher said,

*"I can see it in my neighborhood that the parents, lola (grandmother), are the ones who are answering the modules, even the test. So, it is a big challenge for me to know the validity of the assessment we give them. We do not know if such a child does all the outputs. So that's one of my problems."*

Another teacher (elementary) shared,

*"When I conducted a home visit, I personally saw that the learner was playing with a cellphone while the grandmother was answering the module."*

Another teacher (college) narrated,

*"I found out from my colleague that students hire someone to answer the module or test, even outputs like essays. And the payment is very affordable. It starts at Php 50.00 only. Payment is done via GCash."*

The administration of assessment without the presence of the teachers can lead to issues on reliability and trustworthiness. Different forms of cheating could happen therefore compromising the validity of the results. The learners who did not answer the learning tasks themselves were deprived of the opportunity to practice a skill or apply the knowledge gained. Moreover, online assessments are not applicable to all types of learning, and administering online assessments on courses designed for face-to-face learning is challenging. Students and faculty are uncertain about the procedure for administrating outstanding assignments, projects, and other continuous assessments [42].

Regarding support and services to teachers and learners, the weak points include inadequate support to teachers regarding finances, ICT materials, and psychosocial support. Almost all teachers reported that they did not receive financial assistance from the school. Most teachers reported that they experienced a lack of support, especially in terms of ICT materials for online classes. Some teachers had to spend their own money to cope with the new platform in teaching. Hence, continuous and personalized professional development should be provided, focusing on pedagogical and technological support [43].

#### **3.3 Opportunities in the implementation of flexible pedagogies during the COVID-19 pandemic**

Many opportunities were identified with the implementation of flexible pedagogies. The following salient opportunities are identified regarding the place and time of learning and what and how students learn. Teachers can do other tasks while facilitating flexible learning. In other words, they can take advantage of time optimization. One teacher said,

*"That's hitting two birds with one stone; that's usually my style. The output is usually presented to me; they share it and post it. They share it with every group. And then, they post it in our Facebook group chat where everyone will learn."*

*Flexible Pedagogies during the Educational Disruption in Bicol, Philippines: Developing… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113300*

Through this, the teachers managed to simplify the lessons and reduce or address the redundancies or duplications. Then, the teachers enhanced their collaboration. As this teacher had to say,

*"We have at least six teachers, and then we divided all the topics in the modules into ten topics. It is manageable because two will be assigned for one module. So, it's very manageable for me and the other teachers to combine the modular approach with synchronous and asynchronous discussion."*

This crisis allowed for the rethinking of how our schools should deliver a good education to our students, despite possible disturbances [44]. The narratives of the teachers reveal how they have become resourceful in delivering instruction. Though there were obvious challenges, they took actions that manifested resilience, positivity, and adaptability.

The flexibility regarding time and place for teaching allowed teachers to multitask, optimize their time, and collaborate with colleagues while they were at home. While preparing a lesson, they could respond to students' queries or ask a question from a colleague or school official. Besides, the teachers could do their work as teachers and at the same time, could attend to home and family concerns. Since there was a challenge in preparing modules or learning materials within a limited time, teachers spontaneously learned to reach out to one another and collaborate in order to complete the needed instructional resources. The challenging time during the pandemic led to these identified opportunities that may positively influence the teachers and their work.

Many opportunities were identified regarding instructional delivery, strategies to organize learning activities, and learning resources. During the pandemic, innovative strategies can be developed to implement flexible pedagogies. Though schools were closed, schooling went on, and it remained crucial that teachers find ways to see what students were learning [45]. A teacher said,

*"I will describe this kind of set-up as a period of adjustment because we are facing many challenges. It is more on delivering learning competencies and, at the same time, being cautious and sensitive about the accessibility of students and their personal adjustment. So far, I have been able to adjust by using different platforms. Aside from Google Classroom, I used the Facebook group page for lessons, and group chats are for announcements."*

Teachers can tap other platforms in technology to develop learning activities. One teacher said,

*"I used both synchronous and asynchronous discussions, and I use digital modules simultaneously. Then, during the demonstration classes, we also have the actual demonstration using the videos for their laboratory activities since they have their home laboratory."*

#### Another teacher said,

*"As to my experiences, I used the modules from DepEd for the Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE) subject. I used them in websites or applications. I*  *modified them. I used the preview on YouTube and some activities online since my subject is Technology and Electricity, and I combined them with the simulations. There are also games in electricity connected to the subject."*

Teachers can also have the opportunity to discover and innovate learning resources using technology and through collaboration, which may motivate the learners to use their creativity. A teacher mentioned,

*"I'm so excited to see their outputs every week because they are very innovative. They have done digital storytelling; they are doing some research related to their output in digital storytelling, a compilation of movie clips related to our lesson."*

The pandemic provided challenges to which the teachers responded positively and creatively through the use of the internet and computers. The teachers' experiences reveal that they adopted innovative ways through the use of different websites, software, YouTube, and other online resources to make learning possible during the disruption. When the teachers recognized the challenges and then the needs, they applied their knowledge and skills so that learning could still be interesting and effective for the learners even when face-to-face classes were restricted. Although given paperwork and administrative tasks, the teacher reported the opportunities they have to make innovations in the lesson design and delivery. Truly, the pandemic has changed how teachers divide their time between teaching, engaging with students, and administrative tasks [46].

Regarding technologies, the opportunity is seen in the need for capacity-building. Teachers are challenged to learn how to use new applications. The new pedagogies have changed how a teacher teaches. An elementary and high school teacher narrated,

*"It was first very difficult because I use digital modules in carrying out my lessons because I'm handling five subjects in elementary and in the high school department. At first, I found it very difficult because I'm not a writer, and I'm not good at gadgets. I am not a techie person. But it was a very challenging one as a teacher. Then, later on, I already adapted to the new system."*

#### Another teacher (high school) mentioned,

*"I combined Google Meet and Google Classroom. I posted the link of the Google Classroom, the link to the website, or the link to the module so that it could be interactive."*

#### Another teacher (college) narrated,

*"Flexible learning taught me to be more adaptive. It was quite intimidating, but I could create video lessons with my students' suggestions. I learned to transcribe my discussions and maximize zoom as my video recording platform. They are also encouraged to update their devices and upgrade the memory of their devices."*

The implementation of flexible pedagogies revealed that digital technologies were fully utilized in education in the region during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although teachers generally have the skills in using the internet and the computer, their experiences revealed that they need comprehensive and continuing training on the use of ICT in teaching. This implies that schools need to provide devices and computers,

*Flexible Pedagogies during the Educational Disruption in Bicol, Philippines: Developing… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113300*

software as well as connectivity in order for the teachers to apply what they learn from the training.

Technology is the only means by which we can reach out to our students during school suspension due to COVID-19 [47]. Therefore, we must reconsider when, where, and how learning happens and adapt our approaches and strategies. Teachers need to become competent facilitators of learning that use technology-supported approaches and strategies.

In assessment and evaluation, the opportunity is seen in giving authentic yet brief assessments that require the integration of specific skills and knowledge. Authentic assessment is not a new practice, but in these times of distance learning, the assessments designed for students must demand that they apply their knowledge to new and novel situations [45]. One teacher narrated,

*"Every month, we have a Google Meet, and I conduct a graded recitation so I can see who among them are learning, who among them are good in the class. That is how I determine, and it becomes one of the [evidence] of learning."*

Assessment is a necessary component of instruction. In flexible learning, an authentic assessment that does not focus on rote memorization and recall should be emphasized. The teachers can provide the learners with reality-based learning and contextual learning through varied and appropriate authentic assessment techniques. Miller [45] argued that as it is important to have routines and still have variety, selecting two to four tools that work well for the teacher and the students that fit the purpose will help.

Regarding support and services to teachers and learners, the opportunity lies in forming a community of practice-small groups where members can mutually support each other. A teacher mentioned that,

*"There are challenges, especially the poor internet signal, but given the flexible time and due date, they could come up with instructional materials. The problem really is the time, but it was manageable because not all the modules were formulated by me. After all, we agreed on two modules for the entire semester."*

With the birth of informal groups, the sharing of resources and insights and the giving of suggestions and support to one another are noted in the teachers' experiences. This identified opportunity to sustain and eventually institutionalize the communities of practice will serve as a strong support to the teachers amidst their numerous concerns and challenges. Undoubtedly, teachers must be supported to enhance their pedagogical competence to ensure teacher effectiveness in instructional delivery. The teachers need professional support to assess students once they return to school to identify what key content and skills have been lost and need rebuilding, detect warning signs of dropping out and undertake effective remedial education [48].

#### **3.4 Threats in the implementation of flexible pedagogies during the COVID-19 pandemic**

Educational disruptions refer to the phenomena when a plan is created by an individual or school and interrupted by the unplanned with overlapping and intersecting effects along a continuum of physical, social, and emotional well-being that potentially result in individualized trauma [49]. Accompanying these disruptions are the threats in the whole

educational system that need to be addressed. Regarding the place and time of learning and what and how students learn, the identified threats include multi-tasking due to household responsibilities and time constraints due to paper works given to teachers. Decreasing attendance of the learners becomes an issue, too. A teacher (high school) said,

*"For example, in grade 7, I have 26 students inside, but the attendance reaches only 15-18 maximum."*

Another teacher (elementary) narrated,

*"At home when I do my work as a teacher, I am interrupted by my work at home. And I also have my own kids who seek my help."*

Likewise, in flexible learning, the teachers may encounter problems in class especially when the learners have divided attention due to different concerns, whether academic, personal, or family concerns. Therefore, teachers need to have clear guidelines for the class and regular reminders and announcements in order to ensure optimum participation in the different learning episodes.

In the dimensions such as instructional delivery, strategies to organize learning activities and learning resources, the following are the identified threats: (1) There are different barriers to communication; (2) There are also errors in the content of some modules; (3) There is limited storage capacity for learning materials; (4) Student engagement is also an issue; (5) There are also errors due to absence of rigorous validation before actual use and unavailability of experts to critique learning activities before actual use. A teacher (college) emphasized,

*"All the parts should be understood by the students. Otherwise, they would disturb you from time to time. They would send your message 'what is this'."*

Another teacher (high school) elaborated her experience,

*"Many students do not turn on their cameras, although I remind them. Many students do not participate in the virtual discussion. To avoid more stress, I just think that they have weak internet because that is what they usually say."*

Another teacher (elementary) said,

*"We have too much paper works aside from making lessons and modules. I already hired someone to print and staple the printed modules."*

Some teachers also refuse to try new strategies due to time constraints caused by the large volume of work. Another teacher said,

*"Actually, I find it difficult because of my limited knowledge of technology."*

Another teacher elaborated on her concern,

*"It is time-consuming for me to learn the new technology. I need more time because this is really my first time using the technologies in teaching. Good for those who are to retire, they can just retire."*

#### *Flexible Pedagogies during the Educational Disruption in Bicol, Philippines: Developing… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113300*

These threats in instructional delivery may result in problems and therefore should be addressed as soon as possible. The barriers to communication can be explained by the poor connectivity experienced in the region. The errors in the modules and materials pose a challenge to the accuracy and reliability of these instructional resources. These can be due to the absence of rigorous validation. For the digital formats of the materials, the schools and the teachers themselves did not have an adequate storage device. Lack of funds also underlies these concerns. There is also a lack of time to design and develop new learning resources due to paper works. During the pandemic, low learner participation is one of the most significant issues in online education, possibly caused by poorly designed interaction opportunities for learners [50]. One of the challenges of encouraging learner participation through purposeful and engaging interactions is that current online learning activities are primarily designed asynchronously [50], which was the case for most public schools offering basic education in the country.

The threats in terms of technologies include: technology gets outdated fast, and access to full features of an application requires a paid subscription. Aside from the cost of the technology, there is the possibility of not utilizing all its potential, which arise from a lack of training, the instructor's attitudes about using the technology, and hardware problems [51]. The issues in the use of technology include insufficient equipment or connectivity, termed the access constraint; inadequate teachers' training related to technology; and support constraints or barriers to technology integration, such as inadequate technical administrative and peer support [52].

