Search

Teacher education in Norway has the form of a five-year, research-based program with three or four subjects studied at the master’s level. The aim of the project that this study builds on was to both prepare student teachers for future work and enhance their development in schools and universities as they worked on their R&D assignments and master’s theses. Teacher education relies heavily on collaboration between schools and teacher education institutions. With cultural–historical activity theory as the theoretical framework, a change laboratory (CL) became the meeting place for the participants in the study. 16 CL sessions were arranged during the four-year project. The data were collected during the last CL session. The teacher educators in university and in school sat in their respective groups, having a dialogue around the question, What have you learned during your work on the R&D assignment and the master’s thesis, and what significance do you think your learning will have? The study shows that teacher educators in university and school co-constructed knowledge of a new activity related to a collaboration between university and school, and that the development work became important for both parties.

Denne artikkelen retter oppmerksomheten mot lærerstudentenes arbeid med FoU-oppgaven i sitt 3. studieår. Artikkelen tar utgangspunkt i en studie hvor kulturhistorisk aktivitetsteori (KHAT) var det teoretiske rammeverket, og hvor endringsverkstedet (change laboratory) var en sentral møteplass for lærerstudenter, lærerutdannere og praksislærere. Artikkelen svarer på følgende problemstilling: Hvordan erfarer studenter trepartssamarbeid i oppstarten av arbeidet med FoU-oppgaven? Det er oppstarten av arbeidet med FoU-oppgaven som er i fokus, og hvordan denne kan danne fundamentet for videre utvikling. Studien ble gjennomført som en kvalitativ kasusstudie, og dialoger fra de tre første endringsverkstedene i arbeidet, samt intervjuer relatert til disse endringsverkstedene, utgjør datamateriale for studien. Datamaterialet ble analysert ved hjelp av åpen koding slik den er beskrevet i den konstant komparative analysemetoden. Hovedkategoriene som ble utviklet i denne analyseprosessen var: «Erfaringer med tid­ligere praksisrettede oppgaver», «Felles planlegging for relevans i skole og i universi­tet» og «Studentenes rolle og erfarte utbytte». Studentene erfarte det som meningsfullt og motiverende å fokusere på områder som skolen hadde behov for å utvikle. Studentene har også erfart samarbeidet med praksislærere og lærerutdannere om FoU-oppgaven som meningsfullt og nyttig for dem som fremtidige lærere.

This study investigates student teachers’ experience of participating in a research and development project named Learning, Assessment and Boundary-crossing in Teacher Education (LAB-TEd). LAB-TEd is a tripartite collaboration project between student teachers, practice teachers and university teachers from two universities in Norway. Framed by cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT), participatory data analysis workshops, known as Change Laboratories, have been used to ensure the relevance of the student teachers’ thesis work for professional development, and to uncover obstacles and barriers to change. Recent research highlights that teachers are typical participants in Change Laboratories implemented in teacher education and schools. There are few studies that highlight student teachers as participants in such interventions, and this may indicate that this is a field of research that is important to investigate. The purpose of the article is to provide insight about how student teachers’ experience participating in a research and development project grounded in CHAT. The data material consists of qualitative interviews with 34 student teachers. Findings from this study indicate that student teachers experienced a development journey by participating in the project. The following are the main findings from the study: The student teachers experienced that their own drive and motivation went from self-interest as the driving force for participation, to a more collective understanding. The student teachers first experienced tripartite collaboration as non-existent, later to become tripartite collaboration. The student teachers experienced how their role in the project’s tripartite collaboration developed from serving as a communication link between university and school, to becoming an actual participant. The student teachers also experienced how their role in Change Laboratories changed from being voiceless participants to becoming more equal partners in the project. The discussion elaborates on the development journey that the participants experienced.

