Developing Competence for Teachers, Mentors, and School Leaders: How Can Video-Based Learning Designs Facilitate Authentic Learning?

Abstract

The use of video-based learning designs in higher education has gained increased attention in higher education in the last decade. The aim of this study is to contribute to the development of knowledge about video-based learning designs as potential drivers of professional competence for different practitioners in schools: teachers, mentors, and school leaders. By adopting a theoretical perspective of authentic learning, we explore how different video-based learning designs can play out in educational settings. Based on a comparative analysis of learning designs and student experiences, we argue that the use of practice videos does not necessarily enhance authentic learning. Findings illuminate how student interaction with practice videos and other mediating tools can contribute to authentic learning. However, the findings also illuminate how university-based educators need to be conscious in striving to design authentic learning. The potential of coaching and mentoring as potential mediators that can enhance learning is highlighted. Implications for designing for video-based professional development are elaborated on.

1. Introduction

The complexity of the professional practice of school actors is the basis of arguments that favor career-long learning, exploration, and the development of practice (Aspfors & Fransson, 2015; Day, 2017; Hallinger & Bridges, 2017; Lejonberg et al., 2015). Such complexity encourages us to investigate how teachers’, mentors’, and school leaders’ exploration of practice in educational settings can contribute to professional development. By designing student activities in authentic contexts, university educators can provide students with opportunities to develop knowledge in the professional contexts that they will likely operate within. This contribution investigates how the use of videos that show students’ practices in schools can help the professional development of teacher students, mentors, and school leaders.

The aim of the study is to contribute to knowledge about how to promote professional learning with video-based learning designs. The investigation is based on the assumption that the use of technology and the innovation of practice-based learning designs have the potential to improve student engagement and educational outcomes (Jenset et al., 2018; Orland-Barak & Wang, 2021). The current study investigates learning designs as an interplay between subjects (students), mediators (such as practice videos, written tasks, and peer coaching), and objects (development or professional competence) (Hauge, 2014; Vestøl, 2016; Vestøl & Lund, 2017). We carry out this study by investigating video-based learning designs in teacher education (TE), mentor education (ME), and in two versions of a principal education program offered in two different cities (PE1 and PE2). In performing this, we are guided by the following research question: How can video-based learning designs facilitate learning in teacher, mentor, and principal education?

In our investigation, we adopt the notion of authentic learning settings as that “characterized by learners who collaboratively try to solve a complex and ill-structured real-world problem through self-directed inquiry and investigation” (Nachtigall et al., 2022, p. 1482). Professional competence is a multifaceted construct integrating all an actor needs to manage the profession (Illeris, 2012). For the actors investigated here, such features include interactions among different types of knowledge, skills, attitudes, judgments, and influencing norms (Sullivan & Rosin, 2008). We adapt Clarke and Hollingsworth’s (2002) perspective on teachers’ professional development, and we understand professional development as a change in practitioners’ knowledge, skills, beliefs, and/or practice that affects how teachers, mentors, or principals enact their professional roles. For the purpose of this article, the term coaching denotes peer settings in which actors (such as students in mentor education) contribute to each other’s professional development in groups or pairs (Aas & Flückiger, 2016). When settings are characterized by one actor who is assumed to be more able than the other/the rest, the terms mentor and mentoring are used (Hobson et al., 2009). Students from the principal preparation programs are denoted as school leaders or students in principal education1.

2. Facilitating Competence Development in Campus-Based Study Programs

Campus-based study programs for school actors are challenged by the fact that students are not situated in the contexts they will carry out daily tasks. The provision of authentic learning opportunities is intended to resemble real-life experiences for people in order to learn and develop (Nachtigall et al., 2022). Developing learning designs where students can use practice videos of their professional practice is an effort that could enhance the opportunities for learning in such settings. Research has indicated that the use of video can contribute to the professional development of teacher students, mentors, and school leaders (Jensen, 2022; Mosley Wetzel et al., 2015; Nesje & Lejonberg, 2022).

To provide students authenticity, contextualized learning experiences are assumed to have the potential to foster cognitive development (such as a deeper understanding of the professional role) and motivation (for instance, a drive to provide quality practice) (Nachtigall et al., 2022). However, the term authentic learning is found to be loosely and inconsistently used and understood in research, although numerous researchers have strived to define and operationalize the term (Nachtigall et al., 2022). Typically, the idea of authentic learning is based on the notion that learning is situated and, consequently, that context is important for knowledge construction (Lave & Wenger, 1991). In seeking a definition of authenticity, certain researchers highlight the importance of real-world problem contexts to ensure authenticity (Herrington et al., 2014). Hod and Sagy (2019) illuminated authenticity as a continuum ranging from traditional schooling characterized by non-authentic designs via simulation and hybrid forms to real-world participation and workplace learning. Also, different design elements, such as the use of tools and innovations, have been denoted as relevant to enhancing authentic learning (Betz et al., 2016; Hod & Sagy, 2019; Nachtigall et al., 2022). Herrington et al. (2014) present nine elements used in the current work to examine learning designs, which will be elaborated on as an analytical approach.

