JOURNAL OF REGIONAL SOCIO-
ECONOMIC ISSUES (JRSEI)
Volume 7, Issue 1, January 2017
Journal of Regional & Socio-Economic Issues (Print) ISSN 2049-1395
Journal of Regional & Socio-Economic Issues (Online) ISSN 2049-1409
Indexed by Copernicus Index, DOAJ (Director of Open Access Journal), EBSCO, Cabell’s Index
The journal is catalogued in the following catalogues: ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly
Resources, OCLC WorldCat, EconBiz – ECONIS, CITEFACTOR, OpenAccess
JOURNAL OF REGIONAL
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ISSUES (JRSEI)
ISSN No. 2049-1409
Aims of the Journal: Journal of Regional Socio-Economic Issues (JRSEI) is an international
multidisciplinary refereed journal the purpose of which is to present papers manuscripts linked
to all aspects of regional socio-economic and business and related issues. The views expressed
in this journal are the personal views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of
JRSEI journal. The journal invites contributions from both academic and industry scholars.
Electronic submissions are highly encouraged (mail to: gkorres@geo.aegean.gr).
Indexed by Copernicus Index, DOAJ (Director of Open Access Journal), EBSCO, Cabell’s Index
International Institute of Organized Research (I2OR) database
The journal is catalogued in the following catalogues: ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly
Resources, OCLC WorldCat, EconBiz – ECONIS, CITEFACTOR, OpenAccess
Chief-Editor
. Prof. Dr. George M. Korres: Professor University of the Aegean, School of Social
Sciences, Department of Geography, gkorres@geo.aegean.gr
Educational Research as a Tool for Teacher Lifelong Learning
Abstract:
Lifelong learning is at the centre of interest in the field of education, and it is, therefore, a
focal point for teachers since it is a fundamental element of their professional life. The
promotion and support of life-long learning could be achieved if teachers carried out the
planning and implementation of educational research throughout their career. If teachers can
embrace the process of lifelong learning along the above lines this would give them the
opportunity to: a) update their knowledge, b) evaluate their cognitive skills, c) strengthen their
autonomy and self-determination as adult professionals. In this sense then, we would argue
that Educational Research could become the target and vision for teacher lifelong learning.
Key-words: Research, Learning, Teachers
JEL Classification:
Ioannis Kalaitzidis1, Olga Kalaitzidou2 and Evangelos Manolas3
1 Ioannis Kalaitzidis, Teacher, Exaplatanos Primary School, Greece, E-mail: infoioannis@yahoo.gr
2 Olga Kalaitzidou, Graduate Student, Department of Forestry and Management of the Environment and Natural
Resources, School of Agricultural and Forestry Sciences, Democritus University of Thrace, Greece, E-mail:
kalaitzidou.olga@gmail.com
3 Corresponding author: Evangelos Manolas, Associate Professor, Department of Forestry and Management of
the Environment and Natural Resources, School of Agricultural and Forestry Sciences, Democritus University of
Thrace, Greece, E-mail: emanolas@fmenr.duth.gr
1. Introduction
Eminent scientists who are involved in the process of improving the institution of education in
general, have both stressed the need for teacher lifelong learning (Day 2003; MacBeath 2004;
Fthenakis 1999; Tippelt 1999; Mattheou 1999) and also correctly point out the necessity for
teachers’ involvement in educational research (Gotovos et al. 1984; Cohen and Manion 1994;
Hammersley 1999; Day 2003). As a process, lifelong learning is now considered to be
essential not only for every individual worker but also for the teacher, as a modern
professional, who has to be ready to make a series of adjustments in his professional life,
since the historical, political and socio-economic circumstances of the 21st century regard
them necessary (Xochellis 1999). Teachers, however, encounter a number of factors which
impede their learning and consequently, lifelong learning, although plenty of evidence argue
in its favour (MacBeath 2004).
