The results chapter begins with a presentation of aspects, examples and perspectives that emerge in the educational practice studied which are linked to the various characteristics of teaching for authentic learning.
Provide an authentic context that reflects the way the knowledge will be used in real life
The teachers at the school in question contacted the energy researchers at an early stage. One of the energy researchers had presented their research project in several contexts where Swedish upper secondary schools with technology programs had been represented and had urged schools to contact them with a view to collaboration. The school in question got in touch, and a collaborative venture was established. One aim of the teachers was for the students to experience first-hand and actively how specific knowledge can be used in real life. In this case, in research into sustainable construction – real-world problems that need to be solved and how research can contribute. The students would experience how the researchers’ knowledge and methods can lead to new technical solutions.
The students got to meet the energy researchers for two full days and hear from them how their research is conducted and what knowledge and methods are used. The researchers described what they did, asked the students questions, and the students asked the researchers questions, resulting in in-depth discussions. The energy researchers also described their measurement methods from a purely technical point of view, something that the students would then work on. Similarly, data analyses were discussed, which the students would also undertake further work on. The students engaged in extensive discussion, and some even questioned things in a critical way, to which the energy researchers provided answers and their own views.
When students worked at school on their tasks relating to data analysis and surveys of sensors, measurement methods, etc., they were able to relate to the conversations with the researchers. Some of them used the researchers’ data and pondered the measurement parameters they had investigated.
Once the student projects started, many students were able to apply the knowledge initiated by the energy researchers. The students were also given a review on how to undertake project work by one of the teachers. That teacher has significant extra-school experience of project work in programming and energy technology. The teacher related examples from an industry that the students also know about, one to which they had already made study visits previously and had also received visits from engineers in that field. Project work as a process and the specific product development process with its various phases as such was thus given a real-life prerequisite by the teacher.
The teacher managed to create a physical environment and methodological approach that allowed students to see how the knowledge will ultimately be used. The set-up involving the school premises, the teacher’s approach and the lesson time provides a design for creating complexity and situational opportunities. The approach allowed for many resources, also facilitating assessment from a number of different perspectives, a design that makes no attempt to fragment or simplify tasks. For instance, one student group developed a digital jukebox. They engineered a compact device allowing users to select from various melodies simply by placing a plastic badge nearby. The teacher team helped by supplying materials for the device and sensors, and by identifying suitable programming tools. Additionally, they facilitated student support through online chat groups.
Provide authentic tasks and activities
The meetings with the energy researchers gave the students a sense of how and why certain measurements are made and how data can be analysed so that conclusions can be drawn, and new technical solutions can be proposed. In addition, they showed that new technical solutions need to be created to solve problems with today’s buildings and energy solutions. Once the students had attended the teachers’ lectures and were given tasks, they could see the connection to issues that had been raised in the meetings with the researchers. The tasks became authentic and meaningful for them.
When the students worked on the assignments of their choice and when they worked in project form, they said that it felt “real” in some way. The assignments had a client who was interested, who needed the task to be completed or had at least set it for some specific reason. The students had to structure their projects, search for methods, search for ideas, discuss, read up on the subject, generate ideas, test, and retest, ask those who knew, etc.
The students had to take responsibility for their time and their planning. The lessons were scheduled for one day a week, when the week’s planned activities were to be carried out, but they had to take responsibility for lunchtimes and how long each stage needed to last. Via short briefings, they were given the opportunity to describe to the teacher how the project work was progressing. The teacher constantly gave feedback on how project work is conducted in real life. The students seemed to be aware that they were being trained in such skills. In conversations with the students, statements often emerge to the effect that, e.g. by working “for real”, they are being trained as engineers or for higher education and research. During lunchtimes, the teachers and students sat and eat together, discussing the projects as colleagues rather than as teachers and students. Examples of topics that might come up could include how to benchmark the students’ projects and which university to apply to.
This approach facilitates activities that have real-life relevance, where the assignments and tasks are often poorly defined. There is only one complex task to be studied by the students, and the students can define the tasks and subtasks required to complete the main task. Throughout the entire time, they have an opportunity to discover both relevant and irrelevant information, the opportunity to collaborate, identify tasks that can be integrated across subject areas.
Provide access to expert performances
The teacher was present in the classroom and could guide students him/herself to some extent, but sometimes had to refer to someone else. It might be another teacher, the energy researchers, other contacts outside the school, a company, a website, etc. The teacher actively went round the class and gave good advice, discussed solutions with the students but, above all, gave tips on contacts who are experts in the specific problem. The teacher actively searched for solutions and to some extent helped the students find contacts. The classroom was not a limiting factor for the students: they felt that through the teacher they could connect with experts in various fields related to their project.
