ARTICLE IN PRESS

Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (2005) 799–816

www.elsevier.com/locate/tate

New learning and choices of secondary school teachers

when arranging learning environments$
Adrianus de Kocka,b,, Peter Sleegersc, Marinus J.M. Voetend
a
Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands
b
KPC Group, ‘s-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands
c
University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
d
Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the types of choices secondary teachers make when arranging learning
environments and to determine how these choices change within the context of educational reforms aimed at the
stimulation of New Learning. Interviews held with 15 Dutch secondary teachers showed three aspects of learning
environments to which these choices of teachers are primarily related: (1) the division of teacher and learner roles, (2)
learning goals, and (3) learning materials. The same three aspects emerged when teachers were specifically asked about
arranging learning environments that stimulate New Learning. The interviews showed, however, that teachers have
different conceptions of the instructional choices that will stimulate New Learning. In addition, teachers appeared to be
thinking mostly in terms of learning products and not in terms of learning processes as a learning goal. Furthermore,
teachers showed hardly any attention for arranging cooperative learner roles. For the successful transformation of
education in the direction of New Learning, therefore, more support for teachers is recommended.
r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Learning environments; Secondary education; Learning goals; Teacher and learner roles; New learning; Teacher choices

$ 1. Introduction
This article is a revised version of a paper presented at the
Onderwijs Research Dagen [Educational Research Days] held in
May 2003 in Kerkrade, The Netherlands, under the auspices of Dutch secondary education faces large-scale
the Open University, Heerlen, The Netherlands, and a paper changes aimed at the creation of learning environ-
presented at the Earli Conference held in August 2003 in Padua, ments intended to stimulate so-called ‘New Learn-
Italy. ing.’ The notion of New Learning concerns three
Corresponding author. Department of Educational
Sciences, University of Amsterdam, P.O. Box 94208, 1090 GE
basic principles with regard to learning: (a)
Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Tel.: +31 20 525 1230. learning is a social activity, (b) learning is a
E-mail address: a.dekock@uva.nl (A. de Kock). situated activity, and (c) learning is a constructive

0742-051X/$ - see front matter r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.tate.2005.05.012
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

800 A. de Kock et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (2005) 799–816

activity. The stimulation of new forms of learning at the organization of upper secondary school
which are based on the idea that learning is a subjects in such a manner that learners are
social-interactive, contextual, constructive, self- stimulated to learn increasingly more indepen-
regulated, and reflective process (Simons, 2000) is dently or ‘learn to learn.’ The notion of ‘the
propagated for a variety of reasons (Bolhuis, teacher as coach for the learner’s learning process,’
2003). First, there is an economic argument: the the call for developing metacognitive skills,
capacity for self-directed learning is needed be- and the increased use of cooperative learning
cause, at least in western societies, knowledge methods all reflect growing attention to New
creation has become very important for economic Learning (see Simons, Van der Linden, & Duffy,
development. A second argument is that Dutch 2000).
society is part of a global village in which there is For the innovation called the Study House to
continually a ‘confrontation with other truths’ succeed, teachers’ conceptions of teaching have to
(Bolhuis, 2003, p. 328), which asks for an be transformed/changed from a focus on transmit-
individual’s ability to deal with these confronta- ting content, via a teachers/student interaction
tions. A third argument stresses that the stimula- focus towards a focus on student learning (Boul-
tion of self-directed learning supports the ton-Lewis, Smith, McCrindle, Burnett, & Camp-
development of a democratic society, in which all bell, 2001). Stimulating New Learning will require
citizens have equal possibilities to function well. teachers to make other choices than they are used
Finally, the fourth argument says that the devel- to make in arranging their learning environments
opment of competencies for self-directed learning or, more specifically, the organization of lessons,
is needed to adequately prepare students for higher the learning goals to be achieved and the materials
education. selected to supplement the lessons. Very little is
Furthermore, the stimulation of new forms of known, however, about the concrete choices
learning is also inspired by new psychological and teachers make in arranging learning environments,
educational insights that stress a shift from let alone about the choices specifically directed at
learning environments based on a knowledge- stimulating New Learning. The two research
transmission model towards learning environ- questions to be addressed in the present study
ments based on a knowledge-construction model were therefore as follows. (a) Which choices do
(Lowyck & Ellen, 1993). A concomitant shift in teachers make with regard to the arrangement of
the learning goals is also to occur. In addition to learning environments in general? (b) Which
learning products (i.e., knowledge and skills), the choices do teachers make with regard to the
functions of learning or ‘learning to learn’ are arrangement of learning environments in order
being valued as learning goals. This means that the to stimulate New Learning in particular? An
role of teachers in secondary education should interview study was conducted with 15 Dutch
change from only being a knowledge provider to secondary school teachers, who were involved in
also being a guide of the learning processes taking the Study House reform (initiated in 1998) for
place in students. This shift in learning goals about 2 or 3 years. The purpose of the study was
implies that students must become active and not to evaluate the reform, but to explore the
independent learners. In addition, the new forms choices teachers make in arranging learning
of learning call for an increase of cooperative environments, and to see how these choices relate
learning and thus require new roles for students to the New Learning strived for in the reform
towards each other. efforts.
In Dutch upper secondary education, the men- The choices a teacher makes in arranging the
tioned large-scale changes have been translated in learning environment are part of his or her total
an innovation called the ‘Study House’ which body of practical knowledge. The research litera-
bases on these three learning principles aiming to ture contains very different perspectives on just
create new learning environments that stimulate what constitutes practical knowledge and profes-
New Learning. The Study House reform is aimed sional knowledge (Munby, Russell, & Martin,
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

