1 Introduction

Discussing the support to the education and action of pedagogical coordinators implies considering the advances of studies and proposals of action and reflection upon this professional’s work and the need for specific education for a qualified action. The multiple and complex functions of the pedagogical coordination and the lack of clarity about the functions and attributions of this position are currently recognized (^{PLACCO; ALMEIDA, 2021}) and demand special care with those starting to occupy this position.

Many teachers take over the pedagogical coordination believing that their experience as teachers will be enough to work in the new position. Although this practical experience of working in the classroom is a reinforcement for those starting the new activity (^{GROPPO; ALMEIDA, 2013}), it does not cover all specificities of the new function, which validates the idea that support in this initial coordination phase is decisive for the whole process of professional learning required by the professional activity.

When pedagogical coordinators are not supported or tutored in their professional onboarding, it is common to notice that the quality of their work is compromised, and that the whole school is affected. This usually occurs due to the fact that these professionals have not received specific qualification in their initial or continuous education. Such qualification is required to put into practice specific knowledge and expertise in the school routine since this professional is seen as the problem solver, which hampers the prioritization of functions inherent in their position.

These situations very often make coordinators take over paperwork that is not part of their function, feel isolated and far from their peers, mainly the school principal, and this prevents them from developing the three essential dimensions of their function, namely, articulation, education, and transformation (^{PLACCO; ALMEIDA; SOUZA, 2015}).

While such dimensions require from experienced pedagogical coordinators a long time of learning, in addition to suitable conditions in schools to handle and develop them, they are even more challenging to beginning pedagogical coordinators. Therefore, it seems relevant to ask: how are these dimensions incorporated in the beginning coordinator’s work? What types of support and tutorial can contribute to their overcoming of the challenges related to this position?

Taking these issues into consideration, this article aims to present and analyze a professional induction action anchored in the collaborative partnership between experienced and beginning coordinators, that is, an action of support and tutorial toward the overcome of challenges experienced in the pedagogical coordination onboarding process. We introduce data and analysis resulting from part of an education-research study ^¹, based on the principles of action research (^{THIOLLENT, 2011}), whose research protocol is: 5.186.675. This part of the study emphasizes collaborative partnership.

2 Methodological aspects

The perspective of articulating research and teachers’ education has been defended and used by many researchers (^{ANDRÉ, 2002}; ^{PASSOS, 2007}; ^{RAUSCH, 2012}; ^{PEREIRA, 2017}) and evidences the critical and emancipatory character of an onboarding process in the school context starting from the teachers’ views aiming at the transformation of the local reality and at guaranteeing the implementation and maintenance of changes (^{LONGAREZZI; SILVA, 2013}). Taking that into consideration, this education-research focusing on collaborative partnership between experienced and beginning coordinators and developed as induction actions for the beginning professionals met the action research theoretical and practical requirements.

Sixteen meetings (eight with each group) were held remotely due to the Covid-19 pandemic in the second semester of 2020, including Chat content, two discussion groups, spontaneous conversations and exchange via WhatsApp, and a questionnaire that were used to collect data.

The participants in these development meetings were 25 teachers that had been approved in a public test for pedagogical coordinator in 2019 and had no experience in coordination, thus they were considered beginning coordinators, and 17 coordinators with up to three years of experience, hereinafter referred to as experienced coordinators, who worked in the municipal education system of São Paulo.

To organize the meetings, the 42 participants were divided into two groups so that each group joined beginning and experienced coordinators in a balanced way and the collaborative partnership could occur.

The first and second meetings with groups 1 and 2 were held with the purpose of identifying, analyzing, and prioritizing the education needs of the research participants, with their contribution, from discussions about the professional challenges they faced. Such needs, seen as problems or difficulties the professionals had to face in their new work settings (^{ESTRELA; LEITE, 1999}), were converted into development content discussed from the third to the eighth meetings.

Coincidently, the contents chosen by the two groups were the same, except for that of the last meeting. Thus, all the participants dealt with topics involved in the attributions of the pedagogical coordinator, lesson observations, coordinator’s feedback to the teacher after lesson observation and regarding the teacher’s plan, teachers’ development, and professional education strategies. In the eighth meeting, group one worked with the learning monitoring theme, while group 2 discussed pedagogical documents (final evaluation of the school unit and school pedagogical political project).