Assessing distance learning in a program with a competency-based approach poses numerous challenges to the stakeholders in regular or continuing education programs [53]. The threats in assessment and evaluation are the academic helpers for hire and other adults performing the assessments in terms of assessment and evaluation. A teacher (high school) said,

*"In performance tasks in language, for example, I can assess the facial expression and emotion in the delivery. In written works, there is the question of authenticity or originality because I have encountered, one time, two identical answers. The phrases are exactly the same."*

#### Another teacher (college) shared,

*"When I read the written outputs of the students, there are exactly similar outputs. They just copied and pasted. I don't have [plagiarism] checker but I am sure they were dishonest about their outputs."*

Academic dishonesty results in the unfair distribution of ratings to students, and demotivates students who strive to acquire knowledge, and adversely affects the teaching-learning process [54]. An available option to minimize, if not prevent, cheating is to use originality-checking software and lockdown browsers. However, it is essential to know that high overlap with other works does not necessarily indicate plagiarized work, and there can be false positives [55]. Lockdown browsers, which can prevent the use of additional electronic materials during examinations, may not work if the students use a separate device like a cellphone or if they set the lockdown browser inoperative; thus, it should be used together with other examination security measures [56]. These lockdown browsers, however were not available to the teachers involved in this study.

The main threat regarding support and services to the teachers and learners is that some schools have capacities for supporting teachers while others do not have or have less. The teachers reported that a few schools might afford the cost of assistance, such as the monthly communication allowance, cell card, or internet load, but other schools do not have the financial resources at all. Other schools may be able to provide in-service training and professional development to teachers more effectively and efficiently than other schools. One teacher from a private school mentioned,

*"We have provided ample training and mentoring, so we were more confident to prepare the modules and the instructional materials as well as conduct class using the virtual mode."*

Another teacher from a public elementary school said,

*"We are always required to attend webinars and virtual training. Honestly speaking, sometimes I register and watch the webinar or virtual training while performing another function such as preparing my portfolio or narrative report."*

Another teacher assigned to the college said,

*"We need to attend the enhancement activity for the faculty, but while attending, I also do something else like preparing the syllabus."*

Teachers' narratives show that they attend professional development activities while performing another function; thus, they cannot give full attention to either of them. Divided attention due to multi-tasking cannot be expected to result to mastery. When virtual trainings are held, it is important to provide the teachers with release time.

Other schools have enough personnel to provide psychosocial support, while others do not even have their school guidance counselor. One teacher assigned in a small school narrated,

*"Most of our webinars are about the academic aspects; we rarely had webinars and activities on improving our knowledge and competencies as para-professional guidance counselors so we can better provide psychosocial support to the learners."*

Providing professional development opportunities to teachers and ensuring they are comfortable in their new teaching environment is essential [57] because these will make them more competent and confident in supporting the students. Teachers will be more successful at remote instruction if they believe they can do it, and school leaders can boost their sense of efficacy [58]. Yet, schools have different capacities to initiate professional development activities for the teachers, and this threat needs to be addressed by considering other means like partnering with other institutions whose mandates include capacity building or collaborating with non-government agencies or foundations whose mission includes enhancement of competencies of teachers.

#### **4. Proposed framework for flexible pedagogies**

When seen in the SWOT analysis frame, the teachers' experiences, challenges, observations, and insights on the implementation of flexible pedagogies provide

#### *Flexible Pedagogies during the Educational Disruption in Bicol, Philippines: Developing… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113300*

information that can inform a framework that explains the factors that influence the delivery of the teaching-learning process in a flexible modality. The results of this SWOT analysis provide experiential information helpful in designing a paradigm that will allow a better understanding of flexible pedagogies in the context of fastevolving technologies.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, new models and approaches to online teaching and learning must be developed quickly [13, 59] to ensure that teaching and learning continue despite the disruption. As these models and approaches evolve, the teachers were expected to continue their tasks as facilitators of learning and were therefore faced with a range of technological, social, pedagogical, and cognitive challenges to the teachers [10, 11] amidst the widespread adoption of technologies in education. As teachers faced issues with the expertise and exposure to technology and thus struggled to adapt to the digital teaching-learning space [13], they were forced to balance the use of technology with effective pedagogy [12]. The teachers were confronted with the challenge of quickly adapting to the teaching methods and technologies for which no pre-prepared guide could be followed [17]. At a period characterized by uncertainty, stress, and social distancing [60], the teachers needed to effectively integrate technologies to enhance student learning by applying their current skills to support and promote learning [14], thus needing an adequate understanding of the affordances and constraints of the different technologies. As students expressed their dissatisfaction with the implementation of online learning in general, particularly in the aspect of quality of learning experience, mental health, finances, interaction, and mobility [15, 16], the teachers needed to find ways to address this dissatisfaction and support student learning in the online environment. As teachers tried to cope with the pedagogical and technological challenges, they, too, needed to deal with the stress and cognitive load involved in managing online teaching and learning [61, 62] and criticisms by parents.

The proposed framework for flexible pedagogies was based on the teachers' experiences in implementing flexible pedagogies, seen in the SWOT analysis frame. It is called the 6 Cs of Flexible Pedagogies. Its development went through a rigorous process with the following suggestions and comments on the draft framework (see **Figure 1**).


**Figure 1.** *The six Cs of flexible pedagogies (draft).*


### **5. The six Cs of flexible pedagogies: a proposed practice-informed framework for flexible pedagogies**

Society is characterized by disruption, volatility, uncertainty, complexity, ambiguity, and diversity (D-VUCAD). The continuing global health crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly changed and challenged the educational systems worldwide. This pandemic is responsible for creating the largest disruption of education systems in history, affecting nearly 1.6 billion learners in more than 190 countries and all continents and leading to the closures of schools and other learning spaces that have impacted 94 percent of the world's student population, up to 99% in low and lower-middle income countries [2].

At present and in the future, the educational system needs to adapt and adopt flexibility in instructional delivery. Implementation of flexible learning is a viable option to keep learning undisrupted. According to Lee and McLoughlin [5], flexible learning refers to a set of educational approaches and systems concerned with providing learners with increased choice, convenience, and personalization to suit their needs, providing the learners with options about where, when, and how learning occurs, by using a range of technologies to support the teaching and learning process.

#### *Flexible Pedagogies during the Educational Disruption in Bicol, Philippines: Developing… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113300*

With this at the mainstream, there is a need to fully understand flexible pedagogy for the institutions to support the teachers who support the learners and for the teachers themselves to understand and support themselves fully towards appropriate continuing development.

Flexible pedagogies may refer to ways of considering approaches to teaching and learning that enable such student choices [8]. Furthermore, Gordon [8] elaborates that those flexible pedagogies and technology may be regarded as natural partners—flexible learning can be provided by and supported through technology, while conversely, technology can encourage flexible approaches to the delivery and assessment of learning. Flexible pedagogies mean learner-centered educational strategies that provide choices regarding time and location of learning, resources for teaching and learning, instructional approaches, learning activities, and support for teachers and learners [9].

In an educational landscape deeply influenced by fast-evolving technologies, a practice-informed framework for flexible pedagogies is designed to present the factors that affect the delivery of the teaching-learning process, thus affecting the teachers and the performance of their functions. The teachers' experiences and the analysis of these experiences in the eight dimensions [9] informed the development of this framework. Essentially, the framework aims to cite the factors that affect the teachers when flexibility is adopted as an overarching principle in the entire educational system. In this way, the educational institutions will be able to see the teachers from their perspective and then provide the essential support that will optimize their performance for the direct benefit of the students.

The proposed practice-informed framework called the 6Cs of flexible pedagogies, purports that teachers are directly or indirectly affected, and so is the quality of their performance as facilitators of flexible learning by the following: character, context, content, condition, competence, and collaboration (see **Figure 2**).

Character refers to a distinguishing feature or attribute of an individual, group, or category, especially moral qualities, ethical standards, and principles [63]. This includes commitment and candor.


Context refers to the surrounding circumstances that affect the teaching-learning process. It covers both the social situation and the IT infrastructure.


Content refers to what the teachers deliver to the learners using different modalities. It includes both the curriculum and the instructional resources.


Condition refers to the climate in the educational setting or academe as it is directly or indirectly influenced or impacted by other societal forces or actions of other entities. Under the condition, policies and governance are included.


Competence refers to the ability to integrate and apply contextually appropriate knowledge, skills, and psychosocial factors to consistently perform successfully within a specified domain [67]. It can be either individual competence that focuses on the personal and cognitive traits of so-called competent managers or employees in relation to their job performance or organizational competence that focuses on corporation-wide strategic competence and collective practices. It can also be comprehensive, integrating individual and organizational strategic competencies together [68].


Collaboration is a work practice whereby individuals work together for a common purpose [69]. It involves both communication and connectedness.

• Communication refers to the process of understanding and sharing meaning [70].

*Flexible Pedagogies during the Educational Disruption in Bicol, Philippines: Developing… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113300*

**Figure 2.** *The six Cs of flexible pedagogies (final version).*

• Connectedness refers to being or feeling socially, emotionally, spiritually, or professionally linked with others or with another or the robustness of such relationships [71].

These six factors relate to each other directly or indirectly, but altogether they inform the teacher, his decisions, his choices, and his overall performance. In particular, all these affect the different dimensions such as where and when learning occurs, what and how students learn, how to deliver instruction, what strategies are used to organize learning activities, what type of learning resources should be provided, what technologies are useful, when and how to provide assessment and evaluation, and what kind of support and services should be provided to students and instructor [9].

Considering the 6Cs of flexible pedagogies, the teachers need to be mindful of the different "new pedagogical ideas" that offer new pathways for graduate attributes and capabilities, including learner empowerment, future-facing education, decolonizing education, transformative capabilities crossing boundaries, and social learning [58]. Flexible pedagogical ideas are explored with the learners in mind - to build the capability of the learners to think critically and creatively, develop intercultural competence, develop skills, adapt to the changing circumstances, and propose alternatives under the new normal, among others.

All these "new pedagogical ideas" are elaborated by Ryan and Tilbury [58], and are presented briefly below. Learner empowerment refers to actively involving students in learning development and processes of "co-creation" [58]. Future-facing education means refocusing learning towards engagement and change processes that help people consider prospects and hopes for the future globally [58]. Decolonizing education means deconstructing dominant pedagogical frames and creating experiences that extend intercultural understanding and the ability to think and work using globally sensitive structures and methods [58]. Transformative capabilities refer to creating an educational focus beyond an emphasis solely on knowledge and understanding, using pedagogies guided by transformative approaches to learning [58]. Crossing boundaries involves taking an integrative and systematic approach to pedagogy to generate interdisciplinary, inter-professional, and cross-sectorial learning [58]. Lastly, social learning means

developing cultures and environments for learning that harness the emancipatory power of spaces and interactions outside the formal curriculum [58]. All these pedagogical ideas on learner empowerment, future-facing education, decolonizing education, transformative capabilities crossing boundaries, and social learning by Ryan and Tilbury [58] significantly relate to and affect the 6C's of flexible pedagogies. Therefore, the teachers need to deeply appreciate and understand these pedagogical ideas so that the teachinglearning processes promote the transformative and holistic development of the learners through flexible pedagogies, a form of supportive pedagogies during disruptive times.

Thus, to address issues and concerns related to and to improve the quality of flexible learning, there is a need to seriously consider the teacher's circumstances and improve them, which necessitates looking into these six factors that affect flexible pedagogies. Similarly, these six factors may serve as inputs in designing and implementing a continuing development intervention for teachers, individually or collectively, to enable them to become effective facilitators of learning amidst the technological adaptations in education in a D-VUCAD context.

#### **6. Conclusions**

The drastic shift from face-to-face instructional delivery to flexible learning modalities due to the COVID-19 pandemic has posed challenges to the teachers, the facilitators of learning. The teachers' experiences, challenges, observations and insights reveal strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats in the eight dimensions of flexible learning [9], which influence instructional delivery amid a wide variety of technologies during the COVID-19 pandemic. A proposed framework for flexible pedagogies covers factors affecting the teachers and the delivery teachinglearning process, namely, character, context, content, condition, competence, and collaboration, and serves as a means to better understand flexible pedagogies and the teachers during educational disruption when technologies in education have become undeniably pervasive. It is recommended that interventions or policy reforms be made to improve the situations of the teachers and address the identified weaknesses or threats in implementing flexible pedagogies. The proposed practice-informed framework for flexible pedagogies is recommended for further validation. Further studies on flexible pedagogies may focus on specific aspects such as assessment, collaboration with stakeholders, scaffolding the learnings, and other research designs such as case studies, phenomenology, and other qualitative approaches may be considered.

