STEM Teachers' Competence Development:

When Opportunities Jump over Barriers

Nikolina Nikolova, Eliza Stefanova, Krassen Stefanov and Pencho Mihnev

Faculty of Mathematics and Informatics, Sofia University St. Kl. Ohridski, James Bourchier blvd. 5, 1164 Sofia, Bulgaria

Keywords: Teacher Training, Inquiry-Based Science Education, STEM Teachers’ Competence Development.

Abstract: In this paper we present a study, aimed to identify the main challenges teachers face when trying to implement

innovative teaching methods, stressing on identifying the needed STEM teachers competence development.

The overall design of the study follows the European Awareness Scenario Workshop methodology and aims

to negotiate the teachers’ need, policy makers decisions and other stakeholders’ understanding of the resent

National regulatory framework, related to the teachers’ competence development. The main research

activities, performed during the study, are outlined and compared with similar research efforts and initiatives.

At the end systematic analysis of results achieved is performed and proposals for further improvement of the

competence development of teachers were made. The extracted requirements – mode, forms, topics, etc., for

STEM teachers’ competence development are valuable for universities and other institutions offering

teachers’ professional development courses. They are a base for further design of computer supported inquiry-

based education for teachers’ competence development.

1 INTRODUCTION

The Enhancing Learning In Teaching via e-

inquiries (ELITe) Erasmus+ project aims to provide

computer-supported learning opportunities for

secondary teachers’ competence development, which

stands as a priority of the “Education and Training”

EC policy agenda. The main project goal is to support

computer-based teachers’ professional learning for

competence development, targeting specifically in-

service educators in the STEM (Science, Technology,

Engineering, and Mathematics) domain. We need to

use conceptual, methodological and domain specific

perspectives, in order to form specific requirements

for the software tools to be used in the project. This is

related to the first specific project objective: to

deepen understandings on the requirements for

STEM teachers’ competence development at

national levels, as conceptualised and expressed by

policy makers, policy mediators and practitioners. In

this paper we present the methodology how this

analysis to be performed, and describe the design,

conduction and delivery of specific tailored for

Bulgaria event used for this purpose. We also present

the main results from this analysis - the main

conclusions regarding domain specific aspects of

STEM teachers’ competence development in

Bulgaria.

There are many challenges faced from all the

stakeholders in Bulgaria – policy makers, policy

mediators, teachers’ trainers, STEM teachers, and

broad society. Our main research goal in this paper is

to clarify main opportunities and barriers, as they are

seen by each stakeholder’s group, and to find a way

to negotiate the possible ways for their extended use

(opportunities) and solving or removing problems

(barriers). The extracted analysis and resume will be

used as input for further inquiry-based learning model

development and the respective software tools, and

the design and implementation of specific computer-

based learning scenarios for STEM teachers’ training.

2 RELATED WORK

The work of the Thematic Working Group ‘Teacher

Professional Development’, which comprised experts

nominated by 26 European countries and stakeholder

organisations, resulted in a document named

“Supporting teacher competence development for

better learning outcomes” (European Commission,

2013). This important report was grounded on various

328

Nikolova, N., Stefanova, E., Stefanov, K. and Mihnev, P.

STEM Teachers’ Competence Development: When Opportunities Jump over Barriers.

DOI: 10.5220/0006767703280335

In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2018), pages 328-335

ISBN: 978-989-758-291-2

policy documents on teacher training of the European

Commission (2007, 2010, 2012a, 2012b, 2012c),

Caena (2011a, 2011b), the European Union (2006,

2007, 2008, 2009) and other research studies. On the

base of examples of the policy approaches used in

Europe, this document explores and highlights the

concepts of teacher competences and competence

frameworks, discusses ways of development and

assessment of teacher competences, and “defines the

key factors that lie behind successful policies”

(European Commission, 2013, Chapter 5). The

document acknowledged that “The process of

bringing stakeholders together to discuss these issues

can, in itself, be beneficial, especially if it leads to an

increased sense of ownership of the results and a

commitment to their implementation.” (European

Commission, 2013, p. 43).