The first discussion group, named group A, included six experienced coordinators who took part in the development meetings and wanted to participate in the discussion group. This occurred seven months after the end of the development meetings, that is June 2021. The objective was to understand whether and how the collaborative partnership between experienced and beginning coordinators developed during the development meetings in 2020 impacted the professional practice of those experienced coordinators.

The second discussion group, named group B, included five professionals that had no experience in pedagogical coordination when they participated in the development meetings. They were teachers that had been approved in the coordination public test and were waiting to take office and volunteered to take part in this discussion group. This group was formed eight months after the end of the development meetings, that is, July 2021. It aimed at investigating how their professional onboarding occurred after their participation in the education-research.

The data analysis was based on Prose Analysis (^{ANDRÉ, 1983}). After collecting the empirical material, some floating reading was carried out to identify and highlight parts that dialogued with the objective of the education-research, that is, to investigate how the professional onboarding of the pedagogical coordinator occurs when supported by the collaborative partnership between experienced and beginning coordinators with mentorship and favored by education-research. Next, those excerpts were highlighted using different color markers, to organize them in topics (subjects). Those topics were grouped based on theme similarity and complementarity. Thus, the following analysis axes were built up: survey collection process, analysis, and prioritization of the research participants’ education needs; collaborative partnership between university and schools and between experienced and beginning coordinators from education-research; contributions of the education-research to the experienced coordinators’ practice transformation; contributions of the education-research to the beginning coordinators’ onboarding process.

Each axis was articulated to one of the specific objectives of the education-research, which were: to survey, analyze, and prioritize collectively the research participants’ development needs ² to organize and develop the development meetings; to identify factors favoring the collaborative partnership between university-schools and experienced and beginning coordinators; to understand whether and how the collaborative partnership and the mentorship impacted the experienced coordinators’ work; to analyze whether and how the induction action of this education-research provided the beginning coordinators with input to face the professional onboarding challenges. Within each analysis axis, aspects or categories were exposed, which had not been initially pursued, but ended up giving a better understanding of the phenomenon investigated, as proposed by ^{André (1983)}.

3 Pedagogical Coordinators’ Professional Onboarding

The beginning teachers’ professional onboarding process is defined as their entrance in the activity of teaching and learning how to teach. The pedagogical coordinators’ professional onboarding occurs when a teacher, who usually has some experience in teaching, takes over the pedagogical coordination. This might occur via public test, in which the future coordinator takes office, or via appointment, when a teacher is chosen by his/her peers to take over that position. This rule depends on each education network.

According to ^{Huberman (1995)}, the professional onboarding period covers the first three years of work. Most of the time, within this period, the new pedagogical coordinator needs to interact with the new professional team, constitute a new professional identity, and learn to accomplish another set of tasks linked to teaching, but rather different from it. This is not easy to accomplish, specially if these professionals are alone and have no support or mentorship. Thus, with few exceptions, the beginning of this career “has been tough on many teachers that become coordinators” (^{GROPPO; ALMEIDA, 2013}, p. 94).

Professional teachers’ onboarding phase, according to ^{Huberman (1995)}, includes a period of survival and discoveries. In this initial phase, the same occurs with beginning coordinators who need to adapt to the new job. “They are usually used to looking after their own classrooms, and suddenly have to deal with a huge diversity of obligations and visualize not only their classrooms, but also all the other classes in a school, with all their complexity, and inserted in a broader school system” (^{GROPPO; ALMEIDA, 2013}, p. 94).

According to ^{Placco (2009, p. 47)}, the daily routine of a coordinator many times leads them to “a frequent disorganized, anxious, immediate, and reactional action, sometimes even frantic. In such context, their intentions and purposes are frustrated and the circumstances make them respond to the moment situation, ‘extinguishing fire’” in their own words. Regarding that, ^{Placco and Souza (2012)} explained that most of the time, when facing these situations, many coordinators in an attempt to survive end up getting lost by trying to respond to the urgent situations that appear all the time and consume their time with paperwork or disciplinary interventions, which are not part of their function. This, with few exceptions, makes them lose the central focus of their work that, as explained by ^{Placco, Almeida and Souza (2015)}, must involve three great dimensions: articulation, education, and transformation.