A. de Kock et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (2005) 799–816 801

2001, Chapter 42). In agreement with Van Driel the link between ‘knowledge-for-practice’ and
and Verloop (1998), and Verloop, Van Driel, and ‘knowledge-in-practice.’
Meijer (2001), we define practical knowledge as the Although arguments may be made that teachers
integrated whole of knowledge, beliefs and values do not have completely ‘free’ choices when
with regard to teaching, that a teacher has actually arranging learning environments due to
accumulated on the basis of his or her personal different social and institutional pressures that, as
and professional experiences. The teacher’s knowl- a consequence, make teachers become de-profes-
edge and beliefs with regard to the arrangement of sionalized (Van Veen, 2003), we do think that
learning environments obviously constitute a part teachers to some degree can and do make choices.
of the teacher’s so-called knowledge base (see, for The Study House reform does not provide ‘blue-
example, Meijer, 1999). Although the notion of prints’ of learning environments but gives the
New Learning and the ideas about new learning teachers a high degree of freedom in making own
environments that would stimulate New Learning arrangements. In an analysis of the dilemmas
are stressed by educational researchers and policy- facing teachers when attempting to put constructi-
makers, the question, still, is whether and how vism into actual practice, Windschitl (2002)
these ideas about New Learning and new learning stresses that most learning environments have a
environments are also ‘alive inside the head and mixed configuration of features, which means that
heart of teachers’ (see Beijaard, 1998). the environments do not consistently reflect the
For the successful transformation of educa- principles of either New Learning or more tradi-
tional practice, considerable congruence between tional learning. Teachers may apply ‘new’ co-
the theoretical and practical knowledge of teachers operative learning methods, for example, but
is needed. As Waeytens, Lens, and Vandenberghe within a traditional behavioural context in which
(2002) recently stressed in their study of concep- they fully control what is learned and how. These
tions of ‘learning to learn,’ a clear translation of mixed configurations reflect the individual choices
the concept of ‘learning to learn’ into the actual teachers can make when arranging learning
words used by teachers is needed. Since the environments. In this study, those choices are
implicit professional knowledge of teachers often examined, leading to specific arrangements of
serves as a filter for the interpretation of the learning environments; choices, which are mostly
rhetoric associated with top-down educational not based on rational decision processes but
innovations (Pajares, 1992; Putnam & Borko, guided by implicit considerations that are part of
1997; Verloop et al., 2001), reform efforts should the practical knowledge base of teachers.
match the knowledge and beliefs of teachers to ‘Learning environment’ refers to all aspects of
some extent and thereby allow them to also ‘own’ the learner’s environment that possibly promote
the process of change to some extent (Datnow & learning, for example, learning goals and materials
Castellano, 2000). Teacher learning and thus (Joyce & Weil, 1996). Each aspect of the environ-
change is based not only on formal knowledge ment may be divided into a number of categories.
and theory or ‘knowledge-for-practice’ but also on With respect to learning goals, for example,
experiential knowledge or ‘knowledge-in-practice’ cognitive learning skills may be distinguished from
(Vandenberghe & Kelchtermans, 2002). In other affective learning skills. To analyse choices tea-
words, the knowledge-for-practice regarding the chers make in arranging learning environments, we
arrangement of learning environments to stimulate used a classification scheme of learning environ-
New Learning must somehow link up with the ments that includes elements of New Learning (De
actual knowledge-in-practice of teachers or what Kock, Sleegers, & Voeten, 2004). In Fig. 1, an
they, themselves, consider important for the overview of the structure of the classification
arrangement of learning environments to stimulate scheme is presented. The basic aspects used to
New Learning. Research on teachers’ choices may describe learning environments are: (a) the learn-
shed more light on the ‘knowledge-in-practice’ ing goals, (b) the division of teacher and learner
with regard to learning environments, as well as roles, and (c) the roles of the learners with respect
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

802 A. de Kock et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (2005) 799–816

I Learning goals
Learning products
Knowledge of learning content

Knowledge of learning process

Attitude towards learning content

Attitude towards learning process

Cognitive learning skills

Affective learning skills

Social learning skills

Transfer skills

Learning process
Preparatory learning functions Cognitive Affective Metacognitive

Executive learning functions Cognitive Affective Metacognitive

Closing learning functions Cognitive Affective Metacognitive

II Division of teacher and learner roles

Behavioral model Developmental model Apprenticeship model

III Learner roles with respect to each other

Competitive Individual Cooperative

Fig. 1. Basis for the classification scheme of learning environments.

to each other. With regard to the learning goals, a reflects an orientation towards New Learning,
distinction is made between goals pertaining to which is the core of the Study House reform.
mainly the products of learning (e.g., mastery of With regard to the division of teacher and
specific content) and goals pertaining to mainly the learner roles, a distinction is made between a
process of learning (e.g., various metacognitive behavioural, developmental and apprenticeship
learning functions). Specific knowledge, skills, and model. Within a behavioural model, the teacher
attitudes refer to the product of learning. The tells the learner what and how things should
integrated use of specific sets of knowledge and be learned and the learner more or less follows
learning skills, i.e. the execution of learning these instructions. In a developmental model, the
functions (see Simons, 2000), such as ‘orientation learner regulates his or her own learning with
towards learning goals’, ‘maintaining motivation the teacher serving as a coach. In an apprentice-
and self-confidence’ or ‘thinking about future use ship model, the learner and the teacher participate
and transfer’ refers to the process of learning as a in a shared world with respect to a particular
learning goal in itself. Attention to process goals subject; the teacher has considerable expertise
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

A. de Kock et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (2005) 799–816 803

within this world and tries to model his expertise. both levels, and the teachers came from eight
Teachers with an orientation towards New Learn- different schools.
ing will tend to adhere to the developmental or
the apprenticeship models; these models are
2.2. Materials and procedure
advocated within the context of the Study House
reform.
The 15 teachers were sent a letter with informa-
The learner roles with respect to each other are
tion regarding the aims of the study and the
distinguished into competitive, individual and
interview procedure. Before the teachers were
cooperative roles. In a competitive learning situa-
actually interviewed, the interview procedure and
tion, a learner’s learning is clearly beneficial to
guidelines were pilot-tested with a single teacher,
himself and not to his peers; learners actually
and a few modifications were subsequently made.
compete with each other. In an individual learning
The 15 teachers were next interviewed individually
situation, learners’ learning is clearly beneficial to
with help of an interview guide (see Appendix A).
themselves alone, and otherwise has no connec-
Prior to the interviews, the researcher observed
tions to the learning of others. In a cooperative
one lesson for each teacher. This observation
learning environment, learners’ learning in one
provided concrete reference points to mention
way or another benefits each member of the group
during the interview and also allowed the re-
in which they participate; the learners cooperate as
searcher to ask the teacher why he or she acted in a
peers (see Johnson & Johnson, 1999). The strive
particular manner at a particular point in time,
for New Learning is characterized by attention for
which could reveal very relevant practical knowl-
cooperative learning, and therefore, learning en-
edge. The interview length varied from 25 to
vironments within the context of the Study House
50 minutes. The interviews were audiorecorded
reform are directed to the stimulation of coopera-
and transcribed.
tive learner roles.
The classification scheme will be used to
interpret the results of the present interview study 2.3. Data analysis
and reflect upon the current theoretical assump-
tions regarding the arrangement of learning For each teacher, the interview transcript was
environments to promote New Learning. divided into utterances defined as everything a
teacher says between one question posed by the
researcher and the next. Complete answers were
2. Method chosen as the unit of analysis because considerable
importance was attached to the context in which
2.1. Participants the teachers made their remarks. The analysis
of the utterances was conducted in four phases in
In order to contact a variety of secondary school order to continually monitor the reliability and
teachers, the researcher corresponded with several validity of the results. During each of the four
secondary schools varying in size and location (i.e., phases, with the exception of the third phase, at
urban versus rural) and then contacted teachers least two people were involved in the analysis.
from very different subjects (e.g., English lan- During the whole analysis, four different persons
guage, Economics, Biology). This resulted in the were involved. Researchers 1 and 2 were involved
recruitment of 15 secondary teachers for the in the first and second phases, and researchers
interview study: 12 males and three females. In 1, 3 and 4 were involved in the fourth phase.
The Netherlands, the upper grades of secondary Finally, the results of the fourth phase in the
school contain only students pursuing a Higher analysis of the data were communicated to
General Secondary Education (Havo, additional 2 the research participants with the request to check
years) or a Pre-university Education (VWO, the results for accuracy. None of the participants
additional 3 years). Most of the 15 teachers taught requested any changes or additions.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