However, the idea of enabling real-world contexts and authenticity can be questioned. Research on what is assumed to denote real-world aspects of learning environments has indicated that maximum fidelity either in real-life situations or simulations does not necessarily lead to effective learning (Herrington, 2006). A few studies have investigated how participants perceive implemented authenticity or how this authenticity can affect certain learning outcomes (Betz et al., 2016; Nachtigall et al., 2022). Barab et al. (2000) argued that authenticity does not occur in the learner, the task, or the environment but in the dynamic interaction among these components. As argued by Betz et al. (2016), individual susceptibility is essential for the learners’ experience of authenticity and desired outcomes, such as the development of teaching, mentoring, or leader competencies. Such awareness can motivate researchers to also include learners’ experiences when investigating authenticity related to learning designs. However, self-reporting on outcomes in this matter is challenging as authentic learning settings can have low effects on cognitive outcomes and high effects on motivational outcomes (Nachtigall et al., 2022).

By demanding students to work with videos captured in their (possible future) workplace, investigated learning designs intend to enhance teacher students’, mentors’, and leaders’ professional learning. As such, the designs are typical as they align with Nachtigall et al.’s (2022) description of learning design goals, which aims to facilitate learning experiences that make students perceive the tasks they are given in a design as valuable, useful, and relevant to developing competence. According to Herrington et al. (2014), there are practical and theoretical questions regarding the future of authentic learning designs in education that are unanswered, such as issues related to the design of convincing tasks to provide complex and sustained learning, and the role of technologies in facilitating the creation and publication of genuine products. We intend to illuminate relevant possible mechanisms that can be taken into consideration when designing for authentic learning.

3. Analytical Approach

In this work, designs that promote authentic learning are understood as a pedagogical approach that provides learning opportunities by allowing students to experience the same problem-solving challenges in the curriculum as they will in their daily endeavors (Herrington, 2006; Herrington et al., 2014).

We use a framework from Herrington et al. (2014), comprising the following nine elements as drivers for authentic learning:

• Provide an authentic context that reflects the manner in which knowledge will be used in real life.
• Authentic tasks are understood as loosely defined tasks with real-life relevance.
• Access to expert thinking and the modeling of processes in real-life contexts.
• Multiple roles and perspectives providing opportunities to explore the task from different perspectives.
• Collaborative construction of knowledge based on appropriate means of communication with relevant others.
• Reflection opportunities provided by the task and context, organization enabling students to return to the elements of the design, and the opportunity to compare with others.
• Articulation that demands students to concretize their ideas and reasoning, providing opportunities for articulation in collaborative groups and in the presentation of arguments.
• Mentoring and scaffolding provide collaborative learning.
• Authentic assessments integrated with the activity, thereby providing the opportunity to craft polished performances or products in collaboration with others.

In the following account, we consider these nine features to illuminate how video-based learning designs can facilitate professional development. We understand design as a dynamic activity that integrates three elements: subject, object, and mediating tools. To illustrate design that is understood as the interplay between these elements within the contextual conditions defined by the study program, we adapted a model presented by Vestøl (2016). This model, presented in Figure 1, is used as an approach to focusing our analysis on mediators as potential drivers for authentic learning, in addition to focusing on tensions between intended and realized learning designs.

The subjects can be understood as primary and secondary subjects. The primary subjects are students in one of the investigated study programs. The secondary subjects are the actors to whom the student is required to develop a competence relation—for example, pupils or mentees. Similarly, the mediating tool(s) can also be primary or secondary. The students’ own practice videos are—along with the written tasks—primary tools. Other recourses used to support the use of the primary mediating tool—such as theory, an app for filming, and guides for peer coaching—are considered secondary. The object is understood as the goal of the subjects’ interaction with tools—in this case, to develop professionally as teachers, mentors, or school leaders. Such an objective is in line with other contributions illuminating how opportunities for authentic learning can lead to cognitive and motivational learning outcomes (Nachtigall et al., 2022).

Further, the written tasks investigated in this study are intended to define and structural activities in which subjects use tools to reach the objective. Given such an understanding of written tasks, we treat them as expressions of designs. As visualized in the model presented by Vestøl (2016), such designs can be analytically divided into “teaching design” and “learning design”. Teaching design is understood as design for teaching developed by university-based educators while learning design is developed by students as they interact with the teaching design. When the elements (subject, mediating tool, and object) interact, the student transforms the teaching design presented by educators into a learning design. The learning design can be understood as the enacted design, while the teaching design is the intended design (Hauge, 2014; Vestøl & Lund, 2017). Hauge (2014) describes enacted design as “what actually happens when teachers and learners engage in joint construction of the learning object” (p. 314). For instance, the intention of video-based designs (the teaching design) could be to facilitate the mentor students’ analytical approach to their own mentoring, further enhancing the understanding of their own mentoring and mentoring competence. To facilitate such processes, the teaching design could be a task encouraging mentor students to capture a naturally occurring mentoring session. However, the mentor student engaging with the teaching design has different individual characteristics and several contextual aspects to take into account. Issues such as time, access to mentees, technical challenges, and stress related to being filmed can be obstacles to capturing naturally occurring mentoring. As such, the enacted design (the learning design) can differ from the intended design, for instance, by being less authentic than encouraged by the teaching design.