During lunchtimes, more teachers would join in and then there was an opportunity for specific discussions about issues that had arisen in any group. The environment resembled a company with ongoing projects where issues and examples of solutions could be discussed. The students asked questions or discussed their proposed solutions with a larger group of teachers, and there was potential for a sense of a unified expert group.
A group of students participated in a more extensive competition with their assignment: they were to develop a measuring box that would be launched like a rocket, before slowly falling to the ground, and carry out measurements in the air. The students competed abroad and made it to the finals in a completely different country. The assignment included, inter alia, advanced programming, for which the students needed some support, which is why one of the teachers who may be seen as an expert in the field, accompanied the students to the first competition country. The students gained access to expert thinking and modelling processes/real-life examples. They also had access to other students/teachers at different levels of expertise, and the environment gave them the opportunity to share their stories. They thus had access to the social context and, through meetings with, inter alia, the energy researchers, they could observe real-life situations where real-life activities occured.
Provide multiple roles and perspectives
In the students’ work and in their meetings with e.g. the energy researchers, the students both took on various roles and encounter various roles. In the projects, a student was given the opportunity to play different roles. An example is where the same student first took on the role of the person who structured the project, drove the planning and schedule forward and showed interest in an overall project manager role. Then the same student ended up with a programming problem that caused the schedule to be relaxed, and the focus was entirely on a small task. By the students working independently in groups on their projects and feeling secure in the environment, they could take on different roles. The teacher also invited them to reflect repeatedly on the role they took on in the group.
Different perspectives were highlighted by the teacher. Through questions and advice about various contacts outside the school or via websites, teachers also provide new input on the assignments. This may relate to economic perspectives linked to material selection in the prototypes, ethical aspects linked to various parameters to be measured, various aspects of convenience/comfort associated with a solution to be used by individuals, external environmental aspects, etc. Students may have found it difficult to broaden perspectives without the teacher’s guidance.
Through the approach and the environment, students acquire different perspectives on the topics/issues from different points of view. The teacher’s prompts also give them an opportunity to express different points of view through cooperation. The teacher’s contacts and willingness to go outside the school environment gave students the opportunity to encounter more than one resource fruitful enough to implement more variants.
Support collaborative construction of knowledge
Students were constantly encouraged to collaborate, and they themselves noticed that they could achieve more together. One student argued for the need to work alone, and the student was allowed to do so, but the teacher invited the student to constantly engage in discussion with another group which was working on similar content in their assignment. The lone student also described how contact was made with people and companies outside the school, where discussions took place. The teacher constantly asked about how ideas and knowledge were created; the purpose seemed to be to demonstrate to the students how important it is to collaborate.
The format of the teaching means that students were given tasks and develop assignments that were aimed at a group rather than at an individual. Then the teacher organised the classroom for pair work or small groups and created a suitable structure for whole-group presentations.
As previously described, students could encounter authentic contexts throughout the year through visits, conversations with energy researchers and others, and they were given an authentic task. It was also important that the students were given plenty of time, that they could return to the activities if desired and work further after a period of reflection. By having a whole day a week at their disposal that they themselves planned, they felt that they had time to think, reflect and reconsider if necessary. It was also important that students could compare themselves with experts. By being able to discuss with their teachers, whose intention is to act as colleagues rather than teachers, students believed that they learned to converse with “experts”. Students also stated how they got the opportunity to compare themselves with other students at different stages of the project. The teacher also let the students stop working occasionally in a full class situation and allowed different groupings of students to present their solutions to facilitate further reflection.
All students got the chance to work on a complex task that involves something real and ongoing, as opposed to a contrived task. They were also given the opportunity to develop the necessary knowledge within their projects. They had opportunities to speak out and collaborate in groups to facilitate social and individual understanding. In terms of the energy researchers, it become clear that the students both developed knowledge together with the researchers and developed the confidence to highlight their own opinions and positions. They expressed critical views and asked questions. In this connection, they were able to present arguments to express their views and argue their case.
Provide coaching and scaffolding
The teacher had planned for and facilitated a complex and open learning environment. He/she did this by scheduling the lessons for one day a week, by creating interesting classrooms that looked like creative project rooms with extensive equipment. Because collaborative learning was encouraged by constantly allowing students to evaluate it, the students got to experience how more capable partners can help. Similarly, the teacher and the entire teaching team enabled several people to assist the students with guidance. The students were left to control their own project, but the teacher implemented the task and was available for coaching while the project was ongoing. The students were never left to themselves.
Provide for authentic assessment of learning
When the students’ work was finally to be assessed, this was done in a way similar to real-life project reports. The students got to be effective actors and apply their acquired knowledge to create performances and products that they could present. The teacher let the students spend a lot of time and effort on collaboration with others, and on the complex and unclearly structured challenges that required judgment and knowledge. The teacher, as mentioned earlier, had created a huge range of factual material and other resources. The assessment was also integrated into the activities: the teacher constantly went around and entered into discussion with the project groups. Several learning indicators could be made visible to the teacher and to the students themselves. They discussed how they wrote their programs, where they found facts or inspiration, what contacts they made and what they learned during specific conversations with others. Students submitted various written reports throughout the project period. They wrote weekly follow-ups and their final reports, and their own memos to remind them of how they thought and considered their options. The teaching team had set appropriate criteria for scoring different products, the project work itself and reports.