804 A. de Kock et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (2005) 799–816

During the first phase of the analysis, an initial aspect of the learning environment. Given that the
list of the different aspects of the learning teachers did not speak of abstract aspects of the
environment referred to by the teachers and the learning environment, intersubjective agreement
various categories used in connection with the between the researchers with regard to the label-
different aspects of the learning environment was ling of a group of categories as indeed representing
constructed in the following manner. The teachers a critical aspect of the learning environment was
spoke in a very concrete manner, which means in therefore required. Those elements of the learning
terms of categories and not aspects of the learning environment which the researchers assumed to not
environment. For example, they spoke of the play a role in the promotion of learner’s learning,
importance of ‘striving for social skills’ (i.e., at the such as the colour of the classroom ceiling, were
category level) but not of ‘the importance of not considered as a critical aspect of the learning
learning goals for the arrangement of the learning environment. In addition, those elements of the
environment’ (i.e., at the aspect level). For this learning environment which appear to promote
reason, researcher 1 first examined the 15 inter- learner’s learning but are not, in the shared
views to identify different categories. Thereafter, opinion of the researchers, explicitly intended to
those categories that appeared to refer to a do this by the teacher were also not considered a
particular aspect were grouped together and the critical aspect of the learning environment; these
different groups were assigned a label to indicate elements fall beyond the direct influence of the
the aspect of the learning environment it repre- teacher and are therefore open to minimal
sents. Researchers 1 and 2 next discussed the modification at best. The teachers were found to
results of this initial global analysis of the speak of several such elements, including the
transcripts, which led to the formulation of some number of lesson hours for the subject, the
additional aspects of the learning environment and textbook—which was often not selected by the
the modification of some of the aspects initially teacher him/herself or the time of day for a
proposed. particular activity (e.g., morning, late afternoon).
During the second phase of the analysis, the For making these decisions, the work of De Kock
initial list of categories and aspects was further et al. (2004) was used.
refined as indicated below to create a coding In the third phase of the data analysis,
scheme for the utterances. For this purpose, researcher 1 coded all of the utterances from all
researchers 1 and 2 independently coded a random of the interviews using the final version of the
sample of about 50 utterances from the interviews coding scheme. A code was assigned to an
and then compared their codings. Any coding utterance not only when the teacher described a
discrepancies were discussed and, when deemed particular category but also when the category was
necessary, the coding scheme was modified accord- simply mentioned.
ingly. The improved version of the coding scheme The fourth and final phase of the data analysis
was then taken as the starting point for a new consisted of (a) the creation of a profile for each
round of independent coding and subsequent teacher in terms of the aspects of the learning
comparison. This strategy was followed until, environment and the categories mentioned and (b)
after three rounds, a clearly reliable version of an overarching analysis of all the interviews. Both
the coding scheme was attained and thereby analyses were conducted using a checklist matrix
intersubjective consensus on the classification of (see Miles & Huberman, 1994), which was derived
the categories and aspects of the learning environ- from the coding scheme. Researcher 1 and
ment referred to by the teachers interviewed here. researchers 3 and 4 cooperated on the conduct of
It should be noted that the first criterion for these analyses. That is, several of the steps in this
labelling a group of categories as indicating a phase of the analysis were undertaken by research-
particular aspect of the learning environment was er 1 and then discussed with researchers 3 and 4.
the teacher him/herself considering the category This fourth phase of the data analysis produced an
(or group of categories) as referring to a critical overview of the choices teachers make with regard
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

A. de Kock et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (2005) 799–816 805

to various aspects of the learning environment and most cases, to be the result of interview questions 2
related categories. This stepwise method of inter- and 4 (see Appendix A). Out of a grand total of
view analysis is basically comparable to that 336 utterances, 152 met at least one of the
applied in the study of teachers’ conceptions of aforementioned criteria. For these 152 utterances,
‘learning to learn’ of Waeytens et al. (2002). a new summary was made, which is also shown in
Table 1. To discuss the substantive distinctions
teachers make between new and ‘more traditional’
3. Results learning environments, the classification scheme of
learning environments (see Fig. 1) was used. The
The interview data provide a clear picture of proportions of the whole set of utterances are
which aspects of the learning environment play a written as ‘10% in general,’ whereas proportions
role in the choices teachers make in arranging of New Learning utterances are written as ‘10% in
learning environments. The picture is summarized NL utterances.’
in Table 1, where a descriptive list of the 14 aspects Table 1 shows that the most frequently men-
of learning environments mentioned is presented tioned aspects were: (1) division of teacher and
together with an overview of the quantitative learner roles (46% in general and 57% in NL
results. In order to examine the choices the utterances); (2) learning goals (38% in general and
teachers made to arrange learning environments 41% in NL); and (3) learning materials used (26%
that—in their opinion—stimulate New Learning, in general and 30% in NL utterances). The three
those utterances in which the teachers did one of aspects of the learning environment mentioned the
the following were selected: (a) explicitly spoke of least were: (14) arrangement/setting of tables/
‘new or modern learning environments’ or (b) pupils in classroom, (10) role/function of assess-
compared the current classroom situation with the ments and (13) atmosphere.
situation prior to the adoption of the Study House In the following, we first report the teachers’
reform. The relevant utterances were found, in comments on the three most frequently mentioned

Table 1
Fourteen aspects of learning environments mentioned by the 15 teachers

Aspects mentioned Total set of utterancesa NL utterancesa

n % N n % N

1—Division of teacher and learner roles 155 46 15 86 57 15

2—Learning goals 127 38 15 63 41 13
3—Learning materials used 89 26 15 46 30 14
4—Role of the learning materials used 43 13 15 23 15 13
5—Tasks, activities, assignments which pupils have to complete 79 24 15 38 25 14
6—Phasing of instruction 29 9 13 13 9 9
7—Physical teaching-learning situation 26 8 10 15 10 8
8—Learner roles toward each other 22 7 10 9 6 5
9—Form of assessment 23 7 13 10 7 7
10—Role/function of assessments 4 1 4 3 2 2
11—Interpersonal teacher behavior 20 6 10 4 3 4
12—Characteristic of the learning content 15 4 7 6 4 3
13—Atmosphere 10 3 4 4 3 2
14—Arrangement/setting of tables/pupils in classroom 3 1 2 1 1 1
a
n: Total number of utterances (first n) and number of NL utterances (second n) in which teachers talk about the aspect; %:
proportion of the total of 336 utterances (first %) and proportion of the total of 152 NL utterances (second %); N: number of teachers
from whom these utterances are.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