#### **Acknowledgements**

The researcher would like to thank the teachers for their voluntary participation in the interviews and focus group discussions and the jurors for critiquing the proposed framework for flexible pedagogies. This study, which is part of a research project Pedagogy, Innovations and Trends during the Educational Disruption, was funded by Bicol University.

#### **Conflict of interest**

The author declares no conflict of interest.

*Flexible Pedagogies during the Educational Disruption in Bicol, Philippines: Developing… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113300*

#### **Author details**

Rebecca Rosario O. Bercasio Bicol University, Legazpi, Philippines

\*Address all correspondence to: rrobercasio@bicol-u.edu.ph

© 2023 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

### **References**

[1] United Nations. Policy Brief: Education during COVID-19 and beyond. 2020. Available from: https:// www.un.org/development/desa/dspd/ wp-content/uploads/sites/22/2020/08/ sg\_policy\_brief\_covid-19\_and\_ education\_august\_2020.pdf

[2] UNESCO. COVID-19 Education Response: How Many Students are at Risk of not Returning to School? Advocacy Paper. 2020. Available from: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/ pf0000373992?locale=en

[3] SEAMEO-INNOTECH. Integrating Education for Sustainable Development into Secondary Education Social Studies Curriculum in Southeast Asia. 2010. Available from: http://www. seameo-innotech.org/wp-content/ uploads/2014/01/PolRes\_Integrating-Education-for-Sustainable-Development. pdf

[4] UNESCO. Education 2030 Incheon Declaration and Framework for Action. 2016. Available from: http://uis.unesco. org/sites/default/files/documents/ education-2030-incheon-frameworkfor-action-implementation-of-sdg4- 2016-en\_2.pdf

[5] Lee MJW, McLoughlin C. Beyond distance and time constraints: Applying social networking tools and Web 2.0 approaches to distance education. In: Veletsianos G, editor. Emerging Technologies in Distance education Research. Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press; 2010. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/285077300\_Beyond\_ distance\_and\_time\_constraints\_ Applying\_social\_networking\_tools\_ and\_Web\_20\_approaches\_in\_distance\_ education

[6] Advance HE. Flexible Learning in Higher Education. 2020. Available from: https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/guidance/ teaching-and-learning/flexible-learning

[7] Bennington B, Tallantyre F, Le Cornu A. Flexible Learning: A Practical Introduction for Students. York: The Higher Education Academy; 2013. Available from: https://s3.euwest-2.amazonaws.com/assets.creode. advancehe-document-manager/ documents/hea/private/fl\_student\_ guide\_0\_1568036752.pdf

[8] Gordon N. Flexible Pedagogies: Technology-enhanced Learning. York: The Higher Education Academy; 2014. Available from: https://s3.euwest-2.amazonaws.com/assets.creode. advancehe-document-manager/ documents/hea/private/resources/ tel\_report\_0\_1568036617.pdf

[9] Huang RH, Liu DJ, Tlili A, Yang JF, Wang HH et al. Handbook on Facilitating Flexible Learning during Educational Disruption: The Chinese Experience in Maintaining Undisrupted Learning in COVID-19 Outbreak. 2020. Available from: https://iite.unesco. org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/ Handbook-on-Facilitating-Flexible-Learning-in-COVID-19-Outbreak-SLIBNU-V1.2-20200315.pdf

[10] Alenezi E, Alfadley AA, Alenezi DF, Alenezi YH. The sudden shift to distance learning: Challenges facing teachers. Journal of Education and Learning. 2022;**11**(3):14. DOI: 10.5539/jel.v11n3p14

[11] Barron M, Cobo C, Munoz N, Ciarrusta IS. The changing role of teachers and technologies amidst the COVID 19 pandemic: Key findings from a cross-country study. 2021. Available

*Flexible Pedagogies during the Educational Disruption in Bicol, Philippines: Developing… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113300*

from: https://blogs.worldbank.org/ education/changing-role-teachers-andtechnologies-amidst-covid-19-pandemickey-findings-cross

[12] Rapanta C, Botturi L, Goodyear P, et al. Balancing technology, pedagogy and the new normal: Post-pandemic challenges for higher education. Postdigital Science and Education. 2021;**3**:715-742. DOI: 10.1007/ s42438-021-00249-1

[13] Pokhrel S, Chhetri RA. Literature review on impact of COVID-19 pandemic on teaching and learning. Higher Education for the Future. 2021;**8**(1):133- 141. DOI: 10.1177/2347631120983481

[14] DeCoito I, Estaiteyeh M. Transitioning, to online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic: An exploration of STEM teachers' views, successes, and challenges. Journal of Science Education and Technology. 2021;**31**(3):340-356. DOI: 10.1007/s10956-022-09958-z

[15] Barrot JS, Llenares II, Del Rosario LS. Students' online learning challenges during the pandemic and how they cope with them: The case of the Philippines. Education and Information Technologies. 2021;**26**(6):7321-7338. DOI: 10.1007/ s10639-021-10589-x

[16] Reaid S. Technological and pedagogical challenges for teachers during COVID-19. In: Langran E, editor. Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference. San Diego, CA, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE); 2022. pp. 2259- 2265. Available from: https://www. learntechlib.org/primary/p/221019/

[17] Reimers F, Schleicher A, Saavedra J, Tuominen S. Supporting the continuation of teaching and learning

during the COVID-19 Pandemic Annotated resources for online learning. 2020. Available from: https://www. oecd.org/education/Supporting-thecontinuation-of-teaching-and-learningduring-the-COVID-19-pandemic.pdf

[18] University of Birmingham. Promoting Equality of Opportunity through Flexible Learning. York: The Higher Education Academy; 2016. Available from: https://s3.eu-west-2. amazonaws.com/assets.creode. advancehe-document-manager/ documents/hea/private/hea\_-\_ birmingham\_1568037348.pdf

[19] Kariippanon KE, Cliff DP, Lancaster SJ, Okely AD, Parrish AM. Flexible learning spaces facilitate interaction, collaboration, and behavioural engagement in secondary school. PLOS ONE. 2019;**10**(14):e0223607. DOI: 10.1371/ journal.pone.0223607

[20] The University of British Colombia. Flexible Learning: Benefits for Students. 2023. Available from: https://flexible. learning.ubc.ca/for-students/benefitsfor-students/#:~:text=Benefits%20 include%3A,learning%20delivers% 20more%20scheduling%20options

[21] Benzaghta MA, Elwalda A, Mousa MM, Erkan I, Rahman M. SWOT analysis applications: An integrative literature review. Journal of Global Business Insights. 2021;**6**(1):55-73. DOI: 10.5038/2640-6489.6.1.1148

[22] Dyson RG. Strategic development and SWOT analysis at the University of Warwick. European Journal of Operational Research. 2004;**152**(3):631-640. DOI: 10.1016/ S0377-2217(03)00062-6

[23] Stotler J. Strayer education incorporated: An equity valuation. Journal of the International Academy for Case Studies. 2008;**14**(4):83-89. Available from: https://lib.manaraa.com/ books/STRAYER%20EDUCATION% 20INCORPORATED%20AN%20 EQUITY%20VALUATION.pdf

[24] Sharma D, Singh V. ICT in universities of the Western Himalayan region of India II: A comparative SWOT analysis. International Journal of Computer Science Issues. 2010;**7**(1):62-71. Available from: https://www.researchgate. net/publication/220489984\_ICT\_ in\_Universities\_of\_the\_Western\_ Himalayan\_Region\_of\_India\_II\_A\_ Comparative\_SWOT\_Analysis

[25] Rios PJ. A SWOT analysis of globalization in Adventist higher education. International Forum. 2013;**16**(1):62-78. Available from: https:// journals.aiias.edu/info/article/view/141

[26] Kenan T, Pislaru C, Elzawi A. Trends and policy issues for the e-learning implementation in Libyan universities. International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance. 2014;**5**(1):105- 109. Available from: http://www.ijtef.org/ papers/349-N10012.pdf

[27] Sarhan LI, Atroshi AM, Ahmed NS. A strategic planning of developing student information management system using SWOT technique. Journal of University of Human Development. 2016;**2**(3):515-519. DOI: 10.21928/juhd. v2n3y2016.pp515-519

[28] Pan KD, Su CL. Research on professional development of rural teachers in Zhanjiang city based on SWOT-PEST analysis. Open Journal of Social Sciences. 2023;**11**:418-427. DOI: 10.4236/jss.2023.113030

[29] Andrade MS, Alden-Rivers B. Developing a framework for sustainable growth of flexible learning opportunities. Higher Education Pedagogies. 2019;**4**(1):1-16. DOI: 10.1080/23752696.2018.1564879

[30] Richey RC. Developmental research: The definition and scope. 1994. Available from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ ED373753.pdf

[31] Gürel E. SWOT analysis: A theoretical review. The Journal of International Social Research. 2007;**10**(51):994-1006. DOI: 10.17719/ jisr.2017.1832

[32] Azorín C, Fullan M. Leading new, deeper forms of collaborative cultures: Questions and pathways. Journal of Educational Change. 2022;**23**(1):131-143. DOI: 10.1007/s10833-021-09448-w

### [33] García-Morales VJ,

Garrido-Moreno A, Martín-Rojas R. The transformation of higher education after the COVID Disruption: Emerging challenges in an online learning scenario. Frontiers in Psychology. 2021;**12**:1-6. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.616059

[34] Aditya DS. Embarking digital learning due to COVID-19: Are teachers ready? Journal of Technology and Science Education. 2021;**11**(1):104. DOI: 10.3926/ jotse.1109

[35] Epps A, Brown M, Nijjar B, Hyland L. Paradigms lost and gained: Stakeholder experiences of crisis distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education. 2021;**37**(3):167-182. DOI: 10.1080/21532974.2021.1929587

[36] Marroquín B, Vine V, Morgan R. Mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: Effects of stay-at-home policies, social distancing behavior, and social resources. Psychiatry Research.

*Flexible Pedagogies during the Educational Disruption in Bicol, Philippines: Developing… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113300*

2020;**293**:113419. DOI: 10.1016/j. psychres.2020.113419

[37] Guri-Rosenblit S. Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education. Distances et Savoirs. 2006;**4**(2):155-179. DOI: 10.3166/ ds.4.155-179

[38] Smith BJ, Lim MH. How the COVID-19 pandemic is focusing attention on loneliness and social isolation. Public Health Research & Practice. 2020;**30**(2):3022008. DOI: 10.17061/ phrp3022008

[39] Collie R. COVID-19 and teacher's somatic burden, stress, and emotional exhaustion: Examining the role of principal leadership and workplace buoyancy. AERA Open 7. 2021;**2021**:1-15. DOI: 10.1177/2332858420986187

[40] Code J, Ralph R, Forde K. Pandemic designs for the future: Perspectives of technology education teachers during COVID-19. Information and Learning Sciences. 2020;**121**(5):419-431. DOI: 10.1108/ILS-04-2020-0112

[41] Klapproth F, Federkeil L, Heinschke F, Jungmann T. Teachers' experiences of stress and their coping strategies during COVID-19 induced distance teaching. Journal of Pedagogical Research. 2020;**4**(4):444-452. DOI: 10.33902/JPR.2020062805

[42] Sahu P. Closure of universities due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): Impact on education and mental health of students and academic staff. Cureus. 2020;**12**(4):e7541. DOI: 10.7759/ cureus.7541

[43] Badiozaman IFA, Leong HJ, Wong W. Embracing educational disruption: A case study in making the shift to a remote learning environment. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education. 2020;**2020**:1-15. Available from:

https://www.emerald.com/ insight/content/doi/10.1108/ JARHE-08-2020-0256/full/html

[44] Rojas JF. Flexible learning as the new normal. Business Mirror. 2021. Available from: https:// businessmirror.com.ph/2021/05/24/ flexible-learning-as-the-new-normal/

[45] Miller A. Formative assessment in distance learning. George Lucas Educational Foundation. 2020. Available from: https://www.edutopia.org/article/ formative-assessment-distance-learning

[46] Barron M, Cobo C, Munoz-Najar A, Sanchez I. The changing role of teachers and technologies amidst the COVID-19 pandemic: Key findings from a cross-country study. Education for Global Development. 2021. Available from: https://blogs.worldbank.org/ education/changing-role-teachers-andtechnologies-amidst-covid-19-pandemickey-findings-cross