Investigated learning designs describe and structure several sub-activities in which students interact with tools to achieve the objective (professional development). Although the designs are developed by educators, they intend to facilitate and frame learning processes that extend over time and are primarily driven by students themselves. To illuminate potential tensions between intended and enacted design in this contribution, we use the term intended design when referring to the aspects of learning designs provided by the university, and we use the term enacted design when referring to students’ perceptions and actions related to engaging in the learning designs. In the current study, the intended learning design is investigated by analyzing mediating tools (especially the task formulations provided to guide students through the learning designs). The enacted design is investigated in the analysis of survey data from teacher students, mentor students, and students in principal education. Our approach defines mediating tools in a video-based design learning design as external stimuli in order to drive changes in how the subjects understand and enact their role (Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002; Vestøl, 2016).

4. Context

The empirical data in this article are taken from three different types of study programs from the same department at a university in Norway in 2021 and 2022. The teacher students were in their first semester of a one-year post-graduate certificate-in-education program at the time of filming their practice. The students all had master’s degrees and had been through a minimum of two practicum periods. Participation in the video-based design was voluntary, with students recruited over email and through their learning platform. The mentor students were in their first semester of two during filming. They all have formal teacher education and a minimum of three years of teaching experience. The investigated task is the second of a total of four mandatory tasks to be conducted by the mentor students. The video was also permitted to be used as data in their written exam. Students in the two different investigated principal education programs were in their last semester. Students in principal education must hold a formal position as a principal or leader in a school in order to be accepted as a student in the principal education program. The PE1 design was the fourth of seven mandatory tasks. The PE2 design was the fifth of six mandatory tasks.

All study programs introduced the design to students in campus gatherings, addressing issues regarding the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), methodologies, assessment criteria, and the use of technological tools. The students were left alone between three and six weeks to complete the task; however, assistance was available on demand.

Table 1. Overview of program types and task formulations.

Program	Task 1	Status of Task	Number of Students
TE	Analysis of video clips in peer coaching groups Film own teaching, choose a five-minute clip for a peer coaching seminar. In the seminar, teacher students are divided into small groups showing their video clips to each other. The students frames the clip, and the group provides peer coaching based on a guide. Aspects of pupil interaction and support for learning are discussed.	Voluntary	33 2
ME	Analysis of own mentoring practice Assume the perspective of a theoretically based personal learning goal related to their own mentoring practice and formulate an exploratory question. Film own mentoring practice where you test the initiative to develop your own mentoring. Analyze the mentoring sequence filmed in light of theory. Answer the exploratory question. Coach a learning partner and receive coaching on your own work.	Mandatory 3	66
PE 1	Reflection notes and video of own leadership Film own dissemination in which you present an opinion/intention related to democracy, student data, school development, or the new curriculum reform in a joint meeting on your school. A peer student will film the meeting and shadow you throughout the day. Reflections related to filming/shadowing will form the basis of your individual topics for peer coaching.	Mandatory 4	38
PE 2	Conduct video of teamwork in your study group or at your own workplace. Choose an aspect of teamwork (e.g., related to school development, conversations in teams, expansive learning, quality development, boundary work, tools, etc.). Analyze and present data from the teamwork in light of the relevant theory and study literature.	Mandatory	29

¹ Formulations related to sub-activities are provided in the table. In addition, the task presentations also provided frames for word limits, assessment criteria, etc. The tasks were also accompanied by additional written resources, such as instructions for peer coaching. ² 16 students participated in 2021, and 17 students participated in 2022. ³ Approximately four students completed the task without use of practice videos due to technical challenges. ⁴ Approximately half of the students completed the task without use of practice videos due to technical challenges.

presents an overview of the investigated designs.

As visualized in the table, the investigated designs comprise structures for interplay among subjects, mediating tools, and objects in different sub-activities, thereby enabling students to immerse themselves in different parts of the intended learning design throughout a sustained period of time.

5. Technological Approach

It is acknowledged that the use of practice videos in schools provides great learning opportunities, as well as considerable challenges (Nesje & Lejonberg, 2022). In the investigated learning designs, all students complete a five-hour ethics course with certification demand before filming. The ethics course addresses GDPR, consent, storage, different categories of data, general ethical considerations, and the technicalities of filming (UiO, 2020).