A major study of teachers’ related policy was

conducted during the 2002-2004 period by OECD in

collaboration with 25 countries (OECD, 2005),

aiming to explore, systematise, and present issues and

effective policies with respect to the activities, related

to developing effective teachers. Its methodology is

to some extent similar to the methodology of the

study, presented in this paper. It addresses 4 key

issues, related to the topic. The study methodology

included the preparation of countries’ background

reports (based on a predefined set of questions and

requirements), organising workshops in different

countries and disseminations of their results,

implementing national visits of experts groups,

writing paper reports on the basis of the different

visits to detect issues, collecting rich sets of data and

performing specific data analysis, and describing the

main results in the policy report (OECD, 2002).

Another well-known initiative of OECD is the

Teaching and Learning International Survey

(TALIS), a periodic survey, administered in 2008 and

2013, and planned for delivery in 2018. Bulgaria

participated in both 2008 and 2013 surveys and will

participate in the 2018 edition. This gives a very good

opportunity for triangulation of the findings and

results of the described by the current paper STEM

teachers’ competences development study with the

TALIS results for Bulgaria.

Yet another big OECD current initiative is the

Innovative Teaching for Effective Learning (ITEL)

project. First an extensive research work was

conducted, resulting in a book (Guerriero, 2017),

focussing on conceptual framework of teachers’

professional competence, where the teachers’

competence is fed by the initial, continuous, and

informal/non-formal teacher learning, consists of

content & pedagogical knowledge and affective-

motivational competences and beliefs, and results in

teaching approaches, which lead to instruction that

supports the cognitive and social-emotional student

learning (Guerriero, p. 261). This competence

framework was used for the development of the

survey instruments of international comparative

studies conducted in ITEL that investigate teachers’

knowledge as a key component of teacher quality

(Sonmark et al.).

There is a big number of other studies that focus

explicitly on the teaching-related factors, which play

as stimuli or barriers to inquiry-based learning (IBL).

For example, Kang and Keinonen, (2016) commented

the results of 7 small scale studies, conducted in

different single countries, and summarised that the

reported in these studies barriers and teacher

reluctance to apply IBL may have as main inhibiting

factors: the low teacher confidence and competence

in using inquiry instructions; the lack of time and

resources; the tight curricula; the inadequate

professional development; the large class sizes, the

lack of professional science content knowledge; the

difficulties in developing students’ ideas and in

designing experiments for students’ hypotheses; and

the insufficient school resources (Kang and

Keinonen, p. 32). Authors pointed out the “teachers’

confidence in teaching science and their collaboration

to improve science teaching” as important factors for

implementing IBL (Kang and Keinonen, p. 44). In

another study of 34 IBL early-adopting Australian

teachers, the participating teachers pointed out as the

most important barriers to IBL-teaching “the extreme

time restrictions on all scales, the poverty of their

common professional development experiences, their

lack of good models and definitions for what inquiry-

based teaching actually is, and the lack of good

resources enabling the capacity for change.”

(Fitzgerald et al.).

In a successful effort to cope with the counted

above barriers, the IBL-in-Science focused EC

project “weSPOT” formulated prerequisites for

successful IBL in schools, based on earlier research

results, namely: “change teachers’ attitude and

provide stronger support to students (at micro level);

provide schools management support; enable

teachers to share experience and best practices;

provide the needed ICT support (at mezzo level);

provide constant training for teachers and a rich set

of resources based on ICT infrastructure (at macro

level).” (Nikolova and Stefanova). The weSPOT

researchers then developed a reference model for

inquiry skills, and a diagnostic instrument to measure

the individual performance on inquiry skills. In this

way the project “

provided teachers and learners with

STEM Teachers’ Competence Development: When Opportunities Jump over Barriers

329

efficient support and the technology tools to reach

competence, progress and to become able to find the

optimal inquiry level to match their needs”

(Mikroyannidis et al.)

Another important research program of EC

related to improving innovation in education is

eTwinning. An excellent overview of the best efforts

related to preparation and training of STEM teachers

in this program is given in (Papadakis, 2016).

3 METHODOLOGY

The ELITe consortium has performed a detailed

analysis of the situation in four European countries,

including Bulgaria. On the base of this analysis a

comprehensive research report called “Policy

envisions and requirements for STEM teachers

competence development in Greece, the Netherlands,

Bulgaria and Spain” was developed. This report was

used in order to design multiplier national events,

aimed to communicate and negotiate the main

outcomes from this analysis with policy executives,

policy mediators and practitioners,, and to identify

systemic opportunities and challenges to implement

training activities for STEM teachers’ competence

development.

