View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Attempting to Implement a Pedagogy of Care during the Disruptions to Teacher Education Caused by COVID-19: A Collaborative Self-Study

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Attempting to Implement a Pedagogy of Care during the Disruptions to Teacher Education Caused by COVID-19: A Collaborative Self-Study
Language: English
Authors: Moorhouse, Benjamin Luke (ORCID 0000-0002-3913-5194), Tiet, My C.
Source: Studying Teacher Education. 2021 17(2):208-227.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 20
Publication Date: 2021
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Tests/Questionnaires
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: COVID-19, Pandemics, Ethics, Caring, Online Courses, Teacher Educators, Teacher Education Programs, School Closing, Educational Technology, Videoconferencing, Barriers, Foreign Countries, Teacher Student Relationship
Geographic Terms: Hong Kong
DOI: 10.1080/17425964.2021.1925644
ISSN: 1742-5964
Abstract: This article reports on a collaborative self-study conducted by the authors (two teacher educators) as we attempted to implement a pedagogy of care during the disruptions to teacher education caused by COVID-19. Due to the pandemic, we were required to conduct our teacher education courses synchronously online through video-conferencing software. Although this mode of instruction allowed us to continue teaching despite the restrictions necessitated by COVID-19, the relational aspect of teaching and the role of care seemed to be limited and became an important concern for us. Through self-study, we aimed to improve our online teaching practices by enacting a pedagogy of care during one full semester. We detail our attempts to conceptualise a pedagogy of care for the online classroom, begin our courses from a position of care and prioritize and maintain care throughout the semester. We also present the ongoing challenges we experienced in implementing a pedagogy of care online. While recognising that everyone has been affected by COVID-19 in different ways, we hope through sharing our experiences, others can learn from them and conceptualise and implement a pedagogy of care in their contexts.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2021
Accession Number: EJ1303294
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFqu8NTYHCPSpy6-G3ExUh4AAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDGtARGry7mDfDJ3UggIBEICBmrbx8HFUNmLc48EU8IE6lryVxnUyQoHGmLYL2GjPtbGricR_4uXeuLvNkurdHrwc_7-TCa0S64LD40vZ3tviHo8iS7nlSB07V2NHWNMmKtPlSqc-vLWb8uNrFqak6o1iUUBqfu_vO6xyjDJj8Gg9i4P_gASmOYqJs-YLTSzZmIYTwS6MxAv3UHlsaK2X_bs3yt8ILXmA7VQ3acg=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0151406168;v1m01aug.21;2021Jul16.03:40;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0151406168-1">Attempting to Implement A Pedagogy of Care during the Disruptions to Teacher Education Caused by COVID-19: A Collaborative Self-Study </title> <p>This article reports on a collaborative self-study conducted by the authors (two teacher educators) as we attempted to implement a pedagogy of care during the disruptions to teacher education caused by COVID-19. Due to the pandemic, we were required to conduct our teacher education courses synchronously online through video-conferencing software. Although this mode of instruction allowed us to continue teaching despite the restrictions necessitated by COVID-19, the relational aspect of teaching and the role of care seemed to be limited and became an important concern for us. Through self-study, we aimed to improve our online teaching practices by enacting a pedagogy of care during one full semester. We detail our attempts to conceptualise a pedagogy of care for the online classroom, begin our courses from a position of care and prioritize and maintain care throughout the semester. We also present the ongoing challenges we experienced in implementing a pedagogy of care online. While recognising that everyone has been affected by COVID-19 in different ways, we hope through sharing our experiences, others can learn from them and conceptualise and implement a pedagogy of care in their contexts.</p> <p>Keywords: COVID-19; care ethics; online teaching; self-study; teacher education</p> <hd id="AN0151406168-2">Introduction</hd> <p>The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on education around the world. In most countries, universities and schools have had to consider ways to minimise human-to-human physical contact to reduce the spread of the virus (UNESCO, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref1">30</reflink>]). This has meant the suspension of in-person teaching and the adoption of completely online or <emph>Hyflex</emph> mode teaching (where students can choose to join classes either in-person or synchronously online through video-conferencing software (VCS)) (Crawford et al., [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref2">6</reflink>]; Kohnke & Moorhouse, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref3">17</reflink>]). This has created physical as well as relational distances between learners and their teachers.</p> <p>In teacher education, COVID-19 has brought uncertainty and disruptions to various aspects of programmes, courses and roles (Cutri et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref4">7</reflink>]). In our institutions in Hong Kong, professional practicums were moved online, immersion and teaching abroad experiences were ended early (postponed or cancelled). Taught courses were conducted exclusively online from January 2020 to June 2020 (Spring semester) with some courses being offered either online only or in Hyflex mode from September 2020 to December 2020 (Autumn semester). It is within this abruptly uncertain and unprecedented context in which this collaborative self-study of teacher education practices (S-STEP) between us was conceptualised and conducted.</p> <p>The self-study was initiated in response to our concern and challenge of upholding the quality of instruction and care for students in the wake of the forced suspension of in-person teaching. It was our professional judgment that the required move online would greatly compromise the relational aspect of our education practices in the pre-COVID-19 era. As we believe an essential aspect of teacher education is the relationship we foster with and between students, and the sense of care we feel for and from our students, we felt ill-prepared for what relationships and care might look like in online teacher education. Therefore, by exploring our own practices through S-STEP, we wished to address the question 'How can we foster and sustain our commitment to care when conducting teacher education online?' While we wanted to personally benefit from this study by reflecting and improving our practices revolving this central question of care, we also believed it could have implications beyond our partnership (LaBoskey, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref5">18</reflink>]). We concur with Berry and Kitchen ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref6">2</reflink>]) who suggested, 'Self-study has important contributions to make in these times for documenting the experiences and insights that come from radical educational change' (p. 124).</p> <hd id="AN0151406168-3">Context of the Study</hd> <p>As nearly every country, university and individual has been affected in unique ways by the pandemic, it is important to first set the context for our experiences with COVID-19, and how these unprecedented times have led us to explore our teacher education practices.</p> <p>Benjamin had been involved in teacher education for four and half years before the pandemic. All these teaching experiences had been in-person. He had little experience of online teaching beyond using a Learning Management System (LMS) for organising and disseminating course materials. So, in the spring of 2020, he did not feel prepared for online teaching. His university, at the time, required him to conduct lessons synchronously online through VCS. Throughout the full spring semester, Benjamin did not feel satisfied with teaching. He did not sense the same rapport with learners nor the amount of care for his students which he had felt in the past. At the end of the spring semester, it became apparent that the effects on teacher education of COVID-19 would continue with the likelihood of limited or no in-person teaching for the near future. Therefore, he felt a desire to explicitly address this feeling of dissatisfaction with teaching, disconnect and distance from learners and apathy of care he has felt conducting teacher education online.</p> <p>To complicate things further, in the summer of 2020, Benjamin moved from a teaching-track position at the University of Hong Kong to a research-track position at Hong Kong Baptist University. It is in this new institution that the S-STEP was conducted. In the autumn term (August 2020-December 2020), Benjamin was teaching one undergraduate and one postgraduate teacher preparation course. Sessions were held weekly for a thirteen-week semester. Benjamin adopted a 'Virtual Flipped Classroom Approach' for both courses. The Virtual Flipped Classroom Approach involves the provision of a recorded video lesson, including input and tasks, before a synchronous online lesson (Ismail & Abdulla, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref7">13</reflink>]). First, Benjamin uploaded a 30-minute annotated presentation to the LMS. This was followed five days later by a two-hour synchronous online lesson through VCS. Benjamin chose the approach, as he noticed that during synchronous online lessons a large amount of lesson time was taken up by the delivery of content, leaving little time for student discussion and interactions. By providing the content ahead of the lesson, synchronous lesson time could be freed up for discussions and group tasks and consequently reducing the amount of teacher-talk (Ismail & Abdulla, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref8">13</reflink>]). He had been using this approach in the previous semester and had noticed an increase in interaction during the synchronous lessons while also receiving positive comments from students (Moorhouse, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref9">20</reflink>]). From October to December, the undergraduate course was offered in a Hyflex mode. Between 10–20% of students chose to join in-person depending on the number of reported COVID-19 infections in the community at the time.