Teachers’ learning obstacles can be removed and allow them to engage in lifelong
learning processes, giving them the opportunity and ability to participate in educational
research procedures, which are also educational processes (Hammersley 1999). Teachers who
participate in educational research processes have therefore the ability to critically reflect on
their experiences, contemplate in a rationally and thus transform their views, while acquiring
a culture of continuous learning (Mezirow 2007).
That is why we set as an objective of this article, that teachers can adopt the culture of
lifelong learning through undertaking and carrying out educational researches in the course of
their working life, from its beginning until their retirement. In this way, we basically show
how teachers can be led to lifelong learning, which is considered an academic requirement.
Also, although it is not the main purpose of our article, we believe it is advisable to
mention from the outset, the difficulties (time, lack of mentality, lack of knowledge and
skills) that exist for such a venture; and of course educational research is not the one that will
magically solve the problems of education and teacher participation in the process of lifelong
learning.
2. The issue of educational research
Educational research (E.R.) which is part of social research (Cohen and Manion, 1994) is a
systematic process of collecting, analyzing and interpreting data about the educational process.
The aim of this process is to use the research findings for the benefit of teaching practice and
of the educational process in general. However, educational research, as problem solving tool
used by the teacher, remains wishful thinking because of the insufficient or even absent
training of teachers of primary and secondary education in the methodology of the educational
research (Kalaitzidis 2006). This problem is further intensified by the fact that due to this lack,
the teacher does not have a solid cognitive background compared to other fields of knowledge
(Cohen and Manion 1994) and remains trapped in an empiricist way of handling his daily
teaching practice (Gotovos et al. 1984).
The teacher may free himself (through his participation in the research process of the
E.R.) if he can process his experiences, establish them theoretically, reflect on them critically
and of course use and learn from them (Mavrogiorgos 2009). Although the international and
Greek scientific community has proposed the development of the teacher-researcher model for
many years, (Day 2003; Gotovos et al. 1984; European Commission, 2013a; European
Commission, 2015) and the European Union regards teaching research as one of the required
qualifications for teachers (European Union, 2007; European Commission, 2013b) it has not
yet been adopted by the modern educational reality.
It is worth mentioning at this point the latest developments regarding teachers’ attitude
towards E.R. At first, teachers thought that the research inside and outside the classroom is
something that doesn’t concern them and besides, they didn’t have the appropriate training to
engage in E.R. (Tatsis 1986). Also, Dottrens et al., in 1966, noted that practicing teachers
were negatively disposed towards ER .This attitude emerged either from their lack of
training which still exists today or because they subconsciously believed that the research
process will be used as a means of control, revealing various gaps and weaknesses. This
skepticism is compounded by the mistrust of the university community, who unofficially
believe that teachers cannot carry out a research because of their lack of training (Kyridis et
al. 2004).
However, we cannot overlook the positive attitude that is constantly being formed by
teachers towards E.R. (Kalaitzidis 2006; Ekiz 2006; van der Linden et al. 2012). More and
more teachers-postgraduate students in the field of pedagogy engage in E.R. with an
increasing trend, i.e. more and more teachers attend post-graduate programs which would
make them engage in educational research (Skouras et al. 2007; Lakassas 2015). This shows
us that the ER constantly gains ground in the educational world. It is significant and
encouraging that most teachers maintain a positive attitude not only for research, but they
would also like to be able to involve themselves in an ER as members of a research team
(Kalaitzidis 2006). Which makes it clear that in this way the desired bridge between
educational research and educational practice will be achieved (Gotovos et al. 1984). At the
same time, there will also be a more effective way of communicating the research findings so
that they can be better used in educational practice (Skouras et al. 2007); because the teacher
should have the necessary knowledge and skills on E.R. in order to be able to utilize its
findings (Kalaitzidis 2006).
That is why we should make the most of this opportunity and set as a strategic goal of
the educational policies of teachers their training in the methodology of the E.R., with a view
to promote the teacher as a researcher who will carry out researches on his own. After all, the
teacher is the one who has a privileged position in the triangle teacher-student-curriculum
since the classroom is the natural place for the teacher-researcher to study, as opposed to
external researchers for whom the classroom is an external space.