[47] Laghigna A. Distance Learning: Challenges and Opportunities. School Education Gateway. 2020. Available from: https://www.schooleducationgateway.eu/ en/pub/latest/news/distance-learningchallenges.htm

[48] Beteille T. Supporting Teachers during the COVID-19 (Coronavirus) Pandemic. Education for Global Development. 2020. Available from: https://blogs.worldbank.org/education/ supporting-teachers-during-covid-19 coronavirus-pandemic

[49] Panther L, Allee-Herndon KA, Perrotta K, Cannon S. I Can Tell You Stories: Teacher Education during Educational Disruption. The Teacher Educator. 2021. Available from: https:// www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/ 08878730.2021.1918302?journalCode=u tte20

[50] Song D, Rice M, Oh EY. Participation in online courses and interaction with a virtual agent. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 2019;**20**(1):43-62. Available from: http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/ irrodl/article/view/3998/4952

[51] Valentine D. Distance Learning: Promises, Problems, and Possibilities. University of Oklahoma; 2002. Available from: https://www.westga.edu/~distance/ ojdla/fall53/valentine53.html

[52] Johnson AM, Jacovina ME, Russell DG, Soto CM. Challenges and solutions when using technologies in the classroom. In: Crossley SA, McNamara DS, editors. Adaptive Educational Technologies for Literacy Instruction. New York: Routledge; 2016. Available from: https:// files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED577147.pdf

[53] Leroux JL. Assessment of Distance Learning in a Competency-based Approach. 2018. Available from: https:// www.profweb.ca/en/publications/ articles/assessment-of-distance-learningin-a-competency-based-approach

[54] Guangul FM, Suhail AH, Khalit MI, Khidhir BA. Challenges of remote assessment in higher education in the context of COVID-19: A case study of Middle East College. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability. 2020;**32**:519-535. DOI: 10.1007/s11092-020-09340-w

[55] Holden OL, Norris ME, Kuhlmeier VA. Academic integrity in online assessment: A research review. Frontiers in Education. 2021;**6**:1-13. DOI: 10.3389/feduc.2021.639814

[56] Hess M. 3 Ways to Support Teachers in Flexible Learning Environments. eSCHOOL NEWS. 2021. Available

from: https://www.eschoolnews. com/2021/06/23/3-ways-to-supportteachers-in-flexible-learningenvironments/2/

[57] Roy M. Helping Teachers Feel More Confident about Distance Learning. 2020. Available from: https://www. edutopia.org/article/helping-teachersfeel-more-confident-about-distancelearning

[58] Ryan A, Tilbury, D. Flexible pedagogies: New pedagogical ideas. Higher Education Academy. 2013. Available from: https://www.heacademy. ac.uk/sites/default/files/resources/ npi\_report.pdf

[59] Popa S. Taking stock: Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on curriculum, education, and learning. Prospects. 2022;**51**(4):541-546. DOI: 10.1007/ s11125-022-09616-7

[60] Costley J. Using cognitive strategies overcomes cognitive load in online learning environments. Interactive Technology and Smart Education. 2020;**17**(2):215-228. DOI: 10.1108/ itse-09-2019-0053

[61] Dong Y, Xu C, Chai CS, Zhai X. Exploring the structural relationship among teachers' technostress, Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK), computer self-efficacy and school support. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher. 2019;**29**(2):147-157. DOI: 10.1007/ s40299-019-00461-5

[62] Picciano AG. Online Education: Foundations, Planning, and Pedagogy. Routledge; 2018 10.4324/9781315226750

[63] Dictionary.com. Character. 2021. Available from: https://www.dictionary. com/browse/character

*Flexible Pedagogies during the Educational Disruption in Bicol, Philippines: Developing… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113300*

[64] Carr LJ. Situational sociology. American Journal of Sociology. 1945;**51**(2):136-141. DOI: 10.1086/219745

[65] Governance Institute of Australia. What is Governance?. 2021. Available from: https://www.governanceinstitute. com.au/resources/what-is-governance/

[66] International Bureau of Education. Concept of Governance. 2023. Available from: http://www.ibe. unesco.org/en/geqaf/technical-notes/ concept-governance

[67] Vitello S, Greatorex J, Shaw S. What is Competence? A Shared Interpretation of Competence to Support Teaching, Learning and Assessment. Cambridge University Press & Assessment; 2021. Available from: https://www. cambridgeassessment.org.uk/ Images/645254-what-is-competence-ashared-interpretation-of-competenceto-support-teaching-learning-andassessment.pdf

[68] Kianto A, Hong J. Handbook of Research on Knowledge-intensive Organizations. 2009. Available from: https://www.igi-global.com/ chapter/knowledge-based-approachorganizational-measurement/20857

[69] AIIM. What is Collaboration?. 2021. Available from: https://www.aiim.org/ what-is-collaboration

[70] Pearson J, Nelson P. An Introduction to Human Communication: Understanding and Sharing. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill; 2020. 6, 504 p

[71] Dictionary.com. Connectedness. 2021. Available from: https://www. dictionary.com/browse/connectedness

### **Chapter 6**

## Designing Tools for Supporting Self-Regulated Learning in Collaborative Learning Environment: Understanding from the University School Dresden

*Anke Langner and Marlis Pesch*

### **Abstract**

The chapter discusses pedagogical methods and tools that promote individual growth in collaborative school learning processes, emphasizing applied educational research at Europe's largest real lab, The University School Dresden, with 800 students, 50 teachers, and multidisciplinary scientists. Daily activities involve quick feedback loops, continuous testing, and method/tool refinement for impactful learning. This chapter explores (a) "Learning paths" for guiding individual development, (b) the "Logbook" for planning personalized learning, and (c) the "Lapbook" for project-based activities with peers. These methods align with cultural-historical theory's view of learning and development. This chapter spotlights tools developed by the research team to enhance self-regulated learning, vital for cultural-historical theory-based learning environments. Initial evidence suggests that (a) tools should align with student development and (b) teachers need continuous professionalization for optimal utility.

**Keywords:** cultural-historical theory, self-regulated learning, cooperative learning, learning-support methods, monitoring of learning/development processes

### **1. Introduction**

The framework for children's development is changing, primarily through the digital. Self-regulated learning in conjunction with digital has also recently become more critical in the pandemic, placing new demands on children's development. Independently of this, the use of digital tools is increasingly being demanded of future employees, for example, in the form of the 4Cs (cooperation, communication, creativity, and critical thinking), which are emphasized as necessary by the OECD.1

<sup>1</sup> cf. https://www.oecd.org/education/.

Dealing with digitality and self-regulated learning (SRL) thus extends traditional cultural skills (reading, writing, and arithmetic) so that schools will only be able to fulfill their qualification function [1] in the future only if it also supports the development of these competencies. The school is where children and young people aged 6 to 18 spend (at least) half a day daily. At the same time, the school has the task of organizing learning [2]. But how must learning be organized under these challenges? This question is being explored in this chapter. Based on the first evidence from the school experiment *University School Dresden*, a Laboratory School, mainly methodologicaldidactical answers are given.

The chapter starts with a theoretical introduction: Starting from the culturalhistorical theory, with reference to concepts of self-regulated learning, theory-based requirements for didactics, and methodology in the classroom are formulated and are related to the idea of the University School Dresden. While the theory references alone do not provide explicit answers to the challenges, we believe that with a new orientation of learning settings based on these aspects, initial approaches can be developed to address the challenges mentioned above.

Therefore, in the second part of the chapter, three instruments will be presented in a practice-oriented way, which have been developed in the last three years in the school experiment *University School Dresden* in a co-construction process between science and school practice [3, 4] to support students in their learning processes: Learning Paths; Logbook; and Lapbook. All three instruments are outlined in this chapter at their current stage of development. The development process, as well as the application processes in the school, were accompanied so that the first findings from the application of the instruments, which on the one hand, focus on the adaptations of the instruments and the other hand, on the professionalization of the teachers in the use of these instruments, can be presented within the framework of this chapter. Thus, this chapter is neither strictly theoretical nor empirical. Instead, it moves at the interface between theory and practice, aiming to make visible transfer processes of theoretical considerations into practical methods/measures and inviting to reflect on the relationship between theory and pedagogical methods/materials and their accompanying techniques.

#### **2. Theoretical background**

#### **2.1 Cultural-historical theory**

Following the understanding of the cultural-historical theory, learning is an individual activity. It can only be sustained if what and how something is learned makes sense to the individual. Meaningfulness, in turn, arises for the individual by connecting to the individual's experiences and needs in the engagement with the world [5]; this is the actual learning activity. Activity in the sense of cultural-historical theory does not only mean complying with the teacher's requested actions. Still, it includes an active engagement with the world up to one's structuring of this appropriation process. In this process, the individual uses the most convenient access to the world. Consequently, to learn and develop, he needs differentiated offers to acquire knowledge. According to Galperin [6] interiorization process, it can be the materialized action and the accompanying language, to name just two aspects that the individual can use in the learning process.

#### *Designing Tools for Supporting Self-Regulated Learning in Collaborative Learning Environment… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113882*

For the appropriation of the world, according to the cultural-historical theory, not only the meaningfulness and the nature of the activity are decisive, but also whether what is to be appropriated in the Zone of Current Development and the individual is allowed to move in the Zone of Proximal Development. The Zone of Proximal Development [7] emphasizes the importance of dialog with others for the individual's development process. Because the story takes place primarily in the Zone of Proximal Development, that zone in which the individual accomplishes things that he could not do without someone else's support. The Zone of Current Development, on the other hand, describes what the individual can already do independently without help. Therefore, the learning and development process requires cooperation tied to dialog. Dialog does not have to mean a linguistic exchange, on the contrary: Dialog includes speaking to each other and sharing a rhythm, interaction, or nonverbal communication. According to Buber [8], it is a dialog when the counterpart (each of the participants) "really means the other(s) in their being and suchness and turns to them with the intention that living reciprocity is established between him and them" ([8], p. 166). For a dialog to develop, it is necessary to have an attitude of recognition and to perceive the other person with their needs, views, and interests. Only through cooperation and dialog can the human being develop as a social being because his intrapsychic processes are conditioned by interpsychic procedures, which refer to a reciprocal relationship with other persons/humans (for example [9]).

Due to the dependence of human beings on sociality, a successful development process requires both the exact determination of the respective starting situation of a student and an open learning environment for individual development and the possibility for collaborative learning processes. Each individual can only create meaning for him or herself, so learning opportunities are easier to formulate and determine when students are more active process designers of their development and learning.

Such an understanding of individual learning and development processes is not only found in the cultural-historical school. Also, Zimmerman [10], one of the best-known researchers on self-regulated learning, formulates: "Learners are proactive in their efforts to learn because they are aware of their strengths and limitations and because personal set goals and task-related strategies guide them" ([10], p. 65f). Therefore, the following section will focus on concepts of self-regulated learning.

#### **2.2 Self-regulated learning**

As already explained in the section on the cultural-historical school, learning involves active construction processes, i.e., children develop concepts, ideas, and knowledge about the world around them in active engagement with their environment. Such an understanding of learning processes makes it clear that they are, on the one hand, highly individual and, on the other hand, require initiative on the part of the learner. Moreover, while learning settings are created in school contexts, these sometimes vary considerably in their structuring (teacher-centered vs. weekly schedule work). Increasingly, self-regulatory skills are required for this. Last but not least, changing learning formats during the pandemic, which were mainly accompanied by an increase in digital or hybrid learning contexts and characterized by an increased shift of school-based knowledge acquisition to the home context, partly without adequate pedagogical support, have once again highlighted the relevance of self-regulated learning processes.

Even beyond pandemic conditions, the dynamics of progress in all areas of life require an agile acquisition of competencies that enables knowledge to be acquired independently. In addition to school contexts, this also applies to non-school contexts and, in the sense of lifelong learning, to people of all ages since self-regulated learning is also highly relevant in training/continuing training processes in everyday working life [11].

One of the most frequently cited definitions of self-regulated learning is according to Schiefele & Pekrun: "Self-regulated learning is a form of learning in which the person, depending on the nature of his or her motivation to learn, self-determines one or more self-control measures (cognitive, metacognitive, volitional, or behavioral) and self-monitors the progress of the learning process" [12].