</p> <p>My was new to teacher education. She took up Benjamin's vacant position at the University of Hong Kong in August 2020. Previously, she had been a primary school teacher in Hong Kong for twelve years. The shift from teaching primary students to adult learners was deemed enough of a challenge without the compounded need to experiment with an unfamiliar teaching mode. As the added challenge of teaching online led My to feel uneasy and ill-prepared for the new professional role, partnering with Benjamin in a collaborative self-study quest to pursue this adaptative journey was a practical and attractive option.</p> <p>My was teaching two undergraduate and two postgraduate teacher preparation courses. Like Benjamin, My started out with a Virtual Flipped Classroom Approach with all four courses. The last few undergraduate class sessions resumed in-person for students' presentations and simulated micro-teaching sessions. However, halfway through the semester for the post-graduate courses, My discontinued the flipped approach and resumed to a full weekly two-hour synchronous online session since most of the students, who were full-time classroom teachers, had difficulty finding time to watch the pre-recorded lecture videos before class.</p> <p>During My's induction to the faculty in July 2020, we discussed the challenges of teacher education and the disruptions created by COVID-19. We decided that a collaborative self-study of the challenges and possibilities created by the need to teach online, specifically exploring how our commitment to care might be fostered and sustained when conducting teacher education online, would benefit us both. We wanted to understand how we could maintain a sense of care for students when teaching online, especially, when we have never met them in-person (Rose. & Adams, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref10">26</reflink>]) and everyone is coping with the uncertainties of a pandemic (Allen et al., [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref11">1</reflink>]). This situation while making care perhaps even more important (Shin & Hickey, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref12">28</reflink>]), also made it more challenging. At the same time, we felt the partnership would help us with our own professional transitions into our new roles and institutions. Importantly, our study did not focus on a single class or group of learners but the entirety of our teaching experiences from August 2020 to December 2020.</p> <hd id="AN0151406168-4">Pedagogy of Care</hd> <p>Like us, many teacher educators see care as central to their teaching practices. Before discussing care and how it is manifested in online teacher education, it is important to define what we mean by care. Noddings ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref13">23</reflink>]), in her seminal work, suggested that care is not only important, but essential. Noddings made an important distinction between 'natural care' and 'ethical care.' She suggested that natural caring is our instinctive response to others' needs and when we want to connect with and feel for others. It is dispositional in nature and the more reactive type of the two. However, ethical care stems from a strong intent and moral desire <emph>to</emph> care. Thus, its deliberate and proactive nature better enables the carer to initiate and sustain relationality in the face of challenges. This ethical care involves an active choice that grew out of some conflict or resistance – we believe we should respond with care but experience some resistance to responding with care.</p> <p>Nicol et al. ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref14">22</reflink>]) provided an example of a teacher education context where an educator might face resistance to respond with care. For example, they might feel too tired or unprepared to respond to their pre-service teachers' questions. They know they should respond with care, but there are physical or contextual constraints conflicting with their belief. In these cases, Noddings ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref15">23</reflink>]) suggested that teachers draw on their ethical ideal, their lived experiences of being cared for and caring, to help them 'respond freely because [they] want to do so' (p. 14).</p> <p>More importantly, care is relational rather than individual, meaning that care is reciprocal. Teachers and learners collaboratively cultivate a culture of care within a classroom and care can fail to emerge (Noddings, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref16">23</reflink>]). Therefore, to enact a pedagogy of care, there must be a desire to care from the teacher, a deep understanding of the needs of the cared for, and an acknowledgement of the act of caring provided and a want to be cared for by the learners. In addition, the contextual conditions need to be supportive of cultivating care and although every classroom has the potential to be caring, it is not inevitable. Conditions such as mode of teaching and assessment, class sizes, and length of course can all imped or support care. Teachers need to be aware of these conditions and create opportunities for human connection. This may seem natural to many teacher educators in the in-person environment, but it is likely learned behaviour developed over the time spent as learners and teachers.</p> <hd id="AN0151406168-5">Pedagogy of Care and Online Teaching</hd> <p>The online teaching environment creates a novel context for fostering and sustaining relations and care. For example, teachers and learners do not share the same physical space, interactions are mediated through synchronous (e.g., VCS) and/or asynchronous technologies (e.g., LMS) (Moorhouse et al., [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref17">21</reflink>]), and class time and out of class time become blurred (Rose. & Adams, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref18">26</reflink>]). Although explicit attention to care and relationships is beneficial in any classroom, including in-person classes (Kitchen, [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref19">14</reflink>]), some scholars suggest that it could be more important in the online classroom (Deacon, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref20">8</reflink>]) as the online classroom itself may lack the social environment naturally found in a physical classroom.</p> <p>In order to foster a sense of care online, it is crucial to establish <emph>presence</emph>. Garrison et al. ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref21">12</reflink>]) classify presence into three major types: cognitive; social; and teaching. Cognitive presence is cultivated by the teacher optimizing course content and instructional decisions for online learning. Social presence refers to the degree of <emph>realness</emph>, namely the intensity and authenticity the teacher and the students feel from the online interactions. Teaching presence is contingent on the teacher's ability to create a supportive and caring community for learning.</p> <p>For teachers to establish presence, and subsequently, a culture of care, they need to be able to take explicit and concrete acts to build a relationship with and between learners, with care as a core element of online course design and implementation. Studies that have looked at the factors which make students feel cared for in online settings include frequent prompt feedback, multiple contact opportunities, and positive, personal comments (Sitzman & Leners, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref22">29</reflink>]). Moreover, the relational distance between the teacher and learner can be reduced through engaging in casual chats and sharing of personal stories (Moore, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref23">19</reflink>]). Although actions such as these can help learners feel cared for online, for the teachers, it seems harder for them to feel that <emph>they</emph> are providing care. Rose. and Adams ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref24">26</reflink>]) described a scene which they believe encapsulates the experience of many online teachers – '[s]itting in front of her computer at night, online teaching is experienced as an intensely solitary occupation, devoid of the warmth that comes from caring and being cared for' (p. 11). Therefore, teachers might be trying to perform the act of caring; however, they may not feel they are actually providing care nor sense the effect of their care on their students.