The European Awareness Scenario Workshop

(EASW) methodology was used for the

implementation of such event in Bulgaria. This

methodology relies on dividing event’s participants in

varying compositions groups, depending on the

specific goal to be addressed. In such a way, working

in groups and in a plenary was used to develop

scenarios on the workshop topics, to name barriers,

and to propose strategies and steps for realising the

goals and overcoming the barriers. Working on

concrete “scenarios” or various problems, it invites

working group members to think about realistic

challenges rather than dreaming about unlikely

problems and how to solve them. Such a workshop

follows three phases - the critical analysis phase, the

visionary phase and the implementation phase – “to

create a basis for local action”. The EASW setting

allows for interaction between stakeholders - rather

than a static one, in which presentations are provided

to participants, and aim for consensus building rather

than instructional approach. One disadvantage of

EASWs is their reliance on stakeholder balance,

which might never be reached realistically. However,

targeting a certain number of distinctive stakeholders

is a good starting point to make “bringing together a

broad range of interests” a little more concrete.

We planned to have three sessions during our

event – Raising issues session, Negotiation session,

and Structuring proposals session. During the

Raising issues session participants work in

homogenous groups, aiming to identify the

opportunities and challenges on implementing

activities for STEM teacher’s competence

development. During the Negotiation session they

were re-arranged in heterogeneous groups, looking

for solving the conflict aspects and generating

recommendations on how to take advantage of the

opportunities and how to avoid / deal with the

challenges. The aim of Structuring proposal session

was, in plenary, to map the issues and

recommendations in the frame of broader educational

priorities.

4 IMPLEMENTATION

4.1 Setting and Context of Event

The multiplier event took place in June 2017, at the

end of the academic year in Bulgaria, with the total of

48 participants. It strictly followed the EASW

methodology.

According to the methodology, participants were

separated in three groups:

 Policy makers – representatives from Ministry

of Education, Regional Management Centers

of Education, National Center of Information

support, professors responsible for teachers’

training curricula from main universities in

Bulgaria, and head teachers responsible for

local school policy in STEM teaching;

 Practitioners – STEM teachers from general

and vocational schools;

 Broad Society members – parents,

representatives of private educational centers,

private companies, NGO and research centers.

In Bulgaria, since 2016, there is a new Law on pre-

school and school education. We paid special

attention to teachers’ professional development and

the way of attestation, and National requirements for

‘teacher’ professional qualification. They stimulate

teachers’ professional development by regular

trainings, participation in research activities and

experience exchange events. The new students’

national educational standards and curricula for

STEM education also is a challenge in front of the

teachers and teachers’ educators. Another important

initiative of the Ministry of Education and Science,

called Innovative school, is providing innovative

vision, development strategies, and teaching

CSEDU 2018 - 10th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

330

approaches to all interested schools, and stimulating

the school managers to involve the pedagogical staff

at schools in activities, enhancing their academic,

pedagogical, administrative and communicative

competences.

On the base of these specific facts and the issues

described in the preliminary analysis research report,

we formulate the main topics for the multiplier event

discussions:

 What teacher competences are needed to

design Inquiry-based learning (IBL) activities

in class;

 What kind of support is needed for teachers for

IBL day-to-day application;

 What content should be provided and how, in

order to spread widely the IBL approach;

 What are the challenges in schools

management related to strategy, curricula and

teaching approaches;

 What are the opportunities and challenges in

using training for building teacher

competences.

4.2 Structure of the Event

The raising issues section started with a presentation,

which provided detailed information in relation to

project description and aims, and main results from

the analytical report of national policy documents on

policy envisions and requirements for STEM

teachers’ competence development. All participants

were divided into three homogenous groups and were

given a list with topics prepared in advance.

Figure 1: Homogenous groups' SWOT analysis.

Policy makers were engaged with national

standards on teachers’ qualification, trainings topics

for teachers, how to receive feedback from teachers

and society, how to assess (in advance and post-

event) relevance and quality of particular teaching

training course and/or teachers’ training provider.

Practitioners discussed administrative issues, the

need of relevant environment for STEM teaching

(textbooks, simulations, and specialised labs), the

new subjects in the curricula, the new summative

exams and how they correspond to national standards

of education, the teachers’ attestation process and

related carrier development, salary, penalties.