At this point of our chapter, we should also mention that we choose E.R. over action
research because E.R. is considered a prerequisite for the teacher’s participation in an
educational action research, because this is one of the methods of the E.R. (Cohen and
Manion 1994). But action research is also a process in which teachers are treated as a unit
dependent on the researcher and therefore manipulated, something which totally opposes the
modern idea of Adult Education (Kapachtsi and Kakana 2010; Day 2003).
3. When educational research meets adult education
E.R. is considered not only a research process, but also an educational process and as we seek
to underline in this chapter, it has a lifelong perspective for the participating adult teacher
(Mavrogiorgos 2009).
As adults, teachers should be pushed to adulthood which encompasses the elements of
personal growth, perspective and autonomy (Rogers 1999). That is why we argue that the best
way to meet the above features is, if the teacher can carry out and of course use an E.R.
The research process of the ER is a purposeful process, because the researcher is asked
to plan in advance the purpose of the research, to define the research problem and decide on
the research methodology to be followed in order to answer the research questions. This
suggests that the ER, as a purposeful process, is also a voluntary and intended learning
activity: it could be a “learning episode” for the participating teachers (Rogers 1999). Such a
learning episode which occurs within an ER, gives the teacher the opportunity to act while
looking into a “personal problem” which, in our case, refers to a problem of teaching practice.
In this sense, then, we notice that this research-learning process leads to the reconsideration of
the teacher’s experience (Day 2003) and therefore enables him to transform his views and
give meaning to his experiences (Mavrogiorgos 2009).
Thus, participation in the research process of the ER involves the teacher in a better
understanding of himself and contributes to his personal development (Day 2003) and growth,
expanding and making the most of all his skills. In the light of the above discussion, teacher’s
involvement in the research process of the ER can add to him elements of self-knowledge,
which is also the ultimate goal of Adult Education (Rogers 1999).
We should mention at this point that by engaging in educational research within their
professional life, teachers have the opportunity to disengage from a rather mechanically
repetitive work (Gotovos et al. 1984) since it is constantly enriched by research data and the
use of teachers’ experiences. The research process of the ER can be seen, therefore, as a
systematic, scientific method of using and applying the knowledge and experience of
teachers. This has great value because the teacher will be able to enrich the educational
process with new knowledge that, to an extent, produces himself. After that, he has to make
certain decisions regarding the teaching practice. In this way, the teacher, as mentioned above,
not only produces knowledge, but he is also expected to apply it. This process is indicative of
a mental and intellectual autonomy, which is another feature of adulthood (Rogers 1999). Of
course, participation in decisions concerning his own teaching practice is a missing link with
the theory of andragogy which is a humanitarian approach to adult education; it is also
indicative of teachers’ inclination to define themselves, which is another element of adulthood
(Kokkos 2005).
So, after being “released” from a sterile and repetitive educational practice, the teacher
can achieve a more balanced professional life, a constantly evolving way of thinking, that will
lead him to better judgments regarding his teaching practice. Within the above framework, his
professional life, ensures in the best possible way for the teacher, a sense of perspective for
him both as an individual and as a professional, which is also one of the characteristics of
adulthood (Rogers 1999).
At this point it should be mentioned that the planning and implementation of an ER is
binding for the teacher and makes him responsible for all the decisions and actions that will
be taken in order to complete the ER. Therefore, another component of adulthood is the
promotion of responsibility (Rogers 1999).
Inevitably we could argue, in the context of our discussion above, that participating in
a ER is an educational process that promotes adulthood and for this reason it is also a process
that supports and promotes the educational process of Adult Education. That is why we so
heartily embrace the view that, if we want to deal with the teacher as an adult, we only have to
make him become involved and able to carry out educational researches either individually or
collectively in his career (Mavrogiorgos 2009).