</p> <hd id="AN0151406168-6">Previous Self-Study Research on Online Teacher Education</hd> <p>With the increase in online teacher education globally before the pandemic, there has been a subsequent interest from S-STEP scholars. Self-study researchers have begun to explore their experiences as online teacher educators (e.g., Dunn & Rice, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref25">9</reflink>]; Fletcher & Bullock, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref26">11</reflink>]; Rice, [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref27">25</reflink>]). For example, Fletcher and Bullock ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref28">11</reflink>]) found that the physical and temporal distance evident in the online environment affected how they fostered relationships with students and the pedagogies they adopted. Due to the perceived disembodiment of teaching and learning and the sense that they did not feel they needed to fully immerse in the classroom when online, they felt less satisfied when teaching online than in-person. Dunn and Rice ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref29">9</reflink>]) drew on the concept of presence to explore specific online instructional practices related to presence in an online special education teacher education course. Although they identified a number of ways that Dunn had enacted presence, and indeed care, in his teaching, the authors felt there were many complexities evident in online teaching that needed to be addressed. Rabin ([<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref30">24</reflink>]), through exploring her own practices and drawing on her students' feedback on her efforts to implement 'care ethics' over three years of online teacher education, found that 'caring in the online environment highlighted rigidities in the teacher-student hierarchy' (p. 16). Finally, Rice ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref31">25</reflink>]) explored his practices as both an online teacher and an online graduate student. He documented the pressure of his perceived need to promoting deep relationships with students in online courses and subsequently, how to help the student-teachers in his course develop skills to engage relationally with children.</p> <p>The studies discussed above involved teacher education courses primarily delivered through asynchronous online modes during normal times. Yet they show that the online environment requires teacher educators to develop additional skills and adjust their mindset and expectations when engaging with the relational aspects of teaching and learning online. Our S-STEP was conducted during the pandemic, when the shift to online was rapid, and the mode of delivery in flux (Cutri et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref32">7</reflink>]). In addition, we were required to provide synchronous online lessons through VCS which is distinctly different from asynchronous online teaching (Moorhouse et al., [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref33">21</reflink>]). While we have found an array of technological 'solutions' to the delivery of content and knowledge in teacher education in response to the COVID-19 pandemic (Allen et al., [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref34">1</reflink>]), it seems the same is not true of care. Given what is known about the value of a pedagogy of care in teaching and teacher education, the complexity of implementing a pedagogy of care online, and the increased need for care during the COVID-19 pandemic or other crisis, it seems that studies such as this one can make a contribution during these unprecedented times (Berry & Kitchen, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref35">2</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0151406168-7">The Study</hd> <p>The study adopts a collaborative S-STEP methodology. S-STEP 'aims to understand situated human activity from the perspectives of those engaged in it' (Berry & Kitchen, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref36">2</reflink>], p. 124). To help us conceptualise and conduct our S-STEP, we drew on the four methodological considerations of self-study articulated by LaBoskey ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref37">18</reflink>]). Our study was self-initiated and self-focused, aimed to understand our teaching and learning practices, was driven by multiple qualitative methods, and we seek exemplar-based validation with the research community. We approach our study with the intention to share our complex, and sometimes confusing experiences of attempting to enact a pedagogy of care online during the disruptions caused by COVID-19. We believe strongly in the need to share our vulnerabilities and uncertainties so others may resonate with our experience. As outlined earlier, the impetus for our study was the rapid shift to online teaching and the impact this had on Benjamin's satisfaction with his teaching, specifically, the relational aspect of online teaching, and the role of care or absence of care. For My, the great transition from a primary classroom teacher into teacher education along with the abrupt need to teach online during the pandemic presented its own challenges.</p> <p>Scholars have suggested that while S-STEP can be powerful as an individual pursuit, it is the collaboration with colleagues and/or students that can help the researcher to reframe and challenge his/her understandings and as a result really move their practices forward (LaBoskey, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref38">18</reflink>]). This has led critical friendship to be a central feature of S-STEP (Schuck & Russell, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref39">27</reflink>]). According to Schuck and Russell ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref40">27</reflink>]), a critical friend 'acts as a sounding board, asks challenging questions, supports reframing of events, and joins in the professional learning experience' (p. 107). In this study, we both acted as each other's critical friend in creating a critical partnership. We were aware that such a partnership requires humility, honesty and can be risky. Exposing our vulnerabilities 'presents a genuine danger, but it is recognised as part of learning, which also involves unlearning' (Bullough & Pinnegar, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref41">5</reflink>], p. 340).</p> <hd id="AN0151406168-8">Data-gathering and Analysis</hd> <p>Although S-STEP research permits a wide range of methods (LaBoskey, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref42">18</reflink>]), it is important to catalogue our development during the process of our self-study and how we have evolved our understandings and practices in response to it (Bullock & Ritter, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref43">4</reflink>]). This has also meant an evolution of our methods. Given the restrictions inherent with COVID-19, while recognising the value of in-person interactions in collaborative S-STEP (Schuck & Russell, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref44">27</reflink>]), we started our study in early August 2020 by making weekly video calls through VCS and recorded these conversations. The conversations were largely open-ended in the initial stages where we would spend time discussing our experiences of online teaching, and our thoughts about how and what care looks like in the online and in-person classroom. Later, although the calls became less frequent, they became more focused as we tried out different approaches and could draw on the entries in our journals (discussed below) to guide our conversations. Often, we would take personal notes after the meetings which we could then add to our journals to further the interactions. In total, we made ten video calls during the period from August to December 2020.</p> <p>Besides our video calls, we felt we needed additional ways to promptly record our emerging thoughts and ongoing experiences. Therefore, in late August we both began writing our own digital journals using Google Docs. The journals provided a digital workspace for us to make sense of our experiences in addressing the concerns we had about adjusting to online teaching. In the journals, we wrote about our plans, troubles, experiences, thoughts and also uploaded various artifacts such as teaching materials, anonymous students' feedback, and hyperlinks to readings and resources. We initially granted only viewing rights to each other's journals, but later expanded to granting editing access so that we could respond and write comments to each other. This was in response to our evolving needs during the early stages of the self-study where we felt we were reflecting in isolation and in need of some external stimulation to help us reframe or gain new awareness of what we were experiencing and thinking. We found the ability to comment and write questions on each other's journals proved to take our reflection to a new level of reflexivity. We did not have a set timeline to post in the journal. Instead, we posted when something relevant had happened or felt a need to share our thoughts. We commented on each other's journals in a similar fashion. We acknowledge possible critique on the lack of regularity with the journaling. Yet from our experiences, the flexibility and choice seemed to strengthen our agency and commitment to the S-STEP under the stressful conditions.</p> <p>Our comments to each other's journal entries rendered two benefits. First, they created a dialogic space for discourse and a shared learning zone. The comments often stimulated our thoughts and acted as a catalyst for our regular conversations which in turn furthered the reflection in our journal writing. Admittedly, this iterative process resulted in a self-generating and interactive reflective cycle. Secondly, the interactivity fostered a sense of resonance between the us that mimicked a micro-community. The topics of the journal entries were not only about enacting a pedagogy of care, but also about our transition to our new roles and institutions, thoughts and observations about teacher education in general and our reflections on the current COVID-19 developments. Combined, our journals included over 15,000 words. In addition, we utilized an instant messaging platform for quick real-time written chats, to suggest times for meetings and inform each other of added entries to our journals. The journals are our primary source of data in this study with the video call conversations and written chats sent through the instant messaging platform supplementary.