Personnel from the armed forces, police, and health services are subject to split-second bias when interacting in crises, however, when it comes to communication and negotiations, deep knowledge about the dialogues is still unexplored. Our objective in this article is to achieve a better understanding of how emergency personnel use dialogue to mediate other peoples’ actions in critical situations, and how the new knowledge can help these professionals to increase their impact. Our research has been guided by the following research question: When in a crisis, how do emergency personnel’s utterances function as auxiliary stimuli to mediate other peoples’ higher-order thinking and voluntary action? Using a multiple case study design, emergency personnel from the armed forces, the police and the health services in Norway shared their experience from crises, encompassing three cases: (1) The Coaching in Crossfire, (2) The Axe Desperado and (3) The Still Face. Analysis of the qualitative data revealed the following findings, divided into five categories: (1) Unlocking Situations, (2) The Chain of Utterances, (3) The Impact of Auxiliary Stimulus, (4) The Mediation of Higher Mental Functions and (5) Renewed Volitional Action. We discuss our findings in the light of established perspectives associated with expertise, relations, emotions, and the Pygmalion Effect. Our research improves the knowledge on the potential of dialogue as a shared relational process, even when people are in a crisis situation. Thus, our research has practical implications for emergency personnel in relation to crisis management, as well as for human relations when a crisis suddenly occurs.

The study presented in the article focused on school-based development in lower secondary schools in Norway. School-based development represents a new practice not only for school leaders and teachers but also for teacher educators, who should assist schools in their development processes. The study was conducted within the framework of cultural historical activity theory (CHAT). The aim of the professional development project was twofold: to develop teaching practice in schools and also to evolve the teaching in the participating teacher education institutions. The problem formulation for the article is the following: How does teacher educators’ collaboration with schools contribute to learning in their own institutions? The purpose of the study was to find out how the teacher education institutions’ participation influenced the activity within the institutions and what factors could impede or support teacher educators’ actions and learning, and even expansive learning. Expansive learning means that a new collective practice or activity is developed in the institution. To answer the research question, a collective case study was conducted to understand the premises and promises for expansive learning in teacher education. The study found “Organizing of the work at the institutions,” “Teacher educators’ experiences and learning,” “Teacher educators as researchers,” and “Leadership and change” to be central categories that can describe teacher educators’ work and its premises and promises. The study concludes that leadership at the institutions is the main factor that can impede or enhance expansive learning and thus institutional development, and that an interplay between content, culture, and structure is necessary for expansive learning in teacher education.

Background: Internationally, teacher education usually involves close school-university cooperation. In Norway, such collaboration includes enabling student teachers to develop into researching teachers. In this article, our interest lies in how the Change Laboratory (CL), a form of participatory workshop, can lay the foundation for three-way collaboration between student teachers, teacher educators, and practice teachers, in terms of resolving practice issues and facilitating student teachers' research planning. Purpose: The study, contextualised within cultural historical activity theory (CHAT), sought to better understand student teachers' experiences and learning gleaned from collaboration in the CL. Method: Eight student teachers participated in the research, which was carried out over a four-year teacher education research and development project involving one university and one primary school. During this time, the student teachers met in the CL with the teacher educators from the university, and the practice teachers, who were working as mentors in the training schools. The data collected, comprising presentations and dialogues from the CL sessions, were analysed qualitatively. Findings: According to the analysis, the student teachers thought that their CL experiences had supported them along the trajectory of becoming reflective, professionally oriented practitioners. They felt that, through participatory meetings with the teacher educators and practice teachers, they had developed in-depth subject knowledge; learned to collaborate; learned about school development; and learned how to be well prepared for the profession they were entering. In addition, they considered whether the project could be expanded to the entire teacher education system. Conclusions: The findings draw broader attention to the role of participatory meeting places in creating a community of trust, and their potential to support teachers' learning at crucial stages of their professional journeys, from early career phases and beyond.

