Excellent work on cooperation and cooperation processes in schools. It is shown how collegial cooperation and team development can contribute to the development of schools.
The work was written as part of a qualifying course of study "Master for School Management". The author is actively involved in the school service as a teacher.
Following the logic of the proverb, he who works alone also reaches his goal. But this may take longer or the result may not be as satisfactory as it could be through collaboration. Various modalities of work practice are also available in the context of educational work in schools. In addition to the lone worker who plans lessons alone, teaches alone, reflects alone, and solves all problems alone, there are various ways of working together. Schley (2011) refers to the model of the classic lone worker as the "one man model." This must be questioned in the context of school development because individuals cannot develop a school alone. School development can only occur collaboratively. Collegial collaboration in schools has always existed, but often only informally and with little institutionalization.
In the literature on school development, teacher cooperation is considered the basis for professional action by teachers in school (cf. Bonsen 2010, p. 289f.). School development research also emphasizes the importance of cooperation for adequate educational provision for students. However, it is not entirely unproblematic to speak of cooperation, because different forms of collegial cooperation can be distinguished from each other, e.g. exchange, division of labor, and coconstruction, which have different functions in everyday school life (cf. Fussangel and Gräsel 2010, p. 258).
Cooperation is an integral part of the everyday practice of teachers. Since school development processes are not possible in isolation, this thesis places cooperation in the system context of school development. To this end, the second chapter first provides a basic approach to the concept of cooperation. After a definition of the term, the forms and prerequisites of cooperation are presented. In the third chapter, the contextual conditions are considered. [...]
Table of contents
1. Introduction
2 Approaching the concept of cooperation
2.1 Definitions
2.2 Forms of cooperation
2.2.1 Tax groups
2.2.2 Vintage teams
2.2.3 Sections
2.2.4 Class teams
2.3 Prerequisites for cooperation
3 Cooperation in the context of school development
3.1 Changing schools
3.2 Tasks of the Executive Board
3.3 Cooperation as a focus of school development
4 From I to We
4.1 Group and Team
4.2 Professional learning communities
4.3 System Leadership
4.4 Networking in concrete terms
5 Possibilities and limits of cooperation
5.1 Potentialities
5.2 Limits
5.3 Practical reflections
6 Conclusion
Bibliography
1. Introduction
Following the logic of the proverb, the one who works alone also reaches his goal. But this may take longer, or the result may not be as satisfactory as it could be through cooperation. Also in the context of pedagogical work in schools, various modalities of work practice are available. In addition to the individual worker, who plans lessons alone, teaches alone, reflects alone and solves all problems alone, there are various possibilities for cooperation. Schley (2011) describes the model of the classic individual worker as a "one model". This is to be questioned in the context of school development, because individuals cannot develop a school alone. School development can only take place together. Collegial cooperation in schools has always existed, but often only informally and little institutionalized.
In the literature on school development, the cooperation of teachers is regarded as the basis for professional action by teachers in schools (cf. Bonsen 2010, p. 289f.). School development research also emphasizes the importance of cooperation for an adequate educational offer of the pupils. However, it is not entirely unproblematic of the Cooperation, because different forms of collegial cooperation can be distinguished from each other, e.g. exchange, division of labor and co-construction, which have different functions in everyday school life (cf. Fussangel und Gräsel 2010, p. 258).
Cooperation is an integral part of the everyday practice of teachers. Since school development processes are not possible in solo work, the present work places the cooperation in the system context of school development. To this end, the second chapter first provides a fundamental approach to the concept of cooperation. According to a definition, the forms and prerequisites of cooperation are presented. In the third chapter, a consideration of the context conditions takes place. The changing demands on schools and pedagogical work play a role in this. In this context, the cooperation is also presented as a field of responsibility of the school management and a focus on school development. Since cooperation today is predominantly associated with the concept of the team (cf. Boller 2009, p. 112), chapter four takes a look at team development and other possibilities to shape school development through cooperation. Chapter five deals with the opportunities and risks of cooperation and focuses on the practical reflections of teachers on cooperation.
2 Approaching the concept of cooperation
2.1 Definitions
According to the origin of the word from Latin, "cooperator" means "employee"1. Cooperation therefore stands for the cooperation or, in a broader sense, for the cooperation of people. Any kind of cooperation requires the participation of at least two people, but usually of several people. Basically, cooperation is considered a "maxim of pedagogical action" (Huber and Lohmann 2012, p. 23). Cooperation is not only a form of cooperation between teachers in relation to education and teaching, it is also an educational and educational goal of schools (cf. ibid., p. 23).
Huber and Lohmann present the concept of cooperation conceptually from different perspectives. "Cooperation as an individual concept of behavior" refers to the behavior of an individual. The behaviour determines, for example.B, whether cooperation takes place or not (cf. ibid., p. 24).
"Cooperation as an organizational theoretical term" refers to the structure of an organization. The decisive factor here is the extent to which an individual can decide independently, or how much room for manoeuvre the individual has. This concept is closely linked to the school organization (cf. ibid., p. 24).
However, the aforementioned concepts fall short, because cooperation depends on several factors. Cooperation does not only describe the behavior of individuals or organizations, but must be understood as a system concept. As a system property, cooperation means "the ability of a social system to carry out joint solutions to problems and to make the necessary decisions by consensus" (König 1991, quoted from Lohmann and Huber 2012, p. 24). However, cooperation is not automatic. Whether cooperation takes place in a team or a specialist group depends strongly on the persons involved, their subjective attitudes and behaviour and the systemic rules (cf. ibid., p. 24f.).