6. Methodological Approach

In this qualitative study, we conducted an in-depth exploration of four different video-based learning designs to explore how video-based learning designs can facilitate learning in teacher, mentor, and principal education. To illuminate the research question, we found it relevant to explore how the interplay between elements in intended learning designs has the potential to facilitate authentic learning. However, to illuminate enacted learning designs, student surveys were also essential. Students were therefore encouraged to provide anonymous, honest input in the survey in order to develop quality in education programs. To develop an understanding of the learning designs, we read through task formulations and related written resources presented to students, as well as students’ experiences as they appear in anonymous open-ended surveys filled in at the end of the study programs. In the first read through, we became aware of how the designs described the practices that the students should film. Some designs demanded students to film their own practice in schools, while one required filming in a study group. We not only found that students underlined the perceived relevance of filming during real practice but also viewed filming as a possible obstacle to perceived authenticity in their evaluations. As such, we searched for a theoretical framework that is relevant to illuminate aspects related to professional learning in practice. Task formulations and written resources were thematically analyzed (Braun & Clarke, 2006, 2022) with theory-driven categories. The nine elements of Herrington et al.’s (2014) framework were used to examine the four learning designs and student evaluations. We used the nine categories to describe and contrast features and to highlight how diverse activities described in the material can have the potential to enhance or constrain authentic learning. All heads of the four study programs were involved in writing and/or validating information on how the designs were communicated and implemented within the various study programs. As co-authors, we also discussed our understanding and analyses to challenge our interpretations during the process, and we invited other colleges to challenge our analyses and interpretation of data.

7. Findings

The findings illuminating how a video-based learning design can facilitate authentic learning are presented in

Table 2. Characteristic features of the four intended learning designs related to the nine elements of authentic learning described by Herrington et al. (2014).

Elements of Authentic Learning	Teacher Education	Mentor Education	Principal Education 1	Principal Education 2
1. (Authentic) context	Video is taken in schools in practicum, when teaching.	Video is taken at own work place, when mentoring. 1	Video is taken at own work place, when presenting in a meeting.	Video is taken in own work place or on campus when working in team.
2. (Authentic) tasks 2	Film own teaching; peer coaching, seminars on core features of the teaching profession.	Personal learning goal; film own mentoring; peer coaching.	Film own presentation in a joint meeting; peer coaching.	Film teamwork in own study group or in schools; analyze the video.
3. Access to expert performance and thinking	Formally assigned mentors. Teacher–educators participate in peer coaching seminars. Access to relevant literature.	Peer coaching. Access to relevant literature and some access to mentor educators. 3	Principal educators take part in peer coaching. Access to the relevant literature.	Access to the relevant literature and some degree of access to principal educators. 4
4. Multiple roles and perspectives	Teacher (when teaching pupils). Coach and coachee (in peer coaching). Researcher (when analyzing video).	Mentor (when mentoring in own school). Coach and coachee (in peer coaching). Researcher (when analyzing and writing).	Leader (with teachers in own school). Researcher (when observing learning partner). Coach and coachee (in peer coaching).	Leader or college (during teamwork). Researcher (when analyzing video).
5. Collaborative construction of knowledge	Peer coaching facilitated by teacher educators.	Peers watch each other’s films and discuss them.	Peer shadowing on school visit and peer coaching.	Students are to carry out a team-based activity.
6. Reflection	Students plan teaching and choose, frame, share, and discuss a video sequence they find relevant for further investigation of core features of the teaching profession. Coach peers.	Students plan mentoring and choose, frame, share, analyze, and discuss a video sequence they find relevant to exploring the question they have formulated based on a personal learning goal. Coach peers.	Students plan a presentation and write a reflection note to ground further investigation of practices in peer coaching.	Students choose an aspect of teamwork to analyze and present data from video-recorded teamwork.
7. Articulation	Students frame their video related to study topics in peer coaching. They articulate thoughts on central features of the teacher role when providing peer coaching.	Students formulate an exploratory question based on personal learning goal. They articulate their thoughts in a written analysis of data and also share and discuss with peers.	Students articulate an opinion related to a study topic in a joint meeting in their own school. They formulate a reflection assignment based on shadowing. They articulate reflections before and during peer coaching.	Students articulate thoughts during teamwork and when analyzing data in a written assignment.
8. Mentoring and scaffolding	Peer coaching scaffolded by a teacher–educator.	Peer coaching. Feedback on written assignment.	Peer coaching scaffolded by principal educators.	Feedback on written assignment.
9. Authentic assessment	Students perform during teaching. Coaching from peers and teacher educators.	Students perform during mentoring. Feedback and mentoring from peers and mentor educator. Written papers must be accepted before final exam.	Students perform during joint meetings. Coaching with peers and also shadow them. Receive and give feedback in peer coaching. Written papers must be accepted before final exam.	Students perform during teamwork. Written papers must be accepted before final exam.

¹ For most students, video is taken when they mentor their mentees, for whom they are formal mentors. Mentor–students who did not have access to own mentees were encouraged to perform and film a mentoring session with a beginner teacher or colleague. ² For more details, see Table 1. ³ University-based experts within the field responsible for the course introduce the designs, answer questions, and are available for students. ⁴ University-based experts within the field responsible for the course introduce the designs, answer questions, and are available for students.

.

In the following account, we elaborate on how theory can be analytically used to visualize how the interplay between design elements can facilitate authentic learning. Three of the four investigated designs from the teacher, mentor, and principal educator provide authentic contexts in the sense that the students film themselves interacting with pupils and colleagues in school contexts. Moreover, the fourth design (PE2) not only encourages such practice but also provides the option to investigate campus-based teamwork with fellow students. The ME and PE1 designs invite students to film when practicing with actors who are formal mentors or leaders. The students from TE, however, have limited responsibility for the pupils they teach when filming given that they are in practicum. As such, the designs reflect the manner in which knowledge will be used in schools, particularly in the designs taken from TE, ME, and PE1, as well as PE2, for students who choose to investigate teamwork in their own schools.

