Dialogkompetens i skolans vardag - Publikationer - LTU - Luleå ...

Relation between tools used in action research and the ZPD 565
Concluding remarks
As a part of the action research process, and for the purpose of supporting learning in
the ZPD, different tools were tried out by the participants. During the process, the
tools were gradually internalised so as to become owned by the individuals or communities
of practice. None of the tools derived from a prefabricated given-ness as a tool
‘to be applied’ (Altrichter, 2005). The analysis highlights differences between a
passive role in the reproduction of knowledge and an active role in ZPD in which
knowledge is produced. To be actors in a learning process that can lead to emancipation
is also within the philosophy of action research (Carr & Kemmis, 1986).
The teachers in this study had access to several communities of practice. The
time afforded to sharing experiences from different school cultures and to gaining
input from the university teachers was greatly valued by the participants. Time, also
increased the opportunities for building relations as an important part of being a
true critical friend. Since they were in practice together, the participants developed
relationships of trust as users of different tools, especially as regards shadowing.
Even if tools such as writing and shadowing were used separately, they were also
combined in conjunction with group sessions of participants being ‘critical friends’
in facilitation and during web dialogues. However, it seems to be more difficult to
create an atmosphere that enables participants to be critical friends in a group. As
Rönnerman (2005) explains, group discussions together with a facilitator can lead to
the development of collegial knowledge or, in other terms, a shared communityrelated
language. This can be extended to communicate knowledge in writing,
discussions and dissemination, all of which are important for learning and school
improvement.
In theories about the ZPD, interaction with colleagues, in the form of carefully
formulated challenges in the ZPD, is a necessity for professional development.
According to Wenger’s (1998a) view of communities of practice, it is action, rather
than language, that is in focus. We address the importance of having both; that is to
say, being in action together (shadowing) forms an authentic base for written and
verbal tools. Without similar experiences of action, there is a risk that facilitation, web
dialogues and log-writing are regarded merely as mental activities as opposed to situations
with a high potential for learning.
A crucial element in action research processes is the need to make different efforts
to enable everyone’s voice to be heard in both speech and written texts. During such
processes there is a need to develop teachers’ awareness of how to contribute to practice-related
dialogues and of their ability to use colleagues’ voices in the collective
development of knowledge. In this study, the tools produced different voices and a
question about what kinds of voices each tool can illuminate. The use of individual
tools visualises a single voice, which might lead to an inner dialogue. In Bakthin’ terms
this can also lead to learning, since the inner dialogue will be stimulated, even though
these processes are not there to be investigated (Bakhtin, 1981; Dysthe, 2002). Tools
that produce dual voices or multi-voices also involve the dependency upon other
voices than one’s own. Using each other’s voices for learning is also a means of