Teacher Education in Transformation (TET)
Transforming Teacher Education and building sustainable Professional Identity meeting the
complexity of Teaching and Learning through Research oriented Practice in University Schools.
1. Relevance to the PRAKUT-programme
The Programme for Practice-based Educational Research (PRAKUT) has as one of its primary
objectives to enhance the quality of teacher education. This application is related to more specific
objectives in the programme concerning how students develop professional competence through
connecting research and practice in a new programme developing the university school concept.
2. Background and State of Art
The University of Tromsø started autumn 2010 a new differentiated five year master program in
teacher education: Pilot in North. This program consists of two tracks, one for grade 1 -7 and a
second for grade 5-10 in compulsory education. This is the first master programme for such
education in Norway. The ambition is to develop a new program increasing competence and greater
professional satisfaction focusing on enchanging literacy and andacademic learning outcomes. An
overall goal is to fit together theoretical and experienced based knowledge. Sharing a common
understanding of the challenges facing future teacher education, has resulted in an agreement
between the Faculty of Educational Sciences at the University of Oslo and the Faculty of
Humanities, Social Sciences and Education at University of Tromsø in January 2011 concerning
practice schools -named university schools. This is a new model for improving the integration of
theory and practice, content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge
and knowledge growth in teaching. The development of a new contextual teacher education is
important in the project meaning that the school system are focusing at and reflecting cultures
sorrounding it. The ambition tied to the concept and practice of university schools is diverse. A
system for accreditation schools have to meet certain criteria in order to become partners in the new
programme for teacher education. This concerns existing teaching-learning quality as well as staff
competence culture for learning and development. The commitment for partnership in research and
development work involving teachers, pupils, teacher student and teacher educators is a core aim in
the new programs. The acccreditation system is anchored in an extended partnership with the
municipality of Tromsø that will be partner in the development of the university schools.
The project Teacher Education in Transformation (TET) has as its material basis the new master
programme and the accreditated university school model. TET links to knowledge and experiences
from taking part in two nationally initiated programs; PRAKSIS FOU Fra ord til handling (20072010), PIL (practice as integrating element in teacher education) as well as additional research on
teacher education. (Haugaløkken og Ramberg, 2005). Both The Navigare-project and the project
Learning, development and research in practice: Teacher students as research partners in the PILprogramme constitute preliminary activities in relation to TET. Results from these projects
contribute to the understanding of the complex interaction between individual, professional and
social components involved in developing learning arenas. Interaction quality both on individual
and system level is of paramount importance. This is also reflected in different national and
international studies (Lødding og Vibe 2010; Hattie 2009).
When theory is rejected, when students are being socialized to existing patterns of activities, it is
hard to meet the political and professional ambition of research and research-based Our point is that
practical teaching knowlede is an equal partner in this party)). Korthagen (2001) has shown how
this issue has to be fronted in teacher education and reflected in a professional identity. Theory and
practice must be connected, related and integrated supported by organizational changes as well as
developing new theoretical concepts and models adequate for the complexity of issues involved.
PIL results tell about the need for changes both in practice at school level as well as in theory
1
teaching at the university. In USA cooperation between teacher education institutions and
professional development schools (PDS) especially the last decade of the last century was
developed. ”The idea is to develop collaborative partnership between institute-based teacher
educators and school-based teachers, sharing the responsibility for the preparation of prospective
teachers” (Korthagen 2001:11). However, research on the PDS-schools has shown a number of
unsolved issues especially regarding cooperation and relations between partners. Summing up state
of art in researching teacher education Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden still put forward the
basic challenges for teacher education: How can we create programs and learning environments
that ensure this diverse teacher-candidate pool will develop the knowledge, skills and dispositions
that allow success in the classroom with all the children they serve? What knowledge and skills are
prerequisite to entering the classroom? What aspects of learning to teach can be acquired on the
job?(2007)
However, they also presents some key findings giving direction to future strategies for enhancing
the quality of teacher education: ”These pedagogies of teacher education - student teaching,
performance assessment and portfolios analyses of teaching and learning, case methods and
practitioners inquiry- are intended to support teachers abilities to learn in and from practice. In
different ways, each approach helps to build the vision, knowledge, tools, practices, and
dispositions of new teachers to reflect on and analyze their practice” (Her står det ene sitatet I
kursiv – det andre ikke).
