A case study of e-tutors training program Doukakis Spyros, Koutroumpa Cleo, Despi Olga, Raffa Elissa, Chira Theodora, Michalopoulou Georgia The American College of Greece-PIERCE-DEREE-ALBA Athens, Greece {sdoukakis, cleo, odespi, eraffa, tchira gmihalopoulou}@acg.edu Abstract In the present study the training program of four in-service secondary educators to undertake the role of e-tutor is presented. The training program was based on the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework and realized via a blended learning environment. After the completion of the training program the educators acted as e- tutors in a pilot e-tutoring program. Once the pilot e-tutoring was finished the educators gave semi-structured interviews and participated in a focus group, where issues raised during the implementation of the pilot program were discussed. The analysis of the interviews highlighted how important the educators considered the understanding of the different context in which e- tutoring is taking place in contrast with that of a conventional classroom. They also pointed out the technological and pedagogical knowledge that e-tutors need to have so that they can work on the e-tutoring environment. Keywords e-tutoring, teacher training, TPACK I. INTRODUCTION The integration of digital tools into the educational procedure has led educators to redefine their way of teaching, while at the same time has increased researchers and educators interest in pin-pointing appropriate methods for the utilization of these tools in supporting students learning. Within this framework, e-tutoring is a digital media for supporting students, which utilizes possibilities offered by the internet and web 2.0 tools in order to enhance the cooperation between students and educators [1]. Within this context an e-tutoring program was designed via the Blackboard Collaborate (BC) platform at the American College of Greece-PIERCE for the first and second grade students of lower secondary education (Gymnasio). The environment is presented at Figure 1. Fig. 1. Blackboard Collaborate (BC) platform In order for the e-tutoring program to function and hence for the school s pilot program to take place the training of educators who would become e-tutors was considered essential. For this purpose a training program was designed and implemented. After the completion of the training program, the trainees were assigned to the e-tutor role. Furthermore, after the completion of the e-tutoring pilot program which was held four times per week, the educators gave semi structured interviews and participated in a focus group, where issues raised during the implementation of the pilot program were discussed. The rest of the article is structured as follows: a relevant literature review is presented in the next section. In the third section the training program is described, while in the fourth section the results of analyzing the interviews of the e-tutors are displayed. The article finishes with the discussion of the findings and the conclusion. II. LITERATURE REVIEW E-tutoring has the characteristics of traditional teaching in a classroom. In this sense, there is a teacher that facilitates students to acquire further knowledge, develop capacities and modify attitudes towards the subject taught [1]. The difference lies on the environment through which the cooperation between teacher and student is realized. E-tutoring is realized through an online environment, where an internet site or platform is used [2]. E-tutoring environments dispose a series of interactional and co-operational possibilities that contribute to teaching, learning and the assessment of students. Furthermore, these environments provide a synchronous discussion system which permits face to face contact in rooms; dispose a multifunctional whiteboard with graphics, chat, application sharing, and assessment tools; and offer the possibility of recording the e-tutoring course for further and later use, etc. [3]. Finally, taking into consideration the easy access to and use of Blackboard Collaborate, as well as the fact that teachers and students are at home and not at their work place (or wherever they wish, for that matter), e-tutoring environments modify students, teachers and parents perspective on teaching and learning. The e-tutoring integration in the existing structure of an educational institution creates the need for teachers training in the new environment. According to Goodyear et al., [4], during the preparation of the educators for their new role as e-tutors it is of prime importance to reinforce the role of the teachers as 978-1-4799-0086-2/13/$31.00 2013 IEEE
facilitators, as technologists, as administrators, as advisers, as assessor and researchers. Simultaneously, it is considered as very important for the teachers to be capable of welcoming, establishing ground rules, creating community, managing communication, modelling social behaviour and establishing identity [4]. Hampel and Stickler [5] suggested a pyramid of skills specifically for language teachers that they need in order to successfully work as e-tutors: Basic ICT competence, Specific technical competence for the software, Awareness of constraints and possibilities, Online socialization, Facilitating communicative competence, Creativity, choice/selection, Development of own style. Fig. 2. Skills pyramid [5] Compton [6] criticized the sequential nature of the pyramid model, arguing that:...there is an implication that these