This understanding follows conceptions that conceive of behavior as a function (f) and interaction (I) of both cognitive (K), motivational (M), emotional (E), and social characteristics (S), as well as characteristics of the organism (O) and the environment (U). Westhoff and Kluck [13] summarize this in a shortened way in a so-called behavioral equation: *V* = *f*I(*U*, *O*, *K*, *E*, *M*, *S*). Accordingly, it can also be assumed for (successful) learning that both characteristics of the person and attributes of the current learning situation influence the learning behavior. However, Schiefele and Pekrun's definition lacks the emotional component, even though this has proven to be quite relevant in coping research and research on socially self-regulated learning, especially when dealing with challenges (e.g., failures or conflicts in learning groups) [14, 15].

To understand at which points in the process of self-regulated learning the instruments already developed start, the relevant models of the SRL are presented. For an overview of the current state of research on models of SRL, please refer to the literature [11, 16].

In our understanding of self-regulated learning processes, we follow the assumptions of process models first formulated by Zimmerman [10, 17] and later taken up by Schmitz and Wiese [18, 19]. Process models emphasize the dynamic and phased features of self-regulated learning. Three superordinate phases are distinguished: the Preaction Phase, the Action Phase, and the Postaction Phase. It is assumed that these phases follow each other sequentially, thereby allowing for the transfer of experiences from one learning situation to the following learning situations [18, 19].

In the Preaction Phase, learning goals are formulated and possible learning strategies are planned to achieve these goals. Planning, based on characteristics of the situation and the task, involves, on the one hand, characteristics of the task and the situation. On the other hand, it focuses on individual beliefs (e.g., self-efficacy expectations) and emotional and motivational preconditions [18, 19].

In the subsequent Action Phase, the previously planned learning strategies are implemented. Here, volitional processes for maintaining/optimizing the execution of actions are central [18, 19]. Learning strategies can be very diverse and relate to the different components of the behavioral equation above. Here, too, there are different conceptions. However, there is a relatively large degree of agreement concerning the following distinction (for example see [11, 20]): First, cognitive strategies are mentioned here, which include dealing with concrete learning content; these include elaboration strategies, organizational strategies, and repetition strategies. In addition to cognitive strategies, metacognitive strategies relate in particular to planning, selfmonitoring, and regulation of learning processes. Both are often referred to as primary strategies in the literature. In addition, so-called support strategies (also called secondary strategies) are mentioned, which mainly include providing resources/ resource-based learning strategies and self-management activities to organize, support, and shield learning activities and capture the availability of resources [11, 20].

#### *Designing Tools for Supporting Self-Regulated Learning in Collaborative Learning Environment… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113882*

Suppose we once again focus on the metacognitive strategies that seem to be central in the self-regulation process, then according to Wirth and Leutner [21], three essential strategies can be identified: (1) goal setting, in which, considering available resources and task demands, learning goals are derived (2) the planning of the learning processes, in which (potentially) suitable learning strategies are selected based on one's knowledge about specific strategies and taking into account the task characteristics, and (3) the monitoring, with which one's learning processes can be continuously observed and evaluated, to then be able to adapt them in the sense of the process model presented above [21]. Monitoring in the sense of self-observation is also particularly emphasized by Schmitz and Wiese [18]. In a model developed by Landmann and Schmitz [22], the authors introduce self-monitoring as an independent dimension that considers specific aspects of self-monitoring at different levels. Thus, selfmonitoring takes place in or parallel to all three phases of the self-regulated learning process. This can also explain how, for example, the execution of individual learning actions can be reflected upon promptly and adapted if necessary, or, in a longer-term perspective, learning patterns or learning goals can be adjusted as well [22].

In the third phase of the self-regulation process, the Postaction Phase, there is an assessment of the achievement of the learning goals. This also involves reflection on the causes of the results and findings obtained from this phase can be considered in the Preaction Phase of a new learning unit [18].

#### **2.3 Collaborative learning and self-regulated learning**

It is striking that in these models, the social characteristics listed above in the behavioral equation as relevant for behavior and thus also for self-regulated learning—are not explicitly named. For a long time, research on self-regulated learning has focused on individual processes [23]. Only in the last two decades has this broadened to include group processes in collaborative learning settings. As a result, there has been a significant increase in studies of socially shared regulated learning (SSRL) in this context.

Models of self-regulation [10, 16, 18], initially developed for individual selfregulated learning, can also be applied to SRL in collaborative learning settings. The research group around Hadwin and Järvela [24, 25] developed, based on the selfregulation model of Winne (cf. overview article on the SRL model by Panadero [16]), a model of SSRL. The working group around Järvelä and Hadwin [25] distinguishes three levels of regulation: Self-regulation, co-regulation (CoR), and socially shared regulation (SSR). In doing so, they consider it central to emphasize that "The nuanced use of these terms [social regulation, interpersonal regulation] to distinguish CoRL and SSRL from SRL is often misinterpreted to imply self-regulated learning is not a social mode of regulation. In contrast, we have always positioned self-regulated learning as a social process influenced by and influencing social context" ([24], p. 93). In collaborative learning settings, self-regulation is required not only during one's learning process but also during regulative processes and is necessary for the interactive learning processes with the other group members. This applies in all phases of the learning process, i.e., via the development of a common understanding of the learning task, the formulation of shared goals, the joint implementation of these goals through learning actions, and collaborative evaluation and feedback processes during and after a learning phase, and in particular also to the motivational and emotional challenges that may arise when difficulties or obstacles arise in mastering/fulfilling the learning task. There are few findings on these two aspects (even for SRL) [14, 15, 26]

and further research is also needed for collaborative interaction in face-to-face as well as digital learning environments.

In German-speaking countries, to our knowledge, there has been little empirical research on SSRL. Melzner et al. [27] combine regulated learning approaches with the SSRL in CBCL, from which they derive a model in which, starting from an individual perception of the problem, individual and co-regulated and socially regulated processes can be used to overcome the challenges. An article by Schoor, Narciss and Körndle [28] deals mainly with questions concerning the taxonomy of different species of SSRL and Schoor presents a coding scheme for SSRL [29].

Overall, it can be noted that a substantial proportion of studies on SSRL have focused on student samples (for example [14, 27, 30–32]). Significantly less research exists on children and adolescents (for example see [33, 34], which is surprising in that SRL research, in particular, focuses on this group with the argument that selfregulatory skills should be learned as early as possible and promoted as appropriate. However, little is known about how specific processes of SSRL affect learning outcomes [24]. One reason could be that cooperative or collaborative learning settings are used less frequently in more "traditional" classroom settings, as they are presumably practiced in most schools. However, the existing studies indicate, that sustainable learning processes might be related to collaborative learning settings and that significant learning successes can be recorded in face-to-face as well as digital cooperative learning settings [33–36].

#### **2.4 Consequences for the pedagogical approaches**

Due to what has been written so far, changes are needed in the learning environment and the pedagogical support of the learning process. The learning environments must create cooperation in learning and simultaneously, the development paths of the students should be individual. In terms of the Zone of Proximal Development, learning environments for all students must provide repetitive, reinforcing, and challenging opportunities to allow students to develop toward the Zone of Proximal Development. Since development is not predictable, we believe that reconstructing each student's learning and developmental path is necessary to provide individualized learning environments. Such a reconstruction requires data that go beyond the one-dimensionality of a grade, which raises the question of how an alternative instrument should be designed that allows for a differentiated view of learning processes [37–39].

At the same time, this is insufficient because even good documentation only allows a reconstruction but cannot make any deduction for the future. To align the learning environment as closely as possible to the learning and development situation of the students, the student's perspective is needed. The ideal situation is when students are increasingly empowered for their learning process, can reflect on it and consequently help to shape it from their point of view. This necessarily entails increased self-activity in the learning process. This co-creation of the own learning process by the students is not without preconditions but demands once more to make the constant cycle of action with its complex and interactively interconnected components (cf. behavioral equation) positively experienceable for the students in the pedagogical accompanying and support process. This means considering each student's needs, interests, goals, self-efficacy, self-esteem, deliberate strategies, and emotional techniques [40, 41].

This implies for pedagogical action that the continuum of external and self-control must be mapped in school processes and the instruments used. In concrete terms,

*Designing Tools for Supporting Self-Regulated Learning in Collaborative Learning Environment… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113882*

this means that with a continuous withdrawal of external regulation, increasingly self-regulatory procedures can/must be applied. At the same time, however, externally regulated processes are indispensable for enabling successive self-regulation. The assumption of exclusively self-regulated or externally controlled learning action cannot be upheld since the situation's characteristics and the person's characteristics are consistently effective in individual learning processes [12].

Furthermore, pedagogical action should strengthen the perception of self-regulation without leaving the students to their own devices. This is not least by finding a balance between knowledge practice—knowledge development—knowledge transformation—knowledge creation [42].

#### **2.5 Basic features of the university school Dresden**

These pedagogical consequences were the initial thoughts for developing the school experiment at the *University School Dresden*. Since September 2019, the Technical University of Dresden has been designing the 15-year school experiment *University School Dresden*. This means: Scientists at TU Dresden have developed a theory- and evidence-based concept for schools, the effectiveness of which is to be proven. For 3 school years, instruments for establishing more self-regulated (digitally supported) learning have been anchored in it [3, 43]. The *University School Dresden* concept focuses on facilitating individual development paths in cooperative learning processes [3]. For this purpose, concrete concepts and the instruments still to be discussed were developed on one hand.

On the other hand, the entire school process was adapted to this on the organizational level: At *University School Dresden*, children learn from the first grade onwards in cross-grade groups in project-oriented lessons [43], which plays a central role. There are hardly any classical subjects on the timetable; the day is structured according to specific learning formats. From Year 4 onwards, the school day begins with the selforganization phase, i.e., in terms of the process model of self-regulation, the Preaction Phase, in which planning of the daily learning units takes place utilizing a Logbook (cf. 3.2). This is followed by studio work *of* 1.5–2 h, in which the students work very individually on self-selected learning content (similar to learning office work). This studio work is supported by learning guides2 and takes place in an interdisciplinary manner, i.e., the science subjects are combined in the *NaWi* studio, German and the foreign languages form the *language* studio, and history, geography, and ethics are the *society* studio. In the university school, the students work on *learning modules* during this time: Classical learning contents are methodically processed so that the students can acquire knowledge relatively independently. After a break of about one hour with breakfast and exercise follows the project work of 1.5 h to 2 h. In this phase, the students work in smaller project groups of 4-5 Students: inside on a project. For the organization of the project work, the students use the Lapbook (cf. 3.3). After the subsequent one-hour lunch break with lunch and exercise, there are two additional learning units of one hour, in which the students can continue to work on individual learning content in learning studios, but also take advantage of sports and artistic activities, as well as use these learning times for laboratory work or intensive language times.

While the morning learning workshops (studio work) vary daily concerning the subject areas (science, language, and society) but are fixed, the students can dial

<sup>2</sup> At Dresden University School, teachers are called learning facilitators because it is their task to accompany and support the learning and development processes of the students.

in individually for the afternoon learning times via a digital platform. This selection should be made according to the individual learning needs, which in turn are determined jointly between students and learning guides in regular development discussions and documented in the framework of the Learning Paths (cf. 3.1). The documentation of the learning modules worked on in the individual learning studios utilizing the Learning Paths creates transparency concerning the Learning Path of each student.

The development of the described aspects of the school concept and the instruments, among others, is carried out according to the approach of design-based research [44] in a co-constructive process between school practice and science [4, 45]. The following outline of tools for more self-regulated learning is the initial interim results from the collaborative development process.

#### **3. Tools supporting the development of self-regulated learning in cooperative learning environment**

From the students' point of view, the derivation so far can be summarized as follows: Implementing more self-directed rather than peer-directed learning in school practice requires tools that support students to


In addition, pedagogical guidance in the learning process must change. In primarily externally controlled learning processes, an entire class's learning is the same way. Accordingly, the determination of the goal of the learning process, the scope for shaping the learning activity, the control of the learning activity as well as the evaluation, and thus large parts of the regulation of the learning process lie in the control sovereignty of the teacher. In more self-regulated learning, the aspects mentioned above shift to the learner. On the one hand, this requires instruments for the students that enable them to control their learning processes in a self-regulated manner. On the other hand, teachers need tools that help them to understand the student's learning process in order to intervene in a supportive way when necessary. In the following, three instruments developed in the university school to support the school actors in the abovementioned aspects are presented: the Learning Paths, the Logbook, and the Lapbook.