Broad Society members were invited to discuss

the results of teachers’ work, the possibility of earlier

graduating of students and joining the labour market,

the lack of motivated and qualified teachers in STEM

disciplines, the new requirements for school-parent

communication and sharing responsibilities.

The moderators conducted and managed the

discussion in each group. They also wrote down

strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and treats

related to the new regulatory framework, as identified

in each group, creating the ground for performing the

SWOT analysis. After that all participants joined

together, and the issues identified in relation to the

SWOT analysis were presented from representatives

of each group. After a short discussion, all

participants voted in favour of different statements of

the SWOT analysis. The statements which gathered

most of the votes were used to identify the set of

issues to be negotiated during the second session.

Figure 2: Votes for Negotiation issues.

For the second session (negotiation session)

participants were divided again into three but

heterogeneous groups, with equal number of

representatives from policy-makers, practitioners and

broad society members. The next task for the

participants was to focus on differences, to look for

reasoning and negotiating a solution. As a result from

this session, each group had to find a compromise

vision for STEM teachers’ professional development

and Inquiry-based learning. The final outcome was a

list with ideas, suggestions and possible actions

agreed in each group. At the end of this session

representatives from each group presented and

justified their findings in a general plenary meeting

and discussion with all participants. A summary and

conclusions on the main needs and considerations in

relation to STEM teachers’ training was the final

result from this session, forming an extended list with

the requirements for effective and efficient teachers’

trainings – topics, logistic, delivery, specific

activities, etc.

The final session – structuring proposals – was

performed in a week after the end of the face-to-face

workshop event. SWOT analysis was performed a

STEM Teachers’ Competence Development: When Opportunities Jump over Barriers

331

few days after the multiplier event by the organisers

by using the open questions of the questionnaire,

participants’ feedback during the event, collection of

the results during each session work, and how they

evaluate the participants' activity and quality of work.

It presents strengths, weakness, opportunities and

threats in relation to planning and implementation of

the multiplier event, the effect of networking, and

quality and relevance of outcomes. The details of the

main results are outlined in the next section.

4.3 Evaluation of the Face-To-Face

Workshop

All participants filled in anonymous questionnaires

just before the closing of the event. They were asked

to evaluate the organisation of the event in terms of

content / thematic, process and venue, background

materials, process / methodology of the event, and

overall satisfaction from the event. The evaluation

questionnaire was filled in by 40 participants. They

found background materials – initial information and

presentation, relevant to the event topic and their

personal professional interest.

Figure 3: Workshop materials evaluation.

Evaluation of the process and methodology shows

only one person with thinking that the event should

provide more opportunities of interaction, one person

with opinion that there were no enough opportunities

of gaining new ideas, and two participants with

relatively low level of satisfaction of the event

outcomes.

Regardless of these very few moderate comments, the

huge majority of participants provide high scores of

the methodology and process of implementation of

the event. 90% (36 persons) show high level of

overall satisfaction of the event. The participants’

comments share the feelings of satisfaction, and

expectations this workshop to be followed by other

similar events.

Figure 4 Overall satisfaction level.

5 MAIN OUTCOMES

The outcomes of the Raising issues session were

summarised and presented as a SWOT analysis result,

as shown in Table 1:

Table 1: SWOT analysis of the National regulatory

framework in accordance with teachers' competence

development.

(S)TRENGHTS

1. STEM teachers are free to present new subjects and

to use new teaching methods and innovative training

2. Qualification program is well regulated with good

ortunities for STEM teachers

3. Opportunity for STEM teachers to participate in

trainin

outside the countr

(

. CERN

)

4. The new regulation gives opportunities for

differentiation of the education after 10

grade

5. Clear and transparent system for the assessment of

STEM teachers

6. New regulation provides clear directions for STEM

teachers with detailed work

oals

7. The Inclusive Education provides new opportunities

for STEM teachers

(W)EAKNESSES

1. Lack of clear links and dependencies between

attestation of STEM teachers and their salaries and

career develo

ment.

2. Lack of choice for professional qualification

3. Reduced number of hours in the science subjects

leadin

roblems how to satisf

standards.