The new master programme i teacher education and the partnerships developed through the
university schools concept is in continuity with the work in Navigare and PIL, but it is no longer
piloting. Thus it necessitates once more reflecting on the questions put forward by DarlingHammond and Baratz-Snowden and develop answers to them through the research ambition put
forward in this project.
3. Theoretical basis , key research questions and methodological considerations
A teacher with a reflected attitude to own teaching, being motivated for participation in systematic
development work, will be best capable to contribute to developing own school (White Paper nr. 11
2008-2009:24).New professional identity, a school system developing and validating its own
knowledge,appears both in new educational policy, and society’s discourses.These changed
expectations to teacher education, teacher trainers, teacher students and teachers as well schools
contributes to larger complexity. Teaching has developed into a demanding and complex profession
where developments in society have impact on the teacher role. Teachers have to relate to new
demands for documentation, evaluations and assessments, user surveys, national tests and
inspections. Responsibilities are changed through decentralization of in-service-training and
systems of quality monitoring. This opens possibilities for new and challenging cooperative
activities for school owners, school and teacher education.
Not only are teachers supposed to teach and supervise as earlier. They are expected to become
team workers, master taxonomy of objectives and assessment, developing new forms of practice,
evaluate research findings, have a focus on the importance of organizational development and
perform qualified marketing (Imsen 2009:49).
Never have demands on the individual teacher been so complex. Teacher training is expected to
meet these demands by developing a research based legitimacy and creditability for teaching,
teachers and the school as an organization. Correspondingly, it is a challenge for teacher education
to face this situation with new forms of partnership, new tools and artefacts in teacher education
integrating theory and practice and research as a fundamental asset for developing schools as well
as a professional identity. Based on Qvortrup one may say that school as an organization is in need
for a structure facilitating professional learning and innovation for teachers and the organization as
a whole. Organizations coping with structural complexity need internal analytic complexity (Here
2
must be something wrong: These organizations don`t need internal complexity: They have it!) to
cope with external complexity (Dierkes et. al 2001). Qvortrup describes this as a system where one
continually reflects actions and processes. This is in line with what is described as learning
organization (Hargreaves 2004, Argyris og Schön 1996, Senge 1999). Schools with such
characteristics will be capable of learning within unpredictable and changing surroundings with
adequate adaptation. Systems thinking offers concepts and models for relating unique schools and
their learning to larger contexts and simultaneously connect personal learning with collective
learning. Such professional learning communities emphasizes three main constituents: cooperation
and discussion among professionals in school, strong and lasting concentration on teaaching and
learning in this cooperation and collection of assessment and additional material in order to
explore and reflect upon progress and challenges over time (Hargreaves 2004:150). Increased
quality demands in school requires teachers contributing to school development and simultaneously
improve their own teaching through professional self-development (White Paper nr.11 2008-2009).
Having in mind such expectations to the teacher profession, it is of utmost importance to make
available (clinical) experince in school communities fronting organizational learning keeping up
with political expectations and changes in socieity. Such communities are characterized by
professional teams of high quality, involvement in visons, goals, missions and learning outcomes
for the school with collective processes and partnership also with parents and pupils. The
accreditation system for university schools taking part in the project reflects these criteria. The
main challenge in the clinical part of teacher education is a lack of quality standards and weak
coupling to theory (It may also be the other way round -if we stick to the idea that there may be
interestind points of departure in practice as well). Creating learning arenas connecting content
knowledge, pedaogical content knowledge and pedagogy with practice could meet this challenge.
Developing quality through research-based coupling of theory and practicedint though new
partnerships with university schools is the fundament for the research issues and theoretical basis
chosen for this research project. It is important to have positive start experiences in practice since
research shows this is a key issue in influencing teacher drop out (Ulvik, 2008). Weniger has
pointed out that that all theory develops out of practice and returns there, thus all pratice are theoryinfused. This is ideally a good starting point for weaving the bonds beteen subject knowledge,
theory in pedagogy and practice.However, according to Westbury, didactics challenges the
viewpoint that individuality and character can be formed through abstract systems. They are formed
by humans. Thus we have to deal with the tensions beteewn a systemtheoretical and a dadactic
approach to teacher education. Didactical theory is thus more oriented to models for Bildung and
the relation to content. Curriculum theory however integrates more system perspectives related to
content and functional skills.