</p> <p>Throughout the data collection, we were simultaneously reading and re-reading each other's journal entries in order to comment on them and use them to prepare us for our video calls. This informal process led to the emergence of some repeated themes which related to our conceptualisation of care, our practices of implementing care and also our challenges. This continuous engagement with the data increased our familiarity with it and eased us into the data analysis.</p> <p>In December 2020, after the data collection period, we analysed the data using thematic analysis procedures (Braun & Clarke, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref45">3</reflink>]). In the first stage, both of us read and re-read our and our partner's digital journals independently to familiarise ourselves with them. Initially, each journal was treated as a separate data set. We each coded our own journals before then coding each other's. We generated initial codes for each set and then we compared our analysis. After that, themes and subthemes were identified within each set. At this stage, we combined the two data sets, compared the themes within the two sets and agreed on the final themes. Throughout the process, we compared our analysis to the relevant literature. Finally, extracts were selected, and the report was compiled. Through this process three main themes related to our attempts to implement a pedagogy of care during our online teaching were revealed. These were: beginning courses from a position of care, prioritizing and maintaining care, and ongoing challenges of care. The themes were both chronological and incidental in nature, mapping our discussions, actions, insights, contradictions, experiences and reflections about care during the data collection period.</p> <p>To increase reliability of our analysis and enhance the trustworthiness, we kept in close communication during the data analysis process. While we understand our experiences and context were unique, it is still important for the study to have value for other teacher educators. Therefore, to achieve LaBoskey's ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref46">18</reflink>]) methodological consideration of exemplar-based validation (i.e. others in teacher education are able to validate findings through comparison with their own experiences), we tried to identify moments in our data that we felt could truly capture our experiences, ideas and thoughts during this period of uncertainty and change, with the hope that other teacher educators can relate to them (Feldman, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref47">10</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0151406168-9">Findings</hd> <p>In this section, we present our findings with the hope that they provide an honest and authentic account of our experiences. It is important that we do not simply present a positive account of our experiences. In fact, the process was an uncertain and confusing one which left us feeling vulnerable most of the time. Here, we present our developing understanding of care, our attempts to establish and enact care and how we went about to address our ongoing challenges related to care.</p> <hd id="AN0151406168-10">Conceptualising a Pedagogy of Care for the Online Classroom</hd> <p>Before the semester began, our conversations focused on the sharing of our previous experiences, discussing the differences between the teaching and learning environments between in-person and online lessons, and conceptualising a pedagogy of care for the online classroom. Though we both had experienced online teaching, these experiences had been with familiar students whom we had taught previously. Therefore, we debated the question, 'If we struggled to cultivate care with students we knew, what would this mean for a group of learners whom we haven't met or known in-person?' Specifically, we were disappointed with the kinds of interaction we experienced, everything seemed more teacher-centred and directed. There also seemed to be limited opportunities for causal chats, or private conversations with individual or small groups of students within the lesson time. Even students who were very vocal in the in-person classroom, were largely quiet during online lessons. We were greatly conflicted on what constituted 'best' practice and how care could be conveyed with our online practices.</p> <p>We were both consciously aware that we wanted to enact a pedagogy of care but were unsure of how we might go about doing this in this online. For example, in our conversations and journal entries, we discussed that in the in-person classroom, we use multiple cues, such as body language and facial expressions, to discern mood, temperament, impression, and atmosphere. These cues help to familiarize us with our learners and consider their needs during lessons. However, in the online classroom, these are harder to gauge and require explicit alternative actions. My reflected on these differences in her journal and the impact this had on our readiness for online teaching:</p> <p>In the past, we could rely on that knowledge stock we've accumulated over years of teaching .... [However now] we need to build up a <emph>new</emph> repertoire of signals and physical cues to look for or notice and assign meaning to them. (20 August 2020)</p> <p>This new repertoire of signals and physical cues was something we discussed in our video calls. For example, we talked about the 'digital replacements' available on the VCS, that are designed to substitute in-person non-verbal cues such as, 'non-verbal feedback icons' in the online sessions (Kohnke & Moorhouse, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref48">16</reflink>], p. 2). However, we were also aware that these require students to take extra effort and make an explicit act of clicking on the icon. We noticed that this step itself, as little as it may seem, makes the response less genuine than a spontaneous smile, confused look or reactive laugh that help guide us in the in-person classroom.</p> <p>Seeing the environments as different allowed us to understand how the expression of care and experience of care would likely be different. This helped us adjust our expectations and consider strategies that might aid our pedagogy online. We both believed the care we primarily show in the in-person classroom resembled Noddings ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref49">23</reflink>]) natural care. However, explicitly addressing the issue of care for the online classroom requires us to imagine an ideal ethical care that made explicit what is often implicit. We came to the realisation that anchoring ethical care from the beginning of our online teaching was instrumental in facilitating natural care. Thus, we explicitly sought to create the conditions for care by establishing social and teacher presence in the online setting (Garrison et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref50">12</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0151406168-11">Beginning Courses from a Position of Care</hd> <p>As we were about to begin teaching online, we thought a lot about how we would begin a course from a position of care so that we could show our learners the kind of environment we wish to create and the relationships we hope to foster. We thought about how we did this in the in-person classroom. Benjamin talked about the different strategies he had previously used. These included asking students to make personalised name cards and introducing themselves. He often asked them to write all the different 'names' they go by, such as family relationships, professional titles, nicknames, preferred names and their official names. Students then introduce all their names and the different identities they represent. He would also ask students to make a short video in groups to teach the class something (e.g., a trick or a song). Activities such as these helped to create a sense of community and a more relaxed learning environment. They emphasize constructing shared experiences that we believe are fundamental in cultivating and humanizing relationships. We understood that activities such as these might not be feasible online as they required openness and negotiation which can be challenging with a group of learners separated by distance and unfamiliarity.</p> <p>As a result, we had to develop new strategies for the new mode with an explicit emphasis on humanisation of the online classroom. For example, Benjamin asked students to complete a pre-course online survey with different questions about their personal and professional identities (see Appendix). He learned things about the students he would never have known in-person, such as who likes Gundam toys, who had a law degree and who fostered cats. In the first synchronous online session, he was able to share what he had learned, and make explicit the challenges of online teaching and learning to prepare learners for the realities of the mode (e.g., limited interaction, loneliness, screen fatigue) with some explicit strategies to help address them (see Figure 1).