Collaborative Self-Study with Pre-Service Teachers to Improve the Use of Drawings as a Pedagogical Tool

ABSTRACT

This collaborative self-study with pre-service teachers describes a process of examining the use of drawings as a pedagogical tool at a tertiary institution of learning. Hence, this research examines the question: What can I learn from my students to improve the use of drawings as a pedagogical tool and thus improve my work as a teacher educator? Eight students (also known as pre-service teachers) accepted an invitation to help me improve the use of drawings as a pedagogical tool. Four main themes emerged from three sources of information which were qualitatively analyzed. The first theme was ‘not just knowledge’. I learned that drawings don’t have to ‘come at the expense of disciplinary knowledge’ as they can actually expand it. The second theme made it clear to me that the use of drawings evoked strong, negative and positive emotions in students when using them. The third theme led me to understand that there is complexity in using drawings. Through the fourth theme I developed an understanding of how I should use drawings as a pedagogical tool in the future. Not only did the collaborative self-study help me to better understand the use of drawings, it also led me to consider the use of other creative tools as part of an ongoing pedagogical process. In addition, in the future I will create a continuous dialogue with students that will clarify the pedagogical ideas behind using drawings and other creative learning tools, thus working towards continuous improvement in my teaching practice.

KEYWORDS:

• Drawing
• higher education
• teacher education
• collaborative self-study
• professional development
• pre-service teachers

I took my initial steps as a teacher educator after completing my PhD, which focused on avian ecology and involved quantitative research methods. My teaching approach was based on the traditional approach, dominated by lecture-centered sessions while the students remained passive (Iqbal et al., 2021; Nghia et al., 2018). As such, I was simply transferring information. I used the same ‘copy/paste’ approach to teaching that I had experienced at university. My attempts were not successful and I encountered many difficulties during the transition to becoming a teacher educator (Seikkula-Leino et al., 2021; Smith & Lev-Ari, 2018). The difficulties I encountered in the transition between education institutions, which are not unique to me, are reported in the self-study literature (Murray & Male, 2005; Myers et al., 2022) and in other research fields (Gourlay, 2011).

Very quickly, I realized that this was not the way to educate pre-service teachers (generally referred to as students). I realized that there is little value in educating the future generation of educators to simply transfer knowledge (Seikkula-Leino et al., 2021; Smith & Lev-Ari, 2018). I recognized the need to investigate the pedagogy I use (Myers et al., 2022). I understood, as written by Wenger (2000), that teaching is not only about the transfer of knowledge. I decided that a change was needed in my teaching approach. I realized that as a teacher educator, although I am not a pedagogical guide, I should integrate innovative pedagogical strategies into my teaching (Wenger, 2000).

I knew that teaching is a dynamic process in which there is active involvement of all partners (Vygotsky, 1978); it is a process of two-way interaction between the partners during the teaching and learning process. I learned that when teaching pre-service teachers, there is a mutual relationship that includes social processes related to personal experience. With the change of my perception, I adopted a teaching model that combines three elements: ‘head’ – knowledge, ‘hands’ – action, and ‘heart’ – emotion (Singleton, 2015). Around the same time, I was exposed to the idea of using drawings as a pedagogical tool (Barraza, 1999; Cohenmiller, 2018). I realized that drawings do not have to ‘come at the expense of disciplinary knowledge’ – they can actually enhance and expand it – and therefore, recognizing the value of using drawings, I began to incorporate them into my teaching (Gal, 2023).

Following the temporary closure of education institutions due to the Corona-19 pandemic, I explored ways to reduce the pressure on students. I set alternative assessment tasks in lieu of the usual tests. Most of the time this was group-based assessment. In 2022, I decided to examine the level of understanding of the students individually. In the last lesson of several different courses, I asked the students to make a drawing of the central focus of the course. Together with drawings from previous years, I collected more than 350 drawings from five different courses, in which an assignment had been given to illustrate the central concept of the course. The drawings were supposed to demonstrate the level of understanding of the students at the end of the teaching process and help me understand what the students actually knew about the concept they were asked to draw (Bulunuz, 2019). For each subject, and in accordance with the recommendations for analyzing drawings cited in the literature (Cronin-Jones, 2005), I chose between five and seven criteria that would indicate the students’ level of understanding. The results were disappointing. The average grade in each of the courses was very low. I was very disappointed and experienced feelings of disquiet. It wasn’t just the low grades that made me reflect on my teaching process. On studying the drawings closely, I discovered that some of the students did not draw what they had been asked to draw at all. The combination of low grades and failure to follow instructions gave me no rest.