4. The relationship between educational research and teacher lifelong learning
Rapid and radical developments in the latter half of the 20th and 21st century, in the fields of
science and technology, have created the appropriate conditions for the so-called “societies
of knowledge” (Prokou 2004). And new demands about education in general but also for the
teacher arise from these societies. The teacher is expected to make a continuous effort to
acquire knowledge, not only because knowledge is constantly changing, but because through
knowledge critical thinking is cultivated and critical reflection on the educational practice is
promoted as well. Consequently, a demand arises which can only be met and verified through
the process of teacher lifelong learning (Xochellis 1999). These conditions put forward the
type of the “critically reflecting” teacher (Kasoutas 2007), who is open minded, free from
prejudices and willing to hear different views (that he critically processes), and who also has
the courage to acknowledge his mistakes. At the same time, the teacher should abandon his
role as dispenser of information, of theoretical and practical knowledge and become a
“facilitator of learning” organizing learning processes (Xochellis 1999).
In order to respond successfully to their new role, teachers must be committed to
learning, making themselves lifelong learners since this is a structural element of their
professional status (Mavrogiorgos 2009). Moreover, in this way, teachers can be learning role
models for their students (Day 2003). But apart from the above, lifelong learning has become
a new requirement for teachers working in schools (Day 2003).
The desirable objective is, therefore, to involve teachers in processes that promote and
facilitate lifelong learning. That is why the teacher is asked to plan and carry out his own
educational research. A safe way to integrate teachers in the lifelong learning process is to
organize their professional life accordingly, promoting writing skills while encouraging them
to think and act within the planning and implementation of the ER (Mezirow 2007).
It should also be mentioned that the research process of the ER has as its starting point
the definition of the educational-research problem. Consequently, the teacher enters a
detachment process from educational practice. This is a fundamental methodological principle
(Mavrogiorgos 2009), resulting from the process of ER. So, the teacher is basically called to
process his experience, underlining the educational problem. We therefore support that the
research process of the ER engages teachers in processes of negotiating their experience
through international and domestic bibliography, which give them the opportunity to establish
it theoretically and gain insight into it (Smyth 1995). Thus, teachers gain experience which is
firmly established on their educational practice while at the same time they engage in
processes of transforming their views since their experience can be an object of analysis and
reflection (Day 2003). So the teacher who is working on an ER has the opportunity and ability
to learn from his experience because he is actually asked to reflect on it through the scientific
method of the ER research process. Therefore, we refer to the so-called experiential learning
(Kokkos 2005) and in this sense the ER becomes an experiential learning process (Phillips
2012) and not just training. Teachers learn from their experiences as part of the research
process and attribute to them a driving force of lifelong learning, because they prepare the
teacher for a new research which will motivate him to acquire further knowledge and cultivate
his critical thinking skills (Kokkos 2005).
The processing of teachers’ acquired experience leads to the activation of critical
reflection, due to the study of various scientific articles regarding the educational problem
raised (Lintzeris 2007). In this way, they set out the requirements needed in order to analyze
their earlier beliefs, find out how these were formed and make conscious choices in their
teaching practice (Britzman 1991). In other words, through the process of critical reflection,
teachers are asked to create a dialectal relationship between theory and practice, knowledge
and experience, their biography and the social structures and thereby, transform the terms and
conditions of their work (Mavrogiorgos 2009). At the same time, by engaging in critical
thinking , the teacher can be lead to a holistic reconsideration of the way he perceives, feels,
thinks and acts; that is reach critical self-reflection (Kokkos 2005).
So, if the teacher- through planning and implementing an ER- can enter into processes
of critical reflection and self-reflection, he can as well enter into the process of rational
dialogue, because this is the means by which we try to understand the meaning of facts and
of the arguments formulated (Mezirow 2007).