#### **3.1 Learning paths**

The starting point for developing the learning pathways is the thesis that the learning environment teachers develop can only be as good if the teacher understands the students' learning situation. Understanding the learning situation does not mean evaluating or judging, but rather, in the sense of rehistoricization [47], a recognition,

#### *Designing Tools for Supporting Self-Regulated Learning in Collaborative Learning Environment… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113882*

then an explanation, and, in the third step, an understanding. To understand the learning processes of all students, the first step is to analyze and reconstruct the individual development in the context of the respective subject structure (e.g., mathematics, German, etc.). In a subsequent second step, explanatory knowledge is to be developed based on the reconstruction of the individual situation so that understanding is made possible [48]. This understanding sets the framework for pedagogical action. It is the starting point for developing pedagogical action options (e.g., classroom settings) necessary. In school practice, this processual perspective is more strongly integrated into pedagogical action by resorting to formative assessment/diagnostics. However, these approaches to pedagogical diagnostics often aim to micromanage each lesson, coupled with "self-assessment" [49] on the part of the student. The tools used for this purpose are often small-step competency grids [50] that explicitly relate to the lesson's content and are usually structured from the subject logic rather than the current developmental logic of the student. This contradicts the basic assumptions of the cultural-historical theory mentioned at the beginning of the chapter, that meaningfulness can only be developed through acquired meaning. Still, meaning cannot be inferred from meaning. Instead, the production of meaning takes place in an individual process in which the dialog with others is significant. Consequently, there is a need for another instrument that gives a structure without making a fixed determination of the developmental steps of the students. A tool was sought that would enable the documentation of the learning process for each student, making it understandable for both the learning guide and the students themselves. On the other hand, the instrument should also provide the students with an orientation for a self-regulated learning process. One initial solution is the Learning Paths we have developed. However, the instrument can also support the learning processes through external control by the learning guide.

A Learning Path exists for one subject (the subject matter) at a time. This subject matter is further differentiated into sub-subjects or sub-subjects that are to be acquired by the students. The easiest way to imagine a Learning Path for a subject/ perspective is through a tree structure (cf. **Figure 1**). The appropriation process is divided into nodes. These nodes can build on each other in linear logic, or there are multiple nodes in a cloud. Then different contents or competencies are needed in the appropriation process. Still, they do not necessarily build on each other. Several of these node sequences also called Learning Paths, form a Learning Path [37].

Consequently, the Learning Path for a subject is initially pre-structured according to the subject-specific acquisition logic. Teachers and subject didactics decided which objectives/competencies build on each other and therefore have to be worked on linearly and which do not have to be performed consecutively. Concerning **Figure 1**, this means that 1.1 Node A and 1.2. Nodes B are not linear, i.e., first A, then B must be processed; they thus form a so-called "cloud" within which linear logic is suspended. Node C, however, follows in linearity the cloud with 1.1 Node A and 1.2 Node B and should be processed only after the previous cloud has been successfully processed. Another ordering principle in the Learning Paths—primarily so that they do not become too confusing when a discontinuous logic is applied in the Learning Path nodes—is age, which also maps a linear sense. This bears the risk of a predefined Learning Path to be worked through based on the present generation of the student. Therefore, Learning Paths must be able to document and control developments but not be the sole control element.

In practice, this means that if students choose learning modules (i.e., learning materials on selected subject content) as part of their project work that is linked to a Learning Path node outside the student's age range, the students can still complete the learning module and thus also the Learning Path node, i.e., completed Learning Path nodes outside the given age range can also be filled in, just as some can. However, in the linearity of the Learning Path nodes, the preceding one has not yet been processed. Therefore, the ability to break the linearity in the Learning Path is imperative so that the factual structure logic does not counteract the appropriation logic of the student. Only in this way can the learning and development processes be aligned with the individual development paths of the students and not with the structural logic of the department.

Once the building blocks for the Learning Path nodes have been completed for each subject area, it is concluded with an associated building block test. This provides the learning facilitators with feedback on each student's Learning Path. This way, the learning guides can trace individual Learning Paths for each subject area and offer targeted support in working on individual topics.

The Learning Paths are stored digitally, as this is the only way to ensure that they can always be used and kept up to date by both students and learning guides. Through monitoring, they can also be well integrated into development discussions with students and parents.

Related to grades 7 through 10, learning pathways need to allow for more beyond what is described: They must reflect different levels of requirements. In the spirit of an inclusive school, learning pathways should be able to differentiate without stigmatizing. Therefore, the Learning Paths are structured so that nodes cover the basics of the subject matter and are thus Learning Paths for all students—this corresponds to the completion of secondary school (cf. **Figure 2**). In addition, there are supplementary nodes for graduation after the 10th grade (RS) or the Abitur (GYM) at the respective Learning Paths. Only with this logic can the students learn what corresponds to their development potential and that they are not stigmatized. Because, as already formulated, the initiation of development processes requires tasks that lie in the individual's Zone of Proximal Development.

The Learning Paths as documentation enable the respective student to learn what is relevant for them. This does not imply that everyone does what they want. Instead, the students decide in advance which Learning Path node they want to work on (e.g., because it is relevant to a specific project) and then complete it. They are also guided in selecting Learning Path nodes by the learning guide. Consequently, the Learning Paths, *Designing Tools for Supporting Self-Regulated Learning in Collaborative Learning Environment… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113882*

#### **Figure 2.**

*Schematic representation of learning paths according to required level differentiation.*

the Logbook, and the Lapbook are also tools for the students' self-direction process. The Learning Paths are not a tool for direct collaboration, but because they document the individual, a design space is created for true collaboration on the common object [51].

#### **3.2 Logbook**

As explained in the self-regulated learning section, goal setting is particularly central in the Preactional Phase of the self-regulation process. This is of particular importance because, based on the formulated learning goals, a reflection and assessment of the learning successes can take place process-accompanying and recursively already during the regulation process in the Action Phase or in the Postaction Phase after an individual learning unit (cf the hierarchy model of Landmann and Schmitz [22]). Reflecting on one's learning process is a complex act. Lompscher [52] discusses diverse developmental aspects concerning students' reports of learning strategies in self-assessment tools (e.g., questionnaires), and considerations that might be transferred to reflection on self-regulated learning processes in general.

There is a Logbook at the University School to support the students in this phase of the SR process and to gradually lead them to an independent formulation of learning goals. The term Logbook originally comes from seafaring and describes a diary in which all essential observations during a ship's voyage are entered so they can be retraced later if necessary [53–55]. The Logbook is used similarly at *University School Dresden* because it is intended to help students and learning facilitators document learning processes and make them comprehensible. Each school day begins before the first learning time with an entry of the individual learning goals for the current day in the student's Logbook. **Figure 3** shows a page of the Logbook for years 4–6.

The Logbook thus starts in the Preaction Phase and pursues the goal of enabling students to (better) structure their learning processes. This is because, coupled with the formulation of learning goals, the planning of learning actions also occurs in the Preaction Phase of SRL [11]. The Logbook can therefore be used after setting the learning objectives for the day in each learning time to visualize the relevant learning objective and to make plans for the current learning process, i.e., to select suitable methods, materials, learning partners, etc. The Logbook can also be used as a tool for the learning process. On the other hand, in the Postaction Phase, one's learning process can then be described and traced. Thus, understanding one's own learning process can be increasingly achieved. This favors the experience of self-efficacy in the learning process when learning goals can be assessed as achieved or at least partially achieved. In addition, it can be helpful—albeit only in the next step—for reflecting on one's learning process, which can be used in a circular process for derivations and changes for future learning phases [18, 19].


**Figure 3.** *Illustration of a page of a logbook for grades 4–6.*

To achieve these goals, it is essential to ask how the students should formulate individual learning goals to promote learning processes within the framework of an SRL optimally.

This formulation of learning objectives requires a detailed analysis of the task(s) by the student in question [11]. Based on this, learning objectives for the learning unit are derived. Following the explanations of the students' Learning Paths, it becomes

#### *Designing Tools for Supporting Self-Regulated Learning in Collaborative Learning Environment… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113882*

clear that the learning tasks and, thus, the learning goals are highly individual, depending on which node or Learning Path and, therefore, which learning module the students are currently in. In addition, the learning workshops are interdisciplinary, so that in the area of geography, one student may be working on modules from the area of geography while other students are working on modules from the area of history.

Ideally, the individual learning objectives cover all learning times, i.e., one objective is formulated for each learning time; otherwise, at least three learning objectives should be specified for two learning times. The students should write the objectives in complete sentences to achieve good comprehensibility of the purposes (e.g., for feedback on the learning process by the learning guide) and to promote the ability to express themselves in writing. The formulation of the objectives should be based on the SMART criteria, considered relevant in the literature (also concerning the assessment of the achievement of objectives) [11, 56–59]. In addition to the SMART criteria for goal formulation, other ideas about which factors should be considered (for example [60]) were not used for the Logbook in the *University School Dresden*.

Which criteria of goal formulation are summarized under the acronym SMART?

First, the goals should be Specific, i.e., they should be formulated as clearly as possible [58, 61]. For the entries in the Logbooks, it is therefore not sufficient to name only the subject perspective (e.g., biology) or additionally the specific topic (e.g., my body); in the best case, the students can also name the specific module (e.g., the senses) and formulate how much they want to work on from the module today (e.g., 2 tasks and 1 video).

Goals should also be formulated to be objectively Measurable, as this is particularly relevant for the subsequent assessment of goal achievement. This also shows how closely the criteria are related in specific and measurable terms. For the example formulated above (Biologie→Mein Körper→Die Sinne→2 Tasks & 1 Video), this is true because when the goal is achieved, it can be verified that 2 tasks and 1 video have been completed.

The goals should be Realizable to enable the students to experience self-efficacy. However, this is only possible if the goals can also be achieved through one's actions [61].

Another characteristic is Terminated, in that the goal is to be achieved within a specified time frame. This is predetermined from the outset by the time limits of the individual learning units in the *University School Dresden*, so this does not have to be specially formulated by the students.

Finally, in the SMART acronym, we find the "A". Different sources have different meanings for this [58]: These include Achievable- Attainable- Acceptable- Attractive-Challenging- Assignable. Achievable and Attainable are closely related to realizable and enable the experience of self-efficacy in self-regulated learning processes. After all, goals are only achievable if they are fundamentally something that can be implemented with the available resources. This connects to the concept of the Zone of Proximal Development [7], according to which learning goals, and thus learning tasks, are ideally oriented toward learning actions that promote the individual's development from what has already been accomplished independently (Zone of Current Development) to what can be achieved with some assistance from others (Zone of Proximal Development). Goals for which the individual largely depends on outside support would thus not be achievable.

Goals should be Accepted insofar as the student agrees with the goals for themselves, i.e., considers them relevant to their learning process [58]. This can be assumed to be the case when students can formulate their learning goals individually; for goals set by teachers, as tends to be the case in traditional school contexts, this is

undoubtedly much less the case. Closely related to this is Attractive because it can be assumed that learning objectives are attractive primarily when learners can recognize an added value concerning their learning process when the learning objective is achieved. An attractive goal should also be formulated positively [58]. In addition, learning objectives should be challenging, i.e., not too easy or difficult. This also ties into the theory of the Zone of Proximal Development, according to which an optimal learning goal is formulated to enable learners to move into the Zone of Proximal Development.

The criterion Assignable is particularly relevant in contexts of collaborative learning. Here, in addition to a standard formulation of goals, it should also be determined who is responsible for achieving them. Depending on the learning objective, these can be individuals, small groups of people, or an entire project group.

In summary, this extends the original SMART criteria to SMA<sup>5</sup> RT criteria:


Immediately after the formulation of the objectives, they are viewed by the facilitators. This gives the facilitators an overview of what the students are working on. At the same time, it provides the learning guide the opportunity to give feedback to the students on their goal formulations and, if necessary, to support them with targeted questions to find suitable individual learning goals or to adjust the formulated plans according to the SMA<sup>5</sup> RT criteria, e.g., if they seem to be too general or too easy/difficult for the student. In the long term, the ability to formulate realistic goals should be further developed in the students with increasing use of goal formulation according to SMA5 RT and a linked review of goal achievement.