What facilitates an authentic teaching approach¸ themes related to the inductive thematic analysis
In the inductive thematic analysis, certain patterns emerged as to what seemed to facilitate an authentic teaching approach in the case under investigation.
The teachers described how they had tried their hand at it for six to seven years to come up with the right approach. Their starting point were always what they themselves have learned from industry. The collaboration with the energy researchers over the past year had changed and further facilitated their approach towards authenticity. There were more data to work on for the students and a clear link to tasks in control and regulation technology and mechatronics. Many projects with links to the energy researchers have been created. The school’s profile has now been defined as focusing on energy calculations and measurements.
The environment as facilitator
The teachers described how they try to create a permissive environment. They have a low staff turnover, and they talk about “creating a special environment”.
“We collaborate our way into the courses, deputise for each other, work together, collaborate between courses, there are several teachers on the same course”. (Teacher)
The teachers describe how they have incorporated various stages in the workflows and how it is always a teacher who is ultimately responsible, but that more lecturers come in from outside. They have tried to use guest teachers in various areas; they express the view that study visits are important. Blocks are created in the schedule to enable guest lecturers to present and run topics or to make study visits. A guest gets to present an area, and the students are given the opportunity to work on this e.g. between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. for three days. An example would be the topic of hydromechanics that the students worked on during the autumn. The teachers describe how they want to showcase the university and companies – real-world work: they want to stimulate and motivate the students. They want to show that it is people who work, who have skills, that they are from real life and that they say the same thing as the teachers.
“We want to stimulate interest in life, in work.” (Teacher).
The teachers have built-up networks of contacts but want to develop more formal networks.
“Companies and universities should be interested in showcasing projects that they are currently engaged in and what things are important to learn.” (Teacher).
Process rather than product
The teachers describe how they want the students to work: work should be enjoyable and something positive.
“The students’ curiosity should lead them somewhere.” (Teacher).
The teachers explain how they want the students to find a problem for themselves and find a method that helps them see how to tackle the problem.
“The students have to come up with something themselves. They shouldn’t stop at asking how they’re going to do it – that’s not what happens in real life.” (Teacher).
The teachers also state that they are trying to get away from set grading patterns. Students can pass the course even though they are not creating a finished product; the important thing is the design process itself, that the students develop curiosity and creativity, that they learn how everything connects together, that they dare and fail.
“Students shouldn’t just be accrediting tasks that they can already do. If they didn’t finish, they should report why they didn’t; they should reflect on why that was.” (Teacher).
Training to work independently
Already in the first year, the students need to start working on thinking for themselves. At the start of upper secondary school, they are still unsure and asking about what is right or about how to do it. The approach used at the school does not work right away, the students need to get used to it and train themselves. But once they are in the third year, they manage to work independently on their projects and understand how to work on projects.
How the teachers and the principal view their role
The most important ability of both the teachers and students is that “you just have to dare to take a big leap” (Principal). The teachers stress the importance of daring to make mistakes and not being immediately correct, both as a teacher and a student.
“We teachers are not omniscient, we have good skills and we can contribute with our breadth of knowledge. We have a common pool of experience, but we don’t know everything.” (Teacher).
The teachers describe how they see the approach as an investigative activity, how they often must familiarise themselves with new things, all the time in fact. During this project four teachers who support each other and the students with the projects in the technology subject. According to the teachers, the students can sometimes be “sharper” and “you can take advantage of that”. The teachers explain how the approach they use is beneficial in the subject of technology. They state how they do not subscribe to the view that “we are teachers and we should have the best level of knowledge”.
The principal explains what is the most important thing for the approach to work:
“Dare to make that leap! Don’t keep doing the same old thing! We can’t do everything: the content is prescribed, but we develop the approach.” (Principal).
The specific approach plays a greater role in the technology courses than in other subjects. There is no textbook for the Technology 2 course in the technology subject on the program, and no assessment support has been developed centrally. The principal describes how they instead started from their own skills, the companies they know and can collaborate with. The principal describes a sense of insecurity, but above all freedom. The principal also states how important it is to provide support for business contacts, study visits, travel, etc. The principal further describes how this year the students have undertaken a CERN visit and studied solar power and pumping power in Seville, then nuclear power in the south of France. The principal provides support, the teachers have contacts they can cooperate with. The approach enables cross-curricular learning. In terms of content, the focus is on energy and on measuring various parameters, obtaining data, and using it. The principal sums it up: “The students collaborate, we facilitate!” (Principal).