806 A. de Kock et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (2005) 799–816

aspects (based on the responses to interview question, namely: ‘Which choices do you consider
questions 1–4, see Appendix A). For this purpose, most important for determination of the form and
Table 2 shows the different categories mentioned content of a lesson?’
by the 15 teachers within these three aspects
together with an overview of the quantitative 3.1. Division of teacher and learner roles
results. Furthermore, Table 2 shows for each
category to what extent teachers relate it to new With regard to the division of teacher and
learning environments or to ‘more traditional’ learner roles, Table 2 shows that the teacher
learning environments. Next, we pay specific utterances were classified into four categories. The
attention to the teachers’ responses to the fifth most frequently occurring categories were category

Table 2
Categories mentioned by the 15 teachers within the three frequently mentioned aspects

Categories per aspect Total set of utterancesa New Learning utterancesa,b

n % N n % N NL T

Aspect 1. Division of teacher and learner roles

a. Teacher steers learning process—learner executes learning process 74 48 15 37 43 14 22 15
b. Learner and teacher as partners in learning 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 0
c. Learner steers learning process—teacher coaches/guides 104 67 15 66 77 15 66 0
d. Teacher is model—learner imitates 5 3 4
Aspect 2. Learning goals
a. Knowledge of learning content 46 36 13 17 27 7 11 6
b. Knowledge of learning process 8 6 6 6 10 4 6 0
c. Attitude toward learning content 8 6 3 2 3 2 2 0
d. Attitude toward learning process 14 11 10 8 13 6 8 0
e. Cognitive learning skill 53 42 15 29 46 13 29 0
f. Affective learning skill 5 4 4 3 5 2 3 0
g. Metacognitive learning skill 12 9 7 9 14 7 9 0
h. Transfer skill 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 0
i. Social skill 13 10 8 3 5 2 3 0
j. Practical skill 20 16 8 10 16 6 9 1
Aspect 3. Learning materials used
a. Book 34 38 14 12 26 7 8 3c
b. Answer book 15 17 9 9 20 6 8 1
c. Study planner 32 36 10 23 50 11 23 0
d. Examination book 2 2 1
e. Reference book 2 2 2
f. ICT 5 6 5 4 9 4 4 0
g. Video 8 9 3 1 2 1 1 0
h. Reading text 7 8 3 2 4 2 0 2
i. Listening text 7 8 2 3 7 2 3 0
j. Authentic material 2 2 1 2 4 1 2 0
k. Calculator 2 2 1 1 2 1 0 1
a
n: Total number of utterances (first n) and number of New Learning utterances (second n) in which teachers mention the category;
%: proportion of the total number of utterances in which teachers talk about the aspect to which the category refers (first %) and
proportion of the number of New Learning utterances in which teachers talk about the aspect to which the category refers (second %);
N: number of teachers from whom these utterances are.
b
NL: Number of utterances in which a teacher relates the category to learning environments that stimulate New Learning; T:
number of utterances in which a teacher relates the category to ‘more traditional’ learning environments.
c
In one of these 12 New Learning utterances the category ‘book’ was related to both learning environments that stimulate New
Learning and ‘more traditional’ learning environments.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

A. de Kock et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (2005) 799–816 807

(a) teacher steers learning process—learner exe- of roles. The teacher and learners cooperatively
cutes learning process (48% in general) and steer the learning process and may both initiate
category (c) learner steers learning process— reflection on a learner’s progress, for example.
teacher coaches/guides (67% in general). The
The intention is that they work independently
categories (a) and (c) appear to represent two
and, in my view, there should something more
extremes for this aspect of the learning environ-
to go with learning independently: reflection on
ment whereas category (b) learner and teacher as
what they have learned and which of this has
partners in learning represents a form of ‘shared
been beared in mind and how they can solve
steering’ and may be viewed as falling somewhere
problems. These are things I again discuss with
in between the two extremes.
them at the end of a section or chapter, and we
In terms of Fig. 1, the category (a) teacher steers
do this with everyone at once. Thus, it is in fact
learning process—learner executes learning repre-
the tail, it’s the reflection at the end and, at this
sents a behavioural model for the division of
point, I should bring them at a level that they
teacher and learner roles. The teacher tells the
can do these things on their own, I also try to
learner what and how things should be learned and
stimulate this from time to time by asking them
the learner more or less follows these instructions.
to write a little report: close your book and
For example, students work on assignments and
write down what you learned from the last
have to turn these in to the teacher for checking
section, what was it about, what you should
from time to time.
know, etc., and then I have a little chat with
They are working on the writing component them afterwards. (14, 100501)
and a test is coming up at the end of the year,
Category (d) teacher is model—learner imitates
they just have to work independently, what they
reflects the apprenticeship model for the division
must do is, they must turn things in to me, I
of teacher and learner roles (see Fig. 1). According
check the things and briefly discuss their work
to this model, the learner and the teacher
with them and that’s it. (11, 220501)
participate in a shared world with respect to a
Category (c) learner steers learning process— particular subject. Teachers have considerable
teacher coaches/guides represents a developmental expertise within this world and try to model their
model of the division of teacher and learner roles. expertise. One teacher spoke of ‘modelling’ a
In this model, the learner regulates his or her own particular attitude towards the subject he teaches
learning with the teacher serving as a coach. In in the following manner.
contrast to the behavioural model, the initiative
I think my attitude towards the group is very
for carrying out much or at least many parts of the
important, in which my choice is that I try to
learning process lies with the learner him/herself.
adopt an open position so that I stimulate them
Now there is a student in my class who is to attend, practice, invite them to learn, also
preferably not disturbed, she has an attitude of show them that I myself really like to do this,
‘just let me work on the examination book,’ and that I am enthusiastic about my subject, (2,
when she hits upon something she is asking a lot 270401)
of questions, you know, in that case it is all
Category (c) learner steers learning process—
initiated by herself, and that’s the way I prefer.
teacher coaches/guides, which represents a devel-
(13, 240401).
opmental model of the division of teacher and
Category (b) learner and teacher as partners in learner roles, occurred only in connection with
learning can be seen to lie somewhere between the new learning environments. All 66 NL utterances
behavioural and developmental models of the assigned to this category explicitly linked the
division of teacher and learner roles. A ‘shared learners’ steering of their own learning process
responsibility’ model, which is not distinguished in with the change to new learning environments.
Fig. 1, appears to underlie this particular division This is illustrated by the following description
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