I decided to examine my teaching process and try to understand where I might been ‘missing something’. In other words, the intention of this self-study was to consider my pedagogy and understand where I need to adjust or improve my teaching approach as a result of this introspection (Bullock, 2017). Through the use of a collaborative self-study methodology (Appleget et al., 2020; Loughran, 2007; Samaras et al., 2019), and, like other studies reported in the literature (Berry & Kitchen, 2020), I intended to examine the practice of using drawings, as well as how I used them, with the aim of improving and influencing students who study with me in future. As in other studies (O’Dwyer et al., 2019) that adopted collaborative self-study, I sought to use collaborative self-study in a critical and in-depth examination of my pedagogy, in this case through feedback from students who studied with me (Appleget et al., 2020).

In fact, in undertaking this study, it allowed me to deliberate and understand what did not work, which will also inform my future pedagogical choices. Hence, the current research examines the question: What can I learn from my students to improve the use of drawings as pedagogical tool and thus improve my work as a teacher educator? This research question guided this study and also responds to the call to action in the literature for teacher educators to lead reform in teacher education through self-study methodology (Bonne et al., 2006; Groothuijsen et al., 2020; Ping et al., 2018).

Literature Review

The importance of developing the ability of teacher educators to independently evaluate their work was reported as far back as five decades ago (Stenhouse, 1975). Back then, as with today, it was understood that self-inquiry is a valuable technique for self-improvement and a strategy that provides tools to influence the professional growth, pedagogy, and teaching environment of teacher educators (Borg, 2006; Gaard et al., 2017; Haberlin, 2019; Lunenberg & Samaras, 2011; Lunenberg et al., 2010; Ritter, 2017; Stenhouse, 1975).

Self-study is methodology (Appleget et al., 2020; Loughran, 2007; Parsons et al., 2022) that emphasizes the centrality of the role practitioner researchers in improving their professional practice (Carless & Boud, 2018) arising from internal questions (Ping et al., 2018). Self-study by teacher educators and engaging them in the process of reflection on their teaching methods is based on the understanding that reflection should be an active, vital process and not just a passive situation (Appleget et al., 2020; Dawson et al., 2019) which can contribute to teacher educator professional development (Samaras et al., 2016). Recently there has been renewed interest in the ability of teacher educators to investigate their own work in the classroom, along with the understanding that in education systems, teaching and learning processes must adapt to the dynamic reality of the 21st century. This dynamic reality includes frequent changes in the understanding of the nature of higher education (Čechová et al. 2019). In the modern context, it is crucial for a teacher to be able to solve professional problems on his/her own as well as by undertaking self-professional development which enables self-improvement (Sasson et al., 2020; Shukshina et al., 2016).

The departure point for self-research is ‘I’ (Lunenberg & Samaras, 2011; Lunenberg et al., 2010) and the research is centered on the researcher’s ontology. In this way, the researcher examines his/her truths and the working assumptions on which he/she operates (Lunenberg & Samaras, 2011; Pinnegar & Hamilton, 2009). This process contributes to professional growth and pedagogical improvement (Borg, 2006). The starting point for personal research is different from researcher to researcher (Ritter, 2017).

