Creation and Evolution of a Community of Practice Focused on Critical Action Research in an Ecuadorian University

Tammy Fajardo Dack

A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Curriculum, Teaching, and Learning Ontario Institute for Studies in Education University of Toronto

Tammy Fajardo Dack

Doctor of Philosophy

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education University of Toronto

2017

Abstract

This research examines the learning experiences of a group of university language professors within their Landscape of Practice (Wenger, 2010; Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015b) and how these learning experiences are shaped after partaking in a Community of Practice (CoP)

(Wenger, 1998; Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015b) that focuses on critical action research (CAR). The study is an action research informed case study that draws from the communities of practice conceptual framework considered within the social learning systems

(Wenger, 2000; Blackmore, 2012).

Qualitative data was collected from 16 members of the community, including eight focal participants, through observations, questionnaires, document review, conversational interviews and focus groups. Findings suggest that participants perceive the initiative of creating a community of practice as a positive and worthwhile endeavor because it allows them to learn about critical action research within a group that shares interests and expectations. Furthermore, the participants explain how this space for interaction has opened opportunities to understand the

ii link between teaching and research, move beyond academic egoism, and share experiences as well as knowledge.

Themes emerging from the analysis suggest that, although perceptions and understandings of critical action research and social justice have shifted after participating in the community and two CAR projects have since been proposed, there is still a need to encourage the use of this research approach within universities in Ecuador where inequity among professors seems to be the rule. In addition, the data highlights factors that have enabled or constrained the commitment of participants to community activities as well as their own academic and professional development.

iii

Acknowledgments

Writing this dissertation and completing my doctoral journey was a challenging process that I would not have been able to achieve without the ongoing support and encouragement of many to whom I will be forever grateful. I first thank the participants of this study without whom this project would not have made sense. Thank you for your generosity, interest, and willingness to participate.

To my supervisor, Dr. Antoinette Gagné, thank you for guiding me from the early stages of this journey and advising to work on something meaningful for me and my context. Thank you for your guidance, insight, and unconditional emotional support at all times. I am deeply grateful to you for believing in me, and for the opportunities you gave me to learn and grow. There are not enough words to express how fortunate I was to have you by my side on this journey.

To my committee members Dr. Katherine Rehner and Dr. Jeff Bale, I am thankful for your generous support and insightful feedback on this dissertation from its proposal to the final draft. To my external examiner, Dr. Lynn Paine, thank you for your thoughtful feedback and presence at my defense. Thank you to my externals Dr. Kathy Broad and Dr. Mary Kooy, for taking the time to be on my examining committee, especially to Dr. Broad for your insights and comments at the final defense.

My heartfelt thanks to my parents, Anna and Rod, my grandmother, Lorenza, and the rest of my family in Ecuador and Canada for your support and encouragement during these four years of hard work and study. Thanks to my Papa Norman, who took care of me during the years of course work. Although you are not physically with me now, I know you are celebrating with me from heaven.

Finally, but most importantly, I want to thank my husband Paul and my sons Joaquin and Daniel. Thank you for rising to this challenge with me; this achievement is not only mine, it is ours! This journey was a learning process for us as a family. I love you with all my heart

Dedication

When I finished the first month of classes in the doctoral program, I was overwhelmed, confused, and even tempted to give up. My husband, Paul, sent me this message:

I wish you the best for today’s class. Do not feel intimidated. I believe in you. You are capable of everything and you can be the best! People at OISE also believe in you and that is why you got accepted. You can do it!

Work patiently and just think about studying. Forget about anything else. Our sons and I support you and are happy to make the sacrifice of not having you here with us because we love and trust you.

These words have been in my heart and mind since then. They have been an enduring reminder in times when I did not believe in myself.

This dissertation is dedicated to Paul, Joaquin, and Daniel who have trusted and loved me unconditionally.

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments...... iv

Dedication ...... v

Table of Contents ...... vi

List of Tables ...... xiii

List of Figures ...... xiv

List of Acronyms ...... xv

Appendices ...... xvi

Prologue ...... 1

Chapter 1 Introduction ...... 5

1.1 Research in Ecuadorian Universities ...... 5

1.2 The Problem with Research ...... 7

1.3 Is There a Possible Solution? ...... 7

1.4 Learning in Community ...... 8

1.5 Research Questions ...... 9

1.6 Who Am I and what is My Connection to the Research? ...... 9

1.6.1 A Convener ...... 12

1.6.2 A Participant – Researcher...... 13

1.6.3 A Critical Action Researcher ...... 14

1.7 Overview of Chapters ...... 15

Chapter 2 Research Context...... 17

2.1 Introduction ...... 17 vi

2.2 The Ecuadorian University ...... 18

2.2.1 The Colonial Universities ...... 18

2.2.2 The Postcolonial Catholic University: Omnium potentior est sapientia ...... 19

2.2.3 The University and Liberalism ...... 20

2.2.4 Research Then and Now ...... 21

2.2.5 The Education ‘Revolution.' ...... 24

2.2.6 From a Teaching-Only to a Teaching and Research Focus ...... 27

2.2.7 The Neoliberal attack on the ‘Education Revolution’ ...... 28

2.3 Universidad de Cuenca ...... 29

2.3.1 Mission, Vision, and Objectives ...... 30

2.3.2 What about Research?...... 31

2.3.3 Professors with a Ph.D.: Are we Close to 70%? ...... 32

2.4 The Language Institute ...... 36

2.4.1 Teaching or Researching? ...... 38

2.4.2 The Language Professors ...... 39

Chapter 3 Literature Review ...... 40

3.1 Introduction ...... 40

3.2 Teaching and Researching at the University ...... 40

3.2.1 Is There a Missing Link? ...... 42

3.3 Communities of Practice: A Site for Finding the Nexus between Teaching and Research? ...... 43

3.3.1 Formation and Sustainability of Communities of Practice ...... 46

3.3.2 Gaps Identified in the Literature ...... 48

3.4 Critical Action Research ...... 49

3.4.1 Critical Action Research in Higher Education...... 55

vii

3.4.2 Critical Action Research as the Focus of a CoP ...... 58

3.5 Concluding remarks ...... 59

Chapter 4 Conceptual Framework ...... 60

4.1 Introduction ...... 60

4.2 The Social Theory of Learning ...... 61

4.2.1 Components of the Social Theory of Learning ...... 62

4.3 Social Learning Systems ...... 63

4.3.1 Structuring Elements of Social Learning Systems...... 64

4.3.2 The Nature of Learning in Social Learning Systems ...... 64

4.4 Communities of Practice ...... 65

4.4.1 Characteristics of a Community of Practice ...... 66

4.4.2 Dimensions of a Community of Practice ...... 67

4.4.3 Key Success Factors for a Community of Practice ...... 69

4.4.4 Elements of a Community of Practice ...... 70

4.4.5 Boundary Processes ...... 71

4.4.6 Identities ...... 71

4.5. Landscapes of Practice ...... 72

4.5.1 Modes of Identification ...... 74

4.6 Concluding remarks ...... 76

Chapter 5 Methodology ...... 78

5.1 Introduction ...... 78

5.2 The Community ...... 79

5.3 The Study Participants ...... 80

5.3.1 Inviting New Members ...... 80 viii

5.3.2 Focal Participants ...... 82

5.4 Research Approach ...... 82

5.5 Research Design ...... 83

5.6 Data Collection: Qualitative Methods ...... 85

5.6.1 Observations ...... 87

5.6.2 Background Questionnaire...... 88

5.6.3 Document Review ...... 88

5.6.4 Conversational Interviews ...... 89

5.6.5 Focus Groups ...... 91

5.7 Data Analysis ...... 92

5.7.1 Questionnaires and Document Review ...... 92

5.7.2 Observations ...... 92

5.7.3 Conversational Interviews and Focus Groups ...... 93

5.8 Validity and Reliability ...... 95

5.8.1 Triangulation ...... 96

5.9 Ethical Considerations ...... 96

5.10 Limitations of the Study ...... 98

Chapter 6 Participants’ Portraits and Landscapes of Practice ...... 100

6.1 Introduction ...... 100

6.2 Members of the Community: Comparative Portraits ...... 100

6.2.1 Academic Backgrounds and Ongoing Education ...... 101

6.2.2 Teaching Experience and Current Activities in the University ...... 104

6.2.3 Research Experience ...... 106

6.3 Focal Participants ...... 109

6.3.1 Teresa ...... 110 ix

6.3.2 Tatiana...... 111

6.3.3 Telmo ...... 113

6.3.4 Camila ...... 114

6.3.5 Tania ...... 116

6.3.6 Tito ...... 117

6.3.7 Cecilia ...... 118

6.3.8 Claudio ...... 120

Chapter 7 The Organization of Our Community of Practice ...... 123

7.1 Introduction ...... 123

7.2 The Building Blocks for a New Community of Practice ...... 124

7.2.1 Previous Research Experience ...... 124

7.2.2 Initial Expectations ...... 127

7.2.3 Willingness to Participate ...... 131

7.2.4 The Community and Detrimental Discourses ...... 134

7.3 Procedural Experiences of Our CoP ...... 136

7.3.1 Connectivity between the Members...... 136

7.3.2 Membership ...... 138

7.3.3 Feedback in Interaction ...... 142

7.3.4 Professional Growth...... 145

7.4 Crossing the Boundary between the Traditional and the New ...... 146

7.4.1 Should the Community Prioritize Theory or Practice? ...... 146

7.4.2 Demand for External Support ...... 148

7.4.3 New Concerns, New Challenges...... 150

7.4.4 Future projects ...... 151

Chapter 8 CAR Plans and Projects ...... 154

8.1 Introduction ...... 154

8.2 Background of the Projects ...... 155

8.2.1 Researching or Not Researching Our Students: The Dilemma ...... 155

8.2.2 The Heterogeneous Realities of Our Students ...... 158

8.3 Ideas for Projects ...... 162

8.3.1 Talking about Social Justice and Intersectionality...... 162

8.3.2 Is the Community Ready for Social Justice and Intersectionality? ...... 166

8.3.3 Students’ Realities and Teaching Practices ...... 168

8.4 Individual Projects ...... 170

8.4.1 Telmo’s Project ...... 171

8.4.2 Camila’s project ...... 173

8.5 Limitations for Conducting More Studies ...... 175

Chapter 9 Internal and External Factors of the CoP ...... 178

9.1 Introduction ...... 178

9.2 Time, the Enemy ...... 179

9.2.1 Attendance at the Meetings ...... 180

9.2.2 Overload of Responsibilities? ...... 182

9.3 The Language Institute ...... 185

9.3.1 Support ...... 185

9.3.2 The Denial of a Request ...... 188

9.4 The DIUC ...... 190

9.5 The University ...... 192

9.6 Future Perspectives ...... 195

Chapter 10 Making Connections ...... 197

10.1 Introduction ...... 197

10.2 Perceptions about Learning within a CoP that Focuses on CAR ...... 197

10.3 The Nature of Participants’ Contributions to the CoP ...... 201

10.4 Perceptions and Understandings of CAR and Social Justice ...... 203

10.5 Enabling and Constraining Factors of the CoP ...... 206

10.5.1 Enabling Factors ...... 206

10.5.2 Constraining Factors ...... 208

10.5.2 Personal Identity Markers: Enabling or Constraining Factors? ...... 211

10.6 Concluding Remarks ...... 213

Chapter 11 Conclusions ...... 214

11.1 Introduction ...... 214

11.2 Our Community of Practice ...... 214

11.3 Limitations of the Study ...... 216

11.4 Implications ...... 216

11.5 Future Directions ...... 218

Epilogue ...... 221

References ...... 223

Appendices ...... 235

xii

List of Tables

Table 1. Universities According to Finance Mode, 2017 ...... 21

Table 2. Student Population by Type of University 1970-1980 ...... 22

Table 3. Professors with a Doctoral Degree 2012-2015 ...... 27

Table 4. Hours Distribution for Full-Time Tenured Professors ...... 28

Table 5. Number of Professors with a Ph.D. Degree per Faculty ...... 33

Table 6. Number of Professors Enrolled in a Ph.D. Program ...... 35

Table 7. Sustainability Model for CoPs ...... 47

Table 8. Empirical Studies on Communities of Practice at Institutions of Higher Education...... 48

Table 9. Elements of a Community of Practice ...... 70

Table 10. Dimensions and Modes of Identification of a CoP ...... 76

Table 11. Members of the Community ...... 81

Table 12. Community Meetings ...... 86

Table 13. Research Reports Coding Scheme ...... 89

Table 14. Interviews Dates and Times ...... 91

Table 15. Data Analysis ...... 94

Table 16. Participants’ Academic Background ...... 103

Table 17. Participants’ Teaching Experiences and Activities in the University...... 105

Table 18. Participants’ Research Experience ...... 107

Table 19. Research Reports Details ...... 108

Table 20. Focal Participant Color Coding ...... 109

Table 21. Focal Participants’ Main Characteristics ...... 122

Table 22. Excerpt coding ...... 124

xiii

List of Figures

Figure 1. Who Am I? ...... 10

Figure 2. Organization of Chapter 2 ...... 17

Figure 3. First Universities in Ecuadorian Territory ...... 18

Figure 4. Gran Colombia ...... 19

Figure 5. Universidad Central del Ecuador, 1925...... 19

Figure 6. Gross enrolment ratio in tertiary education in Ecuador...... 24

Figure 7. Ecuadorian Constitution ...... 25

Figure 8. Prometeo Project Researchers’ Profiles ...... 26

Figure 9. Universidad de Cuenca in 1890 ...... 30

Figure 10. Aims of the Universidad de Cuenca ...... 31

Figure 11. Mission Statement Language Institute ...... 37

Figure 12. Vision Statement Language Institute ...... 37

Figure 13. Critical Action Research Model ...... 52

Figure 14. Components of the Social Theory of Learning ...... 63

Figure 15. Dimensions of a Community of Practice...... 67

Figure 16. Modes of Identification ...... 75

Figure 17. Stages of Data Collection ...... 88

Figure 18. Teresa’s Landscape ...... 110

Figure 19. Tatiana’s Landscape ...... 112

Figure 20. Telmo’s Landscape ...... 114

Figure 21. Camila’s Landscape...... 115

Figure 22. Tania’s Landscape ...... 117

Figure 23. Tito’s Landscape ...... 118

Figure 24. Cecilia’s Landscape ...... 119

Figure 25. Claudio’s Landscape ...... 120 xiv

List of Acronyms

AR Action Research CAR Critical Action Research CoP Community of Practice CoPs Communities of Practice CES Consejo de Educación Superior / Higher Education Council DIUC Dirección de Investigación de la Universidad de Cuenca/ Research Directorate of the University of Cuenca EFL English as a Foreign Language FEUE Federación de Estudiantes Universitarios del Ecuador / Federation of University Students of Ecuador FL Foreign Language FLACSO Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales / Latin American Faculty of Social Sciences HE Higher Education L1, L2, L3 First Language, Second Language, Third Language LOES Ley Orgánica de Educación Superior / Organic Law of Higher Education PAR Participatory Action Research SENESCYT Secretaría de Educación Superior, Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación / Secretariat of Higher Education, Science, Technology, and Innovation TEFL Teaching English as a Foreign Language TESOL Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages UC Universidad de Cuenca VLIR-IUC/ The interuniversity partnership between universities in Flanders (Belgium) UCUENCA and the University of Cuenca.

Appendices

Appendix A: Authorization Letter from the Academic Council of the Language Institute of the University of Cuenca: English Translation ...... 235

Appendix B: Authorization Letter from the Academic Council of the Language Institute of the University of Cuenca: Original Spanish...... 236

Appendix C: Ethics Approval ...... 237

Appendix D: Sign-up sheet ...... 238

Appendix E: Email to Potential Participants ...... 239

Appendix F: Information Letter and Consent Form for Director ...... 240

Appendix G: Information and Consent Form for Participants in the Community ...... 245

Appendix H: Information and Consent Form for Focal Participants ...... 250

Appendix I: Background Questionnaire ...... 255

Appendix J: Interview Questions ...... 257

xvi

Prologue

I had just finished my courses and comprehensive exams in a doctoral program at one of the top-ranking universities in the world and went back to my job at the Universidad de Cuenca in

Ecuador. On my first day back, I attended a faculty meeting where the results of the evaluation of the Language Institute were presented. These results were what we expected in some areas, but in others they were surprising and disturbing. This was particularly the case with those results related to research. The number of professors conducting research could be counted on the fingers of one hand. It was alarming because none of the decisions at the Institute for over 50 years had been made based on findings from research; rather, they were made on assumptions and best guesses. It was worrysome because we did not have research projects underway, and even worse, from the perspective of the

University administration, we had not published any articles in indexed journals. This state of affairs in the Institute would most certainly impact the Government’s evaluation in 2018.

The Higher Education Council will revisit and evaluate universities on a regular basis, and one of the most important areas that will be reviewed is our performance as researchers using a number of metrics including the number of academic articles published in peer reviewed national and international

1 2 journals. It had become clear to me that the top-down government reforms our University had begun to implement had grown from a nationally imposed neoliberal agenda where research performance had become central to secure recognition and more funding. Unfortunately this aspect of the government-sanctioned reform agenda overshadowed another part of the initially envisioned educational reform for universities which was the need to address social issues through research.

Some professors felt no need to worry about the proposed reform because the Language Institute had traditionally been a ‘teaching-only’ branch of the university and they did not imagine that would change. In addition, a small number of professors at the Institute already working in research teams, were not worried either as they had begun publishing articles.

As I considered their research, I was concerned that it was not directly connected to our teaching context nor did it focus on any of the issues and particularly inequities among students and faculty in our Institute. I don’t mean to diminish the importance of my colleagues’ research which considers linguistic issues beyond our teaching context.

I felt that something needed to be done to open doors for professors in the Institute and allow them to see the possibility of conducting more qualitatively-oriented research

3 in their own classrooms. I wanted our Institute to not only comply with the conditions imposed by the government, but I hoped we could work collaboratively to learn and improve upon our teaching practices while addressing issues related to social justice. I believed that all professors needed to consider their teaching context critically to understand the issues that impact our students’ and our own experiences. Our job is not to change the world into a utopia, but it is our responsibility to raise awareness about the reality in our classrooms to strengthen the change potentialities that neoliberal forces seek to dissolve.

For me, this lack of research in the Institute meant an opportunity to help colleagues develop a critical teacher- researcher identity that could be the start of an important change. In fact, I proposed forming a community focused on learning about critical action research and sharing knowledge and experiences related to teaching and research. However, my proposal was not welcomed by some of my colleagues who I think believed I was proposing this community solely for the purpose of completing my doctoral research study.

Although the creation of a community did indeed allow me to carry out my doctoral thesis, I designed my doctoral research in this way because I wanted to create something meaningful that would support the professional development of some of

4 my colleagues who did not have the same privileges and opportunities as I had. Unfortunately, the fact that I was working toward a PhD in a top-ranking university with the support an Ecuadorian government scholarship was an issue for several colleagues. My ideas, proposals, and projects were rejected by some who said that changes could not be introduced because things would remain the way they had been for a long time already.

Stubborn as I am, I decided to follow Socrates’ advice: “The secret of change is to focus all of your energy, not on fighting the old, but on building the new.” I moved ahead with my proposal and created the community with those colleagues who were open to change. We have explored new ways to think about research and equity together for over a year now. There have been several issues to overcome and I am sure the future will bring more but the plan is to continue exploring the possibilities while enjoying the journey.

Chapter 1 Introduction

1.1 Research in Ecuadorian Universities

Although the university has been internationally conceived of as a site for knowledge generation through research, in Ecuador, since its colonial origin, the university was established as an institution for teaching and learning only. Universities around the world have contributed to the economic and social development of society. The research activities in universities generally have led to the generation of new and valuable knowledge resulting from the efforts of researchers and research teams. However, until recently universities in Ecuador have been solely teaching institutions where knowledge has been merely transmitted but neither transformed nor produced.

In the last decade, with the arrival of the so-called ‘Citizenship Revolution,’ the Ecuadorian government and its Higher Education Council / Consejo de Educación Superior (henceforth CES) has commanded universities to place major emphasis on research in all academic areas, and this is particularly the case in science and technology. Thus, primary, secondary and tertiary levels of education have gone through evaluations and reforming processes. However, special attention has been given to those reforms taking place in higher education, placing it as the axis of the ‘education revolution’ of the country. Currently all universities in Ecuador ought to work toward shifting from teaching institutions to universities that involve and require research and knowledge production that should be translated into articles published in high ranking journals.

Ecuadorian universities were evaluated to determine why faculty was not conducting, and in some cases not even interested, in research. It was found that the main problems were a lack of resources, lack of professors’ interest to commit to research endeavors, the quality of the faculty, in terms of graduate degrees, and the decision of the universities themselves to be teaching institutions. Some universities made this decision mainly because, as in many places around the globe, teaching and research in Ecuador, have been considered two separate worlds; professors either teach or research, but cannot do both. Based on these results, the government decided to restructure how universities are conceived in the country. It has allocated more funds to

5 6 encourage the proposal and development of research projects, and it is motivating, even forcing, professors to enroll as students in research-based graduate programs as a requirement to become tenured or be promoted within the tenure track.

In 2010, the Ley Orgánica de Educación Superior (henceforth LOES), a law for higher education, was passed by the National Assembly, and its general regulation (Reglamento General a la Ley Orgánica de Educación Superior) was issued in 2011. In 2010, the regulation for higher education institutions was that all professors should have at least one master’s degree as a basic requirement to teach at the university level and that the degree had to be in the knowledge area they were teaching. However, in 2011 the stakes went higher, requiring all universities to have at least 70% of their faculty with Ph.D. degrees by 2017 if the university wanted to be a teaching and research focus institution and offer academic graduate degrees (Asamblea Nacional del Ecuador, 2011). This requirement was very ambitions not to say unrealistic as in many institutions, in the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto for example, it takes an average of 5.6 years for the completion of a doctoral degree. For professors who obtained their tenured positions before this law was approved, obtaining a doctoral degree is not mandatory. However, conducting research and publishing articles in high-ranking journals is imperative if they want to escalate in their career paths (CES, 2012).

Faculty in the humanities and social sciences in Ecuadorian universities have been reluctant to conduct research because there has been a fossilized belief that teaching and researching are two entirely separate activities. On the one hand, university instructors dismiss academic research because they assume that all valid research should be conducted within a positivist paradigm with a focus on issues that are not related to their daily work in the classroom. In addition, they believe that so called acceptable research should be quantitative and large scale in the sciences rather than the humanities and social sciences. On the other hand, they do not feel interested in researching their classroom because academia usually does not consider it as scientifically significant.

1.2 The Problem with Research

The ongoing changes have been taking place for the Ecuadorian universities, and the conditions the government has been imposing on universities and professors have created major concerns for faculty. Professors, like myself have accepted that sooner or later, in one way or another, we will have to get involved in research teams and projects. We have also recognized that although the rules are set, there is a lack of interest on the part of a large group of professors to conduct research as well as lack of institutional support, particularly for the social sciences.

It is true that not all professors at the University of Cuenca, and most notably, at the Language Institute have the possibility or desire to enroll in research-based graduate programs. The reasons they cite vary based on their individual realities regarding economic and personal reasons (they do not have the money to pay for tuition fees and/or do not want to leave family), but some are indeed interested in learning how to conduct research and publish to have opportunities for professional development and career advancement.

Although the Language Institute was founded over 50 years ago and currently teaches five different languages to more than three thousand students, the professors have never been encouraged to conduct research either within their classrooms or beyond. As a result, because some faculty members express fear or disinterest in research, it has become the stranger that is not invited into our daily conversations and interactions. Therefore, the biggest issue is not the university’s expectation that faculty conduct research in addition to their teaching responsibilities, but rather the timeframe in which professors are expected to shift from a focus on teaching to a focus on both teaching and research in their day-to-day professional lives.

1.3 Is There a Possible Solution?

In response to the current situation related to research opportunities in Ecuadorian universities and the Language Institute at the University of Cuenca, I proposed to create a community in which the professors of the Institute could share with and learn from each other. The purpose of the community was not only to come up with research projects that would help us advance to tenure, but also to develop new and critical understandings of our teaching practices, the issues within our language classrooms, and the actions we take to address these problems. It was about

8 taking into account the student as a human being who is “shaped by the interaction of different social locations (e.g., laws, policies, state governments and other political and economic unions, religious institutions, media)” (Hankivsky, 2014, p. 2).

It is imperative to give a voice to what professors do in their classrooms and to what students need, and embedding research in our teaching practices might be the right start. Finding that connection between teaching and researching helps teachers develop deep understandings of their practice and the ability to make judgments that are in accordance with their profession and context (Lankshear & Knobel, 2004).

Research helps teachers move away from a teaching-learning process of transmission to one based on transformative practices that can impact the broader educational community in positive ways. A teacher doing research in his/her classroom becomes a critically knowledgeable individual who challenges current practices in order to benefit learners and their professional development.

In this sense, the main objective of universities in Ecuador should not only be encouraging the type of research that minimizes the gap between teaching and researching, but it should be looking for strategies that make the integration a possible and ongoing process. This nexus may support the transformation of higher education to achieve high academic standards and to address and challenge social issues.

1.4 Learning in Community

The purpose of this study is to examine how the members of a recently formed community of practice oriented to critical action research perceive their learning experiences within the community. The members of this community are 16 university-level Ecuadorian language instructors who share an interest in learning and conducting research in their classrooms addressing issues of social justice to become critically engaged and socially responsible, while at the same time complying with the current requirements of the Ecuadorian university. Therefore, their perceptions of critical action research and social justice while participating in the community will be analyzed.

Furthermore, this research explores and describes the nature of the participants’ contributions and the exchanges between them, and how these insights foster the development and strengthening of the community. As humans’ behaviors are highly dependent on the context in which they are embedded, the individual, community and institutional factors that affect their participation and contributions to the community will also be examined.

1.5 Research Questions

This study investigates how language instructors’ understandings and interpretations of their classrooms issues are shaped when participating in a community of practice. Importantly, this community also seeks to promote critical action research as a way to become change agents for equity and social justice through education while complying with the university requirements and achieving professional development. In this light, this doctoral research attempts to answer the following overarching and sub-research questions.

How do university-level language instructors perceive their learning within a community of practice that focuses on critical action research?

1. What is the nature of the contributions of university-level Ecuadorian language instructors to the community of practice?

2. What are the perceptions and understandings of university-level Ecuadorian language instructors of critical action research and social justice after participating in the community of practice?

3. How do individual and institutional factors enable or constrain university-level Ecuadorian language instructors’ participation and commitment to the community of practice?

1.6 Who Am I and what is My Connection to the Research?

I decided to represent myself, and later the participants of this study borrowing the circle and square from Leonardo da Vinci’s drawing the Vitruvian Man. In this drawing, da Vinci portrays a man inscribed in a circle and square to represent the human body as the main source of proportion, but it also represents the perfection and equilibrium of the human being as the center

10 of all things and the only one with the capacity to make sense of the world that surrounds him/her. I found a direct relationship between the drawing and the notion of communities of practice in the sense that CoPs locate learning in the person and his/her relationship with the social world that surrounds him/her. Additionally, I consider that da Vinci’s representation relates to the notion of positionality which “refers to the stance or positioning of the researcher in relation to the social and political context of the study – the community, the organization or the participant group” (Rowe, 2014, p. 628).

Figure 1. Who Am I?

Who I am today has depended greatly on my family background, lived experiences, learning choices, and professional life. I could not define myself with fixed categories as many different factors have had an impact in shaping my identity which in turn frames and explains my positioning in relation to every aspect and phase of this research process (Rowe, 2014).

Born to parents from two different cultures and languages (my father is Ecuadorian, and my mother is Canadian), as a child, I was taught to see myself as bicultural and bilingual. I use the word taught because I grew up in Ecuador where bicultural and bilingual identities at that time were scarce. I thank my parents for the opportunity they gave me to embrace and love both cultures and language as well as the customs and identities that came with them. The connection with Canada created in me a particular interest in knowing the language for more than communicating with my mother and relatives; I wanted to be more and do more with it and through it.

In Ecuador, I was very close to my extended family, and most of my aunts and uncles are teachers. I could see how important the teaching profession was and value the amazing job teachers do. It was then that I knew what to do with my love for English and my passion for the teaching profession. I have a bachelor’s degree in education with a focus on teaching English as a foreign language and a master’s degree in English and applied linguistics. During my bachelor’s degree, I taught English from grades 5 to 10, and while writing my master’s thesis, I started working as a university professor. My first university lecture was in 2008 in Universidad del Azuay, a private university in the Cuenca, and two years later I was tenured at the Language Institute of the University de Cuenca.

Working at the university level was challenging from day one; students were critical, demanding, and their needs and expectations were much higher than those of children and teenagers. When I taught at both universities, particularly at the Universidad de Cuenca, I was able to grow personally and professionally and take on leadership roles through which I developed new perspectives and perceived the injustices that exist among students and professors.

Now, I teach in the Faculty of Philosophy and Education within the framework of the Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL) undergraduate program. I am also the research coordinator for the Master’s program in TEFL and I am the director of a research project in the undergraduate TEFL program. These different positions have allowed me to navigate the context not only as a classroom instructor but as a leader who has had the opportunity to notice the educational, professional, and social issues that affect students and professors.

“Who dares to teach must never cease to learn” – John Cotton Dana

I realized I had to continue learning and preparing myself to meet the demands of my context and challenge the social issues I had perceived and lived. I applied for two graduate programs in two different years, and in 2013 I was accepted in the Language and Literacies Education Ph.D. program at OISE; moreover, I was granted full scholarship by the Ecuadorian government to pay for my doctoral studies. It was such an honor to be accepted at the University of Toronto which besides being one of the top universities in the world, is also part of my Canadian identity. I decided to take on this new learning adventure and it has been life changing; in me it has created a real transformation. Coming to OISE and discussing about issues related to equity, social justice, and respect for diversity, made me develop a more critical stance toward the many social issues that, in the Ecuadorian university context, are often ignored.

My experience as a learner, a teacher, and a researcher in training allowed me to take on several roles in this research study; however, my positioning remained, at all times, that of an insider researcher which, according to Rowe (2014), is “consistent with the foundational principles of action research as a participatory and reflexive practice that involves researchers and participants in a process of co-inquiry to address identified problems, create change or explore opportunities” (p. 628).

I played different roles and each of these helped me observe and interpret the experiences of the community from various perspectives. My positioning in relation to the context affected the different stages of the research process (Rowe, 2014), from the designing stages to the interpretation of the individual and collective understandings of the participants within the community.

1.6.1 A Convener

A person who is responsible or has the desire and/or necessity to gather people for a specific purpose or to address a specific problem is known as convener. According to Neil and Neal (2011), a convener is one who gathers and holds people together for the “sake of authentic engagement” (p. 4).

At the beginning of the project, I took on this role. I invited all the professors at the Language Institute to form a community of research with me. This community’s main purpose was to share our teaching and research experiences, doubts, issues and to discuss them in a critical way. Also, it was a way to learn about critical action research to be able to address our classroom problems in a way that would benefit students.

When I made the invitation to join a community of practice, I let my colleagues know that my preference was not to be the leader of the group or have any special privileges. In fact, I was an insider researcher because of the simmilarities I shared with the participants in terms of “common expectations, intensions and power equity” (Rowe, 2014, p. 629). My hope has been that they would see me as the person who facilitated the process of getting together to create a space where we could co-construct our research knowledge based on our learning, teaching and research experiences.

Nonetheless, throughout the study, my convener role evolved to be more than just the initiator of the community. The fact that I belonged to different communities, especially to OISE, and experienced different levels of leadership throughout my career, made my voice louder than other members of the community. That is, much of what took place within the community stemmed from my role of convener which was influenced and guided by my own experiences and desire to develop initiatives beyond what happens in the classroom and bring change forward. This is an example of how the community experienced some of the ‘top down’ versus ‘bottom up’ tension referenced earlier.

1.6.2 A Participant – Researcher

As mentioned before, my positioning in this research project was an emic one. I was an active member of the community since its first meeting in November 2015. I embraced this new space within the broader community of professors at the Language Institute as a co-participant and a co-learner of critical action research. Since I am a regular instructor who is not part of the academic or administrative board of the Institute, power imbalance within the community from an administrative perspective did not occur.

Nonetheless, as noted by Rowe (2014), “positionality is multidimensional, and it is not uncommon for the researcher(s) to be closely positioned to the participants on some dimensions and not on others. These disparities can create conflict, changing the process and outcomes of the study” (p. 629). In this regard, I must acknowledge that being the only professor at the Institute working toward a PhD that involved the initiation of a new community in a top-ranking university with an Ecuadorian government scholarship, caused some resistance among colleagues and likely led to fewer participants in my study than expected. To make the process less challenging, I guaranteed my colleagues that the ultimate purpose of the community was not my dissertation but to create an inquiry site. I also mentioned that in this space, we could feel comfortable sharing experiences and the problems we encounter in our classroom and learning how to act towards those issues in a more critical and efficient manner.

I did not document the first meetings as the Research Ethics approval was still pending. During our first interactions, we came to agreements regarding frequency for our meetings, topics that would be discussed, and the areas we wanted to focus our research. After receiving approval, data were compiled from February 1, 2016, until March 7, 2017. I audio-recorded several meetings for further transcription and analysis. My interventions during the meetings were also considered during the analysis and synthesis of the data.

Being a participant-researcher provided an opportunity to observe the relationship between the researcher and the community to generate knowledge that is critical and that seeks social transformation (Anderson, Herr, & Nihlen, 1994).

1.6.3 A Critical Action Researcher

As a result of my analysis and critique of the research experience, professors at the University of Cuenca, and particularly the Language Institute were required to produce research but were not always given the opportunities or encouragement to learn about and conduct research. Indeed, the institutional support and interest were given to the hard sciences, leaving the social sciences aside meaning I was studying what I saw as marginalized population.

By creating this community and examining its evolution, I wanted to empower the professors to give their teaching experiences a voice and create a space where we could learn from and with

15 each other. As a critical action researcher, I was able to live, learn and experience through the worldviews of the community members, and as a group, we started “understanding and even challenging conflicting value systems” (Davis, 2008, p. 5).

1.7 Overview of Chapters

In this chapter I have included the background to the study, which briefly describes the current status research has in Ecuadorian universities, and the requirements professors are asked to meet. In addition, I presented the research questions that guided the study, my roles in the research, and my relationship with the research topic.

Chapter 2 contextualizes the research study exploring higher education in Ecuador since it was first established, and the major changes it has gone through in the last decade. It offers a closer description of the University of Cuenca and its Language Institute to understand better the conditions in which professors work and what is expected from them.

Chapter 3 reviews relevant literature that has empirically studied the link between teaching and research in higher education, and how communities of practice can be potential sites to find the nexus. Furthermore, it surveys the literature on critical action research in universities and as the main focus of communities of practice which members are university professors.

Chapter 4 discusses and explains the conceptual framework upon which the trajectory of individual members of the community and the community as a whole are analyzed and interpreted.

Chapter 5 describes the research methodology, the participants who took part of the study, and the stages of data collection and data analysis. In addition, it includes a description of the factors taken into consideration to guarantee the validity and reliability of the study, the ethical considerations, and limitations.

Chapters 6 to 9 present the key research findings, providing rich and in-depth descriptions and analysis of the creation and evolution of a community practice that focuses on critical action research.

Chapter 10 includes interpretations of the findings through the social learning and communities of practice conceptual framework.

The final chapter, Chapter 11, describes the conclusions, revisits the limitations, and suggests implications and areas for further research.

Chapter 2 Research Context

“El Ecuador irá a donde su Universidad vaya.” / “Ecuador will go where its University goes.” – Osvaldo Hurtado Larrea, President of Ecuador, 1982

2.1 Introduction

To contextualize the study and to better understand the status of research in Ecuadorian universities, this chapter has been organized from the general to the specific. First, I offer a description of the Ecuadorian university through a historical account that includes the key points in time that will shed light on how and why the university in Ecuador came to be what it is today. Additionally, I include an explanation of the research culture in the country from the past to the present, and the regulations that are currently governing the higher education system. Then, I describe the Universidad de Cuenca, which is the site for my research, in terms of its organization, objectives, research, and what I consider the most important, its faculty. In the last section of the chapter, I describe the Language Institute at the Universidad de Cuenca and how research has been promoted among its professors who are the participants of this study. Figure 2 depicts the organization of this chapter.

Higher Education in Ecuador

The University of Cuenca

The Language Institute

Figure 2. Organization of Chapter 2

2.2 The Ecuadorian University

The Ecuadorian university throughout time has survived tough processes and decisions. It first started as a Colonial inheritance with a strong intervention of the Catholic church and survived the political agenda of the governments in turn. Over the last nine years, the Ecuadorian university has been exposed to a major transformation that goes beyond those that have come before demanding new high-stake requirements be met.

2.2.1 The Colonial Universities

The first universities in what today is Ecuadorian territory were founded between 1586 and 1686 by three Catholic congregations. The Augustinians founded the Universidad de San Fulgencio in 1586, through a Papal Bull given by the Pope Sixtus V. In 1622, the Jesuits established the Royal Pontifical Universidad de San Gregorio Magno, and in 1681 the Dominican Order created a convent that was later established as the Universidad Santo Tomás de Aquino in 1688 (Malo, 1985; Ramos Ampudia, 2000).

Spain (the Crown)

Real y Pontificia Universidad de San Universidad Santo Universidad de San Fulgencio Tomás de Aquino Gregorio Magno

Figure 3. First Universities in Ecuadorian Territory

As a result of the expulsion of the Jesuits by the Crown, in 1767 the three universities were closed. However, 1786 a new institution for higher education, resulting from the merging of the Real y Pontificia Universidad de San Gregorio Magno and the Universidad Santo Tomás de Aquino, was established. The new institution, Real Universidad Santo Tomás, offered studies in philosophy, theology, law, and medicine. This university was mainly founded to educate the Catholic monarchy and the future priests (Malo, 1985).

In 1826, in the Congress of Cundinamarca, Simón Bolívar created a Central University in each department of the Gran Colombia: Venezuela (today Venezuela), Cundinamarca (today Colombia, Panama and some parts of Central America) and Quito (today Ecuador). Then the Real Universidad Santo Tomás adopted the name Universidad Central de Quito (Malo, 1985). Figure 4 depicts Gran Colombia and its departments in 1826.

Figure 4. Gran Colombia (Hispanoamerica Unida, 2013)

2.2.2 The Postcolonial Catholic University: Omnium potentior est sapientia

After the independence of Ecuador in 1830, the Universidad Central de Quito was maintained and framed to meet the political and academic contexts of the new Republic. In 1836, the President of Ecuador, Vicente Rocafuerte, signed a decree to change the name of the institution to its current name, Universidad Central del Ecuador and gave it the motto Omnium potentior est sapientia (Wisdom is almighty). Figure 5 depicts a historical photo of the Universidad Central del Ecuador.

Figure 5. Universidad Central del Ecuador, 1925 (Centro Cultural, 2000).

The link between the State and the Catholic church in Ecuador was reinforced as a confessional status was established, declaring in its first Constitution that the religion of Ecuador was Catholic, Apostolic, and Roman. In 1862, the Holy See and President Gabriel García Moreno signed an agreement through which all Catholic communities were given the responsibility of the country’s education at all levels (Ramos Ampudia, 2000).

In 1867, in Guayaquil and Cuenca, the second and third largest cities in the country, two public universities were founded. However, when President Gabriel García Moreno took power in 1869, he demanded to close the Universidad Central del Ecuador, intervened the universities in Cuenca and Guayaquil, and created the Escuela Politécnica Nacional. After some years, during the presidency of Antonio Borrero, the Universidad Central del Ecuador opened again (Ramos Ampudia, 2000).

2.2.3 The University and Liberalism

In 1895, during the radical liberal revolution led by Eloy Alfaro, all links between the University and the Church were dismantled, eliminating programs in Theology and Canon Law. Furthermore, the liberal government proclaimed Ecuador as a country with freedom of creed in the Constitution of 1906. Particular attention was given to education at all levels, supporting secular education and the inclusion of women and the working class. In 1921, a process of democratization of the university with a student co-governing model started, accepting the participation of students in the collegial bodies of universities (Ramos Ampudia, 2000; Ayala Mora, 2015).

During the government of Francisco Paéz in 1937 and in order to reestablish the relationships with the Holy See, a Modus Vivendi was subscribed to guarantee the presence of the Catholic Church in the country. As a result, in 1946 the first private university, led by Jesuit priests, was founded in Quito to educate the secular and religious elite. Since then, the number of universities in the country has multiplied; currently, according to CES, there are 57 institutions in the country (CES, 2017).

Universities were grouped according to the type of financing they received from the Government. The groups included public, those which are fully financed; co-financed private,

21 those which are partly funded by the Government due to the Modus Vivendi between Ecuador and the Holy See (most of these universities are Catholic); and self-financed private. This grouping system remains the same today (Asamblea Nacional del Ecuador, 2010). A breakdown of the number of institutions in the group is depicted in Table 1. Table 1. Universities According to Finance Mode, 2017

Type N

Public 31

Private 18

Co-financed private 8

Total 57

2.2.4 Research Then and Now

Universities in Ecuador, throughout time, have been teaching institutions in which the transmission of information has played a major role. Knowledge generation and the production of research in the form of academic articles or books has been practically null, with undergraduate and graduate theses being the only evidence of existing research. There was little monetary investment from the Government and only the wealthy intellectuals of the time could fund their research work and even bring foreign researchers. The few Ecuadorian researchers at that time belonged to the field of Medicine, Biology, and Archeology (Ayala Mora, 2015).

The beginning of the oil exploitation in 1972 brought a major shift in the Ecuadorian economy, motivating the State to increase its public investment in construction, housing, and education. The universities and polytechnic institutions started to build laboratories and purchase more resources to conduct research. There was more support for the social and economic sciences through the creation of research institutes and centers in different universities of the country. International aid arrived at the state in the form of books and journals, which opened the study of research methodologies and techniques (Ayala Mora, 2015).

Ecuador, as many countries of Latin America, experienced massification of higher education due to the social, economic, and cultural changes (Schwartzman, 1999). Massification is a term coined to describe the rapid growth of enrollment in tertiary education worldwide. The oil industry, modernization, and the agrarian reform in Ecuador improved the living conditions of the working class, and as a result, a major increase in the number of student registrations at all levels, especially in high schools, occurred. Rapidly, the number of high school graduates who wanted to go to university grew, pressuring higher education institutions through protests, which even provoked deaths, to eliminate the admission exam to have more opportunities to access the University (Ayala Mora, 2015). Between 1970 and 1980 there was an average increase of 21.4% in students’ registration (Pareja, 1986), which represents 26.15% of the gross enrolment ratio for tertiary education (UNESCO Institute for Statistics, 2017). Table 2 shows the increase in enrollments over this 10-year period in both public and co-financed private/private institutions. Table 2. Student Population by Type of University 1970-1980 Type of University 1970 1975 1980

Public 30,009 110,055 222,762

Co-financed private and private 8,304 19,075 39,788

Total 38,313 129,130 262,550

The overcrowding of universities at that time required more expenditures to build more physical space and hiring more professors. In order to meet the high demand, many of the professors hired were not properly trained. Research activities were left aside as most professors were dedicated exclusively to teaching and developing their teaching material. Nevertheless, some still looked for ways to develop and conduct research projects in different areas with the help of foreign researchers.

In 1983, the Government decided to allocate 1% of the general budget to research activities; unfortunately, these funds were not given regularly, and researchers were sometimes not paid for months (Ayala Mora, 2015). The gap between professors and researchers started to grow because the main activity of the Ecuadorian university remained teaching and the formalization of

23 teachers; there were not academic or scientific profiles (Cevallos Estarellas & Bramwell, 2015). Research in public higher education institutions was an activity that depended solely on the additional budget assigned, if any, and in the case of public universities, research was not existent. (Ayala Mora, 2015).

Although admission courses and exams were implemented in the 90’s in public and private universities, the student population in higher education institutions has kept growing, making difficult the shift from teaching-only to teaching and research universities. It is important to note, however, that the growth has fluctuated in the last decade due to two government decisions.

First, higher education was declared a free right for all citizens in 2008, which explains the high gross enrolment ratio increase since that year until 2012. Second, a new national admission exam was implemented in 2012, which created restrictions but attempted to guarantee quality in the access to higher education. In the same year, after the government’s evaluation of universities, some institutions of higher education were closed due to lack of education and administration quality. This event forced hundreds of students to enroll in programs similar to the ones they were studying in other universities of the country.

Since 2012, although student population has kept growing, the increase of the gross enrolment ratio has not been as significant as it was in 2008. Figure 6 depicts the increase in the gross enrollment ratio in the years were the changes mentioned above occurred.

2013: 40.48%

2012: 39.86%

2008: 38.68%

1991: 19.54%

1990: 19.54%

Figure 6. Gross enrolment ratio in tertiary education in Ecuador (UNESCO Institute for Statistics, 2017).

2.2.5 The Education ‘Revolution.'

Since the approval of the new Constitution of Ecuador in 2008, the university has been exposed to a series of changes to make it more efficient and effective, to offer high-quality education, to include research in its daily activities, and to find a connection with the broader community. The aim of this long-needed transformation involves encouraging the building of a strong research culture to observe and propose solutions to the issues of the Ecuadorian communities to satisfy the needs, guarantee the rights, potentiate the social capacities, and improve the quality of life of people (Asamblea Nacional del Ecuador, 2010).

For the first time in more than two decades, a government decided to propose a solution to the problems higher education had been facing and included in its Constitution relevant aspects that deal with teaching and research in universities. The relevant articles of the Constitution are depicted in Figure 7.

Article 350. The higher education system shall be aimed at academic and professional

training with a scientific and humanist vision; scientific and technological research;

innovation, promotion, development, and dissemination of wisdom and cultures; building solutions for the country’s problems with respect to the objectives of the development system.

Article 351. The higher education system shall be articulated with the national education system and the National Development Plan; the law shall establish

mechanisms to coordinate the higher education system with the Executive Branch. This system shall be governed by the principles of responsible autonomy, joint governance, equality of opportunities, quality, relevance, integrality, self-determination to engender

thinking and knowledge, in the framework of a dialogue between different forms of

knowledge, universal thinking, and global scientific and technological production.

Figure 7. Ecuadorian Constitution (Asamblea Nacional del Ecuador, 2008, p. 123).

The Government’s plan to achieve this transformation included various strategies. It developed a program that encourages students and professors to pursue their master and doctoral degrees in the best universities of the world. The government grants full scholarships for programs that are related to the areas of interest and need of the country; e.g. engineering, medical, technology, and education. The grant pays for tuition fees, research costs, and living expenses. Individuals interested in obtaining the scholarship go through two separate processes. First, they have to apply and be accepted to an international university. Second, in Ecuador, there is a rigorous selection process in which applicants have to meet criteria regarding educational background and achieve high scores in a series of evaluations (SENESCYT, 2016).