^{Placco and Souza (2008, p. 27)} defended that the articulation dimension of the coordinators’ work refers to conducting, through collective work, the school political pedagogical project, in which the coordinator articulates the several dialogues and situations found in the school context. The other two dimensions, namely, education and transformation, are linked to the planning and development of professional development actions with the teachers inside the school, to organize situations and interactions so that they become reflective and critical of their own teaching practice (^{BENACHIO; PLACCO, 2012}), breaking the cycle of conservative and acritical attitudes.

Adding to that, many times, beginning coordinators are placed in more vulnerable or larger schools. Very often their work lacks support and mentorship from the school and the education network, and minimal working conditions (^{GROPPO; ALMEIDA, 2013}). All these facts make their professional onboarding even more difficult. For beginning coordinators to adapt to the new job without missing the central focus of their work, for trying to respond to urgent situations, partnerships and collaborations seem to be needed in the entrance period.

4 Collaborative partnership as professional induction action

The collaborative partnership is still a concept in development, but already shows some relevant features according to ^{Foerste (2005)}. For that author, the partnership, in general, is a type of organization that “involves institutions and/or individuals that aggregate voluntarily (…), establishing collective negotiations and share commitments and responsibilities among themselves”. It is a co-management practice anchored in the principles of democracy such as participation in decision-making processes, in which disagreements are resolved by consensus (^{FOERSTE, 2005}, p. 70).

^{Foerste (2005)} defended the collective definition of education contents via negotiation and shared reflection and suggested the possibility of opening minds so that perceptions, beliefs, and professional practices from different areas can be reflected upon collectively in development processes, which imply the participation of those involved.

When beginning coordinators take part in the definition of contents of their own development with shared reflection upon their own perceptions, beliefs, and practices, and from this interaction with their peers, they can enrich their way of thinking, acting, and broadening their critical reasoning. They, therefore, create possibilities of facing the complex challenges of the beginning of this new career.

Collaborative partnership can be used as a powerful professional induction action when it does not involve a very large number of professionals, and when it is mainly directed to the support and mentorship of beginning professionals focusing on facing and overcoming the challenges of the start of their career.

When used with this purpose, collaborative partnership cannot be considered an induction program, but rather as an induction action. An induction program is a “broad, consistent, and detailed professional development process – which is organized by a school district to educate, support, and retain new teachers and make them progress in a learning program throughout life” (^{WONG, 2020}, p. 3).

In this study, the induction action refers to a guided support process shared between beginning and experienced pedagogical coordinators. In this model, the experienced professionals and the researcher take over mentorship to favor the beginning coordinators’ onboarding process. In this study, mentorship is understood as proposed by ^{Ochoa (2011)}, as the symmetric relation established between a more experienced professional and another with very little or no experience. In this relation, the beginning coordinators are seen as a whole, not considering only the work carried out by them. Mentorship, in this sense, aims to support the beginning professionals in the development of their professional activity and build up knowledge from the relationship developed between the peers.

5 What the data produced in the education-research revealed about collaborative partnership as induction action

In this education-research, in the first development meeting, the answers given in the Google Forms by experienced coordinators were socialized. They referred to the question: what challenges do you face as a pedagogical coordinator (PC)? After this socialization, some possible themes were presented to be approached in the development meetings that were elaborated from the characterization of those challenges based on the similarity criterion. Next, we explained that those themes could be accepted or refused by the group as the content of the next development meetings. This process led the research participants to conversation and collective negotiation of the development contents, creating the opportunity for continuous development and evidencing the dialectic perspective defended by ^{Antolí, Imbernón, and Rodríguez (2001)}:

About teachers’ education, you [researcher] said something very important that is to study the strategies, to know how I am going to go about my education. I need techniques and strategies to know how to do it. I remember a pedagogical meeting in which the person [coordinator] was there only because there should be a meeting. She [coordinator] wanted to convey something, but I left the venue thinking: “I don’t know what this thing was.” It did not help me at all. I also worked with a coordinator that charged me so much that I could not think about anything, I only expected her to charge more during the meeting. I had no time to breathe or think for myself. Now, I keep thinking: “What does it mean to be a coordinator?” (Esmeralda², Group1-beginning coordinator)

Development strategies, I think this is an excellent theme. I had never thought of it. Developing your own education is hard (Larimar, Group 1-experienced coordinator).