4. The standards for learning content are slow to follow

the rapid STEM developments

5. Lack of flexibility in following the learning program

leads to low motivation and high level of absences

of students

(

includin

talented and

ifted students

)

6. Long time period between teacher attestations

revents rapid development of STEM teachers.

7. Lack of hi

ualified teachers

(O)PPORTUNITIES

1. STEM teachers have more opportunities for

innovative

ractices throu

h the school curricula.

CSEDU 2018 - 10th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

332

Table 1: SWOT analysis of the National regulatory

framework in accordance with teachers' competence

development (cont.).

2. STEM teachers can implement new teaching

methods through different research programs.

3. STEM teachers can use electronic materials and

innovative software tools for labs and

ractice.

4. Team Buildings and STEM teacher training are

encouraged under a Differentiated Model

5. Cloud technologies give new possibilities for STEM

teachers for better relationships with parents

6. STEM teachers can try new forms of education like

distance and blende

education

7. STEM teacher competences can be assessed by

inde

endent

rofessional or

anisations.

8. Innovative schools can allow STEM teachers to

develop more flexible and creative curricula

accordin

to the school

rofile and vision.

9. Teachers’ qualifications can be flexible in time and

subjects and as a result to be better aligned to

teachers

rofessional needs.

(T)HREATS (from external factors and environment)

1. Low STEM teachers’ salaries

2. Lack of coordination between the MES and Higher

Education (HE) regulations

3. Not all STEM teachers are di

itall

literate

4. Lack of control over the quality of STEM teachers’

training courses. Training organisations will offer

low quality cheap courses to attract more teachers by

easily providing qualification credits to the

5. Lack of clear system for recognising STEM teachers

rofessional certificates and similar rewards

6. Some institutes ‘produce’ STEM teachers with low

ualit

and

uestionable di

lomas

7. Low level of society participation and support for the

STEM teachers endeavors.

8. Lack of regulated funding for STEM education

environment

Some points were marked both as strengths and as

weaknesses from different groups. The reason is that

they were pointed from different perspectives. For

example, the annual thematic plan give some

possibility for teachers with common profile to

collaborate in preparation of the lessons, but it also is

a barrier for their flexibility to change the plan and

lessons according to the student’s needs. In general,

both groups agreed on these two different

perspectives. This was reflected in their

recommendations, which are elaborated in the next

Table 2. It contains recommendations on how to take

advantages of opportunities and on how to overcome

challenges emerged during the previous session.

Table 2: Heterogeneous group's results.

Group 1

1. To organise STEM teachers’ trainings in mixed

forms

–

online and traditional learning

2. A certain number (%) of qualification credits to be

related to the specialty/subject teacher training (with

academic and practical trainings)

3. The qualification courses to be based on up to date

STEM subject content and teaching methodology

4. To combine knowledge and skills from different

STEM sub

ects in the courses

5. To offer courses aligned to the STEM research

methodolo

accom

anied b

ractical exercises

Group 2

1. To motivate training organisations to offer rich

choice of course themes and

ualification courses

2. To plan methodological thematic trainings for

STEM teachers in a practical and interactive way.

3. To stimulate the use of e-simulations and other

relevant software tools for STEM teachers both for

their trainin

s and how to use them in the classroom.

Group 3

1. STEM teachers’ training should combine face-to-

face with other relevant forms.

2. STEM teachers should have courses for the

inclusion of s

ecial educational needs

(

SEN

)

ils.

3. STEM teachers should be offered specific courses

on new teaching methods for their subjects

4. STEM teachers need specific general courses on

applying interactive teaching methods

It was not difficult to come with these

recommendations, as the three different groups

agreed on more of 70% of all issues from the SWOT

analysis. There were cases of disagreement, for

example teachers think that opportunities for

professional qualifications are limited, while policy

makers had the opposite opinion. Another point of

disagreement is related to the opinion of policy

makers for the lack of high qualified STEM teachers,

while the teachers; opinion is opposite. Also, there

were some fears among teachers from new

regulations regarding teachers’ evaluation.

Most of the recommendations from all the groups

were related to the content of the teachers’ training

courses. The teachers’ training courses’ topics were

the most discussed. The recommendations were

mostly related to learning materials and activities. All

groups agreed that new rapid science achievements

should reflect in immediate changes in the students’

curricula. Special attention was dedicated to the use

of innovative software tools in STEM disciplines.