Those who are selected and travel to study abroad must return to the country after they graduate to work for the government double the time they were studying. Although they are required to provide their services to the government, they are fully paid. Recent graduates must reimburse the country for its investment (grants can be as high as $250,000 USD); these reimbursements are not financial, but are made by graduates sharing their knowledge with future professionals.

The Vice-Minister of Science and Technology recognized that these programs meant a long-term strategy for the development of the country. During its first stage, transfer of knowledge will be experienced until the country starts generating its own knowledge (Bajak & Sibaja, 2012).

A second program is the Prometeo Project, which seeks to promote and strengthen education, scientific research, innovation and technological development in all strategic areas of the country (Ramírez, 2013). This program’s main objective is to repatriate those Ecuadorian brains that had to leave due to the crisis and lack of opportunities and to attract foreign researchers with extensive and well-known experience in a particular area of studies, such as technology, innovation, and productivity. Foreign scholars stay temporarily in Ecuador to develop research projects and help with the training of Ecuadorian researchers. By the end of 2012, the project had regained 50 Ecuadorians that were working abroad and had imported 50 foreign talents.

Currently, these skilled individuals are being paid a relatively competitive salary ($6,000 U.S. per month) compared to what they earned outside of the country. There is an increased interest in the project by researchers, professors, and professionals in different fields from Spain, the United States, and other nations from the developed and the developing world. Currently, more than 500 applications are being assessed (Bajak & Sibaja, 2012). Figure 8 depicts a sample chart containing the researchers’ profiles. RESEARCHERS PROFILES

APPLICANT SPECIALTY CATEGORY NATIONALITY

Name, Last name Doctor in Paleontology Researcher Spain Name, Last name Ph.D. in Communication and Television Researcher Brazil Name, Last name Ph.D. in BioMolecular Sciences Researcher Italy Name, Last name Doctor in Molecular Biology Researcher United States Name, Last name Doctor in Geomorphology Researcher Belgium Name, Last name Doctor in Zoology Researcher Colombia

Figure 8. Prometeo Project Researchers’ Profiles (adapted from SENESCYT, 2016).

2.2.6 From a Teaching-Only to a Teaching and Research Focus

The LOES and its general regulation establish a typology for Ecuadorian universities that depends on the relevance given to research and the number of professors who have a Ph.D. degree. The law classifies universities in three levels: • Level 1: Teaching and research universities: will be allowed to offer academic master’s and doctoral programs, and conduct research projects. • Level 2: Teaching universities: will be allowed to offer undergraduate and graduate professional programs • Level 3: Will be authorized to offer continuing education programs (Asamblea Nacional del Ecuador, 2010, 2011).

For a university to be categorized in the first level, the law states that 70% of its faculty should have a doctoral degree. In October 2017, all universities will go through an evaluation process to be categorized according to the above-indicated criteria. It is important to mention that the law has caused major concern among the authorities at all higher institutions of the country because it lacks practicality; it is not possible to produce such a large percentage of professors with doctoral degrees in just a few years. Although the number of PhDs working at universities has doubled between 2012 and 2015, it has not even reached a 7% of the 35,501 professors working at higher education institutions in the country (SENESCYT, 2017) as depicted in Table 3. Table 3. Professors with a Doctoral Degree 2012-2015

Year Total Professors Professors with PhD Percentage

2012 33,720 1,056 3.13%

2013 36,873 1,166 3.16%

2014 39,402 1,665 4.22%

2015 35,501 2,278 6.42%

The LOES has an additional regulation, Reglamento de Carrera y Escalafón del Profesor e Investigador del Sistema de Educación Superior, that details the responsibilities professors have in terms of teaching, researching, and administration work, and the requirements they need to become tenured or be promoted. This regulation includes separate sections for professors who are already tenured or those who work under a contract.

According to this regulation, a full-time professor, tenured or not, must work 40 hours a week distributed as teaching, research, and administration hours. Contract full-time professors who want to have research hours must demonstrate research experience and be part of a project approved by the Research Directorate of the University. Part-time professors, tenured or not, work 20 hours a week and cannot take part in research projects. If they are interested in taking part of these activities, they have to do it on their own time, and they do not receive any monetary compensation for it (CES, 2012). Table 4. Hours Distribution for Full-Time Tenured Professors Activity Number of hours per week Teaching Between 3 and 16 hours a week (for each teaching hour, up to an hour of preparation and evaluation activities) Research Up to 31 hours Administration Up to 12 hours

2.2.7 The Neoliberal attack on the ‘Education Revolution’

As mentioned earlier, in 2007, the Ecuadorian government initiated an ambitious university reform; however, besides making undergraduate studies free, it adopted the characteristics of dominant educational systems which are based on neoliberal economic models (Davies & Bansel, 2007). In the last 10 years, the Ecuadorian government has developed policies and quality standards for higher education and has changed the funding systems of public universities. These reforms, according to Davies and Bansel (2007), include the main features of neoliberalism as it has been operationalized in higher education (HE) in many parts of the world since the 1980s.

An example of neoliberalism in HE involves the Ecuadorian government decision to create a new public polytechnic university, rejecting and discrediting the ones that existed in the country

29 which were valued and recognized internationally. Yachay Tech, was created ‘to promote the knowledge society’, a concept repeated constantly by President Correa. Its infrastructure cost more than the budget assigned to all public universities in one year. In 2016, this university had only nine thousand students while the rest of public universities had five hundred thousand.

Furthermore, in 2008, the Ecuadorian government adopted a university admission system based on standardized tests in the areas of Mathematics and the Spanish language. This admission system has resulted in systemic discrimination against marginalized groups including poor, indigenous, and afro Ecuadorian populations. This exclusion has been justified with the discourse that access to university should be based on individual merits and capabilities without considering the lack of opportunities students from public and rural high schools have in comparison to those from private urban institutions.

Neoliberalism in HE in Ecuador has become a way to control and discipline faculty. Competition, productivity and efficiency are encouraged and used as criteria to determine the effectiveness of university educators. Research is monitored and praised based on the number of publications in high ranking journals and registered patents. Finally, professors in all Ecuadorian universities have been asked to conduct research studies and write related articles for publication in indexed journal without the provision of sufficient training, support or time.

2.3 Universidad de Cuenca

The Universidad de Cuenca is a public university located in the mid-south of Ecuador. It was created in October 1867 for the development of the region, trying to break with the centralism that was present at the time. Thanks to the arrival of German professors, the Universidad de Cuenca created the Faculty of Sciences and offered courses of pure and applied mathematics and physics.

Figure 9. Universidad de Cuenca in 1890

After 150 years since its establishment, the Universidad de Cuenca is now organized in 12 faculties: Law and Social and Political Sciences, Medical Sciences, Architecture and Urbanism, Engineering, Chemical Sciences, Agricultural Sciences, Dentistry, Economic and Administration Sciences, Philosophy and Education Sciences, Hospitality Sciences, and Psychology. These faculties offer 49 undergraduate programs in all knowledge areas. Additionally, there are a Language and a Physical Education Institutes that collaborate with all the programs.

2.3.1 Mission, Vision, and Objectives

The Universidad de Cuenca’s mission is to train professionals and scientists engaged in the improvement of the quality of life in an intercultural context. The University is focused on academic quality, creativity and innovation, and its capacity to respond to the human and scientific challenges of today’s regional, national, and world society in an equitable, compassionate, and efficient way. The University projects itself as an institution that will be known and valued nationally and internationally for its excellence in teaching and research, relationship with the community, and for its engagement with the development plans of the region and country that seek to generate a critical thinking model in the society (Consejo Universitario, 2013). The six aims of the institution are depicted in Figure 10.

Commitment Transparency Excellence Loyalty Innovation Equity

• Society and • Academic, • Encourage and • Mission, • Scientific and • Promote change environment scientific and promote vision, and technologic • Positive action • Legal administrative changes aims • Proactive vision politics regulations. activities • Principles of • Encourage • Human capital • Respect cultural • Government's • Public access scientific team work • Research diversity goals for to institutional quality social • Effective higher information. belonging communication education • Report to the • Excellence • Institutional • Strengthen the university with efficiency management sense of community and identity and society effectivenes. • Academic, scientific and administrative management.

Figure 10. Aims of the Universidad de Cuenca (Universidad de Cuenca, 2017)

To conform with what is established in the Ecuadorian Constitution and the LOES, the Universidad de Cuenca is governed by the principles of humanism, freedom, inclusion, gender equity, creative and plural thinking, free education, and equality of opportunities for professors, students, administration employees, and other workers. The University, through a student- centered approach, seeks to teach its students to become critical learners who construct new knowledge and skills that match the advances of science, art, and technology. At the same time, it supports the professional development of professors and opens opportunities for research and the connection with the community (Consejo Universitario, 2013).

2.3.2 What about Research?

After the government’s evaluation, the University created a Research Directorate (henceforth DIUC), Direccion de Investigación de la Universidad de Cuenca, which aims to strengthen the development of science, technology, and innovation, working with disciplinary and interdisciplinary approaches. Under the Directorate, there are five research units: Environmental Studies, Population and Sustainable Development, Water and Soil Management, Organizational Development Support, and VLIR-IUC/UCUENCA which is a unit that works in cooperation with the Council of Flemish universities. There are five research departments divided into multidisciplinary (Hydric Resources and Environmental Sciences; Space and population) and disciplinary groups (Computing Sciences: Civil Engineering; and Electric, electronic, and telecommunications). Additionally, there are three research groups: Mediatic Convergences, Regional Economy, and Business Administration. The 12 faculties of the University have their

32 research centers which work in collaboration with the DIUC and report directly to the deans (Universidad de Cuenca, 2015).

Since the Universidad de Cuenca is at the early stages of integrating research into its regular activities, teaching and research as a combined activity has not yet been considered. So far, as described in the organization of the research units, departments, and groups, science and technology have been given priority, framing education and the social sciences as less significant. Professors who conduct research projects do it as an additional task separate from their daily practice in the classroom, perpetuating the schism that exists between teaching and research. While some professors from the Faculty of Philosophy and Education and the Language Institute have conducted research in their classrooms in the course of their master or doctoral studies, they have not included a critical orientation; their research has been mainly skill-based.

2.3.3 Professors with a Ph.D.: Are we Close to 70%?

Before the law was passed, obtaining a doctoral degree was a decision that not many professors at the Universidad de Cuenca made. Having a master’s degree was sufficient and some of the professors who became tenured 15 to 20 years ago did not even possess master’s degrees. In 2012, there were 37 PhDs and 510 Masters from a total of 1210 professors, including tenured and contract (Universidad de Cuenca, 2012).

According to the last Institutional Management Report of the Universidad de Cuenca (2016), the University has 1295 professors and researchers from which 489 are tenured and 806 work under a contract. From the total, only 100 (7.72%) professors, including tenured and non-tenured, have a doctoral degree; most of them belong to the hard sciences and the Research Directorate (Universidad de Cuenca, 2016). Table 5 shows the number of professors with a PhD per faculty and group according to their working status as tenured or contract. The information included in the table was updated and provided by the Director of the Planning Department of the Universidad de Cuenca in April 2017.

Table 5. Number of Professors with a Ph.D. Degree per Faculty (J.P. Diaz, personal communication, April 4, 2017)

Contract Tenured Faculty/Department professors professors Total

Engineering 8 17 25

Agricultural Sciences 8 6 14

Chemical Sciences 4 8 12

Philosophy and Education Sciences 3 8 11

Architecture and Urbanism 5 4 9

DIUC 8 8

Economic and Administration Sciences 3 5 8

Medical Sciences 5 1 6

Law and Social and Political Sciences 1 2 3

Arts 1 1 2

Psychology 1 1

VLIR 1 1

Total 39 61 100

Percentage (total professors 1295) 3.01% 4.71% 7.72%

It is important to mention that not all the professors in doctoral programs were granted a government scholarship, some of them are covering the program fees themselves or have applied for student loans. This situation has led them to choose programs based on costs and in-person attendance requirements (short stays abroad). Thus, for some not choosing a program based on personal, academic interests or university prestige, could potentially corrupt the significance of obtaining a doctoral degree.

The University of Cuenca, being a public university, supports the government’s scholarship program for professors, granting a leave of absence with or without pay. The Academic Board of

34 the University approved a plan in 2015 to encourage more professors to enroll in graduate programs in foreign countries. Through this plan, economic support is given to tenured faculty who meet the requirements (among them, the doctoral program has to be an area of priority for the University). The grant includes a paid leave of absence (60% the regular salary), registration and tuition fees (60%), and three thousand dollars, one time only, for travel costs (Consejo Universitario, 2015). The funds are given if the budget assigned by the Government at the beginning of the year is enough; in 2015 and 2016, for instance, no grants were given. Most of the professors that have decided to study use this payment to support their families while they are abroad.

Even though there are opportunities to obtain economic aid, only 131 professors, a 10% of the total (1295 professors), have enrolled in doctoral programs. In this case, most of them belong to the social sciences, specifically the Faculty of Philosophy and Education (see Table 6).

In Ecuador, there are only two universities that offer doctoral programs: Universidad Andina Simon Bolivar and Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales (FLACSO). Universidad Andina Simon Bolivar was not created in Ecuador; it is an international university for the Andean Community (Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru). Although its headquarters is in Sucre, Bolivia, it has extensions in each country; in the case of Ecuador, it is located in Quito. The doctoral programs offered in this university have a cohort modality and are in Business Administration, Law, Latin American Cultural Studies, Latin American Studies, Latin American History, Latin American Literature, and in Public Health, Environment, and Society. The total cost of registration and four years of tuition for South American students is approximately 11 thousand dollars, which is relatively inexpensive compared to the cost of attending universities in Europe and North America.

The second higher education institution, FLACSO, is an international organization created in 1956 at the UNESCO’s General Conference. The main purpose of establishing this university of social sciences was to create spaces in Latin American countries for reflection to allow for the development of societies. There are campuses in Argentina, Brasil, Chile, Costa Rica, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, España, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, the Dominican Republic, and Uruguay.

Table 6. Number of Professors Enrolled in a Ph.D. Program (J.P. Diaz, personal communication, April 4, 2017)

Contract Tenured Faculty/Department professors professors Total

Philosophy and Education Sciences 6 30 36

Engineering 2 17 19

Architecture and Urbanism 7 10 17

Economic and Administration Sciences 5 12 17

Arts 1 6 7

Agricultural Sciences 7 7

Chemical Sciences 4 3 7

Medical Sciences 6 6

Dentistry 5 5

Hospitality Sciences 1 3 4

Law and Social and Political Sciences 1 2 3

Psychology 1 2 3

Total 28 103 131

Percentage (total professors 1295) 2.16% 7.95% 10.11%

FLACSO in Ecuador offers cohort doctoral programs in Social Sciences with specializations in Andean Studies, Social Sciences with specialization in Political Studies, Development Economics, International Studies, History of the Andes, and Public Policies. The admission to this institution is highly competitive as tuition is 100% funded.

As discussed above, Ecuadorian professors are often prevented to continuing with graduate studies for economic reasons. However, a frequent secondary reason is age. Senior professors

36 who have several years of teaching experience and are almost in the last stage of their careers are also reluctant to initiate a doctoral program.

For these reasons, it is necessary to think about the role all the professors who cannot be part of research-based graduate programs will have within the university. Will they be segregated from the ones that can conduct research? Will they be encouraged to conduct research? Will there be research training programs for them? These questions motivated the initial stage of this research which was to think about and propose an option for these professors to feel motivated to be part of a community where their experience and role as teachers will be perceived as a valuable resource.

2.4 The Language Institute

The Language Institute at the University of Cuenca, formerly known as the Department of Languages, was created in 1960. It is focused on teaching university students and the broader community, approximately three thousand people, a wide selection of foreign languages: English, French, German, Italian, Japanese, Mandarin, Portuguese, Quichua (one of Ecuador’s indigenous languages), and Spanish (offered to foreigners).

English language learners are the biggest population of the Institute’s students because learning English is a graduation requirement at Ecuadorian universities. Although students are required to take only three levels of English, the Language Institute offers eight levels and a course to prepare for the TOEFL exam. English courses are offered in-class and online. While French, German, Italian, Mandarin, and Spanish courses open every semester, other languages are offered according to students’ demand and instructors’ availability.

MISION STATEMENT The mission of the Language Institute of the University of Cuenca is to offer students and the community in general the opportunity to learn different languages through active methodologies that develop language skills in an integrated way, and to communicate effectively in their daily and professional life by expanding their capacity to interact in harmony with people from different cultures, and thus, have access to new knowledge that enriches their lives and contributes to the building of a better country.

Figure 11. Mission Statement Language Institute (Universidad de Cuenca, 2017).

VISION

By 2020, the Institute of languages will lead the regional teaching of modern languages for communicative, social, and academic purposes. It will be the support for those students, professionals, and researchers who need one or more foreign languages for an effective connection with a globalized and technologic world and for a better understanding of different cultures.

The Institute of Languages will continue to expand its current offerings and will incorporate technology to offer on-line courses for those students who cannot take face- to-face classes or for those who choose distance learning. Simultaneously, it will promote and provide support for linguistic and methodological research in the different languages.

Figure 12. Vision Statement Language Institute (Universidad de Cuenca, 2017).

The main objective of the Language Institute at the University of Cuenca since its beginning has remained the same; it is to teach languages to university students and the general population according to their needs and interests. This objective is clear in the Vision Statement depicted in Figure 12.

In its internal regulation, the Institute also presents the following statements as its objectives. • Promote the socio-cultural learning of languages through linguistic learning. • Frame the teaching-learning process of the different languages within a communicative and practical approach through the use of various resources and techniques that will support an effective learning. • Encourage the ongoing practice of the four language skills that will take the student to achieve the desired proficiency level. • Promote the use of the virtual platform to support independent learning. • Organize training courses and workshops for the professional development of its professors. • Motivate and support research projects in applied linguistics or topics related to the different languages that are taught at the Institute. • Encourage the writing of academic articles related to the processes of language teaching and learning. Stimulate the creation and proposal of new projects. • Promote and support the teaching of Spanish to foreigners. • Promote projects that seek a relationship with the community. • Promote and implement specific courses according to the requirements of students (Universidad de Cuenca, 2017).

2.4.1 Teaching or Researching?

It is stated in the vision statement and the objectives that the Institute is committed to encouraging professors to get involved in research as a way to improve their teaching practice and the effectiveness of the courses. However, only a few projects have been conducted, and none of them have used the language classroom for context of the research. This situation does not support the transformation that universities in the country need.

This absence of research projects either for lack of professors’ interest or time has created a growing concern among the faculty regarding the writing of articles. Currently, promotions mainly depend on publications in international, peer-reviewed, high-ranking academic journals, and presentations at national, or better yet international, conferences and congresses (CES, 2012).

2.4.2 The Language Professors

There are 71 professors at the Language Institute out of which 65 teach English, two teach French, and the other four teach the other languages (one per language). Most of the faculty have a master’s degree or are in the process of getting one (taking courses in a master’s program or writing their master’s theses). There are 14 professors enrolled in Ph.D. programs in a public university in a South American country. They represent 9.94% of the professors of the Institute and 1.17% of the total number of professors of the Universidad de Cuenca. They traveled for two weeks in the first and second year of their program. Their course work was completed during the recess between the two academic terms (February 2015 and February 2016); their studies did not interrupt their teaching activities. Currently, all of them have their thesis proposals approved and are working on the data collection stage of their research dissertation.

A small number of language professors, 14, have research activities as part of their 40 weekly hours of work. They are either part of a project or work individually or in collaboration with other institutions. The projects that have been conducted have not addressed any issue at the Language Institute; in fact, the contexts studied have all been even outside of the university. It is necessary to start thinking that our Institute is a language teaching site with more than 3000 learners. It is a rich context that provides many opportunities to conduct research that could be valuable for the Institute, the University, and the broader teaching and research community. This project aims to begin this important conversation.

Chapter 3 Literature Review

Research is a high-hat word that scares a lot of people. It needn’t. It’s rather simple. Essentially research is nothing but a state of mind… A friendly, welcoming attitude toward change… going out to look for change instead of waiting for it to come. Research is an effort to do things better and not to be caught asleep at the switch. It is the problem-solving mind as contrasted with the let-well-enough-alone mind. It is the tomorrow mind instead of the yesterday mind.

– Charles Kettering (cited in Boyd, 1957, p. 216)

3.1 Introduction

This chapter presents an analysis of the existing research on communities of practice focused on critical action research in university contexts. It first presents the importance of linking teaching and research in higher education institutions as a way to achieve an educational and professional change. Additionally, it explains how the model of communities of practice can function as the space to create this nexus. It then moves on to survey the research exploring critical action research in university settings and within communities of practice.

3.2 Teaching and Researching at the University

Do most university teachers think that research and teaching are two separate worlds? Are they afraid to become researchers of their classrooms? Teachers may have been reluctant to conduct research because of the many responsibilities they have, including lack of time, and the lack of institutional support. In addition, in higher education institutions that are not strong in research, faculty have had been indoctrinated with the idea that research is done by full-time trained researchers and that teachers should only do what they are trained for, teaching. In today’s Ecuadorian university, there is a need for a change that ensures that the line between teaching 40

41 and research is not drawn. There is a strong call for bringing research and teaching together to benefit students, the professional development of faculty, and the broader academic society in general.

Professors in universities should seek opportunities to shift their role and become teacher- researchers because the context in which they work every day is filled with opportunities to become agents of change and to contribute to and produce academic knowledge. Research should not be only an activity through which knowledge is discovered and created, nor should teaching be seen as the task of transmitting that knowledge to students, rather both activities taken together allow for understanding complex realities in the changing and dynamic context of higher education.

The importance of teachers researching and reflecting on their daily activities in the classroom with students lies in the fact that through such work teachers can develop different understandings of their practice. Olson (1990) claims that by conducting research, teachers become empowered to influence their practice in the classroom, and even more importantly, to influence their institution and to reach to levels where their voices are not usually heard. According to Kincheloe, a “teacher’s voice is viewed as a teacher’s ability to define their educational philosophy, as well as to act accordingly towards implementing sustainable changes in the educational realm” (Kincheloe, 2003 as cited in Ilisko, Ignatjeva, & Micule, 2010, p. 52).

The two core functions of higher education are teaching and research, and their relationship is necessary and undeniable. Therefore, if a university highlights the importance of bridging teaching and research and encourages this nexus, academics in the university are expected to teach as well as to conduct research.

This relationship in higher education has been extensively studied during the last two decades. Through an interview-based study carried out in English universities, Coate, Barnett, and Williams (2001) concluded that “teaching and research can exist in a range of relationships with each other, and these relationships are shaped by the value-orientations of academic staff and the management of available resources” (p. 172). Various scholars (Colbeck, 1998; Lindsay et al., 2002; Jenkins et al., 2003; Brew, 2003; Healy, 2005) have looked at the relationship between the

42 disciplines. They have concluded that students prefer to be taught by active researchers who can involve them in research activities (as cited in Lucas, 2007).

3.2.1 Is There a Missing Link?

Finding the meeting point between teaching and research is not something that can be easily achieved; however, universities around the world are taking up the challenge of creating this link to enhance teaching practices, strengthen a research culture, and improve students’ learning experience. Various studies have been conducted on the benefits of this mergence and the difficulties encountered in the process.

Harland and Staniforth (2000) conducted an empirical study in their institution in which the participants were professors who had different degrees of research and teaching experience. Part of their study had learning how professors perceived their practice and opportunities for professional development as its objective. For Harland and Staniforth, the focus was particularly on participants’ teaching, as research was the main activity in their university. Through interviews with 20 participants, the authors identified several difficulties when supporting the academic, professional development of their professor participants. These issues included first the diversity of academic work because participants had different levels of expertise, were in different stages of their career, and had varied time distribution between research, teaching, and administration activities. The second major issue was related to administration activities which although seen as low status in comparison to teaching and research by the participants, increased the workload. Third, the authors mentioned problems around research activities. That is, some of the interviewees manifested their unconformity with the “high-flying researchers” (p.505) who “were protected from teaching,” (p. 505) and as a result, the ones who were not protected had more teaching and administration hours curtailing their ability to do research. Unfortunately, teaching was also identified as a problem because it was seen as a secondary activity and it was not as valued or rewarded as research was.

Douglas (2013), by conducting interviews with all professors from a social science department at an English university, proposed advice on how to connect teaching and research. He suggested that faculty “teach as part of your research activity; use your research when planning lectures; be a flexible researcher and adapt your research interests to available opportunities; proactively

43 promote yourself and your research, and engage in research as a collective activity.” (p. 377). Tight (2016) also drew on the work of Baldwin (2005) to explore ideas related to how to create or strengthen the nexus. The ideas include using personal research when designing courses, designing learning activities around research issues, assigning small research activities to students, encouraging students to become part of research projects and or departments, and conducting research in the classroom to make informed decisions about teaching.

Brew (2012) presents a model that could reduce the divide between teaching and research in universities where teaching has been the focus and research has been done as an additional activity carried out only by ‘research experts’ and somewhat forbidden for professors. This model is based on the idea of academic communities of practice proposed by Lave and Wenger. For them, learning is a social practice that involves active participation in a community.

3.3 Communities of Practice: A Site for Finding the Nexus between Teaching and Research?

Lave and Wenger (1991) define a community of practice (CoP) as the “set of relationships among persons, activity, and world over time and in relation with other tangential and overlapping communities of practice” (p.98).

Brew (2012) pointed out that in a community of practice, research and teaching can be merged because both activities involve negotiation of meaning and building of knowledge within a social context. She has also explained that different sections of a university such as departments, units, groups, professors, students, or the university as a unit can form a community of practice. All the members who create it “are responsible for the maintenance of the community of practice, for inducting newcomers into it, for carrying on the tradition of the past and carrying the community forward to the future” (p. 109). Hartnell-Young and McGuinness (1996) have expressed a similar view about building knowledge in communities where its members share roles, purposes, and experience. Furthermore, Lucas (2007) has highlighted that the communities of practice model can be the foundation of communities of research practice within universities.

Bozu and Imbernon (2009) have expressed a similar view; for them, creating communities of practice to enhance collaboration, cooperation, and the exchange of knowledge between

44 university professors is one of the best alternatives for an academic and professional development framed in spaces of reflection, training, and innovation. They define a community of practice in the context of higher education as

a group of people (teachers and researchers) joined by common interests to share and collaboratively construct knowledge, exchange information and experiences about the professional practice itself, and interact to learn and relate to one another. In this way, a common repertoire of thinking and action is developed and spaces for professional development are created. (p. 5)

Lucas (2007) also investigated the benefits of creating a community of practice. She conducted a study in education departments in Scottish institutions to develop research potential in academics who were not research-active before. Her study involved 40 professors from three universities in Scotland. She analyzed the experiences of professors in terms of how encouraged they felt to do research, the benefits they gained by engaging in research, and the implications for their professional development. In addition, she looked at the experiences in relation to the characteristics and elements of communities of practice (events, leadership, connectivity, membership, learning projects, and artifacts), boundary processes, and identities. Lucas suggested that the communities of practice model is helpful in reducing the gap between research and teaching activities. Furthermore, the author concluded that being part of a community of practice that focuses on research has the potential to create a research identity, especially in those who did not have previous research experience.

The work of Bozu and Imbernon (2009) describes the development of a community of practice formed by education professors over two academic years in Spanish universities where Catalan is the official language (Universitat de les Illes Balears, Universitat de Barcelona, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, and Universitat Rovira I Virgili). The main objective of this community has been to co-construct knowledge in the academic context and to investigate development dynamics of university training in Europe that require professors to mobilize locally and internationally. To be able to comply with the objectives, members of the community performed several activities: a) the creation of the community which included the exchange of experiences and creation of programs as well as the distribution of responsibilities; b) the development of the community that involved meetings, exchange of methodologies and materials, creation of virtual

45 spaces, and professor exchanges; and c) the evaluation of the community that was conducted by all members at the end of the innovation and training stage.

Bozu and Imbernon have found that this horizontal community that brought together education professors from various universities with different understandings about teaching and research reinforced their mutual engagement, joint enterprise, and shared repertoire. They concluded that the community allowed its participants to find a connection between teaching and research. This nexus is “the scaffold that allows us to advance in the university world in general and the teaching world in particular with the conviction that self and joint reflection is the right way to live as teachers” (p. 8).

In another study conducted in 2009, Barret, Ballantyne, Harrison, and Temmerman, have reported the factors that enable the development of an academic community of practice and its implications for academics. The participants, who were also the researchers, were four professors from the areas of music education and academic work. Data included email logs, recordings and transcripts from meetings and online exchanges, as well as individual reflections. The authors reported that their experience within the community was one “of complementary collaboration (John-Steiner, 2000), where each team member has brought skills and attributes to the project that have complemented those of others” (p. 413). They concluded that communities of practice and the sense of collaboration that takes place within the community can potentially develop a change in those who participate.

Hill and Haigh (2012) framed a research project that studied how teacher education research capability could be built in a recently merged faculty of education. They interviewed several research leaders from different countries and conducted a case study in their faculty. The authors located their study within the communities of practice framework. They found that five recurring themes emerged around building research capability: “building research cultures; establishing and nurturing communities of research practice; learning to be a researcher through involvement in research work; providing institutional support for research activity and learning; and addressing/acknowledging impediments and challenges to building research capability” (p. 978). They have concluded that establishing communities of practice can help build and improve a research capacity.

3.3.1 Formation and Sustainability of Communities of Practice

Various authors have also studied the formation and sustainability of Communities of Practice (CoPs) (see for example, Roberts, 1998; Stoll et al., 2006; Bond & Lockee, 2014). For instance, Kezar and Gehrke (2017) conducted an exploratory study to understand how CoPs were formed and sustained. The authors looked at four faculty communities belonging to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics departments in higher education. A total of 112 faculty members including professors, associate professors, former faculty members, administrators, and staff were the participants in this study.

The researchers analyzed data collected through interviews, observations, document analysis, and surveys. Based on the results obtained, they created a model for sustainability, which can be used according to the nature of each CoP. The model included six features: “Leadership development, distribution, and succession planning; a viable financial model (branding – distinctive identity); a professionalized staff; feedback and advice mechanisms; research and assessment; and an articulated community-derived strategy” (Kezar & Gehrke, 2017, p. 332). They recognized that there could be issues related to each of the features proposed in the model; however, they also suggested possible solutions (See Table 7).

Regarding problems that can be encountered throughout the survival of a community of practice, Bond and Lockee (2014) have stated that groupthink can be a major issue because false ideas or views can be supported by the group. The authors suggest that “it is important to safeguard the integrity of the knowledge-building process while minimizing the persistence of groupthink.” They continue by suggesting that “possible safeguards against groupthink…may include exposure to external perspectives and approaches, course reviews, and submission of research to peer-reviewed conferences or publications” (p.23).

Table 7. Sustainability Model for CoPs Feature of sustainability Issue Possible solution(s) Leadership development, Continuity of leadership Training of community distribution, and members to be leaders succession planning Distribution of leadership roles A viable financial model Obtaining funds Partnerships (branding – distinctive identity) Creating a brand to protect its Grants applications intellectual property Have materials approved by certified reviewers. Professionalized staff Volunteer professional staff Hiring staff to meet goals

Feedback and advice Limited or lack of feedback Create advisory boards and mechanisms encouraging members to be self-critical Research and assessment Not enough research Conducting more research to Lack of evaluation processes show the value of the community and attract funding

Developing processes to assess the development of the community An articulated community- Not always centered around a Developing a strategic plan derived strategy particular niche or focus with a specific niche.

In addition to the studies described above, others have been conducted on the development of communities of practice and the impact they have on promoting teacher and researchers’ professional development, encouraging online learning and collaboration, and supporting academic research and writing. These studies have been done at the university level, researching faculty and students, and/or high school teacher as shown in Table 8.

Table 8. Empirical Studies on Communities of Practice at Institutions of Higher Education

Author/year Focus of study Approach Participants Data collection Moule (2006) Develop CoPs for Case Students of nursing, Questionnaire online learning study radiography, and Online diary radiotherapy Interaction on discussion boards Interviews

Arias and Evaluate the processes Narrative University teachers Notes from meetings Restrepo (2009) for professional study and research Observations development and assistants Reflective journal autonomy

Spiegel et al. Strengthen the Case Ecuadorian Implementing guides (2011) capacities of four study researchers, research Programs development Ecuadorian assistants, and policy Research projects universities in terms makers of research and learning projects El-Hani and Promoting teacher’s Case High school in- Online forums Greca (2013) professional study service and pre- development through service biology a virtual CoP teachers; university teachers; and graduate and undergraduate students in Federal University of Bahia, Brazil

Rees and Shaw Explore the impact Case Female Pre- Questionnaire (2014) that a female CoP to study tenure/early career Open-ended essays support academic faculty and post- research and writing tenured/mid-career has on its participants faculty

3.3.2 Gaps Identified in the Literature

Although some research has been conducted on communities of practice, the studies that include university-level teachers as participants or participant researchers are scarce. Additionally, there is a gap in longitudinal studies addressing the implementation and development of a community of practice for teacher-researchers.

After analyzing the literature, which supports the development of communities of practice as potential sites to bring teaching and research together, and identifying a research gap in that universities lack of these spaces to encourage professors to conduct research, I adopted the role of a convener to motivate fellow language professors in an Ecuadorian university to form a community. I invited them to share experiences and learn from each other, and to co-construct knowledge on critical action research as it opens up opportunities for the professors to acquire a dual role as teacher-researcher and to challenge the status quo.

To continue with this review of the literature, I now present the definitions and characteristics of critical action research and the existing empirical studies conducted in university settings and communities of practice.

3.4 Critical Action Research

Critical action research (CAR) is a research methodology through which teachers can generate knowledge from their practice and can achieve educational and social transformation. According to Manfra (2009), CAR is a way of reconnecting the goals of social justice (e.g., equity, human rights, democracy) to teaching practice (as cited in Burrel Storms, 2015). Its purpose is to encourage teachers to challenge the positivist top-down views of knowledge and to develop as agents of social change.

In critical action research, social and cultural factors that affect students are examined. Teachers who engage in CAR develop a commitment toward social change and a deep understanding of all the factors that affect their students’ lives. In this respect, Burrel Storms (2015) argues that in critical action research “students’ lived experiences, cultural backgrounds, and prior knowledge are valued, viewed as strengths, and an authentic and relevant course of inquiry” (p. 157).

Critical action research emerged as a result of combining critical theory and action research (AR). Critical theory is a social theory that questions and challenges hegemony, power dynamics, and social inequities to promote social change (Davis, 2008). Critical theory is interdisciplinary and experimental; it challenges traditional lines of thought, asserting that research must address problems and issues of today’s society and increase our understandings about it (Bronner, 2011). It seeks a social transformation, and its aim is to shed light on

“linguistic and ideological structures by which we make sense of, while thus ideologically constructing, the world around us” (Felluga, 2015, p. 24).

Action research has been perceived as a natural way of teaching through which teachers reflect on the practice, take measures to improve it, and evaluate the results in a never-ending cyclical process. Several scholars have defined action research in different ways, but most have referred to its reflective, collaborative, systematic and problematizing nature. For instance, Wallace (1998) defined AR as a method for teachers to reflect on their practice and to base the decisions they make about it on data collected and analyzed systematically.

Similarly, Stringer (1999) defined AR as “a collaborative approach to inquiry or investigation that provides people with the means to take systematic action to resolve specific problems” (as cited in Burns, 2011, p. 237). AR is an opportunity for the teacher to reflect on his/her identity, practice, and academic, professional development (Taylor, Rudolph, & Foldy, 2008; Burns, 2010; Goodnough, 2010). It also leads teachers to new ways of thinking about inquiry and engaging in critical research (Burns, 2005).

More recently Burns (2010) has presented what I consider a more complete definition that explains what AR includes and the role of the teacher, demonstrating that AR is a suitable approach for finding a connection between teaching and researching.

AR involves taking a self-reflective, critical, and systematic approach to exploring your own teaching contexts. By critical, I don’t mean being negative and derogatory about the way you teach, but taking a questioning and ‘problematising’ stance towards your teaching. My term, problematising, doesn’t imply looking at your teaching as if it is ineffective and full of problems. Rather, it means taking an area you feel could be done better, subjecting it to questioning, and then developing new ideas and alternatives. So, in AR, a teacher becomes an ‘investigator’ or ‘explorer’ of his or her personal teaching context, while at the same time being one of the participants in it. (p. 2)

(Critical) Action research is a legitimate type of inquiry about teaching practices and their impact on students’ learning and lives. It is valuable research for the teaching and the academic community because when teachers share their findings and collaborate in research groups, the value of their work can increase radically (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1990). Teachers should be encouraged to conduct research in their classrooms because in the process they become creators of their knowledge, agents of educational improvement, and powerful individuals willing to

51 challenge traditional education paradigms. In addition, it allows teachers to make original contributions to the knowledge base, and impact their professional development, benefiting students and resulting in the improvement of the institutions in which they collaborate.

Davis (2008), basing on the link of critical theory with action research, has defined CAR as an extension and validation of AR.

The critical action research process turns the traditional power hierarchy between ‘professional’ researchers and research ‘subjects’ upside down and invokes a commitment to break down the dominance and privilege of researchers to produce relevant research that is able to be sensitive to the complexities of contextual and relational reality. In this type of research, the stakeholders of the research work with the researchers to define the problem and set the research agenda, find new ways of seeing the situation, and work toward solutions. The process empowers both the researchers and the research participants because the research effort allows discovery and exploration of power differentials in the research relationship as well as in the community under study (p.140).

As aforementioned, in critical action research, the researchers and the participants work in collaboration, breaking the power inequality that has been traditionally present between the researcher and the ‘subject’ of the research. A critical action research process works best when the researcher and the participants work together with a “strong and authentic sense of development and evolution in their practices, their understanding of their practices, and the situations in which they practice” (Kemmis, McTaggart, & Nixon, 2014, pp. 18-19).

CAR looks at the social context and how individuals coexist with each other as the object of research. It studies discriminatory social practices that are made up by social interactions between people, and how to challenge, address, and transform those social practices. It is a process through which people can work collaboratively to change the practices of the social world in which we live in and interact (Kemmis, McTaggart, & Nixon, 2014).

CAR involves advocating for social justice within and outside educational institutions as its results can expand to the larger community. In addition to examining teaching and learning practices, it can help teachers understand how those practices can interfere with “marginalized groups’ ability to be successful academically, connect classroom level experiences to broader

52 social and political issues (Daoud,2010), and engage in actions to remove those barriers” (Burrel Storms, 2015, p. 157).

As with traditional action research, most critical action researchers follow a cyclical process that involves reflecting, planning, acting, observing, reflecting, replanning, and so on; nonetheless, DePoy, Hartman, and Haslett (1999) propose a more specific model for critical action research as depicted in Figure 13.

Recognizing and Convening a guiding Identifying the scope articulating a social committee of the reseach (type of problem social change)

Selecting a Designing the study Training research team collaborative research in research methods team

Acting on the findings = planning and Conducting the study Reporting the findings following through with and analysis social change

Identifying a guiding committee for follow- up

Figure 13. Critical Action Research Model

In this model, according to Davis (2008),

The cycle of planning, reflecting, and acting between community participants and researchers breaks down the traditional positivist research tradition of certainty and objectivity on the part of the researchers. It requires a willingness for vulnerability on the part of both the researchers and the community participants as they open their own ways of thinking, behaving, and being to scrutiny and question. However, because critical action research allows those being scrutinized to participate in the scrutiny, the level of insight and understanding resulting from the process can be deep and lasting provided that everyone involved is given the autonomy to fully collaborate in every stage of the effort. (p.141)

Critical action research allows the teacher-researcher and the participants to develop deep understandings of social justice issues and educational practices of a particular context at a particular point in time; how the social and pedagogical practices are influenced by social, political, economic, and cultural circumstances; and how the production and reproduction of these practices influence in the future. Understanding these aspects within a particular context will help the participants of critical action research challenge the existing structures and make social and educational practices sustainable and fair for everyone involved.

Critical action research is a social process in which the researcher-practitioner focuses on closely examining the local context and the social issues or difficulties that are involved. As Kemmis, McTaggart, and Nixon stated “it is directed towards studying, reframing, and reconstructing social practices” (p.19). In critical action research, there are opportunities to create spaces for researcher and participants to interact and study social issues in a collaborative way. The purpose of creating ‘communicative spaces’ (Habermas, 1996) is to bring participants together in the attempt to change how they interact in a social context.

In CAR, it is important for the teacher-researchers to develop a sociocultural consciousness to break with the divide between them and the participants by first “examining how their own sociocultural identities, worldviews, biases, and prior experiences have influenced their philosophy of teaching and learning (Nieto & McDonough, 2011).

Critical action research is conducting studies or learning about the realities of the immediate context. It is to observe how natural interactions occur, and based on the observations, plan

54 actions to challenge and change current practices. Critical action research is a social process that allows envisioning changes in:

• What the participants think and say (their saying), and the cultural and discursive arrangements (like languages and specialist discourses) that shape the ways they understand and interpret their world. • What the participants do (their doings), and the material and economic arrangements that make it possible for them to do these things, and • How participants relate to others and the world (their relatings), and the social and political arrangements that shape the ways they interact with the world and with others (Kemmis et al., 2014, pp. 20-21).

Critical action research empowers researchers and participants by giving them a voice to speak about the inequalities within a social system. As it was noted previously, CAR aims to encourage teachers and participants to produce a change. Davis (2008) describes the main objective of critical action research as

twofold: (1) improved understanding of a social phenomenon and (2) social transformation at a community or organizational level resulting from reflexivity and self- reflection about the hegemony in the research relationship in the community or organization. Critical action research requires seeing things through the worldviews of other people and understanding, perhaps challenging, conflicting value systems. (p.141)

Conducting critical action research is neither easy for the researcher nor the participants. Some notions and traditions need to be challenged and hopefully broken. The researcher-participant relationship, perceived as a power dynamic system in which the researcher owns the power and control, is the first one that must be defied as collaboration is one of the conditions for the success of critical action research. A second tradition to demystify is that of separating research from practice. As it has been mentioned in this section of the literature review, in critical action research, academic research and practice work together. It is in this link where from the earliest stages, participants should be invited into the research project. The third challenge for practitioner researchers is raising their voices to be heard; that is, looking for ways to share their findings and experiences with others. With such sharing, perhaps more professionals in the field of education will be encouraged to become critical action researchers.

3.4.1 Critical Action Research in Higher Education

Universities could be strategic research sites for teacher educators who decide to create a bridge between teaching and research. There is a lack of research on how CAR has been used in higher education or how it can provide opportunities for the professional development of professors. Indeed, it seems CAR may still be a research approach that has not yet been completely accepted in the university context.

At least three reasons appear to explain why (critical) action research is scarce in the university context and therefore in the academic literature. First, as suggested above, (C)AR has not been appreciated as ‘valid and reliable research’ in comparison to other research paradigms. In fact, for faculty members there may be a perception that such research might not attract funding and/or grant professor promotion or tenure. Second, traditional researchers at the University have highlighted the many ethical issues involved when the researcher is an insider. Finally, (C)AR research in higher education is a relatively new field.

Nevertheless, as CAR challenges the traditional social practices, it can be used to transform the misperceptions academics may have about it. More research using CAR may allow academics to see it as a suitable approach to start a research culture that contributes to the building of knowledge, supports professional development, improves students learning, and challenges social issues of power and inequalities. Cochran-Smith and Lytle (2007) referred to research conducted by teachers as the space for critical reflection.

Perhaps the most distinctive feature of this approach to infusing practitioner inquiry into the cultures of large research universities derives from the ways that many of our questions for research have emerged from practice and the collaborative study of practice. Uncomfortable with the seeming ease with which universities have traditionally invoked the notion of ‘theory into practice’ to explain and rationalize the relationships of research universities and K-16 schooling, we have tried to show how working from a different set of underlying assumptions about inquiry, knowledge and practice structures the work of faculty members in relation to various professional learning communities within and beyond the university. As we have noted, there are a considerable number of universities where faculties have been involved in similar work, and thus much to be gained we think from examining – across contexts – the dilemmas and complications that occur when university-based researchers alter their relationships to their own practice. The infusion of practitioner inquiry into university culture creates a synergistic space for the kinds of critical examination of teaching, learning and research within universities that universities have been calling for in the public schools (p. 642).

For this part of the literature review, I searched for published empirical studies on critical action research at the university level. Some of these studies looked at experiences in the academic journey of professors and researchers (Cole & Knowles, 1996), and the role of the teacher as a researcher (Harland & Staniforth, 2000; Tormey, Liddy, Maguire, & McCloat, 2008). Others were self-studies of professors while teaching about action research (Johnston et al., 2003; Brown, Dressler, Eaton, & Jacobsen, 2015; Goodnough, 2003) or supervising students while preparing dissertations or doing practicum teaching (Burchell & Dyson, 2005). In addition, some research reports were on the use of CAR to evaluate the impact of social issues (Millican, 2014) and CAR in education as the focus of a research team (Arias & Restrepo, 2009).

Harland and Staniforth (2000), in addition to looking at how professors in their institution perceived their practice, promoted the idea of teachers as researchers to improve the teaching practice of the active researchers in their university. Throughout this four-year study, they encouraged their participants to conduct research that included a critical and reflective dimension of their practice. Although not all professors were equally engaged in conducting research that was critical and reflective in nature as some prioritized other forms of research, Harland and Staniforth have suggested that action research makes teachers change-agents and helps collaborative work. Also, they concluded that

Action research has become embedded in our practice, to the extent that it is not something done in ‘addition’ to other work. We feel we are attempting to create our own theories of knowledge and professional development and as McNiff (1993) has suggested, we believe we are moving from ‘a view of research as the basis for improved practice to a view of self-improving practice as research.’ (p.512)

Correspondingly, Tormey et al., (2008), conducted two case studies on critical action research projects in Irish universities. They found that critical action research is a valid research method to link research and practice and to address issues of inequality, social justice, globalization, development, environmental protection, and sustainability. They have emphasized that CAR should be promoted in higher education settings to bring together “the roles of the academic practitioner as teacher and as researcher” (p. 428).

A qualitative case study by Goodnough (2003) reports on self-reflections of the researcher’s roles as researcher and convener of an action research group which focuses on the multiple

57 intelligences in science education. This AR group was formed by two elementary school teachers, two high school teachers and the researcher-facilitator who was a university teacher; all participants were volunteers. The group met on a weekly basis over five months to discuss and explore the multiple intelligences theory and its potential for teaching and learning science. Each participant had to conduct an action research project.