(…) If we could talk about strategies to carry out the development, that would be great. Where can I get more information about that? (Opala preto, Group1- beginning coordinator)

For the ones that are going to coordinate, learning development strategies is very relevant (Pérola dos Mares do Sul, Group1-beginning coordinator).

Esmeralda remembers some pedagogical meetings she attended as a teacher. For her, a meeting to pass on information only does not contribute to the improvement of the classroom practice. She also recalls that one coordinator she worked with tended to put a lot of pressure on teachers. That posture, in her opinion, did not allow teachers’ reflection and autonomy.

This excerpt from Esmeralda’s answer indicates that the discussion between the research participants to identify, analyze, and prioritize their development needs, occurred in the “perspective of professional development centered on the individuals and their specific work contexts” (^{ESTRELA; LEITE, 1999}, p. 31). When retrieving such memories, Esmeralda reflected upon the coordinator’s professional practice, even if she was not a coordinator yet. Thus, it is possible, as explained by those authors, to transform desires and interests, which are probably not defined yet, into enquiries, which will become development needs.

^{Estrela and Leite (1999, p. 31)} pointed out that the “identification of needs based on the teachers’ reflection upon their own teaching practice” is not usual in their initial education, and that this reflection upon their professional practice is important because it might “facilitate a progressive awareness, definition, and prioritization of needs” by those involved in the process. The same applies to pedagogical coordinators.

Esmeralda uses a certain critical tone that suggests that she has already noticed that teachers’ education shall not be seen as a kind of training that precedes the teaching action, where theoretical and technical knowledge is passed on to the future teachers. In such education situation, the teacher is considered by the educator as incapable of generating teaching knowledge, since the knowledge is produced by specialists and the practice developed by the teacher is a reproduction of such theories (^{IMBERNÓN, 2004}).

When questioning herself about what being a coordinator means, Esmeralda demonstrated the desire to address, in the development meetings, education strategies as suggested by the researcher from one of the themes elaborated through the characterization of the challenges pointed out by the experienced coordinators. It seems relevant to emphasize that the contents of the development meetings were not defined only from what was expressed by the experienced coordinators or the researcher. There was constant negotiation between the research participants and the researcher and these negotiations founded the collaborative partnership (^{FOERSTE, 2005}) and enabled greater autonomy of thinking, acting, and solving problems (^{DAMIANI, 2008}).

We also observed that the sharing of experiences lived by Esmeralda as a teacher seems to have made Larimar, an experienced coordinator, to reflect upon the way of mediating education. Her speech suggests that developing teachers’ education is hard, since she demonstrated the desire to approach this theme. Both Esmeralda’s testimony and the researcher suggestion of working development strategies in the education context were seen to lead the group to make a collective decision, that is, to recognize the importance of the theme in their education and the strategies to develop it.

The collective identification, analysis and prioritization of development needs provoked a movement toward the involvement of the participants in the research decision making regarding the development content. Such involvement is a basic pillar in a democratic education system, in which people are not mere objects working for the education network. The excerpt below, presented by Pérola (questionnaire), a beginning teacher, confirms that involving learners in their education so that they identify, analyze, and prioritize their needs is productive: “Another important point (of the meetings) was the elaboration of the whole development plan based on our needs: it was fantastic and productive”.

This kind of participation and this way of not seeing professionals as objects in an education system, ^{Foerste (2005)} adds, are essential for the establishment of a collaborative partnership. In such perspective, the relationship is horizontal and democratic, as revealed by this excerpt:

I see that the researcher’s speech is very democratic. She always asks feedback. She usually says: “Does it make sense?” or “Do you agree?” Nothing is imposed. It is quite democratic, and she always asks feedback to understand what is happening with the group, how helpful it is (Safira, beginning teacher, Discussion Group B).