There was agreement that science disciplines require

more simulations of phenomena and possibilities for

students to experiment, generate hypothesis and

STEM Teachers’ Competence Development: When Opportunities Jump over Barriers

333

formulate conclusions. For mathematics and

computer science reasoning, the algorithmic thinking

and use of interactive digital learning resources were

recognised as more suitable.

All groups also recognised the importance of the

Interdisciplinary approach – practical trainings

combining different STEM subject matter and

relationships, in collaboration with other STEM

subject teachers. This is related to developing new

learning designs, stressing on implementation and

evaluation of students’ achievements. Also, it is

related to applying innovative teaching methods –

interactive methods of teaching / learning, design and

implementation of student’s inquiry, group work

management, use of innovative ICTs in education,

etc., focused on STEM education.

All groups were also agreed, that abilities to work

with small well aligned students’ groups are critical

for the success of STEM education. These groups

need to be tailored to the specifics of the subject and

the educational need – involving students with special

educational needs and learning disabilities, as well as

work with talented students.

Another important recommendation was related

to effective communication and collaboration with

parents and the involvement of parents in all aspects

of the school live, so called ‘school for parents’. This

is related to efficient management of schools, and

especially for organising STEM teaching and

learning.

All groups agreed, that without efficient

evaluation and assessment of educational process it is

not possible to achieve high quality in STEM

education.

Most of the participants agreed on the forms of

STEM teachers’ training courses. They prefer active

practical learning process instead of the standard one,

based on lectures and formal exams. They agreed that

demonstration and participation in innovative

teaching methods implementation is very important

for the successful transfer of given teaching

methodology to the classroom. Also, they strongly

agree on the use of online training courses content and

specialised software tools for support of the STEM

specifics. In brief, the most important requirements,

related to the forms of teachers’ training courses are:

 Face-to-face or blended learning

 Online courses – as a current support, and as

an archive for long term use.

 Balance between learning at work place

(school) and out the door courses – regional,

national workshops as environment for sharing

ideas and experience

6 CONCLUSIONS

The multiplier event, delivered at the end of June

2017, developed a good network of policy makers,

teachers’ trainers, teachers and broad society

members. It was the first step in identifying the

requirements of STEM teachers for effective and

efficient competence development with the use of

relevant software tools.

The main outcomes from the Bulgarian multiplier

event were very similar to the outcomes of other three

such events. All outcomes from these events were

summarised and used as requirements for the special

inquire-based teaching software system DojoIBL

system (http://dojo-ibl.appspot.com).

This system was developed by the project partner

from the Netherlands and it is specially designed to

implement inquiry-based methodology for learning.

The application has been adapted also to the four

countries’ specific national requirements, and the user

interface has been translated in Bulgarian, Dutch,

Spanish and Greek language.

At the moment, the project is at the phase of first

pilot teacher trainings, which are conducted in

blended learning form, following the inquiry-based

learning methodology, and using the DojoIBL

software tool.

After the end of all pilot experiments, analysis of

the results of trainings of STEM teachers will be

performed. On the base of this analysis the project

will formulate set of guidelines and requirements for

STEM teachers’ competence development in Europe

with the use of specialised software tools.

The teachers from all four countries in the project

shared their needs of trainings on the new topics in

the student’s educational standards and curricula. For

STEM teachers, very special topic of interest is the

use of relevant ICTs, providing interactivity that can

compensate the limitations of school specialised labs

(totally missing or poor of equipment). They need

also practical courses related to the interweaving of

different disciplines, providing ideas, design

examples, and directions for students’ achievement

and the process assessments in implementation of

interdisciplinary learning. They also need trainings on

how to design, deliver and conduct an inquiry based

learning on specific topics in specific grades.

All the stakeholders groups agreed on the need of

application of modern teaching approaches in the

classroom. Special attention is dedicated to the

interactive teaching methods which still are not very

popular in Bulgarian schools. For STEM learning

disciplines there is a special need teachers to be

CSEDU 2018 - 10th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

334

trained on how to design, deliver and conduct

inquiry-based learning process.

Different forms of assessment and related

feedback is still a problem for teachers having

practices mainly on the use of open/closed questions

tests but experiencing lack of skills in the evaluation

of practical work, team work, or inquiry-based

learning and other innovative methods.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The research is done with financial support of

Enhancing Learning In Teaching via e-inquiries

(ELITe) project, Erasmus+, KA2 - Cooperation for

Innovation and the Exchange of Good Practices,

Strategic Partnerships for school education, Project

Code: 2016-1-EL01-KA201-023647.