Following the feedback from the learning guide and, if necessary, adjustments to the learning objectives, the learning objectives formulated individually by the students are worked on in the individual learning times (Action Phase of the process model of the SRL).

At the end of each learning unit, an assessment of goal achievement is then made (Postaction Phase). This is done for grades 4–6 using a so-called "target" (cf. **Figure 3**). The students can divide the target into as many parts as the learning objectives have been formulated (cf. **Figure 3**). For each learning objective, an assessment is now made as to whether the learning objective has already been started actively achieved through learning actions. If this is the case, then the outer ring can be painted. Suppose you have not only started working on the ring, but have already achieved a (significant) part of it but have not yet completed it. In that case, you can also paint the middle ring. The inner ring can then be filled when the learning objective has been achieved. In this way, it is made clear by visual means how successful the achievement of objectives has been for the individual learning objectives and the learning objectives of the entire day as a whole. The assessment of goal achievement can also be used the following day to revisit goals that may have only been partially

*Designing Tools for Supporting Self-Regulated Learning in Collaborative Learning Environment… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113882*

worked on or goals that have been started. In this sense, experiences from previous learning processes are thus integrated into new learning units, as assumed by the process model [18].

The students use one color for each of the three perspectives (science, language, and society) to work on the target, i.e., the documentation of the achievement of learning objectives in science is marked with blue, for language yellow, and for society orange. In this way, the students also see the balance of their chosen subjects/objects, e.g., when blue is repeatedly seen more often than yellow and orange on the target.

In addition, the students can design their Logbooks individually (e.g., drawings on the cover page and pages). We believe this helps to ensure that students embrace the Logbook as a personal tool to support self-regulated learning.

#### **3.3 Lapbook**

A Lapbook is a tool students use to design their project work [43] between grades 4–6 to acquire competencies in project-based learning. These competencies include, for example, time management, process management, and self-structuring.

The Lapbook is a tactile and visual element supporting the project process. The students design the Lapbook themselves: In the beginning, there is only a white A3 sheet of paper in front of them. First, the Lapbook is divided into three parts according to the division of the project work phases: Idea generation, planning, and project processing (cf. **Figure 4**). The first phase, association and imagination (red phase), aims to collect ideas and develop researcher questions. Next, the subject perspectives (e.g., linguistic or scientific) and methods (e.g., experimentation, questioning) that can be used to answer the formulated questions are determined. A classic applied

**Figure 4.** *Illustration of grade 4–6 Lapbook.*

method for associating is the ABC list.3 From the determination of these mentioned aspects and the required resources, the students derive a schedule, which is also mapped. For this purpose, the students stick the weeks with the days of the week under the color blocks according to how many weeks are planned for the respective phases by the individual student.

This schedule is then always filled in daily. At the end of the red phase, the students present their first project sketches to each other. Then, facilitated by the facilitator, students come together based on a common theme so that smaller groups now work together to form a project group.

This small group starts with the yellow research and planning phase. In this phase, with the help of further research and precise planning of the project process by the students, the project plan is further developed and recorded in the Lapbook through other additions. There is a lot of gluing and folding in the book. In addition, the project objectives are further refined in consultation with at least one project partner. This more detailed planning phase determines when work assignments can also be divided between students. In this way, students learn the division of labor, again recorded in the Lapbook.

When the project group, taking into account the individual schedules of the group members, has created a standard detailed plan for further action, the project moves to the third phase—implementation and presentation. In this phase, specific planning of the individual project steps occurs daily. For this purpose, the Logbook already described above is now used even more intensively by the students for their project work, in which project-specific learning objectives are formulated. Especially the practice days, where work on the creation of project products is done together in the project group, needs more detailed planning between the members of a project group and requires them to structure themselves over a more extended period than the directly following learning time. This is because the planning for these practice days must go beyond the concrete planning on the practice day in the medium term so that all the necessary materials, rooms, etc., are available on the practice day. Therefore, in contrast to the Logbook, which mainly focuses on the daily individual learning goals from the learning studio and project work, the Lapbook primarily supports self-regulated learning with a medium/long-term perspective over several days (sometimes weeks).

With the visual structuring and documentation of the individual project phases, the Lapbook supports the students in planning the project processes and understanding and reflecting on them. This documentation of one's learning and work process in the cooperative project work phase is systematically guided and developed in grades 4 through 6. Together with the Logbook and learning pathways outlined above, students and facilitators can gain an understanding of the individual learning and development process while supporting students in an increasingly self-regulated learning process.

#### **4. Implications for teacher's actions for supporting this kind of learning arrangements**

First of all, it should be noted that the methods described do not guarantee the implementation of more self-regulated learning. However, there are already indications in the literature which general aspects teachers should consider when promoting

<sup>3</sup> ABC lists are association and creativity techniques designed to help students find subordinate or related topics to a theme in order to formulate research questions.

#### *Designing Tools for Supporting Self-Regulated Learning in Collaborative Learning Environment… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113882*

self-regulated learning processes. For example, Zimmermann [10] mentions here, among other things, that students should be given choices for tasks and methods and learning partners. In addition, teachers should promote specific goal setting, teach learning strategies, and encourage self-evaluation of achievement. Parents and colleagues [11] also cite tasks based on the student's interests and the provision of choices to enable exploration, planning, action, and learning, as well as regular and informative. Motivational feedback to encourage students to complete the task is an essential aspect of the pedagogical activity to promote self-regulated learning. Suppose one follows the explanations of the three instruments presented by us. In that case, it can be stated that these aspects are the first implementation in practical school everyday life.

For the Learning Paths, the Lapbook and the Logbook to be effective, they must be continuously applied in everyday school life. The application processes must be standardized and completed according to the objectives. Therefore, for the three instruments, it will be explained once again how the learning facilitators can use them to support processes of self-regulating learning in students.

Learning Paths: The teachers must continuously maintain the creation (and adaptation, if necessary) of the individual nodes and Learning Paths for each subject area. The learning facilitators should pay attention to how the Learning Path nodes should be implemented in the context of learning content in the learning modules. In addition, the individual monitoring of the Learning Paths concerning the respective student should be carried out continuously by the teachers because only in this way can learning processes be discussed and reflected in the goal and development discussions with the students. This monitoring must be student-related and teacher-related to be able to continuously develop the quality of the support provided by the teacher.

Logbook: Using the Logbook requires, on the one hand, understandable and concrete instruction by the teacher, both concerning the formulation of the learning objectives and the assessment of the achievement of the goals utilizing the target. On the other hand, feedback on the formulated learning objectives by the learning guides is essential. This feedback should be based on the known criteria for feedback that promotes learning so that positive development can be achieved concerning self-structuring in one's learning process and learning successes can be appropriately acknowledged. For the assessment of the achievement of objectives, after the students have first made this independently, the learning guide should then provide feedback to the student on the individual learning objectives to initiate an adjustment of the assessment utilizing targeted questions or hints, if necessary, and to support reflective processes.

Lapbook: Similar to the Logbook, keeping the Lapbook requires timely feedback from the teacher to the student and teacher-led reflection on the use of the Lapbook, as well as sustainability in the structure of using the Lapbook as a working tool.

As is clear from the descriptions of the use of these three instruments, the role of teachers changes in such a learning process more oriented toward self-regulation in cooperative learning settings. Teachers have to follow and demand processes and structures more than in a learning setting controlled by them, e.g., everyone fills out the Logbook in the morning, follows the rules of filling out the Logbook, and only the contents are different. While establishing the instruments in the *University School Dresden,* it becomes clear that not all teachers succeed in this follow-up to the same extent. Teachers need the necessary skills, such as time management, structuring their own work processes, and the ability to prioritize. Not least, to build these competencies, but also to understand the behaviors of students, teachers need reflective competencies.

#### **5. Conclusion**

All three instruments presented have been on trial in the university school for 2 to 3 years. Therefore, it is necessary for all actors involved in the school experiment [4] to constantly question the instruments used and further adapt the pedagogical processes associated with them. This does not argue against the devices developed so far but rather corresponds to the method of development determined at the beginning of the approach of design-based research (DBR) in terms of formative educational research [45, 62].

Different aspects play a role in the revision of the developed instruments. For learning pathways, for example, the amount of documentation is relevant to teachers. For practical usability, it would be necessary to find a measure that corresponds to the student's learning process and, at the same time, takes into account the "control needs" of the teachers. Something similar can be reported for the Logbook and the Lapbook. Further adaptation is aimed at the best possible support for students and easy practical use by teachers. In this sense, what has been presented is an interim result. In addition to theory- and practice-based adaptations of the instruments, an implementation in a learning and school management software is planned so that the instruments can also be used digitally.

Finally, related to the project-oriented and collaborative approach of the school learning setting at the *University School Dresden*, we also focus on suitable instruments to support socially shared regulated learning. To promote socially shared regulated learning (SSRL), targeted intervention is needed because SSRL does not occur simply by learning cooperatively. Consequently, such an instrument must specifically support students in developing competencies at different levels of regulation (emotional, cognitive, and motivational) during the phases of SRL to learn together in a self-regulated manner successfully. Therefore the students' focus should also be on identifying challenges or obstacles that might arise [63] and be provided with methods to support SSRL.

#### **Acknowledgements**

The previous results and presentations are based on cooperation with the *University School Dresden*. All actors are always ready for changes and further adaptations. They are also happy to give us tireless feedback on their ideas for further development.

We acknowledge financial support for the publication of this book by the Open Access Publication Fund of Saxon State and University Library Dresden (SLUB Dresden).

#### **Conflict of interest**

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

*Designing Tools for Supporting Self-Regulated Learning in Collaborative Learning Environment… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113882*

#### **Author details**

Anke Langner\* and Marlis Pesch TU Dresden, Faculty of Education, Dresden, Germany

\*Address all correspondence to: anke.langner@tu-dresden.de

© 2023 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

### **References**

[1] Fend H. Neue Theorie der Schule: Einführung in das Verstehen von Bildungssystemen. 2nd ed. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften; 2009. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-531-91788-7

[2] Terhart E. Schulpädagogik und Organisationspädagogik. In: Göhlich M, Weber SM, Schröer A, editors. Handbuch Organisationspädagogik: Mit 17 Abbildungen und 4 Tabellen. Wiesbaden, Heidelberg: Springer VS; 2018. pp. 47-57. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-658-07512-5\_8

[3] Langner A, Heß M. Die Universitätsschule Dresden - das Schulkonzept. In: Heinrich M, Klewin G, editors. Gründungsschrift Verbund Universitäts- und Versuchsschulen: WE\_OS-Jahrbuch 2020. Universität Bielefeld; 2020

[4] Langner A, Ritter M. Schule entwickeln über ein wechselseitiges Gestalten von Schulpraxis und Wissenschaft. Spe – Schulpraxis entwickeln. Journal für Forschungsbasierte Schulentwicklung. 2022;**1**:23-48

[5] Leont'ev A. Tätigkeit, Bewusstsein, Persönlichkeit. Berlin: Volk und Wissen; 1979

[6] Galperin PI. Stage-by-stage formation as a method of psychological investigation. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology. 1992;**30**:60-80

[7] Vygotskij L. Ausgewählte Schriften. Köln: Rugenstein; 1987

[8] Buber M. Das dialogische Prinzip. 10th ed. Ģơtersloh: Ģơtersloher Verlagshaus; 1984 (translates)

[9] Vygotskij LS. Denken und Sprechen: Psychologische Untersuchungen. Weinheim, Basel: Beltz; 2002

[10] Zimmerman BJ. Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice. 2002;**41**:64-70. DOI: 10.1207/s15430421tip4102\_2

[11] Perels F, Dörrenbächer-Ulrich L, Landmann M, Otto B, Schnick-Vollmer K, Schmitz B. Selbstregulation und selbstreguliertes Lernen. In: Wild E, Möller J, editors. Pädagogische Psychologie. 3rd ed. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2020. pp. 45-65

[12] Schiefele U, Pekrun R. Psychologische Modelle des fremdgesteuerten und selbstgesteuerten Lernens. In: Weinert FE, Birbaumer N, Graumann CF, editors. Enzyklopädie der Psychologie. Göttingen: Hogrefe Verl. für Psychologie; 1996. pp. 249-278 (translates)