</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 1. Slide presented in the first sessions of Benjamin's courses</p> <p>Similar to Benjamin, My conducted a pre-course survey for her postgraduate courses to inform her course design. In the first sessions, she made clear her expectation and hoped to have students show their faces on camera to help establish that social presence. Another of My's strategies evolved from her first experience with one class to the next. In the first class, she 'told' the students about herself. She found this to be too unidirectional and not 'organic or generative'. So, in the first session of another class of learners, she gave the students a few minutes to write a question about something they would like to know about her. She wrote about this in her journal:</p> <p>[Asking students to ask questions about me] is so much more "organic" than preparing a self-introduction slide about myself because the questions are generated directly from students' interests about me. It was very interesting to see the range of their questions from "Do you have pets?", "What's your favourite movie/hobbies?", "Do you like going to the beach because you have a virtual beach background?", ... "How do you pronounce your name?" to more serious questions like "What advice would you give us as Year 3 students?" [and] "What expectations do you have for us in this class?" ... (1 September 2020)</p> <p>My valued the vast assortment of questions because they embodied the students' genuine interest in what they wanted to know about her and the course. Although these types of warm-up activities took up class time, both of us felt the activities conducted were time well-spent. Benjamin reflected on the first sessions in his journal:</p> <p>Overall, the [warm-up activities] went well – I got feedback from students in one group through an SRS and they were pretty positive about the session content and delivery. (7 September 2020)</p> <p>As the above quote illustrates, we were generally pleased with the way the warm-up activities were received by students and how instrumental they were in helping to establish social presence – a critical first step to enacting care.</p> <p>However, we noticed that even with the warm-up activities, we still did not feel that we knew things about our learners that would help us fully care for them. For example, although we made an effort to ask students to turn on their cameras, not everyone did. We felt conflicted on this issue. On the one hand, we believe in privacy. Yet on the other hand, we see the value in seeing each other as a way to humanize the learning experience. In addition, despite our efforts, the first sessions of all our courses seemed to be more teacher-centred and formal than we would expect in the in-person classroom. There were few opportunities for short casual chats or one-on-one interactions that help establish rapport or reduce hierarchical relationships. It was evident that the synchronous online classroom was a public space which limited private speaking turns. This, we felt, could lead to a degree of superficialness and an unwillingness from students to share their needs or concerns.</p> <hd id="AN0151406168-12">Prioritizing and Maintaining Care</hd> <p>As the semester progressed, we continued to reflect on, think about and discuss the contextual differences between the in-person and online classroom. Though we knew they are different and therefore required different strategies and mindset, we found it useful yet conflicting at times to think about the actions we took to show care in the in-person classroom. It was helpful to think about how we showed care, but it was also a hinderance when we realised that we could not do what was natural to us online. In the in-person classroom, we exhibited care in a number of ways throughout a course from casual chats with students as they enter the classroom or during breaks, providing snacks and drinks, responding honestly and promptly to students' questions and concerns and personalising feedback. However, we found that the online classroom constrains most of these activities. For example, students all enter the session at about the same time, the movement from whole class to group work (via breakout room functions in VCS) is more structured and the opportunities for one-on-one chats and informal interactions in small groups are greatly limited. Consequently, we had to think of explicit ways to address these constraints. To do this, we attempted different strategies:</p> <p>First, we added personal touches to our online class sessions by exposing more of our personal selves. One strategy was to include personal sharings in the online teaching (Moore, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref51">19</reflink>]). For example, Benjamin shared photos of his weekend activities with his children, while My shared her nieces' birthday card writing to illustrate concepts in a writing lecture session. In addition, we situated lessons in the broader real-life context, such as playing Christmas music or talking about the impact of COVID-19 on schoolteachers. We found these strategies started the lessons in a more positive and relaxed manner. Nevertheless, it was sometimes hard to gauge how much to share and for how long without seeing students' real-time responses. While students' positive responses such as 'cute' and 'lovely' suggested they valued the deliberate personalisation, as with other elements of online teaching, the sharings tended to be one way.</p> <p>Second, we established class groups on an instant messaging platform. We explicitly tried to use the platform in an informal way. For example, My would use sympathetic language and Emojis to humanize her messages in an attempt to convey the emotions and temperament of the person behind the text (See Figure 2). While Benjamin sent occasional messages of encouragement, for example, when schools suspended in-person classes due to increased COVID-19 cases. Students responded in an equally informal tone. We felt this created a sense of warmth and personal connection between us to foster openness so students would feel more comfortable and safer to give feedback. As the courses progressed, students seemed to become more engaged on the platform, particularly for My. For example, one of her students posted her workplace problem and received responses from peers. This, we felt, was evidence of a sense of belonging and community amongst the students. However, to maintain the group as a space for interaction did require regular postings from us and our prompt feedback to students' questions posted in the group.</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 2. Example of message sent through an instant messaging platform</p> <p>Third, we explored various methods and technologies to gather students' perceptions, questions and concerns about the course content, activities and assignment tasks. We tried polls on the VCS and the use of student-response systems during and between sessions (See Figure 3). We did this as we believe open communication and seeking out information about our learners' needs are key in helping us to care for them. We found the strategy was useful in collecting students' anonymous understandings, feedback, ideas and opinions about the course as well as providing a voice to students who remained voiceless during our online lessons. However, the anonymity limited follow-up discussions and we often felt we were simply consulting the students rather than engaging them in ongoing dialogues.</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 3. Example of students' anonymous responses gathered through a student-response-system</p> <p>Our strategies to prioritise and maintain care evolved throughout the semester as we gained more experience teaching online, received feedback from students and engaged in our self-study. Nonetheless, despite our attempts to implement a pedagogy of care through the various strategies mentioned above, the process was not easy, nor was the result always what we had hoped for. For every strategy, there seemed to be constraints. For example, instant messages increased the pressure on us to respond instantly. Polls were only completed by a few students and it was hard to gauge if students valued our sharing or saw them as a waste of the lesson time. In the next section, we elaborate on these challenges.</p> <hd id="AN0151406168-13">Ongoing Challenges of Care</hd> <p>Although we had both purposefully started the semester with the aim of cultivating and facilitating care, throughout the semester, we found ourselves facing challenges and contradictions in our experiences of care which filled us with a sense of vulnerability not evident in our in-person practices. Things that seem to come naturally in the in-person classroom, such as learning students' names or noticing if students were absent, seemed harder online. Benjamin wrote about this in his journal:</p> <p>I realised that I'm halfway through my course and I still don't know all my students' names ... I usually know by this point and have strategies, such as name cards to help me remember - I noticed that I have learnt a few of the students' names, those who attend in-person and some of the students who turn their cameras on, but not others. (7 October 2020)</p> <p>This worried Benjamin deeply as he had always felt practices such as learning students' names and following up on students who were absent was integral to care. However, it seemed that even when care was positioned as a core focus of his practice online, he could not remember names nor feel the same sense of concern for students who were absent. This may suggest that he had not built the same bond with students.