808 A. de Kock et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (2005) 799–816

from a French-language teacher of how students Another teacher, however, emphasizes the need
work independently on listening to texts and on to still steer the learning process even after the
their speech skills: introduction of the Study House reform,

y I just notice that the better students have You first have to transfer a piece of content
already decided to work on French I during one and, thereafter, they have to apply it them-
of those three hours, especially those guys selves. To let them go completely, in the sense of
sideways, they have independently taken this ‘those and those pages,’ that’s possible but I
on. I sometimes see them work on French II know the effectiveness is much lower in that
three times a week. They have a discman with case. (8, 200401)
them to do the listening exercises. They some-
The following quote illustrates that some
times go to another classroom to work together
teachers also question the capability of students
on a speech exercise, that is that own direction
to steer the learning process themselves and
and, in the old method, I would just say: We are
therefore connect category (a) with the idea of
now going to take that text, read it and answer
new learning environments.
the questions. (1, 140501a)
You have to teach them a lot about planning,
Category (a) teacher steers learning process— that’s the biggest problem. In fact, learning is
learner executes learning process, which represents the biggest problem; working independently,
a behavioural model of the division of teacher and moewa, most of them can manage that. But also
learner roles, was sometimes mentioned explicitly planning time independently while learning,
in connection with ‘traditional’ learning environ- especially learning independently, is thus most
ments (15 of the 37 NL utterances for this difficult and, as a consequence, you have to
category) and sometimes mentioned specifically steer them in this respect, then you can hand
in connection with ‘new learning’ environments out a study planner. (3, 300501a)
(22 of the 37 NL utterances for this category). One
teacher explicitly connects his demonstration of
3.2. Learning goals
exercises on the chalkboard to a traditional
manner of teaching and the need to steer the
Table 2 shows the teachers to speak of 10 types
learning process.
of learning goals largely corresponding with the
learning products distinguished in Fig. 1 (with the
As with population genetics, then you are more
exception of category (j) practical skill). The
the math teacher; or in the case of the previous
teachers mentioned category (a) knowledge of
chapter on energy and metabolism, then I am
learning content in 36% of their utterances. This
more the physics teacher. I do notice these
was often done with respect to ‘theories,’ as
differences. In the role of the math teacher or
illustrated by the following statement.
physics teacher, I teach in a more old-fashioned
way; I demonstrate sums, then, on the chalk- In this chapter, students were first offered the
board, for example, something that I almost theory and then went through the topic of
never do in the case of regular biology lessons compound types between molecules and within
and labs. Then I let them think for themselves. molecules. I partly let them do this themselves
The students find this very difficult. It makes no and I partly explained it to them, it is something
sense to let them work independently for two or very complicated, so students generally regard it
three lessons, only to come to the conclusion in as complicated and, as a consequence, I did a
the end that everyone has come to a standstill. lot of explaining. (16, 010601)
Then you had better lead them, relatively
protected, by the nose, lead them around the Category (e) cognitive learning skill also oc-
big pitfalls. (5, 170501) curred frequently, namely in 42% of the teachers’
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

A. de Kock et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (2005) 799–816 809

utterances. An example is that students should may be more flexible and may depend more on the
learn how to search for information: individual preferences of the learners.
Of course you can opt for four smaller practical
y you can then choose for a very structured
assignments. The reason why I didn’t do this is
assignment. You can give them all the same
because I wanted them to use the entire analysis
assignment, include everything you want in the
scheme this time; for this purpose, a more
assignment or, in contrast, you can give them
complex assignment is needed or you have to
their own choice. The reason that I do the latter
provide them with information. However, one
is that I think it is much more fun, first. When
of the most important components is that they
there are presentations, it is not fun to
also learn to search for information, so I want
continually hear the same topic. So it also gives
them to have to search for information on their
extra information about a couple of actual
own. (17, 110501)
themes,. Thereafter, the choice of topic has to
Furthermore, without exception, category (e) meet some criteria. Students are also very
cognitive learning skill was mentioned as typical of motivated; they are almost never allowed to
new learning environments. All 29 NL utterances choose something themselves so that’s the
assigned to this category linked the attention for reason, the motivation, the fact that they are
skill development needed for learning with the offered an extra piece of information regarding
arrangement of learning environments directed an actual problem, that’s what they take with
towards New Learning. In the following state- them as a result. (11, 110501)
ment, for example, the teacher stresses that,
relative to his teaching prior to the implementation All other categories of learning goals mentioned
of the Study House reform, he now stimulates by teachers were also explicitly connected to new
students more to identify the reasons for problems learning environments, with the exception of
arising during the learning process. the category (j) practical skill which was mentioned
once in connection with a ‘traditional’ learning
I continually try to ask questions like ‘why is
environment. The interviewed teachers, however,
that, how is that possible and what reasons
talked only about the products of learning—
could that have.’ that’s what I consider very
specific knowledge, skills, and attitudes—and not
important are questions about your opinion on
about the process of learning, i.e. the execution of
something. (7, 010601)
learning functions (see Simons, 2000).
Category (a) knowledge of learning content was
sometimes connected to ‘traditional’ learning
environments and sometimes to new learning 3.3. Learning materials
environments. One teacher pointed out, for
example, that the acquisition of knowledge is a As may be seen from Table 2, 11 categories of
central feature of ‘traditional’ learning environ- aspect (3) learning materials were distinguished in
ments. the teacher utterances. The categories (a) book
(38% in general) and (c) study planner (36% in
I think that the teacher in years past was only
general) were the most frequent ones. An example
lecturing, which was often a situation in which
of category (a) is the mention of the grammar
there was a text which was often then at the
book and dictionary in the following:
service of the grammatical topic of the lesson.
(9, 180501)
I don’t give everyone an answer directly. When
Another teacher, however, stresses that knowl- I realize that it is something they can recall
edge of learning content remains important in new from their own memory or find in the grammar
learning environments aimed at stimulating New chapter or a dictionary, then I only give them a
Learning but then suggests that the actual content little push in that direction. (9, 140501a)
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

810 A. de Kock et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (2005) 799–816

An example of category (c) is the mention of a In the past, I was criticized considerably for
study planner as an instrument to help students things not being clear or only providing the
structure their independent work: correct answers for homework assignments, for
example. I now assign more assignments than
In history lessons, I often let pupils work on a before. I thought this would make my students
quire independently; that is, this kind of booklet lazy, but now I am sure that they will take a
[interviewee shows them]. And the intention is: peek at the answer book but that this also helps
take the booklet, take your study planner and them comprehend the assignment. And that’s
there you go, you can start with it. And what is exactly why I give easier the working outs to
good is to see that they begin and know exactly them (4, 240401)
what to do and in case of any vagueness or
when they don’t understand the learning With regard to category (a) book, the scenario
matter, they can consult me. (30, 200401). appears to be split. On the one hand, this type of
material is classically linked to ‘traditional’ learn-
Within aspect (3) learning materials used, a ing environments. On the other hand, it is
couple of categories are mentioned scarcely. connected to new learning environments. Teachers
Partly, teachers connect these categories to new often connect such learning materials as books to
learning environments: (f) ICT, (g), video, (i) straightforward knowledge acquisition which is
listening text, and (j) authentic material. Partly, characteristic of traditional learning methods. In
they connect them to ‘more traditional’ learning new learning environments, books are used in a
environments, which is the case with category (h) somewhat different manner, as one teacher ex-
listening text and (k) calculator. plains:
Category (c) study planner was always connected
To let students learn, thus, means that you
to the mention of new learning environments (see
don’t say ‘this is the book, open it to page 102
Table 2). Study planners are learning materials
and I will read you the text.’ No, you give them
introduced during the Study House reform. One
a book and then say: ‘This is page 102, good
teacher describes the impact of study planners on
lucky’ And then there is an assignment which
his instructional practices in the following manner.
says: read the text, check each other’s pronun-
ciation, etc. (10, 270401)
The essential difference lies in the fact that a
studenty Look, in those days, I decided per
lesson what we were going to work on; nobody 3.4. Additional aspects of the learning environment
was able to work ahead; nobody could fall mentioned
behind. Per lesson, I had in my head what we
were going to do. And now, there is a study The fifth interview question (see Appendix A)
planner and, as a consequence, they are able explicitly asked teachers which aspect of learning
toyalmost everyone is working at a different environments they considered most important.
stage. (9, 220501) Teachers’ comments in reaction to this specific
question point at the importance of two aspects
With one exception, also category (b) answer that are not discussed so far. The 15 teachers
book (which also refers to working outs of assign- mentioned three aspects of learning environments
ments, not in the form of a book) is connected with as most important. Aspect (1) division of teacher
new learning environments. Eight of nine NL and learner roles was mentioned the most—a total
utterances assigned to this category reflect the of 7 times—which is largely in keeping with the
increased use of answer books in new learning aforementioned findings. The following two state-
environments. One teacher clearly states that he ments illustrate the importance of this aspect of
assigns assignments more easily now than before the learning environment in the eyes of the
the Study House reform. teachers.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

