El impulso decisivo dado por el Mobile World Congress

In addition to the notes above, the researcher also gained a general picture of all nine meetings in the three TSGs. All the three TSGs shared a similar procedure in

143 conducting the TSG meetings. Before the meetings started, the teachers socialized (informal talk). That informal conversation lasted between 10 and 15 minutes. After that, the meetings were started with a short introduction (welcoming speech) by the TSG coordinator. At this point, the TSG coordinator conveyed gratitude to the members for attending the TSGs, followed by informing the participants of the objective/topic of the meetings. This phase lasted between 10 and 20 minutes and was sometimes followed by one to three questions or suggestion from the teachers. After the introduction, the TSG coordinator invited the speakers or facilitators to present their presentation. The presenters during my observations were teacher supervisors9 who were expert teachers and facilitators, while the facilitators in the TSG meetings were the TSG members. During the observation, the facilitators were senior teachers.

The presentations usually lasted from 45 to 70 minutes. The speaker or facilitator presented their presentation in three different ways as follows:

Firstly, the speakers or facilitators presented their topic before inviting the participants to ask questions or to give suggestions. This sort of presentation happened when the Curriculum 2013 was presented. There were similar patterns in presenting this topic in the three TSGs in which the speaker or facilitator gave their presentation before a question and answer session. This topic was introduced once in each TSG in these three districts during the TSG observations (OB.M1DA, OB.M2DB, and OB.M1DC).

In this approach, the process of transferring information and knowledge about the Curriculum 2013 seemed to focus predominantly on the speaker or facilitator activities and was less concerned with possible participants’ interactions and collaboration. Speakers or facilitators focused on lecturing and demonstration of the presentation and

the participants’ main activities were copying presentation materials produced by the

speakers or facilitators on the screen (power point) and asking questions. To be noted, although the meeting were speaker or facilitator driven, the participants had sufficient time to ask questions or get feedback.

9_{Teacher’s supervisors have duties to supervise teachers in regard to their classroom activiti}

144

Secondly, the facilitator spoke between 20 and 30 minutes before inviting the participants to ask questions and/or give feedback. In this second approach, the speakers or facilitators encouraged the participants to directly interrupt their presentation whenever they wanted something to be clarified. This pattern happened when the TSG members discussed: using technology in designing lesson plans and teaching materials (OB.M2DA), working plans for the TSG meetings in semester 2 (OB.M1DB), and methods and approaches in language learning (OB.M2DC).

The second approach seemed to provide greater opportunities for the teachers to interact and share knowledge among themselves compared to the first approach. The observation showed that, on many occasions, when a teacher asked a question or commented on something related to the materials being presented, other teachers and the facilitators gave feedback and responses.

Lastly, the facilitators gave a short introduction to the topic (usually between 15 and 30 minutes), then divided the participants into small groups. After dividing the participants into groups, the facilitator distributed the meeting materials to be discussed in the groups before discussing it with the whole group. The participants were divided into small groups in the three TSG meetings, namely when they discussed: the guidelines for semester tests (OB.M3DA & OB.M3DC); and learning models: numbered heads together (OB.M3DB). The small group discussion lasted between 25 and 40 minutes. During the small groups’ discussion the facilitator went around the meeting rooms, checking the participants’ understanding and progress.

In this last approach, the processes seemed to focus predominantly on the participants’ activities and were concerned much more about how to encourage participants to interact and collaborate among themselves. The facilitator’s main activities were to facilitate the meeting processes. In this approach, the majority of the participants seemed to get involved actively during the small group discussions.

In the informal conversations the researcher had with some teachers, they said that most of the TSG meetings were conducted following the last pattern (one of the TSG members acting as a facilitator and participants were divided into groups to discuss a

145 topic). They said that sometimes they conducted the TSG meetings with seminars and/or workshops when they considered it was a better way to disseminate information (e.g. the Curriculum 2013). The most important point was that, the participants had sufficient time to get and give feedback during the meetings. According to the participants, one of the reasons why the participants had sufficient time in the TSG meetings to reflect and give feedback was because the meetings were not attended by so many participants (in contrast to seminars/workshops).

At the end of their presentation, the speakers or facilitators generally concluded their presentation and then handed over the meetings to the TSG coordinator. Before closing the TSG meetings, the TSG coordinators informed the participants about the schedule and the topics for next meetings. The TSG coordinators always encouraged the participants to attend the next meeting and to invite other teachers as well. Before leaving the meeting venue, the teachers had more informal conversations while having light refreshments.

Another source of data in this chapter is from the interviews. The following section presents a brief description of the interview processes and the participants.