</p> <p>Furthermore, even with our efforts to engage learners and show our appreciation of their contributions and participation, the majority of interactions were dominated by the teacher with a reduced student voice. For example, after Benjamin shared a personal story or event, he would invite his students to share about themselves with a question prompt (e.g., What did you do at the weekend?). Yet, only a handful of students would share. These tended to be the same students each time, and they preferred to use the written chat rather than sharing orally. Even with consistent coaxing and displays of enthusiasm and interest from Benjamin, it was difficult to get many students to share. Interestingly, while students' feedback suggested they liked these strategies, they did not necessarily feel they needed to share. We regularly thought about and discussed the different elicitation strategies we could deploy to try and get more student responses, but worried about the sensibility of our expectations given the different physical contexts under which students logged into the online classroom. We speculated that some may not be able to respond due to a noisy home environment, the commute on their way home, or fatigue.</p> <p>In addition, we discussed the role of learners online. For the majority of students, we felt a reduction of active participation and a more consumer approach to class attendance was the norm. However, for a few others, this could be the opposite. My found that one student was very active online, contributing orally and engaging regularly through the chat function of the VCS. Yet in the in-person sessions, she appeared rather timid and rarely participated at all.</p> <p>Despite these isolated cases, the concern for student participation gave us both an added layer of vulnerability. We attributed this to the limited information we could collect on our students, which meant we did not always have enough data to know why students were not actively responding. My reflected on this issue in her post-conversation notes in December 2020:</p> <p>The sea of faces on screen are often not too informative to online instruction. At times, I feel that I'm teaching in my own imagined world because I don't have enough information, so I'm doing things based on my assumptions and haphazard perceptions of what's going on. It's true that with in-person, teachers are still imperfectly informed ... but that is even more so with online teaching.</p> <p>As the quote illustrates, the sense of disembodiment caused us to constantly feel unsure of our ability to predict reasons for students' actions or lack of actions. Were the students unsure? Were they waiting for others to respond? Did they not think the question was worth answering? Had they left their computer? On some occasions, we simply did not know if we were teaching a highly engaged group or whether the students were present at all. This compromised reciprocity made it difficult for us to feel student presence.</p> <p>A final challenge we experienced was that of access, and how to balance our professional and private lives. Our efforts to be approachable and available through instant messaging as well as our sense of guilt that somehow our students might feel they are receiving a sub-standard learning experience due to the mode led us to respond to messages promptly, no matter when they were received. My felt her 'worth as a course instructor was linked to her ability to respond promptly to students' requests and give timely feedback to ensure that students can perceive the care [she] was trying to convey.' We struggled with the obligation to be available for our students and the personal need to allow time for ourselves and our families. We concluded that a healthy and sustainable pedagogy of care must include deliberate care for ourselves.</p> <hd id="AN0151406168-14">Discussion</hd> <p>We set out, through this S-STEP, to explore how we can enact a pedagogy of care in our online teacher education practices. The desire to address care and the humanisation of online teacher education originated from our previous experiences and the sense that something was missing – namely the relational aspect which is central to our teaching and the satisfaction from it.</p> <p>Through understanding and analysing our own experiences and practices, we presented our experience in three stages: conceptualising care online, prioritizing and enacting a pedagogy of care in the online context and the challenges evident in our attempt to implement it. Although we have always placed care at the centre of our teaching and understood that the relational aspect of teaching is essential, it was not until the pandemic's involuntary thrust us into the online mode that we explicitly thought about the practices we used to create a culture of care. Of course, we are under no illusion that the in-person classroom is perfect, nor that the issues we faced were unique to the online context. For example, student disengagement is often experienced by teachers in in-person settings. Yet, perhaps because of the familiarity of the in-person classroom, although we see care as central to our practices, we have never systematically studied it in our in-person classrooms. However, presented with the unfamiliar teaching online environment, suddenly the lack of human proximity, made us deliberately think about how we experience care, and how we show care. Acts that are easy and part of the humanisation of teaching in the in-person classroom, like casual chats, had to be reconceptualised into more explicit strategies, such as sharing videos, conducting polls and finding informal communication channels outside of those readily available through our institutions. What felt natural and effortless before required proactive deliberation and mindfulness. Similar questions and challenges have been raised by other S-STEP scholars as they experienced the shift from the in-person to the online classroom (e.g., Dunn & Rice, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref52">9</reflink>]; Fletcher & Bullock, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref53">11</reflink>]) and have been experienced by other teacher educators forced online due to the pandemic (Cutri et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref54">7</reflink>]). This appears to be an obvious area of concern as teacher educators often place care and building relationships as central to their practices and with the online teaching environment feeling so different, it is likely the first thing which teachers notice when they attempt to teach online (Dunn & Rice, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref55">9</reflink>]).</p> <p>For our part, discussing and building awareness of the limitations and potential affordances of online teaching was essential to conceptualising and enacting a pedagogy of care. Our conversations and reflections around the differences between online and in-person teaching allowed us to consider what care might look like online. We found that an online pedagogy of care needs to be premeditatively crafted, via textual correspondences and more deliberate strategies and responses, with lesser degree of spontaneity than in-person teaching. In essence, we need to establish social and teacher presence (Garrison et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref56">12</reflink>]) in order to create a culture of care. Ironically, while we aimed to create a sense of <emph>realness</emph> in order to experience authentic care, the lack of spontaneity made it feel <emph>less</emph> real for us as the ones caring. This left sessions feeling teacher-centred and formal, at least to us. Rabin ([<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref57">24</reflink>]) made a similar observation regarding her online teacher education practices, with her students also finding her teaching 'rigid and teacher-centred' (p. 8). This is something we need to be mindful of as we continue to develop our online practices.</p> <p>Furthermore, we perceived that we did not know our learners as well as we would in the in-person classroom, and this affected how we cared for them and felt care from them. We attributed this to a lack of data about our students. The cues we draw on in the in-person classroom to develop an image of our learners and the class were not as readily available. Additionally, we found the digital replacements such as non-verbal feedback icons still left us with inadequate and incomplete information of our students. Indeed, assessing every aspect of learners online is difficult (Cutri et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref58">7</reflink>]). The lack of knowledge was unsettling and added another level of uncertainty, making us feel vulnerable as we did not always have enough information to plan, respond or engage with our learners. It also meant we could not develop our own sense of social presence as our learners did not always feel fully real to us. In retrospect, however, the use of the group chat on an instant messaging platform was instrumental in helping with this to some degree.</p> <p>We speculate that the sense of uneasiness we felt could also be due to our students conceptualising their 'role' differently online when compared to the in-person classroom. Relationships and care are reciprocal (Noddings, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref59">23</reflink>]). Therefore, when teachers do not get any or limited responses from students, this will likely have an impact on the teachers' perception of whether their care is received or even wanted. In addition, the social norms evident in the in-person classroom do not easily translate online. The public and private space is less clearly delineated online, making the class feel more formal. Indeed, the rich corporeal sense of in-person interaction accessorized by real-time exchanges of facial expressions, physical proximity and emotional connections is replaced online by the sole use of language and requires more effort from learners to manifest their active participation. Yet, it seems, at least from our case, that students were less willing to participate online. The creation of an informal space (i.e. an instant messaging platform) proved to help in this regard, but did not fully address the unidirectionality of interactions and lack of participation from some students. Hence, it is hoped that future studies explore the learners' perspective of care in online courses and how they perceive their role. Not just their perceptions of being cared for, as has been reported by some studies, but more importantly their reciprocal role in creating a culture of care in conjunction with the teacher. A collaborative self-study partnering with students could help address this gap (Kitchen et al., [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref60">15</reflink>]).