This case study is based on the researcher’s interpretations of her multiple roles in the group and on the participants’ perceptions of her roles. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews, informal interviews, notes from the meetings, and journals. The author reported that throughout the study, she improved her understanding of action research and collaborative inquiry within the group she facilitated. She recognized that although collaboration was a virtue of the team, they faced challenges in terms of time and heavy workloads. For Goodnough (2003), action research can potentially reduce the gap between theory and practice only if it is based on collaboration. She states, “without trust, motivation, openness, a willingness to engage in critical reflection, and ownership of the research, action research groups are unlikely to be effective in bridging the theory-practice gap” (p. 60). She further concluded that university researchers or facilitators can engage in critical reflection about their practices and be more flexible about their roles. Indeed, as Goodnough suggests “by learning together (university researchers and practitioners) through critical reflection and informed action, significant, positive changes in practice and greater contributions to educational theory will be achieved” (p.60).

Goodnough’s reflections agree with those given by Brown et al. (2015) who used action research as a methodology to reflect on the design and teaching of an action research course and to promote continuous academic and professional improvement. Their findings indicate that AR is an opportunity for professors to reflect on their practice and to learn about the difficulties students go through when learning and conducting AR projects.

Using a more critical approach to action research, Millican (2014) studied how an increase in fees and the privatization of universities impacted students’ expectations. The study, which is a comparison between the experiences of undergraduate students in Australia, Canada, and the United States with students in England following an increase university fees, seeks to understand students’ lives in universities in today’s socioeconomic landscape. In addition, CAR studies

58 conducted by Thomas (2000), Miskovic and Hoop (2006), and Lorenzetti and Walsh (2014) explored social issues by linking the university with the community.

3.4.2 Critical Action Research as the Focus of a CoP

Cochran-Smith and Lyle (1992) commented on the efforts made to bring teachers together to share their experiences, learn from each other, address classroom and institutional issues, and raise questions about universities as sites for research. They mentioned that networks or communities of teachers have as their main purpose to help teachers reflect on their practices and “encourage teacher or action research” (p. 305). In this respect, Lucas (2007) reports that academics who are interested in connecting teaching and research as a tool for their professional development are also interested in researching their work and encouraging students to engage in research projects and communities. More specifically, Lucas found that in one of the institutions she conducted research, academics were involved in research projects that observed their own teaching practices.

In the description of their community of inquiry, Bruce and Easley (2000) have highlighted how sharing values and beliefs has aided the members of the community to live meaningful experiences for more than 22 years. The authors do not describe their community as a model, but as a site that supports action research activities. Their community, DIME (Dialogues in Methods of Education) is formed by school teachers and university faculty who study how to improve their teaching through research. In their meetings, they share ideas, critically analyze the factors that shape their work as educators and researchers, and provide mutual support.

Bruce and Easley (2000) acknowledged that members of DIME have learned about teaching and learning, the process of change in teaching, and the challenges of building communities of research that focus on teaching and learning. Among the challenges, they have mentioned that there are still some barriers where selfishness thwarts willingness to share with colleagues, that sometimes it is difficult to arrive at an agreement, and that the lack of time hinders their work as a community. Nonetheless, this community has survived for over 22 years because its members have overcome these challenges; little by little they have built enough trust for everybody to feel confident to share what they do. Differences among participants have been seen as contributions and valuable opportunities to learn more from each other. As Bruce and Easley suggest,

“successful action research communities need to invest effort to accommodate difference and change. Listening to others, a simplistic mantra, may be a key to this process” (p. 256).

The study that resonates the most with my own is one conducted by Arias and Restrepo (2009) in two Colombian universities. The two authors along with eight other professors and two students working as research assistants formed an inquiry group that looked at evaluation practices in foreign language acquisition through action research. In their article, Arias and Restrepo discuss the potential that AR has in supporting the professional development and empowerment of faculty that does research through this approach. They share how during the establishment of this community, roles of the members in terms of participation and sense of belonging were discussed. The authors also illuminate that colleagues in this community had collaborative and individual identities – the former to provide mutual support and the latter to contribute from each reality and condition.

The community met on a weekly basis and attended seminars and workshops together to learn more about the subject of their interest and the methodology they were applying. Every meeting was led by a different person, which contributed to the development of leadership roles and horizontal relationships. The authors have reported that working within a participative, democratic, and flexible community has allowed all participants to reflect individually and as a group about the educational realities and the power they hold through collaboration to challenge and transform those realities.

3.5 Concluding remarks

Throughout the literature review, the areas of interest for my research have been presented. The empirical research analyzed above portrays that there is insufficient research investigating communities of practice as sites to encourage university professors to embark in research endeavors. It is also evident that literature on the use of CAR as the research focus of these communities is scarce in comparison to those which concentrate on AR. Furthermore, studies from Latin America are practically non-existent, which indicates these communities are not yet formed, and that CAR needs to be introduced to universities in our countries where social inequalities are the norm.

Chapter 4 Conceptual Framework

“We must become able not only to transform our institutions, in response to changing situations and requirements; we must invent and develop institutions which are ‘learning systems,' that is to say, systems capable of bringing about their own continuing transformation.” - Schön, 1971, p.30.

4.1 Introduction

This chapter introduces the conceptual framework that I used for the study which is crucial for analyzing the data and informing the interpretations of the findings presented in Chapters 7, 8, and 9. These interpretations are related to how the participants of the study perceive their learning within a community of practice (CoP), the nature of their contributions to the community, their perceptions and understandings of critical action research (CAR) and social justice as the main focus of the community, and the individual and institutional factors that enable or constrain their participation.

To better understand the nature of learning within a community and the concept of Communities of Practice (CoPs) this chapter starts with the description of the social theory of learning and social learning systems and its structuring elements (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Lave, 1993; Wenger, 1998). It then moves to a more elaborated explanation of what CoPs are, their characteristics, dimensions, and elements (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998, 2000, 2010; Lave, 1993). The notion of Landscapes of Practice (LoP), recently developed by Etienne and Beverly Wenger-Trayner (2015b), is described at the end of the chapter along with an explanation of how participants identify with different practices within a landscape. It is necessary to note that the social theory of learning and social learning systems are introduced as the foundation of the concepts, CoP and LoP, that framed this research study.

I chose to use CoP and LoP as the conceptual framework because the purpose of the study was to look at the development of a community that brought professors together to learn from and with 60

61 each other within their own context. The notion of CoPs and LoP as theories for learning propose a frame that focuses on learners’ active participation, learning, and competence development in sociocultural communities (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Lave, 1993; Wenger, 1998; Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015b).

4.2 The Social Theory of Learning

The Social Theory of Learning was proposed by Wenger (1998) and it places learning within our lived experiences and participation in our own context. The author further described a social theory of learning as a process that requires active participants who construct identities in relation to and within social communities.

Wenger (1998) acknowledged that the Social Theory of Learning does not replace or contest other learning theories, but rather is an additional one that addresses different aspects of learning and has its own principles and foci for understanding what learning is and how to empower it. The theory was built on the assumptions of the importance of learning and “the nature of knowledge, knowing and the knowers” (p.4). Wenger (1998) describes the grounds upon which his theory is constructed: • We are social beings. Far from being trivially true, this fact is a central aspect of learning. • Knowledge is a matter of competence with respect to valued enterprises – such as singing in tune, discovering scientific facts, fixing machines, writing poetry, being convivial, growing up as a boy or a girl, and so forth. • Knowing is a matter of participating in the pursuit of such enterprises, that is, of active engagement in the world. • Meaning – our ability to experience the world and our engagement with it as meaningful – is ultimately what learning is to produce. (p. 4)

As explained by these premises, as social beings we are part of a learning process that is a social activity that requires active participants who are engaged in the world and its communities. Social participation shapes who we are, what we do, and how we interpret what we do. The social theory of learning highlights the relationship between the individual and the world, activity, cognition, learning, and knowing (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Lave, 1993). That is, learning involves negotiating meaning, participating actively in social communities, and constructing identities within those communities (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998).

Wenger (1998) has pointed out that the social theory of learning integrates four components that portray the learning process as social and participatory. These four components include: meaning, practice, identity, and community (Figure 14). According to the author, the learning process can be focused on any of these components by placing it in the center, because the components are connected and intertwined. In my study, I emphasize on the element of community as the learning of university professors within a community of practice is analyzed and interpreted.

4.2.1 Components of the Social Theory of Learning

Meaning, learning as experience, involves modes of participation and reification in the community. While participation means engaging in activities, discussions, and other social interactions, reification refers to the artifacts (words, concepts, documents, stories, discourses) that we produce as a result of our participation in the world (Wenger, 2010). Participation and reification are interrelated elements that assist us in negotiating and renegotiating meaning which is historical and context-embedded. Learning emerges from negotiated experiences and meaningful participation in the community (Wenger, 1998, 2010).

Practice, learning as doing, concerns discussions about the resources and perceptions shared in order to develop community engagement. Practice is a learning process that takes place through our interactions and negotiations with others and the world; that is, we learn collaboratively, and in this collaboration, we find practice (Wenger, 1998).

Identity, learning as becoming, refers to the way identity and experience are shaped through learning experiences within our communities. As Wenger (2010) suggests “learning is not just acquiring skills and information; it is becoming a certain person – a knower in a context where what it means to know is negotiated to the regime of competence of a community” (p. 181).

Community learning as belonging

Practice: Identity: learning as Learning learning as doing becoming

Meaning: learning as experience

Figure 14. Components of the Social Theory of Learning (Adapted from Wenger, 1998, p. 5).

Community, learning as belonging, refers to the learning context in which active participation and engagement are bounded. This encompasses the community in which we are learning and participating (Wenger, 1998, 2010).

4.3 Social Learning Systems

According to Blackmore (2012), a social learning system is focused on how learning takes place through social interactions and how the context shapes and is shaped by those interactions. In social learning systems, as mentioned by Wenger (2000), competence is developed when our experiences and social interactions interact within our communities. Thus, learning occurs when there is interplay between the social competence developed within the community and our personal experience of the world.

Social learning systems are characterized by “emergent structure, complex relationships, self- organization, dynamic boundaries, ongoing negotiation of identity and cultural meaning” as suggested by Wenger (2010, p. 179).

4.3.1 Structuring Elements of Social Learning Systems

When the structure of social learning systems is explored, three basic components are distinguished: communities of practice, boundary processes, and identities. (Wenger, 2000). Although communities of practice are one of the structuring components of social learning systems, they can also be a learning system per se because they are “the simplest social unit that has the characteristics of a social learning system” (Wenger, 2010, p. 180). Based on this premise, and the fact that this research focuses on the implementation and development of a CoP, the boundary processes and identity elements of a social learning system will be presented within the communities of practice model.

4.3.2 The Nature of Learning in Social Learning Systems

Lave and Wenger (1991) described learning as a situated activity which is an “integral part of generative social practice in the lived-in world” (p.35). That is learners become participants of social communities, and it is through that participation that learning takes place, knowledge is acquired, and skills are developed. As Lave and Wenger (1991) suggest,

As an aspect of social practice, learning involves the whole person; it implies not only a relation to specific activities but a relation to social communities - it implies becoming a full participant, a member, a kind of person. In this view, learning only partly – and often incidentally – implies becoming able to be involved in new activities, to perform new tasks and functions, to master new understandings. Activities, tasks, and functions do not exist in isolation; they are part of broader systems of relations in which they have meaning. (p. 53)

According to Lave and Wenger (1991) learning occurs in an interactive participation process, which they have called legitimate peripheral participation, and in the access of learners to participation. Legitimate peripheral participation is the process through which an individual, known as a newcomer, engages with the sociocultural practices of a community and gradually acquires knowledge and skills, and becomes more experienced. In the authors’ words,

Learning viewed as situated activity has as its central defining characteristic a process that we call legitimate peripheral participation. By this we mean to draw attention to the point that learners inevitably participate in communities of practitioners and that the mastery of knowledge and skill requires newcomers to move toward full participation in the sociocultural practices of a community. (p. 29)

This participation process is legitimate as it is a way of belonging to the social community. It is an essential element and condition for learning. Participation is peripheral because it means belonging and being part of the social world that shapes learners’ (participants) perspectives and identities. Lave and Wenger (1991) explained that legitimate peripheral participation is not an educational form but rather an analytical lens to understand learning within social communities and the social practice. They state,

Viewing learning as legitimate peripheral participations means that learning is not merely a condition for membership, but is itself an evolving form of membership. We conceive identities as long-term, living relations between persons and their place and participation in communities of practice. Thus identity, knowing and social membership entail one another. (p.53) 4.4 Communities of Practice

The term Community of Practice was first coined by Etienne Wenger and Jean Lave (1991) to describe how learning takes place through practice and participation, and to refer to the community as a living curriculum for the learner. The concept defines a learning approach that focuses on active participation in authentic, context-embedded activities (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Lave, 1993).

A community of practice is the core element of a social learning system because it contains the competences that build that system. It is not an isolated concept, but rather part of a thinking- about-learning conceptual framework (Wenger, 2000, 2010). The term has been further defined as groups of “people who engage in a process of collective learning in a shared domain of human endeavor… who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly" (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015a, p. 7).

In a community of practice, there is a shared field of interest to which participants are committed. The members of a community of practice are practitioners who share the resources, histories, and experiences of their practice; they help each other and also learn from one another.

Communities of practice exist everywhere: businesses, governments, associations, unions, schools, universities, among others. However, not every group of people that forms a community can be recognized as a community of practice (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015a). In the field of education, the concept of communities of practice has been applied to teacher training programs, teacher-administrator relationships, and teacher professional development. Educational practices can be affected in three dimensions by the perspective of Communities of Practice: internally, externally and over the lifetime of students, as Wenger-Trayner and Wenger- Trayner (2015a) suggest.

• Internally: How to organize educational experiences that ground school learning in practice through participation in communities around subject matters? • Externally: How to connect the experience of students to actual practice through peripheral forms of participation in broader communities beyond the walls of the school? • Over the lifetime of students: How to serve the lifelong learning needs of students by organizing communities of practice focused on topics of continuing interest to students beyond the initial schooling period? (p. 5).

4.4.1 Characteristics of a Community of Practice

In a community of practice, people interact, share understandings and activities, and create and negotiate meanings from the actions in which they engage. Communities of practice have been analyzed as “sites of learning” (Lave, 1993, p. 72) in which learning is an essential part of social practice. To create and cultivate CoPs the combination of three essential elements, the domain, the community and the practice, and their parallel development is vital. (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015a). The authors explain these elements as follows:

The domain: A community of practice is not merely a club of friends or a network of connections between people. It has an identity defined by a shared domain of interest. Membership, therefore, implies a commitment to the domain, and therefore a shared competence that distinguishes members from other people… The domain is not necessarily something recognized as ‘expertise’ outside the community.

The community: In pursuing their interest in their domain, members engage in joint activities and discussions, help each other, and share information. They build relationships that enable them to learn from each other; they care about their standing with each other… Having the same job or the same title does not make for a community of practice unless members interact and learn together.

The practice: Members of a community of practice are practitioners. They develop a shared repertoire of resources: experiences, stories, tools, ways of addressing recurring problems —in short, a shared practice. This takes time and sustained interaction. (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015a, p. 2)

4.4.2 Dimensions of a Community of Practice

As mentioned above not every organization that uses the term ‘community’ to describe itself can be seen as meeting the community component of CoP. Similarly, not every practice (playing the guitar or the piano) defines that component of CoP. Wenger (1998) has claimed that by linking community and practice, a more accurate depiction of practice is provided which in turn defines a specific type of community. Furthermore, there are three dimensions that characterize communities of practice and that have been described by Wenger. These dimensions are: (a) mutual engagement; (b) joint enterprise; and (c) shared repertoire, which are depicted in Figure 15.

joint enterprise

shared repertoire

mutual engagement

Figure 15. Dimensions of a Community of Practice (Adapted from Wenger, 1998, p.73).

(a) Mutual engagement refers to the quantity and type of interactions among the participants of the community. It is the participation and the negotiation of meanings among members. It is

sharing experiences and understanding of the shared domain to create relationships that can benefit the community and the broader context. Being declared a member of a community is not enough, active participation is necessary to achieve membership which is indeed a characteristic of mutual engagement. Wenger (1998) has stated three important aspects of mutual engagement: (1) Enabling elements of engagement such as a sharing an experience or commenting on an article. (2) Diversity, which refers to the value of individual differences of the members in the learning process within the community. (3) Multiplexity which means creating true relationships among participants; that is, relationships are not idealized, peaceful, and always supportive but also ones that include disagreements, struggles, and frictions. (b) Joint enterprise regards the common purpose that keeps people together in the pursuit of a common objective. It is the process that keeps the community alive by engaging members of the community in joint endeavors over time; it involves mutual accountability (Wenger, 1998). Joint enterprise is many times negotiated as it involves events and interactions in which not everybody agrees. As humans, there are many internal and external factors that influence our identities, learnings, perceptions, and opinions. Joint enterprise is also characterized by the indigenous identity, goals, and practice that evolves within the community which is shaped by the social, political, cultural, or institutional context in which it develops. However, the community’s reality is produced by “participants within the resources and constraints of their situations. It is their response to their conditions, and therefore their enterprise” (Wenger, 1998, p. 79). The mutual negotiation and indigenous purpose involved in joint enterprise create a regime of mutual accountability in which relations among the members evolve enough to feel responsible for each other where sharing and learning occurs (Wenger, 1998). (c) A shared repertoire involves members’ meaningful participation and negotiation of meaning to generate and develop shared resources such as procedures, discourses, stories, experiences, language, and actions. Wenger (1998) mentioned two characteristics of the shared repertoire of a CoP. First, he referred to shared history which is built up over time by the members of the CoP from their experiences, trajectories, words, and routines. Second, he pointed out ambiguity not as an element lacking meaning but as a condition for negotiation and generation of meaning as the elements of the repertoire are opened for interpretation.

In addition to the vital elements for the creation of a community of practice (domain, community, and practice), Wenger (1998) presented a list of indicators to confirm that a CoP has formed and that its dimensions are present. These indicators include: 1) sustained mutual relationships – harmonious or conflictual 2) shared ways of engaging in doing things together 3) the rapid flow of information and propagation of innovation 4) absence of introductory preambles, as if conversations and interactions were merely the continuation of an ongoing process 5) very quick setup of a problem to be discussed 6) substantial overlap in participants’ descriptions of who belongs 7) knowing what others know, what they can do, and how they can contribute to an enterprise 8) mutually defining identities 9) the ability to assess the appropriateness of actions and products 10) specific tools, representations, and other artifacts 11) local lore, shared stories, inside jokes, knowing laughter 12) jargon and shortcuts to communication as well as the ease of producing new ones 13) certain styles recognized as displaying membership 14) a shared discourse reflecting a certain perspective on the world. (pp. 125-126)

4.4.3 Key Success Factors for a Community of Practice

In addition to the essential characteristics and dimensions of Communities of Practice, Etienne and Beverly Wenger-Trayner (2011) have highlighted several key factors that potentially contribute to their success or failure. These success (or failure) features are identification, leadership, time, governance, sense of ownership, trust, recognition for contributions, high expectations for value creation, organizational voice, connection to a broader field, and interactions with other communities.

Although the authors stated that all these factors can become critical depending on the circumstances, they claimed that the first three, identification, leadership, and time, are the ones deserving more attention and define the factors as:

• Identification which originates from social energy and passion for the domain.

• Leadership relates to the people who take the initiative and has the skills to organize the community as a learning space and who has the willingness and energy to continue over time.

• Time is the challenge for every community as members’ participation and membership is divided. Even though members show interest and commitment, their time has become a

scarce commodity; therefore, community activities need to ensure “high value for time” (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2011, para. 4).

4.4.4 Elements of a Community of Practice

The dimensions of communities of practice have been further expanded into six elements: events, leadership, connectivity, membership, learning projects, and artifacts. According to Wenger (2000), these six elements should be looked at when designing a CoP where learning will occur and competencies develop. Table 9 below presents a brief description of each of the elements proposed by Wenger.

Table 9. Elements of a Community of Practice (Adapted from Wenger, 2000, pp. 230-232)

Events CoPs organize events such as meetings and decide on frequency, activities, and responsibilities of the members.

Leadership CoPs depend on multiple forms of leadership: thought, networkers, pioneers. Leadership roles change over time.

Connectivity CoPs should enable connectivity and brokering relationships among the members. Interaction and communication can occur through multiple media.

Membership Membership in CoPs should be diverse, welcoming, positive, and flexible.

Learning Projects CoPs engage in responsible learning agendas: finding gaps in the knowledge base and deciding on projects to fill the gap.

Artifacts CoPs generate and decide on maintaining their own artifacts: stories, experiences, discourses, documents, tools.

As mentioned above, learning, development of skills, and construction of identities occur through our legitimate participation within the community in which we socially interact; however, a community is not isolated nor are our personal and professional identities developed by being part of a single community. CoPs are part of a “complex social landscape of shared

71 practice boundaries, peripheries, overlaps, connections, and encounters” (Wenger, 1998, p. 118). These complex social landscapes include other communities of practice, “and we live and learn across a multiplicity of practices” (Wenger, 2010, p. 182).

4.4.5 Boundary Processes

When looking at communities of practice, it is impossible not to acknowledge the existence of boundaries that emerge from the different experiences, histories, relationships, discourses, perspectives, and capabilities. They are considered an important component of social learning systems, as communities of practice, because they not only connect communities but also provide opportunities to learn something new or shift ways of thinking. As Wenger (2010) articulates, “learning at boundaries is likely to be maximized for individuals and for communities when experience and competence are in close tension” (p. 233). Learning at boundaries, therefore, requires interaction, engagement with differences, commitment to see competence, and ways to interpret and negotiate different repertoires.

Boundary processes involve exchanging practices between communities and negotiating their boundary; that is, making sense of how the practice of one community contributes or not to the practice of the other. Boundaries can be problematic because the absence of sufficient shared repertoire can lead to misunderstanding and confusion. Yet, the authors also note how boundaries can be potential spaces for learning where “the meetings of perspectives can rich in new insights, radical innovations, and great progress” (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015b, p. 17).

4.4.6 Identities

Our identities define who we are, how we do things, and why we do things. Identities are not automatically developed; they are a result of the aspects that influence our lives. Our identities are shaped by what we know and do not know, by the communities where we belong and the ones we do not. Every component of our identity moves with us and makes us behave and participate in the way we do in different spaces and practices.

Wenger (2000, 2010) described three reasons why identity is crucial in communities of practice. First, he mentioned that each person’s multiple identities influence their perception of what is

72 important or not and with whom they identify, creating knowledge from the combination of competence and experience. Second, identities are important in dealing with boundaries and learning from our interactions by opening to new ways of thinking and being. Third, within our identities, communities and boundaries are seen as an experience in the social practice.

It is important to note that although belonging to a community or several communities where collective ideas and perspectives are formed, we develop individual identities within those communities and boundaries. In Wenger’s (2000) words, “whenever we belong to multiple communities, we experience the boundary in a personal way. In the process, we create bridges across communities because, in developing our own identities, we deal with these boundaries in ourselves” (p.239). Furthermore, Wenger (1998) explained identity as a learning trajectory that incorporates “the past and the future into the experience of the present” (p.158). Wenger explained that our identity informs our trajectories through complex interactions within and across communities.

Additionally, identity has been characterized as multi-membership because our participation in any community constitutes only a small part of our identity. We engage in multiple practices and belong to multiple communities, and the competence and knowledge we develop in each of those communities and practices are what shapes our identity. According to Wenger (1998) “our various forms of participation delineate pieces of a puzzle we put together rather than sharp boundaries between disconnected parts of ourselves” (p.159).

4.5. Landscapes of Practice

Based on Wenger’s (1998) ideas on landscapes of social shared practices, the most recent work of Etienne and Beverly Wenger-Trayner (2015b) explore what it means for a practitioner to work and function within the dynamic landscapes of different communities of practice. According to the authors, a profession’s body of knowledge is a landscape of practice that has been built up by belonging to different communities and by negotiating boundaries between those communities.

A person does not live and work in only one community and does not learn solely from that community. In fact, a person’s knowledge and identity are constructed and shaped by belonging to a system of communities in which learning, experiences, and histories are accumulated. When

73 a person enters a new community, he/she increases his/her knowledge by learning from the experiences of others but also enriches the community with the experience and knowledge he/she brings and shares. Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2015b) describe the relationships that a person builds across a landscape of practice using the notion of knowledgeability, which is an ability to take advantage of the experiences of the landscape as meaningful opportunities to engage in the practice.

It is important to acknowledge the landscapes of the members of a community to avoid obscuring the multiple communities to which they belong. It is necessary “to pay attention to our multimembership in different communities and to the challenges we face as our personal trajectories take us through multiple communities” (Hutchinson, et al., 2015, p. 2).

Individual experiences and identities are a reflection of the complexity of the landscape in which a person functions. Relationships and coexistence within the landscapes of practice can be problematic as tensions might exist in the boundaries between the practices. For the Wenger- Trayners (2015b), “participation in a landscape provides the constitutive texture of an experience of identity. Through our journey, the landscape shapes our experience of ourselves: practices, people, places, regimes of competence, communities, and boundaries become part of who we are” (pp. 19-20).

Learning as the generator of practice creates boundaries in which we reflect on our competence in that practice and our identities. Active boundaries across practices become opportunities for exploring and questioning the communities of practice in which we are involved, balancing and considering communities’ particular importance to us and our commitment to them, and looking for differences and connections between them. As Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2015b) state,

Not all the practices we interact with or the boundaries we cross have the same significance, of course. Our journey creates a variety of relationships to locations in the landscape. Some we enter fully and some we visit, merely catch a glimpse of, or ignore altogether. Some we explore deeply and some remain foreign. With some we identify strongly, with others lightly, and with many not at all… Some communities may welcome us, while others may reject us…Through it all, the journey shapes us via experiences of both identification and dis-identification. (p. 20)

4.5.1 Modes of Identification

To further understand the position of learning within a landscape of practice, it is necessary to review the three distinct modes of identification (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015b), formerly referred to as modes of belonging by Wenger (1998): engagement, imagination, and alignment. Through these modes of identification, the members of a community of practice, who at the same time belong and interact with other CoPs, see their identities as participants “in social processes and configurations that go beyond their direct engaging in their own practice” (Wenger, 1998, p. 173). Indeed, participants create relationships of identification to the different communities in which they participate and interact, and make sense of the landscape and their position in it.

Engagement is a mode of identification and a source of identity as participants of a landscape of practice are involved in active negotiations of meaning and relations to a practice. Engagement is bounded in the sense that we can only engage in the activities, conversations, and histories of the practices to the extent that our physical and time abilities and priorities allow (Wenger, 1998, 2010). Engagement provides direct experience for our learning process as committed members or only visitors of a landscape of practice (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015b). Wenger (1998) claimed that engagement “requires the ability to take part in meaningful activities and interactions, in the production of shareable artifacts, in community-building conversations, and in the negotiation of new situations” (p.184).

Imagination is about extrapolating from our past experiences to influence our future decisions; it is projecting images of the social world and ourselves within the social world. It is imagining new possibilities, perspectives, relations. Indeed, for Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2015b), “imagination functions inside a community as members make assumptions about each other, recall the past, and talk about their future, but it can also travel without limits and is a way to experience identification way beyond our immediate engagement” (p. 22).

According to Wenger (1998) imagination involves different processes:

1) Recognizing our experience in others, knowing what others are doing, being in someone else’s shoes

2) Defining a trajectory that connects what we are doing to an extended identity, seeing ourselves in new ways 3) Locating our engagement in broader systems in time and space, conceiving of the multiple constellations that are contexts for our practices 4) Sharing stories, explanations, descriptions 5) Opening access to distant practices through excursions and fleeting contacts – visiting, talking, observing, meeting 6) Assuming the meaningfulness of foreign artifacts and actions 7) Creating models, reifying patterns, producing representational artifacts 8) Documenting historical developments, events, transitions; reinterpreting histories and trajectories in new terms 9) Generating scenarios, exploring other ways of doing what we are doing, other possible worlds, and other identities. (p.185)

Alignment is about fitting within the broader context and contributing to broader initiatives. It is about coordinating, connecting and organizing activities, actions, and practices within the context in which we function and following instructions and laws. However, as noted by Wenger (2010), alignment is “not merely compliance or passive acquiescence… it is a two-way process of coordinating perspectives, interpretations, actions, and contexts so that action has the effects we expect” (pp. 184-185). Each of these modes is depicted in Figure 16.

Engagement Imagination shared histories of learning possibilities relationships the world interactions the past practice the future ourselves

Alignment coordinated enterprises discourses complexity styles compliance

Figure 16. Modes of Identification (Adapted from Wenger, 1998, p. 174).

The three modes of identification are within each person’s practice and across the boundaries of practices. Furthermore, each mode of identification contributes to meet and maintain the dimensions that allow the creating and evolution of a CoP as shown in Table 10.

Table 10. Dimensions and Modes of Identification of a CoP (Adapted from Wenger, 2000, p. 31)

Joint enterprise Mutual engagement Shared repertoire Engagement Opportunities to Events and interactions Shared experiences, negotiate a joint inquiry to develop trust language, artifacts, and questions histories, tools, documents Finding gaps in the developed over time. knowledge and working Opportunities for new together to address those interactions and meanings. gaps.

Imagination Visions of the potential Knowing each other. Self-representations of the of the community to Making participation in community. inspire participation and the community Language to talk about the define a learning agenda. meaningful in community. participants’ lives. Alignment Members articulate and Definitions of roles, Traditions, methods, subscribe to a shared norms, behaviors, standards, routines, and purpose principles, commitments frameworks that define the and expectations that practice hold the community together.

4.6 Concluding remarks

I used the three essential characteristics, dimensions, and elements of CoPs to analyze the data and interpret the findings in relation to the initial organization of our group and the activities that led us to become and evolve as a community of practice. The notion of landscapes of practice provided the opportunity to better understand and value the background of the participants and

77 the nature of their contributions. Furthermore, the modes of identification allowed me to comprehend the commitment of the participants to the community activities and purpose, and their perspectives and expectations for the future.

Chapter 5 Methodology

“We think we listen, but very rarely do we listen with real understanding, true empathy. Yet listening, of this very special kind, is one of the most potent forces for change that I know.”

- Carl Rogers, 1980, p.116

5.1 Introduction

The purpose of this research is to analyze the learning nature of university-level language instructors of the Language Institute at the Universidad de Cuenca within a community of practice. The members share their interest in learning about and committing to critical action research to develop new and critical understandings of their teaching, the issues within their language classrooms, and the actions they take to address those concerns. The experiences of the professors within the community can inform other professors within the Universidad de Cuenca about how these sharing spaces can lead to adopting a teacher-research role that will support knowledge generation, academic and professional development, the learning experiences of the students, and institutional growth regarding research and quality of education.

This chapter includes the process of selecting participants, and the research approach and research design chosen for the study. It also describes the data collection process and the data analysis and synthesis along with the reasoning behind each decision. The methodology of this study seeks to provide detailed descriptions of the experiences of the members of the community and informed interpretations to be able to answer the overarching research question and sub questions as follows.

How do university-level Language instructors perceive their learning within a community of practice that focuses on Critical Action Research?

1. What is the nature of the contributions of university-level Ecuadorian language instructors to the community of practice?

2. What are the perceptions and understandings of university-level Ecuadorian language instructors of critical action research and social justice after participating in the community of practice?

3. How do individual and institutional factors enable or constrain university-level Ecuadorian language instructors’ participation and commitment to the community of practice?

The chapter closes with a discussion of important aspects related to the validity and reliability of this research to determine how accurate the findings are, and if there is consistency between my approach and that of similar studies. It also addresses ethical considerations and limitations of the study.

5.2 The Community

Forming a community of practice is more than just joining people in a group as certain conditions need to be met by all potential members. As mentioned in Chapter 4, according to Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2015a) to cultivate a community of practice, it is necessary to develop the domain, the community, and the practice in parallel.

All professors from the Language Institute of the Universidad de Cuenca are active practitioners in the field of language teaching; thus, the practice element of the CoPs concept was already met. When I first presented the project to faculty members, those identified with the domain decided to join me. We shared an initial interest in getting together to learn from each other and about CAR. During our first meeting as a community, we talked about our experiences as teachers and researchers and our expectations of the group. We made in-house decisions concerning the frequency of our meetings, our research interests, and our priorities as teachers looking to become teacher-researchers.

5.3 The Study Participants

Once consent from the University of Toronto and the Universidad de Cuenca was granted, a convenience sample method for recruiting the participants was employed. That is, the participants of this study, consenting language professors of the Language Institute of the Universidad de Cuenca, were chosen because they were readily available (Patton, 2002).

5.3.1 Inviting New Members

I started the participants’ selection process by attending one of the weekly faculty meetings, held every Monday, led by the Director of the Language Institute. Although I have worked in the Institute for a number of years, I introduced my new role as a researcher and described the study and its objectives. I invited all professors to join the community of practice and ultimately become participants in my study. I passed around a sign-up sheet for those who were interested in receiving more information and potentially participating. At the end of that meeting, 24 professors had written their names and email addresses down (Appendix D). A follow-up email was sent to those who registered to invite them to our first meeting (Appendix E). This communication was written in Spanish to make sure that the professors of languages other than English could understand.

The first official meeting of the group was held on February 1, 2016, and only 18 professors out of the 24 who signed up attended. I described the community as a site for finding a nexus between teaching and research. I explained that our approach was critical action research because it can lead transformation practices and create a positive impact in the University. We agreed on meeting twice a month for a 90-minute period and to use Spanish as the language of our meetings, so all professors were able to interact. It is important to mention that participation was voluntary and that our meetings, although held on the University premises, were not during our working hours.

Furthermore, I explained in detail my research purpose, process, and possible implications. I distributed the informed consent forms (Appendix G), which were written in English for professors who teach that language and in Spanish for the ones that teach other languages, and reviewed them with the professors. All questions regarding participation and anonymity were

81 answered. Some professors were concerned that their interactions in the community of practice were going to be reported to the Director of the Institute and have an impact on their year review. However, I highlighted the fact that she was not able to participate in the community during data collection, and that all information related to individual and group participation would be kept strictly confidential as they would be given a pseudonym that was to be used in all analyses and reports of the data. I was also clear in pointing out that integrating the community of practice did not indicate acceptance to become participants. Individual data were collected only from the 16 professors that voluntarily decided to be participants of the research and signed the consent form. The two that did not sign the consent eventually stopped attending the meetings.

The participants were given pseudonyms according to their working status within the University and if they had previous research experience or not. That is, the first name starts with a T if the professor has tenure or with a C if the professor works under a contract. It was important to make this distinction because as it was explained in Chapter 2, professors have different rights and obligations that depend on their status. A similar process was applied for the last names; thus, they start with an R if the participants have had previous research experience or with an N if the professors have not had any experience in research. Although first and last names are provided, throughout the research, the participants are referred to by the first name of their pseudonym (Table 11). Table 11. Members of the Community 1 Teresa Ruiz 9 Cristian Rivera 2 Tatiana Ramos 10 Catalina Nunez 3 Telmo Navas 11 Carlos Roldan 4 Camila Nieto 12 Tamara Navarro 5 Tania Rojas 13 Tomás Noriega 6 Tito Romero 14 Carla Narvaez 7 Cecilia Neira 15 Constanza Naranjo 8 Claudio Novillo 16 Tina Rocha

As aforementioned, participants were recruited from the Language Institute of the Universidad de Cuenca in which I am also a professor; thus, a professional relationship exists between the

82 researcher and the members of the community. Nevertheless, I did not hold any administrative or academic position in the Institute that could create any power differential.

It should be noted that I, also a member of the community, am the only professor of the faculty at the Language Institute that had been granted a scholarship from the Ecuadorian government to study in a prestigious international university. I consider this situation may have had an impact on the decision of some colleagues to not participate.

5.3.2 Focal Participants

After our second meeting, I noticed ten colleagues seemed more committed, enthusiastic, and optimistic about the new learning experience. Thus, I personally asked them to be the focal participants in the study. The criteria for the selection were simple, they were: members of the community, attended to the first two meetings, and demonstrated a willingness to participate.

Out of the ten members of the community I spoke with, eight accepted and signed the consent forms (Appendix H). Therefore, the eight members of the community who acted as my focal participants are Teresa, Tatiana, Telmo, Camila, Tania, Tito, Cecilia, and Claudio.

5.4 Research Approach

Studying the learning experiences of faculty members of the Language Institute required the application of a qualitative research design framed within a constructivist paradigm. The main purpose of the study is to understand the participants’ underlying assumptions, beliefs, and actions within their practice and how these are shaped after partaking in a community of practice that integrates a critical action research approach. This agrees with the purpose of the constructivist paradigm in which individuals are constantly trying to understand the world in which they live.

According to Creswell (2014), qualitative research within the constructivist paradigm relies on the participant’s understandings and views of the phenomenon studied and on their interactions and discussions with other people. For Creswell, in this type of approach researchers focus on the interactions among participants and the contexts in which participants live and work. Furthermore, researchers recognize how their own personal, cultural, and historical background

83 and experiences shape the interpretations of the meanings participants have about a particular situation.

This specific approach was chosen for the study since it seeks to understand how language professors perceive their learning within a community of practice and how their own backgrounds, experiences, and interactions in their other landscapes as teachers and researchers influence their participation and contributions. By using a qualitative approach, this study provided rich, thick descriptions of the experiences of language professors within the community of practice.

5.5 Research Design

The research incorporated an embedded case study design that was informed by participatory critical action research. Simons (2009) has defined case study as an in-depth exploration from multiple perspectives of the complexity and uniqueness of a particular project, policy, institution or system in a real-life context. It is research based, inclusive of different methods and is evidence-led (p. 21). Case studies provide a detailed and rich description of an individual unit be it a person, a classroom, or an institution. Through case studies, a researcher can portray an in- depth view of specific participants within a specific setting.

Hitcock and Hughes (1995) argued that case studies are concerned with the thorough description of specific events in a case, include historical narratives of the events, and focus on an individual actor or group of actors and their perceptions. The case study approach is bounded and restricted to a single contextualized unit because it is situated in a specific context at a given moment. Moreover, it is studied in its natural context, which offers rich natural occurring data, drawn from multiple data sources. Case studies are usually longitudinal because they allow the researcher to explore the process of change or development of the phenomena under investigation over an extended period of time. Nevertheless, it is flexible in the sense that it can be equally carried out in a few weeks or months depending on the particularities of the context and the participants (Simons, 2014).

An embedded case study, as described by Yin (2004) takes place when subunits are also investigated within a single case. Subunits provide opportunities for a deeper analysis that

84 strengthens the study of the single case. In this research, the case study looked at the evolution of a community of practice, which members are language professors, as the unit of analysis and the individual members as subunits. The research design chosen for the study is consistent with the research purpose and questions to be able to obtain rich data to better understand and describe the organic development of the group and the individual experiences of its members.

Moreover, studying the community as a whole allowed me to understand the stories, experiences, interactions, and relationships amongst its members, and how these change over time. Learning about how individual members experience their membership in the community offered light in understanding how community participation shapes the perceptions, questions, and actions about the participants’ teaching and research practices.

As mentioned before, this case study was informed by participatory critical action research as it is a participant-centered approach. I, as the researcher, reflected on the issues of my own practice regarding teaching and research and saw how the same issues were also the struggles of my colleagues. I took action by proposing the formation of a group, in which I was a participant, where common interests and uncertainties where shared to learn with and from each other.

Through participatory (critical) action research, I was able to investigate this community. This approach emphasized participation and action, and it sought to understand a reality by changing it in a collaborative and reflective way. As stated by Reason and Bradbury (2008) “within action research projects, communities of inquiry and action evolve and address questions and issues that are significant for those who participate as co-researchers” (p. 2). Participatory (critical) action research allows a community to emerge and develop from the process.

In this study, participants and I were co-researchers and co-constructors of a new reality. My role was to facilitate the implementation process of this new space of inquiry, and together with the participants, our role was to strengthen the development and assure the survival of our community. We followed an iterative cycle that involved constant reflections about our academic and professional reality, discussions, and suggestions to find solutions and achieve desired outcomes.

5.6 Data Collection: Qualitative Methods

The research employed various strands of data collection methods to better understand and apply our different perspectives the reality under study. One method, observations, was used to collect data from the entire community during 19 meetings from February 2016 to March 2017. The other methods used were applied in two different stages and were used to collect data from the community as the unit of analysis and from focal participants as the subunits.

The community sessions were held once or twice a month (depending on the participants’ schedules) and lasted between 60 and 90 minutes. The meetings were in Spanish in order for all participants, including the ones who teach languages other than English, to be able to participate and collaborate in the community. The meetings were recorded and later transcribed and translated to document in detail the interactions between the members (including those interactions with myself).

The meetings usually started with a brief summary of our previous session to make sure that the participants who did not attend knew what we were talking about. We then moved to the main topic of the meeting. During the first seven meetings, culminating in May 2016, we took turns to share our experiences as teachers, graduate students, and some as researchers. Our sessions were interactive conversations where a lot of asking, narrating, and describing was involved.

Due to the requests of some of the members, beginning in June 2016, we started reading articles and book chapters about critical action research, social justice, and intersectionality. We prepared the readings in advance and in the meetings, we shared our understandings of what we read. In addition, we continued talking about our practice, issues, and concerns, and supported the designing stages of some projects.

Table 12. Community Meetings

Meeting Date Number of Topics participants 1 February 1, 2016 7 • Inform consent forms • Changes in the University 2 February 16, 2016 9 • The importance of knowing our academic and professional backgrounds • Activities done by professors in class • Using what we do in class as research 3 March 10, 2016 9 • The importance of knowing our students’ personal background • Previous research experiences • Experiences of the members who recently came back from doctoral coursework 4 March 28, 2016 10 • Our research approach: Critical action research • Research topics accepted by the TEFL master’s program and the Faculty of Philosophy • Possible topics for research projects 5 April 11, 2016 6 • Research in the Language Institute • Teaching in the Language Institute 6 April 25, 2016 9 • Theory vs. Practice • Learning/remembering the research process • The importance of reviewing existing research to learn about CAR and Social Justice 7 May 18, 2016 8 • Academic selfishness • Personal motivation to conduct research • Reading for next meeting: Hankivsky, O. (2014). Intersectionality 101. Canada: The Institute for Intersectionality Research & Policy, SFU. 8 June 6, 2016 7 • Commenting on the article we read • Opportunities to address social issues in our classroom and research 9 June 27, 2016 7 • Talking about the article • Activities for the following semester. 10 July 19, 2016 12 • Opportunities for CAR in the University through the DIUC: forms to submit proposals to the DIUC • Support from the Language Institute • Reading for next meeting: Norton, L. (2009). Putting pedagogical action research into the university context: What are the pressures? In L. Norton, Action research in teaching and learning: A practical guide to conducting pedagogical research in universities (pp. 1-20). New York: Routledge. 11 September 12, 2016 8 • Talking about the chapter we read • Our request was rejected by the Academic Council 12 September 26, 2016 9 • How can we address social issues in our teaching and research? • Reading for next meeting: Zeichner, M. (2010). Investigación-acción: La renovación personal y la reconstrucción social. In M. Zeichner, La formación del profesorado y la lucha por la justicia social. Madrid: Ediciones Morata.

13 October 10, 2016 11 • Commenting on the chapter we read • Helping Tito and Camila with their projects 14 October 31, 2016 8 • Working on ideas for projects • Reading for next meeting: Doria, R., & Castro, M. (2012). La investigación-acción en la transformación de las prácticas de enseñanza de los maestros de lenguaje. Lenguaje, 40(2), 447-468. 15 November 21, 2016 10 • Commenting on the article • Seeking for support to the social sciences 16 December 6, 2016 9 • Research motivation: hard sciences vs. social sciences at UC • What about writing articles? 17 January 9, 2017 12 • Perceptions about the critical approach to research • Can we take this intersectional stance? 18 January 30, 2017 8 • How can we help more members develop projects? • Reading for next meeting: Hall, C. (2016) A short introduction to social justice in ELT. In C. Hastings and L. Jacob (Eds.), Social justice in English Language Teaching (pp. 3-10). Alexandria: TESOL press. 19 March 7, 2017 10 • Commenting on the chapter • Future steps

5.6.1 Observations

Participant observations during the community meetings were done throughout the 12 months of data collection. Observations in case study research are thorough descriptions of the events and incidents occurring in a group in its natural setting. Through participant observation, the researcher can learn about the activities of the group by observing and taking part of those activities. According to Hesse-Biber and Leavy (2006), a researcher can take three different roles during observation depending on the nature of the study. The researcher can be a complete observer, an observer-as-participant, a participant-as-observer, or a complete participant. During the community meetings, I took the role of a complete participant, which is a common approach in action research (Mertens, 2015).

As mentioned in the introduction of this section, the rest of the data collection process was divided into two stages, and different methods were used in each one to collect information. The two stages are depicted in Figure 17.

•Background Questionnaire •Document review Stage 1 Community

•Conversational interviews •Focus groups Stage 2 Focal participants

Figure 17. Stages of Data Collection

In the first stage, a background questionnaire was administered to the participants to learn about their academic background and their previous research experience. Document analysis of participants’ research reports was done to better understand the kind of research they had produced. It is important to clarify that the background questionnaire and the analysis of the research papers were completed only at the beginning of the study to set the groundwork for the subsequent data collection procedures.

5.6.2 Background Questionnaire

To elicit relevant information about the academic background and the teaching and research experiences of participants, an email background questionnaire was sent (Appendix I). A questionnaire is a useful and efficient data collection instrument that enables the researcher to collect information that participants provide about themselves. This information “is typically not available from production data alone” (Mackey & Gass, 2011, pp. 92-93). The information provided by the participants was used to create individual portraits that are included in Chapter 6.

5.6.3 Document Review

Participants in the study were asked to provide any written sample of their previous research work: academic papers, journal articles, undergraduate thesis, and master’s thesis. According to

Mertens (2015), reviewing documents and records can provide the qualitative researcher with an opportunity to access the necessary information about the background of participants or insights about a particular situation.

Participants’ research reports were analyzed to obtain a clearer and deeper understanding of the type of research experience they have had in the past. More specifically, these documents were reviewed to determine the main focus of their research. That is, to know if the focus was solely on skill development (practical) or if other factors like inclusion, diversity, and equity (critical) were also taken into consideration. A coding scheme was created to portray the substantive features of the reports provided (Table 13). Once the analysis of the research samples was completed, participants were given the time to review the tables where the information was synthesized.

Table 13. Research Reports Coding Scheme

Type Problem/issue Context Participants Research design Focus Brief studied and approach description

The category type included published articles, research proposals, theses, and research papers as course assignments. The final category, research papers, was included because at the time some participants were in masters and doctoral programs. The focus, as mentioned before, was either practical or critical.