All intended designs are understood as having real-world relevance, as they zoom in on the core features of the profession in focus in the respective study program. The students from TE film their teaching and use the film to discuss the core features of the teaching profession. The students from ME film their mentoring and use the film to discuss and analyze based on a personal learning goal related to mentoring. The students from PE are required to carry out a presentation in a joint meeting (PE1) or engage in teamwork (PE2). As such, the two designs from PE can be interpreted as less open, as they provide guidelines for a specific part of the professional practice that students are to investigate and also provide students with topics to focus on, such as school development, expansive learning, or the use of student data. The TE students are required to discuss their films by focusing on their interaction with pupils, exploring pupils’ thoughts and ideas, and supporting pupils in their learning process. The students from ME have more loosely defined requirements in the sense that the students must plan the activity and analytical approach more openly.

When it comes to access to expert thinking and the modeling of processes in real-life contexts, TE students have access to such resources from their formally assigned practicum mentors. Moreover, university-based teacher educators participate in peer coaching seminars where the films are elaborated on. PE1 students have access to expert thinking and modeling, as university-based principal educators facilitate and participate in peer coaching. In ME and PE1, fellow students coach each other. Given that these students are all experienced teachers who conduct formal mentor or principal education, the students are given substantial responsibility to model, share, and challenge each other’s thoughts when engaging with these designs. Although students are, to an extensive extent, left alone when interacting with these designs, university-based experts are available for student initiatives. As all designs require the relation of practice to theory, expert thinking can also be interpreted as available to students through the study literature.

Further, all investigated designs demand students to perform multiple roles. For example, TE students interacting with fellow students and mediating tools provide students with opportunities to explore the task from various perspectives—for example, exploring core features of the teacher’s role by coaching peers in groups and analyzing their own videos. Three of four designs (TE, ME, and PE1) demand students to act in the role of focus in the study program (teacher, mentor, or school leader). With regard to PE2, however, participating in teamwork can be interpreted as a generic practice rather than a leader-specific practice. All designs also encourage a researcher-like role when requiring students to analyze their video. Moreover, coach and coachee roles are activated in three of the four designs (TE, ME, and PE1), as peer coaching is part of these designs.

The investigated designs encourage the collaborative construction of knowledge in a variety of ways. All designs demand students to practice involving several actors, which could challenge students’ thinking and practice in diverse ways. For example, pupils probably challenge teacher students’ thoughts regarding teaching in practicum. Furthermore, the structure of peer coaching that we found in three of the four study programs (TE, ME, and PE1) has developed written resources to mediate collaborative knowledge construction, providing open and challenging questions to enable collaborative exploration and the construction of knowledge. The design of PE2 differs from that of the others in this matter, as collaboration is only integrated into the design by requiring students to conduct a team-based conversation.

Investigated designs intend to provide reflection opportunities by challenging students with authentic tasks in authentic contexts within the investigated designs. Loosely defined tasks lead students to return to the elements of the learning design and provide them with the opportunity to compare and discuss their thoughts with others. All designs demand that students plan an activity that is relevant to them, film it, and use the film to analyze their own professional practice. In TE, ME, and PE1, reflection opportunities are also enhanced by inviting peers to discuss their practice and providing additional avenues for professional development.

Further, all investigated designs have guidelines for articulation that require students to concretize their ideas and reasoning. TE, ME, and PE1 explicitly require students to articulate ideas as preparation for filming their own practice. The same three designs also require students to orally articulate thoughts regarding their own practice in peer coaching settings. ME, PE1, and PE2 also require articulation as a mandatory written task in the study program, either as a reflection note to be further elaborated on in peer coaching (PE1) or as a written analysis in which the video is used as data (ME and PE2).

As indicated in the analysis, coaching and scaffolding in collaborative learning are essential elements in TE, ME, and PE1. What can be interpreted as “more able partners” (Herrington et al., 2014) interacting in this process are available to students in TE and PE1. In TE, the peer sessions are facilitated by teacher educators (and in certain cases, mentor students2). Similarly, peer coaching for PE1 students is facilitated by principal educators. In the ME design, structures for peer coaching place students in roles such as coaches. The students in ME (and PE) have mentoring and coaching as main topics for their study program and are also experienced teachers, school leaders, and/or mentors/coaches; moreover, the designs challenge students to make contributions toward each other. Two of the four investigated designs (ME and PE2) also provide students with written feedback on their written papers, which is intended to scaffold their thinking and development. The students are also encouraged to follow up on the topics they select and the data they use in subsequent tasks (such as the final written exam).