Safira felt that she was in a democratic space and highlighted concern and attention on the researcher’s part when mediating the participants’ speech using questions to reach consensus and be sure that the development content catered for all participants’ interests and needs.

When the beginning teachers’ questions are answered without judgement by the experienced professionals, and when those involved socialize their experiences and share their knowledge within a collaborative context, the coordination practice learning might occur, as confirmed by these beginning teachers’ remarks:

Since we were not in this position [coordinator], it is very difficult. The others [group participants] and Ana [researcher] […] in relation to the beginning teachers, the fact that there is no criticism and that they realize that we are trying to overcome our difficulties all the time helps us a lot (Safira, Discussion Group B).

(…) sharing experiences and materials were important elements in these interactions [experienced-beginning teachers], mainly, because the development course created opportunities to see the theory in our practice (Alexandrita, questionnaire).

Safira expressed that her interactions with more experienced peers, without criticism or judgements could contribute to the professional learning process. Alexandrita emphasized that, through their experience reports and reflection upon them, it was possible to establish a relation between theory and practice, and think about possibilities of approaches in the coordination work. These excerpts from the experienced professionals’ answers indicated that the collaborative partnership between experienced and beginning professionals was positive:

Well, I found these meetings between those that were about to start [coordination] and those that were already in the position [substitute coordinator] very important. I was so happy when Grandidierite that is my education regional director joined the group. She had many doubts about remaining in her school as a coordinator or leave it and go to another school. (…) Then, when she told me that my speech [in the development meetings] helped her to choose, and now I see that she is growing in a school that I also know, I feel happy. With a brief speech, in which I only expressed what was in my heart and the things I had gone through, I could help her (Turmalina, Discussion Group A).

(…) I keep thinking how I would like to be welcomed when I was new [in the coordination]. So, I think that those that are newly arrived, and even someone that is already experienced can welcome each other. I believe that it is always valid to join the new and the experienced working on mutual support (Diamante, Discussion Group A).

Turmalina exposed her feeling of joy for knowing that when she narrated her routine as experienced coordinator to Grandidievite during the development meetings, it helped her to make a decision. In education, when there is space for the “lived events to blossom, it has a great affective implication, which is a drive for the acceptance of new work proposals, and at the same time, increases the possibility of reinterpreting past experience, confronting it with present situations” (^{ALMEIDA, 2003}, p. 84). Both (Turmalina and Grandidievite) seemed to have benefitted from that due to the opening of spaces for socialization of lived events in the development meetings. Turmalina could re-elaborate her experience, while Gradidievite could reflect upon her own issue and make a more assertive decision based on her peer’s experience.

The collaborative partnership between these research participants seems to have enabled the “rescue of values such as sharing and solidarity – which are sometimes lost in our ways through this extremely competitive and individualistic society” (^{DAMIANI, 2008}, p. 225).

In this context of socialization of lived events that occurred in several moments in the education-research, Diamante seemed to have searched her memory for the time when she was a beginning coordinator, and having realized that, she took a position and defended that experienced and beginning professionals must help each other.

In such perspective, ^{Foerste (2005)} pointed out that public policies must be created to give teachers’ the opportunity to reflect upon present concrete situations in their pedagogical practice, aiming to define collectively more assertive work alternatives to transform the reality. The beginning professionals, Ruby’s and Diamante’s speeches, indicated that the most remarkable development meeting for them was the one that addressed lesson observation. Their speeches showed evidence that allowed us to better understand how the collaborative partnership contributed to the construction of more solid input so that these participants could face the challenges of their professional onboarding:

For me, what marked was when we talked about the pedagogical intervention in the classroom, you see? In the classroom observation, because up to that point no other coordinator had carried out this type of observation of my work, isn’t it interesting? (Ruby, Discussion Group B).

(…) I loved the experience of being observed in the classroom since this is not the type of practice we have in my school (Diamante rosa, Group 1, questionnaire).