A. de Kock et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (2005) 799–816 811

In the past, we had the idea of ‘we have stressed. Five times, teachers point at this aspect,
something to do together.’ But then the roles labelled as (11) interpersonal teacher behaviour as
were very fixed, and the role of the learner was: the most important aspect of the learning environ-
listen and do your sums, etc. And the role of the ment when explicitly asked about this.
teachers was: tell them how to do things. (3,
I make a specific choice for the role as teacher,
010601)
also in my role as a teacher I am, on the one
I think it has something to do with more hand, the teacher who regulates the boundaries
initiative on the part of the students, on the —the boundaries for the students to work
basis of questions and problems formulated by within; on the other hand, I relate to them as
the teacher. I think that is the most important an equalyin the manner in which you talk
and there are a couple of ways to achieve it. The to students or discuss things or make a joke.
core aim, in my opinion, is greater initiative on (1, 110501)
the part of the learners, to stimulate that more
and more, and to achieve that more and more. Aspect (11) interpersonal teacher behaviour
(1, 010601) consists of three categories: (a) influence, (b)
proximity and (c) enthusiasm. The categories (a)
In addition, aspects (13) atmosphere and (11) influence and (b) proximity appear to reflect the
interpersonal teacher behaviour were mentioned two dimensions proposed in the Model for
when the teachers were explicitly asked which Interpersonal Teacher Behaviour put forth by
aspect of learning environments they considered Wubbels, Créton, and Hooymayers (1985). More
most important. Aspect (13) atmosphere was only specifically, the influence category represents the
mentioned once as most important and was one of degree to which a teacher controls the commu-
the aspects mentioned least in the interviews (3% nication within the classroom and just how often;
in general and 3% in NL utterances). Two the proximity category represents the degree to
statements from the teacher who mentioned atmo- which a teacher cooperates with the students.
sphere as the most important aspect of the learning Aspects (11) and (13) thus reflect critical elements
environment illustrate the point. of the learning environment or actual prerequisites
I made the choice. They have a whole-class for learning. An adequate atmosphere and good
tempo. You try to keep everyone in the boat; interpersonal relations allow pupils to feel safe and
they all have to grow together towards the learn. These aspects, thus, may be considered as
exams; they really have to be a class, not a conditional for effective learning environments.
couple of individuals; they have to form a class
together. One student’s question is often an-
other student’s question as well, that’s an 4. Conclusions and discussion
important aspect. (2, 240401)
Last year, I had another classroom setting. It Two research questions were central to this
was a u-form; the advantage of this was that I study: (a) Which choices do teachers make with
was very close to the learning and I had the idea regard to the arrangement of learning environ-
that they worked better in this manner because ments in general? (b) Which choices do teachers
you could keep an eye on each other better. make with regard to the arrangement of learning
There was a kind of unity. You can walk environments in order to stimulate New Learning
around and talk directly to each other, which in particular? In the following, we briefly summar-
also breaks the whole class structure. It was ize and discuss the results of these research
much more of a group idea, it was a club questions. Thereafter, some methodological lim-
feeling. (4, 240401) itations will be considered together with some
directions for further research.
The specific function of the teacher with regard With regard to research question (a), it can be
to the atmosphere in the classroom was also concluded that teachers make choices first and
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

812 A. de Kock et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (2005) 799–816

foremost with respect to the following aspects of ticeship division of roles called for to enhance New
learning environments: division of teacher and Learning.
learner roles, learning goals and learning materi- With regard to the learning goals aspect of the
als. Teachers also indicate, when explicitly asked, learning environment, category (e) cognitive learn-
that atmosphere and interpersonal teacher beha- ing skill was considered typical of new learning
viours are of considerable importance. With environments by all of the teachers. Category (a)
regard to research question (b), the same aspects knowledge of learning content was partly connected
of the learning environment are found to be most to new learning environments and partly con-
important for the arrangement of the learning nected to traditional learning environments, which
environment to stimulate New Learning in the again reflects a variation observed across and
eyes of the teachers studied here. At the level of within teachers. Although it is often stressed
categories the following particular choices within within the context of the Study House reform that
the context of the Study House reform are the aim of education is to move from pure
reported. knowledge acquisition to the development of the
With regard to the division of teacher and cognitive, affective and metacognitive skills needed
learner roles, teachers relate category (c) learner to continuously learn, the interview data show the
steers learning process—teacher coaches/guides teachers to still connect content acquisition to new
without exception to new learning environments. learning environments. One possible explanation
Category (a) teacher steers learning process— for this finding may be that education always
learner executes learning process was related to concerns some particular subjects, themes and
both new learning environments and traditional content. Another explanation may lie in the fact
learning environments. This divided picture re- that teachers still consider content to be important
flects variation both across and within teachers. but approach its acquisition in a much more
That is, the Study House reform is aimed at a shift flexible manner within the context of the Study
from a category (a) division of roles to a category House reform. Knowledge acquisition remains
(c) division. While category (a) teacher steers important, but students can approach it much
learning process—learner executes learning process more in terms of their own individual interests and
is more typical of traditional learning environ- preferences than in terms of predefined themes.
ments, the finding that teachers also connect With regard to the learning materials aspect of
this category to new learning environments the learning environment, categories (b) answer
can be understood as it is very difficult to change book and (c) study planner are almost unanimously
the traditional role patterns which are so connected to the arrangement of new learning
deeply rooted in the school culture (see Windschitl, environments whereas category (a) book is some-
2002). Teachers have very little experience with times related to new learning environments and
the expected new division of roles, which may sometimes to more traditional learning environ-
lead to a preoccupation with the possibility ments, which indicates considerable variation
of students misusing their freedom to organize across and within teachers. Teachers still view
the learning process as they see fit. For this reason, the traditional study book as an important tool
teachers may often fall back into the role within the new learning environment but then as
of directing learners’ learning even after the one among a wide variety of learning materials,
introduction of the Study House reform. including study planners, answering books and
In addition, teachers may have little or no time ICT. It should be noted that teachers ascribe
to reflect upon their instructional practices different roles to the study book (see aspect (10)
and simply think that their behaviour is largely role of learning materials). The role of the study
in line with the ideas behind New Learning. book may be construed in terms of transferor of
That is, a traditional division of the roles between content or in terms of guideline. Teachers may give
teacher and students may not be perceived as the study book much more of a steering role than
inconsistent with the developmental and appren- they did before the Study House reform, where the
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