Additionally, rational dialogue is the means of communication among objectively and
rationally knowledgeable teachers, because they come in contact, as mentioned above, with
the current and relevant bibliography and they don’t base their views on subjective judgments
(Lintzeris 2007). This communicative process can be constantly improved, since teachers will
get in touch with even more words and concepts within the research process of the ER. The
more words and concepts the teacher owns and uses, the more easily he can communicate
through rational dialogue; understand meanings and also express his thoughts and feelings
(Stathopoulos 2007). All the above results in the building of a shared meaning through the
understanding of the various arguments made during the development of the ER. This also
contributes to sound decision making and to the undertaking of initiatives and actions
concerning the teaching process.
It is evident then, that the participation in an ER enables the teacher to activate his
critical thinking skills and also become involved in processes of critical dialogue. These two
“pillars” provide the necessary conditions for the so- called transformative learning, which
has a lifelong learning effect on the participant teacher-researcher (Mezirow 2007).
Also, the ER refers to a process in which teachers set their own research objectives,
they select their bibliography as well as the most appropriate statistical methods for the
analysis and interpretation of their data, and they finally reach conclusions which are a kind of
assessment. And that is why we support that the ER -as a process- encompasses not only
educational characteristics but also characteristics of self-directed learning. So, if the ER can
be characterized as a self-directed learning process, it can also be a technique and strategy for
the promotion of lifelong learning (Kalogrides 2014). And as a self-directed learning process,
the ER could replace in many cases, the teacher’s involvement in training programmes of high
economic cost and quite often of questionable effectiveness because they have no experiential
quality.
5. Conclusions
If teachers can embrace the process of lifelong learning by planning and carrying out
educational research throughout their career, this would give them the opportunity to:
a) Update their knowledge. A professional can no longer survive based exclusively
on the basic knowledge he acquired at university. (European Commission 1993). The teacher
will have the opportunity to come into contact with the new knowledge that is constantly being
produced at such a great speed (Xochellis 1999). We note that the ER ensures not only the
contact with the new knowledge but also a constant contact with learning, which fully
complies with the so-called “new type of man” who learns throughout his life: the “Homo
discerns” (Kanaki-Protopappa 1999).
b) Evaluate their cognitive skills. Adopting a lifelong learning outlook does not only
require the transformative learning of those involved; this process also contributes to the
evaluation of their cognitive skills, affecting, in this way, their self-concept and self-esteem
(Kanaki-Protopappa 1999). This argument also leads us to processes of teachers’ self-
knowledge, which is the main aim of the educational process of Adult Education (Rogers
1999).
c) Strengthen their autonomy and self-determination as adult professionals. By
adopting the process of lifelong learning, the teacher who plans and carries out educational
researches throughout his career, satisfies the longstanding demand of pedagogy to bridge the
gap between educational research and educational practice (Gotovos et al. 1984). Moreover,
the teacher has a leading role and actively participates in decisions which refer to his teaching
practice. This process is conducive primarily to autonomy and also to the teacher’s self-
determination and is one of the main objectives of adult education (Rogers 1999).
Therefore, since lifelong learning can constitute for today’s educators a struggle for
obtaining and preserving their autonomy, teachers can, consequently, cultivate and develop
their personality through equipping their professional life with a sense of perspective and
strength to act as responsible citizens. This sense of autonomy will strengthen teacher
incentives for participation in social affairs beyond the one-dimensional, mechanical and
repetitive work of a teacher’s everyday life. In parallel, we should mention that the
development of critical thinking and rational dialogue, which a teacher develops in the
framework of designing and implementing educational research, means that he can be led to a
holistic re-evaluation of physical, biological, social and technological reality. This makes
teachers more capable of approaching knowledge in an interdisciplinary manner, i.e. as a
system of interdependent parts. Teacher lifelong learning can, therefore, constitute an
important factor for sustainable development in today’s world since sustainable development
requires the modification of human behavior and, consequently, of our educational culture
both at individual and team level (Kalaitzidis et al. 2011).