Merk: Denne artikkelen ble publisert i tidsskriftet FOU i praksis. Tidsskriftet skiftet navn til Nordisk tidsskrift for utdanning og praksis i september 2019. Utdanningene i Norge er i endring. Barnehagen fikk nye rammeplaner i fjor, og i 2013 ble førskolelærerutdanningen endret til en barnehagelæreutdanning. Det innebar store endringer i læreplanen eller det som kalles «Rammeplan for barnehagelærerutdanningen». Følgeforskningsgruppen for Barnehagelærerutdanningen (BLU) viser at mange ennå strever med å finne ut hvordan en i praksis skal drive utdanningen innenfor de tverrfaglige fagområdene. I grunnopplæringen er det fastsatt en ny, overordnet del i læreplanverket – hvordan den skal tolkes, strever mange ute i de enkelte kommunene med. Hvordan skal en legge til rette for dybdelæring? Og hva betyr nå egentlig det?

Merk: Denne artikkelen ble publisert i tidsskriftet FOU i praksis. Tidsskriftet skiftet navn til Nordisk tidsskrift for utdanning og praksis i september 2019. For ett år siden markerte vi tiårsjubileum for Tidsskriftet FoU i praksis, samtidig som vi gikk over fra papirformat til digitalt format. Det ble slutt på papirutgaven. Denne endringen var vi spente på. Nå vet vi at det ikke fungerte helt slik vi håpet, fordi det ikke var lagt til rette for nedlasting av enkeltartikler. Det er nå i orden, og dermed er vi også registrert i Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), som vi har fått mange spørsmål om. Tiårsjubileet ble også markert gjennom en review-studie av innholdet i de ti årgangene. Gjennom denne studien viste Nilssen og Postholm at det var stor overvekt av kvalitative studier som lå til grunn for artiklene i perioden. I dette nummeret er det motsatt. Tre av fem artikler har forskningsdesign som innebærer kvantitative metoder. Nilssen og Postholms studie viste også at vi har publisert forskning fra alle nivå i utdanningssystemet, fra barnehage til høyere utdanning. Dette nummeret speiler noe av denne tendensen.

Merk: Denne artikkelen ble publisert i tidsskriftet FOU i praksis. Tidsskriftet skiftet navn til Nordisk tidsskrift for utdanning og praksis i september 2019. Internasjonal litteratur gir god dokumentasjon av hvilke faktorer som fremmer skoleutvikling. Konteksten som læringsprosesser foregår i, er viktig for læringsutbytte, og norsk skole avviker på mange områder fra den skolen vi finner i mange andre land. Det er derfor god grunn til å stille spørsmål ved om internasjonal forskning alene kan brukes som grunnlag for utvikling av norsk skole. Den studien som presenteres her, omfatter tre skoler i Midt-Norge som deltok i piloteringen av kompetanseutviklingen på ungdomstrinnet i skoleåret 2012/2013. Funnene er hentet fra intervjuer med rektor og en gruppe av lærere på skolene. Skolene i studien var svært ulike. Likevel ser vi at det er stort samsvar mellom skolene i hvilke faktorer som er viktige for å gi utvikling. I tillegg ser vi stort samsvar med de faktorene som internasjonal litteratur legger vekt på at fremmer skoleutvikling. Det viser at det i hovedsak er de samme faktorene som fremmer skolebasert kompetanseutvikling lokalt i Norge som er beskrevet i internasjonale studier, og at lokale, regionale og nasjonale forhold spiller mindre rolle. I artikkelen diskuterer vi hvordan funnene i vår studie er koblet til funn i tidligere studier. Sitér: Lysne, D. A. og Postholm, M. B. (2018). En studie av skolebasert kompetanseutvikling i lokale kontekster. Tidsskriftet FoU i Praksis, 12(1), 69–86. English abstract English title: A study on school-based competence development in a local context International literature presents evidence of the factors that promote school de-velopment. But since context is important for learning and since the Norwegian school in many areas differs from the school we find in many other countries, there is good reason to question the relevance of international studies when planning school development projects in Norway. The present study includes three schools in Central Norway that participated in the pilot of the school-based competence development project in lower secondary school the year 2012/2013. The findings are drawn from interviews with the principal and a group of teachers in each school. The schools in the study were very different. Yet we see that there is a convergence between the schools in what factors that are important to promote development. In addition, we see a strong correlation with the factors that international literature emphasizes as important for school development. This shows that it is essentially the same factors that promote school development locally in Norway as described in international studies and that local, regional and national contexts matter less. In this article we discuss how the findings of our study are linked to findings in previous studies