Since learning is a social process (Parsons et al., 2022; Vygotsky, 1978), helping peers can improve learning processes (Tondreau et al., 2022). Therefore, a central factor in self-study is the integration of partners as part of collaborative self-study (O’Dwyer et al., 2019; Tondreau et al., 2022). These partners can support the process of personal development (O’Dwyer et al., 2019), encourage critical thinking (Richards & Ressler, 2016) while listening actively to partners (Freese, 2006), engage in reflective processes (Appleget et al., 2020) and help to shape the skills of the teacher educator (Schwarz-Franco‬‏ & Ergas, 2021). Discussions with partners in the process of their education turns the learning about ‘I’, the researcher, into learning in which the partners can also develop professionally (Haberlin, 2019; Lunenberg & Samaras, 2011; Lunenberg et al., 2011). Furthermore, the collaborative self-study makes it possible to examine the teaching process in a critical and transparent manner, and in this way, to enable personal professional development in everything related to teaching methods (Samaras, 2002, 2011; Samaras et al., 2016). The collaborative self-study, that includes transparency, structured processes, a clear methodology and self-disclosure, provides an answer (Loughran, 2007; O’Dwyer et al., 2019) to the existing criticism such as fear of personal bias, narrow point of view and excessive subjectivity of researchers in the scientific world about those who use self-study (Loughran, 2007; Zeichner, 2007).

The use of drawings in my classes began with the recognition that there are different learning styles (Gardner, 2000) which are a result of learning processes changing over time (Lowenfeld & Brittain, 1987; Piaget, 1971). The idea was to diversify my classes and incorporate creative tools (Flowers et al., 2015; Gruenewald, 2003) during my teaching, and that verbal learning that combines visual learning will enable more effective learning among students (Fiorella & Kuhlmann, 2019).

Drawing is used in a variety of research fields such as psychology, medicine, environmental education, geography, mathematics, science and more (Anderson et al., 2015; Ben Zvi – Assaraf & Orion, 2010; Cheung et al., 2020; Farokhi & Hashemi, 2011; Inwood, 2008; Schneller et al., 2021). The use of drawings is common at different ages, from preschool to adult (Chambers, 1983; Cheung et al., 2020; Flowers et al., 2015; Gedžūne & Gedžūne, 2015; Morón-Monge et al., 2021; Özsoy & Ahi, 2014; Yildiz et al., 2021). The act of drawing requires the expression of internal information; organizing it in such a way as to express knowledge in a visual form (Fiorella & Kuhlmann, 2019; Kirby et al., 2022).

At a young age, when children’s writing ability is limited, drawing is used to express ideas. The advantage of drawing is its ability to examine a variety of topics that young children cannot express orally or in writing. For example, life experiences (Ahonen et al., 2018), relationships with the environment (Morón-Monge et al., 2021), values (Ahonen et al., 2018), misconceptions (Gedžūne & Gedžūne, 2015; Köse, 2008), knowledge (Morón-Monge et al., 2021), emotions (Alabdulkarim et al., 2022; Morón-Monge et al., 2021; Staples et al., 2019), perspective (Yildiz et al., 2021) and attitudes. In addition, drawing allows children to express their creative ability in a personal way (Flowers et al., 2015). Moreover, drawing allow relaxing, calm, venting, concentration and is not stressful (Alabdulkarim et al., 2022; Morón-Monge et al., 2021). Therefore, drawings overcome cultural obstacles (Merriman & Guerin, 2006). On the other hand, when the examination of the drawing is done without the presence of the person making the drawing and receiving a verbal explanation from that person about the essence of the drawings, there can be a bias in the interpretation. Therefore, in older children when the ability to write is better, drawings should be accompanied with an explanation of the drawing. The explanation should help reduce the bias and allow a deeper understanding of the essence of the drawing.

Along with the benefits of using drawings, there are also challenges. Drawing can be an unfamiliar cognitive challenge (Fiorella & Zhang, 2018). Sometimes, the illustrator may imitate the drawings of others (Einarsdóttir, 2007) or not perform the task according to their understanding, and not according to the teacher’s guidelines (Areljung et al., 2022). Sometimes, the drawings are not of sufficient quality (Fiorella & Zhang, 2018). In addition, drawing is influenced by knowledge, age, culture and ability (Farokhi & Hashemi, 2011). Furthermore, the drawings produced also depend on the resources that teachers allocate to the drawing activity (Areljung et al., 2022). Despite the challenges of using drawings, I decided that the benefits of using drawings outweighed the challenges.