These beginning coordinators stated that the classroom observation practice aiming at improving the teachers’ work is not something common in the schools where they used to work. Many times, as said before, the coordinator takes over tasks that are not theirs and cannot monitor and intervene in the teaching work developed by teachers. It seems relevant to mention that with few exceptions, this function deviation also results from lack of qualification regarding the coordinators’ role as educators within schools (^{GROPPO; ALMEIDA, 2013}). According to ^{Giovani and Tamassia (2013)}, coordinatora must observe teachers in their classrooms to monitor their teaching practice, talk to them afterwards, and present a written feedback, providing constructive comments and suggestions, aiming to improve the teachers’ practice and favor students’ learning. This work enables a more specific guidance, identification of development needs, and implementation of good practices that must be shared with other teachers to favor exchange among peers and collaborative reflection upon the lived events. The excerpts below show evidence that the collaborative partnership impacted the experienced coordinators’ practice:

The development meetings made me reflect upon the importance of prioritizing development demands (Pérola, questionnaire).

(…) our meetings made me realize that many tasks were outside the scope of my function, that overload of work made me exhausted and I thought of not taking office after having passed the text. I talked to the principal and explained that I would help in the daily activities, but that I would privilege my functions (Serendibite, questionnaire).

(…) I approached the management to talk, you see? (…) I explained that I needed to focus on pedagogical issues, even because we were experiencing something new [in 2020], something that we didn’t know about. So, this demanded a lot of organization from the teachers and from myself. Then, after that conversation, I think the work flowed because we started sharing the work, you see? (Serendibite, Discussion Group A).

(…) the speeches [other research participants’] sometimes validated what I was going through at that time [as a coordinator]. (…) Here, in the group, I met very different people, with opinions that differed from mine, but I respected them a lot. I managed…, while those people were talking, I learned and I talked to myself, I thought: “I would not do it like that, or I would do it too”. (…) I understood something from the meetings: I can reflect upon each speech. This experience [development meetings] was great (Turmalina, Discussion Group A).

These excerpts indicate that the exchange and shared reflection on experiences, through the collaborative partnership between beginning and experienced professionals, resulted in the experienced coordinators’ understanding of their education role, in their change of posture when facing tasks that are imposed to them in the daily routine, and improvement of their work.

Serendibite could realize that many activities that she carried out daily were not part of her job, and that overloaded her. She stated that she could get rid of all the work that did not belong to her due to the reduced number of employees, but she managed to privilege her function. By dialoguing with the school principal, she managed to share tasks and establish a more articulated work model with the principal.

Turmalina confirmed that, through her peers’ speech in the development meetings, she managed to reflect upon her own practice, and as a coordinator, before taking part in the education-research, she conducted teachers’ development in her school based on her instincts. After participating in the development meetings based on collaborative partnership, she started to use the development strategies to plan and develop her teachers’ professional development actions.

6 Final Considerations

In the process of surveying, analyzing, and prioritizing the coordinators’ development needs to define collectively the contents of the development meetings, it was necessary to balance the needs felt and expressed by them and the needs foreseen by the researcher. During the development meetings, the coordinators sometimes were not very clear when expressing their development needs, thus the researcher had to intervene to help them. Such intervention, in the education-research, was developed through negotiation, based on equality, respect, and mutual trust. The researcher believes that it is necessary to involve the coordinators in the survey, analysis, and prioritization of their development needs. Such involvement might occur through socialization and collective discussion of the challenges faced daily. When the coordinators are involved, shared reflection upon their own practice is made possible (^{FOERSTE, 2005}) supported by the theoretical framework, from interactions and exchange of experiences, and, consequently, it is very likely that the collaborative partnership between experienced and beginning professionals will occur. In such situation, it is necessary to provide responses to the needs defined by the group, carrying out a tailored development process (IMBERNÓN, 2010). The collaborative partnership provided input so that the beginning coordinators could face and overcome the difficulties of their professional onboarding, taking over their role as educators in the coordination. Thus, we firmly believe that collaborative partnership between experienced and beginning professionals is a legitimate action of support and mentorship in the professional onboarding. Collaborative research is also a tool providing experienced coordinators with professional development since it can transform their professional action.