Rosenbusch defines cooperation in a similar way. This is a "voluntary joint bundling of individual experiences, knowledge and responsibilities and group activities towards a common goal" (Rosenbusch 2005, quoted from Huber and Lohmann 2012, p. 23). In addition to a common objective, Rosenbusch emphasizes the principle of oversummation: In cooperation, the sum of the whole is greater than the sum of the individual parts (cf. ibid., p. 23). For pedagogical work, this means that teachers can achieve more through cooperation. Cooperative work can be more successful and effective than classical lone combat and thus plays a major role in the development of schools.
2.2 Forms of cooperation
In the context of school, numerous forms of cooperation occur. Some are part of the core business of pedagogical work and are firmly institutionalized, e.g. specialist, year or certificate conferences. However, cooperation here often consists of the exchange of information or joint decisions. In specialist group meetings or year teams, there is usually a stronger cooperation in terms of content or education (cf. Fussangel 2008, p. 8). In the forms of cooperation resulting from the special organizational structure of the school, Rolff speaks of structure-like cooperation (Rolff 1980, quoted from Fussangel 2008, p. 9). These forms of cooperation are already available through institutional framework conditions and can play a decisive role in school development if they are used sensibly.
In contrast to this is the team-like cooperation, which consists of a close cooperation in terms of content and does not automatically result from the conventional structure of school (cf. ibid., p. 9). The team-like cooperation must first be initiated and developed. This becomes clear e.g. the work of tax groups, which cannot necessarily be derived from the school organisation. For this form of team-like cooperation, a steering group must first be set up so that cooperation can take place. This form of cooperation has a decisive potential for school development.
A special feature is the informal collegial cooperation of teachers, which can be described as an improvement of personal working conditions and optimization of individual pedagogical professionalism (see Fussangel 2008, p. 9). This form of cooperation is expressed, for example, in mutual consultation, the exchange of experiences, advice and teaching materials. However, it is questionable how this form of spontaneous cooperation can be used for systematic school development.
Furthermore, depending on the direction of effect of the cooperation, a distinction can be made between vertical and horizontal cooperation (cf. ibid., p. 8). In horizontal cooperation, teachers from different hierarchical levels work together, e.g. with class leaders or with the school management. In the case of horizontal cooperation, there is cooperation between teachers of the same hierarchical level, e.g. hospitation groups for reflection of the lessons.
Rolff also distinguishes between organizational and content-related cooperation (cf. ibid., p. 11). Organizational cooperation deals with aspects of work organization, e.g. coordination of classrooms and use of technical equipment. The content-related cooperation deals with pedagogical aspects, e.g. work on the curriculum or reflection of lessons. Both forms, but in particular the content-related cooperation, are crucial for the development of school and teaching.
However, cooperation is not simply there or not, it does not follow the all-or-nothing principle. Rather, cooperation takes place at different levels of varying degrees of intensity (Little 1990, quoted from Fussangel 2008, p. 12f.). On the one hand, the intensity levels represent the optimal development of the cooperation of a college, on the other hand, they exist side by side in many forms. This means that in a college there are subgroups that have a more or less pronounced form of cooperation (Figure 1).
Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten
The levels of cooperation differ in the degree of autonomy of the teachers and in the binding nature of the cooperation. The level "Storytelling and scanning for ideas" is to be equated with the conversation about one's own teaching (cf. ibid., p. 13). This leads to an exchange of experiences between the colleagues, in which they learn something about the teaching practice of other colleagues in order to further develop their own teaching. However, this form of cooperation is rather non-binding and the participants act strongly autonomously. The next stages of "aid and assistance" and "sharing" represent an increase in the intensity of cooperation, in which the individual degree of autonomy becomes smaller and the obligation increases (cf. ibid., p. 14). This stage is characterized by a stronger institutionalization, the exchange of materials and experiences takes place e.g. regularly and there are already consolidated cooperative structures in the college. The highest intensity of the cooperation is achieved with the "Joint Work" stage, which is characterized by comprehensive collegial cooperation. "Joint Work" follows the insight that pedagogical tasks cannot be mastered alone, but only together. The aim of school development should be to lead as many teachers as possible to the highest level of cooperation.
Some already established forms of cooperation with a team-like structure can be regarded as the main drivers of school development. Therefore, they will be presented below.
2.2.1 Tax groups
Tax groups can be regarded as a necessary infrastructure for school development work (cf. Rolff 2012, p. 31). They are important because they are a colleous body that puts the school development process on a broader footing. One of the main tasks of a steering group is the control of the school development process by the participants themselves (cf. ibid., p. 32). In order for the cooperative work of the steering group to be successful, a number of conditions must be met, e.g. clear mandate, voluntary participation and representation of various groupings of the College (see ibid., p. 33). Rolff gives the following examples, which are worked on cooperatively within the framework of the tax group work: Carrying out an inventory, preparing feedback conferences, developing tools for evaluations, planning measures for development projects.
2.2.2 Vintage teams
Year teams are made up of teachers who teach a year of students. The team includes teachers from various subjects. You have the task of planning and implementing concrete measures together, e.g. differentiation measures in the classroom, funded projects or travel programmes. The measures and decisions result from the cooperative work of the team. The team meetings set the organizational framework for cooperation and communication of the members (see Friday 2011, p. 18f.).
2.2.3 Sections
Subject groups consist of the teachers of a common subject. The subject groups can be year-specific or cross-year. In the periodically held specialist conferences, the content and organisational aspects of the subject are clarified. This form of cooperation offers the opportunity to clarify specific subject-related details that cannot be discussed in the year teams (see ibid., p. 19).
[...]
1 Translation see: http://de.pons.eu/dict/search/results/?q=cooperator&l=dela&in=&lf=la.
-
-
-
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X.