Method

The gaps between my expectations as a teacher educator and the students’ level of understanding, and the results of the drawing analysis, were the triggers that motivated me to engage in this collaborative self-study research (Lunenberg & Samaras, 2011; Lunenberg et al., 2010; Pinnegar & Hamilton, 2009) together with my students (Pithouse-Morgan & Samaras, 2019). Personal initiative to conduct research is one of the characteristics of self-study (Haberlin, 2019). Through examining the literature (Loughran, 2007) I became aware of several central principles that helped me focus on my self-study. I recognized that I have the internal demand to create a new framework for using drawings as a pedagogical tool. I also realized that as part of the need to examine and question my assumptions about using drawings I needed to have positive interaction with the students who had experienced the drawing activities in my classes.

Through email, I contacted the students (82 in total), who studied with me in various courses (M.Ed. or B.Ed.) in which I used drawings. Before contacting the students, I received the approval of the ethics committee of the academic institution where I work. The message was sent to those students who would not be studying with me again in the future. In the email I presented my goal and invited any students who were willing to help me in my endeavor to improve my teaching methods to contact me. Eight students responded. There were two males and six females-one male and one female from one course, and one male and five females from another (see Table 1). All understood the purpose of the study and what their participation would involve, and readily agreed to take part in the process.

Table 1. Participants.

Participant (F/M)	Course he/she studied	Degree
Aya (F)	Social-ecological systems	M.Ed.
Hen (F)	Social-ecological systems	M.Ed.
Lea (F)	Social-ecological systems	M.Ed.
Liat (F)	Social-ecological systems	M.Ed.
Mohan (M)	Social-ecological systems	M.Ed.
Talya (F)	Social-ecological systems	M.Ed.
Itay (M)	Biodiversity	B.Ed.
Shir (F)	Biodiversity	B.Ed.

The interaction (i.e. meetings) with students took two forms: six were Zoom video conference meetings while the other two were face-to-face. For me, the Zoom meetings were more convenient for doing the research. These Zoom meetings allowed greater flexibility when considering the dates and times, which also needed to be convenient for the students.

The meetings were between 45–60 minutes in duration. With each student, individually, I discussed the challenges and benefits of using drawing as a pedagogical tool, but mainly focused on my teaching method and the way I used drawing in the various classes. The different points of view and emphases among the students is consistent with the understanding that collaborative self-study can include dialogue at different levels and in different forms (Lunenberg & Samaras, 2011). All sessions were recorded so that I could listen to the conversations multiple times. Furthermore, I referred to what was said by the students in each of the meetings during subsequent meetings with their peers. In this way, the students could respond to the thoughts of their associates in an indirect way, because in collaborative self-research, time must be devoted to deepen understanding and enable insights that will advance the goal of the research (Appleget et al., 2020). By listening to the recordings of the discussions, it was possible to create what were effectively three- or four-way conversation, even though in real time I only met with a single student at a time.

Each meeting began with a reminder of the purpose and an explanation of what I hoped to achieve by the end of the conversation (Lunenberg & Samaras, 2011). From the outset I tried to create a relaxed atmosphere that promoted honesty and trust, which is a necessary basis for collaborative self-study (Tondreau et al., 2022). During the meetings I asked for clarification when needed and did not hesitate to ask the students to discuss weaknesses in how I taught, as part of the attempt to confront (Diacopoulos & Butler, 2020) my experience with the drawing activities. My goal was to develop a set of guidelines to improve my way of using drawings as a pedagogical tool, and thus improve my work as a teacher. I encouraged the students to analyze, criticize, reflect on their feelings and describe the learning process they went through during the drawing task. Their immersion in the discussion helped me to create meaning and understand the experience from the students’ perspective. During each meeting, I wrote down points of interest that arose, which led to further questions later in the conversation. The investigation was thorough and in depth. During the discussions, I also asked the students to respond to various points I collected leading up to the meetings from my field notes based on the other meetings with the students and from the literature which related to using drawings in education (Barraza, 1999; Cohenmiller, 2018; Farmer et al., 2018), a step in the self-study process that would add to the credibility of the analysis (Lunenberg & Samaras, 2011). The addition of information from the literature was intended to expand the discussion and allow alternative perspectives on the use of drawings to be considered.