Authentic assessment, understood as integrated with the activity and providing the opportunity to craft and assess polished performances, is essential in TE, ME, and PE1 by demanding students to prepare and conduct core activities related to the study program they are in (to teach pupils, mentor mentees, or present to the people they lead). A student’s performance is then assessed first by themselves and then during peer coaching (TE, ME, and PE1) and by university-based experts (TE and PE1). Moreover, PE2 includes the opportunity to craft polished performances, as students participate in actual teamwork. However, the design does not encourage the crafting of a polished performances to the same extent as in the other designs. In addition, the opening for students to choose campus-based teamwork within their study group, instead of being situated in their school, provides opportunities for authentic assessment to a limited extent. Students’ written papers are also assessed in ME and PE2. Experts must accept these written assignments for students to be able to take the final exam.

In summary, the four investigated designs exemplify how practice videos can be integrated as mediating tools in intended learning designs. All designs have students as the primary subject, and developing professional competence related to the role is the focus of the object. All designs involve practice videos and written tasks as mediating tools, accompanied by support resources, but the intended outcomes vary. All designs consist of sub-activities, but the extent and complexity, such as the opportunity to interact with secondary subjects and other relevant actors, vary. The designs enable students to immerse themselves in different mediating tools, but the openness and extent of the different involved tasks vary. To investigate the enacted designs, student experiences were analyzed. In the analysis of the open-ended survey data, the nine categories were used to code student responses. In the table below, examples of the following codes are presented. The numbers refer to the elements of authentic learning, as presented in

Table 3. Characteristic features of the responses from participators in the four study programs related to the nine elements of authentic learning described by Herrington et al. (2014).

Elements of Authentic Learning	Response Characteristics	Empirical Examples
1. (Authentic) context	Responses describing the context as authentic or knowledge as relevant for real life.	“great learning opportunity to see one self” (PES)
2. (Authentic) tasks	Responses describing the tasks as loosely defined tasks or with real-life relevance	“educational and fun to plan for filming, execute it and reflect upon it afterwards” (ME)
3. Access to expert performance and thinking	Responses describing access to expert thinking or the modelling of processes in real-life contexts.	“educational to get insight into peers everyday life as leaders” (PEO)
4. Multiple roles and perspectives	Responses describing multiple roles or perspectives providing opportunities to explore the task from different perspectives.	“nice to see own teaching from the pupil perspective” (TE)
5. collaborative construction of knowledge	Responses describing collaborative construction of knowledge in communication with relevant others	“nice to have one to discuss observations with” (PEO)
6. Reflection	Responses describing reflection opportunities provided by task and context	“a good tool to learn about, and reflect upon own professional development” (TE)
7. Articulation	Responses describing how articulation demands concretion of ideas and reasoning	“starting pint or common language, improvement of practice and learning from common sequences” (ME)
8. Mentoring and scaffolding	Responses describing mentoring and scaffolding providing collaborative learning	“together with other mentors, the video can be used as a point of departure for development. Provides opportunity for concrete feedback” (ME)
9. Authentic assessment	Responses describing assessment providing opportunity to craft polished performances or products in collaboration with others	“the video made me aware of aspects of own practice that I was not aware of, and provided opportunity for me to adjust these” (PES)

.

TE: Several informants describe how filming their own teaching practice provides opportunities for seeing and developing professional competence (1, 2, and 9). The characterization of the responses from this group of informants focuses on how they used videos for self-assessment, focusing on what worked and what they think they should improve on in their own practice (9). Some respondents mention challenges related to artificial settings and video clips that are too short as potential obstacles to perceived relevance (1 and 2). One informant mentioned that they can learn from watching each other (3). Enabling pupil perspectives and having peer perspectives on their own practice were mentioned (4). The potential for discussion with was is also described in the material (6, 7, and 8). Mentors were not involved in the learning design, and a couple of quotes described exploring the video with mentors as a missed opportunity (8).

ME: Informants generally describe how the use of videos of their own mentoring provides an opportunity to see and develop professional competence (1, 2, and 9). However, several respondents mention challenges related to how filming mentoring could hamper natural conversations by creating artificial contextual features (1 and 2). A couple of respondents mentioned how seeing peers modeling mentoring was beneficial (3). Several respondents mentioned how it was beneficial to be able to approach the video material from different perspectives (4 and 7) and how exploring with peers could add to insights (5, 7, and 8). Several informants used the word “reflection” when describing opportunities provided by the learning design (6).

PE1: Informants describe how the use of videos of their own leadership practices in schools provides an opportunity to see and develop professional competence (1, 2, and 9). However, several respondents mention challenges related to filming the demanding tasks of leaders, such as conversations about conflicts and challenges the teacher they lead experiences (1 and 2). Several respondents mentioned the relevance of seeing colleagues’ model leadership roles (3) and being enabled to explore leadership roles with colleagues (4 and 5). Several responses use the word “reflection” to denote how the learning design enables new thoughts related to their own practice (6). The relevance of using practice videos to articulate a focus area for group coaching and to discuss challenges with peers is also mentioned by several respondents (7, 8, and 9).

PE2: Some informants describe how filming their own practice provides an opportunity to see and develop professional competence (1, 2, and 9). However, this empirical material stands out from the others as the perceived lack of opportunity for enacting leadership practice in schools is more evident. Several informants describe that the filmed practice was perceived as artificial (1 and 2)3. A few students mentioned how the design provided an opportunity to adopt different perspectives (4) and reflect on practice with peers (6 and 8).