During the second stage, data were collected only from the focal participants through interviews and focus groups. This information allowed me to have a better understanding of how participants experienced their learning within the community.

5.6.4 Conversational Interviews

Individual conversational interviews were conducted at three different times during the research. According to deMarrais (2004), an interview is a process in which the participant and the researcher take part in an exchange of ideas related to the participants’ thoughts, opinions, perspectives and descriptions of a specific topic. Through interviews, the researcher gains in- depth knowledge of the participants and can portray a complete and thorough description from

90 their words and experiences (deMarrais, 2004). In addition, interviews support the development of rapport between the researcher and the participants, allowing the discussion of particular details of the phenomenon being studied.

A conversational interview is an informal, conversational type of interview that “enables the participants to engage in the process more freely without merely responding to researcher- generated questions,” (deMarrais, 2004, p. 53). At the same time, it gives more freedom to the researcher to tailor questions according to the experiences of each participant.

The first set of interviews was conducted in March 2016, after questionnaires and documents were analyzed. The second one took place in the middle of the data collection period, July 2016, and the final interview took place at the end of the study in January 2017. The first group of interviews served to expand the information collected through the questionnaire and to find out professors’ attitudes toward conducting critical action research, and their expectations of the community of practice as a site to link teaching and research. The second and third interview provided data about professors’ learning and sharing experiences within the community of practice. As with the meetings, the participants and I agreed to have all interviews in Spanish as they felt more comfortable using their first language. Having a common first language and cultural background with the participants helped to increase trust and create rapport.

Each interview session was no longer than 45 minutes and was scheduled according to the participant’s availability. Only one interview was conducted via Skype as the participant did not have time available due to personal circumstances. This interview was carried out with video and audio, but only the audio was recorded to assure anonymity. The rest of the interviews were all audio recorded as well. All audio files were transcribed and translated to have a written version for later analysis.

Table 14. Interviews Dates and Times Participant Interview 1 Interview 2 Interview 3 (pseudonym) Camila March 2, 2016 July 27, 2016 January 26, 2017 Tania March 3, 2016 July 28, 2016 January 23, 2017 Telmo March 4, 2016 July 28, 2016 January 24, 2017 Claudio March 6, 2016 July 25, 2016 January 25, 2017 Cecilia March 13, 2016 July 31, 2016 January 25, 2017 Tito March 13, 2016 July 25, 2016 January 23, 2017 Tatiana March 30, 2016 July 31, 2016 January 26, 2017 Teresa March 31, 2016 July 25, 2016 January 31, 2017

5.6.5 Focus Groups

Two focus groups, which met at two different times during the research, were formed with the eight focal participants. A focus group is an inquiry method in which a group of people participate in a natural discussion about the topic of inquiry (Kleiber, 2008). The moderator, in this case, the researcher, can take different approaches to obtain the perceptions, opinions, and attitudes of the participants toward the research topic. The less-structured approach allows more opportunity for the researcher to obtain richer data to analyze. Focus groups, which are usually described as group interviews, are not organized around questions and answers, but instead they rely on the interactions within the groups (Krueguer & Casey, 2009).

Each focus group formed had four focal participants. The focal participant assignment to each of these groups was random; that is, each person had the same chance to be in either group. Meetings for the focus groups were held in addition to the regular sessions of the community. I met with each group for two sessions of no more than 60 minutes at two different times of the study: one in the middle of the data collection period (July 2016) and one at the end (January 2017). As with the conversational interviews, Spanish was the language we used, and the dates, times, and locations were decided according to the participants’ availability and personal convenience. Interactions during the focus group meetings were audio recorded and later transcribed and translated.

5.7 Data Analysis

The research questions and the concepts of social learning systems, communities of practice, and landscapes of practice (explained in Chapter 4) were crucial to structuring the analysis of the data. As stated by LeCompte (2000), the “analysis that is meticulously done, based on clearly articulated theories and responsive to the research questions can be good analysis” (p. 152). I used a deductive approach to analyzing the data; in other words, I synthesized, interpreted, and made sense of the large sets of data collected through the observations, questionnaires, document review, conversational interviews, and focus groups by making informed decisions based on the research questions and the concepts studied.

The data analysis was divided into two parts. The first part was the analysis of the data collected through the background questionnaire and the research reports. The data gathered through these methods was analyzed as soon as it became available because it informed the subsequent stage. The second part was performed at the end of the study once all community meetings, interviews, and focus groups were completed.

5.7.1 Questionnaires and Document Review

The information that was collected through the background questionnaires and the revision of the research reports was analyzed and synthesized using tables that allowed me to obtain a holistic vision of the intersecting factors of each of the participants. The synthesized information was later used to create individual and comparative portraits of the participants, which are presented in Chapter 6.

5.7.2 Observations

As it was mentioned in the data collection section, I was a complete participant observer during the community meetings that were recorded and later transcribed. The participants were given the opportunity to review the written records of the interviews. Once the transcripts were approved by the members of the community, they were translated into English. A research assistant who is highly proficient in English and Spanish validated the translations making sure that they remained true to the original meaning. Furthermore, participants who are English teachers also reviewed and validated the translations. This data was analyzed deductively by

93 using themes and preconceived categories framed by the research questions and the conceptual framework.

5.7.3 Conversational Interviews and Focus Groups

As with the community meetings, audio recorded interviews and focus groups were also transcribed. Focal participants had the opportunity to validate the written records of their individual interviews and the focus groups. Once the participants approved the transcripts, they were translated into English. Again, the research assistant, who is highly proficient in English and Spanish, reviewed the translations to assure the meaning was kept as close as possible to the original. Participants who teach English validated the translations as well.

To analyze all transcribed and translated data, I followed the two levels of coding suggested by Creswell (2014). I first use a more holistic procedure to organize the information into categories, and second, I analyzed the data looking for themes or issues. (Stake, 1995; Wolcott, 1994 as cited in Creswell, 2014) These two steps allowed me to describe the organization and evolution of the community in an organic way in Chapter 7. The descriptions include how professors have felt and learned in the community, what issues they have encountered, what questions have emerged about research and teaching practices, what actions have been taken to address problems in the classroom, and how they have contributed to the community.

The thematic analysis provided enough information to contextualize individual experiences as well as to portray connections, similarities, and differences between the participants. Throughout the analysis, I considered the relevance of each theme to the research questions, conceptual framework, and the complete data set to assure a thorough and integrated analysis (Ayres, 2008). Nevertheless, emerging themes and patterns of meaning that were not framed but informed by the research questions and conceptual framework were also considered for the analysis which resulted in modified categories (LeCompte, 2000). These modified categories made the descriptions of the professors’ learning within the community richer. Table 15 explains how the data analysis was conducted in correspondence to the research questions and conceptual framework.

Table 15. Data Analysis

Research Questions Conceptual Framework Data Main RQ: How do university-level Social Learning Systems (Wenger, 2000; Community language instructors perceive their Wenger, 2010; Blackmore, 2012) meetings learning within a community of Communities of Practice: characteristics, Conversational practice that focuses on Critical dimensions, and elements (Wenger, interviews Action Research? 1998, 2000, 2010; Wenger-Trayner & Focus groups Wenger-Trayner, 2015). Landscapes of Practice (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, Learning in a landscape of practice: A framework, 2015b) RQ1: What is the nature of the Landscapes of Practice (Wenger-Trayner Background contributions of university-level & Wenger-Trayner, Communities of questionnaire Ecuadorian language instructors to practice: a brief introduction, 2015a) Document review the community of practice? RQ2: What are the perceptions and Communities of Practice focusing on Community understandings of university-level CAR meetings Ecuadorian language instructors of Conversational critical action research and social interviews justice after participating in the Focus groups community of practice?

RQ3: How do individual, Communities of Practice (Wenger, 1998, Community community, and institutional factors 2000, 2010; Wenger-Trayner & Wenger- meetings enable or constrain university-level Trayner, 2015). Conversational Ecuadorian language instructors’ interviews participation and commitment to the Focus groups community of practice?

5.8 Validity and Reliability

The research study used different strategies to ensure that validity and reliability were met during the entire process. Validity determines the accuracy of the findings from various perspectives and reliability indicates the consistency of the researcher’s approach in comparison to different researchers and projects (Gibbs, 2007).

Strategies that have been recommended by McMillan and Schumacher (2001), Cohen, Manion, and Morrison (2010), and Creswell (2014) were employed. These strategies included:

• Data collected from multiple sources: Observations, questionnaires, document review, interviews, and focus groups were examined to obtain different perspectives as well as to confirm the emerging findings.

• Member checking: Participants were given the opportunity to revise and validate the transcriptions and translations of meetings, interviews and focus groups to assure they were accurate. Furthermore, participants who provided the research samples also checked the accuracy of the analysis.

• Long-term observations: Complete participant observation lasted 12 months from February 2016 to January 2017. Prolonged and persisted observation supports the validity of the data collected (Cohen et al., 2010). In addition, all interactions were audio recorded, which according to McMillan and Schumacher (2001) enhances the validity and reliability of the findings.

• Intra-rater and inter-rater strategies: The first was done by repeatedly checking the transcriptions, translations, and codes. The later was performed by a research assistant. All disagreements were solved after discussing the assistant’s concerns.

• Rich, thick descriptions: Detailed descriptions were used to describe the experiences of the participants within the community. I included verbatim accounts of the member’s interactions and contributions in English and Spanish to give bilingual readers the opportunity to validate translations, and readers in general to view the interpretation of the findings.

• Participatory mode of research: I, as the researcher and also a participant, was involved in all phases of the study from the research design, data collection, data analysis, interpretation of findings, and conclusions.

• Clarification of researcher bias: I have positioned myself in this research through describing the multiple roles I adopted during the study in Chapter 1.

5.8.1 Triangulation

In addition to the strategies already mentioned, I employed triangulation to correlate the data collected for this study from the different sources. Triangulation was conducted with the qualitative data collected through the observations, interviews and focus groups in order to identify patterns and recurrent themes. The triangulation process provided a better understanding of the development of the community as a site for merging teaching and research and adopting a critical approach to research, and of the individual participants’ perspectives as new critical action researchers.

Furthermore, triangulation increased the validity and reliability of the analysis and findings of this study. As Duff (2012) states, “triangulation, a term commonly used in qualitative research in particular, refers to the integration of different kinds and sources of information in investigations of a particular phenomenon, typically as part of the process of validation or establishing credibility of the study” (p.1).

5.9 Ethical Considerations

Ethical issues in research need to be anticipated, particularly when data are collected from people. It is an obligation for the researcher to protect the participants, develop a sense of trust with them, safeguard the integrity of the research, and handle the possible issues that might emerge (Israel & Hay, 2006). As stated by Creswell (2014) matters concerning the ethics of a research study need to be managed at all stages of the research process: “prior to conducting the study; beginning the study; collecting data; analyzing data; and reporting, sharing, and storing data” (pp. 91-92).

My research proposal was presented and approved by the Thesis Committee during the last trimester of 2015. As the proposed research involved working with humans, a research protocol was completed to comply with the policies and guidelines of the University of Toronto. I included the permission granted by the Academic Council of the Language Institute of the University de Cuenca (Appendix A and B) in the application form. I received the Ethics Approval from the Social Sciences, Humanities, and Education Research Ethics Board in January 2016 (Appendix C).

I attended a meeting to invite professors of the Language Institute to join a community of practice and to become participants in the research. In that meeting, I explained the nature of the project, the objectives, and the purpose of the community and my research study. Following this initial meeting, interested colleagues and I gathered a second time. In the second meeting, I also clearly explained the purpose and the potential benefits of the study to all participants. I indicated that participation was voluntary and that participants could withdraw at any time. To indicate their decision to participate as a member of the community only or as a member of the community and focal participants, the professor participants signed the Informed Consent forms. These forms included an introduction to the researcher and the research; the purpose of the study; the responsibilities of the researcher and the participants; and the participants’ activities, benefits, and rights. The documents can be seen in Appendix G for participants of the community and Appendix H for focal participants.

To guarantee the confidentiality, privacy, and anonymity of the participants, I changed their names and assigned pseudonyms that were used during the analysis of the data and the presentation of the findings. Since the community is small and participants could still be recognized because they are familiar with each other, all identifying characteristics, such as the language they teach, were omitted.

McMillan and Schumacher (2001) have pointed that access to participant’s information, responses, and documents is restricted to the research to assure privacy, confidentiality, and anonymity. Therefore, only my thesis supervisor and I have had access to the real names of participants and the data collected. All audio files, transcriptions, translations, questionnaires, and research samples were labeled with the pseudonyms, encrypted, and password protected.

Furthermore, these files were saved in an external hard drive, which was kept in a locked cabinet at all times. Completed consent forms were also kept secured under lock and key. Only my thesis supervisor and I have had access to these documents.

5.10 Limitations of the Study

Although I carefully conducted the study, there are limitations that need to be acknowledged. I have organized these limiting factors in terms of generalizability, attendance at the meetings, my relationship with participants, and my role as participant researcher.

Due to the reduced number of participants and the qualitative approach of the study, the findings cannot be generalized or connected to other populations. However, they have provided rich insights that can guide further questions to explore. To address the second limitation, it is necessary to recall that participation was voluntary and that activities of the community were held at the convenience of the participants. Since all members had different schedules, it was difficult to agree on days and hours in which all the participants could attend. Although each meeting had more than half of the research population, full attendance was achieved at only a few meetings. This situation resulted in an issue for data collection and analysis in the sense that every meeting had a different group of participants.

The third limitation refers to my work relationship with the participants. As a professor at the Language Institute myself, I am a colleague to all members of the community which may have influenced the responses provided during the interviews. However, this limitation was minimized by the fact that participants were given the opportunity to interact with others during the community meetings in which I kept my participation to the minimum.

The last limitation is my role as a participant researcher. I conducted the interviews and was present in the community meetings and led the focus groups. I analyzed and interpreted the data from my perspective as the researcher, a professor in the same context of the participants, and as a participant in the community. Although I attempted to reduce bias as much as possible, I have to recognize that my own background and experiences may have had an impact in my interpretations.

Despite the limitations, this study is necessary, appropriate and relevant given the current conditions that professors and universities have to meet to be part of the transformation of higher education in Ecuador. As mentioned in the introduction chapter, universities in Ecuador have to move from being solely teaching universities to become teaching-research higher education institutions; thus, there is a strong necessity to provide spaces for professors to gain intensive and extensive research practice.

Chapter 6 Participants’ Portraits and Landscapes of Practice

Reflecting on our own trajectories as learners, most of us will be amazed at how many practices we have engaged in, dabbled in, visited, encountered, or avoided over the years. In some cases, joining or leaving a practice involved crossing a significant boundary and constituted a major event or transition. – Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015b, p. 19

6.1 Introduction

In the first part of this chapter, academic and research background information about all the participants (16) of the study is presented. Data collected through the background questionnaire was analyzed and organized according to different categories: (1) academic background and graduate studies, (2) teaching experience and ongoing work, and (3) research experience. Comparative tables containing the synthesized information have been created to offer a general view of the members of our community of practice.

The second section of the chapter offers a closer picture of the focal participants of the study. It contains short descriptions of each participant built from the first set of conversational interviews in which the information collected through the background questionnaire was further elaborated. Additional personal information that was provided during the interviews is also included.

6.2 Members of the Community: Comparative Portraits

I had the opportunity to invite my colleagues from the Language Institute to form a community wherein, besides sharing our practice, we could learn collaboratively about critical action research using our backgrounds, experiences, and knowledge. Twenty-four professors started the community, but after two months only 18 continued attending the meetings. When I asked them to be participants in this research study, 16 signed the informed consent forms. The two members who did not sign eventually stopped attending the meetings. The 16 participants were asked to

100

101 provide background information regarding their education level, teaching experience, current activities in the University, and research experience. As mentioned before, this data was collected through a questionnaire that was sent to their email addresses.

6.2.1 Academic Backgrounds and Ongoing Education

Before presenting the academic background of the participants and what their current activities in terms of education and training are, I first share participants’ personal characteristics regarding their gender and age. While the demographic data of participants was not analyzed for this research, it could be considered for future studies. The community was made up of ten females and six male professors. This gender difference matches that of the broader University in that there are more female professors, particularly in language teaching and education programs. From the 16 members, eight were in the age range between 35 and 45, three between 25 and 35, one between 45 and 55, and one over 55 years old, showing that the community was formed mainly by young professors.

To be able to teach in an Ecuadorian university, a person is required to hold at least one master’s degree. Out of the 16 participants, 10 have a master’s related to English teaching and the English language, five in Curriculum and Education, and one in Foreign Language and Cultural Studies. It is interesting to note that from among the 16 participants, 15 chose a master’s program that was related to their bachelor studies, which for the majority was English Language Teaching. The participant that studied a different field in his undergraduate program had a bachelor degree in Art Studio, Painting and Printmaking.

As it was explained in Chapter 2, the necessity to pursue further graduate studies has increased due to the demands of the government. Currently, there are 131 professors in the Universidad de Cuenca that are enrolled in a doctoral program. From the 16 members of the community, six are doctoral students in a general education program at a South American public university. Although their field of interest is language teaching, they chose a more general program that suited their professional and personal lives as well as their economic means. In other words, the program includes only two short periods of residency, which allowed the participants to avoid being away from families and work, and the cost for five years is affordable in comparison to

102 similar programs in North American or European universities. Table 16 summarizes the academic background and the ongoing studies of the 16 participants.

103

Table 16. Participants’ Academic Background

Participant Gender Age Education Bachelor´s degree field of Master´s degree Where Ph.D. degree Ph.D.´s field range level study was or will be granted of study Teresa Female 35 – 45 PhD student English Language Teaching English Language and Applied Foreign South American Education Linguistics University Tatiana Female 35 – 45 PhD student English Language Teaching English Language and Applied Foreign South American Education Linguistics University Telmo Male 35 – 45 PhD student English Language Teaching English Language and Applied Foreign South American Education Linguistics University Camila Female 25 – 35 Master English Language Teaching TESOL

Tania Female 35 – 45 PhD student English Language Teaching English Language and Applied Foreign South American Education Linguistics University Tito Male 35 – 45 PhD student English Language Teaching English Language and Applied Foreign South American Education Linguistics University Cecilia Female 25 – 35 Master’s English Language Teaching Linguistics applied to TEFL student Claudio Male 25 – 35 Master English Language Teaching Science, Curriculum, and Instruction Cristian Male 35 – 45 Master Art Studio, Painting, and Education, Curriculum, and Printmaking Instruction Catalina Female 35 – 45 Master’s English Language Teaching Linguistics applied to TEFL student Carlos Male 35 – 45 Master English Language and Teaching English as a Foreign Literature Language Tamara Female 45 – 55 Master English Language Teaching Teaching in Higher Education

Tomás Male 55 – 65 PhD student English Language Teaching Teaching and Curriculum for Foreign South American Education Higher Education University Carla Female 35 – 45 Master English Language Teaching Teaching English as a Foreign Language Constanza Female 35 – 45 Master Education Master in Didactics

Tina Female 35 – 45 Master Foreign language, literature, Master in Cultural Studies and cultures.

104

6.2.2 Teaching Experience and Current Activities in the University

Before teaching at the Language Institute of the Universidad de Cuenca, all members had had teaching experience in other educational institutions. Their experience varied in the number of years teaching and the educational stages for which they worked (elementary, secondary, and/or university). That is why the online questionnaire included three questions to identify the total number of years teaching a foreign language, the number of years teaching a foreign language in a university, and the number of years being a language professor at the Universidad de Cuenca.

Within the study community, half of the participants had less than 15 years of FL teaching experience and the other half with 15 or more years of experience. Specifically, two participants had been teaching a foreign language for 1 to 5 years, three participants from 5 to 10 years, three from 10 to 15 years, five from 15 to 20, and three for more than 20 years. In some cases, the year range being a language instructor and a language professor was the same because participants taught in two educational stages, high school and university, at the same time. The majority of participants of the community had been teaching an FL at the university level for more than five years, and only three had been teaching from 1 to 5. Similarly, when looking at the years teaching at the Universidad de Cuenca, 12 participants out of the 16 had the same number of years for the second and third section, which shows that the majority of members started their career as university professors at the Universidad de Cuenca.

As it was noted in Chapter 2, full-time professors work 40 hours per week. This time is distributed among teaching, research, and administration activities. From the 16 participants, seven were teaching between 20 and 24 hours, five were teaching between 16 and 20 hours, one was teaching between 12 and 16, and three were teaching between 6 and 12 hours. These hours correspond to the semester in which the questionnaire was completed, as every semester is different. Only five participants had research hours, the others had administration hours during which they completed activities such as thesis supervision, course coordination, and committee tasks (exams, teaching resources, peer evaluation). Detailed information about each participant can be seen in Table 17.

105

Table 17. Participants’ Teaching Experiences and Activities in the University

Participant Years as Years as language Years at the Teaching Weekly hours Additional activities language teacher professor Universidad de weekly grading, planning, at the University University Cuenca hours and other activities Teresa 10 to 15 10 to 15 5 to 10 6 - 12 6-12 Thesis supervisor Research Tatiana 15 to 20 5 to 10 5 to 10 6 - 12 6-12 Thesis supervisor Research Telmo 10 to 15 10 to 15 5 to 10 16 - 20 12-16 Thesis supervisor Camila 1 to 5 1 to 5 1 to 5 16 - 20 6-12 Teaching resources committee Tania 15 to 20 5 to 10 5 to 10 12 - 16 12-16 Research Course Coordinator Tito 15 to 20 15 to 20 10 to 15 6 - 12 20-24 Research Course Coordinator Cecilia 5 to 10 1 to 5 1 to 5 16 - 20 6-12 Committees Claudio 5 to 10 1 to 5 1 to 5 16 - 20 16-20 Committees

Cristian 1 to 5 1 to 5 1 to 5 20 - 24 6-12 Exam Committee Catalina 15 to 20 1 to 5 1 to 5 16 - 20 12-16 Peer evaluation committees Carlos 10 to 15 1 to 5 1 to 5 20 - 24 20-24 Research Tamara 20+ 15 to 20 15 to 20 20 - 24 16-20 Course Coordinator Tomás 20+ 20+ 20+ 20 - 24 20-24 Exam Committee

Carla 20+ 15 to 20 15 to 20 20 - 24 16-20 Committees Constanza 15 – 20 10 to 15 5 to 10 20 - 24 12-16 Committees

Tina 15 – 20 5 to 10 5 to 10 20 - 24 16-20 Course Coordinator

106

6.2.3 Research Experience

Based on my experience as a language professor at the Language Institute for seven years, daily conversations with colleagues, and public knowledge about research activities in the University and the Institute, I anticipated that most of the members of the community had not had any previous research experience. This lack of research experience, was a key source of motivation for this study.

Through the answers provided to the questionnaire, I was able to confirm that 8 out of the 16 participants did not have any research experience. The four members who reported one year of experience referred to the time they spent doing research to complete their master’s thesis. Three participants have been part of research projects for two years, and only one participant answered she had had four years of research experience. From the latter five participants, only three have published an article. One participant published in an international journal and the other two published in the University’s journals. See Table 18 for information per participant.

Participants were also asked to provide written samples of what they considered involved research. They could send published articles, bachelor’s or master’s theses, research papers that were course assignments, among others. I reviewed these documents with the purpose of finding out the research approach applied as well as learning if the main focus was practical or critical.

It is important to mention that 12 out of the 16 participants shared their written research samples with me. The documents were analyzed using the coding scheme that was shown in Table 13. From the analysis, I can report that ten research samples had a practical focus; that is the effectiveness of a particular teaching method, or the improvement of a language skill. The research approach that was preferred by the participants was action research; however, none of the action research studies had a critical focus. The only two samples that had a critical focus were a case study and a theoretical review. It was clear that there was some basic knowledge about the action research process, but also that a critical stance to research had not been encouraged or used. Table 19 presents the details of each document that was reviewed.

107

Table 18. Participants’ Research Experience

Participant Previous research Previous research experience Research reports Publications experience (years) Teresa 2 Research project to teach English to older Yes Yes adults Tatiana 4 Research projects on English teaching Yes Yes practices and teacher's beliefs in public high schools Telmo 0 No No Camila 1 Master’s thesis Yes No Tania 2 Research project to teach English to older No No adults Tito 2 Research project on language learning vs. Yes Yes language acquisition at the University of Cuenca. Cecilia 0 No No

Claudio 0 No No Cristian 1 Master’s thesis Yes No

Catalina 0 No No Carlos 1 Master’s thesis Yes No

Tamara 0 No No

Tomás 0 No No

Carla 0 No No

Constanza 0 No No Tina 1 Master’s thesis Yes No

108

Table 19. Research Reports Details

Participant Type Problem/issue addressed Context Participants Research Approach/ Main Focus Design Teresa Published article Benefits and preferences of older Cuenca 151 older Quantitative Practical adults for learning English adults Tatiana Published article The impact of training English English teaching in Teachers Action Research Practical teachers in the public system in Public schools in Cuenca Cuenca Telmo Master’s thesis A comparative analysis of learning a University of 30-second Action research Practical foreign language in multimedia Cuenca level students courses and regular courses

Camila Course assignment Looking at instruction beyond book Ecuadorian high no participants Literature review Practical activities schools Tania Master’s thesis The influence of blended learning in University of intensive Action research Practical academic performance of students Cuenca course students Tito Published article Students' assessment of blended University of 58 students Exploratory - mixed Practical learning EFL course Cuenca method Cecilia Course assignment EFL teachers' and students' attitudes University of 16 intermediate Action research Practical – research proposal towards the use of electronic Cuenca EFL students dictionaries for text production and 8 teachers Claudio Research proposal Students with borderline intellectual Language classroom Researcher Qualitative case Critical functioning in an EFL Classroom (teacher) study Cristian Master’s thesis Low quality of learning devices. Academic no participants Theoretical research Critical The creation of a language learning device. Catalina Master’s thesis Improving speaking fluency University of 30 students Action research Practical Cuenca intermediate level Carlos Master’s thesis Improving reading skills University of 60 beginner Experimental Action Practical Cuenca level students research Carla Master’s thesis Didactic guide - technical University of 29 participants Action Research Practical vocabulary Cuenca - Medical school

109

6.3 Focal Participants

In addition to certain tasks I carried out with all 16 members of the community, I also carried out different tasks with the eight members who acted as my focal participants. The selection process of these participants was based on their attendance at the first two meetings as well as their engagement and contributions. Ten members were selected and asked to become focal participants; however, eight accepted and signed the informed consent forms.

Teresa, Tatiana, Telmo, Camila, Tania, Tito, Cecilia, and Claudio contributed to this study as the focal participants. They participated in three interviews and two focus group meetings. Each focal group had four participants, and the assignment to the groups was random. Participants’ descriptions and utterances have been color-coded. In the descriptions included in this chapter as well as in the findings presented in the three subsequent ones, participants can be identified by the color code assigned to each one. Table 20. Focal Participant Color Coding Participant Code Teresa Blue Tatiana Orange Telmo Green Camila Pink Tania Purple Tito Red Cecilia Brown Claudio Turquoise

This section of the chapter includes description of each of the participants in terms of their background, education, current activities at the Universidad de Cuenca, previous teaching experience, and personal life. Each of the participants’ landscape of practice is presented to highlight how their experiences and knowledge have contributed to the learning trajectory within our community of practice.

109

110

6.3.1 Teresa

Teresa shares the same background as the other seven focal participants. She is an Ecuadorian Spanish-speaker who learned English as part of elementary and high school curriculum and then she specialized to teach it. She holds a bachelor degree in teaching English as a foreign language (TEFL) from a private university in Cuenca. Her master’s degree is in English and applied linguistics which she obtained in the Universidad de Cuenca. Currently, she is part of the group of doctoral students from the Universidad de Cuenca who are studying education in a public university in a South American country.

Prior to working as a university professor, Teresa taught English at a private high school and a private university; however, the university was closed after the governments’ evaluation. She is a single mother of two young adults.

Figure 18. Teresa’s Landscape

111

Teresa’s landscape of practice is comprised of her membership in different communities which have shaped her learning trajectory within those communities and our CoP. Teresa is an associate professor who teaches English at the Institute as well as content courses in the TEFL undergraduate program. Her navigation between these two educational units within the University has not been an easy task as she has had to respond to different expectations from authorities in these two units as well as to the needs of two completely different student populations; however, her experiences teaching the English language have given her insights on how to prepare future English teachers in the TEFL program.

Teresa is one of the few professor at the Language Institute who is actively involved in research. She has been assigned weekly hours to work on research, which she does with two other colleagues. In her current practice as a researcher, she is working on a quantitative study, which is her preferred orientation due to her previous research training and experience.

Teresa has been working for a private university for 8 years as well as for the Universidad de Cuenca for 6 years. Her membership in different higher education institutions in our city has provided Teresa with valuable opportunities to negotiate boundaries and understand the different realities of students; however, as a result of carrying out so many activities, Teresa tends to concentrate her energy on the academic performance of the students rather than other social issues that may, in fact, impact their academic performance.

Her decision to pursue doctoral studies was motivated by the demands of the government and the university. Since starting the doctoral program, Teresa’s contact with different professors, researchers, and research approaches have made her realize that there is a steep path ahead for our University to become competitive in terms of research across and within faculties. As a result, it has taken longer for her than other community members to shift from her belief that quantitative research is the most appropriate paradigm for university research.

6.3.2 Tatiana

Tatiana is Ecuadorian and Spanish is her first language. She learned English as any other student in the country during elementary and high school. She decided to become an English teacher and obtained her bachelor degree in TEFL at a private university in Cuenca. She also holds a

112 master’s degree in English and applied linguistics from the Universidad de Cuenca. She is currently studying in a doctoral program in Education in a South American country with other colleagues. Before joining UC, she worked as an English teacher in a private high school for several years, as well as for another private university that no longer exists. Tatiana is married and has two children.

Tatiana’s current practice has been influenced by her membership to various communities within and outside of the University of Cuenca. Tatiana has been a tenured associate professor in UC for six years; however, she has been working there for seven years. She teaches English courses in the Language Institute and content courses through English in the TEFL undergraduate program. Like Teresa, Tatiana finds many differences between teaching students who are learning English at the Language Institute and teaching those who are training to become English teachers in the TEFL Program. For Tatiana, responding to the demands of the directors of both units has been challenging and, at times, annoying as it seems there is ongoing rivalry between the Language Institute and the TEFL Program.

Figure 19. Tatiana’s Landscape

113

Tatiana is the only professor in the community who has several years of experience working as a member of a research team. Tatiana worked for 4 years in a consulting center of the Faculty of Philosophy and Education that offered training sessions to teachers from public elementary and high schools. The research projects conducted in the center were focused on the evaluation of the training courses. In addition, Tatiana has been working on a research study with two colleagues for over a year now. Although she is open to working with different research approaches, her current project follows a positivist paradigm to fulfill the expectations of the DIUC.

6.3.3 Telmo

Telmo is also Ecuadorian, and his first language is Spanish. He learned English during his undergraduate studies in TEFL. He obtained his bachelor degree in a public university in the city. Telmo holds a master’s degree in English and applied linguistics from the Universidad de Cuenca. Currently, he is a doctoral student in an Education program in a public South American University. Telmo is single and has a young child.

He started teaching English even before graduating from university. He first worked in a private language institution and then in two different high schools. He also worked as an online tutor for a private university that offers distance learning programs.

Telmo is an assistant professor who has worked at UC for close to 9 years. His landscape of practice currently includes his membership in different communities within the University of Cuenca as well as the cohort of doctoral candidates that he belongs to. He teaches English courses at the Language Institute and supervises undergraduate theses from the TEFL program. He used to teach in the TEFL program but he decided to teach only at the Language Institute due to problems he experienced at the beginning of every semester related to the distribution of teaching hours across both units.

Telmo’s first experience with research involved the completion of his master’s thesis. After his master’s degree, he did not continue with any research work until his recent enrolment in a doctoral program. He has expressed his openness to learning different types of research approaches; however, he has a preference to what he calls more ‘practical projects’ and is developing a proposal for a quantitative research doctoral research study.

114

Figure 20. Telmo’s Landscape

6.3.4 Camila

Camila is younger than the majority of the members of the community. She is also Ecuadorian and Spanish is her first language. She holds a bachelor degree in TEFL from a private university in the city and a Masters in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) from a public North American university. Camila is married and a mother of two toddlers.

Camila, as hundreds of other public elementary and high schools’ teachers in Ecuador, had the opportunity to obtain her master’s degree in North America due to the government’s program Go Teacher. This program was a partnership between the Ecuadorian government and a public university in North America. The main objective of this program was to improve English language teaching in the country.

115

Her experience as a language teacher started when she taught Spanish to American retirees who were moving to Cuenca and other cities in Ecuador. Later she started teaching English in a private elementary school.

As soon as Camila returned to Ecuador she was hired by the Universidad de Cuenca. She was hired about five years ago, and she is still working on contract rather than in a permanent position. She teaches English courses and is part of the committee responsible for choosing and preparing teaching material.

Figure 21. Camila’s Landscape Due to her current employment status as a contract professor, Camila can work only part time and cannot be assigned research hours. If she wants to conduct research, she has to do it on her own time and without payment. Nevertheless, she is expected to have research experience if she wants to apply for a tenured position.

116

Camila is interested in learning more about research paradigms and motivated to conduct her own research. She has a critical stance toward research which, might be a result of her experience as a master’s student in a foreign institution.

6.3.5 Tania

Tania is an Ecuadorian Spanish speaker who learned English during elementary and high school and university studies. She graduated as a bachelor in a TEFL distance learning program in a private university in Ecuador. She holds a master’s degree in English and applied linguistics from the Universidad de Cuenca. As other participants of the community, she is a doctoral student in an education program in a public South American University. She is married and has a young child and a teenager. Her previous experience included teaching English to teenagers in a private language center and a private high school.

Her current landscape of practice is comprised of her teaching, administration, and research activities and her experiences as a doctoral student. Tania is an assistant professor who teaches English at the advanced levels at the Language Institute. She has been teaching at UC for 10 years. Like Telmo, Tania used to teach in the TEFL undergraduate program, but she decided to leave the position because of the complexity of scheduling across these two units. She is also the coordinator of the intensive English courses at the Language Institute, so she is part of the Academic Council.

She takes part in a multidisciplinary research project in the Faculty of Engineering and helps with the language portion of the project, particularly by translating articles. She is interested in designing research projects with the students at the Language Institute, but has not had the opportunity nor the support to do so.

Her experience as a doctoral student has given her new insights about research and the type of approaches available for her own research. She is working on her doctoral research proposal which includes a mixed-methods study as she believes this approach will be more highly valued than other research paradigms.

117

Figure 22. Tania’s Landscape

6.3.6 Tito

Tito’s background is Ecuadorian and his first language is Spanish. He holds a bachelor degree in TEFL from a public university in Cuenca and a master’s degree in English and applied linguistics from the Universidad de Cuenca. He is also part of the group of UC professors who are enrolled in an education doctoral program at a public university in a South American country. Tito is married and does not have any children.

Tito began teaching 15 years ago and was a freelance tutor for students from different elementary and high schools in Cuenca. After many years doing this, he was hired by a private business university to teach business English courses.

About 10 years ago, Tito was hired by the University of Cuenca and became an assistant professor at the Language Institute. He teaches English courses and has coordinated different types of courses that the Language Institute offers.

118

Figure 23. Tito’s Landscape As a researcher, Tito has collaborated with different research teams; however, none of the studies conducted have been at the Language Institute or had university students as participants. Tito has published some articles from his master’s thesis and presented one of them in an international conference. His contributions to the community have developed over time, offering important insights about what he has learned as a doctoral student.

6.3.7 Cecilia

Cecilia is the only foreign focal participant in this study and since there are only a few foreign professors in the Language Institute her nationality and first language will not be included for confidentiality and anonymity issues. Cecilia’s second and third languages are English and Spanish respectively. She holds a bachelor degree in intercultural studies, which she obtained in her home country. She is currently studying a master’s in TEFL in a public university in Ecuador. Cecilia is married and has two young children.

119

She started as a language tutor in pre-university courses in her country, and when she moved to Ecuador she worked in a private university, which was closed after the governments’ unfavorable evaluation. Later, she applied for a teaching position at University of Cuenca where she has worked for approximately 5 years.

Cecilia is a contract professor who teaches one of the additional languages in the Language Institute. As is the case for other contract professors, Cecilia can only work part time as a teacher and administrator. Her administration hours include course planning and participation in several committees.

Cecilia decided to enroll in a master’s program in TEFL, even though English is not the language she currently teaches, because she was told it would be her only opportunity to become tenured at UC. Taking research courses and preparing the research proposal for her master’s thesis have been her first experience with research.

Figure 24. Cecilia’s Landscape

120

6.3.8 Claudio

Claudio is an Ecuadorian Spanish speaker. His undergraduate studies were completed at a public university in Cuenca, obtaining a bachelor degree in TEFL. He also holds a Master’s degree in curriculum which he completed in a public foreign university in North America. Claudio is single and does not have any children.

Claudio has been teaching English for approximately 8 years. He started as an English teacher in a public elementary school. This position allowed him to apply to the Go Teacher government program and travel to North America to obtain his master’s degree.

He was hired by the University of Cuenca and has worked there for 4 years. As a contract professor, Claudio works part time and cannot be assigned research hours. He teaches English courses and his administration activities at the Language Institute depend on the committees he is asked to join.

Figure 25. Claudio’s Landscape

121

As is the case for Camila, Claudio has a critical stance toward research and is willing to work in research projects that do more than measure language proficiency. His contributions to the community in terms of research knowledge and experience are clearly influenced by his experience as a master’s student in North America.

The information about the participants academic and research landscapes of practice provides a basis for understanding the nature of their contributions during the meetings, especially regarding knowledge and perceptions about teaching practices and research approaches.

Moreover, getting to know the focal participants and learning about their professional and personal landscapes allowed me to better understand their contributions in the meetings, the focus group sessions, and the personal interviews. Additionally, it gave me a more complete picture of their identity that helped me to interpret the findings of this research study.

Even though more textured portraits could have offered a more nuanced understanding of the community of practice, the portraits included in this section purposely do not go in-depth in order to guarantee the confidentiality, privacy, and anonymity of the participants. As mentioned before, since the community is small and participants could be recognized if too many details were included in their portraits, specific information and identifying characteristics, such as belonging to a particular community or holding a position, were omitted.

Table 21 presents a summarized version of the main characteristics of the eight focal participants.

122

Table 21. Focal Participants’ Main Characteristics Pseudonym Background Language (s) Academic Background Doctoral studies Previous teaching Activities at UC Family experience Teresa Ecuadorian L1 Spanish Bachelor: TEFL (private national) PhD student High school English teacher Tenured English Single L2 English Master’s English and Linguistics (international and TEFL Professor (public national) program) Private university English Parent professor Researcher Tatiana Ecuadorian L1 Spanish Bachelor: TEFL (private national) PhD student High school English teacher Tenured English Married L2 English Master’s English and Linguistics (international and TEFL Professor (public national) program) Private university English Parent professor Researcher Telmo Ecuadorian L1 Spanish Bachelor: TEFL (public national) PhD student High school English teacher Tenured English Single L2 English Master’s English and Linguistics (international Professor (public national) program) Private university English Parent professor

Camila Ecuadorian L1 Spanish Bachelor: TEFL (private national) N/A Elementary school English Contract English Married L2 English Master’s in TESOL (public teacher Professor international) Parent Spanish teacher (freelance) Tania Ecuadorian L1 Spanish Bachelor: TEFL (private national) PhD student High school English teacher Tenured English Married L2 English Master’s English and Linguistics (international Professor (public national) program) Parent

Tito Ecuadorian L1 Spanish Bachelor: TEFL (public national) PhD student English tutor Tenured English Married L2 English Master’s English and Linguistics (international (freelance) Professor (public national) program) Private university English Researcher professor Cecilia Foreigner L2 English Bachelor: Intercultural Studies N/A Foreign university Contract foreign Married L3 Spanish (private international language tutor language professor Master’s student: TEFL (public Parent national) Private national university language professor Claudio Ecuadorian L1 Spanish Bachelor: TEFL (public national) N/A Elementary school English Contract English Single L2 English Master’s in Curriculum (public teacher Professor international)

122

Chapter 7 The Organization of Our Community of Practice

“…the notion of learning through participation in communities of practice appropriately and powerfully illuminates learning and knowledge about teaching.” – Adler, 1998, p. 162

7.1 Introduction

In order to know how a community of practice with university language professors who focus on critical action research can break with the established practices that amount to complying with what has been the status quo of Ecuadorian professors (teaching and generating reports), the organizational experience of the community was important to investigate. In the organization of our community, individual interests converge in one: merging teaching and research with a focus on critical action research to eventually communicate findings and potentially publish articles. Volunteer members of this community have gone through interesting processes of interaction that gradually led them to the configuration of a new identity as teacher-researchers, members of a Community of Practice.

The findings that emerged from the participants’ voices around the establishment and development of the community are presented in this chapter. These findings have been framed within the concept of CoPs including its dimensions, characteristics, elements, and modes of belonging. To better understand the development and learning process of our CoP, focal participants’ voices from interviews, meetings, and focus groups are included throughout this and subsequent chapters using the color codes that were indicated in Table 20. Comments of the members of the community who are not focal participants are also included but using the automatic (black) color.

In addition and to better understand the evolution of the participants within the community, I have included information regarding the comments. That is, a code and a number are given to the excerpts depending if they are from a meeting, an interview, or a focus group. 123

124

Table 22. Excerpt coding Source Code Number Community meeting CM 1, 2, 3… 19 Interview IN 1, 2, 3 Focus group FG 1, 2

As mentioned in the methodology chapter, the verbatim accounts of the member’s contributions are included in English and Spanish, which gives the opportunity to bilingual readers to validate translations.

7.2 The Building Blocks for a New Community of Practice

When implementing a Community of Practice with a research focus in the Language Institute, it was fundamental to take into consideration the previous experiences of the language professors who agreed to join the group. Some of the experiences shared by the participants were found to be favorable to the construction of this community, and others were not. The landscapes of practice of the community members shed light on how their backgrounds, expectations, willingness to participate, and adverse past experiences influenced the first steps that the community took.

7.2.1 Previous Research Experience

Only a few participants of the community have previous experiences in research conducted in the university. One of the participants, Teresa, commented that several years ago she was invited to participate in a research group. However, through her participation in this community, she has realized that what they did in that previous group was not real research, but perhaps a previous step to approach a systematic research process. She explained:

We used to sit down to read and write summaries from the literature. We did not follow any of the characteristics of a systematic and organized research process. For this reason, among others, there is a lack of published works. Research groups that are formed should have a well-planned working scheme. (IN1)

Simplemente nos sentábamos a leer y escribíamos resúmenes que no seguían ninguna de las características de una investigación sistemática y organizada. Por

125

esta razón, entre otras, hay una escasez de trabajos publicados. Los grupos de investigación que se forman deben tener un esquema de trabajo bien planificado. (IN1)

Among the past research experiences of the participants, there are those offered by a consulting center that was part of the Faculty of Philosophy and Education. This center was a non-profit organization that trained EFL elementary and high school teachers and offered counselling, short workshops, longer courses, and conducted research projects. Tatiana, who was part of the team that prepared and presented the training sessions, explained that the research conducted was mainly to evaluate the effectiveness of the workshops and courses offered.

We prepared a series of courses for EFL teachers from public high schools in the city which lasted more than one year (around 110 hours). The courses were based on the use of communicative strategies to focus interaction. We studied the impact these courses had on the teachers who attended to compare their condition before and after the treatment. (IN1)

Preparamos una serie de cursos para profesores ILE de colegios públicos de la ciudad que duraron más de un año (aproximadamente 110 horas). Los cursos estaban basados en el uso de las estrategias comunicativas para enfocarse en interacción. Investigamos el impacto que estos cursos tuvieron en los profesores que asistieron para comparar su condición antes y después del tratamiento. (IN 1)

Tatiana also mentioned that as part of the Language Institute she had developed some projects and got to publish her articles, but none of the projects were conducted within the University context or with her students. She considered herself as a researcher because of her past experience in the consulting center and, even more, her training during her master’s program and the writing of her thesis.

Other cases, such as that of Telmo, indicate that the participants’ work most closely related to research has been supervising theses:

I worked at another university in the city before starting here at the Universidad de Cuenca, but mainly as a tutor and theses supervisor. (IN1)

Trabajé en otra universidad de la ciudad antes de empezar aquí en la Universidad de Cuenca, pero principalmente hacía tutorías o dirigía tesis. (IN1)

126

Telmo's case resembles that of Tania who mentioned she has never been part of a research project as such. She has also supervised theses and been part of theses committees. The experiences in this field have not always been satisfactory for her, as she felt many times theses were not properly supervised because renowned professors who hold power within the University, have used their position over the objectivity of work well done. She explained:

Years ago, I read and graded a thesis supervised by a well-known professor of the University, and it was wrong. It was a verbatim copy of books, and it did not even have citations. I approached the authorities and they told me to leave it alone as things had always been done that way. (FG1)

Hace años califiqué una tesis dirigida por una persona de gran trayectoria de la Universidad y no servía. Era una copia textual de libros y no estaba ni citada. Me acerqué a las autoridades y me dijeron que no, que deje así. Que así se ha hecho siempre. (FG1)

In fact, as it was presented in Chapter 6, the portraits of the professor members of the community respond to a professional activity of teaching but not of researching. For instance, in the first interview Camila mentioned that she was teaching English 24 hours a week in three different levels. Most of the teaching stories shared by the participants revolve around their experiences in the classrooms. In this respect, Tito said:

Moving from a business university to teach at the Universidad de Cuenca was a big change because when I started here, I had to teach at the Civil Engineering school. I had classes with 40 or so students. The transition was really shocking because I used to work with 12 or 15 students. (IN1)

Venir de una universidad de negocios a enseñar en la Universidad de Cuenca fue un gran cambio porque cuando empecé a enseñar aquí tuve que enseñar en la escuela de ingeniería civil y tenía clases con 40 o más estudiantes. Fue realmente impactante la transición de 12 o 15 estudiantes a 40. (IN1)

Another testimony of the same nature was given by Cecilia who mentioned:

I came to the Universidad de Cuenca four years ago. I have taught classes from the first to the eighth level, but of course, I have more experience with the first, second, and third level. (IN1)

Ingrese a la Universidad de Cuenca y ya estoy cuatro años. Yo he dado clases desde primer nivel hasta octavo, pero por supuesto tengo más experiencia con primero, segundo y tercer nivel. (IN1)

127

As it can be seen, not all the participants have previously worked in research teams or projects, in fact, only two members of the community have effectively demonstrated they were part of research teams and published an article in one of the University’s journal. Therefore, their domain – area of knowledge or activity – (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015a), before entering the community, was specifically about pedagogy for teaching a foreign language, and the full command of the foreign language they teach.