Following the meetings, we exchanged emails in order to give the students the option of sending me any insights that didn’t arise during the discussions. Some provided reflective emails while others sent video recordings. In total, my data sources included: six Zoom meetings, two face-to-face meetings. Moreover, I received 16 responses by email from different students, an average of two responses per student. I also received five video recordings. Offering time for re-examination, and the opportunity to carefully consider what was said in the conversations, was part of my adherence to guidelines (Loughran, 2007) for writing a self-study report, notably ‘to (again) minimize possibilities for self-justification or rationalization of existing practices and behaviors’ (p. 16).

Data Analysis

The data for this collaborative self-study was collected between February 2022 and June 2022. It was qualitatively analyzed (Loughran, 2007; Pinnegar & Hamilton, 2009) using a process based on Thomas’ work (Thomas, 2017). This involved reading and re-reading the transcribed dialogue from the meetings with the eight students.

The use of multiple sources (Collins & O’Riordan, 2022; Hammerton & Munafò, 2021) was important for providing a comprehensive understanding of the issues and for strengthening the internal validity of the analysis. It also assists in enhancing the rigor and credibility of the study. The information collected was systematically organized according to codes, categories and finally themes that relate to the research question that led me to carry out the self-study.

The inductive analysis included an examination of all the information collected. In the first cycle analysis, I was open-minded about different types of codes such as emotional codes, processes codes, values codes, etc. Even in the second cycle analysis, I did not limit myself to certain categories (Saldaña, 2009).

Findings

In this research based on self-study methodology, I asked myself: What can I learn from my students to improve the use of drawings as a pedagogical tool and thus improve my work as a teacher educator? Four main themes emerged from the data. The first was ‘not just knowledge’. The students emphasized to me that there is value in using drawings even if it comes at the expense of learning disciplinary knowledge. In the second theme I came to understand the emotional complexity of the students towards the drawing activities. Thirdly, I was made aware of the demoralization that can come about as a result of carrying out the task of drawing during my lessons, and fourthly, I was exposed to the students’ recommendations for the continued use of drawings.

Not Just Knowledge

All eight students, without exception, expressed a belief in the need to combine the imparting of knowledge with the provision of pedagogical tools for their future teaching, as one student described:

I am building my toolbox for future use. Before each lesson I can open the toolbox and choose a suitable tool from it from the subject I studied according to the knowledge and experience I acquired in the lessons … this is an example of how I can do it in the future … it’s really important.

From this student I learned that the way I chose to combine the acquisition of knowledge and the demonstration of a teaching method is important. I may be a role model for him.

Another student supported this view and said: ‘The combined classes are an example to follow … add more volume to the combination of this, because it adds to the learning’. From this student’s statement, I learned that the combination of knowledge and pedagogy is not harmful to learning, but on the contrary, only adds to it.

A third student also discussed the importance of the synergy between pedagogy and the acquisition of knowledge:

Even if it seems like you taught less, in practice the combination

of the pedagogy made the learning deeper and wider … it’s okay to

spend time drawing during the lesson … I gained [a better understanding

of] pedagogy and a deepening knowledge that is the real thing… it

doesn’t hinder learning; it only adds to learning … It’s a shame that only

a few of the lecturers do it.

One student understood the concept of ‘head’ – knowledge, ‘hands’ – activities and ‘heart’ – emotions learning, as can be seen from the following quote:

You constantly do ‘head’, ‘hands’ and ‘heart’ – that’s the only way

to learn. Even if, perhaps, you learn less knowledge, it is absorbed

better and I believe it will stay with me for a long time … All lecturers

should do this.

From this theme I learned that adopting the ‘head’, ‘hands’ and ‘heart’ model as a teaching approach at a teacher education institution was a fundamentally correct decision. The students supported the combination of imparting knowledge and demonstrating the pedagogy in which knowledge can be used, as part of their recognition of the learning process.

Feelings Towards the Drawings

The way the students expressed their feelings about using drawing as pedagogical tool often focused on their feeling of distress. Sometimes this was slight as one of the students pointed out:

It’s not the drawing that is the problem, the problem is in how to

express the subject, the whole idea … it’s abstract, its connections

… it’s not painting for fun … thinking more about what I’m going to

draw … not from the artistic side, but that it reflects knowledge.