This review study includes 43 articles from 2016 and 2017 focusing on teachers’ professional development, as guided by the following twofold research question: “What characterizes teachers’ professional development in school, and how does this development influence school improvement?” The review indicates that teachers’ learning processes need to be developed if they are to lead to school improvement. It is not enough for researchers simply to study learning processes in schools; they must also conduct formative intervention studies. Ultimately, while conducting research on these processes, researchers should provoke and sustain an expansive transformation process led by and owned by practitioners—leaders and teachers in the whole school. Findings suggest that more research is needed to show how outside resource persons, such as researchers, can contribute to school development in collaboration with teachers and school leaders at work.

Merk: Denne artikkelen ble publisert i tidsskriftet FOU i praksis. Tidsskriftet skiftet navn til Nordisk tidsskrift for utdanning og praksis i september 2019. Etter å ha eksistert i 10 år utga Tidsskriftet FoU i Praksis et jubileumsnummer våren 2017. Samtidig var det slutt på papirformatet. Det første nummeret i 2017 markerte overgangen til utgivelse på en digital plattform. Gjennom Open Access blir forskningen også gjort tilgjengelig for alle interesserte. Vi er glade for at forskere fra ulike fagområder innen utdanningsforskning og fagdidaktikk ønsker å publisere i tidsskriftet. Vi har derfor både utvidet redaksjonen og fått med medlemmer i redaksjonsråd fra flere fagfelt. Vi er også glade for at vi i dette nummeret kan presentere forskning fra et vidt spenn i utdanningsforløpet: barnehage, grunnskole og lærerutdanning.

Merk: Denne artikkelen ble publisert i tidsskriftet FOU i praksis. Tidsskriftet skiftet navn til Nordisk tidsskrift for utdanning og praksis i september 2019. Artikkelen presenterer en review-studie av artikler som er publisert i Tidsskriftet FoU i praksis siden det ble startet opp i 2007 og frem til utgangen av 2016. Hensikten med studien var å få en oversikt over tidsskriftets artikler, og om studiene som ligger til grunn, har innfridd forventningene til tidsskriftet. Problemstillingen som rammer inn studien, er følgende: Hva har forskning publisert i tidsskriftet bidratt med til profesjonsfeltet? Artikkelen gir først en beskrivelse av hva vi legger i begrepet FoU-arbeid. For å få utviklet svar på forskningsspørsmålet har vi brukt den konstant komparative analysemetoden. Funn viser at artiklene spenner fra barnehage- til høyskolenivå, og at forskningsfokuset i studiene innenfor disse nivåene er rettet mot flere områder. Studiens funn blir presentert for hvert nivå, etterfulgt av en sammenfattende drøfting. I artikkelen presenteres også en over- sikt over metodene som er benyttet i studiene som ligger til grunn for artiklene. Konklusjonen er at forskningen i all hovedsak er forskerinitiert. En begrensning ved studien er at forskningen som er presentert, omfatter kun den som har lyktes i publiseringsprosessen i tidsskriftet, og gjennomgangen er dermed ikke represen- tativ for alle artiklene tidsskriftet mottar. Artikkelen rundes av med en avsluttende refleksjon om hva gjennomgangen av artiklene i tidsskriftet likevel kan bidra med. Sitér: Nilssen, V. og Postholm, M. B. (2017). Ti år med Tidsskriftet FoU i praksis: Fokus, funn og forskning. Tidsskriftet FoU i Praksis, 11(1), 7–40. English abstract English title: Ten years with Tidsskriftet FoU i praksis: Focus, findings and research The article presents a review of articles published in the journal Tidsskriftet FoU i praksis since it was established in 2007 and until the end of 2016. The purpose of the study was to get an overview of the articles published in the journal and examine if the studies they present have met the expectations of the journal. The problem formulation that frames the study was the following: What has research published in the journal contributed to the profession? In the article we first outline our understanding of R&D work. To develop answers to the research question we have used the constant comparative method of analyses. Findings show that the research covers levels from kindergarten to higher education, and that the research focuses on various themes within each educational level. The findings are presented for each level followed by a discussion. The article also presents the methods used in the studies that the articles build on. The conclusion is that the research is initiated mainly by researchers. A limitation of our study is that the research presented is research that has succeeded in the publication process in the journal, and the review is therefore not representative for all the articles that the journal receives. The article ends with a concluding reflection on the contribution of the review of the articles in the journal.