As noted in Chapter 3, the importance of linking teaching and research in universities is undeniable and opportunities from professors should be created. This is especially true in universities like the Universidad de Cuenca, which is starting a research culture that is new to many members of the faculty. Douglas’ (2013) study is an example of how the connection between teaching and research could be encouraged. Research activities should be implemented gradually to complement teaching roles as a flexible and collaborative activity. Similarly, Baldwin (2005) and Brew (2012) offered suggestions on how to reduce the divide between teaching and research. The former recommended that research should guide decision making about teaching and designing learning activities (as cited in Tight, 2016). Brew (2012) suggested using Wenger’s Communities of Practice model has framed the development of this study. Brew (2012), Hartnell-Young and McGuiness (1996), Lucas (2007), and Bozu and Imbernon (2009) agree that CoPs are sites for bridging research and teaching as both involve negotiation and collaboration in generating and exchanging knowledge within a social context.

7.2.2 Initial Expectations

In the beginning, the community was an instrument for the participant professors to realize that a sharing-learning process can be a suitable way to achieve their aspirations, as Tito expressed:

Sharing and learning is what I am really looking forward to. I would like to share what I am doing now and gradually be able to reflect on what I am doing… I want to get some perspective from the group and learn from everyone and from you too. (IN1)

Compartir y aprender, eso es lo que realmente estoy deseando. Me gustaría compartir lo que estoy haciendo ahora y poco a poco poder reflexionar sobre lo que estoy haciendo… quiero obtener algunas perspectivas del grupo y aprender de todos y de usted también (IN1)

128

At the general level, there is a hopeful opinion about meeting the institutional demands placed on professors. For example, Teresa mentioned she had found opportunities to learn from others in the group. In the same sense, Claudio expressed:

I am very interested in being part of this group to learn and work on any project... It is a great opportunity to be able to cooperate or share something that may be working in my classrooms (IN1)

Me interesa mucho formar parte de este grupo para aprender y concretar algún proyecto…Es una gran oportunidad poder cooperar o compartir algo de lo que a lo mejor esté funcionando en mis aulas (IN1)

It is clear that from the initial meetings there was a desire for reciprocal contribution among all members of the community. Tatiana mentioned hear goal of shared learning during her first interview as well as her desire for change:

... what I really hope is to share and learn from others. I expect that a safe space is formed where we can talk about both strengths and weaknesses without watching our backs. If we can become teachers-researchers looking for change within our own classrooms, the results will be tangible. I hope that through this community, we will be able to promote research in the Institute as a tool to develop personally and professionally. (IN1)

…realmente lo que espero es compartir y aprender de los demás. Que se forme un espacio seguro en donde podamos hablar tanto de fortalezas como de debilidades sin tener que cuidarnos las espaldas. Si logramos convertirnos en docentes- investigadores que buscan un cambio dentro de sus propias aulas, los resultados serán palpables. Espero que a través de esta comunidad logremos fomentar la investigación en el Instituto como una herramienta que nos permita desarrollarnos personal y profesionalmente. (IN1)

Likewise, the desire to overcome professional selfishness is noted by Teresa:

What I expect from this community is that we could share more than just what we know. We need formal training. If someone travels or attends a course or seminar, he or she should come back and transmit the new knowledge to the group. (IN1)

Yo espero de esta comunidad que no nos quedemos solo en eso de compartir lo que nosotros sabemos. Sí necesitamos capacitación formal y si alguien viaja o va a algún curso pues venir al grupo y reproducir lo que aprenda. (IN1)

129

Unfortunately, academic and professional selfishness is a characteristic of the relationship among professors at the University. This situation was evident when Telmo criticized this selfish behavior:

It is incredible to see experienced professors hide research articles, projects... publications! That should no longer happen ... They hide the books they buy so no one can have access to them. There is a lack of willingness to share, and knowledge that is not shared is useless. (FG1)

¡Es increíble ver a profesores de años y con tanta experiencia esconder artículos, proyectos…publicaciones! Eso ya no debería pasar… Esconden libros que se compran para que nadie más tenga. Falta la predisposición para compartir y el conocimiento que no se comparte no sirve de nada. (FG1)

In the first interview, criticism was also expressed about the belief that people might copy research works. This lack of trust obviously weakens the good harmony among professors. In relation to this, Cecilia mentioned:

There is still fear of being copied, or that if you work, for example preparing lesson plans or materials, others will take advantage of your work. It is worthwhile sharing, because when I know somebody has used a method, technique, or project that worked, I will not copy it. Rather I will try to adapt it to the group of students with which I am working. (IN1)

Todavía hay ese miedo de que te copien o de que, si trabajas, por ejemplo, preparando clases o materiales, otros se aprovechen de tu trabajo. Compartir vale la pena, porque cuando veo un método, técnica o proyecto que funciona, no voy a copiar sino a adaptarlo a mi idea o visión y al grupo de estudiantes con el que estoy trabajando. (IN1)

In several meetings, the issue around publishing academic articles emerged. Members of the community of practice mentioned they could not lose sight of what is required from them by the university: publishing articles. Camila and Claudio expressed their concerns in this matter because as contract professors, they are not allowed to conduct research or lead a research group, which hampers them from publishing findings. This regulation of the Universidad de Cuenca meets the requirements of the national law, LOES.

130

Camila and Claudio mentioned respectively:

For now, learning how to research and start working towards publishing articles, because you know that, currently, a degree is not enough to get tenure. Regulations also include publications. On the one hand publications are required, but on the other hand research is limited. I really don´t understand! (IN 1)

Por ahora aprender a investigar y encaminarnos a publicar algo porque usted sabe que ahora, ya el título no es suficiente para un concurso. El reglamento también dice publicaciones. Entonces por un lado se exige publicaciones, pero por otro lado se limita la investigación. ¡Realmente no entiendo! (IN1)

I expect that this community can include professors working under a contract to have the possibility to do research and publish. (IN1)

Espero de esta comunidad que nos puedan incluir a los contratados para tener la posibilidad de investigar y poder publicar. (IN1)

Among the expectations, participants also mentioned that our research projects or proposals should not move away from our reality, thus the objective of conducting CAR with our own students was shared by many. In one of our first meetings, a member of the community, Cristian, said:

I think we can conduct research with our own students. I know someone who works at another university in another city who is doing it. This person did it for a semester and he is already writing an article about it. (CM2)

Creo que podemos realizar investigaciones con nuestros propios estudiantes. Conozco a alguien que trabaja en otra universidad en otra ciudad que lo está haciendo. Esta persona lo hizo por un semestre y él está ya escribiendo un artículo. (CM2)

In the theme of expectations, some members of the community expressed the idea of extending the work they developed in their master’s. This is the case of Catalina, who during a meeting stated:

Our master’s or doctoral theses could be research projects. We could analyze the data from the pilot study or main study and use them as a research project. (CM2)

Nuestras investigaciones podrían contar como un proyecto de investigación. Podríamos usar nuestros datos del estudio piloto de nuestras tesis de maestría o doctorado para analizarlos y usarlos como un proyecto de investigación. (CM2)

131

Finally, the participants expressed their agreement in the need to create a community to support their academic development. Claudio explained his reasons:

I hope we have opportunities for both writing and publishing. If at any time, the University re-opens the call for tenure positions, we can have articles published already, and that would be an advantage. (IN1)

Espero que podamos ir abriendo oportunidades tanto para escribir como para publicar artículos. Si es que en algún momento vuelven a convocar a concursos tener artículos publicados sería una ventaja. (IN1)

The desire to create and participate in a Community of Practice is evident. Furthermore, among the expectations of the members is the fact that research should revolve around their daily work; that is, the research processes should involve reflection and intervention in their own classrooms while teaching their students. In other words, the interest in learning how to conduct (critical) action research is perceived as constant; that is, the participants imagine the benefits they can obtain from being part of a community of practice, which translates into a new domain. In this case, shifting from being professors to becoming professor-researchers who at some point would be able to publish was a clear goal. In fact, expectations reveal joint enterprise of the members is one of the dimensions of CoPs that allows its creation and development as mentioned in Chapter 4.

Lucas (2007) reported the benefits experienced by Scottish university professors within a community of practice that was created to develop research potential. Correspondingly, Bozu and Imbernon (2009) described the positive experience of the community of practice formed by professors in Spain and concluded that participating in the CoP allowed participants to advance in the university by finding the link between teaching and research. The positive results of these studies shed light on the effectiveness of the model, particularly for university contexts, and encouraged the creation of the community observed.

7.2.3 Willingness to Participate

The willingness to actively participate from the initial stages of the community was an important asset for achieving its objectives. This factor was also noticed during the first set of interviews; for instance, Tito expressed:

132

I am sure that having this comfortable environment in which you can really share and learn will help us. I really like the fact that we are sharing experiences and having opportunities to be in touch with experts like your supervisor. So, I think the community would be one of the steps that will really lead us to grow. (IN1)

Estoy seguro de que tener este ambiente cómodo en el que realmente puedes compartir y aprender nos va a ayudar. Realmente me gusta el hecho de que estamos compartiendo experiencias y tenemos la oportunidad de estar en contacto con expertos como tu directora. Así que pienso que la comunidad sería uno de los pasos que realmente nos llevarán a crecer. (IN1)

The commitment to attend the meetings and the contribution of ideas and knowledge also depend on participants’ willingness. In this respect, Teresa expressed:

I would bring some of the experience and knowledge I have. For now, I’m committed to my learning to be able to contribute more. (IN1)

Aportaría un poco de la experiencia y el conocimiento que tengo. Por ahora comprometiéndome a seguirme preparando para poder aportar más. (IN1)

On the same topic, Tatiana commented:

We are always encouraging collaborative work in classrooms, and I think that by participating in this community we are being role models of working collaboratively. We all come with our own realities, experiences, and knowledge, which can enrich others in the group. (IN1)

Siempre estamos fomentando al trabajo colaborativo en las aulas y pienso que al participar en esta comunidad estamos predicando con el ejemplo de trabajar colaborativamente. Todos venimos con nuestras propias realidades, experiencias y conocimiento lo cual puede enriquecer a otros en el grupo. (IN1)

Participants also mentioned that their commitment to such a community might benefit students. Cecilia suggested that experimenting with autonomy to address learning can give a new dimension to her students. She stated:

My research would be important if I can help my students and have a clearer perception of their learning. I would like to try new methods. Also, to help students experience autonomy to learn and see learning as something global and not just to pass the term. (IN1)

Mi investigación sería importante si puedo ayudarles a mis estudiantes y tener una tener una percepción más clara de su aprendizaje. Me gustaría intentar

133

nuevos métodos. También para ayudar a que los estudiantes experimenten autonomía para aprender y vean el aprendizaje como algo global y no solo para pasar el ciclo. (IN1)

Participant’s willingness to participate was a major factor that was found in this study, but readiness to learn from peers also emerged as imperative. Camila and Tania’s responses to the first interview confirm this claim:

I am a teacher who is just starting a career in a University. Being already a university professor at my age is a big deal, and learning from people who already have experience in this context, to me personally, is a great opportunity. (IN1)

Yo soy una profesora que recién está empezando. A mi edad ya estar en la universidad es bastante, entonces aprender de gente que ya tiene experiencia en el medio para mí personalmente es una gran oportunidad. (IN1)

There are people who are willing to learn, including me, because I’ve seen in the meetings how much I can enrich my knowledge, and how we can all contribute to grow together. (IN1)

Hay gente que está dispuesta y que estamos dispuestos a aprender, porque he visto en las reuniones el enriquecimiento que puedo tener en mi conocimiento y cómo podemos todos podemos contribuir a crecer juntos. (IN1)

During the first interview, I could also notice the research styles and preferences of the participants, which guided how the meetings were conducted. For example, Telmo mentioned:

I like to read. I like to learn how to handle new ways of teaching and reaching students, and the best way to get to know what my students need is doing research. (IN1)

Me gusta leer. Me gusta saber y descubrir cómo se manejan nuevas maneras de enseñar y de llegar a los estudiantes, y qué mejor manera de saber que necesitan nuestros estudiantes que mediante la investigación. (IN1)

Thus, the enthusiasm of the participant professors comes not only expectations from the community but also individual willingness to learn from the other members of the community. Therefore, another dimension of CoPs as a condition for its establishment and survival is fulfilled; in this case, I refer to the desire to form a community and mutually engage. These findings mirror those of Bozu and Imbernon (2009) and Barret et al. (2009), which describe how

134 active participation in communities of practice reinforce mutual engagement and collaborative work which encourages and produces change in those who get involved.

7.2.4 The Community and Detrimental Discourses

There are frequent clichés surrounding professors who conduct research. As expressed by some participants, they must learn not to pay attention to those comments within the university. During the initial meetings, Tomás mentioned that colleagues of the Institute think that when professors propose projects is because they do not want to work. About this situation, Tatiana noted:

Unfortunately, there are many people who think that professors who want to do research want to work less and teach less. These comments are heard because the results of research projects are not seen. (IN1)

Lamentablemente hay mucha gente que piensa que quienes queremos hacer investigación es para trabajar menos y dar menos clases y justamente este tipo de comentarios se dan porque no se ven los resultados de la investigación. (IN1)

In fact, these prejudices still continued even to the community members which can be evidenced in Tatiana’s words during the second last meeting. She stated:

Some colleagues still think that if you want to do research is because you do not want to teach or work. They think that if you do research, you are lazy. They think doing research is not working. (CM5)

Algunos compañeros todavía piensan que si se quiere investigar es porque no se quiere enseñar y es porque tal o cual profesor es perezoso y no quiere trabajar. Comparan al investigar con no trabajar. (CM5)

Feeling indifference towards research by a large number of professors in the Institute was another topic that emerged from the interviews. Tito claimed:

Some of them, I would say, are not really willing to leave their comfort zone. Research is quite demanding. We have to put a lot of effort into it. (IN1)

Algunos de ellos yo diría que no están realmente dispuestos a salir de su zona de confort, porque la investigación es bastante exigente. Tenemos que poner mucho de nuestro esfuerzo en esto. (IN1)

135

Furthermore, the focus group discussions showed that the working environment in the Institute demonstrates that lack of collaboration may grow out of competition. In this respect, Tania mentioned:

Sharing knowledge, resources, learning experiences is a benefit for all. Some people just keep their knowledge to themselves. They are closed-minded and do not want to collaborate. They are not interested in teaching what they know to others. There is envy, and they do not want to see others succeed. (FG1)

El compartir conocimiento, recursos, aprendizajes es un beneficio para todos. La formación de algunas personas se cierra y no quieren colaborar no les interesa enseñar lo que saben a los demás. Hay envidia y no quieren ver que el resto se supere. (FG1)

Just as there are prejudices around those who do not investigate or publish, there are also misconceptions around those who do. The main judgment is that research is an excuse for laziness. In Harland and Staniforth’s (2000) study, although it focused on encouraging teaching because research was the main function of the institution they observed, a similar situation was reported. In fact, participants expressed their displeasure around full-time researchers who were not teaching, leaving more teaching hours to those who were not protected.

Although the opinions that surround researchers are negative, they demonstrate the fact that the members of the community share stories and discourses. There is a desire among the members to shift these stories and develop a new shared repertoire of successful teaching and research experiences that not only would encourage them, but that would open the minds of colleagues who wrongly undervalue research within the teaching practice.

In the organization of our community of practice, the individual personal and professional experiences and landscapes of practice were central to understand the initial expectations and contributions of the members. Not all the participants had previous research experience, but for those who did, for instance Teresa, it was not easy to shift paradigms and adopt a critical approach.

All members of the CoP were willing to participate and attend meetings. Furthermore, they had high expectations for the group in terms of research opportunities. However, for some, this

136 enthusiasm was not enough as, they were often unable to attend the meetings due to other commitments within the Language Institute. As Camila, Cecilia, and Claudio were professors working on contracts, which did not include research responsibilities, they were fully aware that they would not get support or remuneration for any research work undertaken. In spite of this Camila’s research is featured in this study as she was one of the only community members who not only challenged the inequalities faced by students in the classroom, but also her own status as a contract professor.

7.3 Procedural Experiences of Our CoP

Initially, our community had expectations from the community and willingness to participate and sustain the group’s interest in critical action research; however, as meetings and group work were generated, other categories that were of interest to this study and responded to the conceptual framework, emerged.

7.3.1 Connectivity between the Members

Among the positive expressions given by the members of the community, I can highlight the good impression of their interactions. The sharing of experiences has led to obtaining positive results, as mentioned by Teresa in her second interview:

I have felt quite comfortable in the meetings that I have attended. I was very pleased to be able to hear what each one is experiencing in their own reality as a teacher-researcher. (IN2)

Me he sentido bastante cómodo en las reuniones a las que he asistido. Me gustó mucho el hecho de poder compartir lo que cada uno está experimentando en su propia realidad como docente investigador. (IN2)

Correspondingly, Tatiana expressed that sharing experiences has been an advantage for the members of the community:

I think the greatest advantage has been sharing and learning from each other. (IN 3)

Creo que la mayor ventaja ha sido el poder compartir y aprender uno del otro. (IN3)

137

Additionally, within the group I could notice that there was greater trust among members and less fear of making mistakes. Telmo and Tania commented they felt the kind of confidence that has created significant stimulus and encouraged cooperation, and in addition has reduced competition. They mentioned:

I feel that we have created a space for sharing where we feel comfortable. We are not afraid to ask questions and / or make mistakes, because we are here to learn. (IN3)

Siento que hemos creado un espacio de compartir en donde nos sentimos cómodos y no nos da miedo consultar y/o cometer errores, porque estamos para aprender. (IN3)

I have learned that it is possible to share and learn from others. It is not necessary to hide what we know because somebody is going to steal ideas. The important thing is to share what we know and learn because it can help us to build interesting projects that can have an impact. Ultimately, this is what the university wants from research. (IN2)

He aprendido que es posible compartir y aprender de los otros. Que no es necesario esconder lo que sabemos porque nos van a robar las ideas. Lo importante es compartir lo que sabemos y aprendemos porque nos puede ayudar a construir proyectos interesantes que tengan un impacto que es lo que la universidad quiere de la investigación. (IN2)

The experiences within the group started to emerge in positive reflections and a desire to replicating the shared space for learning. Tania suggested that many of the member’s experiences with students should be imitated with other groups:

I am convinced that these spaces of sharing are the ones that can help us more than any seminar in which we only listen for hours-and-hours and then forget what we were told. I like when we share experiences that have worked in the classroom because they can be replicated in our spaces. (IN2)

Estoy convencido de que estos espacios de compartir son los que nos pueden ayudar más que cualquier taller de horas y horas en las que sólo nos dedicamos a escuchar y luego olvidamos lo que se nos dijo. Me gusta mucho cuando compartimos experiencias que han servido y funcionado en las clases porque se pueden replicar en nuestros espacios. (IN2)

There was a generally favourable opinion towards the meetings, which resulted in greater cooperation among the members of the community. This observation could be compared to those

138 highlighted by Bruce and Easley (2000) when describing their DIME community. In their meetings, participants increased their mutual support by sharing ideas and critically analyzing their practice.

Participants of our community also mentioned that mutual collaboration has generated a positive working environment, reducing the sense of competition between the members of the group. This finding also coincides with the experiences lived by DIME’s participants (Bruce & Easley, 2000) in terms of overcoming selfishness and fostering confidence.

7.3.2 Membership

From the second and third interviews, perceptions about change were beginning to emerge from some members of the community of practice. For example, Tatiana who at the first interview indicated her desire for change through the efforts of the community, expressed her positive impressions in her second interview. She reflected:

I have felt comfortable. I have seen an incredible change in the members of our group, and not only when we are in the meetings but also when we are not. (IN2)

Me he sentido bastante cómodo y he visto un cambio increíble en quienes formamos parte del grupo y no solo cuando estamos en las reuniones si no también fuera de ellas. (IN2)

In the same sense, Camila expressed that she has realized the changed mentality of the members with respect to research:

An advantage has been to learn to think differently since it is the only way in which we will be able to act differently. (IN3)

Una ventaja ha sido aprender a pensar diferente ya que es la única manera en la que vamos a poder actuar diferente. (IN3)

Teresa, who at the beginning pointed out the need to overcome professional egoism, stated that the voluntary participation of colleagues and their commitment to attend has been important. Furthermore, Telmo also had this positive perception towards the involvement of colleagues as such:

139

The main advantage, I think, has been the participation of colleagues. Giving the time that sometimes we do not have to attend the meetings shows that there are people who want to develop professionally. (IN3)

La ventaja principal creo que ha sido la participación de los compañeros. El dar el tiempo que a veces no se tiene para reunirnos demuestra que si hay gente que quiere superarse profesionalmente. (IN3)

There have been many advantages in the group. First the idea and your initiative to dedicate time to create the group. Also, the disinterested participation of the colleagues. Basically, we are giving our time to attend the meetings. (IN3)

Ventajas ha habido muchas para el grupo. Primero la idea y su iniciativa de dedicar tiempo para formar el grupo. También la participación desinteresada de los compañeros, a la final estamos dando nuestro tiempo para asistir a las reuniones. (IN3)

With the participation in the community, new paths towards research were collaboratively generated. For example, Teresa, reflected on the positive use of in the use of artifacts when she shared:

I have felt pretty good especially since we decided to focus on reading texts and began recommending articles and books that we can read. (IN3)

Me he sentido bastante bien sobre todo desde que decidimos enfocarnos en lecturas de textos y empezamos a recomendar artículos y libros que podemos leer. (IN3)

Interestingly, the interviews revealed that participants saw the value of the CoP for their work in the Institute as well as for their work in the classroom with students, as some propose adopting the approach in the classroom space as well. Cecilia mentioned how she was thinking about research with her own students:

I am learning more about the research process and the steps we have to take to do research with our students in the classroom. I am learning to think differently and to take into account the social problems that our students may have. (IN2)

Estoy aprendiendo más sobre el proceso de investigación y de los pasos que tenemos que seguir para hacer investigación con nuestros estudiantes del aula. Estoy aprendiendo a pensar diferente y tomar en cuenta los problemas sociales que pueden tener nuestros estudiantes. (IN2)

140

Later it was seen that one expressed advantage of the group was to learn more about the personal lives of each one of the members of the group. Tito mentioned how important it was for him to get to know colleagues in another level:

It is important to learn about people, their experiences, and trajectories. Knowing all aspects that are part of our identity to understand each other better has been what I have perceived as the most valuable advantage. (IN3)

Aprender de las personas, de sus experiencias y trayectorias. Conocer todos los aspectos que forman parte de la identidad de cada uno para así comprendernos mejor ha sido lo que yo he percibido como la ventaja más valiosa. (IN3)

Tania expressed that debating and reaching agreements have been aspects that she positively valued:

The biggest advantage was the creation of the group as a space in which we can debate, learn, reach agreements. (IN3)

La ventaja más grande fue la creación del grupo como un espacio en el que podemos debatir, aprender, llegar a acuerdos. (IN3)

Another view that demonstrates the value of the group for the personal growth of professors was that given by Camila who mentioned the value of developing that critical and reflective curiosity. She shared:

The group has been a great support both for my teaching work and for raising my critical and reflective awareness, which I think are key to becoming a good researcher (IN1).

El grupo ha sido un gran apoyo tanto para mi labor docente como para despertar en mi la curiosidad, pero una curiosidad crítica y reflexiva que pienso es clave para ser una buena investigadora. (IN3)

The relationship between professor colleagues as well as the feeling of cohesion emerged in positive expressions from the beginning. Tatiana and Tania mentioned that they have felt harmony in the group:

There have not been any problems with the fellow members of the community. I think we are learning to listen and debate without falling into meaningless discussions. (IN2)

141

Con los compañeros no ha habido ningún inconveniente. Creo que estamos aprendiendo a escucharnos y debatir sin caer en discusiones sin sentido. (IN2)

I have not had problems with anyone. I think we are in this community because we want to be here. I think the group makes us feel good. (IN2)

No he tenido ningún inconveniente con nadie. Creo que estamos los que queremos estar y sentimos que el grupo nos hace bien. (IN2)

There has been a sense of fellowship and collaboration between the members of the community. Telmo expressed how he has felt when working with the group:

I think we have adapted well to working in the group. The fact that that we already knew each other as coworkers has contributed. Furthermore, some of us were classmates in the master’s program, and now we are still classmates in the doctoral program. (IN2).

Pienso que nos hemos acoplado bastante bien a trabajar en el grupo. También contribuye el hecho de que ya nos conocíamos en varios ámbitos como por ejemplo compañeros de trabajo, de maestría, ahora incluso algunos somos compañeros del doctorado. (IN2)

Interaction among peers has fostered mutual understanding and collaboration. In this regard, Tito expressed:

I have learned a lot about the trajectories of my colleagues, which has opened my mind to understanding that not everyone lives the same. I know how valuable it is to learn from the experiences of others (IN2).

He aprendido mucho sobre cada trayectoria de los compañeros, lo que ha abierto mi mente a entender que no todos viven lo mismo que uno y lo valioso que es aprender de las experiencias de los demás. (IN2)

The fellowship developed has favored collaboration and a sense of trust as expressed by Cecilia:

I have felt identified with some people more than others. I have felt confident enough to approach to them and ask for help. (IN2)

Me he llegado a identificar con unos más que con otros y me he sentido con la confianza suficiente de acercarme y pedir ayuda a cualquier miembro de nuestra comunidad. (IN2)

Feelings supported and developing confidence to participate were also expressed by Claudio:

142

I am a very quiet person, and sometimes I find it difficult to participate. However, I have felt supported and motivated to share and actively participate in the group. (IN2)

Soy una persona sumamente callada y a veces hasta me cuesta participar. Sin embargo, me he sentido apoyada y motivada a compartir y participar activamente en el grupo. (IN2)

Moreover, membership in the group produced courage to ask for help as Cecilia reflects:

Before, I would never have dared to ask for material or about the classes. Now, I feel that the colleagues from the community are much more open and they share their knowledge and resources. (IN2)

Antes nunca me hubiese atrevido a pedir material o a consultar sobre las clases. Ahora siento que los compañeros de la comunidad se abrieron mucho más y comparten sus conocimientos y materiales (IN2)

It was observed that sharing experiences, as well as learning critically about teaching and research produced results once participants became part of the community. Coexistence and support within the community registered positive impressions regarding participants commitment to achieve the objectives of conducting research.

In contrast to the difficulties such as lack of time, positive and favorable opinions were always more abundant and expressive. A sense of support, solidarity, cohesion, and understanding were the focus in the participants’ interactions. Membership in the community generated a collective desire to keep improving the working environment. These findings concur with the success of the DIME community (Bruce & Easley, 2000), which has survived over 22 years due to the contributions and negotiations of its participants. Their discussions and disagreements have been taken as opportunities for learning.

7.3.3 Feedback in Interaction

The particular experiences of the members of the community where also generative sources for its development. These experiences also raised other expectations for the future of the group. One of the characteristics expressed by the participant professors, in this case, Claudio, from the beginning is that sharing experiences has provided feedback to the group. He stated:

143

It seems that it would be a way to learn how to do research and benefit the professors and our students. Having the possibility to reflect on what we do daily in the classroom can lead us to draw valid conclusions that can be replicated. (IN1)

Me parece que sería una forma de aprender a investigar y de beneficiarnos entre todos los docentes y beneficiar a nuestros estudiantes. El tener la posibilidad de reflexionar sobre lo que hacemos a diario en el aula nos puede llevar a sacar conclusiones validas que se pueden replicar. (IN1)

This type of feedback was taking place throughout the learning process of the participants in the community. For instance, in his second interview Telmo shared how learning from the experience of certain members of the group enabled him to imitate aspects of their work with good results. He shared:

We are all learning from everyone. That is what I like the most and motivates me to continue. There is one colleague that talks about changing classroom activities constantly, and that is what I am doing now. Sometimes I do the same thing during the entire class, but now I am determined to change activities several times during class. (CM9)

Todos estamos aprendiendo de todos. Eso es lo que más me gusta y me motiva a continuar. Hay un compañero que cambia las actividades todo el tiempo, y eso es lo que estoy haciendo ahora. A veces hago lo mismo durante la clase entera pero ahora estoy decidida a cambiar las actividades varias veces durante la clase. (CM9)

The realities of each participant were thus strengthened by the contributions of others, and this often emerged through the provision of feedback to the group. Tito’s comments during his third interview support this argument:

I believe that each one’s contributions have been strengthening our learning. Each one lives his/her own reality as a teacher and/or researcher in teams that do not necessarily engage in action research, and many as graduate students (IN3)

Creo que los aportes de cada uno han ido fortaleciendo el aprendizaje. Cada uno vive su propia realidad como profesor, investigador en equipos que no necesariamente se dedican a la investigación acción, y muchos como estudiantes de posgrado. (IN3)

The achievements of the community are important in the sense that they might help to enable other external groups in the University to do the same, as it was also suggested by Tito:

144

We should keep working as a team convincing ourselves that we can do research as insiders in our own context to produce change from the inside. If we continue to strengthen as a group, I think we can reproduce the idea with other colleagues and in other spaces. (IN3)

Seguir trabajando como equipo convenciéndonos que podemos hacer investigación desde adentro y producir cambio desde adentro. Si nos seguimos fortaleciendo como grupo creo que podemos reproducir con otros compañeros y en otros espacios. (IN3)

During our second last month of meetings, the possibility of incorporating a person with a doctoral degree was important for some of the members. Tomás mentioned that it would be helpful for our community to be recognized as a research group according to the University regulations:

It is definitely a strength to have colleagues who have studied abroad and come with different learnings and perspectives… Although we have some doctoral candidates, masters, and master’s and doctoral students that make this community particularly strong, we need somebody with a PhD degree if we want the DIUC to recognize us as a research group. (CM9)

Definitivamente es una fortaleza del grupo tener compañeros que han estudiado en el exterior y que vienen con diferentes aprendizajes y perspectivas. A pesar de tener en el grupo a candidatos a doctores, masters, y estudiantes de maestria y doctorado que hacen que esta comunidad sea particularmente fuerte, necesitamos ya a alguien con título de PhD para que la DIUC nos reconozca como grupo de investigación. (CM9)

Shared experiences were one of the most encouraging elements of being part of this community, which contributed to the personal and professional growth of the members. The ability for participants to grow was echoed within Bozu and Imbernon’s (2009) definition of a community of practice in higher education. These authors suggested that the exchange of knowledge, information, and experience within a community of practice of university professors might be a successful alternative for academic and professional development.

Additionally, members positively considered the possible inclusion of new peers with more expertise in the field of research. In this regard, Bond and Lockee (2014) mentioned that exposing the community to different perspectives from other researchers or approaches is useful

145 for the survival of a community, because it potentially avoids stagnate thought or the emergence of a single one way of thinking among the group.

7.3.4 Professional Growth

Fellowship and mutual collaboration make the group cohesive and strengthen favorable ties to achieve the desired results. Camila expressed the advantages she has experienced through the emerged sense of cooperation:

I have felt like an important and essential part of the group. It is the first and only space where I have not been described as a ‘contract’ professor, and I have not been limited to what to do and how to do it. (IN2)

Me he sentido parte importante y esencial del grupo. Es el primer y único espacio en donde no se me ha calificado como ‘contratado’ y no se me ha limitado a que hacer y cómo hacerlo. (IN2)

During the second focus group meeting, growth was emphasized in reflections as occurring in both the personal sphere and in participants’ perceptions about both research and teaching. Tania mentioned:

I still think that it (the community) is a space for personal and professional growth. I think we are slowly finding that link between research and teaching that many colleagues think does not exist. Now, I am more certain that we cannot think of teaching without research or research without teaching (IN3)

Sigo pensando que es un espacio de enriquecimiento tanto personal como profesional. Creo que vamos poco a poco encontrando ese nexo entre la investigación y la docencia que muchos compañeros piensan que no existe. Ahora estoy más segura que no podemos pensar en docencia sin investigación ni en investigación sin docencia (IN3)

However, personal growth among the members did often arise as favoring the teaching activities. In this regard, Cecilia noted:

I feel that now my work as a teacher is more thoughtful. It is based on the needs of the students and not so much on the requirement of the syllabus, although it is an obligation to finish it. (IN3)

146

Siento que ahora mi trabajo como profesora es más reflexionado y basado en las necesidades de los alumnos y no tanto en la exigencia del sílabo, aunque sea obligación cumplirlo. (IN3)

When teachers feel positive and enthusiastic, an emotional balance can be reached where the personal and work environment also improve facilitating better teaching and research performance and professional growth.

The work done by Arias and Restrepo (2009), Bruce and Easley (2000), Lucas (2007), and Harland and Staniforth also demonstrates positive results in respect to encouraging professional development and empowering professors when participating in communities of practice. The key factors for the success of their communities have been collaboration, negotiation, and flexibility to adapt to difference and change.

The members of the community perceived their community as a space that provided opportunities for mutual understanding and collaboration. The efforts made by the participants to maintain a safe and positive environment in this community were possibly motivated by the desire to avoid the conflicts frequently arising at the weekly faculty meetings often characterized by fights and mandates. The relationships between the participants prior to participating in the community also contributed to developing feelings of confidence and respect.

7.4 Crossing the Boundary between the Traditional and the New

Professors in the Language Institute have been traditionally dedicated mostly to teaching activities. Daily conversations have been about completing the syllabus, testing students, and registering grades on time. Research has been an additional activity that some professors have done in their free time. The establishment of the Community of Practice has provided its members with opportunities to explore their teaching competence and use it to learn more about research, and cross boundaries between the known and the new.

7.4.1 Should the Community Prioritize Theory or Practice?

Once the community started, the doubt about prioritizing the study of the theory or focusing more on the practical experiences of members was expressed. Teresa, for example, was strong in her beliefs that we had to be theory driven rather than practice driven:

147

Some people do not believe that formal training with strict reading is necessary, and they go directly to practice. I believe that everything must be based on theory, but it is something very personal. (IN2)

Hay personas que no creen necesario ese entrenamiento formal, de lectura estricta y mucho van a la práctica. Yo creo que todo debe basarse en la teoría, pero es algo muy personal. (IN2)

However, different opinions were also expressed like the one given by Tito who thought that practice and theory are essential to achieving quality research. According to Tito:

I think we cannot focus a 100% of the time on theory, nor a 100% on experiences, but we must find a meeting point between the two. As I understand, one of the objectives of this community is to learn from each other. We have to frame what we are learning within the theories and concepts that we know and the ones we will learn. If the objective were to learn only from books, I would have looked for a course or read at home alone. (CM6)

Pienso que no podemos centrarnos 100% del tiempo en la teoría, ni el 100% en la experiencia sino encontrar un punto de encuentro entre las dos. Según entiendo uno de los objetivos de esta comunidad aprender uno del otro y lo que vayamos aprendiendo irle enmarcando en teorías y conceptos que ya sabemos o que podamos aprender. Para aprender solo de los libros buscaría una clase formal o leería solo en casa. (CM6)

During the last few meetings, the idea of combining theory and practice was reinforced as an essential condition for conducting research. Claudio commented:

We know that how to make theory into practice is an ongoing discussion. We have to link the theory to the practice otherwise there is nothing. (CM6)

Sabemos que es un tema recurrente el cómo poner la teoría en práctica, pero es una necesidad. Tenemos que bajar la teoría a la práctica de lo contrario no hay nada. (CM6)

At first there was a disparity of ideas when it came to advancing from either a theoretical or practical perspective, but eventually professor members of the community agreed on a more balanced position where the two elements should be combined to obtain better results. As the community evolved, discussions were in fact opportunities to make informed joint decisions. As in Bruce and Easley’s (2009) work, community challenges that emerged were overcome due to the increasing levels of trust among the participants.

148

7.4.2 Demand for External Support

The position of one member of the Community of Practice, Tito, disagrees with the others. For him, the importance of having organized the team lies in being able to receive feedback in a collaborative way so that everyone can move forward, and not only on waiting for external help and guidance. He expressed:

Sometimes I feel a bit confused. Although the group is to support each other and learn from each other’s trajectories, there are colleagues who still think we need foreign experts, and I do not understand that lack of confidence in what we can do. (IN2)

Me he sentido seguro, aunque a veces un poco confundido porque el grupo es para apoyarnos mutuamente y aprender de las trayectorias de cada uno, sin embargo, hay compañeros que aún piensan que necesitamos expertos de fuera y no entiendo esa falta de confianza en lo que nosotros podemos hacer. (IN2)

Although members were aware that the community has the purpose indicated by Tito, two of them emphasized the need to find and include external support for the community. In a meeting Teresa expressed a need for help in these terms:

We need to get an editor to review our projects, and it would be better if it was someone from another country. Someone who is a native English speaker. (CM6)

Necesitamos conseguir un editor para revisar nuestros proyectos y en el mejor de los casos alguien extranjero, alguien que sea nativo hablante de inglés (CM6)

Later in her last interview, she emphasized that a disadvantage for the community was that it did not include research experts:

The main disadvantage I think has been the lack of formal instruction. I insist that we should seek help from people who are more skilled or more experienced than us. (IN3)

La principal desventaja creo que ha sido la falta de instrucción formal. Insisto que deberíamos buscar ayuda de gente más capacitada o con más experiencia que nosotros (IN3)

Teresa’s comments and demands echoed Cristian, who during a meeting recognized the need for someone with more research experience. However, for Cristian, it was important to have such a support within the University. He suggested:

149

We need someone who knows how research works in the University and how we can get our projects approved. We need a person who could be our connection with the DIUC. We must also ask foreign professors who have come to teach in the TEFL master’s program to collaborate and guide us. (CM10)

Necesitamos a alguien que sepa cómo funciona la investigación en la universidad y cómo podemos hacer que nuestros proyectos sean aprobados. Una persona que debe ser nuestra conexión con la Dirección de Investigación (DIUC). Debemos pedir a los profesores que han venido a enseñar en la maestría que nos colaboren y nos dirijan. (CM10)

During the second focus group meetings, it was recognized that for professors who are interested in conducting research, training is imperative. In relation to this, Tatiana concluded:

We need training to do research. There are people who do not want to do research because they simply do not care about it, but there are also people who want to do it but are afraid to take the risk. They are afraid of being wrong because they do not know how to do it. So, if we have someone who can train us, we can lose our fear. I believe that the support of the authorities must come in the form of training. (FG2)

Necesitamos capacitación para investigar. Hay gente que no quiere investigar porque simplemente no le interesa, pero también hay gente que quiere pero tiene miedo y no quiere arriesgarse por temor a equivocarse porque no sabe. Entonces, si tenemos alguien que nos enseñe, podemos ir perdiendo el miedo. Creo que el apoyo de las autoridades debe venir desde la capacitación. (FG2)

An internal debate was held on the need for seeking help from research experts to support the initiatives of the community. The conversations gradually resulted in deciding that there is a need for help from experienced, preferably foreign, professionals. Certainly, one of the major concerns for the future progress of the professor-researchers of this community is to achieve adequate training to cover all the concerns and shortcomings we have as researchers in training.

This finding can be located within Kezar and Gehrke’s (2017) model for CoP sustainability in terms of training the community and looking for partnerships that could provide assessment and feedback. In the same respect, Bond and Lockee (2014) advised on the danger of basing the survival of a community of practice solely on groupthink and suggested that the community should be exposed to external perspectives and that work of individual members should be submitted for external peer-review.

150

7.4.3 New Concerns, New Challenges

To create efficient work that can help with the research needs of professors, there should be a close link between them and the University research departments and units that are clearly orientated to research within the University.

Certain elements of the research should be addressed due to their importance; however, participants felt some areas had been neglected. Teresa had some suggestions about the use of the methodology:

Talking about methodology would also be valuable because we would learn from what each one wants to do. Also, those who have not had the opportunity to do research can learn from the other members of the community. (CM4)

Conversar sobre la metodología sería también súper valioso porque aprenderíamos de lo que cada uno quiere hacer. Y para aquellos que no han tenido la oportunidad de investigar pueden aprender de los demás miembros de la comunidad. (CM4)

Also in this meeting, the need for guidelines on presentation of projects was highlighted. Cristian suggested that these guidelines should be uniform for the whole university to standardize the research projects.

Telmo mentioned that all faculties in the University should have shared criteria on what is expected from professors’ research in order to not hinder their work. He suggested that the Universidad the Cuenca should function as a CoP:

The university has to start working as a community of practice. We are not speaking the same language. Every faculty is working its own way. I am not saying that everyone should work the same because each field is supposed to work its own issues, but some faculties have everything defined and others do not have anything. We are not working as a community, sharing experiences… (FG2)

A la universidad le falta empezar a trabajar como una comunidad de práctica. No estamos hablando el mismo idioma. Cada Facultad está trabajando a su manera. No estoy diciendo que todos deben trabajar igual porque se supone que cada campo tiene sus propios temas, pero hay facultades que tienen todo definido y otras que no tienen nada. No estamos trabajando en comunidad, compartiendo experiencias… (FG2)

151

During the last meetings, Claudio suggested that organizing conferences and presentations could foster mutual collaboration and encourage the community to continue. He proposed:

We should start thinking about presentations and conferences. We should prepare a poster or a panel. Doing that will give us a true sense of belonging to the group and will help us embrace the idea of conducting research. (CM16)

Debemos empezar a pensar en presentaciones y conferencias. Preparar un poster o un panel. Eso nos dará un verdadero sentido de pertenencia al grupo y a la idea de investigar. (CM16)

The idea of collaboration was made concrete when some participants expressed the need to strengthen the supportive and collaborative environment of the community. Teresa suggested providing more support to colleagues with less research experience:

Now it is necessary that we collaborate in the group and support colleagues who do not have projects, so they can prepare a proposal. We have already gone through the process. We have experience filling out the forms and presenting all the requirements. Now we can help those who are willing to do so (CM18)

Ahora es necesario que en el grupo colaboremos entre nosotros y apoyemos a los compañeros que no tienen proyectos para que propongan uno. Ya hemos pasado algunos de nosotros por la experiencia de llenar formularios y presentar todos los requisitos y ahora podemos ayudar a quienes están dispuestos a hacerlo. (CM18)

As a group, we moved away from thinking individually to start thinking at a collaborative level either to work together to prepare conferences or presentations, or to support members who had not yet succeeded in creating a research proposal. As in the findings produced by Lucas (2007) and Barret et al. (2009), the community created potential opportunities in which participants shared their skills and experiences to complement those of others. This situation supported the creation of research identities, particularly in the members that did not have any experience as researchers.

7.4.4 Future projects

The generation of the community will produce projects that will serve as results of the beneficial nature of the community. There is a marked desire among the participants to conduct research as a tool for professional development. However, there is also a focus on seeing the results of their

152 research efforts in the form of publications, which, at the end of the day, are expected from professors. As expressed by Tito:

Another step that we must take is to look for journals where we could send our articles and hopefully have them published. We should create a list. We need to know what is required internationally even more than what is required at the national level. (CM12)

Otro paso que debemos tomar es buscar algunas revistas donde podríamos enviar nuestros artículos y ojalá publicarlos. Debemos hacer una lista. Necesitamos saber lo que se requiere internacionalmente más de lo que se requiere a nivel nacional. (CM12)

Some suggestions for long term goals for the group also emerged. Cristian imagined the community becoming a research center given the commitment and positive feedback among participants:

I sent Tammy some ideas about registering this community as a research group or research center. That should be our ultimate goal because we have the resources and opportunities to do so. (CM9)

Le envié a Tammy algunas ideas acerca de registrar esta comunidad como un grupo de investigación o un centro de investigación que debería ser nuestro objetivo final porque tenemos los recursos y las oportunidades para hacerlo. (CM9)

In the interactions and contributions at our last meeting, the members gave more ideas for future projects. For instance, Constanza suggested linking the Language Institute with the TEFL undergraduate program to collaborate in a joint research study:

A project that we could prepare and that would be interesting is to have students from the TEFL program learn another language in the Language Institute. An experience like that would show future English teachers what it means to learn a new language. It would make them feel what their students would feel when learning English. (CM14)

Un estudio que podríamos preparar y que sería súper interesante es hacer que los estudiantes del programa TEFL aprendan otro idioma en el Instituto de Lenguas. Una experiencia como esa les mostraría a los futuros docentes de inglés lo que significa aprender un nuevo idioma y les haría sentir lo que sus estudiantes sienten cuando aprenden inglés. (CM14)

153

Initially the ideas about projects to initiate research studies were vague and not concrete enough; however, throughout the meetings, some ideas for materializing interesting projects were highlighted. Participants expect to face new challenges such as conducting research and being able to publish their work; nevertheless, they also imagine a future as professor-researchers for them individually and collectively.

Crossing the boundary between the University of Cuenca’s strong mandate favoring quantitative research and a proposal to adopt a different research paradigm was not easy for the members of the CoP. After more than a year learning about CAR and sharing knowledge, only a few members of the CoP did not feel ready to make this transition, and I would say, willing to change their frame of mind. My perception is that these members of the CoP equated working on quantitative projects as practical and efficient. Furthermore, they believed that turning their attention to the emancipatory goals of CAR would detract from their ability to comply with the University requirements and expectations.

Chapter 8 CAR Plans and Projects

The vitality of the teaching profession, if teachers are to be more than mechanical operators of pedagogic procedures, requires practitioners to reflect critically on their practice with reference to wider educational and social issues, and to take appropriate action to modify their values and practices. – Leung, 2009, p. 55

8.1 Introduction

Our community of practice is not isolated from the daily activity of its members as professors of the Language Institute of the Universidad de Cuenca. It is important to remember that attending the community meetings was a voluntary activity in addition to teaching and administration responsibilities of its members. From the onset of the first meeting, our main objective was to learn about research processes, write proposals for research, and conduct critical action research. All of the members of the community had considerable interest on each of these topics. For some in the group it was the first time they found how their actions as professors and researchers could contribute to promoting social justice in their classrooms.

As a result of our conversations and learnings, several ideas about research projects emerged; however, actually conducting a study means transcending from planning to action that must produce results. The majority of the professors in the community have not proposed or conducted a research study for several reasons which was limitations of our community of practice.

This chapter has been structured chronologically starting with the background conceptions we had about conducting research, the ideas that emerged during the sessions of our community, the projects of two members that were applied in the classroom, and the limitations encountered in

154

155 the planning-executing process. As mentioned in Chapter 7, the voices of the participants are included using the color code indicated in Table 20.

8.2 Background of the Projects

The topic that created concerns for several members, especially the ones that had previous research knowledge and experience, was the idea of researching their own students and/or practice. These members had been exposed to a positivist approach to research. They were taught that only scientific methods of inquiry that allowed them to generalize findings were valid. For them, adopting a transformative approach to research their own practice or learn about their own students could raise many issues due to the subjective nature of the CAR approach and the possible bias they, as teacher-researchers, could create.