A. de Kock et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (2005) 799–816 813

study book is used as more of a knowledge is not part of their practical knowledge. They do
transmitter. Only three utterances, however, pro- not have images for explicating these types of
vided information with regard to this assumption. learning goals and therefore they make no notice
The interviews also showed teachers to only talk of them in the interviews. Learning products are
about the products of learning and not the process more concrete and observable (e.g., knowledge of
of learning as a goal of learning. That is, the a specific topic or practical skill) than the process
distinction between cognitive and affective learn- of learning. In the words of Simons (2000), the
ing skills, on the one hand, and cognitive, affective process of learning involves the execution of such
and metacognitive learning functions, on the other learning functions as the finding of prior knowl-
hand (see Fig. 1), was not found in the interview edge, maintenance of motivation and diagnosis of
data. The execution of learning functions is typical the causes of failure and/or problems. These are
of new learning environments. But it may be processes, not directly observable and spread out
possible that the teachers studied here are still over a longer period of time. Teachers could be
preoccupied with the realization of more tradi- more concentrated on the organization of their
tional goals even after the introduction of the lessons around specific learning products (e.g. with
Study House reform. This conclusion is in line regard to exit qualifications), the roles they play in
with the arguments of Land and Hannafin (2000) that organization and the learning materials to be
who found the learning goals pursued by teachers included.
to not be as constructivist as the distribution of One of the features of New Learning is that
teacher and learner roles they adopt. Similarly, learning is construed as a social activity. This
Van Velzen (2002) concludes that teachers’ atten- principle has first and foremost implications for
tion to the learning process is very low for the roles of the learners with respect to each other.
vocational education. Teachers’ behaviour appears In a learning environment that meets the condi-
to be first and foremost aimed at the content of tions for New Learning, cooperation between
student learning, which is in line with the findings learners is emphasized and hopefully thereby
of a recent study of teachers’ conceptions of enhanced, whereas strictly individual and/or com-
‘learning to learn’ by Waeytens et al. (2002). On petitive roles are downplayed. Interestingly, the
the basis of interviews with 53 secondary schools category ‘competitive roles’ was never mentioned
teachers, Waeytens et al. conclude that the by the teachers interviewed within the context of
majority of teachers have a very narrow vision of the present study. Instead, the category ‘learning
‘learning to learn.’ together’—which was not originally distinguished
in Fig. 1—proved important. The category ‘learn-
A narrow interpretation of ‘learning to learn’
ing together’ may be seen as intermediate between
concentrates exclusively on study skills, strate-
individual and cooperative roles. Furthermore, it
gies and techniques. In contrast, the aim of
has to be stressed that the interview data give rise
‘learning to learn’ in a broad sense is to
to the idea that teachers are not aware of or do not
promote the use of higher order cognitive skills,
consider cooperative learner roles as really im-
such as problem solving and information-
portant for the arrangement of learning environ-
processing strategies. In the second case, learn-
ments (this category is mentioned in only four
ing becomes a goal on its own and it is not
utterances from two teachers). More generally, the
considered by the students only as a means to
teachers’ practical knowledge only rarely ad-
achieve some particular objectives. Such tea-
dressed the aspect of the learning environment
chers want their students to become lifelong
concerned with learner roles towards each other
learners. (Waeytens et al., 2002, p. 308)
(7% in general). The reason for this may be
Yet another explanation of this finding would be twofold. During initial teacher education and the
that teachers actually do strive for the learning subsequent careers of secondary school teachers,
process as a learning goal but they feel less they are rarely confronted with the possibilities of
competent to realize this learning goal because it cooperative learning. So, teachers may have not
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

814 A. de Kock et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (2005) 799–816

been educated in different methods of peer- stimulation of New Learning, however, asks for
instruction, like cooperative learning. The second more dynamic settings that often cannot be pre-
reason may be that teachers do know the defined by knowledge transmission applying text-
possibilities of forms of cooperative learning but book- and teacher-based instruction. The results
simply not put these into practice due to: (a) a lack of the present study provide insight into the
of a sufficient social-cultural and material context arrangement of secondary school learning envir-
in their schools; (b) a lack of central values onments to promote New Learning. Clear dis-
towards cooperative learning that are in coherence crepancies between, on the one hand, design
with the needed practice; or (c) a lack of sufficient choices that should be made from New Learning
skills for practicing cooperative learning methods theory, and on the other hand, design choices
(Bolhuis, 2000). teachers actually make with regard to such were
Interpersonal teacher behaviour and atmo- encountered. Therefore, more support should be
sphere were aspects of the learning environment recommended for teachers transforming education
spontaneously mentioned by only a very few in the direction of New Learning. Obviously,
teachers but stressed by a number of teachers greater congruence between theory and practice
when explicitly asked about such. And indeed, in seems to be important, and the results of the
the terms of Brekelmans, Sleegers, and Fraser present interview study show that greater con-
(2000), ‘y teachers who want to realize a more gruence can be reached. Change efforts should
activating instructional system should create a sufficiently fit the concrete choices of teachers with
learning environment where pupils feel safe to regard to the arrangement of learning environ-
experiment with new tasks and activities, coupled ments: foremost choices about the learning goals,
with a sufficient degree of dominance’ (p. 239). the distribution of teacher and learner roles and
With regard to the methodological aspects of the learning materials. The qualitative data of this
the present study, it has to be stressed that the study give information about the particular
phased structure of the analyses allowed us to ‘words’ teachers use in this respect (see Waeytens
monitor both the reliability and validity of the et al., 2002). Change efforts should also take the
findings. Discussion among the researchers was diversity of teacher conceptions with regard to just
undertaken during each phase of the analyses in what constitutes a new learning environment more
order to obtain consensus in as many cases as into consideration. Taking the different concep-
possible. Further research on the use of the coding tions about what constitutes New Learning into
scheme is nevertheless needed to incorporate account is also important for conducting proces-
additional agreement checks. Furthermore, the s–product research, in which learning environ-
responses that teachers give during an interview ments directed at New Learning are involved. And
may be very sensitive to the provision of socially finally, change efforts should focus on the knowl-
desired answers and/or answers that simply reflect edge and beliefs that teachers need to acquire for
the ‘rhetoric’ of ongoing educational change arranging learning environments that stimulate
efforts. In order to avoid this pitfall, the interview New Learning. The results of the present interview
questions were anchored to the observation of a study showed, at least, two aspects of the learning
single lesson prior to the interview. Future environment to be of particular importance:
research should also include additional methods increased knowledge of the learning process as a
to attain an even more valid picture of teachers’ learning goal and greater attention to cooperative
practical knowledge, like concept maps and learner roles.
stimulated recall interviews (Meijer, 1999; Verloop
et al., 2001).
More than before, the introduction of New Acknowledgements
Learning asks for a design role of teachers. In
more traditional settings, the teaching–learning This article is part of the Ph.D. project entitled
process often was transmission oriented. The ‘New learning environments and their outcomes in
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