At the same time, ER and therefore lifelong learning, keeps the teacher in a state of
constant vitality where even towards the end of his career, he will have the opportunity to
learn; and the older the learner is, the more it means to him, because of the self-education,
self-esteem and self-confidence that the research process of the ER provides (Kanaki-
Protopappa 1999). These features thus, ensure in the best possible way, both
acknowledgement for the teacher and a sense of perspective and ongoing professional
development which is a prerequisite for adulthood and adult education (Rogers 1999).
In this sense then, we would argue that Educational Research could become the target
and vision for teacher lifelong learning.
6. References
Britzman, D. Practice Makes Practice, Albany, State University of New York Press, 1991.
Cohen, L. and Manion, L. Educational Research Methodology, Athens, Metaichmio, 1994.
Day, C. Developing Teachers, Athens, Typothito, 2003.
Dottrens, R., Mialaret, G., Rast, E. and Ray, M. Educate and Instruct, 1st ed., Athens,
Diptycho /UNESCO, 1974, orig. pub.1966.
Ekiz, D. “Primary school teachers’ attitudes towards educational research”, ESTP, 6(2), 2006,
pp. 395-402.
European Union. Draft Conclusions of the Council of States on the Improvement of Teacher
Education Quality, Brussels, 26/10/2007.
European Commission. Growth, Competitiveness and Employment, Luxembourg, Office for
Official Publications, 1993. http://europa.eu/documentation/official-docs/white-
papers/pdf/ growth_wp_com_93_700_parts_a_b.pdf (Last Accessed 11 August 2016).
European Commission. Supporting Teacher Competence Development for Better Learning
Outcomes, 2013a. http://ec.europa.eu/education/policy/school/doc/ teachercomp_en.pdf
(Last Accessed 12 August 2016).
European Commission. Study on Policy Measures to Improve the Attractiveness of the
Teaching Profession in Europe, Vol. 1, Final Report, Luxembourg, Publications Office of
the European Union, 2013b. http://ec.europa.eu/education/library/ study/2013/teaching-
profession1_en.pdf (Last Accessed 12 August 2016).
European Commission. Strengthening Teaching in Europe: New Evidence from Teachers
Compiled by Eurydice and CREL, 2015. http://ec.europa.eu/education/ library
/policy/teaching-profession-practices_en.pdf (Last Accessed 12 August 2016).
Fthenakis, B. “Lifelong learning in a knowledge-oriented, utilitarian society: Educational and
pedagogical challenges”, In: Proceedings of the IX International Education Conference
on “Continuing education and lifelong learning: International experience and Greek
perspective”, 11-13 November 1999, Volos, Atrapos, pp. 25-39.
Gotovos, T, Mavrogiorgos, G. and Papakonstantinou, P. Critical Pedagogy and Educational
Practice, Ioannina, Contemporary Education, 1984.
Hammersley, M. Educational Research and Evidence-based Practice, Volume A, Patras,
Hellenic Open University, 1999.
Kalaitzidis, I. “Teachers’ views on educational research. Greek pedagogy and educational
research”, In: Proceedings of the 5th National Conference of the Hellenic Pedagogical
Association, Vol. II, Thessaloniki, Kyriakides Brothers, 2006, pp. 323-331.
Kalaitzidis, I. Kyriakopoulos, G., Arabatzi, Z., Chalikias, M., Karasavvidis, G, Avramidis, N.
and Apostolidis, G. “Municipal education centers for sustainable agriculture”, Journal of
Food, Agriculture & Environment, 9(2), 2011, pp. 100-103.
Kalogrides, S. “Self-directed learning in the context of lifelong learning”, 2014.
http://cretaadulteduc.gr/blog/?p=746 (Last Accessed 30 December 2014).
Kanaki-Protopappa, S. “The philosophical background of lifelong education, its importance
for the self-acknowledgement and professional distinction of modern man”, In:
Proceedings of the IX International Education Conference on “Continuing education and
lifelong learning: International experience and Greek perspective”, 1999, Volos,
Atrapos, pp. 215-230.