8. Discussion

The use of the theory of authentic learning in this study was a stepping stone to investigate designs where students “collaboratively try to solve a complex and ill-structured real-world problem through self-directed inquiry and investigation” based on videos from professional settings (Nachtigall et al., 2022, p. 1482). Although the term real world can be problematized in this matter, the current contribution adds to insights into how higher education can provide students with opportunities to see and develop professional competence in the contexts they are to perform in. The investigation of the intended learning designs through a theory perspective of authentic learning enabled the visualization of how an interplay between design elements can drive knowledge constructions for different types of student groups.

8.1. How Can Video-Based Designs Drive Authentic Learning?

As defined by Nachtigall et al. (2022), authentic learning settings are “characterized by learners who collaboratively try to solve a complex and ill-structured real-world problem through self-directed inquiry and investigation” (p. 4). However, how students experience opportunities to engage in activities such as those described in the investigated learning designs is not given. Investigated responses from our survey data visualize how several students identified certain aspects related to their role that they became aware of seeing their own practice on film, such as body language, how they ask questions, and how they listen when interacting with secondary subjects (pupils, mentees, and teacher colleges). Students report that the experience of analyzing their own practice is relevant: “I had opportunity to go in depth and ‘study’ myself” (ME). Further, responses indicated that the option of not filming in schools can hamper the potential benefits. As one student put it, “artificial settings, give artificial reactions, so the usefulness is very limited” (PE2).

The analysis also indicates how mediating tools accompanying the video recordings, such as written resources, are essential for subjects (students) to achieve objectives (professional development) in video-based designs. As indicated in Herrington et al. (2014), designs should be sufficiently flexible in order for subjects to interact with tools in a flexible manner. TE, ME, and PE1 provide guides for diverse sub-activities. Theory and the course literature can play a prominent role in analyses and in writing mandatory papers than in planning activities for certain designs. Designs (like ME) can also require students to use the literature as a mediating tool in the early planning phase. Students could benefit from having several opportunities to link to the study literature when creating and conducting complex activities. Using new tools in established practices challenges practitioners to adapt and rethink their practices (Hunskaar & Gudmundsdottir, 2023).

As reflection is assumed to drive professional development (Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002; Herrington et al., 2014; Schön, 1987), it is relevant that several students in all investigated designs used the word “reflection” when describing their experiences with the design. However, reflection is a complex concept, and students reporting reflection opportunities do not necessarily reveal that they have engaged in the reflection process denoted in theory and research. However, it is worth noting how demands to integrate theory appear to potentially provide a point of departure for reflection. Students report the opportunity to “analyze with leader theory/roles/strategies” (PE1).

As indicated by the analysis, the roles in the investigated designs provide opportunities to explore different perspectives, as illuminated by the following quote: “I experienced it as quite beneficial because it gave a good starting point for reflection with peer students” (PE1). The analysis highlighted the integration of the collaborative construction of knowledge as an important element in the examined designs (particularly in TE, ME, and PE1). Moreover, as expressed by a student (TE), “Seeing oneself from the outside provides a good basis for discussing with others”. Interactions with secondary subjects in video-based designs can provide opportunities for valuable feedback and discussion that could enhance learning (Bjørndal et al., 2023; Nesje & Lejonberg, 2022).

In ME, students were encouraged to use elements from their work, such as videos, foci, or theoretical approaches, to examine even more perspectives in later tasks. One student reported the following: “By using the video for different purposes, by looking at it with different glasses, I have reflected on my role as mentor” (ME). Challenging students to also take the assessor’s perspective can be a possible source for broadening the understanding of practices, as students are exposed to different perspectives that could challenge their understanding and encourage reflection (Herrington et al., 2014).

Collaboration with university teachers is a central element in TE and PE1; however, it is almost absent in ME and PE2. The integration of discussions with university-based experts, as in TE and PE1, can encourage reflection and provide new perspectives. On the other hand, as highlighted in the theoretical framework, the potential for authentic learning is driven by the students’ opportunities to become immersed in the task over time, the development of their own solutions, and the reflection of different parts of the process. More contact points with university teachers can not only provide essential learning opportunities but also possibly hamper the students’ process by making them less independent.

The analyzed designs allow a diversity of outcomes (Herrington et al., 2014) primarily by demanding students to co-construct the design and define the task. Although students’ professional development is the intended outcome and is defined as the objective in this work, this objective is so open-ended that we find the diversity of outcomes to be an appropriate description. However, there are also variations in this regard when comparing the analyzed designs. TE and PE1 require students to choose between the given topics for the sub-activity with secondary peers, while ME and PE2 leave it more open to the students to decide which aspects of their practice should be investigated. When it comes to the diversity of outcomes regarding formal criteria, the designs vary. TE involves participation in peer coaching as the final outcome; ME encourages the submission of a video, text, or a combination of the two; PE1 involves the submission of a reflection note on participation in peer coaching; PE2 involves the submission of a written text.