A. de Kock et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (2005) 799–816 815

secondary education’ conducted under the aus- To which choices can you trace the
pices and with the financial support of KPC aforementioned?
Group, ‘s-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands, in What other specific options are available
collaboration with the Radboud University Nij- for these choices?
megen, The Netherlands. 5. You have told me about a range of choices in
We would like to thank Christina Schouten this interview. Which choices do you consider
(Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands, most important for the realization of the form
and KPC Group, ‘s-Hertogenbosch, The Nether- and content of lessons?
lands) for her involvement in the analysis of the
interviews. Needless to say, we alone are respon-
sible for the final version of this article. References

Beijaard, D. (1998). Persoonlijke onderwijstheorieën van

Appendix A. Interview guide leraren [Personal education theory of teachers]. In J.
Vermunt, & L. Verschaffel (Eds.), Onderwijzen van kennis
en vaardigheden [Teaching knowledge and skills]
1. Which choices did you make in the planning of (pp. 107–123). Alphen aan den Rijn, The Netherlands:
this lesson in order to realize the particular form Samson.
and content of the lesson? Bolhuis, S. M. (2000). Naar zelfstandig leren. Wat doen en
Did you also make some choices during denken docenten? [Towards independent learning: What do
the lesson that have determined the form teachers do and think?]. Apeldoorn, The Netherlands:
Garant.
and/or content of the lesson? Bolhuis, S. (2003). Towards process-oriented teaching for self-
For each choice mentioned by the teacher, directed lifelong learning: A multidimensional perspective.
the following questions are further posed. Learning and Instruction, 13, 327–347.
What is the importance of this specific Boulton-Lewis, F. M., Smith, D. J. H., McCrindle, A. R.,
Burnett, P. C., & Campbell, K. J. (2001). Secondary
choice? Which of the choices you have
teachers’ conceptions of teaching and learning. Learning
mentioned do you consider most impor- and Instruction, 11, 35–51.
tant? And: Which specific options were Brekelmans, M., Sleegers, P., & Fraser, B. (2000). Teaching for
present for each of the choices you made? active learning. In R. J. Simons, J. Van der Linden, & T.
2. From the perspective of (the ideas beyond) the Duffy (Eds.), New learning (pp. 227–242). Dordrecht, The
Study House reform: How would you classify Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Datnow, A., & Castellano, M. (2000). Teachers’ responses to
the lesson? Does this lesson meet the conditions Success for All: How beliefs, experiences, adaptations shape
for the Study House or not? Why or why not? implementation. American Educational Research Journal,
How is the preceding concretely reflected in the 37(3), 775–799.
lesson I observed? De Kock, A., Sleegers, P., & Voeten, M. J. M. (2004). New
Can you relate this to the types of choices learning and the classification of learning environments in
secondary education. Review of Educational Research, 74(2),
you have made? 141–170.
3. Can you describe a lesson by yourself or a Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1999). Learning together and
colleague in the past which was totally different alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning
from the observed lesson? (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Can you describe the differences and Joyce, B. R., & Weil, M. (1996). Models of teaching (5th ed.).
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
similarities between the two lessons? Land, S. M., & Hannafin, M. J. (2000). Student-centered
How can you trace the differences and learning environments. In D. H. Jonassen, & S. M. Land
similarities back to choices that you (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments
made? (pp. 1–23). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
4. How does a lesson that meets the conditions for Lowyck, J., & Ellen, J. (1993). Transitions in the theoretical
foundation of instructional design. In T. M. Duffy, J.
the Study House look like in your opinion? Lowyck, & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Designing environments
(Give an example from your own educational for constructive learning (pp. 213–230). New York:
practice) Springer.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

816 A. de Kock et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (2005) 799–816

Meijer, P. C. (1999). Teacher’s practical knowledge. Teaching element in the knowledge base of teachers]. Pedagogische
reading comprehension in secondary education. Disserta- Studiën, 75, 225–237.
tion, Leiden University. Vandenberghe, R., & Kelchtermans, G. (2002). Leraren die
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data leren om professioneel te blijven leren: kanttekeningen
analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. over context [Teachers learning to keep professionally
Munby, H., Russell, T., & Martin, A. K. (2001). Teachers’ learning: reflections on context]. Pedagogische Studiën, 79,
knowledge and how it develops. In V. Richardson (Ed.), 339–351.
Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 877–904). Washing- Van Veen, K. (2003). Teachers’ emotions in a context of reforms.
ton: American Educational Research Association. Dissertation, University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational Van Velzen, J. H. (2002). Instruction and self-regulated learning.
research. Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Dissertation, Leiden University, The Netherlands.
Educational Research, 62, 307–332. Verloop, N., Van Driel, J., & Meijer, P. (2001). Teacher
Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (1997). Teacher learning: knowledge and the knowledge base of teaching. Interna-
Implications of new views of cognition. In B. Biddle, T. L. tional Journal of Educational Research, 35,441–461.
Good, & I. F. Goodson (Eds.), International handbook of Waeytens, K., Lens, W., & Vandenberghe, R. (2002). ‘Learning
teachers and teaching, Vol. II (pp. 1233–1296). Dordrecht/ to learn’: Teachers’ conceptions of their supporting role.
Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Learning and Instruction, 12, 305–322.
Simons, P. R. J. (2000). Towards a constructivistic theory of Windschitl, M. (2002). Framing constructivism in practice as
self-directed learning. In G. A. Straka (Ed.), Conceptions of the negotiation of dilemmas: An analysis of the conceptual,
self-directed learning: Theoretical and conceptional consid- pedagogical, cultural, and political challenges facing tea-
erations (pp. 155–169). Münster, Germany: Waxmann. chers. Review of Educational Research, 72(2), 131–175.
Simons, R. J., Van der Linden, J., & Duffy, T. (Eds.). (2000). Wubbels, Th., Créton, H. A., & Hooymayers, H. P. (1985).
New learning. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Aca- Discipline problems of beginning teachers, intera-
demic Publishers. ctional teacher behavior mapped out. Paper presented at
Van Driel, J., & Verloop, N. (1998). ‘‘Pedagogical content the AERA Anuual meeting, Chicago. Abstracted in:
knowledge’’: Een verbindend element in de kennisbasis van Resources in Education, 20, 121, p. 153, ERIC document
docenten [Pedagogical content knowledge as a unifying 260040.