The student’s statement began to arouse in me a point of critical thinking about the complexity of emotions the students encountered when I asked them to represent a conceptual understanding through a drawing.

When I analyzed the data, I discovered that other students raised the same point, as can be read in the following quote:

It’s a complex issue … drawing is the field I come from … I felt an obligation to be able to express something precisely … there is a difficulty in taking a concept and expressing it accurately through visual images.

I began to understand the students’ distress arising from the need to express cognitive understanding through drawing and the desire to succeed in expressing this knowledge. I found students for whom the feeling of distress, or that of their classmates, was much stronger, and they discussed this. This included, the moderate statement: ‘It was difficult for the students … we don’t know how to draw … it’s embarrassing’, and a more direct statement: ‘The drawings put the students under stress … why draw now … this is a task we haven’t done in years’. The statement expressing the strongest feelings of disquiet included the following: ‘ … the students were traumatized by the request to draw … by the very need to just draw, no matter what’.

During the meetings I learned that all the students felt a degree of distress regarding the drawing task. The level of distress depends on each student’s personal skills and experience in drawing methodology. The students who had never drawn before felt more distressed than students who had experience drawing, or had better drawing skills.

‘The hands’, the drawing activity that I integrated into the different courses was designed to provide a break from the teacher-centered education approach. I had intended to promote the acquisition of knowledge in a different and creative method. I thought the drawing activities would be perceived positively by the students. From what the students said, I now understand that this is not the case. For a significant number of the students, the drawing task evoked deep negative emotions. Following the collaborative self-research, I now understand that there is a need to make use of the idea of the ‘hands’, as a learning activity, but that I should diversify my approach to give different options to students for self-expression and demonstration of their learning.

The Complexity of Using Drawing Tools

Students tried to explain to me what caused their feelings of discomfort with regard to drawing the scientific concept. First, the students noted openly and without fear the feeling of self-doubt regarding the drawing activity, as one student claimed: ‘Self-doubt that stems from the lack of confidence in drawing … in the ability to stand behind the drawing … to speak about it’. Lack of confidence, that I was not aware of, is also reflected in the following quote: ‘I draw like a five-year-old girl’. These quotes reflect a very low self-efficacy to draw. According to another student, this lack of self-efficacy stems from a lack of basic drawing skills. As he said: ‘They haven’t used this technique’. Or as another student pointed out: ‘From a young age the use of the language of drawing is silenced … people perceive themselves as not knowing how to draw’. Another explanation for the feelings of uneasiness towards drawing stems from the fear of failure as expressed by one of the students: ‘Concentrated on doing, methodology, and less on the idea … everything I know disappeared … drawing is an inhibiting factor … I will be tested on my poor [drawing] talent’.

Following the realization that the students’ self-efficacy to draw was low, I tried to understand what motivated this low self-efficacy, and asked the students about it in the subsequent meetings. The responses surprised me. The students were worried about their grade following the drawing, which they claimed would be bad because they were dealing with the methodology of drawing and not the content of the course. Further thought on the complexity of combining the expression of scientific knowledge with the need to draw can be found in the words of the following student: ‘There is a combination of conceptual understanding and graphic expression here – it’s not an easy challenge’. In one of the emails sent to me following the meetings, one of the students summarized his feelings of discomfort and the reasons for it as: ‘Drawing is a new language, it takes time to learn a language … there is a gap of discomfort … but with all the problems, the drawings have an advantage and we have to continue’.

From this theme I learned that the task of drawing, the technical act of taking a pen, pencil or marker and starting to draw is complex for a significant number of students. I did not imagine that students in their twenties or older would feel helpless in front of a white sheet of paper on which they have been asked to express theoretical information, in the case of my courses, a scientific concept.

So How Do I Proceed?

With this statement: ‘… we have to continue’, I continued, and developed the dialogue with the students further. All students were unanimous in the view that it is important to continue using drawing tasks in one way or another, because, as one of the students asserted: ‘It would be easier if the tool was used more frequently’. Another student supported the idea of continuing the use of drawings and said: ‘The drawings are a process that allows a general overview and not a focus on the numerical result of a single grade … we need to continue with it’. From these statements, I understood that despite all the difficulties, there is merit in the use of drawings as a pedagogical tool; that their use can enhance the learning process.