skills have to be developed sequentially. I would argue that some of these skills can be developed concurrently and do not necessarily have to come in the order implied in the pyramid. Compton [6], also, suggested a framework comprising: technology in online teaching; pedagogy of online teaching and evaluation of online teaching in each subject area. Compton s [6] proposal seems to be in accordance with the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework as it has been described by Mishra and Koehler [7]. According to Lee and Tsai [8] e-tutors must possess Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge - Web (TPACK-W) within the general concept, so that they can easily handle the requirements of online teaching [9]. In align with the above, the training program for the teachers was based on Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework. The training program focused mainly on the development of the Technological Knowledge, Technological Content Knowledge, Technological Pedagogical Knowledge and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge after the completion of the training program. III. TRAINING PROGRAM Before the beginning of the training, the educator (M1), who would also become an e-tutor and was already a certified teachers trainer for the use of digital tools, attended a training seminar on the use of the Blackboard Collaborate. The educator was trained by two experts so that he could then undertake the trainer role for his colleagues. The training process followed the blended learning model with face to face and on-line meetings. The training program for the teachers who would undertake the e-tutors role was designed so that it would contain the following: Basic knowledge of computer use and utilization of digital tools Pedagogical matters while using digital tools Communication with students (e-tutor s and moderator s role, student s role, creation of appropriate teaching material, teaching strategies) and The e-tutoring environment that they would use (how to connect to the environment and what are the tools provided by the program). The training program lasted 16 hours (6 hours of face to face and 10 of distant training). At first, two meetings with the experts took place and after that the educator M1 took over. In the training pilot program a math teacher (woman) and two Greek language teachers (women, philologists) participated. The trainees apart from the above mentioned stages had to create material and teaching scenarios and to carry out microteaching. The microteaching, contributed to determining the structure of the material and identifying tools that contributed to the objectives of e-tutoring in the specific subject areas. In addition, trainees changed roles, in order to understand the environment and the tools available both from the side of the e-tutor, and the part of the student. With the latter s completion the educators acted as e-tutors in a pilot e-tutoring program. In the first e-tutoring lessons, the e-tutors observed their own actions and interactions in the online meetings/lessons with the students and after the completion of e-tutoring sessions discussed how the lesson evolved. The pilot program lasted seven weeks, during the first of which students' training was implemented. During the students' training, the rules for the proper use of the environment (netiquette) were created. E-tutoring was available for 2 hours per day, 4 evenings per week, for 28 first
grade and 30 second grade students of lower secondary education (Gymnasio). After the completion of the e-tutoring pilot program, the 4 educators gave semi-structured interviews and participated in a focus group, where issues raised during the implementation of the pilot program were discussed. The interviews were conducted by one of the authors of the article, who undertook the role of interviewer. The interviewer knew the four e-tutors and had attended three online meetings with students to familiarize herself with the environment. With this research an attempt was made to document: E-tutors perceptions regarding the e-tutoring before it was implemented, E-tutors perceptions regarding the training program that they participated in and E-tutors perceptions regarding the necessary knowledge an e-tutor should possess. IV. INTERVIEWS AND RESULTS The interviews had an informal tone, resembling a conversation more than a question-answer format of formal character. They were comprised of a thematic approach and issues to be discussed, with unstructured questions [10]. The questions were formed in a way the interviewees could answer in detail, with the possibility for clarifications to be requested. At the semi-structured interviews the interviewees talked about their knowledge, opinions, ideas, interpretations, experiences and interactions within the e-tutoring operation framework. The data gathered functioned as elements that contributed to the acquiring of access to the e-tutors narratives and formulations [10]. Furthermore, a focus group meeting with the educators was convened, so that through immediate interaction further depth to the interviews could be developed. The general schema of open discussion was adopted, where the participants had the possibility to express fully their opinions and the way they comprehend reality [11]. On top of that, through the focus group, data which could not be gathered via other methods was collected, concerning the participants attitudes, views and personal