The conversations about this concern shifted during the course of our meetings because we had the opportunity to internalize the purpose of the community. We wanted to learn about CAR to find a link between teaching and research taking advantage of the many opportunities we have in our classrooms and help students while reflecting on our practice and their learning.

8.2.1 Researching or Not Researching Our Students: The Dilemma

At first, it was noticed that the participants had not had any experience or even interest in researching their practice or their students’ learning process. Tatiana said:

None of the research projects I have done have involved my own students. I have not written any proposal or done formal research in which my students are the subjects of study. (IN1)

Ninguno de los proyectos de investigación que he hecho ha involucrado a mis propios estudiantes. No he planteado, ni he hecho una investigación formal en la que mis estudiantes sean los sujetos de estudio. (IN1)

In this same line, Teresa mentioned she had not investigated her students before because she learned from foreign experts who had visited the Universidad de Cuenca that researching her own students was not ethical and that AR was not a reliable form of research. She claimed:

There are too many issues when working with our own students, and doing action research is not considered a type of research that is formal and valid. (E1)

156

Existen demasiados conflictos al trabajar con nuestros propios estudiantes y hacer investigación-acción no se considera como un tipo de investigación formal y válida. (E1)

Other professors of the community had similar opinions. They argued that the few studies conducted by professors of the Language Institute had not considered researching their students. Tania stated:

There are research projects carried out by some of our colleagues, but not with our students as participants. (CM4)

Hay proyectos de investigación realizados por algunos de nuestros colegas, pero no con nuestros estudiantes como participantes. (CM4)

Some concerns about being able to conduct research while having so many activities within the University were also expressed. For instance, Telmo explained:

It is hard to do research while working. I know we can have some hours a day to do it, but I also have to attend meaningless faculty meetings, grade assignments or tests, plan my classes, and complete reports. It is difficult to do everything at once. My mind is never focused on one thing. (IN1)

Es difícil hacer investigación mientras se trabaja. Yo sé que podemos tener algunas horas al día para hacerlo, pero también tengo que ir a juntas sin sentido, calificar deberes o pruebas, preparar clases y hacer informes. Es difícil hacer todo a la vez. Mi mente nunca se concentra en una sola cosa. (IN1)

The scenario was not at all encouraging at the beginning; fortunately, some members took a self- critical position that was different and they questioned those who discounted the impossibility of researching our own students. Claudio mentioned:

Unfortunately, there are still people who think that we cannot and should not do research with our students, but we should break with those traditional ways of thinking. We should demonstrate we can do valid, reliable, and meaningful research. (I2)

Lastimosamente todavía hay gente que piensa que no podemos ni debemos hacer investigación con nuestros estudiantes, pero deberíamos cambiar esas formas tradicionales de pensar y demostrarles que si podemos hacer investigación que sea válida, confiable y sobre todo útil. (I2)

157

Another participant, Teresa, expressed the need: “to find a link between teaching and research and not treat them separately (encontrar un nexo entre la docencia y la investigación y no tratarlas por separado)” (IN1). Although, for her, the research process must be strict and well controlled for possible bias.

Tatiana had a similar view in this respect:

In the University, there is a tendency to believe that research is separate from teaching, but the more research I do, the more I understand how connected they are. Therefore, I would say that, definitely, we have to work on finding a link between the two. (IN1)

Dentro de la Universidad hay una tendencia a creer que la investigación está separada de la docencia y cuanto más hago investigación más entiendo el hecho de que en realidad ambos están realmente conectadas. Por ello, yo diría que definitivamente, tenemos que trabajar para encontrar esa conexión. (IN1)

After our fifth meeting, ideas for research projects including students as participants started to emerge, showing a change in the way of thinking, motivation, and interest in the members of the community. The following comment was expressed by Tamara during a meeting:

The projects we have should include our students and a critical perspective. At the end, that is what we want to learn in this group; at least that is what motivated me to join the community at first. (CM6)

Los proyectos que propongamos tienen que incluir a nuestros estudiantes y tener una perspectiva crítica. Al final eso es lo que queremos aprender en este grupo. Al menos es lo que me motivó a mí a unirme a la comunidad al inicio. (CM6)

Others shared that by reflecting on their daily teaching practices could be useful to learn and practice how to research. Claudio mentioned in his second interview:

Having the possibility to think about what we do in the classroom can lead us to draw valid conclusions that can be replicated. It seems to me that it would be a way of learning to do research. We can benefit from our own experiences and, at the same time, benefit our students. (IN2)

El tener la posibilidad de reflexionar sobre lo que hacemos en el aula nos puede llevar a sacar conclusiones válidas que se pueden replicar. Me parece que sería una forma de aprender a investigar. Nos podríamos beneficiar de nuestras experiencias y beneficiar a nuestros estudiantes. (IN2)

158

The dilemma about researching our own teaching practice or becoming a full-time researcher working on studies out of our teaching context was present during our first meetings and interviews. Later, understandings about reflecting upon and researching our own practices shifted by sharing experiences and knowledge, and interacting in the community.

There are still some remains of distrust related to researching our students, because as expressed by one member, such research may affect the formality and validity of the findings. A similar situation was reported in the study conducted by Harland and Staniforth (2000) in which some participants preferred different research approaches than CAR. Nevertheless, these authors, as well as Tormey et al. (2008), concluded that CAR is a valid research approach and that including a critical dimension to research has the potential to link teaching and research changing the role of teachers to become teacher-researchers.

8.2.2 The Heterogeneous Realities of Our Students

Among the less favorable opinions about researching our own practice and students, there were those regarding the personal realities of the student body that sometimes hinder the relationship between professors and students. For some members of the community, including students in their research mainly depends on the relationship and communication practices between them.

Teresa, for example, mentioned it has been difficult for her to approach students and have a conversation about something different than the subject she teaches:

Students are extremely shy here in this University, and it is so hard to have a conversation with them. I don’t know why. I mean in the other university I work, students are so different. They participate and talk to you about anything. I know this is a public university, and the other is private, but I don’t think that can be the only reason. (IN2)

Los estudiantes son extremadamente tímidos en esta Universidad y es difícil conversar con ellos. No sé por qué. En la otra universidad donde trabajo, los estudiantes son tan diferentes. Ellos participan y hablan de todo. Sé que esta es una universidad pública y la otra es privada pero no creo que esa sea la única razón. (IN2)

Cecilia in her second interview shared her experience motivating students to apply for scholarships so they can continue taking language classes despite financial problems. Only the

159 first three levels of a language are free for students. If they want to continue, they have to pay. Cecilia mentioned:

I am always telling my students to apply for scholarships so they can continue learning the language. Most of them do not really care. They want to finish the three levels that they need as a requirement to graduate. We should find out why there is so much lack of motivation in our students. It can be economic factors, lack of time because they need to work, so many things. (IN2)

Yo estoy siempre diciéndoles a mis alumnos apliquen a becas para continuar aprendiendo el idioma. A la mayoría no le interesa. Ellos quieren terminar los tres niveles que necesitan como requisito para graduarse. Deberíamos averiguar por qué hay tanta falta de motivación en nuestros estudiantes. Pueden ser factores económicos, falta de tiempo porque necesitan trabajar, tantas cosas. (IN2)

Participant professors mentioned the multitude of realities they have found when working with large groups of students. For instance, Telmo expressed:

Some students come from privileged families, and others from families struggling to make a living. Each one of these realities can be affecting how students respond to the learning process, and even more when coming to the Institute to learn a foreign language as a mandatory requirement they must fulfill. They do not choose to study a language because they like it, but because they need it to graduate. (E2)

Algunos estudiantes vienen de familias privilegiadas y otros de familias con muchos problemas para mantenerse. Cada una de esas realidades puede estar afectando como los estudiantes responden al proceso de aprendizaje y más aún cuando venir al Instituto para aprender un idioma extranjero es un requisito obligatorio que tienen que cumplir. Ellos no escogen estudiar el idioma porque les gusta sino porque necesitan graduarse. (E2)

Regarding the economic issues of some students, Telmo also shared an event that forced the Institute to make a decision about the material used in the classrooms. He stated:

I have not analyzed the personal situation of each student yet, but something that has made me think a lot is the socioeconomic condition of each one of them. At the beginning of every semester we had problems because several students could not afford the required textbook, and they were not allowed to make copies either. As a result, after many years of struggling with this situation, the Federation of Students (FEUE) made a petition to the University’s Rector. They requested not to be forced to buy a textbook and to work with material compiled by the

160

language professors. That is what we do know, we create our own material and provide them with copies which for some students are still expensive. This situation has made me wonder if we are considering these circumstances when we are planning our courses. Now I try to pay for the copies, but I cannot always do it. (IN2)

No he hecho un análisis o diagnóstico personalizado de la situación de cada estudiante aún, pero algo que me ha hecho pensar mucho es la condición socio económica de cada uno. Al inicio de cada ciclo teníamos problemas porque varios alumnos no podían pagar el libro que se les pedía y tampoco se les dejaba sacar copias. Entonces después de muchos años de este problema, la Federación de Estudiantes, FEUE, hizo una petición al Rector. Ellos solicitaron que no se les obligue a comprar un libro y que se trabaje con material recopilado por los docentes. Eso es lo que hacemos ahora, creamos nuestro material y les damos copias a los estudiantes, pero para algunos todavía es costoso. Esta situación me ha hecho pensar si realmente estamos tomando en cuenta estas circunstancias para nuestras planificaciones. Ahora trato de trabajar con copias que yo les facilito, aunque tampoco puedo hacerlo siempre. (IN2)

As a result of reading articles shared in the sessions of the community, Tatiana expressed her opinion about how students’ personal circumstances might affect their learning:

As we have read and learned, every factor of a person's life may affect what he/she does in any area. Thus, I think that perhaps the mistakes or problems that students have in their academic performance are a result of the realities they live in and out of the University. (E2)

Según hemos leído y aprendido, cada factor de la vida de una persona puede afectar lo que hace en cualquier ámbito. Por eso pienso que de pronto los errores o problemas que tienen los estudiantes en su desempeño académico pueden responder a las realidades que ellos viven dentro y fuera de la Universidad. (E2)

All the participants demonstrated either in the interviews or meetings that they were concerned about the students as people with different individual factors that facilitate or hinder their learning. For instance, Camila commented:

I have always seen my students as people and not only as clients or consumers of what I can teach them. (I2)

Siempre he visto a mis estudiantes como personas y no solo como clientes o consumidores de lo que yo les pueda enseñar. (I2)

161

After our eighth meeting, a different discourse about considering the particular aspects of our students’ lives started to emerge. In this respect, Claudio suggested:

From our role as teachers we can become real agents of change. The community has helped me analyze that it is not enough to be labeled as a teacher to generate change in my students. I must do something by taking into account and highlighting the reality of each one of my students. (I2)

Desde nuestro rol de docentes podemos convertirnos en verdaderos agentes de cambio. La comunidad me ha ayudado a analizar que no basta con ser llamada docente para generar un cambio en mis alumnos. Debo hacer algo dándole protagonismo a la realidad de cada uno de mis estudiantes. (IN2)

Differences among the students were also expressed in terms of their mixed proficiency levels, which is a result of the English classes they had in their former high schools. As mentioned by Tomás, usually the students who graduated from public high schools do not have the same learning opportunities than the ones that come from private institutions, and therefore do not have previous knowledge of the language. This difference demonstrates, once more, the way students’ lived experiences produced privilege and oppression. Tomás emphasized:

The possible cause of the disappointing results we have in our Institute regarding the language level is because students do not have enough background knowledge. For us, it is very difficult to correct everything in the university, but we cannot blame our students either because some of them, specifically the ones that come from public high schools, did not have enough English classes and some did not have English classes at all. (CM10)

La posible causa de los resultados desalentadores que tenemos en los niveles del idioma en nuestro Instituto es porque los estudiantes no tienen suficiente conocimiento previo. Para nosotros es muy difícil corregir todo en la universidad, pero tampoco podemos culpar a nuestros estudiantes porque algunos de ellos, específicamente los que vienen de colegios fiscales, no tuvieron suficientes clases de inglés y algunos ni tuvieron clases.

The realities of our students are varied and full of nuances, which can affect their learning. Members of the community are aware of this heterogeneity and try to see the students from a closer and more human perspective. According to some colleagues, the students’ realities and identities may also affect the development of a research study due to their willingness to collaborate or establish a relationship with the teacher. Nevertheless, we must rise to the

162 challenge and think about the benefits we could bring to our students by reflecting on their and our own “contextual and relational reality” as stated by Davis (2008).

Indeed, once the traditional power dynamics between professor (researcher) and students (subject of research) start to change and students are included in the process as participants who work in collaboration with the researcher, an authentic sense of mutual understanding will emerge that will allow to address the social issues in which both live and interact (Kemmis, McTaggart, & Nixon, 2014).

Some of the participants of the community did not feel comfortable addressing the social issues that might exist in the classroom. In the name of respecting privacy, we often choose to ignore the problems that affect those who are close to us. I consider it necessary to start acknowledging and valuing our students’ realities so that we can work to remove barriers and support students on their journey as university student and on their way to becoming socially conscious citizens.

8.3 Ideas for Projects

Research until the establishment of our Community of Practice was understood by the professors of the Language Institute as a hierarchical activity with rigid structures that prevented professors who did not have the ‘researcher’ category to write proposals and conduct studies. However, members of our CoP have begun to challenge this belief and have devised projects that include social issues while analyzing their own experiences as professors, and those of their students in social reality.

8.3.1 Talking about Social Justice and Intersectionality

Certain issues such as the difficulties recent high-school graduates go through to access university, due to Government regulations, raised questions that Telmo was interested in addressing. However, the timing to pursue such a research agenda was unfavorable. He mentioned:

I want to work on issues related to the access to university and equity in access opportunities, but I think this is not the right time because we are too close to the

163

elections. You know, we have to be careful with that because what I say or how I say it might be misinterpreted. I don’t want students to think I have some kind of political interest. Perhaps in a few months I might be able to plan something. (IN3)

Quiero trabajar sobre temas de acceso a la universidad y equidad en las oportunidades de acceso, pero creo que no es el momento porque estamos muy cercanos a las elecciones. Hay que ser cuidadosos con lo que se dice o como se dice para no ser malinterpretados. No quiero que los estudiantes piensen que tengo algún interés político. Talvés despues de unos meses pueda proponer algo. (IN3)

The new research orientation that guides the learning process and future work of our CoP has allowed a change of attitude in the participant professors towards including social justice in their research agenda. In this regard, Camila suggested:

I think that considering the social factors that affect our students’ lives not only for our research purposes but also for our daily teaching could help us achieve great changes. (IN2)

Creo que considerar los factores sociales que afectan las vidas de nuestros estudiantes podría ayudarnos a conseguir grandes cambios no solo para nuestros propósitos de investigación sino también para nuestra diaria labor docente. (IN2)

Tatiana asserted that there might be several aspects affecting our students’ identities. She firmly believes that it is necessary to know students deeply to understand them and their learning process:

I understand that it is necessary, not to say that it should be mandatory, to know the learning and personal experiences of our students in order to understand them. Our teaching and research practice should consider the aspects of their identity that may be affecting or supporting them and their learning process. (IN2)

Entiendo que es necesario, por no decir que debería ser obligatorio, conocer las experiencias personales y de aprendizaje de nuestros estudiantes para poder entenderlos. Nuestras prácticas docentes y de investigación deben incluir aspectos de su identidad que les puedan estar afectando o apoyando a ellos y a su proceso de aprendizaje. (IN2)

Similarly, Tito suggested that students' experiences might provide opportunities to address social issues through CAR:

164

We can begin by finding out about our students’ experiences when learning the language in elementary or high school; that is, taking into account their own trajectory as students and how it may affect their learning now. It can be an opportunity to do research, emphasizing on the social justice aspect. (CM11).

Podemos empezar averiguando acerca de las experiencias de nuestros estudiantes cuando estaban aprendiendo el idioma en la escuela o colegio, es decir tomando en cuenta su propia trayectoria como estudiantes y como eso puede afectar su aprendizaje ahora. Puede ser una oportunidad para investigar enfatizando en el aspecto de justicia social. (CM11)

New expectations about interacting with students emerged. Camila commented on her decision to work with material related to gender equality issues as a result of conversations she had had with female students about the two femicides that occurred in a tourist site of Ecuador in 2016. She reported her experience:

I have been working hard on topics of gender equality in addition to the regular topics we have to cover in class. I have used articles and texts related to this topic for the reading activities in order to raise awareness in students. I would really like to write a proposal and conduct a study in this same sense. (E2)

He estado trabajando mucho en temas de la igualdad de género a más de los temas los temas que hay que cubrir en la clase. He usado artículos y textos relacionados a este tema en las actividades de lectura y para ir creando conciencia en los estudiantes. Me gustaría mucho proponer y ejecutar un proyecto en este mismo sentido. (E2)

Among these new opportunities for research, Tania mentioned considering aspects of multiculturalism, which has been an important and sensitive element in our Ecuadorian society for hundreds of years:

I have been talking with Tito and looking for information to write an action research proposal that will consider and include social justice issues. We are interested in many aspects of multiculturalism because in our classrooms we have students from different indigenous nationalities of our country and now several immigrants, who are many times refugees, from Peru, Colombia, and Venezuela. (FG2)

He estado conversando con Tito y buscando información para plantear un proyecto de investigación-acción que considere e incluya temas de justicia social. Nos interesan muchos aspectos de multiculturalidad ya que en nuestras aulas recibimos estudiantes de diferentes nacionalidades indígenas de nuestro país y

165

ahora varios inmigrantes, quienes son muchas veces refugiados, de Perú, Colombia y Venezuela. (FG2)

In her second interview, Cecilia mentioned that this critical stance toward research had opened new fields of action for her, which she has included in her master’s thesis proposal. She explained:

In the proposal for my master’s thesis, I decided to work with my own students. I also included an interview to find out about the difficulties they have when learning the foreign language. I want to understand personal and external factors that could be the source of the problems. (IN2)

En el diseño para mi tesis de maestría decidí trabajar con mis estudiantes. También incluí una entrevista para averiguar sobre las dificultades que tienen los alumnos al aprender el idioma. Quiero entender los factores personales y externos que podrían ser el origen de los problemas. (IN2)

In the same interview, Cecilia also mentioned thinking about herself and her identity as a contract, foreigner professor in the University:

When we have talked about the topic of intersectionality, I always think about the factors that identify who I am today and how they are affecting what I can or cannot do. For example, I am a contract professor who is a foreigner and the only one who teaches my native language to all levels. Also, I am part of a minority group of five professors who teach languages other than English, who by the way are not always included because English professors are the important ones. Before joining the community, I had no idea what I could do with my language and whether or not it was worthwhile in terms of research. Being in the community has motivated me to think and plan how to look at the issues within my language classroom from a different perspective. (IN2)

Cuando conversamos del tema de interseccionalidad, siempre pienso en los factores que identifican quien soy ahora y como esos aspectos están afectando lo que puedo y no puedo hacer. Por ejemplo, soy una profesora contratada que es extranjera y la única que enseña su idioma nativo a todos los niveles. También soy parte de un grupo minoritario de cinco docentes de otros idiomas, quienes por cierto no somos siempre incluidos porque los profesores de inglés son los importantes. Antes de entrar a la comunidad no tenía idea que podía hacer con mi idioma y si valía o no la pena en cuanto a investigación. Estar en la comunidad me ha motivado a pensar y planificar como explorar temas de mi clase desde otra perspectiva. (IN2)

166

In our twelfth meeting, Tatiana acknowledged that what she has learned about intersectionality and social justice within the community has shaped her views of the action research approach. She stated:

At the moment, I am working on the thesis proposal for my doctoral degree. I am interested in looking at students’ attitudes and perceptions about evaluation practices. I think I could use a critical action research approach since the study will focus on students’ feelings and opinions before and after being evaluated. I am sure I will find interesting topics for my current study and future ones. (CM12)

Por el momento estoy trabajando en mi proyecto de tesis doctoral. Estoy interesada en las actitudes y percepciones de los estudiantes sobre la evaluación. Creo que podría usar investigación-acción crítica ya que el estudio se enfocaría en los sentimientos y opiniones de los estudiantes antes y después de ser evaluados. Estoy segura que voy a averiguar temas interesantes para mi estudio actual y para futuros estudios también. (CM12)

Our engagement led the members of the community to include for the first time in their teaching agenda and research knowledge the notion of social justice. Furthermore, they began to consider opportunities to create new learning experiences for them and their students. Several ideas about projects emerged which included reflecting not only on their practice but also on their identities and roles within the university context.

Through the conversations we had in the meetings, we were able to see and understand the social and educational practices of our University and at least raise our awareness about the “social transformation” that is needed (Davis, 2008, p. 141). Now we see social justice as an opportunity to challenge current social issues and make changes in what our participants (students) think and do, and in how they relate to others in the social context in which they interact (Kemmis et al., 2014).

8.3.2 Is the Community Ready for Social Justice and Intersectionality?

Participants of the CoP expressed a common concern about dealing with students’ personal and sensitive matters without making mistakes such as unintentionally creating intolerance or any form of discrimination. They were still afraid to raise their voices to favor those who have been already silenced without even trying. In this regard, Teresa suggested:

167

I believe that we should write proposals and include what we are learning about social issues and intersectionality, but I also think we should ask for advice on how a project might include these aspects. In that way, we can make sure we will not hurt anybody, and we will contribute both to the students’ well-being and our growth as teachers and researchers. (FG2)

Creo que debemos plantear proyectos que incluyan lo que estamos aprendiendo sobre problemas sociales e interseccionalidad, pero también pienso que debemos buscar asesoría sobre como un proyecto podría incluir estos aspectos. De esta manera, nos podemos asegurar que no vamos a lastimar a nadie y de que vamos a contribuir con el bienestar de los estudiantes y con nuestro crecimiento como docentes y como investigadores. (FG2)

Similar suggestions were those given by Carla and Claudio during a meeting:

The most difficult part has been thinking about a research proposal that includes intersectionality or social justice issues. We still need to learn more about it because it is one of the main characteristics and objectives of the group. (CM12)

La parte más difícil ha sido pensar en los proyectos de investigación que incluyan aspectos de interseccionalidad y justicia social. Todavía necesitamos aprender más sobre todo porque esa es una de las características y objetivos principales del grupo. (CM12)

Carlos and I have been thinking about a research project that uses online reading activities (ReadTheory) to improve the reading skill of our students, but we are not sure how to include the critical aspect. We know that we can include it as a methodology, a vision, or for data collection but we still have to learn more about it in order to make decisions. (CM12)

Carlos y yo hemos estado pensando sobre un proyecto de investigación que use actividades de lectura online (ReadTheory) para mejorar la destreza lectora de nuestros estudiantes, pero no estamos seguros de como incluir el aspecto crítico. Sabemos que podemos hacerlo como metodología o como visión, o para la recolección de datos, pero todavía tenemos que aprender más para poder tomar decisiones. (CM12)

Some colleagues in the community considered addressing extremely sensitive issues a problem. In this regard, Teresa and Tania said:

I still find it difficult to talk about issues such as racism, discrimination, or violence with my students when I do not know if any of them is going through a difficult experience. (IN2)

168

Todavía se me complica hablar de problemas como el racismo, la discriminación, o la violencia con mis estudiantes cuando no sé si alguno de mis ellos está atravesando dificultades. (IN2)

What has been difficult for me is to find out about a personal situation of my students because it would be like invading their private lives. I am not sure how valid it is to talk to the whole class about a specific problem. What if I hurt somebody’s feelings? (CM9)

Lo que se me ha hecho difícil es averiguar sobre alguna situación personal de mis estudiantes porque sería como invadir su vida privada y no sé qué tan válido sea hablarle a la clase entera sobre un problema específico. ¿Y si ofendo a alguien? (CM9)

When considering the many social issues that our students live, many aspects that deserve attention emerged. Taking a more critical stance to look at these issues has led the group to understand the value of CAR as a ‘communicative space’ (Habermas, 1996) where students’ voices, perceptions, attitudes, and identities are more important than their test results. Through CAR both the researcher and the participants become empowered and, as suggested by Davis (2008), reflect on and challenge the inequalities of a social system.

Several members of the community found it difficult to include social justice in their research proposals because of their more traditional view of research itself. In addition, they emphasized the need for more learning and adequate training to be able to propose and conduct studies that include or look at social issues. For other members, touching on delicate aspects of a student’s life created major concerns. Nevertheless, it is necessary to remember that conducting CAR studies requires vulnerability from the researcher and the participants because both expose their own ways of “thinking, behaving, and being to scrutiny and question” (Davis, 2008).

8.3.3 Students’ Realities and Teaching Practices

Interactions and reflections of the members of the CoP about the lives of our students and the struggles some might be experiencing have motivated them to make decisions and consider changes in favor of students.

Tito, in one of the meetings, shared his experience using technology in the classroom and to assign homework. He also acknowledged that now he is thinking about this practice because he

169 had never realized that some students might not have access to the technology he required. He stated:

I use WhatsApp to practice the language with the students. I ask them to record their voices and send the audio to a classmate who will provide feedback on the pronunciation. This assignment helps students work collaboratively and improve their speaking skills. However, I have never thought that some of them may have had difficulties accessing the technology required. Now, I have to think twice when planning these type of activities and assignments. (CM8).

Yo uso WhatsApp para practicar el idioma con los estudiantes. Les pido que se graben y envíen el audio a algún compañero quien tiene que darle su opinión sobre la pronunciación. Este deber hace que trabajen colaborativamente y mejoren sus destrezas del habla. Sin embargo, nunca he pensado en que algunos de ellos pueden tener problemas para acceder al tipo de tecnología que necesitan. Ahora tengo que pensar dos veces cuando planifique este tipo de actividades y deberes. (CM8)

Tania, who has also included the use of technology for her language classes, admitted that she has never even considered the idea of her students not having a computer or internet service at home. She argued that even in cases where students do not have a computer at home, there are many places around the University where they can use a computer with internet service by paying a fee. However, after a couple of meetings, she acknowledged that if some students cannot pay for copies, they might not have the money to afford to pay for renting a computer either. She mentioned:

I always use technology to work in groups. We use Google docs and Moodle for group activities and assignments. I have not considered this could be an issue for my students because if they don’t own a computer, which for me would be extremely rare nowadays, they can go to the internet cafés around here and rent one. (CM5)

Siempre uso la tecnología para trabajar en grupos. Usamos Google docs y Moodle para actividades y deberes en grupo. Nunca he pensado que esto pueda ser un problema para mis estudiantes porque si no tienen una computadora, lo cual sería muy extraño en estas épocas, pueden irse a los cafés internet que hay por aquí y usar una. (CM5)

What can I say! After you have shared your experiences about your students and the struggles they go through to pay for copies, I have realized some of my students might not have enough money to pay for using a computer with internet

170

access. I have to start asking my class to tell me if they have any problems. Maybe I can arrange something for them. (CM8)

¡Que puedo decir! Después de lo que han compartido sobre sus experiencias con sus estudiantes y como ellos tienen problemas para pagar por copias, me he dado cuenta de que puede que algunos de mis estudiantes no tengan suficiente dinero para usar una computadora con internet. Tengo que empezar a pedirle a mi clase que me cuenten si tienen algún problema. De pronto puedo ayudarles. (CM8)

There is a change of attitude about how to see, understand, and perceive the students. This change does not only open the opportunities for potential research studies, but most importantly for considering, recognizing, accepting, and highlighting the individual differences of our students when planning an activity or an entire course. As mentioned by Baldwin (2005) research findings could be taking into consideration when designing courses and learning activities. They can guide the professor in making informed decisions about teaching (as cited in Tight, 2016).

Although the members of the community conducted few projects while I was collecting data for this study, it is notable that the community became a space for critical reflection. We experienced a shift in the perceptions we had about our teaching practices as university professors (Cochran-Smith and Lytle, 2007), and were able to understand the potential benefits that merging teaching and critical research could bring to our educational context.

8.4 Individual Projects

There is a big difference between the ideas that members of the community had for research projects and the ones that materialized. In fact, only two members decided to conduct studies while I was collecting the data.

In this section, I decided to focus on the two members of the community who decided to translate what we were learning into action, rather than on the members who were a little more doubtful of the process because I wanted to show that achieving change, although small, was possible. Although only two members of our CoP completed research projects, their progress reflects the multiple levels of transformation among the community members in terms of thinking more critically and being open to a more critical research paradigm involving advocating for social

171 justice. Telmo and Camila had a greater level of transformation and dared to conduct CAR projects to acknowledge social issues in their classroom which allowed them to develop personally and professionally.

8.4.1 Telmo’s Project

Telmo was the member of the community who first planned and conducted a study with his students. Learning and sharing experiences with other members of the group guided him in formulating and implementing a project that included social justice as a way of granting students equal opportunities to learn English:

I started a collaborative project in which students with a more solid background knowledge of the language work with the ones with little or no previous knowledge. (IN3)

Inicié un proyecto colaborativo en que los estudiantes con un conocimiento previo más sólido del idioma trabajan con los que tienen muy poco o ningún conocimiento previo. (IN3)

In order to pair students, Telmo asked them to complete a questionnaire that included questions about their academic background. Among the information he required, he asked for the name of the high school students graduated from, if it was private or public, rural or urban, and the number of English class hours they had per week. These forms provided him with valuable information that was analyzed in conjunction with a proficiency test.

Telmo asserted that this method to group students made sense for him because he was bearing in mind and acknowledging their individual differences to benefit the entire group. He brought together students who had had the opportunity to receive private education and even, possibly, English tutoring, with those who had attended public schools in which English teaching and learning was not a priority. Correspondingly, he decided to use topics related to the right to access education during his class. In his study, social justice was included as one of the objectives and also the content of the class. In this respect, he commented:

What I did was to include in my class topics about education equity and equality and the access to primary, secondary, and higher education around the world. All of the reading activities were based on related articles from magazines,

172

newspapers, and the internet. The main objective was for students to understand that for many of them accessing higher education studies is a result of the privileges they have, but for others it is the result of sacrifice. I wanted them to realize and value the real reason behind working in pairs. (IN3)

Lo que hice fue incluir en mi clase temas sobre equidad e igualdad en la educación y el acceso a la educación primaria, secundaria y superior en el mundo. Todas las actividades de lectura se basaron en estos artículos de revistas, periódicos o el internet. El objetivo principal era que los estudiantes entiendan que para muchos de ellos el acceso a los estudios universitarios es el resultado de los muchos privilegios que tienen y que para otros es el resultado del sacrificio. Quería que de alguna forma entiendan y valoren la verdadera razón por la que están trabajando en parejas. (IN3)

Although Telmo’s study was not finished and he could not talk about results, he explained that the classroom environment and his teaching had had a major change. He recognized:

I feel my class has had a complete turnaround with respect to the environment. I have never had a class like this before. All of students know each other and get along. Regarding the reading comprehension skills, the majority of my students has improved. (IN3)

Siento que mi clase ha cambiado 180 grados en cuanto al ambiente. Nunca he tenido un curso como este. Todos los estudiantes se conocen y se llevan bien. En cuestión de su destreza de comprensión lectora, la mayoría ha mejorado. (IN3)

Telmo’s learning experience in the Community of Practice was the trigger for carrying out this project. He acknowledged that previously he was solely concerned with helping students improve their English skills, but now he feels encouraged to do something more for them. As he suggested:

I have learned a lot about including reflections about social justice in our teaching practices. I cannot say that I have been indifferent to these aspects before joining the group, but I have never thought it was necessary to include them in my research or teaching. Now, I know that I can use these topics to provoke dialogue among my students and raise awareness about social issues within our own context. (CM18).

He aprendido mucho sobre incluir dentro de nuestras labores docentes reflexiones sobre la justicia social. No puedo decir que he sido indiferente a estos aspectos antes de entrar en el grupo, pero nunca he pensado incluirlos dentro de mi investigación o mis clases. Ahora sé que puedo abordar estos temas para

173

provocar diálogos entre mis estudiantes y crean conciencia sobre los problemas sociales de nuestro entorno (CM18).

Telmo's experience allows me to assume that including social justice as a topic for English class and as a stance for research is of great value for professors and students. Telmo was able to materialize the ideas he imagined within our CoP to improve his teaching and help his students, making their realities meaningful to the process. His experience was shared in the last few sessions of our community and during his third interview where he expressed a great detail and enthusiasm about the success of his project.

8.4.2 Camila’s project

Professors who decide to conduct CAR are interested in achieving emancipatory goals, and committed to act as agents of change. More precisely, they aim to conduct research that is critical and socially responsible is one of the objectives of our CoP.

With this vision in mind, Camila was interested in looking at her students’ perceptions and opinions about gender equality. Her interest accentuated even more when incidents related to this issue occurred within the University and in another city of Ecuador. She stated:

I believe we have to acknowledge the moment we are living in our country. Several issues have become controversial and the main topic of discussion. For me, for example, gender equality is very important and should be included in our research interests and teaching practices. (CM3)

Creo que debemos reconocer el momento que estamos viviendo en nuestro país. Varios temas se han vuelto controversiales y el tema principal de discusión. Por ejemplo, para mí, la igualdad de género es muy importante y debería incluirse en nuestros temas de investigación y nuestras prácticas docentes. (CM3)

At a later meeting, Camila shared that she started to include reading material about gender in her English class. Her decision was made based on a problem in the Law school that emerged from the approval of an undergraduate thesis with misogynistic content. She said:

I am focusing on issues around gender. I am teaching English using content related to this topic. As you may know, the Law school is going through a big problem because a supervisor and thesis committee approved a thesis that says

174

terrible things against women, and since this semester I have many Law students in my class, I decided to take the opportunity to address gender equality. (CM6)

Me estoy enfocando en la cuestión de género. Estoy enseñando inglés usando contenido relacionado a este tema. Como usted debe saber, la escuela de Derecho está con un gran problema porque el director y el tribunal aprobaron una tesis que dice cosas terribles en contra de las mujeres, y como en mi clase tengo varios estudiantes de Derecho, decidí aprovechar la oportunidad para abordar el tema de igualdad de género. (CM6)

During her last interview, Camila stated she was glad she started her research on raising awareness about gender equality in her language classroom because so far, she had perceived positive results:

As you know, I shared with the group the positive experience I had working with my students on gender equality issues. Taking as a starting point what happened with the Law thesis and the femicide in Montañita, I was able to provoke different reactions in my students. At first, I was frustrated. I couldn’t believe students did not want to hear about the topic; not even the girls. They said they were tired of the same thing all the time, and that they have had enough of feminists. I did not care and continued with my plan. Little by little, the texts we read about things both men and women go through started to make sense to the students. Both, male and female students became interested in the subject and even started to bring more resources to share in class. They have brought articles, videos, Facebook posts, and movies. I have not finished the research process yet, and thus I do not know if my work will produce a change in their way of thinking, but for now, I know there is interest in the topic and that I have raised awareness in my students. (IN3)

Como usted sabe, compartí mi experiencia positiva de trabajar con mis estudiantes sobre temas de igualdad de género. Tomando como punto de partida lo que pasó con la tesis de Derecho y el reciente femicidio en Montañita, pude provocar diferentes reacciones en mis estudiantes. Al inicio fue frustrante. No podía creer como los estudiantes no querían ni saber del tema, ni siquiera las chicas. Decían que estaban ya cansados de oír lo mismo todo el tiempo y que ya tuvieron suficiente de las feministas. No me importó y continué con mi plan. Poco a poco los textos que leímos sobre las cosas que pasan tanto a hombres y mujeres fueron tomando sentido para los estudiantes. Ambos, hombres y mujeres se fueron interesando del tema al punto de traer material para compartir en clase. Han traído artículos, videos, publicaciones de Facebook y películas. No he terminado el proceso aún y por lo tanto no sé si mi trabajo producirá algún cambio en su forma de pensar, pero por ahora sé que hay interés en el tema y que he creado conciencia en mis estudiantes. (IN3)

175

Camila’s findings are preliminary; however, she acknowledged she had noticed a change in students’ attitudes toward gender issues. In terms of language learning, she mentioned students were interested in interacting using the foreign language, and for the first time they had been searching for material in English to share in class.

Although only two projects emerged during the first year of our CoP, I believe they are a strong foundation for what we want to achieve. The fact that Camila, a contract professor whose responsibilities do not include research, decided to work with her students on gender issues, demonstrated that it is possible to challenge the traditional practices of the university.

8.5 Limitations for Conducting More Studies

We established a Community of Practice that focuses on critical action research. Sharing our experiences and learning about different approaches to research has led us to pose questions about social justice in our language classrooms. Although the majority of members engaged in the conversation and showed a developing interest in advocating for social justice, only two of them began projects. Limitations that stalled the development of projects that were not found in the literature emerged. These include such issues as resistance to change, the need for more training and learning, a fear of failing, and lack of encouragement from the authorities.

Teresa, for example, mentioned that she had resisted the idea to include social justice in her teaching or research plans:

I have struggled with the idea of including social justice. It has raised many doubts. It is still difficult for me to focus on social justice and not on testing and measuring if a method works. I cannot move away from the academic part. (CM17)

He tenido problemas con la idea y me ha causado muchas dudas. Es difícil para mí enfocarme en la justicia social y no en probar o medir si un método funciona. No me puedo alejar de la parte académica. (CM17)

A similar comment was expressed by Tania:

I am learning that we can give a voice to our students and the social problems that surround them, but I am also very concerned about getting involved with aspects that might be very sensitive for my students. (FG2)

176

Estoy aprendiendo que podemos darles voz a nuestros estudiantes y a los problemas sociales que les rodean, pero también me preocupa involucrarme en aspectos que pueden ser muy delicados para mis estudiantes. (FG2).

Tatiana also found it hard to fit the different aspects of social justice into her research interests:

I still feel that I must learn more about integrating aspects of social justice into my research. (IN3)

Aún siento que debo aprender más de cómo integrar aspectos de la justicia social en mi investigación. (IN3)

Cecilia expressed her fear of failing or not being successful; nevertheless, she mentioned her desire to focus on social justice in the future:

I am still learning about social justice and I do not want to take the risk and make mistakes. Next semester I will work on a project that will include a critical approach and address a social issue. I really hope to keep learning in our community. (IN3)

Aún estoy aprendiendo sobre justicia social y no quiero arriesgarme y equivocarme. Definitivamente el siguiente ciclo voy a trabajar en un proyecto que incluya la parte crítica y abordaré un problema social. Espero seguir aprendiendo en nuestra comunidad. (IN3)

Some colleagues still feel lack of motivation, especially for the research preferences of the University. Cristian mentioned that in the University the social sciences have less opportunities that the hard sciences and technology. He explained:

It is known that the social sciences have always been put in second place in the University. I do not know if it is worth the effort planning a research project given that research in engineering, medicine, and technology has more attention from the authorities. (CM16).

Se sabe que las ciencias sociales en la Universidad siempre han estado en segundo lugar. No sé si valga la pena preparar algo dada la atención que las autoridades dan a la investigación de ingeniería, medicina y tecnología. (CM16)

Social justice has created an imprint in the dialogues of our community that prompted imagining many projects. In practice, however, many members of the group have not adopted this critical dimension in their research plans or activities. There are several factors contributing to this which include the resistance to addressing sensitive issues in research, a fear of overlooking

177 language learning issues by shifting attention to social issues in our practice of CAR, as well as the sense that it is necessary to learn more about CAR before moving forward with research plans.

Chapter 9 Internal and External Factors of the CoP

“To become a full member of a community of practice requires access to a wide range of ongoing activity, old timers, and other members of the community: and to information, resources, and opportunities for participation.” – Lave & Wenger, 1991, p. 101

9.1 Introduction

The organization and survival of a Community of Practice as well as the planning and executing of projects framed within its focus depend not only on characteristics and elements that are endogenous to a community of practice, but also of exogenous factors such as institutional regulations and demands. The first external factor is the institution in which the members of the community operate and have direct responsibility to, the Language Institute. This institution, in turn, has two main activities which are teaching and research. The research portion has to be coordinated by a higher entity, the Research Directorate (DIUC). These two institutions belong to a university that is the biggest system in which our community of practice is inserted: the Universidad de Cuenca. Certainly, endogenous and exogenous factors have a close relationship because one feeds the other; however, while it is possible for a community of practice to modify and even develop from endogenous motivations, the exogenous factors suppose a contextual framework that is difficult, if not in some cases impossible, to modify. It is within these conditions in which the community has to function.

This chapter presents the analysis of the internal and external factors that have enabled or constrained the participation and commitment of the members of the Community of Practice established in the Language Institute. The comments of the participants included in this chapter are a result of the analysis of the data collected. As it was mentioned in Chapters 7 and 8 the excerpts of the participants’ interactions in the meetings, interviews, and focus groups are indicated using the color code presented in Table 20. 178

179 9.2 Time, the Enemy

All members of the community of practice agreed that the lack of time to attend the meetings and to think about research projects had been a disadvantage for the development of the group. While it is true that none of the members has withdrawn from the community, time has prevented many from participating in all the sessions. In this respect, two aspects emerged from the same time- based phenomenon: the disorganization promoted from the institutional sphere, as well as the excess of responsibilities.

During our first meeting and as a result of not having all the professors who registered for our CoP, Tito pointed out that he had been struggling with time every day. He commented:

We have so many things to do. Sometimes I feel I need to multiply myself to be able to do all my work. We do not have time and meeting with the group requires time and commitment. Some people simply do not want to find the time. (IN1)

Tenemos tantas cosas que hacer. A veces me dan ganas de multiplicarme para poder hacer todo mi trabajo. No tenemos tiempo y para reunirnos con el grupo se necesita tiempo y compromiso. Muchas personas simplemente no quieren encontrar el tiempo. (IN1).

Similar commentaries, as the one expressed by Constanza, were present during the meetings:

The lack of time has been a limitation to commit to the group and have more projects. Professors are now required to do so many things that I believe are useless like writing reports and filling forms. The University does not provide the appropriate conditions to do more important things like being in this community. (CM10)

Una desventaja ha sido la falta de tiempo para dedicarnos más al grupo y a sacar proyectos. Ahora se nos exige tanto a los docentes en cuestiones sin importancia como llenar informes y formularios y no se nos da las facilidades para hacer cosas más importantes como esta. (CM10)

It seems that time issues are a constant for all members of the community and for all professors of the University in general. In the conversation we had in the first focus group, Tania highlighted:

180

The biggest problem for me, our group, and, I think, for all professors who want to do research is the lack of time. We have to teach for many hours and on top of that we have administration tasks. (FG1)

El problema más grande para mí, nuestro grupo, y creo para todos los profesores que quieren investigar es la falta de tiempo. Damos tantas horas de clases y encima tenemos actividades administrativas. (FG1)

It is necessary to acknowledge that despite time being our worst enemy, we were able to meet on a regular basis. Every member attended at least three meetings. In that respect Teresa mentioned:

Giving the time we do not have to meet with the group demonstrates that there are people who cares about research. (IN1)

El dar el tiempo que a veces no se tiene para reunirnos demuestra que si hay gente a la que le interesa la investigación. (IN1)

For the members of the community, finding the time to attend the meetings was a challenge. The many activities related to their work within the university reduced their opportunities to become fully involved in the community. However, their interest and desire to learn about research and share with others never decreased, which translated in reinforcing their mutual engagement.

As mentioned by Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2011) time is an issue for all communities of practice because of the multi-membership of each participant. However, when there is a strong commitment, time can also be overcome as it was in the case of the DIME community which has survived for over 22 years (Bruce and Easley, 2000).

9.2.1 Attendance at the Meetings

For some participants, one of the elements contributing to the lack of time is their own way of distributing time. Teresa affirmed:

I do not have enough hours during the day. It is really hard to organize my time with all the things I have to do here and in my other job. (IN2)

No tengo suficientes horas en el día. Se me hace tan difícil organizar mi tiempo con todo lo que hay que hacer aquí y lo que tengo en mi otro trabajo. (IN2)

181

Tania had a similar comment:

I have many issues trying to organize my time between teaching and administration tasks. Thinking about research and considering everything the research process includes is overwhelming. I need to teach less hours to be able to conduct research. (CM8)

Tengo muchos problemas tratando de organizar mi tiempo entre dar clases y las actividades no docentes. Pensar en investigar considerando todo lo que el proceso de investigación incluye me estresa. Necesito dar menos horas de clase para poder investigar. (CM8)

Personal commitments also add to the many activities participants have in their daily lives. In this respect, Camila shared during a meeting:

I always try to finish everything here in the university, but it is impossible. If I take work home I cannot do it. As soon as I get home at three, I have to take my kids to their swimming and soccer class. Later, I help them with homework and by the time I am finished with the house chores, I am ready to sleep. (CM5)

Siempre trato de terminar todo aquí en la universidad, pero es imposible. Si llevo trabajo a la casa, no puedo hacer. Apenas llego a la casa a las tres de la tarde, tengo que llevar a mis hijos a natación y fútbol. Después les ayudo con los deberes y para cuando termino con todo lo de la casa ya estoy lista para dormir. (CM5)

It is clear that for everybody in the group, personal and work commitments barely allow us to acquire more responsibilities. Teresa maintained:

Unfortunately, my participation has not been as I would have liked it to be, because last semester I had more activities at the University and even more obligations at the other university where I work. (IN3)

Lastimosamente mi participación no ha sido como hubiese querido porque en el ciclo anterior tuve más actividades en la Universidad y muchas más obligaciones en la otra universidad donde trabajo. (IN3)

In his second interview, Tito mentioned with a sense of frustration that he had felt lack of commitment to the activities of the community by some members of the group. He stated:

I think that a few members of the group should be a little more committed and attend the meetings more frequently to be able to give informed contributions.

182

Sometimes we waste time explaining what we talked about in the previous meeting instead of moving on. (IN2)

Pienso que algunos miembros del grupo deberían comprometerse un poco más y asistir con más frecuencia a las reuniones para poder emitir criterios un tanto más acertados e informados. A veces perdemos tiempo empapándoles de lo que hicimos en la reunión anterior en lugar de continuar lo que estamos haciendo. (IN2)

However, failing to attend all of the meetings cannot be solely attributed to a possible lack of commitment. It is necessary to bear in mind the many work and personal related activities professors have, which often reduce the possibility to be present during our community sessions. These findings are supported by Bruce and Easley (2000) who reported that, among other challenges, the lack of time was one of the major factors their community had to overcome.

It is noted, then, that having to many responsibilities and lack of time has made it difficult for the meetings between the members of the community. Unfortunately, the institutional time arrangement does not generate the best conditions for a successful structure.