The article is partially supported by Sofia

University „St. Kliment Ohridski“ Research Science

Fund project 80-10-217/24.04.2017 „Inquiry-based

learning in high-tech area as an application of modern

ICTs“.

REFERENCES

Caena, F., 2011a. Literature review. Teachers’ core

competences: requirements and development.

European Commission, Brussels.

Caena, F. 2011b. Literature review: Quality in teachers’

continuing professional development. European

Commission, Brussels.

European Commission, 2007. Communication from the

Commission to the European Parliament and Council:

Improving the Quality of Teacher Education. COM

(2007) 392 final. Brussels, 3.8.2007.

European Commission, 2010. Developing coherent and

system-wide induction programmes for beginning

teachers: a handbook for policymakers. Staff Working

Document 538 final. Brussels.

European Commission, 2012a. Rethinking Education:

Investing in skills for better socioeconomic outcomes.

COM(2012) 669/3

European Commission, 2012b. Assessment of Key

Competences in initial education and training: Policy

Guidance. Strasbourg, 20.11.2012. SWD (2012) 371

final.

European Commission, 2012c. Supporting the Teaching

Professions for Better Learning Outcomes. Strasbourg,

20.11.2012. SWD (2012) 374 final.

European Commission, 2013. Supporting teacher

competence development for better learning

outcomes”. Education and Training Directorate. At:

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/repository/e

ducation/policy/school/doc/teachercomp_en.pdf

European Union, 2006. Key Competences for Lifelong

Learning, a European Reference Framework. Brussels,

2006.

European Union, 2007. Conclusions of the Council and of

the Representatives of the Governments of the Member

States, meeting within the Council of 15 November

2007, on improving the quality of teacher education.

Official Journal C 300/6, 12.12.2007.

European Union, 2008. Conclusions of the Council and of

the Representatives of the Governments of the Member

states, meeting within the Council of 21 November

2008 on preparing young people for the 21st century:

an agenda for European cooperation on schools.

Official Journal 2008/C 319/08, 13.12.2008.

European Union, 2009. Council Conclusions of 26

November 2009 on the professional development of

teachers and school leaders. Official Journal 2009/C

302/04, 12.12.2009.

Fitzgerald, M., & Danaia, L., & McKinnon, D. H., 2017.

Barriers Inhibiting Inquiry-Based Science Teaching

and Potential Solutions: Perceptions of Positively

Inclined Early Adopters. In Research in Science

Education, July 2017, Springer Science+Business

Media Dordrecht

Guerriero, S. (ed.), 2017. Pedagogical Knowledge and the

Changing Nature of the Teaching Profession. OECD

Publishing, Paris.

Kang, J., Keinonen, T., 2016. Examining factors affecting

implementation of inquiry-based learning in Finland

and South Korea. In Problems of Education in the 21st

Century”, Volume 74, 2016, pp.31-48

Mikroyannidis, A., et al., 2013. weSPOT: A Personal and

Social Approach to Inquiry-Based Learning, In Journal

of Universal Computer Science, vol. 19, no. 14 (2013),

Nikolova N., Stefanova E., 2014. Inquiry-Based Science

Education in Secondary School Informatics –

Challenges and Rewards. In Cerone A. et al. (eds)

Information Technology and Open Source:

Applications for Education, Innovation, and

Sustainability. SEFM 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer

Science, vol 7991. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

OECD, 2002. Attracting, Developing and Retaining

Effective Teachers. Design and Implementation Plan

for the Activity. Paris: OECD Publishing.

OECD, 2005. Teachers Matter: Attracting, Developing,

and Retaining Effective Teachers. Paris: OECD

Publishing.

Papadakis, S. (2016). Creativity and innovation in

European education. 10 years eTwinning. Past, present

and the future. International Journal of Technology

Enhanced Learning, 8, 3/4, pp. 279 - 296.

Sonmark, K., et al., 2017. Understanding teachers'

pedagogical knowledge: report on an international

pilot study. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 159.

OECD Publishing, Paris.

STEM Teachers’ Competence Development: When Opportunities Jump over Barriers

335