characteristics. A. About e-tutoring Originally the educators described their relationship with e- learning programs and identified the concerns they had before their first contact with the particular tool and their involvement with e-tutoring programs. They all knew the term e-learning in theory, whilst two of them had followed e-learning programs in the form of asynchronous education. Nonetheless, the educators had not worked with e-tutoring before. At first, they were cautious with the use of this digital tool for the following reasons: whether it is a kind of legitimized private tutoring, whether e-tutoring will offer to the students what they really needed and whether children of this age will utilize the platform appropriately. The educators were also concerned about: whether they could learn and utilize the environment, whether there is a danger of exposing the e-tutor for example by recording the lesson for further utilization, whether they could respond to the students demands and solve any possible problems of a technical nature. During training and their participation at the program, many of their concerns and reservations seemed to be appeased. Characteristically, one educator mentioned:...after realizing what it really meant, I was hopeful that it would help students who are shy solve their problems, especially those who are too timid to expose themselves to their classmates or teachers by posing questions in the classroom. On the other hand, another educator mentioned: the concerns exist still. Not at the same degree, but they still exist. I detect personal defects and weaknesses. As far as their concerns for their students, the opinions of two educators demonstrate their change: Children who were familiar with tools of this form helped overcome several problems, Quickly though, my reservations of how the students would deal with it collapsed. B. About the training program The educators declared high satisfaction with the training program, both in the theoretical and the practical part. The training was practical and extremely helpful, as one educator mentioned. Also, it was extremely important to all the educators that one of the trainers was their colleague. All the educators referred to the characteristics and elements of the training, as: the platform s possibilities and tools, its limitations and constraints (for example, the non-existence of polytonal symbols, even though the trainer found a way to cope with the problem), rules for students appropriate behavior, multiple roles and many hours of practice. C. About e-tutor knowledge The four e-tutors referred to: the technological efficacy that a moderator needs to possess, the very good knowledge of content/subject is called to work upon, as well as her/his pedagogical efficiency. One educator referred to the use of tools that are appropriate each time for every child and every activity, demonstrating Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK). Another mentioned the patience and courtesy an educator needs to possess, talking about Pedagogical Knowledge (PK). She also talked about the good subject knowledge so as to be able to answer any questions from a distance, an example of Technological Content Knowledge (TCK). Generally, the multiplicity of the educator s role was shown, even though the e-tutors focused mainly on the Technological Knowledge (TK) they need to possess (for example, how to deal with a possible connection or computer problem, if the processing programs are compatible, etc.).
D. Classroom and e-tutoring program comparison The educators in the focus group tried to compare a typical classroom with e-tutoring. Three of them argued that classroom management is easier than e-tutoring. Those educators mentioned that the classroom is a place we live in and have by now acquired experience, while another colleague suggested that to have in the classroom 25 young people each of whom is different and you 26th totally different, where you need to adjust the knowledge to their personality so as to be accepted is much more demanding than e-tutoring where you have to deal with one or two students. She also said that...it is actually easier to cope with the e-learners, as students tend to treat the program with respect and do not incline to behave inappropriately, as some of them might in the classroom. They all deemed the academic part of their work identical in the classroom and e-tutoring, even though, as mentioned, in e-tutoring the support needed by the student is defined by her/him, as the educator is called upon to answer questions and not to realize a scheduled teaching. Thus, in the e-tutoring environment the educator s role as a facilitator is different compared to the typical classroom. training on those components of TPACK that are associated with technology (Technological Knowledge, Technological Pedagogical Knowledge, Technological Content Knowledge, and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge), while they feel self-efficient in Pedagogical Knowledge and in Pedagogical Content Knowledge. It is therefore evident that Technological, Pedagogical and Content Knowledge do not constitute separate elements of the educator s cognitive armor, but basically co-exist and co-define the educator s approach (the way s/he uses technology and pedagogy to help his/her students understand and even probe in the material taught). The difference is that training programs on the utilization of e- tutoring environments for in-service