</p> <p>Finally, we would like to reflect on our collaborative self-study. We understand that by acting as each other's critical friend, we should have been asking challenging questions and pushing each other's practices forward (Schuck & Russell, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref61">27</reflink>]). However, perhaps due to our inexperience in self-study or the context in which the study took place, we found ourselves acting more like each other's 'cheerleader' and 'confidant'. Professionally, at the beginning of the S-STEP, both of us were transitioning into new roles and institutions. We had to navigate new expectations, learn new processes and build relationships with new colleagues. This was made harder due to work-from-home advisories. We often felt isolated with most collegial interactions conducted formally via VCS. Personally, the ongoing global effects of the pandemic, combined with the local prevention measures took a toll on us. Life anxiety increased as what we can do and who we could meet in our private time was limited. Both of us have family abroad and we were in constant correspondence with them to ensure each other's safety. In addition, the uncertainty of when we might see our families in-person again added to the homesickness. For Benjamin, his second child was born in 2020 and has yet to physically meet his grandparents who live in the United Kingdom. For My, her annual visit home has been deferred upon her family's request due to infected cases with some of her close family members. These are clearly minor issues when compared to the issues that many people have faced during the pandemic, and we have been lucky to be in a context where the virus has been kept largely under control, yet, they illustrate the effects of the pandemic on every aspect of our lives.</p> <p>Thus, the reciprocity we received from each other during the S-STEP provided a form of care for <emph>ourselves</emph> to sustain our effort to provide care for our students during this challenging time. As a result, our attempt to navigate our transition and upholding our commitment to implement a pedagogy of care was made easier through the S-STEP. However, we understand that to utilize our partnership as a tool to further improve our practices and foster our professional growth, we need to build on our positive foundations, and continue to develop our ability to critique each other's practices (Schuck & Russell, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref62">27</reflink>]). As with implementation of a pedagogy of care online, our critical partnership is also a work in progress.</p> <hd id="AN0151406168-15">Conclusion</hd> <p>Despite the challenges we experienced, we believe providing a pedagogy of care online is not impossible. Rather, care is manifested in its various new forms in an online environment. Although there are technological solutions for the delivery of content and knowledge (Allen et al., [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref63">1</reflink>]), this may not be as evident for care. Therefore, it is important that we at least <emph>consciously</emph> and <emph>proactively</emph> attempt to implement a pedagogy of care in our course design and instruction. As educators, we need to share our successes and failures in order to continually develop a pedagogy of care for online teacher education.</p> <p>As mentioned in the introduction, every country, university and citizen has been affected by COVID-19 differently. Indeed, our circumstances are quite unique. We are therefore aware that our S-STEP is only reflective of our own lived experiences. However, we hope through sharing our own exploration, others can relate to it, find ways to implement care online, and consider what care might look like in their context. In addition, we both found that our use of collaborative self-study gave us greater confidence to try new things and provided us with a venue to raise difficulties, receive suggestions and gain validation for our ideas (Bullock & Ritter, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref64">4</reflink>]). We believe others can benefit from such partnerships during times of radical change in helping to adjust to new realities.</p> <hd id="AN0151406168-16">Acknowledgements</hd> <p>We would like to thank Amanda Berry. She has given us invaluable support and encouragement throughout this self-study.</p> <hd id="AN0151406168-17">Disclosure Statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).</p> <hd id="AN0151406168-18">Appendix Pre-course Survey About Students' Personal and Professional Identities</hd> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tbody><tr><td>Online survey tool questions 1. What is your official name? 2. What is your preferred name? 3. Tell me a bit about your personal self (i.e., hobbies, languages spoken, interests, talents, character, passions – or anything interesting/special about yourself) 4. Tell me a bit about your professional self (i.e., teaching experiences, study habits, goals – or anything relevant to being/becoming a teacher) 5. What do you hope to learn from this course? 6. Why do you think it is important to study this course as part of your programme? 7. What digital technologies do you like to use in class? (e.g., Mentimeter, Kahoot, Jam board) 8. Do you have any questions for me?</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <ref id="AN0151406168-19"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref11" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Allen, J., Rowan, L., & Singh, P. (2020). Teaching and teacher education in the time of COVID-19. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 48 (3), 233 – 236. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2020.1752051</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref6" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Berry, A., & Kitchen, J. (2020). The role of self-study in times of radical change. Studying Teacher Education, 16 (2), 123 – 126. https://doi.org/10.1080/17425964.2020.1777763</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref45" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2), 77 – 101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref43" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Bullock, S. M., & Ritter, J. K. (2011). Exploring the transition into academia through collaborative self-study. Studying Teacher Education, 7 (2), 171 – 181. https://doi.org/10.1080/17425964.2011.591173</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref41" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Bullough, R. V., Jr., & Pinnegar, S. E. (2004). Thinking about the thinking about self-study: An analysis of eight chapters. In J. J. Loughran, M. L. Hamilton, V. K. LaBoskey, & T. Russell (Eds.), International handbook of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices (pp. 313 – 342). Kluwer Academic.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref2" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Crawford, J., Butler-Henderson, K., Rudolph, J., Malkawi, B., Glowatz, M., Burton, R., Magni, P., & Lam, S. (2020). COVID-19: 20 countries' higher education intra-period digital pedagogy responses. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 3 (1), 1 – 20. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2020.3.1.7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref4" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Cutri, R. M., Mena, J., & Whiting, E. F. (2020). Faculty readiness for online crisis teaching: Transitioning to online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic. European Journal of Teacher Education, 43 (4), 523 – 541. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1815702</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref20" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Deacon, A. (2012). Creating a context of care in the online classroom. Journal of Faculty Development, 26 (1), 5 – 12. https://<ulink href="http://www.learntechlib.org/p/88299/">www.learntechlib.org/p/88299/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref25" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Dunn, M., & Rice, M. (2019). Community, towards dialogue: A self-study of online teacher preparation for special education. Studying Teacher Education, 15 (2), 160 – 178. https://doi.org/10.1080/17425964.2019.1600493</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Feldman, A. (2003). Validity and quality in self-study. Educational Researcher, 32 (3), 26 – 28. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032003026</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fletcher, T., & Bullock, S. M. (2015). Reframing pedagogy while teaching about teaching online: A collaborative self-study. Professional Development in Education, 41 (4), 690 – 706. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2014.938357</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2 (2–3), 87 – 105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ismail, S. S., & Abdulla, S. A. (2019). Virtual flipped classroom: New teaching model to grant the learners knowledge and motivation. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 9 (2), 168 – 183. