Teachers and teacher trainers’ views on ICT in supplementary training of

Interviewee Katja explained (Appendices D and G, question 8) that annually, funding for organizing supplementary training for teachers can be applied for from Finnish National Agency of Education. Supplementary training can be organized for example by municipali-ties, volunteer networks or private companies. Teachers may participate in training either outside of classroom hours, or during classroom hours if a substitute teacher can be hired.

There are no official requirements for teachers to participate in supplementary training in Finland, although the employer might expect it.

According to interviewee Maija, a large part of the supplementary training for teachers is provided by the municipalities in which they work (Appendices D and G, question 8). Maija also spoke of a Central Finland region-wide Digital tutor network, which she described to be one of the most organized and efficient networks in the country. Many of the Finnish interviewees, both teacher trainers as well as teachers, had been actively involved in organ-izing supplementary training. Those working at the university teacher training facility

55

provided training mainly through the university, whereas several of the teachers were in-volved in volunteer networks or requested to train colleagues by the employing school.

One of the teacher trainers, Emma, has been organizing long-term supplementary training in Finnish language and literature, and has included themes such as multimedia learning envi-ronments, multiliteracy and collaborative writing in the training. Communication and social interaction are also heavily based on the internet in the modern age. She has aimed for inte-grating ICT into the training in a subtle way, making it a natural - even hidden - part of the course instead of placing it in a central role. Subject matter and the pedagogical point of view are always in the center of her course. She felt that this approach was beneficial espe-cially to teachers, who felt negatively about the use of ICT, and were not interested in using it at the beginning of the course. She reported that it seems to work, as teachers get to dabble in technology without noticing its presence as the course progresses through subject matter, before finally challenging the teachers to use new ICT tools at the end of the course, where they generally feel more comfortable with it.

When asked what kind of ICT training the teachers had received (Appendices C and F, ques-tion 4), some of the teachers answered that they have not taken part in much or any training in recent years. Pekka explained that during his second year as a teacher he had a longer 10-day training, but since then ninety percent of his ICT skills have been learned independently.

He did add, however, that when training others, he usually also learns something himself.

Heikki also concluded that although he has not received barely any official training at all, he has learned from discussions with other teachers. Most of his skills however have also been learned independently. Matti estimated that he participates in training once a year, and the rest of the time he studies independently, "mainly through trial and error". Seija mentioned independent study as her main source of training as well, but in addition she had been taking courses at the university and participating in staff training whenever a new technology was adopted at the school.

When those of the teachers that had received ICT training were inquired whether they found it to be adequate, the answers were diverse. Seija found her ICT training to be sufficient and considered that she can easily find more information by herself if there is for example a

56

program that she needs. Pekka stated that since he had not received any ICT training during his teacher studies and was - as a young male teacher - expected to know about ICT, he very quickly had to start learning about it by himself. Matti answered with a "yes and no", stating that the training leaves much up for the consideration for the teachers themselves, and teach-ers tend to forget the content of the training unless the topic is close to their interests or applicable to a current project in the classroom.

When asked whether their peers had received similar training, Seija responded that some of the training provided by the school is mandatory, or training that is organized to all teachers, whereas some of the training is voluntary. It is up for the teachers, however, what they do in their free time. Pekka described a similar arrangement in his school, where everybody takes part in certain training, but for most of the training the participation is up for the teachers' own interests. Heikki suspected that all the teachers who use ICT very actively have learned of its use independently, even though he did feel that the amount of training has increased in the past few years.

When the teachers were asked what kind of ICT training they thought would be useful for teachers in the future (Appendices C and F, question 13), the answers revolved around the words "practical" and "pedagogical". Seija described an approach where ICT acts as a sup-port for learning, and the focus is in other content. She gave an example of teaching pro-gramming by tying it together with other content, such as reading comprehension or story-telling. She also emphasized practical training that is easy to integrate into one's work, pref-erably organized at the school. Heikki focused on pedagogical training, where the devices support pedagogy rather than take the center stage. He would also discuss technology's meaning in modern society and aid the teachers in ruling out some ICT content, since he felt that it is simply not possible to focus on everything. Pekka suggested training that would mix two methods, combining a traditional lecture and practical project. Teachers would first learn theory, and then implement it in practice with the help of ICT tutors. Matti stepped out of the context of training in a traditional sense, and vouched for having one pedagogically skilled ICT support person at the school, without their own class to teach, to focus only on implementing the use of ICT in the classroom, together with the teacher. That way, the eve-ryday support of the teachers would be secured.

57