teachers need to focus on the TPACK framework s components that include technology (as shown in the picture with grey color), and at the same time rest on educators pre-existing knowledge and framework within which the training is taking place (Fig. 3). E. Overall assessment From the results of the research it is evident that the educators consider e-tutoring to be a worthy experience for them. They deem it a very useful tool in the educational procedure, as it helps students re-evaluate their cognitive level and solve some questions. It was also mentioned that e-tutoring is especially supportive and helpful for the students who hesitate to express themselves and their doubts within the classroom context. Finally, it was underlined that, taking into consideration contemporary students characteristics and their familiarity with technology, the particular tool wins over students, stimulates their interest and helps them develop several capacities. V. DISCUSSION All educators claimed that the training program was very helpful and supported their needs. Also useful were the discussions following the completion of the first e-tutoring courses. The whole program aimed at the support of educators pedagogical and technological needs, while at the talks between content area peers issues of the content were also discussed. The results are in accordance with research Stickler and Hampel [12], who claim the pedagogical training proved to be crucial for all tutors, who felt uncertain about teaching beginners online (p. 81). Furthermore, the development of the educator s confidence and their involvement in the choice of actions, evaluation of structures and the creation of material are important elements of the training program. Moreover, from the e-tutors interviews was evident that the educator who undertakes an e-tutoring program needs to possess deep knowledge of the subject s/he is called upon to teach, as well as knowledge of both pedagogical issues and digital tools. Within the TPACK framework is also evident that educators who possess educational experience in a traditional classroom with face to face interactions ask for focused Fig. 3. TPACK Framework Thus, the differentiation is the focus on TPACK s components that include technology, but with the latter being a circle equivalent to the others (Pedagogy, Content) in the TPACK framework, as described in [9]. Finally, the e-tutors proved that planning, implementation and the tools used within the context of each e-tutoring course are influenced by a number of factors, such as the students knowledge of computer use and any technical problems that might arise, their actual learning needs, the subject area content etc., which supports even further the existing TPACK framework including several different contexts in which e- tutors TPACK needs to be developed. VI. CONCLUSION The present study was conducted before and after a pilot implementation of an e-tutoring program on first and second grade students of lower secondary education (Gymnasio). Overall, it appears that e-tutoring programs can provide an
alternative way of supporting the needs of students, who can gain multiple learning benefits both on knowledge and on abilities and stances. The examination and documentation of e- tutors opinions about the e-tutoring program, as well as the knowledge they need to possess in order to offer their students as many learning benefits as possible is an important component of e-tutoring program success. ACKNOWLEDGMENT Many thanks to Petros Korovessis, Executive Director of Information Resources Management (IRM) department of The American College of Greece, for all his support and help. REFERENCES [1] J.A. Corrigan, The implementation of e-tutoring in secondary schools: A diffusion study, in Computers & Education, 59(3), 2012, 925-936. [2] G.M. Johnson, S.E. Bratt, Technology education students: e-tutors for school children, in British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 2009, 32-41. [3] Blackboard Inc. Blackboard Collaborate, Delivering ROI for K-12 Schools, 2012. [4] P. Goodyear, G. Salmon, J. Spector, C. Steeples, S. Tickner, Competencies for online teaching, in Educational Technology Research and Development, 49, 2001, 65-72. [5] R. Hampel, U. Stickler, New skills for new classrooms: Training tutors to teach languages online, in Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18(4), 2005, 311-326. [6] L.K.L. Compton, Preparing language teachers to teach language online: a look at skills, roles, and responsibilities. in Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22(1), 2009, 73-99. [7] P. Mishra, M.J. Koehler, Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge, in Teachers College Record, 108(6), 2006, 1017-1054. [8] M. Lee, C. Tsai, Exploring teachers perceived self-efficacy and technological pedagogical content knowledge with respect to educational use of the World Wide Web, in Instructional Science, 38(1), 2010, 1-21. [9] H. Chuang, A Case Study of E-tutors Teaching Practice: Does Technology Drive Pedagogy?, in International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 1(2), 2013, 75-82. [10] J. Mason, Qualitative Researching (2nd ed), London: Sage Publications, 2002. [11] L. Cohen & L. Manion, Research Methods in Education (4th ed.), London: Routledge Publishers, 1994. [12] U. Stickler, R. Hampel, Designing online tutor training for language courses: a case study, in Open Learning: The Journal of Open and Distance Learning, 22(1), 2007, 75-85.