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.478</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kitchen, J. (2005). Conveying respect and empathy: Becoming a relational teacher educator. Studying Teacher Education, 1 (2), 195 – 207. https://doi.org/10.1080/17425960500288374</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kitchen, J., Berry, M., & Russell, T. (2019). The power of collaboration. Studying Teacher Education, 15 (2), 93 – 97. https://doi.org/10.1080/17425964.2019.1628560</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kohnke, L., & Moorhouse, B. L. (2020). Facilitating synchronous online language learning through Zoom. RELC Journal, 003368822093723. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220937235</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kohnke, L., & Moorhouse, B. L. (2021). Adopting HyFlex in higher education in response to COVID-19: Students' perspectives. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, Advance online publication, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2021.1906641</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> LaBoskey, V. K. (2004). The methodology of self-study and its theoretical underpinnings. In J. J. Loughran, M. L. Hamilton, V. K. LaBoskey, & T. Russell (Eds.), International handbook of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices (pp. 817 – 870). Kluwer Academic.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moore, M. G. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. In D. Keegan (Ed.), Theoretical principles of distance education (pp. 22 – 38). Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moorhouse, B. L. (2020). Adaptations to a face-to-face initial teacher education course 'forced' online due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Education for Teaching, 46 (4), 609 – 611. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2020.1755205</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moorhouse, B. L., Li, Y., & Walsh, S. (2021). E-classroom interactional competencies: Mediating and assisting language learning during synchronous online lessons. RELC Journal, Advance online publication, 003368822098527. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220985274</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nicol, C., Novakowski, J., Ghaleb, F., & Beairsto, S. (2010). Interweaving pedagogies of care and inquiry: Tensions, dilemmas and possibilities. Studying Teacher Education, 6 (3), 235 – 244. https://doi.org/10.1080/17425964.2010.518494</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Noddings, N. (2003). Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral education. University of California Press. Original work published in 1984</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rabin, C. (2021). Care ethics in online teaching. Studying Teacher Education, 17 (1), 38 – 56. https://doi.org/10.1080/17425964.2021.1902801</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rice, B. (2016). Rethinking technological resources in self-study of teacher education practices: The case of taking and teaching online courses. In D. Garbett & A. Ovens (Eds.), Being self-study researchers in a digital world: Future oriented research and pedagogy in teacher education (pp. 33 – 46). Springer.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rose., E., & Adams, C. (2014). "Will I ever connect with the students?": Online teaching and the pedagogy of care. Phenomenology & Practice, 7 (2), 5 – 16. https://doi.org/10.7939/R3CJ8803K</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schuck, S., & Russell, T. (2005). Self-Study, critical friendship, and the complexities of teacher education. Studying Teacher Education, 1 (2), 107 – 121. https://doi.org/10.1080/17425960500288291</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shin, M., & Hickey, K. (2020). Needs a little TLC: Examining college students' emergency remote teaching and learning experiences during COVID-19. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 1 – 14. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2020.1847261</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sitzman, K., & Leners, D. W. (2006). Student perceptions of caring in online baccalaureate education. Nursing Education Perspectives, 27 (5), 254 – 259. https://insights.ovid.com/pubmed?pmid=17036683</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> UNESCO. (2020). Education: From disruption to recovery. UNESCO. https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse/</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Benjamin Luke Moorhouse and My C. Tiet</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref60"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1303294
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Attempting to Implement a Pedagogy of Care during the Disruptions to Teacher Education Caused by COVID-19: A Collaborative Self-Study
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Moorhouse%2C+Benjamin+Luke%22">Moorhouse, Benjamin Luke</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3913-5194">0000-0002-3913-5194</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Tiet%2C+My+C%2E%22">Tiet, My C.</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Studying+Teacher+Education%22"><i>Studying Teacher Education</i></searchLink>. 2021 17(2):208-227.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 20
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2021
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research<br />Tests/Questionnaires
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22COVID-19%22">COVID-19</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Pandemics%22">Pandemics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Ethics%22">Ethics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Caring%22">Caring</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Online+Courses%22">Online Courses</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Educators%22">Teacher Educators</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Education+Programs%22">Teacher Education Programs</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22School+Closing%22">School Closing</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Technology%22">Educational Technology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Videoconferencing%22">Videoconferencing</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Barriers%22">Barriers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Student+Relationship%22">Teacher Student Relationship</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Hong+Kong%22">Hong Kong</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/17425964.2021.1925644
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1742-5964
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This article reports on a collaborative self-study conducted by the authors (two teacher educators) as we attempted to implement a pedagogy of care during the disruptions to teacher education caused by COVID-19. Due to the pandemic, we were required to conduct our teacher education courses synchronously online through video-conferencing software. Although this mode of instruction allowed us to continue teaching despite the restrictions necessitated by COVID-19, the relational aspect of teaching and the role of care seemed to be limited and became an important concern for us. Through self-study, we aimed to improve our online teaching practices by enacting a pedagogy of care during one full semester. We detail our attempts to conceptualise a pedagogy of care for the online classroom, begin our courses from a position of care and prioritize and maintain care throughout the semester. We also present the ongoing challenges we experienced in implementing a pedagogy of care online. While recognising that everyone has been affected by COVID-19 in different ways, we hope through sharing our experiences, others can learn from them and conceptualise and implement a pedagogy of care in their contexts.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2021
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1303294
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1303294
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/17425964.2021.1925644
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 20
        StartPage: 208
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: COVID-19
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Pandemics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Ethics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Caring
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Online Courses
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Educators
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Education Programs
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: School Closing
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Technology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Videoconferencing
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Barriers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Student Relationship
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Hong Kong
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Attempting to Implement a Pedagogy of Care during the Disruptions to Teacher Education Caused by COVID-19: A Collaborative Self-Study
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Moorhouse, Benjamin Luke
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Tiet, My C.
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2021
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1742-5964
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 17
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Studying Teacher Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1