8.2. How to Design Different Types of Student Groups

The findings indicate that in-depth knowledge regarding the student group is essential when developing learning designs. The analysis indicates how differences among student groups can challenge the designers’ opportunity to enhance authentic learning. For example, students in TE differ from students in ME and PE in the sense that teacher students are often rather inexperienced teachers. However, ME and PE students often have considerable experience from similar activities when filming. Although to a varying degree, all designs enable students to co-construct the task. Such differences can be considered when co-designing tasks or assessing designs.

Data from student surveys indicate how perceived relevance can affect students’ perceptions of the designs. Several replays highlight the relevance of seeing themselves in the role in focus in quotes like “It was a wake-up call and I got several reflections on how I appeared as a mentor” (ME). Furthermore, diverse characteristics related to student experience may also enable students to interact with the structures given in the intended learning design to a varying extent: for example, the prerequisites to use loosely defined tasks as a point of departure. Challenges related to student responsibility in co-constructing the designs by defining their own task are also indicated in the student survey responses obtained from more experienced students. Several students from PE2 highlight how their choices and definition of the task can be an obstacle to the perceived utility of the task. As one of the respondents puts it, “it would have been more interesting to film a practical situation.” Moreover, students find co-creating their own tasks challenging. One PE1 student wrote, “I had planned the task too poorly, so that the filmed meeting did not give much grounding for reflection about leadership”. Such findings indicated the delicate balance between providing support and leaving the task loosely defined in order to allow students’ own initiatives to concretize the designs.

A few remarks about time are also relevant to visualize potential diverse needs that are related to the four different student groups. All investigated designs are complex learning designs and include several activities in which the subject acts differently using the mediating tools in order to achieve the objectives in various sub-activities. Such interplay between sub-activities requires sufficient time for students to adequately engage in all sub-tasks. One student calls this a challenge: “the relatively short period of time for when filming had to take place [made it] hard to capture on film exactly the topic one wanted coaching on” (PE1). This indicates that the time available needs to be consciously addressed when determining the use of practice videos. A possible development for future designs could be to extend the available time or to allow students to compare their practices over time. As one student mentioned, “it can be a good tool for seeing progression” (TE). Such findings could indicate an avenue for further research related to how time and structure can be balanced. It could also be that less experienced students could benefit from more structured iterative designs, while more experienced students could benefit from spending relatively more time interacting with the different design elements.

9. Limitations and Avenues for Further Research

We presented our findings based on an analysis of written recourses and student responses to visualize how the interplay between design elements can facilitate authentic learning. Student surveys are self-reported, which must be treated consciously. For instance, a student reporting reflection opportunities does not constitute evidence that they have engaged in what would be recognized as reflection processes, for instance, by researchers who understand reflection as relating theory to individual experiences (Orland-Barak & Yinon, 2007; Schön, 1987). To validate the presentations of intended learning designs, all study heads who developed them were included in the construction of the current contribution. Such firsthand knowledge of the phenomenon in focus can provide a solid understanding of the intentions, implementation, and conduct of the different intended learning designs. However, such an approach has its challenges. Study heads usually have invested resources in developing quality designs and could be less able to identify weaknesses and shortcomings in the analyzed designs. Moreover, our presented claims could be opened to more critical examination—for example, by investigating students’ outputs, with a focus on the perceptions of professional development, the indications of reflection, or the diversity of outcomes.

Also, several potential obstacles are mentioned by students in the current study and in line with other contributions investigating video-based learning designs (Nesje & Lejonberg, 2022). For example, several students indicate challenges related to the use of technology. Some found the app difficult to use, and some experienced technological errors hampering their interplay with the practice videos used as mediating resources to reach the given objective. Moreover, several students indicate time-consuming processes related to theoretical training and certification processes. In addition, some students reported challenges related to their own discomfort or that of the secondary subjects when being filmed. Several students mentioned considerations related to triggering “artificial conversation” given the actor’s discomfort with being in front of a camera (ME). Such features illuminate what we experience as a main challenge related to video-based learning designs: ethical considerations related to GDPR and video demands coming from study heads in developing strict frames for filming in schools. Such necessary precautions threaten the potential to film in authentic contexts, and they can thereby hamper potential beneficial learning outcomes for students.

10. Conclusions

The current work provides an opportunity to discuss how learning designs can contribute to professional development for different types of student groups. Such interest is based on the assumption that learning designs characterized by authentic contexts, tasks, and assessments have the potential to enhance professional competence by allowing students to try out practices and/or by bringing their own practice to campus in the form of video clips (Herrington, 2006; Lombardi & Oblinger, 2007). This contribution provides examples of how innovation in design and technology can result in educational outcomes by allowing authentic contexts for learning (Herrington, 2006; Lombardi & Oblinger, 2007).

The essential role of conscious designs is the main finding from the current analysis, as one of the students concluded, “video recordings should probably be framed consciously” (PE1). The investigated designs challenge students to participate in campus-structured yet self-driven activities in order to facilitate professional development. As argued by Hauge (2014), learning designs are “context sensitive and respond to, for example, immediate opportunities, learner initiatives and serendipity” (p. 314). However, students must simultaneously be equipped with adequate structures to enable the beneficial use of elements such as practice videos. The findings of this study shed light on the challenges and possibilities related to such a balance.