Kapachtsi, B. and Kakana, D. Collaborative Action Research as a model for teachers’
professional development”, Action Researcher Education, Issue 1, 2010, pp. 40-52.
http://www.actionresearch.gr/AR/ActionResearch_Vol1/Issue 01_06_p40-52.pdf (Last
Accessed 21 June 2012).
Kasoutas, M. “The critical–reflective teacher as a redeeming factor for an equal school of
unequal children”, In: Proceedings of the 4th National Conference on “A school equal to
all children”, Athens, 4-6 May 2007.
http://www.elliepek.gr/documents/4o_synedrio_eisigiseis/187_194.pdf (Last Accessed 28
July 2011)
Kokkos, A. Adult Education: Tracing the Field, Athens, Metaichmio, 2005.
Kyridis, A, Tsakiridou, E, Palaiologou, N. “Research, education and educational research:
The views of students of pedagogical departments on research and education”, Modern
Education, Issue 134, 2004, pp. 57-68.
Lakassas, A. “Storm of doctorates in Greek higher education institutions”, I Kathimerini.
January 11, 2015. http://www.kathimerini.gr/799006/article/epikai
rothta/ellada/kataigida-didaktorikwn-sta-ellhnika-idrymata (Last Accessed 26 January
2016).
Lintzeris, P. The Importance of Critical Thinking and Rational Dialogue in Jack Mezirow’s
Theory on Transformative Learning, Athens, Scientific Association for Adult Education,
2007.
MacBeath, J. “Can teachers learn?” In: Bagakis, G. (Ed), Training and Professional
Development of Teachers, Athens, Metaichmio, 2004, pp. 27-34
Mattheou, D. “Globalisation, the society of knowledge and lifelong education. New
determinants of educational work”, In: Haris KP, Petroulakis NB, Nikodimos, S (Eds),
Proceedings of the IX International Pedagogical Conference on “Continuing education
and lifelong learning: International experience and Greek perspective”, 11-13 November
1999, Volos, Atrapos, pp. 56-68.
Mavrogiorgos, G. “Teacher training. Why teachers are not treated as adult intellectuals”,
2009. http://edu.pep.uoi.gr/gmavrog/index2.html (Last Accessed 28 May 2011).
Mezirow, J. Transformative Learning, Athens, Metaichmio, 2007.
Phillips, N. “The game in adult education”, Adult Education, Issue 26, 2012, pp. 34-39.
Prokou, E. “Globalisation, society of knowledge and lifelong learning”, Adult Education,
Issue 2, 2004, pp. 4-9.
Rogers, A. Adult Education, Athens, Metaichmio, 1999.
Skouras, A., Angelis, A., Vogiatzoglou, S., Prekate, V. and Chronopoulos, C. “Educational
research: A basic component in the configuration and implementation of educational
policies”, Review of Educational Affairs, Issue 13, 2007, pp. 124-133.
Stathopoulos, N. Exercises in Modern Greek Language for the First Grade of High School,
Athens, Savalas, 2007.
Smyth, J. (Ed). Critical Discourses on Teacher Development, London, Cassell, 1995.
Tatsis, C. “Pedagogical research in primary school”, Modern Education, Issue 28, 1986, pp.
59-61.
Tippelt, R. “Systems of lifelong learning and continuing education”, In: Proceedings of the IX
International Education Conference on “Continuing education and lifelong learning:
international experience and Greek perspective”, 11-13 November 1999, Volos, Atrapos,
pp. 3-20.
van der Linden, W., Bakx, A., Ros, A., Douwe, B. and Vermeulen, M. “Student teachers’
development of a positive attitude towards research and research knowledge and skills”,
European Journal of Teacher Education, 35(4), 2012, pp. 401-419.
Xochellis, P. “Continuing teacher education”, In: Proceedings of the IX International
Education Conference on “Continuing education and lifelong learning: International
experience and Greek perspective”, 11-13 November 1999, Volos, Atrapos, pp. 98-101.