9.2.2 Overload of Responsibilities?

Time issues go beyond solutions centered in how participants manage their time because, in fact, the great amount of responsibilities they have implies sacrificing voluntary commitments like our Community of Practice. This challenge was expressed by Teresa in her second interview:

Unfortunately, due to the lack of time and other obligations, I have not been able to attend all the meetings. (IN2)

Lamentablemente por el tiempo y otras obligaciones no he podido asistir a todas las reuniones. (IN2)

The members acknowledged that the flexibility the community offers is not enough to meet the research goals as fast as the University requires. Catalina expressed her concern during a meeting:

It is very difficult to engage with research activities if we do not have the time. How can we acquire research experience in a matter of months? (CM7)

183

Es muy difícil comprometerse con las actividades de investigación si no tenemos el tiempo. ¿Cómo se supone que aprendamos en cuestión de meses? (CM7)

Participants feel overloaded with many teaching hours, courses with too many students, and several non-teaching activities every week. This situation has not allowed all members to participate in every meeting. The conversations during the third interviews revealed this aspect more clearly. For instance, Telmo, Camila, and Tito admitted:

I like to participate in the meetings, but unfortunately, I could not attend all of them. I think I missed four because I had to attend other meetings, or I was grading assignments. (IN3)

Me gusta participar en las reuniones, pero lamentablemente no pude asistir a todas. Creo que falte a cuatro porque tenía otras reuniones o estaba calificando tantos trabajos. (IN3)

I could not be present in every meeting. As a contract professor, I have to be ready whenever I am called, and sometimes the meetings and other activities of the Institute have been at the same time. (IN3)

No he podido estar presente en todas las reuniones. Como profesora contratada tengo que estar lista cada vez que me llamen y a veces las reuniones y actividades del Instituto han sido al mismo tiempo. (IN3)

I have not been able to attend all meetings because you know I have many administration hours. In the office things come up at the last minute. (IN3).

No he podido asistir a todas las reuniones porque como sabes tengo muchas horas administrativas y siempre hay cosas de último minuto en la oficina. (IN).

Frustration was evident throughout the 12 months of data collection. During the first focus group, Telmo commented:

The LOES states that we should teach a maximum of 16 hours per week; however, we are teaching 24. In addition, we have to be part of committees, and attend the weekly faculty meetings. If we ask for hours to do research, they say no. (FG1)

La ley dice que debemos dar máximo 16 horas de clase sin embargo estamos dando 24 horas y a más de eso comisiones y reuniones semanales. Pero si solicitamos tiempo para hacer investigación dicen no. (FG1)

184

During the last meeting Catalina expressed that she felt overwhelmed by many activities that sometimes did not even make sense:

We have been burdened with work in so many areas, and we are not given the opportunity to do research. The fact of having us fill out forms and prepare reports only discourages as professors and future researchers. (CM19)

Se nos ha cargado de trabajo en tantas otras áreas y no se nos da la oportunidad de investigar. El hecho de tenernos llenando formularios y preparando informes solo nos desmotiva como docentes y como futuros docentes investigadores. (CM19)

Some members reported that the situation with teaching and research hours was not likely to change and if it did, it would be to increase the teaching hours. Tina, who had recently attended a general meeting with the University Rector, mentioned:

We know that according to the law a teacher should not teach more than 24 hours and that a professor-researcher should not teach more than 12. However, in practice, this is not true because the teaching hours will increase and the research hours will be less. The University does not want to hire more professors to cover teaching hours. (CM14)

Sabemos que de acuerdo a la ley un docente no debería dar más de 24 horas de clases y un profesor investigador no más de 12. Sin embargo, en la práctica no es cierto y las horas docentes van a subir y bajar las horas de investigación. La Universidad no quiere contratar más profesores para cubrir las horas docentes. (CM14)

The large number of responsibilities that the community members had, made it difficult for them to commit to the meetings and other activities within the group. Indeed, there are excessive responsibilities which have constrained the research planning and production of the group. Issues around multiple responsibilities like the ones experienced by our community were observed by Harland and Staniforth (2000). In their study, they mentioned that time distribution among teaching, research, and administration activities hindered the academic and professional development of their professor participants. In addition, and in contrast to my study, teaching was seen as a secondary activity and was not given the same importance as research.

185 9.3 The Language Institute

The Language Institute is led by a general director and by a coordinator for each type of English course (credit, intensive, online, and academic) and one coordinator for the other languages. These six people form the Academic Council of the Institute who are in charge of making decisions regarding the time distribution of the professors among others.

9.3.1 Support

The opinions expressed by the participants give account of the potential interest they have to learn and do research, but also of the institutional restrictions they have felt to commit to the community. For example, Tania mentioned:

Sometimes I see research as an unreachable goal because the whole organization of the University would have to change to allow more professors to do research and teach less hours. That change requires money which right now the University is not getting from the government. (IN1)

A veces le veo a la investigación como una meta inalcanzable. Pienso que todavía está muy lejana porque toda la organización de la Universidad tendría que cambiar para permitir a más docentes dar menos horas de clase e investigar y eso requiere mucho dinero que la Universidad no está recibiendo del gobierno. (IN1)

Cecilia expressed she had felt many times limited by her condition of contract professor. She mentioned in her first interview that the situation makes her feel underestimated:

I know that it is very difficult to achieve what I am going to say, but I think that contract professors should be allowed to present research proposals and even be project directors. We are being excluded from the opportunity to do research among many other things. (IN1)

Yo sé que es muy difícil lograr esto que voy a decir, pero pienso que se debería permitir que los docentes contratados propongamos proyectos de investigación e incluso seamos los directores. Se nos está excluyendo de la oportunidad de investigar entre muchas otras cosas. (IN1)

The lack of support in terms of research training was expressed by Telmo in his first interview when he said:

186

We teach too many hours. I am teaching 24 hours a week this semester. I have administration activities and only a few hours for research. We have not had enough research training; however, the University demands research results from us. It doesn’t make sense! (IN1)

Damos muchas horas de clase. Este ciclo doy 24 horas a la semana. Tengo tareas administrativas y apenas pocas horas para investigación. No nos han dado la suficiente capacitación, pero la Universidad si nos exige resultados de investigación. ¡No tiene sentido! (IN1)

Similarly, in the first focus group session, Telmo commented there was a lack of support from the Language Institute:

We need more support. We need support from our immediate authorities in the Institute. They ask us to commit to the institution, to teach, and research, but they do not give us the appropriate conditions. (FG1)

Necesitamos más apoyo. Necesitamos apoyo de nuestras autoridades inmediatas en el Instituto. Nos piden ponernos la camiseta de la institución, dar clases e investigar, pero no nos dan las condiciones apropiadas. (FG1)

In the same focus group, Claudio argued:

There are not even incentives but rather threats. Now with the changes in the promotion regulations not even holding a doctoral degree is enough to get tenure or be promoted. We need publications, but we are not given the opportunity to do research. (FG1)

Ni siquiera hay incentivos sino más bien amenazas. Ahora con los cambios en el reglamento de escalafón ni siquiera el título de doctorado es suficiente para ser titular o subir de categoría. Necesitamos publicaciones, pero no nos dan la oportunidad de investigar. (FG 1)

The criticism did not change throughout the year we met, rather it accentuated. During our July meetings (CM10), one of the participants, Cristian, pointed out that the Institute's Academic Council was responsible for the assignment of teaching, administration, and research hours. He also mentioned that the Council could organize tasks better for everybody to allocate enough hours to those interested in doing research, but that he had felt there are preferences. He claimed:

187

The Council makes the final decision on the distribution of time, but not everybody has the same rights. Some of us always get a no for an answer. It is frustrating and very discouraging. (CM10)

El Consejo toma la decisión final sobre la asignación de horas, pero no todos tenemos los mismos derechos. Algunos siempre recibimos un no como respuesta. Es frustrante y desmotivador. (CM10)

Over time, members’ questioning of the Institute’s decisions continued. Despite the efforts of the members to learn about research and prepare projects, the authorities did not support the community. In this regard, Cecilia stated:

There is an evident lack of support from those who have the responsibility to allocate time for activities that are worthwhile as our community. They are more worried about the useless faculty meetings where there are arguments and fights all the time. (IN3)

Hay una evidente falta de apoyo de quienes tienen la responsabilidad de asignar tiempo para cosas que si valen la pena como la comunidad. Están más preocupados de las reuniones inútiles donde hay discusiones y peleas todo el tiempo. (IN3)

During a meeting, the lack of support from the authorities of the Institute was also discussed. Three members of the community had sent a presentation proposal for a conference abroad and were accepted; however, they did not get the permission nor the funding. Tomás commented:

We also need the authorities of the Institute to support us when presenting at conferences. There will be more presentations accepted for both in and outside of the country and we need at least the permission to go. (CM14)

Necesitamos también que las autoridades del Instituto nos apoyen cuando tengamos ponencias en conferencias. Más presentaciones se aceptarán dentro y fuera del país y por lo menos necesitamos el permiso para ir. (CM14)

An institutional organization is essential to support all research initiatives. Certainly, the members of the community belong to the Language Institute which holds power regarding activities and time allocation. The community members are still hopeful and expect that at some point their authorities will become interested in what they have voluntarily begun to consolidate.

Members of the community will continue insisting the importance of linking teaching and research practice has for professors, students, and the academic knowledge base to the Language

188

Institute and University authorities. Findings that will emerge from critical research conducted by (language) professors, which takes into account the student as an individual shaped by different social issues (Hankivsky, 2014), could lead to the transformation of the complex realities of our classrooms and influence the decisions made in our institution (Olson, 1990; Kincheloe, 2003 as cited in Ilisko, Ignatjeva, & Micule, 2010).

9.3.2 The Denial of a Request

Although the authorities of the Language Institute were aware of the existence of our community of practice and even granted written authorization before we started to meet, they failed to allocate an hour a week for the meetings as the members requested. This generated discontent and frustration. Tania said:

We sent a written letter to the Council requesting one hour a week to meet in the group, and our request was denied. We also requested to attend the community meetings instead of the faculty meetings on Mondays, but we got a negative answer. Even though the request was supported by the University regulations, the Institute authorities did not approve our petition. (FG1)

Enviamos una petición por escrito al Consejo para que se nos dé las horas para reunirnos en el grupo o que se justifique la hora semanal de reunión de los lunes, pero recibimos una respuesta negativa. A pesar de que nuestra petición tenía el soporte de los reglamentos de la Universidad, las autoridades del Instituto no la aprobaron. (FG1)

In his second interview, Tito mentioned with a sense of frustration that he thought the Institute authorities were going to be more supportive:

The disadvantage has been the lack of time to attend all meetings and the lack of support from the Institute authorities. They did not allow us to meet one hour a week. (IN2)

La desventaja ha sido la falta de tiempo para asistir a todas las reuniones y la falta de apoyo desde las autoridades del Instituto para la asignación de una hora a la semana para reunirnos. (IN2)

Catalina and Claudio had similar comments:

189

It is very difficult to engage with research activities if we do not have the time, and, unfortunately, we did not have the support of the Language Institute to have that time. (CM5)

Es muy difícil comprometerse con las actividades de investigación si no tenemos el tiempo y desafortunadamente no tuvimos el apoyo del Instituto de Lenguas para tener ese tiempo. (CM5)

I did not like the fact that the Director of the Institute did not allow us to meet one hour a week as part of our working hours. The community meetings turned out to be much more fruitful than the faculty ones we have weekly. I truly hope that in the coming semester we will be able to meet not just one but more hours a week. (IN2)

No me gusto el hecho de que la Directora del Instituto no nos permitió reunirnos una vez a la semana como parte de nuestra carga horaria. Las reuniones de la comunidad resultan ser mucho más fructíferas que las que tenemos semanalmente. Espero en verdad que en los próximos ciclos se nos permita reunirnos no solo una sino más horas a la semana. (IN2)

Nonetheless, the following academic semester the situation remained the same as a second request was refused. At our twelfth meeting, Tomás expressed his disagreement with the decision:

The Institute does not support us with the time. We have to use the time we could be with our families to do research. That is the only way we could get promoted someday. (CM12).

El Instituto no nos apoya con el tiempo. Tenemos que ocupar tiempo que podríamos estar con nuestra familia para poder hacer investigación y es la única forma de pensar en subir de categoría algún día. (CM12)

Teresa mentioned that the only way to demand hours would be by presenting proposals and have them approved by the DIUC or the research department of the Faculty of Philosophy. She suggested:

We know we are just starting with our research group, but we should try to submit project proposals as soon as possible if we want to request hours again. Those of us who have projects already, even though they are not with our students, must help the ones who do not. (CM10)

Sabemos que estamos al inicio de nuestro grupo de investigación, pero debemos intentar mandar propuestas lo más pronto posible si queremos pedir horas de

190

nuevo. Los que ya tenemos proyectos, a pesar de que no son con nuestros estudiantes, tenemos que ayudar a los que no tienen proyectos aún. (CM10)

Despite the discouraging situation, Cecilia pointed out in her third interview:

We need to keep demanding support from the authorities. We must fight to be given time to research. I know they cannot give us all 40 hours to do research because it would be absurd, but we do need some time to grow individually and as a research group. (IN3)

Tenemos que exigir apoyo de las autoridades. Debemos luchar por pedir que se nos dé tiempo para investigar. Sé que no nos pueden dar todas las horas para investigar porque sería absurdo, pero sí necesitamos tiempo para crecer individualmente y como grupo de investigación. (IN3)

While it is true that the Institute has the obligation to support only those research projects that are approved by the Research Directorate, it also has jurisdiction to make the necessary arrangements in the schedules of professors who voluntarily decided to be part of the community and do research. The fact that the authorities did not accept the one-hour petition caused disappointment among the members of the community who were trying their own way to venture into critical action research. Having institutional support for research activity and learning is imperative for building education research capability as it is seen in the findings provided by Hill and Haigh (2012).

Perhaps the lack of support from the authorities of the Institute might correspond to their lack of knowledge about the importance of the relationship between teaching and research which is necessary and undeniable (Colbeck, 1998; Lindsay et al., 2002; Jenkins et al., 2003; Brew, 2003; Healy, 2005). We need to challenge their current perception of research and teaching as separate, mutually exclusive activities by communicating the findings of our work as a community and the findings of individual projects.

9.4 The DIUC

The DIUC is the entity within the University that is in charge of approving and, depending on the project, even funding research. Members of the community believe that their research might not be to the interest of the DIUC as it seems there is a bias towards more scientific and technological research. During a focus group, at least two professors, Telmo and Tania, argued:

191

The University and the DIUC ask us to be part of relevant research projects, and I wonder who decides what research is relevant? We go back to the problem of elitism in research. Decisions are made by the ones in a position of power. (FG2)

La Universidad y la DIUC nos piden ser parte de proyectos de investigación relevantes ¿Y quién califica la investigación como relevante? Volvemos al problema del elitismo en la investigación por parte de los que están en alguna posición de poder. (FG2)

The DIUC seems to be an elitist directorate where only a few can be researchers and have funded research projects. I think decisions are made based on who the researchers are and not on what they propose. Selfishness and vanity are evident. (FG2)

La DIUC parece ser una dirección elitista en donde solo algunos pueden ser investigadores y ganar fondos para proyectos de investigación. Pienso que las decisiones se hacen basadas en quienes son los investigadores y no en lo que proponen. El egoísmo y la vanidad son evidentes. (FG2)

Tito also questioned the decisions made by the DIUC:

The DIUC has not set up general parameters, and the regulations are not the same for everybody. Things are not always fair. Although it is the research governing body in the University, it has not been able to even manage the existing research projects. Believe it or not there are projects that are repeated. (FG2)

La DIUC no tiene parámetros generales y las reglas no son iguales para todos. Las cosas no son siempre justas. A pesar de ser el ente regulador de la investigación en la Universidad no ha sido capaz de controlar los proyectos que tiene. Aunque no lo crean hay proyectos que están repetidos. (FG2)

Tatiana in her third interview suggested that it would be ideal to find out how we can formalize the community and register it as an official research group within the Research Directorate. She proposed:

We should find out how we can formalize our community as a research group within the DIUC. Now with the new Rector, the structure of the entire University is changing, and maybe the DIUC will change too. We can be a research group of the Institute, and if we do not have the support of the Academic Council, we can request it from the Faculty of Philosophy. Some of us are as part of the TEFL undergraduate program. (IN3)

Deberíamos averiguar cómo podemos formalizar nuestra comunidad como un grupo de investigación dentro de la DIUC. Ahora con el nuevo Rector sabemos

192

cómo está cambiando la estructura de toda la universidad y talvez también cambie la DIUC. Podemos ser un grupo de investigación del Instituto y si el consejo no nos apoya podemos pedir apoyo en la Facultad de Filosofía como parte de la licenciatura porque algunos miembros enseñan ahí también. (IN3)

The DIUC is the generator of research axes and the entity in charge of executing the research policies of the University. Its objectives are the strengthening of research practices and the generation of knowledge. Some feelings of distrust were expressed about the DIUC’s practices regarding the decisions it makes in terms of who can conduct research and what proposals are approved. This situation echoes Harland and Staniforth’s (2000) reported issues around research activities. In their study, professors protested about “high-flying researchers” (p. 505) who did not have teaching or administration activities, which meant more of these activities, to the detriment of research, for the professors who were not considered well-known or important by the ones making decisions.

9.5 The University

In the first interview, a participant professor, Camila, pointed out that there is some institutional indifference towards the contract professors:

Here at the University we cannot do research. I have asked everybody about research opportunities and I have always found negative answers. I have asked for an opportunity to join a research group even working on my own time, but the answer has been the same: you cannot do it because you are a contract professor. I feel excluded! (IN1)

Aquí en la Universidad no podemos hacer investigación. He preguntado a todo el mundo sobre oportunidades para investigar y siempre he encontrado respuestas negativas. He pedido oportunidades para unirme a algún grupo de investigación y la respuesta siempre ha sido la misma: no puedes investigar porque eres contratada. Me siendo tan excluida. (IN1)

In the first meeting Tito acknowledged the changes the University is going through, moving from a solely teaching context to a research and teaching driven one; however, he also mentioned there are preferences towards certain fields in this shift. He stated:

We are making that transition from a teaching university to a teaching and research university. I would say that we still need more support in the research part, especially for the social sciences. (CM1)

193

Estamos haciendo esa transición de una universidad de enseñanza a una de enseñanza e investigación. Yo diría que todavía necesitamos más apoyo en la investigación, especialmente en las ciencias sociales. (CM1)

Among the most widespread comments and opinions were that teachers felt the University had favoritism that affected the social sciences. Cristian and Telmo mentioned:

Sometimes it seems that for the University only the faculties that exist are Engineering and Medicine. All the economic support is for these faculties, leaving aside the social sciences. (CM13)

Parece que para la Universidad solo existen las facultades de Ingeniería y Medicina. Todo el apoyo económico es para esas facultades dejando a un lado a las ciencias sociales (CM13)

Unfortunately, more emphasis and importance are given to the technologic and scientific areas. Authorities of the University think scientific and technologic research is the only valid type research and they leave education and the social sciences in second place. (FG1)

Lastimosamente se da más énfasis e importancia se da al área tecnológica y científica se le da mayor énfasis. Las autoridades de la Universidad piensan que solo la investigación científica y tecnológica son formas válidas de investigación dejando la educación y las ciencias sociales en segundo plano. (FG1)

Members of the community as well as the faculty in general are concerned with the University demands regarding publications. The requirement was not only to publish articles, but we have to publish them in journals that are indexed in Scopus, which is the largest data base of peer- reviewed academic journals and books. Nevertheless, the University authorities have not considered that this academic data base deals mainly with topics that are related to areas different from the social sciences. This situation confirms the participants’ arguments about the preferences of the University. Tania expressed her thoughts about this issue:

We are required to publish in journals that are indexed in Scopus. Journals in this data base are very competitive for someone who is just starting. In addition, there are more opportunities for education and social sciences publications in other equally important peer-reviewed literature data bases (CM15).

Se nos exige que publiquemos en revistas indexadas a Scopus. Las revistas de Scopus son muy competitivas para alguien que recién está empezando. Además, hay más oportunidades para publicaciones de educación y las ciencias sociales en otras bases de datos igualmente importantes. (CM15)

194

In fact, the reasons for preferring publications in journals found in Scopus appear not to be due to the quality or validity of the articles, as expressed by Carlos:

This decision to require articles published in Scopus rather than for quality or validity of the data base, is a matter of meeting requirements imposed by the government to accredit careers and universities. (CM15)

Esta decisión de pedir solo artículos publicados en Scopus más que por calidad o validez de la base de datos es por una cuestión de cumplir con requisitos impuestos por el gobierno para acreditar a las carreras y a las universidades (CM15).

The University’s objective is to exceed the required standards. Telmo commented:

The University is very concerned about the upcoming accreditation in 2018, and the publications needed to meet certain requirements. They want professors to increase the number of publications at any cost because several universities in the country are exceeding the number of publications the Universidad de Cuenca has. (FG1)

La Universidad está muy preocupada de la acreditación que se viene en el 2018 y de las publicaciones que se necesitan para cumplir con los requisitos. Les interesa que los profesores aumenten el número de publicaciones a como dé lugar ya que varias universidades del país nos están superando en ese sentido. (FG1)

The decision of the University to require, not to say force, professors to write and publish is hindered by issues such as the lack of practical support. The requirement to publish in high-level journals when professors are only beginning to get involved with the research culture with incipient tools and knowledge seems abrupt.

As mentioned throughout this dissertation, our CoP focused on critical action research which in fact can help professors achieve educational and social transformation by questioning hegemony, power dynamics, and inequities (Davis, 2008). As critical action professor-researchers we can challenge current ways of thinking about what types of research are valuable and those that deserve more attention in our University. We can give a voice to the social sciences by communicating our findings and addressing problems of today’s society (Bronner, 2011), which are reproduced every day in our classrooms.

195 9.6 Future Perspectives

One of the questions in the third interview and a topic we covered in the last meetings was the participants’ future perspectives and expectations of the community. In this regard, there were conflicting opinions. Tito and Camila mentioned:

I think we should encourage more people to join the group by talking about our experiences during these months. (IN3)

Pienso que debemos motivar a más personas a unirse al grupo contando nuestras experiencias durante estos meses. (IN3)

We must reproduce what we have learned. We should ask the authorities of the Institute to give us the opportunities to share about our learning experience within the community because this way we can encourage more colleagues to join. (IN3)

Debemos reproducir lo que hemos aprendido. Solicitar a las autoridades del Instituto que nos den los espacios para contar sobre nuestra experiencia de aprendizaje en la comunidad porque así podemos motivar a que más colegas se integren. (IN3)

During a meeting, Cristian stated that the Institute should have a research department that can start with the members of the community and be led by someone with research expertise. He surmised:

The Institute needs a research department headed by a person with a lot of experience researching and publishing in international peer-reviewed journals; this is the guidance we need. This person should be our representative within the University. I think it should be our starting point even before preparing more projects. (CM18)

El Instituto necesita un departamento de investigación encabezado por una persona con mucha experiencia en la investigación y la publicación en revistas internacionales revisadas por pares, porque ese es el tipo de orientación que necesitamos. Esta persona debería ser nuestro representante dentro de la Universidad. Creo que debería ser nuestro punto de partida incluso antes de preparar más proyectos. (CM18)

Participants of the focus group stated that they demand more training to be provided and accompanied by experts. Tito in the second focus group session suggested:

196

Another good option is getting involved in projects that are already approved, and work with people with more experience than us. What I mean is we can be like research assistants and learn from practice. (FG2)

Otra buena opción es involucrarnos en proyectos ya aprobados y trabajar con personas con más experiencia que nosotros. Lo que quiero decir es que podemos ser como asistentes de investigación y así aprendemos mientras hacemos investigación. (FG2)

Institutional support is essential to nourish the emerging research culture of our University and achieve acceptable research standards. If “the impediments and challenges to building research capability” are acknowledged, as suggested by Hill and Haigh (2012, p. 978), more possibilities will emerge for the community to reach the objectives set by its members. If authorities of the Language Institute provide appropriate conditions for researching and learning about research, language professors will be able to contribute to the goal of a great institution, the Universidad de Cuenca.

Chapter 10 Making Connections

We try hard to understand how the actors, the people being studied, see things. Ultimately, the interpretations of the researcher are likely to be emphasized more than the interpretations of those people studied, but the qualitative case researcher, tries to preserve the multiple realities, different and even contradictory views of what is happening. – Stake, 1995, p. 12

10.1 Introduction

This research investigated the language professors’ perceptions about their learning within a recently formed community of practice whose main focus is CAR. It also analyzed the activities of the community (meetings), the nature of the participants’ contributions, and their perceptions toward CAR and social justice work after participating in the community. The personal and institutional factors that enabled or constrained their commitment to the group were also examined. This chapter answers the research questions through making connections and interpretations of the data presented in Chapters 6, 7, 8, and 9 in relation to CAR literature and within the conceptual framework of communities of practice.

10.2 Perceptions about Learning within a CoP that Focuses on CAR

Wenger’s (1998) vital characteristics and dimensions of CoPs and Wenger’s (2000) elements of CoP were used to interpret and understand the findings related to the overarching research question “How do university-level language instructors perceive their learning within a community of practice that focuses on critical action research?”

The configuration of the group had founding conditions such as the language professors’ shared interests, desire to engage in joint activities, and their common practice that led members to voluntarily join to learn about and conduct critical action research. These three foundational 197

198 conditions relate directly to the essential elements to create and cultivate a community of practice, namely domain, community, and practice as proposed by Wenger (1998).

First, a shared domain of interest was the strongest characteristic of the group as we were all language professors of the Language Institute who were interested in learning about research. Although the shared domain that brought us together was being language professors, we developed a new domain as critical teacher-researchers to be able to understand and address social issues and promote social change (Davis, 2008). Second, with the purpose of achieving the desires and expectations that join us in a community, we worked together helping each other, sharing information, and building relationships. This community precipitated a significant change in the environment we were immersed into because we usually felt we were working in a context of possessive and selfish individualism. Third, the element of practice was met as all of the members of our community were actively performing their daily teaching practice and a few were also involved in research practice.

In Chapters 7, 8, and 9, I provided evidence that describes how participants’ learning changed their understandings about doing research in their own classrooms and adopting a critical frame of mind that challenges traditional lines of thought (Bronner, 2011). By providing excerpts from interviews, community meetings, and focus groups, I portrayed that learning in the community involved sharing interests, doubts, questions, and experiences about conducting research, developing critical understandings of the social issues involved, and starting to think and act differently toward those struggles. Professors’ willingness to start this process of change and desire to create and participate in this community that focuses on CAR can be interpreted through Wenger’s (1998) dimensions of communities of practice including: mutual engagement, joint enterprise, and shared repertoire.

Volunteering to work and learn together and showing enthusiasm and individual willingness to interact, participate, negotiate, and accommodate beliefs and prior learning are signs of mutual engagement. We have supported each other’s learning, embraced and valued differences, created real relationships, and gained a collective voice that learned how to think and act critically (Felluga, 2015; Wallace, 1998; Burns, 2010) to challenge the normalized practices and discourses about valid forms of research in the University context. Initial expectations,

199 developing conversations throughout the meetings, and future plans confirm that there is a common purpose that joined members of the community and kept us together.

Our joint enterprise has evolved as a result of our individual identities and practices, the many discussions and even arguments, and the enabling and constraining situations we encountered in our process of growth. As language professors teaching at the same Institute, we not only had the same practice but also had a shared repertoire, which was part of our identity from the initial meetings of the group. However, over time our shared discourses, histories, experiences, language, and even actions evolved and a newly shared repertoire emerged about successful teaching, critical modes of research, learning together, and future expectations as a result of participating in the community.

The participants’ perceptions of their learning within the community are related to how their understandings, interpretations, and meanings shifted in terms of adopting different ways of doing research, including a critical stance towards action research and incorporating social justice. Moreover, the learning was evidenced through the new discourse the group developed about working and learning collaboratively while actively participating in the community meetings. For the participants, working collectively has aided in altering individual knowledge and consciousness to give importance to social issues of import to the group while finding a connection between the learning process our students go through and their everyday struggles to become agents of change.

The meetings, which involved talking, thinking, discussing, and negotiating, were spaces that allowed participants to generate new ideas, ways of reflecting on their classroom experience, and for some, their classroom and previous research experience. Like participants in Lucas’ (2007) study, members of this community perceived that linking teaching and research could be a tool to improve their teaching and research practice. In fact, transcriptions from community meetings, conversational interviews, and focus groups presented testimonies that demonstrate that elements of a community of practice emerged (Wenger, 2000). Namely, events (meetings per se), and a new membership with which participants identified themselves as being positive, open to change, and welcoming to new people and experiences. They shared artifacts (stories, experiences, discourses, documents, knowledge, experiences and materials), which far from generating

200 feelings of rivalry (as it is, unfortunately, commonly observed in the broader University community), generated feelings of cooperation and academic and professional cohesion. These feelings, in turn, enabled connectivity among the members of the community who were constantly interacting inside and outside the meetings.

Participants’ modes of identification, namely engagement, alignment, and imagination (Wenger- Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015b) within this community, as well as to other communities, were central to understanding their contributions during the 12 months of interactions. The modes of identification strengthened not only the value of the shared repertoire, but also the relationships between the participants of the community.

During the second and third sets of interviews, second focus groups, and throughout the meetings, participants stated that they had felt the benefits of interacting within the community. They mentioned that learning from colleagues, gaining knowledge about the importance of doing research in the classroom through action research and social justice were useful. They also noted feeling comfortable and safe to share feelings and thoughts, and developed increase levels of confidence as important gains from the community. Similar benefits of creating a community of practice were reported by Lucas (2007), Hartnell-Young and McGuinness (1996), and Bozu and Imbernon (2009) who highlighted that the collaborative construction of knowledge that takes place within a community is a powerful alternative for professional development.

Engagement, alignment, and imagination provided opportunities to access new knowledge, new ways of thinking, and new relationships for mutual support. Furthermore, in the community, all members felt comfortable enough to participate freely and propose projects regardless of their contract or tenure status, which was previously an exclusionary activity for many contract professors.

Regarding the participants’ relationships with the other communities where they function, such as the Language Institute and the University, relationships also changed. Participants shared their experience within the community with other professors particularly when dealing with academic selfishness. It seems that they have realized the importance of sharing meaning (Fullan, 2001), knowledge, and resources as a way to bring each other up and achieve better personal and group

201 results A mutual interest united the group, unveiling a safe space for growing personally and professionally. This social learning experience could be an incentive to reproduce new communities of practice within the University context.

The learning process we went through is particularly important in a University context that is clearly defined. We are working in a neoliberal environment that is forcing us to become individualist and competitive, which often acts to neutralize social change. As mentioned by Chomsky (2014), higher education institutions are using neoliberal techniques of discipline, indoctrination, and control to increase teaching hours and workload, and to make it even harder to advance or even enter in the tenure track. These realities are certainly present for us, and in addition to the many responsibilities we have, we are asked to write research articles with the purpose of helping the University enter the competitive market.

As mentioned by Giroux (2015) the demands of today’s university, led by neoliberal forces, have made professors lose common vision, become selfish, and equate partnership to envy. Knowledge has become individualized and learning together dangerous. Giroux (2015), during a public lecture in McMaster University, claimed:

Neoliberal ethic has crept into the university and created this division in which the only thing that exists is shared fear rather than shared responsibilities, a shared sense of what it means to make the university a political space that matters, one in which questions of pedagogy can be talked about.

Nevertheless, just the fact of getting together to work collaboratively rather than competitively challenged neoliberalism and its agenda that seeks to silence group voices raised against inequalities and injustices.

10.3 The Nature of Participants’ Contributions to the CoP

The first research sub-question asked, “What is the nature of the contributions of university-level Ecuadorian language instructors to the community of practice?” To be able to more deeply understand the nature of the participants’ interactions and contributions during the meetings and to draw valid interpretations from the findings, the notion of landscapes of practice and its

202 boundaries was used as the lens to answer this question. (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015b)

Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2015b) described learning as taking place within complex landscapes of practice and within the boundaries between the elements of the landscape. Furthermore, the authors suggested that individual identities are shaped by personal experiences and memberships in various communities. As social beings, we are made of histories and experiences, which we carry with us in ways that influence every situation and context in which we are involved. Looking at how engagement and alignment to various communities have been established in the past and the present helped me to understand how different critical modes of agency developed within our community and how the participants’ identities as critical teacher- researchers emerged.

Becoming a member of a new community that focused on critical action research, which for some was an entirely new world, required attaining a new competence. For the participants that had some background knowledge about research, learning about a critical orientation to action research required a great deal of openness and negotiation to use previous competencies and knowledge for adopting new ones. It was important for the evolution of our community that all the members took the time to learn about the individual experiences and identities of of the other members of the group (Hutchinson et al., 2015). This was essential as before participating in the community, only a political working relationship existed. It was imperative to understand the challenges and struggles each person has within the multiple complex communities in which they live and function every day.

The figures included in Chapter 6 illustrate the landscapes of practice of each of the participants in relation to their (language) background, learning trajectories (education), and the past and current teaching and research practices. In addition, I decided to include more personal information regarding their family because it plays a major role in how a person develops and behaves in other activities. In other words, I do not stop being a parent when I am teaching, nor do I leave my teacher identity when I get home to my children and this reality existed for all those who took part in the community. Participating and interacting with these different

203 communities either in the past or in the present shows how our identities are a product of our own learning and life experiences.

As Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2015b) suggest, the level of significance of the practices with which we interact or the boundaries we cross is different depending on our interests, priorities, and even opportunities to participate. For the majority of focal participants, the most important community was their family, and participation in every other community was to be able to support their priority. For instance, the decision to pursue doctoral studies was made by five out of the eight focal participants to be able to eventually advance in the tenure track and receive salary increases to improve the living conditions of their families. A similar situation exists for those who, although are not currently enrolled in a graduate program, want to learn about and conduct research to have the possibility to write and publish articles that will also allow them to advance on the salary scale.

The boundaries between the different communities within which each participant identified (teaching, researching, committees, and graduate programs) provided them with individual, potential learning opportunities to increase their knowledgeability (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger- Trayner, 2015b). Enhancing knowledgeability meant maximizing their experience within the communities and enriching their contributions and the overall learning experience in our own community of practice.

10.4 Perceptions and Understandings of CAR and Social Justice

The second research sub-question addressed the participants’ perceptions and understandings of CAR and social justice after partaking in the community of practice. The data collected during the meetings, interviews, and focus groups was interpreted through the literature on CAR and through the concepts of imagination (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015b) and learning projects (Wenger, 2000). This literature belongs to the broader conceptual framework of communities of practice.

Not all of the perceptions toward researching our own students and including aspects of social justice were positive at the beginning. In fact, in the initial months of the community, some

204 members even questioned the validity of investigating their own students as a form of research accepted in the academic field. However, after discussing, learning, and negotiating for several months, a shared understanding developed around the notion that combining teaching and critical research is the very reason for the configuration of this community of practice.

Learning within the community has led the participants to view critical action research as a holistic approach in which classroom research should not overlook social issues that might be affecting students’ lives, students’ academic performance, and professors teaching practice. We have ventured into learning how to include a critical lens into action research to make social justice the main focus of our current and future research activities. Through this learning process, although only two projects emerged, critical action research routes have been created. Indeed, the participants’ narratives demonstrated that learning within the community has been significant in relation to promoting social transformation, challenging power dynamics and traditional ways of thought, and questioning lived inequalities both of students and professors. Our experience is similar to that described by Harland and Staniforth (2000) in which, although not all professors included a critical orientation, collaborative work and a new identity as change agents emerged.

A community of practice that focuses on CAR might be a suitable path to find the link between teaching and research and to address social issues as it suggested the research study conducted by Tormey et al. (2008). Similarly, participants of this study believe that CAR can provide opportunities to break with the research homogeneity present in the University in relation to preferring the ‘hard sciences’ that can measure results in quantitative terms to prove they are effective and worthwhile. I am not condemning or invalidating the quantitative approach, nor the more scientific or technological fields, but I consider that this view of research could be perpetuating hegemonic practices that make the social sciences less important and valued in academia. There are several possible ways to investigate phenomenon and conduct research, but when working with our students and reflecting on our practices, the social context and personal struggles play a major role. This is especially the case when developing new ways of thinking about inquiry, producing knowledge, and promoting social change (Taylor, Rudolph & Foldy, 2008; Burns, 2010; Goodnough, 2010; Kemmis, McTaggart, & Nixon, 2014).

205

There is a significant difference between generating ideas and putting them into practice. All members of the community planned and imagined projects (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015b), as it was presented in Chapter 8. In fact, some even idealizing the benefits that these projects could bring to individual researchers and the group as a whole. Nevertheless, only two members of the community, Telmo and Camila, executed their plans as actual research processes that included a critical orientation. Data collection was taking place during the last months of meetings, but, as it was mentioned in Chapter 8, the two professor-researchers felt their projects have produced a change in their students’ attitudes toward the social issues they were addressing.

The remaining participants who had not yet started to do research provided their reasons for not conducting CAR projects during the third set of interviews, last few meetings, and second focus group meeting. Their reasons can be interpreted as including: resistance to change, in terms of research traditions and approaches; need for more learning and training; a fear of failing or causing any damage to students; and lack of motivation resulting from not receiving enough support from the authorities of the Language Institute.

All the members of the community recognized the value of critical action research as a tool that allows for deep understanding of the social and educational practices of our context, which are influenced by social, political, economic, and cultural factors (Kemmis et al., 2014). Our society has been traditionally known for inequalities and power abuse that overlooks merits to favor friends or people also in positions of power.

There are connections between the findings of this study and the literature on CAR, but regarding CAR as the main focus of a community practice, the linkages are less clear as the literature is also scarce. Important aspects emerged from the data analysis that are not addressed in the literature and deserve attention. These include the fact that CAR was not known by the participants of this study and that AR was undervalued creating doubts about the worthiness of the community and the research projects that might have emerged.

206 10.5 Enabling and Constraining Factors of the CoP

This section discusses the last research question that relates to the enabling and constraining events that the participants experienced, which had direct impact on their levels of participation and modes of identification with the community of practice. Findings that emerged from the data collected during the meetings, second and third sets of interviews, and second focus groups were interpreted using the lenses described in Chapter 4. These lenses included the key success (or failure) factors for communities of practice (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2011) and the modes of identification (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015b).

10.5.1 Enabling Factors

Etienne and Beverly Wenger-Trayner (2011) highlighted three key factors, from the extensive list they provided, as the most important for the survival of a community of practice which included: identification, leadership, and time. In the case of our community, identification and leadership were crucial and even made up for time, which became one of the constraints identified.

Since the first meetings of our community, participants were deeply involved and full of expectations. Deciding to participate voluntarily was a sign of commitment to their practice as language teachers and future researchers. Through their participation, I realized that they were passionate about their shared domain at the onset of the study (language teaching) and the newly developed one (critical action teacher-research). Their sense of identification was defined by their initial shared domain and their acquired shared domain of research interest, which produced and were produced by the social energy that characterizes these types of communities (Wenger- Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2011).

The sense of identification of the participants was evidenced through how they perceived belonging to and learning in a community of practice. Their perceptions can be translated into the three modes of identification of CoP: engagement, imagination, and alignment (Wenger- Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015b). These modes of identification allowed them to engage in social learning processes, create relationships, negotiate meanings, share purposes, and project future possibilities for them as individuals and for the community.

207

Leadership was vital for the creation and development of the community over time. I took the initiative to invite colleagues to co-create this community and as the convener my most important task was to maintain members’ interest by providing follow up information after the meetings, organizing times and spaces that worked for the majority (having every member in every meeting was virtually impossible), and representing the group when communicating with the authorities of the Language Institute, the DIUC, and the University.

The other influential factors suggested by the Wenger-Trayners (2011) were present in the evolution and success of our community at various levels. Although as language professors we report directly to the Language Institute and its authorities, our community was self-governed. Indeed, participation was voluntary, attendance was not mandatory, and membership was always open; that is, any professor could join or leave the community at any time and attend the meetings according to their time availability. Our sense of ownership slowly emerged and our level of trust increased with time. In fact, in our early meetings discernible feelings of selfishness and defensiveness aimed at protecting ideas and knowledge were evident.

High expectations for value creation were evidenced from the first meetings and interviews. All participants were enthusiastic about the learning space that was emerging and its potential for providing opportunities to learn from each other’s experiences and about forms of conducting research that could be significant to the social context in which we live and interact. As discussed in the previous section, we developed new discourses about critical action research and social justice and these became our raison d'être and gave authenticity to our collective voice.

The data presented in Chapters 7, 8, and 9 revealed that participants’ learning evolved within the community sessions when they actively participated sharing experiences, imagining projects, and expressing achievements or frustrations. However, their learning evolution cannot be solely attributed to the participation in our community of practice, but to every community in which professors interacted. The connection to other communities offered participants potential advantages and opportunities for their learning which, in turn, transferred to the learning of our own community. For instance, after five participants travelled abroad to attend a course for their doctoral degree, they shared the different views of research of their professors with the group, diverse teaching practices, and their experience as learners in a completely new context. They

208 also mentioned doubts and difficulties they encountered when understanding articles and book chapters and preparing assignments, showing there was trust among the group as professionals. There was a positive friendly environment of mutual respect, even in times of disagreement. In fact, these disagreements contributed to the strengthening of our learning and group cohesion because in the exchange of ideas and in the arguments, we arrived at important and negotiated agreements.

10.5.2 Constraining Factors

The constraints encountered by the community and individual members were several. There were personal and institutional factors constraining participation and commitment; however, it is important to note that the former were many times overcome due to participants’ willingness and enthusiasm. The latter, instead, only confirmed the incongruences that exist between what is written in the laws and what is happening in the University, and also the inequalities that have been perpetuated in our social context.

Personal constraints relate to the changing processes of each of the members of the community during these 12 months. The level of personal change was as important as the collective change of the community as a unit. The process we started was not imposed; it was a proposal that I initiated and my colleagues accepted to participate in voluntarily. Although we felt we needed to initiate a change because, as stated by Fullan (2001), we found “dissatisfaction, inconsistency, or intolerability in our current situation” (p.19), the process was uncertain. In the words of Schön (1971) change involves passing through the zones of uncertainty… the situation of being at the sea, of being lost, of confronting more information than you can handle” was one we navigated (as cited in Fullan, 2001, p. 19).

Achieving social transformation is very ambitious; however, making small contributions to change society from my own reality is possible. Indeed, part of transforming personally, and encouraging others to do so, can be done by changing ways of thinking about and looking at the issues of our context, and taking action because that is how transformation is revealed. It is not possible to fully change a thinking paradigm without becoming involved in taking action. Fullan (2001) calls this change in practice, and it is necessary to achieve our objectives. We cannot wait

209 for things to change by only changing how we think, as “real change involves changes in conceptions and role behavior” (p.26). Our actions should start in our classrooms, inviting, through our teaching and research practices, not only our students but our fellow citizens to shift their way of thinking and acting toward the issues of our immediate society.

We were able to maintain our community during this period, and hopefully it will continue until we find “a sense of mastery, accomplishment, and professional growth” to lead to a “real change” (Fullan, 2001). However, such a short period of time was not enough to shift a lifetime of inculcated beliefs about what counts as valid research. Fullan (2001) mentions the three phases to the change process that have been identified through research. First, initiation that includes the decision to start with the change. Second, implementation that involves attempts to put an idea into practice. Third, continuation that refers to the change being part of the broader system. Our community successfully passed the first stage of initiation, and currently exists with the implementation process. We work in a University that has for decades looked at particular types of research as being the only valid paradigms; thus, 12 months were just the initial stages of shifting the participants’ way of thinking about research and imagining themselves as being professors conducting research around injustices in the classroom. Raising awareness in these professors about the value of a critical paradigm is a challenge that that takes time. According to Fullan (2001), “implementation for most changes takes two or more years; only then we can consider that the change has really had a chance to become implemented” (p. 34).

Time besides being a personal constraining factor, it is also an institutional one. Although efforts were made to arrange days and times that suited all participants’ availability, they reported facing time limitations for attending the community sessions. The reasons varied among the members, but the most common were related to teaching or administrative work schedules, committee meetings that in many occasions were organized and communicated without enough anticipation, additional university responsibilities and duties, assignments for their graduate courses, and the most important taking care of children and families. Wenger (1998) explained that time is a limitation that can inhibit participants’ engagement and that as we hold multi- membership in various communities we “have to handle competing priorities” (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2011, para. 4).

210

Other institutional constraining factors were experienced at three different levels: The Language Institute, the DIUC, and as a result of broader features the University. These limiting issues impacted our community to the extent that we felt our contributions were not recognized and our organizational voice was at risk to being muted (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger Trayner, 2011). The hopes I had when initiating the community where blurred when I faced a lack of support from the authorities who in fact authorized the formation of the community and this research study. Moreover, the high expectations (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger Trayner, 2011) of the members of the community were weakened when realizing the journey was not going to be easy. Fortunately, our shared passion for our interest and our domain of practice supported our desire to continue challenging the factors that produced these struggles.

The biggest issue encountered and widely questioned by the participants during individual interviews, community meetings, and focus groups was the denial of one hour in the schedule requested to the Academic Council of the Language Institute. This particular event generated discontent and for some even frustration and resentment because they felt they could not do anything. The reality is that nobody can afford to risk losing their jobs in the University by not following the rules. They feel obliged to accept this and other decisions that are not considered fair; however, they have decided to continue voluntarily participating in the community, reconfiguring their ambitions in its future survival to achieve the goals that could not be reached for the time being.

The members’ criticism of the institution itself and its bureaucratic practices as for several participants related to how power dynamics play major roles in the middle management of the University such as the Directorate of the Institute and the DIUC. Although there is support from the Rector of the University and the regulations, requests and interesting research projects of some professors become truncated or overlooked entirely in the approval process. The utterances and interactions of the participants presented in Chapter 9 revealed that they felt as though they did not have equal access to research opportunities.

The members of the community also questioned demands and requirements that the University has imposed. While it is true that the institution must provide adequate conditions to motivate professors to do research, the findings suggest that instead it has somehow hindered the initiative

211 of this community of practice. Indeed, for the community the dual purpose was getting professors involved in research to assist their professional development and engage them in significant contributions to achieving social justice in the University. The excessive work responsibilities of the participants and the lack of support from the Institute authorities translated into an institutional blockage.

10.5.2 Personal Identity Markers: Enabling or Constraining Factors?

Although I was able to establish how our group met the criteria of the communities of practice (Lave, 1993; Wenger, 1998; Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015a) and landscapes of practice (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015b) articulated in the conceptual framework, not everything that happened in the community was straightforward or simple. The unique identity attributes of each of the members of our community, which were far beyond their differences and personal landscapes, impacted their participation during the meetings, the multiple levels of personal transformation, and the way they were able to take up opportunities to conduct critical action research.