Merk: Denne artikkelen ble publisert i tidsskriftet FOU i praksis. Tidsskriftet skiftet navn til Nordisk tidsskrift for utdanning og praksis i september 2019. Dette er det aller første nummeret av Tidsskriftet FoU i Praksis som publiseres som Open Access. I tillegg til at det når alle interesserte lesere, er denne utgivelsen også et jubileumsnummer. Vi som er ansvarlige redaktører for dette nummeret var med på å starte opp tidsskriftet som kom ut for første gang våren 2007. Dette var ei spennende og utfordrende tid, og nå opplever vi på mange måter denne spenningen enda en gang. For ti år siden var det May Solberg i Tapir forlag som stilte seg meget positiv til ideen om å starte et tidsskrift. Vi takker både henne og hennes kolleger. Underveis har det skjedd endringer på forlagsfronten og i dag er det Fagbokforlaget som er utgiver av tidsskriftet. Pådriver i prosessen med å utvikle tidsskriftet til Open Access har vært Roald Valle som vi også ønsker å takke.

Merk: Denne artikkelen ble publisert i tidsskriftet FOU i praksis. Tidsskriftet skiftet navn til Nordisk tidsskrift for utdanning og praksis i september 2019. Nummer 2/2016 er den siste papirutgaven av Tidsskriftet FoU i praksis før vi går over til Open Access fra og med 2017. Tidsskriftet vil da bli publisert på Fagbokforlagets nettløsning for tidsskrifter. Dette betyr omlegging fra abonnement til publiseringsavgift. Vi ser fram til overgangen, som vil gi tidsskriftet og forfattere bedre mulighet til å formidle forskningsresultater og faglig innhold til en større leserkrets. Vi ser også fram til det første nummeret av tidsskriftet i 2017, som blir et jubileumsnummer for å feire og markere de ti årene siden oppstarten i 2007. Gjennom disse ti årene har Tidsskriftet FoU i praksis gitt viktige kunnskapsbidrag til profesjonsfeltet, og lærerutdanning og skoleutvikling spesielt. Jubileumsnummeret vil presentere tilbakeblikk og oppsummeringer, og også peke framover.

Merk: Denne artikkelen ble publisert i tidsskriftet FOU i praksis. Tidsskriftet skiftet navn til Nordisk tidsskrift for utdanning og praksis i september 2019. Når vi nå skriver 2016 er vi inne i den siste årgangen av Tidsskriftet FoU i praksis som vil bli utgitt i papirformat. Denne og neste utgave vil komme ut som de har gjort. Forberedelsene til overgang til Open Access er imidlertid i gang, og fra og med 2017 vil tidsskriftet bli publisert på Fagbokforlagets nettløsning for tidsskrifter. Dette vil bety omlegging fra abonnement til publiseringsavgift, slik tilfelle er for mange andre vitenskapelige publikasjoner. Med denne overgangen til Open Access vil vi fra 2017 på en enklere måte kunne formidle forskningsresultater og faglig innhold og være tilgjengelig for en større leserkrets.