It became clear to me that the use of drawings as an effective pedagogical tool is, in itself, a long learning process. One student recounted her daughter’s learning experience when they were on a cross-cultural mission:

I thought about it before this meeting. I thought about the time

we were in Toronto; my daughter took her first steps in the language.

They had a notebook. Every Friday she drew and wrote words in the

notebook. And every Friday, the kindergarten teacher would sit next to

her and write down what my daughter told her … If my daughter had

continued with this exercise until the end, a thorough end, her ability to

express herself in painting and in a creative way in general would

have been much greater.

When I brought up the example of the student’s daughter with the other students, they replied that they were in favor of using drawings as part of a long pedagogical process, rather than in a one-off way like I did in my classes.

Additional support for the idea of using drawings as part of an ongoing pedagogical process can be found in the following quote:

It would be great if you made a formative assessment out of it and even added personal formative assessment … give them a personal notebook at the beginning of the year in which they can record all the drawings, or open a common Google file where they can upload all the drawings … The students then have to evaluate the process of change that has taken place in them.

This student emphasized the importance of the students’ self-evaluation process using personal drawings over several time points during the learning process.

When I sent emails to the students and I mentioned the idea of using drawings in a longer, continuous process, which could include the student’s personal reflection, all the participants supported the idea. One of the students, who had most strongly expressed his displeasure with the use of drawings, contemplated the idea of an ongoing process: ‘I wouldn’t focus only on drawings … you could combine writing poems, collages or similar creative things’. The student who came from the art field supported this idea: ‘Try to make friends with the creative elements … include creativity as part of the teaching process … through the use of material, use of form’. According to the students, cultivation and expansion of creativity is intended: ‘to also allow different learners … not everyone likes, connects, feels comfortable with drawing … the idea of different assessment methods in an institution that trains teachers is great … don’t give up … expand’. When I conducted the meeting with the fifth student and presented him with the ideas that arose from the previous meetings, he added: ‘Group discussion is very important … it develops … it gives new perspectives that you don’t always think about alone’. In a discussion about creating a more effective evaluation process rather than a one-off exam, one of the students suggested incorporating writing in a personal notebook:

Keep a kind of diary … a notebook that has everything in it, texts,

drawings, things the student writes, cognitive aspects, emotional aspects

as well. It’s something very important that inspires insight over time,

not just a combination, words also have great value.

When I asked how to proceed, the students responded with ideas that opened my mind to other ways of using drawings. From my conversations with the students, I got creative ideas on how to use drawings in the future – but not only drawings. I realized that it is necessary to make continuous use of drawings as a pedagogical tool and not to only use them as a once-off task. I learned that I have to expand the creative ways of using drawing in my classes and also to allow the use of different ways of representation.

What I Have Learnt

Through this research study, I sought to answer my research question: What can I learn from my students to improve the use of drawings as pedagogical tool and improve my work as a teacher educator? The collaborative self-study approach allowed me to critically examine (Samaras, 2002) the process of using the drawings. The critical thinking that was used in the dialogue with the students helped me to challenge my way of teaching when I use drawings. The students allowed me to understand the issues and weak points of using drawings and provided me with an answer to the question of what doesn’t work (Cain et al., 2019). Now, I (and others) can, in a relatively simple way, use drawings and other creative tools more effectively. None of the students felt indifferent towards the use of drawings, and all pointed out the difficulty of using them, a view that can also be found in the literature (Einarsdóttir, 2007; Farokhi & Hashemi, 2011; Kirby et al., 2022; Merriman & Guerin, 2006; Morón-Monge et al., 2021). The non-fulfillment of the instructions for drawing the scientific concepts, as experienced with my students, should be understood in the context of the difficulties discussed. The literature cites examples in which children omit objects they strongly dislike in their drawings or completely omit drawing subjects they do not know much about (Cronin-Jones, 2005). Regardless of this, the students were unanimous in their view that the use of alternative assessments should be explored in academic courses in preference to the exclusive use of traditional assessment methods such as the test. This view is consistent with that found in other studies (Dunsmuir et al., 2017; Quesada et al., 2019). The conversations that developed with the students as part of the collaborative self-study allowed me to reflect on the way I used drawing as a pedagogical tool and consequently, I changed my way of thinking.