One of the objectives of the community was to change the ways of thinking of the members, professors of the Language Institute, towards research. It was about raising awareness of a research paradigm that counts as valid research and helps develop critical understandings of the social issues within our language classrooms (Davis, 2008; Bronner, 2011; Kemmis, McTaggart, & Nixon, 2014; Kemmis et al., 2014).

From the beginning of the journey, each participant had a different perspective related to addressing and challenging social issues. There was a strong sense of timidity to approach and event talk about social issues. The main reason, as it was reported in the findings, was the lack of knowledge about this critical dimension when conducting research. However, my analysis of the data also leads me to suggest that other reasons hindered the shift of some participants. Unfortunately, we, human beings in general, are selfish and self-centered. We are used to ignoring anything that does not affect our lives or status directly. As educators, we are supposed to believe in and support social change; nevertheless, the neoliberal forces have led us to teach more, become more efficient, and obtain graduate degrees to optimize the quality of our product

212

– students (Chomsky, 2014); the system has molded us to favor (our) development over social agency (Cascante Fernandez, 2013).

In this sense, on the transformation continuum the journey was different for all the participants. There were tensions around transforming ways of thinking because not everybody moved in the same way along the continuum. Everybody started in a different place at the beginning and moved at various degrees over the year we met. Thus, as stated by Cascante Fernandez (2013), our individual discourses and ways of thinking shifted during and were shaped by our interactions in the community.

For instance, Teresa, who was one of the participants with more teaching and research experience, was skeptical about the validity of CAR. Although her research experience was quantitatively oriented and she was resistant to use a process-oriented paradigm over proving theories through statistical tests, she wanted to keep learning about CAR, which was a big step in her own process of transformation.

Similar to Teresa, other members of the community were used to working with quantitative research either because it was the paradigm they knew and preferred, or it was the one that allowed them to build their careers because of its priority status in the University. Parallel to participating in the community other non-action research projects were conducted by Teresa, Tatiana, Tito, Tania, and myself. By working on the two projects at the same time, I was able to somehow play with the system. I was approved to conduct a research study because it met the requirements of the neoliberal agenda of the Institution (the project included statistics and tests), but I was also able to gather a group of professors who wanted to acknowledge the social issues of our university context and develop a research study that in my doctoral program was viewed as valid and interesting.

Other participants, such as Tito and Camila, showed a level of growth greater than any other members. They dared to start CAR projects to keep learning in the process. Camila’s case is particularly interesting because she challenged not only social issues by raising awareness about gender inequality in her students, but also her status as a contract professor who is largely constrained from conducting research.

213 10.6 Concluding Remarks

Using different elements of the conceptual framework proposed, I was able to provide interpretations of the findings drawn from the data presented in Chapters 6,7,8, and 9. The discussions about the participants’ perspectives of their learning within the community offered insights about the potential communities of practice hold as learning spaces, and in this particular case as a site for merging teaching and research.

Correspondingly, the interpretations offered with the purpose of answering the research sub- questions have indicated the importance of acknowledging participants’ backgrounds and multi- membership to better understand their contributions to the group. By partaking in the meetings and sharing experiences and histories, members of the community have shifted their understandings about research in general and have opened their minds to adopt a critical orientation in spite of the personal and institutional constraints faced.

Chapter 11 Conclusions

“Imagination is everything. It is the preview of life's coming attractions” – Albert Einstein

11.1 Introduction

Through this study, I explored the perceptions of university language professors related to their learning and the adoption of critical action research and social justice as the main focus of a community of practice. Based on my own experience as an language professor who wanted to learn and do research, I understood the struggles that many colleagues experienced when trying to challenge the teaching tradition of the Language Institute and include research as part of their practice.

Interpreting the data that emerged from the community meetings, interviews, and focus groups about the participants’ perceptions and situating them within the social learning and communities of practice concepts, the study provided rich findings of the learning experiences within and outside of the community. This final chapter includes the conclusions regarding the creation of our CoP. It then revisits the limitations and discusses the implications of the study for the participants, the Language Institute, and the Universidad de Cuenca. The chapter concludes with suggestions for areas of further research.

11.2 Our Community of Practice

We have created a community that is reflexive, flexible, dynamic, and diverse. It is a space where our own experiences, understandings about research, and ways to comprehend knowledge are respected and valued. We are a group of language professors who have been working together and interacting for 12 months, a commitment we plan to continue in order to enhance our professional development and benefit students and the broader educational context. 214

215

We can indeed be called a Community of Practice because we have developed and strengthened mutual engagement, joint enterprise, and shared repertoire (Wenger, 1998, 2010; Wenger- Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015a).

Mutual engagement: Our active participation and individual experiences and knowledge are what increased the value of our community. We shared our skills and expertise to complement those of others. Even though there were disagreements and frictions at times, we were open to negotiate understandings and make informed decisions.

Joint enterprise: Common objectives and necessities brought us together in the CoP. Interests and perceptions about research were varied, but through our interactions, we were able to identify with the CAR research focus of the community. After the 12 months of interactions, our joint enterprise has expanded and evolved; we not only want to conduct research to fulfill requirements, but to address social issues in our language classrooms.

Shared repertoire: The community developed its own procedures, discourses, and experiences. We were speaking the same language in the sense that we could understand, value, and respect others personally and professionally. We were able to develop a shared perspective of the world, visualizing the objectives we wanted to achieve.

The collaborative learning process of a group of language professors where everybody had a voice was essential for our professional development and our new identity as professor- researchers. The memorable experiences within the community created knowledge that was relevant, rewarding, and rivaled that we may have learned from a book. While a CoP is not a panacea to all problems in the Universidad de Cuenca or the only way of linking teaching and research, it has the potential to reinvent our ways of perceiving the University and its teaching and research functions.

Although the process was different across the participants in terms of the degrees to which they changed their way of thinking toward a critical approach to research, all of them became conscious than there is more than being an efficient professional through teaching many hours and complying with the requirements imposed by top-down neoliberal reforms. The community

216 realized the need to continue working collectively to assimilate change and its individual and collective meanings (Marris, 1975 as cited in Fullan, 2011, p. 30) which should be shared with the broader University community.

11.3 Limitations of the Study

The limitations of the study regarding its methodology, my role as participant-researcher, and the attendance of the participants to the meetings were provided in Chapter 5. However, I have included them here to make connections with the implications and elucidate possible research areas to explore in the future.

First, the study was limited by the number of participants, the specific context of the study and the individual landscape of each of the participants. These unique factors do not allow us to generalize the findings; however, the concept of CoPs can be applied to other professors from different faculties of the Universidad de Cuenca to encourage the link between teaching and research. The second limitation refers to my role as participant-researcher, as it may have had an impact on my interpretations of the findings as I have experienced the same struggles and frustrations of the participants. All the transcriptions and translations went through a member check process and were reviewed by a bilingual research assistant. This process was completed to guarantee that they remained loyal to the original utterances of the participants and that personal bias was kept to the minimum. The most difficult limitation to control was the attendance at the meetings as participation was voluntary. Time was a significant constraining factor for participation; however, the commitment of the members of the group made up for this limitation in the sense that after every meeting, participants would share what we did with those who could not attend.

11.4 Implications

Implications are presented at three levels: (1) community; (2) the Language Institute; and (3) the Universidad de Cuenca.

At the first level (the community), I consider that the initiative of establishing a CoP that focuses on CAR was positive. Participants perceived the CoP as a learning space that could break with

217 academic selfishness and jealousy that was a feature of the broader institution. Findings show that professors’ engagement and alignment within the community enhanced relationships and provided learning opportunities. Several participants imagined themselves as professor- researchers and some already adopted this new identity.

The efforts made to sustain this community for 12 months should continue and this can be accomplished through activities suggested by Kezar and Gehrkey (2012). The first of these activities include distributing leadership roles among members of the community in order to guarantee sustained participation and equality of opportunities within the group. Second, expanding the community by encouraging more professors from the Language Institute to join as having more members would not only make us more visible, but it would also expand the scope of interests. In this activity, it is important to remind potential participants that participation is voluntary since it is an open evolving system that welcomes everybody at any time. The third activity includes showing the value of the community by conducting more research, communicating results to colleagues, writing research articles, and ultimately registering in the DIUC as a research group or department. Fourth, developing a strategic plan to attract the attention and gain the support of the authorities of the Institute and the University is an important endeavor. Finally, as suggested by the members of the CoP, seeking external professional support to learn more about the research methodology in theory, and most importantly in praxis, is necessary to continue or journey as critical action researchers.

At the second level (the Language Institute), authorities could look at this study and consider giving more support to the community and to individual professors who want to learn and conduct research as part of their work in the University. It is crucial for professors to have the support of immediate authorities, particularly when referring to the assignment of research hours. Denying opportunities for personal and professional growth is going against professors’ rights according to what is included in the LOES.

Findings have provided strong evidence of the necessity to bring teaching and research together if the desire is to transform higher education. Findings from this research suggest that language professors are in fact interested in incorporating research into their teaching activities because they believe that teaching and research are not separate entities. Moreover they see the Language

218

Institute as a site with many opportunities to conduct significant research. Although language teaching has been the main function of the Institute during its 50-year existence, results regarding the language proficiency of our students have not been encouraging. Perhaps it is time to change more than the textbook or the teaching methodology based on random decisions. Indeed, I suggest it is time to acknowledge that research can inform programs and curriculums and contribute to quality teaching.

At the third level (the Universidad de Cuenca), similar experiences can be reproduced in other Faculties of the Universidad de Cuenca as a way to strengthen and sustain the emerging research culture. This is specifically true in the social sciences which have been traditionally excluded from the priorities of the University. Furthermore, I believe there is a strong need to encourage the use of CAR within the Universidad de Cuenca and other universities in Ecuador where inequity among professors and students seems is often the rule.

11.5 Future Directions

Universities in Ecuador have been exposed to a drastic top-down transformation process imposed by lawmakers who apparently have forgotten the realities of our context. Many of the conditions imposed have been impossible to fulfill in the time frame set; such as the number of Ph.D. professors required to become a research university. However, not everything about the new regulations has been negative. In fact, these reforms have urged universities to strengthen programs and processes to benefit students and the broader community. They have also pushed professors to look for professional development opportunities such as enrolling in research-based doctoral programs or learning how to conduct research with other colleagues. Nonetheless, language professors in Ecuador should not only embark on research activities to comply with requirements. Instead, they should look at research in connection with their teaching as a critical tool to understand the social issues in the university context in general and their language classrooms in particular.

As mentioned before, the Language Institute is a site that holds potential opportunities for critical action research. However, in this section, I suggest the ones that have emerged from the findings of the study.

219

1) This study looked at the experiences of participants within the community, but it did not examine the processes or the results of the research projects that were conducted by individual members of the community. It would be interesting to look at the results of each of these studies regarding the social issues addressed and the language proficiency of the students.

2) Looking at individual professor-researcher journeys while conducting CAR could provide insights into their new identity, and the challenges they might encounter when addressing sensitive social issues.

3) Several opportunities and plans for research projects emerged from the conversations in the community. I would like to study at my own journey assisting professor-researchers in preparing and conducting these CAR projects.

4) As mentioned throughout the study, publishing is what is required from professors. Thus, looking at the long-term effects of the community regarding publication productivity is an area for further research.

5) Replicating the experience with other groups of professors in different areas could provide more information about the effectiveness of CoP in diverse university settings. Furthermore, creating CoPs with professors from different fields might generate multidisciplinary research projects.

The Rector of the Universidad de Cuenca, during a speech he gave in early April, stated that all members of the Institution should collaborate in the construction of a history of success for our University. He concluded that “with people who bring new ideas and aspirations, our University becomes diverse; reason is colored” / “Con gente que trae nuevas ideas y aspiraciones nuestra Universidad se vuelve diversa, la razón se colorea” (Vanegas, 2017).

I consider this phrase important because it describes the lived reality in our community and what we imagine for its future. We are a group of language professors who engage in critical and reflective conversations about our practices and our students’ struggles, and we are interested in learning from different research perspectives and experiences. We accept, acknowledge, and

220 value each of the members whose identities have been shaped by the multiple and colorful landscapes of their personal and professional lives.

Epilogue

It has been more than a year since our journey as a community of practice began. The road has not been easy. It has been challenging to explore together how we might adopt a new research paradigm which grows from the bottom-up and is socially constructed because such an approach exists in tension with the more positivistic type of research privileged in the top-down government reforms.

As the convener of our community, it has been difficult at times to help the community remain focused on research involving their own teaching context and issues related to social justice because such a focus is not in line with the current agenda of the University which is mandated by a government that has adopted the technocracy of neoliberalism. Ecuadorian universities have been thrust into a very competitive world where rankings, the number of articles published in peer-reviewed journals, and standardized admission exams are viewed as the determinants of quality in the university. These neoliberal strategies to homogenize and standardize knowledge have made it easier for the government and its regulatory institutions to control the behavior of faculty.

221

222

Unfortunately, during my five-month absence to complete my doctoral degree, the community has not gathered. However, I know that Telmo and Camila have finished their projects and are ready to conduct new studies with different groups of students. Other members of the community are currently busy with their own doctoral journeys; some have taken a more traditional, institutionally recognized approach for their dissertations, while some others have included a critical dimension in their doctoral research.

When I return to the University of Cuenca, my immediate plan is to gather the community again and invite more members to join. I know I will continue to face conflicts and perhaps even more than when I started this project two years ago. There might be more resistance from some of my colleagues to work and collaborate with me in a community due to jealousy or rivalry as I will return with a completed doctoral degree. In spite of some likely resistance, my hope is to continue to work collaboratively with interested colleagues to explore the power of research that is critical and focused on social issues that impact our students in the Language Institute. I want to continue challenging the neoliberal educational system and help to usher in new ways of addressing the inequalities and injustices in our classrooms.

223

References

Adler, J. (1998). Lights and limits: Recontextualising Lave and Wenger to theorise knowledge of teaching and of learning school mathematics. In A. Watson (Ed.), Situated cognition and the learning of mathematics (pp. 161-177). Oxford: Centre for Mathematics.

Anderson, G., Herr, K., & Nihlen, A. (1994). Studying Your Own School: an educator's guide to qualitative practitioner research. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.

Arias, C., & Restrepo, M. (2009). La investigación-acción en educación: un camino hacia el desarrollo profesional y la autonomía. Ikala revista de lenguaje y cultura, 14(22), 109- 122.

Asamblea Nacional del Ecuador. (2008). Ecuador's Constitution of 2008. Constitute. Project: The world's constitutions to read, search, and compare. Retrieved from https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Ecuador_2008.pdf

Asamblea Nacional del Ecuador. (2010). Ley Orgánica de Educación Superior. Quito: Official Registry of Ecuador, No. 298, 12 October 2010. Retrieved from http://www.ces.gob.ec

Asamblea Nacional del Ecuador. (2011). Reglamento General a la Ley Orgánica de Educación Superior. Quito: Official Registry of Ecuador, No. 526, 02 September 2011. Retrieved from http://www.ces.gob.ec

Ayala Mora, E. (2015). La investigación científica en las universidades ecuatorianas. Anales, Revista de la Universidad de Cuenca, 57, 61-72.

Ayres, L. (2008). Thematic coding and analysis. In L. Given, The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (pp. 868-869). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc. doi: http://dx.doi.org.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/10.4135/9781412963909.n451

Bajak, F., & Sibaja, M. (2012). Cultivando los cerebros del futuro. La República.

224

Barret, M., Ballantyne, J., Harrison, S., & Temmerman, N. (2009). On building a community of practice: reflective narratives of academic learning and growth. Reflective Practice, 403- 416.

Blackmore, C. (2012). Landscapes of practice, social learning systems, and rural innovation. The 10th European IFSA Symposium. Aarhus.

Bond, M. A., & Lockee, B. (2014). Building virtual communities of practice for distance educators. New York: Springer.

Boyd, T. (1957). Charles F. Kettering: A biograpy. New York: Beard Books.

Bozu, Z., & Imbernon, F. (2009). Creando comunidades de práctica y conocimiento en la Universidad: una experiencia de trabajo entre las universidades de lengua catalana. Revista de Universidad y Sociedad del Conocimiento, 6(1), 1-10.

Brew, A. (2012). Teaching and research: new relationships and their implications for inquiry- based teaching and learning in higher education. Higher Education Research and Development, 31(1), 101-114.

Bronner, S. (2011). Critical theory: A very short introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.

Brown, B., Dressler, R., Eaton, S., & Jacobsen, M. (2015). Practicing what we teach: Using action research to learn about teaching action research. Canadian Journal of Action Research, 16(3), 61-78.

Bruce, B., & Easley, J. (2000). Emerging Communities of Practice: collaboration and communication in action research. Educational Action Research, 243-259.

Burchell, H., & Dyson, J. (2005). Action Research in Higher Education: exploring ways of creating and holding the space for reflection. Educational Action Research, 291-300.

225

Burns, A. (2005). Action research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 241-256). London: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Burns, A. (2010). Doing Action Research in English Language Teaching. New York: Routledge.

Burns, A. (2011). Action Research in the Field of Second Language Teaching and Learning. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning. New York: Routledge.

Burrel Storms, S. (2015). Social justice in practice? Exploring teacher candidates' commitment toward change agency through action research. Action in Teacher Education, 37(2), 156- 171.

Cascante Fernandez, C. (2013). Critical action-research and us. Revista Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 45-63.

Centro Cultural. (2000). Centro Cultural Metropolitano Quito. Retrieved from http://www.centroculturalq.quito.gob.ec/ccmq.php?c=61&inPMAIN=3

CES. (2012). Reglamento de Carrera y Escalafón del Profesor e Investigador del Sistema de Educación Superior (Codificado). Ecuador: Consejo de Educación Superior. Retrieved from http://www.ces.gob.ec

CES. (2017, March 21). Consejo de Educación Superior. Retrieved from http://www.ces.gob.ec

Cevallos Estarellas, P., & Bramwell, D. (2015). Ecuador, 2007-2014: Attempting a radical educational transformation. In S. Schwartzman (Ed.), Education in South America (pp. 329-361). London: Bloomsbury Academic.

Chomsky, N. (2014). How higher education ought to be on academic labor. (R. Clarke, A. Davis, D. Hoinski, M. Somma, R. Sowards, M. Ussia, & J. Zalesnick, Interviewers) Pittsburgh, PA. Retrieved from http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/02/28/on-academic-labor/27/

226

Coate, K., Barnett, R., & Williams, G. (2001). Relationships between teaching and research in higher education in England. Higher Education Quaterly, 55(2), 158-174.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (1992). Communities for teacher research: fringe or forefront. American Journal of Education, 100(3), 298-324.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (2007). Practitioner Inquiry, Knowledge and University Culture. In J. Loughran, M. Hamilton, V. Laboskey, & T. Russel (Eds.), International Handbook of Self-Study of Teaching and Teacher Education Practices (pp. 601-649). Dordrecht: Springer.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1990). Research on Teaching and Teacher Research: The Issues that Divide. Educational Researcher, 19(2), 2-11.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2010). Research Methods in Education (6 ed.). New York: Routledge.

Cole, A., & Knowles, G. (1996). Reform and "Being True to Oneself": Pedagogy, Professional Practice, and the Promotional Process. Teacher Education Quarterly, 109-125.

Consejo Universitario. (2013). Estatuto de la Universidad de Cuenca. Cuenca: Universidad de Cuenca.

Consejo Universitario. (2015). Tabla de Licencias y Remuneraciones para Cursos de Posgrado para Profesores e Investigadores Titulares. Cuenca: Universidad de Cuenca.

Creswell, J. (2014). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Davies, B., & Bansel, P. (2007). Neoliberalism and education. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 20(3), 247-259.

227

Davis, C. (2008). Critical Action Research. In The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods (pp. 140-143). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. deMarrais, K. (2004). Qualitative Interview Studies: Learning Through Experience. In K. deMarrais, & S. D. Lapan, Foundations for Research: Methods of Inquiry in Education and the Social Sciences (pp. 51-68). London: Mahwah, New Jersey.

DePoy, E., Hartman, A., & Haslett, D. (1999). Critical action research: A model for social work knowing. Social Work, 560-569.

Douglas, A. (2013). Advice from the professors in a University Social Sciences Department on the teaching-research nexus. Higher Education, 18(4), 377-388

Duff, P. (2012). Triangulating theories, methods, and perspectives in SLA research. Retrieved September 25, 2015, from http://ml.hss.cmu.edu/slrf2012/schedule.html

El-Hani, C., & Greca, I. (2013). ComPractica: A Virtual Community of Practice for Promoting Biology Teachers' Professional Development in Brazil. Research Science Education, 1327-1359.

Felluga, D. (2015). Critical theory: The key concepts. New York: Routledge.

Fullan, M. (2001). The new meaning of educational change (3rd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.

Gibbs, G. (2007). Analyzing qualitative data. London: Sage publications.

Giroux, H. (2015, September 24) Where is the outrage? Critical Pedagogy in Dark Times. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAxj87RRtsc

Goodnough, K. (2003). Facilitating action research in the context of science education: reflections of a university professor. Educational Action Research, 11(1), 41-64.

Goodnough, K. (2010). The role of action research in transforming teacher identity: Modes of belonging and ecological perspectives. Educational Action Research, 18(2), 167-182.

228

Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Hankivsky, O. (2014). Intersectionality 101. Canada: The Institute for Intersectionality Research & Policy, SFU.

Harland, T., & Staniforth, D. (2000). Action research: a culturally aceptable path to professional learning for university teachers? Educational Action Research, 8(3), 499-514.

Hartnell-Young, E., & McGuiness, K. (1996). Applying a communities of practice model to research partnerships. Research Focus Conference, (pp. 507-542). Cairns.

Hesse-Biber, S., & Leavy, P. (2006). The practice of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Hill, M., & Haigh, M. (2012). Creating a culture of research in teacher education: learning research within communities of practice. Studies in Higher Education, 971-988.

Hispanoamerica Unida. (2013, March). Retrieved from https://hispanoamericaunida.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/gran-colombia-1824.jpg

Hitcock, G., & Hughes, D. (1995). Research and the Teacher: A Qualitative Introduction to School-Based Research. London: Routledge.

Hutchinson, S., Fenton-O'Creevy, M., Goodliff, G., Edwards, D., Harnet, L., Holti, R., . . . Way, L. (2015). Introduction: An invitation to a conversation. In Landscapes of practice (pp. 1- 10). London: Routledge.

Ilisko, D., Ignatjeva, S., & Micule, I. (2010). Teachers as Researchers: Bringing Teachers' Voice to the Educational Landscape. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability, 12(1), 51- 65.

Israel, M., & Hay, I. (2006). Research ethics for social scientists: Between ethical conduct and regulatory compliance. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

229

Johnston, M., Bendau, S., Covert, J., Cristenson, M., Dyer, J., Risko, G., & Slutsky, R. (2003). Conducting Action Research While Teaching About It. Action in Teacher Education, 9- 15.

Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2014). The Action Research Planner. London: Springer .

Kezar, A., & Gehrke, S. (2017). Sustaining communities of practice focused on STEM reform. The Journal of Higher Education, 88(3), 323-349.

Kleiber, P. (2008). Focus Groups: More than a Method of Qualitative Inquiry. In K. deMarrais, & S. Lapan (Eds.), Foundations for Research (pp. 87-102). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Krueguer, R., & Casey, M. (2009). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2004). A handbook for teacher research: From design to implementation. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Lave, J. (1993). Situating learning in Communities of Practice. In L. Resnick, J. Levine, & S. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 63-82). Washington: American Psychological Association.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

LeCompte, M. (2000). Analyzing qualitative data. Theory into Practice, 39(3), 146-154.

Leung, C. (2009). Second language teacher professionalism. In A. Burns, & J. Richards (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to second language teacher education (pp. 49-58). New York: Cambridge University Press.

230

Lucas, L. (2007). Research and teaching work within university education departments: fragmentation or integration. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 31(1), 17-29.

Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2011). Second Language Research: Methodology and Design. New York; London: Routledge.

Malo, H. (1985). Universidad Institución Perversa. Quito: Corporación Editora Nacional.

McMillan, J., & Schumacher, S. (2001). Research in Education: A conceptual Introduction (5th ed). New York: Routledge.

Mertens, D. (2015). Research and evaluation in education and psychology. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Millican, J. (2014). Higher education and student engagement: implications for a new economic era. Education + Training, 56(7), 635-649.

Moule, P. (2006). Developing the Communities of Practice Framework for On-line Learning. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning , 133-140.

Neal, C., & Neal, P. (2011). The art of convening: Authentic engagement in meetings, gatherings and conversations. San Francisco: Berret-Koehler Publishers, Inc.

Nieto, S., & McDonough, K. (2011). Placing equity front and center revised. In A. Bell, & C. Tyson (Eds.), Studying diversity in teacher education (pp. 363-384). Lanham: American Educational Research Association and Rowan & Littlefield.

Olson, M. W. (1990). The teacher as researcher: A historical perspective. In M. W. Olson (Ed.), Opening the door to classroom research (pp. 1-20). Newark: International Reading Association.

Pareja, F. (1986). La Educacion Superior en el Ecuador. Caracas: CRESALC-UNESCO.

Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

231

Prasad, B. (2014). Social Justice. In D. Coghlan, & M. Brydon-Miller (Eds.), The SAGE encyclopedia of action research (pp. 708-711). London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Ramírez, R. (2013). Tercera Ola de Transformación de la Educación Superior en el Ecuador. 2013: Senescyt.

Ramos Ampudia, C. (2000). La Universidad Ecuatoriana. Quito: Universidad Cristiana Latinoamericana.

Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2008). The Sage Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Rees, A., & Shaw, K. (2014). Peer Mentoring Communities of Practice for Early and Mid-Career Faculty: Broad Benefits from Research-Oriented Female Peer Mentoring Group. Journal of Faculty Development, 5-17.

Rogers, C. (1980). A way of being. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Rowe, W. E. (2014). Positionality. In D. Coghlan, & M. Brydon-Miller (Eds.), The SAGE Encyclopedia of Action Research (pp. 628-631). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Schön, D. (1971). Beyond the stable state: Public and private learning in a changing society. New York: Norton.

Schwartzman, S. (1999). Latin America: National responses to world challenges in higher education. In P. Altbach, & P. McGill Peterson (Ed.), Higher Education in the 21st century: Global Challenge and National Response (pp. 47-57). IIE Research Report No. 29.

SENESCYT. (2016). Secretaria de Educación Superior, Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación. Retrieved from SENESCYT: http://www.educacionsuperior.gob.ec/

SENESCYT. (2017, January 31). GEOPORTAL SNIESE. Retrieved from Visor geografico: http://www.senescyt.gob.ec/visorgeografico/

232

Simons, H. (2009). Case study research in practice. London: Sage.

Simons, H. (2014). Case Study Research: In-Depth Understanding in Context. In P. Leavy, The Oxford Handbook of Qualitative Research. Oxford University Press.

Spiegel, J., Breilh, J., Beltran, E., Parra, J., Solis, F., Yassi, A., . . . Parkes, M. (2011). Establishing a community of practice of research practitioners, policy-makers and communities to sustainably manage environmental health risks in Ecuador. BMC International Health and Human Rights, 11(2), 1-16.

Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

Taylor, S., Rudolph, J., & Foldy, E. (2008). Teaching reflective practice in the action science/action inquiry tradition: Key stages, concepts and practices. In P. Reason, & H. Bradbury (Eds.), The Sage handbook of action research (pp. 656-668). London: Sage.

Thomas, L. (2000). 'Bums on seats'; or 'listening to voices': Evaluating widening participation initiatives using participatory action research. Studies in Continuing Education, 95-113.

Tight, M. (2016). Examining the research/teaching nexus. European Journal of Higher Education, 6(4), 293-311.

Tormey, R., Liddy, M., Maguire, H., & McCloat, A. (2008). Working in the action/research nexus for education for sustainable development. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 9, 428-440.

UNESCO Institute for Statistics. (2017). Enrolment by level of education and type of institution. Retrieved from http://uis.unesco.org/en/home

Universidad de Cuenca. (2012). Informe de Gestión. Cuenca: Universidad de Cuenca.

Universidad de Cuenca. (2015, October). Investigación. Retrieved from Universidad de Cuenca: https://www.ucuenca.edu.ec/investigacion

233

Universidad de Cuenca. (2016). Informe de Gestión Institucional. Cuenca: Universidad de Cuenca.

Universidad de Cuenca. (2017, February 23). Universidad de Cuenca. Retrieved from El Instituto: https://www.ucuenca.edu.ec/la-oferta-academica/idiomas/el-departamento

Vanegas, P. (2017, April 12) The University's contributions to the city of Cuenca. Speech presented when receiving the insignia Santa Ana de los Ríos de Cuenca.at the City's Council, Cuenca, Azuay.

Wallace, M. J. (1998). Action research for language instructors. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice. Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wenger, E. (2000). Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization, 7(2), 225-246.

Wenger, E. (2010). Communities of Practice and Social Learning Systems: the Career of a Concept. In C. Blackmore (Ed.), Social learning systems and Communities of Practice (pp. 179-198). London: Springer.

Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2011). What are the three success factors of Communities of Practice. Retrieved from http://wenger-trayner.com/resources/key- success-factors/

Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2015a, April 15). Communities of practice: a brief introduction. Retrieved from http://wenger-trayner.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/07- Brief-introduction-to-communities-of-practice.pdf

Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2015b). Learning in landscapes of practice. In Wenger-Trayner E, M. Fenton-O'Creevy, S. Hutchinson, C. Kubiak, & B. Wenger-

234

Trayner (Eds.), Learning in Landscapes of Practice: Boundaries, Identity, and Knowledgeability in Practice-Based Learning (pp. 13-30). London: Routledge.

Yin, R. (2004). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks and London: Sage.

Appendices

Appendix A: Authorization Letter from the Academic Council of the Language Institute of the University of Cuenca: English Translation

235

236

Appendix B: Authorization Letter from the Academic Council of the Language Institute of the University of Cuenca: Original Spanish

237

Appendix C: Ethics Approval

PROTOCOL REFERENCE # 32546

January 25, 2016 Dr. Antoinette Gagne Ms. Tammy Mercedes Fajardo Dack DEPT OF CURRICULUM, TEACHING & DEPT OF CURRICULUM, TEACHING & LEARNING LEARNING OISE/UT OISE/UT Dear Dr. Gagne and Ms. Tammy Mercedes Fajardo Dack,

Re: Your research protocol entitled, "A case study of the implementation and development of a community of practice focused on practitioner research in an Ecuadorian university"

ETHICS APPROVAL Original Approval Date: January 25, 2016 Expiry Date: January 24, 2017 Continuing Review Level: 1

We are writing to advise you that the Social Sciences, Humanities, and Education Research Ethics Board (REB) has granted approval to the above-named research protocol under the REB's delegated review process. Your protocol has been approved for a period of one year and ongoing research under this protocol must be renewed prior to the expiry date.

Any changes to the approved protocol or consent materials must be reviewed and approved through the amendment process prior to its implementation. Any adverse or unanticipated events in the research should be reported to the Office of Research Ethics as soon as possible.

Please ensure that you submit an Annual Renewal Form or a Study Completion Report 15 to 30 days prior to the expiry date of your current ethics approval. Note that annual renewals for studies cannot be accepted more than 30 days prior to the date of expiry.

If your research is funded by a third party, please contact the assigned Research Funding Officer in Research Services to ensure that your funds are released.

Best wishes for the successful completion of your research.

Yours sincerely,

Matthew Brower, Ph.D. Jeffrey Steele, Ph.D. REB Co-Chair REB Co-Chair Research Oversight and Compliance Office - Human Research Ethics Program McMurrich Building, 12 Queen's Park Crescent West, 2nd Floor, Toronto, ON M5S 1S8 Canada Tel: +1 416 946-3273 Fax: +1 416 946-5763 [email protected] http://www.research.utoronto.ca/for-researchers-administrators/ethics/

238

Appendix D: Sign-up sheet Languages Institute of the University of Cuenca Community of Practice

Sign-up Sheet for Additional Participants Name Email

239

Appendix E: Email to Potential Participants

(English Translation)

Dear colleagues,

First of all, I want to take this opportunity to thank you for your interest in joining this project and becoming pioneers of an important step for our Institute.

I would also like to invite you to get together to share with you a bit more about the project and hear your valuable contributions. The main objective of this first meeting is to discuss what are the themes that will guide the work of our community. It is also important that during this meeting we agree on the dates, times, and locations of future meetings.

Day: February 1st, 2016

Time: 10:00 – 12:00 a.m.

Location: Room 305 – Language Institute Building

Best regards,

Tammy Fajardo Dack

240

Appendix F: Information Letter and Consent Form for Director

Dear Director, My name is Tammy Fajardo Dack, and I am a Ph.D. candidate in the Language and Literacies Education program in the Department of Curriculum, Teaching and Learning at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto. I am writing to ask you for permission to conduct a research study that would involve professors at the Language Institute of the University of Cuenca. The research is related to the establishment and development of a community of practice focused on critical practitioner research. After reading the detailed information below, please complete and return the consent form attached to this document to me. Thank you. Title of Research Project A case study of the implementation and development of a community of practice focused on practitioner research in an Ecuadorian university Principal Investigator Tammy Fajardo Dack, Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Curriculum, Teaching, and Learning, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto Purpose of the Study The general purpose of this research is to engage university-level language instructors at the Institute of Languages at the University of Cuenca in a community of practice focused on practitioner research to develop new and critical understandings of their teaching and issues within their language classrooms, as well as the actions they take to address those issues. The specific aim is to facilitate a shift of the role of faculty from being language instructors exclusively to becoming critical practitioner-researchers who can integrate approaches oriented toward social justice. This research study requires the participation of faculty members at the Language Institute with the purpose of learning about their underlying assumptions, beliefs and actions within their practice and how these are shaped after partaking in a community of research practice that integrates a critical participatory approach.

241

Participants I would be recruiting 12-15 professors from the Language Institute of the University of Cuenca to be part of the community of practice, and from them, I will recruit 8-10 professors to be the focal participants of the case study. Benefits Professors participating in the research community will benefit from the experiences of colleagues and from the research paradigms that will be discussed in the group throughout the process, as well as, re(framing) their roles as researchers and social agents. Another benefit could be the publication of their research findings in various forms including articles and online media posts. The Language Institute and the University of Cuenca will benefit from the creation of a space in which language professors may not only improve their teaching practice but also enhance their research competence, factors that, according to the University of Cuenca and the Law of Higher Education in the country, are important requirements. What participants will do Participants will take part in two phases of data collection. In the first phase, they will complete a background questionnaire to provide information about their academic background as students and their research experience. They will also provide a written sample of previous research works to understand better the kind of research they have produced. Additionally, they will participate in two 90-minute monthly meetings during which I will document in detail the interactions of the community by being a participant observer and by using an audio recording device. Coffee, juice, and snacks will be provided at every meeting. In the second phase, participants who consent to participate as part of the case study will be interviewed at the beginning, in the middle and at the end of data collection. In addition, depending on the number of participants who agree to be part of the case study, will be part of focus groups which will provide a better understanding of how participants experience their individual and collective role in the community. Participants’ Rights To Confidentiality

242

All participants’ identities will be kept strictly anonymous and confidential through pseudonyms in both the analysis of the data and the oral and written reporting of the findings. Only my supervisor, Dr. Antoinette Gagné, will have access to the recordings, transcriptions, and translations. This information will be kept on a password protected external hard drive in my house that will be locked in a cabinet, and all data will be destroyed no later than five years from now. To Ask Questions about the Research If you would like to ask questions about this research project, please do not hesitate to contact me at any time (Tammy Fajardo Dack) at XXX or [email protected]. You may also contact my supervisor, Dr. Antoinette Gagné, regarding questions at [email protected]. The University of Toronto also has an office regarding ethics if you want more information about your rights as a research participant, or to verify the authenticity of this research. You may contact the Office of Research Ethics at 416-946-3273 or [email protected] To Withdraw at Any Time Participants may withdraw from the study at any time for any reason, and any information collected on them will be destroyed. However, once my research findings are reported or published, they CANNOT withdraw. Risks There are no potential risks in your decision to participate in this study. Please read and sign the attached consent form if you approve this study to be conducted at the Language Institute. Additionally, I will provide letters and consent forms for all professors who wish to participate in the study as part of the community and volunteers of the embedded case study. Upon completion of the study, I will also provide you with a report of my main research findings. Teachers may also request copies of this report by contacting me. Sincerely, Tammy Fajardo Dack PhD Candidate Ontario Institute for Studies in Education - University of Toronto

243

Activities Assist in the coordination of a date for the researcher to present the project to professors of the Language Institute during one of the regular faculty meetings held on Mondays.

Conditions • Any information gathered on professors, including their willingness to participate, will be kept strictly confidential and all participants’ identities will be kept anonymous during the collection, analysis, and reporting of the research data; no identifying information will be used in the reporting of the data either in presentations or in written research reports • I understand that data collected on professors’ participation may be used in academic publications or presentations. However, no identifiable information related to participants will be included. • I cannot participate in the community of research during the collection of data as my position of Director may constrain professors’ participation • I will receive a copy of the research report summarizing the findings of the study • Professors may withdraw before the study is reported or published at any time with no consequences of any kind. However, once the study is reported or published, they may NOT withdraw.

244

______YES, I approve the research study to be conducted at the Language Institute of the University of Cuenca

Name: ______

Email: ______

Signature: ______

Date: ______

______NO, I do not approve the research study to be conducted at the Language Institute of the University of Cuenca

Name: ______

Date: ______

Signature: ______

245

Appendix G: Information and Consent Form for Participants in the Community

Dear Professor,

My name is Tammy Fajardo Dack, and I am a Ph.D. candidate in the Language and Literacies Education program in the Department of Curriculum, Teaching and Learning at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto. I am writing to ask for your participation in a research study related to the establishment and development of a community of practice focused on critical practitioner research for the Language Institute of the University of Cuenca. After reading the detailed information below, please complete and return the consent form attached to this document to me. Thank you.

Title of Research Project A case study of the implementation and development of a community of practice focused on practitioner research in an Ecuadorian university Principal Investigator Tammy Fajardo Dack, Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Curriculum, Teaching and Learning, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto Purpose of the Study The general purpose of this research is to engage university-level language instructors at the Institute of Languages at the University of Cuenca in a community of practice focused on practitioner research to develop new and critical understandings of their teaching and issues within their language classrooms, as well as the actions they take to address those issues. The specific aim is to facilitate a shift of the role of faculty from being language instructors exclusively to becoming critical practitioner-researchers who can integrate approaches oriented toward social justice. This research study requires the participation of faculty members at the Language Institute with the purpose of learning about their underlying assumptions, beliefs and actions within their practice and how these are shaped after partaking in a community of research practice that integrates a critical participatory approach.

246

Participants I would be recruiting 12-15 professors from the Language Institute of the University of Cuenca to be part of the community of practice, and from them, I will recruit 8-10 professors to be the focal participants of the case study. Benefits Professors participating in the research community will benefit from the experiences of colleagues and from the research paradigms that will be discussed in the group throughout the process, as well as, re(framing) their roles as researchers and social agents. Another benefit could be the publication of their research findings in various forms including articles and online media posts. The Language Institute and the University of Cuenca will benefit from the creation of a space in which language professors may not only improve their teaching practice but also enhance their research competence, factors that, according to the University of Cuenca and the Law of Higher Education in the country, are important requirements. What participants will do You will complete a background questionnaire to provide information about your academic background as a student and your research experience. You will also provide a written sample of previous research work to understand better the kind of research you have produced. Additionally, you will participate in two 90-minute monthly meetings during which I will document in detail the interactions of the community by being a participant observer and by using an audio recording device. Coffee, juice, and snacks will be provided at every meeting. Participants’ Rights To Confidentiality Your identity will be kept strictly anonymous and confidential through a pseudonym that will be used in both the analysis of the data and the oral and written reporting of the findings. Only my supervisor, Dr. Antoinette Gagné, will have access to the recordings, transcriptions, and translations. This information will be kept on a password protected external hard drive in my house that will be locked in a cabinet, and all data will be destroyed no later than five years from now.

247

To Ask Questions about the Research If you would like to ask questions about this research project, please do not hesitate to contact me at any time (Tammy Fajardo Dack) at XXXX or [email protected]. You may also contact my supervisor, Dr. Antoinette Gagné, regarding questions at [email protected]. The University of Toronto also has an office regarding ethics if you want more information about your rights as a research participant, or to verify the authenticity of this research. You may contact the Office of Research Ethics at 416-946-3273 or [email protected] To Withdraw at Any Time You may withdraw from the study at any time for any reason and any information collected about you will be destroyed. However, once my research findings are reported or published, you CANNOT withdraw. Risks There are no potential risks in your decision to participate in this study.

Please read and sign the attached consent form if you decide to participate in this study to be conducted at the Language Institute. When my study is completed, you will be provided with a copy of the report of my research results.

Sincerely, Tammy Fajardo Dack PhD Candidate Ontario Institute for Studies in Education University of Toronto

PLEASE KEEP A COPY OF THIS LETTER FOR YOUR RECORDS ******************************************************************************

248

I have read Tammy Fajardo Dack’s letter describing the goals of the research project, and I understand that my participation will involve the following activities and conditions.

Activities • Complete a background questionnaire • Provide a written sample of a research work • Participate every month in two 90-minute sessions.

Conditions • Tammy will keep my information private from everyone, including the Director of the Language Institute • I will receive a copy of the research report summarizing the findings of the study • I may withdraw before the study is reported or published at any time with no consequences of any kind. However, once the study is reported or published, I may NOT withdraw.

______YES, I agree to participate in the research study to be conducted in the Language Institute of the University of Cuenca

Name: ______

Email: ______

Signature: ______

Date: ______

249

______NO, I do not agree to participate in the research study to be conducted in the Language Institute of the University of Cuenca

Name: ______

Date: ______

Signature: ______

250

Appendix H: Information and Consent Form for Focal Participants

Dear Professor, My name is Tammy Fajardo Dack and I am a Ph.D. candidate in the Language and Literacies Education program in the Department of Curriculum, Teaching and Learning at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto. I am writing to ask for your participation in a case study research related to the establishment and development of a community of practice focused on critical practitioner research for the Language Institute of the University of Cuenca. After reading the detailed information below, please complete and return the consent form attached to this document to me. Thank you.

Title of Research Project A case study of the implementation and development of a community of practice focused on practitioner research in an Ecuadorian university Principal Investigator Tammy Fajardo Dack, Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Curriculum, Teaching, and Learning, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto Purpose of the Study The general purpose of this research is to engage university-level language instructors at the Institute of Languages at the University of Cuenca in a community of practice focused on practitioner research to develop new and critical understandings of their teaching and issues within their language classrooms, as well as the actions they take to address those issues. The specific aim is to facilitate a shift of the role of faculty from being language instructors exclusively to becoming critical practitioner-researchers who can integrate approaches oriented toward social justice. This research study requires the participation of faculty members at the Language Institute with the purpose of learning about their underlying assumptions, beliefs and actions within their practice and how these are shaped after partaking in a community of research practice that integrates a critical participatory approach.

251

Participants I would be recruiting 12-15 professors from the Language Institute of the University of Cuenca to be part of the community of practice, and from them, I will recruit 8-10 professors to be the focal participants of the case study. Benefits Professors participating in the research community will benefit from the experiences of colleagues and from the research paradigms that will be discussed in the group throughout the process, as well as, re(framing) their roles as researchers and social agents. Another benefit could be the publication of their research findings in various forms including articles and online media posts. The Language Institute and the University of Cuenca will benefit from the creation of a space in which language professors may not only improve their teaching practice but also enhance their research competence, factors that, according to the University of Cuenca and the Law of Higher Education in the country, are important requirements. What participants will do You will participate in three 45-minute interviews schedule for different stages of the research (March, July, and December 2016). In addition, you will be part of two focus group sessions (July and December 2016) to provide information of how you experience your individual and collective role in the community. The interview and the focus group interaction will be audio- recorded for later transcription, translation, and analysis. Participants’ Rights To Confidentiality Your identity will be kept strictly anonymous and confidential through a pseudonym that will be used in both the analysis of the data and the oral and written reporting of the findings. Only my supervisor, Dr. Antoinette Gagné, will have access to the recordings, transcriptions, and translations. This information will be kept on a password protected external hard drive in my house that will be locked in a cabinet, and all data will be destroyed no later than five years from now.

252

To Ask Questions about the Research If you would like to ask questions about this research project, please do not hesitate to contact me at any time (Tammy Fajardo Dack) at XXXXX or [email protected]. You may also contact my supervisor, Dr. Antoinette Gagné, regarding questions at [email protected]. The University of Toronto also has an office regarding ethics if you want more information about your rights as a research participant, or to verify the authenticity of this research. You may contact the Office of Research Ethics at 416-946-3273 or [email protected]

To Withdraw at Any Time You may withdraw from the study at any time for any reason, and any information collected about you will be destroyed. However, once my research findings are reported or published, you CANNOT withdraw.

Risks There are no potential risks in your decision to participate in this study.

Sincerely, Tammy Fajardo Dack PhD Candidate Ontario Institute for Studies in Education University of Toronto

253

PLEASE KEEP A COPY OF THIS LETTER FOR YOUR RECORDS ****************************************************************************** I have read Tammy Fajardo Dack’s letter describing the goals of the research project, and I understand that my participation will involve the following activities and conditions. Activities Participate in three interviews Be part of a focus group. Conditions Tammy will keep my information private from everyone, including the Director of the Language Institute I will receive a copy of the research report summarizing the findings of the study I may withdraw before the study is reported or published at any time with no consequences of any kind. However, once the study is reported or published, I may NOT withdraw.

______YES, I agree to participate in the research study to be conducted at the Language Institute of the University of Cuenca

Name: ______

Email: ______

Signature: ______

Date: ______

254

______NO, I do not agree to participate in the research study to be conducted at the Language Institute of the University of Cuenca

Name: ______

Date: ______

Signature: ______

255

Appendix I: Background Questionnaire

256

Appendix J: Interview Questions

Instructions: There will be three interviews at three different times during the research. One interview will take place after analyzing the background questionnaire and research reports (March 2016). The second interview will in the middle of the data collection process (July 2016), and the third one will be at the end of the study (January 2017). I will use questions to start the interview and then I will ask follow-up and probing questions.

First interview

1. When did you start teaching?

2. Tell me about your experience teaching at the university level?

3. Tell me more about your experience with research?

4. What are your expectations of the community we are forming?

5. What are you bringing to this community?

Second and third interviews

1. How have you felt in our new community?

2. What have you learned so far?

3. Have you encountered difficulties when interacting with colleagues?

4. How do you perceive the issues in your language classrooms now?

5. Have you questioned those issues? How?

6. What actions have you taken to address those issues?

257