The teacher’s role in the university classroom has traditionally been to present the syllabus to listening students. In Norway new rules have been introduced for the activity in this classroom. The overarching goal for the teaching is to organize a learning situation that makes the students active learners. The article deals with the teacher as a researcher, and focuses on how innovative actions can be implemented by the teacher and studied from a researcher point of view. The text presents cultural historical activity theory (CHAT) as both the theoretical framework for the organized actions in the classroom and as an approach for studying the classroom processes. The article gives an overview over a material that can be gathered in a classroom characterized by student activity. It ends by reflections on how development in one classroom can be transferred to other classrooms.

Background: Our theoretical perspectives direct ourresearch processes. The article contributes to the debateon Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) andDewey’s idea-based social constructivism, and to thedebate on methodology and how the researcher’s theoreticalstance guides the researcher in his or her work.Purpose: The article presents fundamental ideaswithin CHAT and Dewey’s idea-based social constructivism.The purpose of the text is to discuss and examinehow ideas in these two theories guide educationalresearch conducted within the framework of these twoapproaches. Furthermore, the article aims to contributeto the discussion on CHAT and Dewey’s theory.Sources of evidence: Ideas based on Vygotsky’stheories, represented mainly by James Wertsch, MichaelCole, Barbara Rogoff and Yrjö Engeström, andDewey’s ideas, are examined and discussed in relationto educational research. Furthermore, statements madeby Mietinnen, Garrison and Rorty are taken into accountin the discussion on the two outlined theories.Main argument: When CHAT and Dewey’s theoryguide researchers in their work, they have to take thecontext or situation into consideration. Artefacts aretreated as part of this context, and therefore have to bea focal point of the research. In educational research theclassroom and the teacher are also central parts of thelearning environment or context. The teacher is the oneto form the learning environment in which the pupilsthink and act, and therefore, the teacher’s role in theclassroom is important. If researchers are to manage tofocus on pupils’ learning, they must direct their researchfocus both on the teacher as an organizer of the activitiesand on the collaborating and supporting processes between the teacher and the pupils, and between thepupils. This means that the research focus has to includeboth activity and dialogue, which includes processes inall their complexity.Conclusions: Mediating artefacts play a central roleboth in CHAT and Dewey’s theory. If the researcher isto ascertain what the pupils learn when using specificartefacts, he or she will have to study the activities orprocesses within which these learning aids are used.This indicates that the researcher has to study learningprocesses in progress. Garrison states that Dewey’s approachis a philosophy of cultural development. Miettinenfinds that Dewey’s theory does not serve as thefoundation for both historical and cultural analyses ofaction. I disagree with Rorty and Mietinnen, and ratherfollow Garrison’s lead. In both theories, social, culturaland historical factors are, in my opinion, viewed asdecisive factors intertwined in what happens here andnow. Therefore the setting that frames the activity withits social, cultural and historical aspects also has to bebrought into focus in one’s research activity.

Different paradigms or perspectives function as the point of departure and framework for research. In this article ethical issues in the positivist and constructivist paradigms are presented. The article points out that more or less the same ethical codes are used in these paradigms, but with some nuanced interpretations. CHAT (cultural historical activity theory) is presented as a third paradigm. While conducting research, one intention within this paradigm is to change and improve practice. This means that the researcher and the research participants during the research process together set the goals for the work and try to change practice en route to these goals. The relation between the researcher and the research participants is different than in the other two presented paradigms. This means that research in the CHAT paradigm also needs to be guided by different ethical codes. The purpose of this article is to show how some of the traditional ethical codes which direct research both in the positivist and constructivist paradigm change and are also inadequate in the CHAT paradigm. The article presents and discusses ethical codes that challenge the researchers’ communicative, social and knowledge competence.