Motivational Aspects of Teacher Collaboration

Abstract

The mutual dependency of teacher collaboration and motivation has emerged as a promising research field. This article now sets out to systematically review peer-reviewed articles on the interconnection of these concepts. It looks at main findings, identifies ambiguities and contradictions in the constructs and highlights their contested nature. It is shown that many studies use different theoretical approaches and conceptual operationalizations. This leads to inconsistent empirical findings. In addition, teacher collaboration is often perceived as a threat to teacher autonomy. This is surprising considering that both teacher collaboration and teacher autonomy positively affect teacher motivation according to many empirical findings.

Teachers’ professional collaboration and trust relationships: An inferential social network analysis of teacher teams

“…As a result, reactions to the increasing demand for teacher collaboration vary widely. While some schools and teachers implement the changes voluntarily because they see a benefit in increased collaboration, others regard strengthening collaboration between teachers as an additional burden (Hargreaves and Dawe, 1990;Kolleck, 2019).…”

“…Different meanings and understandings of teacher collaboration find their expression in various terms used to describe the phenomenon. The literature on teacher collaboration draws on many different expressions such as teacher teams, co-teaching, professional (learning) communities, (teacher) learning teams, or, more broadly, communities of practice (Kolleck, 2019). With the aim to develop more conceptual clarity, scholars have started to distinguish between different forms of teacher collaboration that arise.…”

“…By investigating how the involvement of teachers in TT activities in schools is connected with teachers' trust relations, this article aims to contribute to recent research on teacher collaboration and trust relations in schools (Kolleck, 2019;Moolenaar, 2012;Moolenaar et al, 2012;Schuster et al, 2021;Vangrieken et al, 2015). Notably, managing such collaborations has become a critical part of leadership roles within schools and local educational authorities (Clement and Vandenberghe, 2000;Conley et al 2004;D ıaz-Gibson et al, 2017;Goddard et al 2000;Horn and Little, 2010;Kolleck, 2014;Kolleck et al, 2020).…”

Same Same But Different? Analysen zur Struktur kollegialer Kooperation unter Lehrkräften im Kontext von Schul- und Unterrichtsentwicklung

“…Massenkeil und Rothland 2016;Vangrieken et al 2015;Vescio et al 2008), finden Aspekte der Operationalisierung deutlich weniger Beachtung. Kolleck (2019) Gräsel et al (2006a) vorgeschlagene Einteilung als gegeben an, und verweist auf zufriedenstellende interne Konsistenzen der drei Teilbereiche. Die hohen Interkorrelationen der drei theoretisch angenommenen Faktoren, auf die bereits die Begründer*innen dieser Einteilung 2006 hingewiesen haben, werden allerdings eher selten beleuchtet.…”

“…Für den deutschen Sprachraum wurde die Forschung dazu vor allem durch den 2006 veröffentlichten Themenschwerpunkt in der Zeitschrift für Pädagogik angeregt (Terhart und Klieme 2006). In den letzten Jahren ist erneut -sowohl national als auch international -ein gestiegenes Interesse an der Thematik zu verzeichnen (Fußangel und Gräsel 2014;Grosche et al 2020;Kolleck 2019;Massenkeil und Rothland 2016;Vangrieken et al 2015). Ähnliche Tendenzen zeichnen sich in der schulischen Praxis ab: Angesichts aktueller Entwicklungen, beispielsweise durch den Ausbau von Ganztagskonzepten oder der flächendeckenden Umsetzung von Inklusion, erscheint eine kontinuierliche Zusammenarbeit im Kollegium notwendiger denn je.…”