Conclusion

The ‘personal journey’ (Diacopoulos et al., 2022) described in this article was my first attempt at using collaborative self-study methodology to improve my work as a teacher educator For me, this self-study was a new and sometimes challenging experience. I approached it with great intentions and an open mind – and a genuine endeavor to improve my pedagogy (Appleget et al., 2020; Schwarz-Franco‬‏ & Ergas, 2021), but, like others (Diacopoulos et al., 2022), I also came with concerns. I did not anticipate that the attitudes and thoughts of my partners in the process, the students, would raise points of view and ideas that would be of such importance and significance in designing a new teaching approach. I appreciate their involvement in the process and their frank contribution. Similar to other studies (Appleget et al., 2020), the collaborative self-study I experienced encouraged me, and I was inspired to try new things based on the opinions of my students.

In my opinion, I learned to create a supportive environment (Olafson et al., 2007) for a fruitful dialogue with students (Pithouse-Morgan & Samaras, 2019). This friendly atmosphere is the key to the success of the teaching improvement process (Olafson et al., 2007). I did this through dialogue based on well thought out questions and action-oriented processes (Parsons et al., 2022). The collaborative self-study process allowed me to critically examine my way (Samaras, 2002, 2011) of using drawings as a pedagogical tool, and thus learn from my research partners (Diacopoulos et al., 2022; Loughran, 2007).

I consider myself to be an advanced lecturer. I make use of the ‘head’, ‘hands’ and ‘heart’ approach to teaching (Singleton, 2015) as part of adapting to the diversity of learners and combining varied and creative pedagogies in my teaching. These are characteristics that can be considered as less acceptable in the academic world, which mainly emphasizes the transfer of knowledge (Markina & Garcia Mollá, 2022; O’Connor, 2022). On the other hand, the collaborative self-study enabled me to understand that the way I implemented the use of drawings was very conservative. From my conversations with the students, I realized that my use of drawings did not make it easier for a significant number of the students. In fact, my desire to address learner diversity was ‘locked’ into my uncompromising demand to make use of drawings. Previously, I didn’t really take the difficulties of the various students seriously. In this way, the research takes me beyond the use of different pedagogic tools and actually helps me to think about my ontological and epistemological stance (Bullough, 2021; Ergas & Ritter, 2021). My ability to understand a wider picture, beyond focusing only on the drawings, is an example of the mental openness that resulted from this self-study (Diacopoulos et al., 2022) and which made me more understanding of the diversity amongst students (Pithouse-Morgan & Samaras, 2019).

Limitations and Contribution

The main limitation of this study stems from my limited experience in the collaborative research process. It is possible that I was not aware enough of all the subtleties in what the students brought up in our conversations. Also, for the students, this was their first experience in this kind of dialogue with lecturers. This first experience can create a state of desire for satisfaction. Also, despite my aspirations that the students will also adopt a dialogue with their students, I am not sure how open the schools, at least in Israel, are to this idea.

Aside from the limitations, the research has both a theoretical and an applied contribution. At the theoretical level, the study helped to build on existing knowledge regarding the use of drawings a pedagogical tool and expands on current literature related to self-study. The study added knowledge that may help in understanding the barriers to future educators for using drawings. On the applied level, it exposed future educators to the practice of personal professional improvement through the use of personal research. In addition, the research revealed the importance of listening to your students and not being afraid to share with them your thoughts on how to improve your own teaching methods, as well as taking their ideas seriously and using their feedback to change your own understanding of teaching methods.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Originality Statement

This manuscript is an original work that has not been submitted nor published anywhere else.

Acknowledgments

I would like to extend my great appreciation to members of the Falcon School, particularly the school principal, for their participation and openness and to all the participants who answered the questionnaire. I also appreciate Dr. Dafna Gan for her contribution and thorough work.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.