[13] Westhoff K, Kluck M-L. Psychologische Gutachten schreiben und beurteilen: Entspricht den deutschen und europäischen Richtlinien zur Erstellung psychologischer Gutachten. 6th ed. Berlin: Springer; 2014

[14] Järvenoja H, Näykki P, Törmänen T. Emotional regulation in collaborative learning: When do higher education students activate group level regulation in the face of challenges? Studies in Higher Education. 2019;**44**:1747-1757. DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2019.1665318

[15] Järvenoja H, Volet S, Järvelä S. Regulation of emotions in socially challenging learning situations: An instrument to measure the adaptive and social nature of the regulation process. Educational Psychology. 2013;**33**:31-58. DOI: 10.1080/01443410.2012.742334

[16] Panadero E. A review of selfregulated learning: Six models and four *Designing Tools for Supporting Self-Regulated Learning in Collaborative Learning Environment… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113882*

directions for research. Frontiers in Psychology. 2017;**8**:1-28. DOI: 10.3389/ fpsyg.2017.00422

[17] Zimmerman BJ. Attaining selfregulation: A social cognitve persepctive. In: Boekaerts M, editor. Handbook of Self-Regulation. San Diego, California: Academic Press; 2008. pp. 13-39

[18] Schmitz B, Wiese BS. New perspectives for the evaluation of training sessions in self-regulated learning: Time-series analyses of diary data. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 2006;**31**:64-96. DOI: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2005.02.002

[19] Schmitz B, Schmidt M. Einführung in die Selbstregulation. In: Landmann M, Schmitz B, editors. Selbstregulation erfolgreich fördern: Praxisnahe Trainingsprogramme für effektives Lernen. 1st ed. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer Verlag; 2007. pp. 9-18

[20] Wild KP, Schiefele U. Lernstrategien im Studium: Ergebnisse zur Faktorenstruktur und Reliabilität eines neuen Fragebogens. Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie. 1994;**15**:185-200

[21] Wirth J, Leutner D. Selfregulated learning as a competence. Zeitschrift für Psychologie/Journal of Psychology. 2008;**216**:102-110. DOI: 10.1027/0044-3409.216.2.102

[22] Landmann M, Schmitz B. Welche Rolle spielt Self- Monitoring bei der Selbstregulation und wie kann man mit Hilfe von Tagebüchern die Selbstregulation fördern? In: Gläser-Zikuda M, Hascher T, editors. Lernprozesse dokumentieren, reflektieren und beurteilen: Lerntagebuch und Portfolio in Bildungsforschung und Bildungspraxis. Bad Heilbrunn: Verlag Julius Klinkhardt; 2007. pp. 149-169

[23] Panadero E, Kirschner PA, Järvelä S, Malmberg J, Järvenoja H. How individual self-regulation affects group regulation and performance. Small Group Research. 2015;**46**:431-454. DOI: 10.1177/1046496415591219

[24] Hadwin AF, Järvelä S, Miller M. Self-regulation, Co-regulation, and shared regulation in collaborative learning environments. In: Schunk DH, Greene JA, editors. Handbook of Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance. New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group; 2018. pp. 83-106

[25] Järvelä S, Hadwin AF. New Frontiers: Regulating learning in CSCL. Educational Psychologist. 2013;**48**:25-39. DOI: 10.1080/00461520.2012.748006

[26] Järvelä S, Järvenoja H, Näykki P. Analyzing regulation of motivation as an individual and social process: A situated approach. In: Volet S, Vauras M, editors. Interpersonal Regulation of Learning and Motivation: Methodological Advances. London: Routledge; 2013. pp. 170-187

[27] Melzner N, Greisel M, Dresel M, Kollar I. Regulating self-organized collaborative learning: The importance of homogeneous problem perception, immediacy and intensity of strategy use. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. 2020;**15**:149-177. DOI: 10.1007/ s11412-020-09323-5

[28] Schoor C, Narciss S, Körndle H. Regulation during cooperative and collaborative learning: A theorybased review of terms and concepts. Educational Psychologist. 2015;**50**:97-119. DOI: 10.1080/00461520.2015.1038540

[29] Schoor C. CASoRL: Coding scheme for the analysis of social regulation of learning. In: Brauner E, Boos M, Kolbe M, editors. The Cambridge Handbook

of Group Interaction Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2018. pp. 528-536. DOI: 10.1017/9781316286302.034

[30] van Woezik TET, Koksma JJ-J, Reuzel RPB, Jaarsma DC, van der Wilt GJ. There is more than 'I' in selfdirected learning: An exploration of self-directed learning in teams of undergraduate students. Medical Teacher. 2021;**43**:590-598. DOI: 10.1080/0142159X.2021.1885637

[31] Schoor C, Bannert M. Motivation in a computer-supported collaborative learning scenario and its impact on learning activities and knowledge acquisition. Learning and Instruction. 2011;**21**:560-573. DOI: 10.1016/j. learninstruc.2010.11.002

[32] Phielix C, Prins FJ, Kirschner PA, Erkens G, Jaspers J. Group awareness of social and cognitive performance in a CSCL environment: Effects of a peer feedback and reflection tool. Computers in Human Behavior. 2011;**27**:1087-1102. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.06.024

[33] Panadero E, Järvelä S. Socially shared regulation of learning: A review. European Psychologist. 2015;**20**:190-203. DOI: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000226

[34] Haataja E, Dindar M, Malmberg J, Järvelä S. Individuals in a group: Metacognitive and regulatory predictors of learning achievement in collaborative learning. Learning and Individual Differences. 2022;**96**:102146. DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2022.102146

[35] Chen J, Wang M, Kirschner PA, Tsai C-C. The role of collaboration, computer use, learning environments, and supporting strategies in CSCL: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research. 2018;**88**:799-843. DOI: 10.3102/0034654318791584

[36] Jeong H, Hmelo-Silver CE, Jo K. Ten years of computer-supported collaborative learning: A meta-analysis of CSCL in STEM education during 2005-2014. Educational Research Review. 2019;**28**:100284. DOI: 10.1016/j. edurev.2019.100284

[37] Langner A. Lernpfade: Individuelle Entwicklungswege in der Schule durch digital gestütztes Dokumentationssystem ermöglichen. PraxisForschungLehrer \*innenBildung. Zeitschrift für Schul-Und Professionsentwicklung (PFLB). 2023;**2**(1):23-48

[38] Langner A, Jugel D. Ohne Verstehen kein pädagogisches Handeln – Diagnostik im Kontext von Inklusion. In: Langner A, Ritter M, Steffens J, Jugel D, editors. Inklusive Bildung forschend entdecken. Wiesbaden: Springer; 2019. pp. 133-150

[39] Langner A, Matusche J, Pesch M. Diagnostik für einen inklusionssensiblen Unterricht. In: Langner A, Niethammer M, Schütte M, Wieser D, Kemter-Hofmann P, Friebel L, Jugel D, Jung J, Matusche J, Milker C, Richter-Killenberg S, Steffens J, Wesemeser K, editors. Schule Inklusiv gestalten – das Projekt SING. Münster und New York: Waxmann; 2022. pp. 129-157

[40] Dlugosch A. Diagnostik im Kontext der Vielfalt. In: Feyerer E, Langner A, editors. Umgang mit Vielfalt. Lehrbuch für Inklusive Bildung. Linz: Trauner; 2014. pp. 119-132

[41] Zimpel A. Entwicklung und Diagnostik. Diagnostische Grundlagen der Behindertenpädagogik. Lernen und Entwicklung. Bd. 1. Münster und Hamburg: Lit verlag; 1994

[42] Konrad K. Lernen lernen – allein und mit anderen. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden; 2014

*Designing Tools for Supporting Self-Regulated Learning in Collaborative Learning Environment… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113882*

[43] Langner A, Heß M, Wiechmann K. Projektarbeit: Struktur und methode. WE\_OS. 2021;**4**:187-204

[44] Gess C, Rueß J, Deicke W. Design-based Research als Ansatz zur Verbesserung der Lehre an Hochschulen – Einführung und Praxisbeispiel. Qualität in Wissenschaft. 2014;**8**:10-16

[45] Langner A, Ritter M, Pesch M. Das Reallabor Universitätsschule Dresden – forschungsmethodische Grundlagen. PraxisForschungLehrer\*innenBil dung. Zeitschrift für Schul- Und Professionsentwicklung (PFLB). 2020;**2**(1):23-48. DOI: 10.4119/pflb-3613

[46] Zimmerman BJ. Academic studing and the development of personal skill: A self-regulatory perspective. Educational Psychologist. 1998;**33**:73-86. DOI: 10.1080/00461520.1998.9653292

[47] Jantzen W, Lanwer W, editors. Diagnostik als Rehistorisierung: Methodologie und Praxis einer verstehenden Diagnostik am Beispiel schwer behinderter Menschen. Berlin: Lehmanns Media; 2011

[48] Lanwer W. Diagnostik: Methoden in Heilpädagogik und Heilerziehungspflege. 1st ed. Troisdorf: Bildungsverl. EINS; 2006

[49] Andrade HL, Heritage M. Using Formative Assessment to Enhance Learning, Achievement, and Academic Self-Regulation. New York, London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group; 2017

[50] Moss CM, Brookhart SM. Advancing Formative Assessment in every Classroom: A Guide for Instructional Leaders. 2nd ed. Alexandria, Virginia: ASCD; 2019

[51] Feuser G. Entwicklungslogische didaktik. In: Kaiser A, Schmetz D,

Wachtel P, Werner B, editors. Didaktik und Unterricht. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer; 2011. pp. 86-100

[52] Lompscher J. Erfassung von Lernstrategien auf der Reflexionsebene: Paralleltitel: Analysis of learning strategies on the reflection level. Empirische Pädagogik. 1996;**10**:245-275

[53] Varnhorn B. Bertelsmann Universal-Lexikon: [das Wissen unserer Zeit von A - Z ; über 70.000 Stichwörter ; 3.000 überwiegend farbige Abbildungen]. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann Lexikon Verl; 2001

[54] Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary. New York: Barnes & Noble Books; 2003. p. 1996

[55] Bundesministerium der Justiz - Bundesamt für Justiz - Kompetenzzentrum Rechtsinformationssystem des Bundes. Schiffssicherheitsverordnung (SchSV) Anlage 1 (zu § 5) Besondere Regelungen bei internationalem schiffsbezogenen Sicherheitsstandard: SchSV; 1998

[56] Schaefer I. Leitfaden Goal Attainment Scaling (Zielerreichungsskalen). 2015. Available from: https://www.lzg.nrw.de/\_php/ login/dl.php?u=/\_media/pdf/evalua\_ tools/leitfaden\_gas\_endversion.pdf [Accessed: September 2, 2022]

[57] Doran GT. There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write managements's goals and objectives. Management Review. 1981;**70**:35-36

[58] Seip M, Döring-Seipel E. Das Arbeiten mit Zielen fördern und fordern. In: Döring-Seipel E, Seip M, editors. Arbeiten mit Zielen: Innovative Wege zur Professionalisierung von Lehrerinnen und Lehrern. Bad Heilbrunn: Verlag Julius Klinkhardt; 2019. pp. 77-111

[59] Locke EA, Latham GP. New directions in goal-setting theory. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 2006;**15**:265-268. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2006.00449.x

[60] Krogerus M, Tschäppeler R. 50 Erfolgsmodelle: Kleines Handbuch für strategische Entscheidungen. 19th ed. Zürich: Kein & Aber; 2014

[61] Seip M, Döring-Seipel E. Zielbezogene Erfolgsfaktoren und Gelingensbedingungen. In: Döring-Seipel E, Seip M, editors. Arbeiten mit Zielen: Innovative Wege zur Professionalisierung von Lehrerinnen und Lehrern. Bad Heilbrunn: Verlag Julius Klinkhardt; 2019. pp. 45-62

[62] Tulodziecki G, Grafe S, Herzig B. Medienbildung in Schule und Unterricht. Grundlagen und Beispiele. 2nd ed. UTB: Klinkhardt; 2019

[63] Malmberg J, Järvelä S, Järvenoja H, Panadero E. Promoting socially shared regulation of learning in CSCL: Progress of socially shared regulation among highand low-performing groups. Computers in Human Behavior. 2015;**52**:562-572. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.082

### Section 3