4. Key issues or focal points of reference based on state of art analysis of theory and research
and political discourses are:
4.1 The Issue of Enactment and its relation to Experience, Reflection and Representation
Weick (1988) coins the term enactment to represent the idea that when people act they bring
structures and events into existence and set them in action. Teachers form themselves in
organizations through enactment of interaction cycles and through the development of rules for
appropriate behavior (Eisenberg,1986). Firstly, they achieve stability. Secondly, enactment theory
can be seen as a process whereby people achieve continuity and coordination. This process requires
rules and roles, so that people can coordinate their activities with another. Enactment theory gives a
rationale for distinguishing strategic and routine behavior contributes to an understanding of
professional identity. However, education, as all professional practice, is a normative activity
building on norms of quality. To be normative the action must have an element of reflection) .
Schön talks about reflective conversation with the situation (Schön, 1983) And to be professional,
the norms have to be shared among the professionals. Sadler (in Gibbs & Simpson, 2004) calls the
norms of the profession the guild knowledge of the profession, the quality indicators for
3
professional performance shared by the members of a profession. To stimulate professional
development, we should focus on teaching as problematic and complex (Loughran, 2006). But then
the teachers have to learn to reflect on experience and evaluate teaching practice according to
professional quality standards. From a social-constructivist point of view, learning is both a social
and a personal process where a learner adapts his/her ideas and convictions to new knowledge and
understanding in an interactive dialogue. This has implications for the engagement of teachers in
processes of professional development and change. When teachers feel ownership towards a shared
definition of professional quality (the guild knowledge) or towards the change process, professional
development and change are more likely to occur (Fullan, 2007). According to Fullan, ownership of
quality through reflection involves and improves thinking about planning and the changing of
approaches. It encourages adaptation and most importantly results in meta-cognition, an
understanding of one’s own learning. The case for ownership of change by self-reflection is
supported by Hopkins et al (1994, Fullan,1999) who point out that having the control of initiatives
for change is essential for the individual if success is to be assured. Rea (in Bush & Middlewood,
2005) also stresses the need for self-motivation to bring about change. Fullan (2007) adds further to
this argument by professing that ownership is essential if change is to be a progressive process in
that it has to encourage and bring out commitment and increase skills.
4.2 The Issue of Complexity
As teaching is becoming more and more complex and demanding this has implications for teacher
professionalism, which, as described above, is characterised by different (and conflicting) views in
recent times. As Day (1999, p.12) states changes in the operational practice of professionalism
reflect the increasing complexities and contradictions of teachers’ work. Their work embodies both
challenge and threat. They may be both autonomous and accountable to others, independent and
collaborative, in control and not in control. Rasmussen states that complexity is a phenomenon
confronting and challenging society and its organizations. is at the same time a challenge to society
and the principle explaining society (2004: 17-18). The concept of complexity implies the idea that
there is always unresolved issues- more to reflect than is possible and more to communicate about
than is realistic. Complexity theory treat change and development of schools and teacher training as
expansion of possible choice, as an continual multiplication of all social connection and not as
linear and incremental improvements in fixed patterns (Rasmussen 1997: 53). A basic function in a
hypercomplex society is thus to develop formulas of contingencies for every functional system
(Qvortrup 2004: 54). As a consequence of contingencies, Qvortrup (2004:55) and Rasmussen
(2004:54) claim that the concept of Bildung (dannelse) has changed in substance. To them it is
problematic to understand Bildung as a normative content canon. The concept has to be reflected
though devleoping formulas of contingencies where contingency is met through the present
processes, not the past. People and organizations are all the time learning something that is not
stable, not even defined or understood ahead of time. In important transformations of our personal
lives and organizational practices, we must learn new forms of activity which are not yet there.
They are literally learned as they are being created. There is no competent teacher or quick fix.
Standard learning theories have little to offer if one wants to understand these processes.
(Engeström, 2001:137-138) Teacher education has in this theoretical perspective to consider the
many roles and systems of discourses teacher students /TS) must experience, reflect and enact upon
and and switch between. TS have to acquire role competencies and transformation competence for
enlarged rooms actualizing new formulas of contingencies.(Qvortrup 2004:183). This implies
switching between discourse systems and in the transformation process change repertoire of
behavior as desribed through Qvortups concepts of medium, code, reflection and function. These
challenges applies also for teacher trainers, and teachers in the university schools. For teachers , the
teacher role, there are basically two forms of discourses in relation to teaching and learning, one
related to profession and the other related to care
4.3 Connecting Enactment and complexity through four pillars of research activity
4
The two issues beeing the focal point in this project bring together the issues connected to theories
is based on a systemtheoretical perspective inspired by Bateson and Luhman complemented with
complexity theory drawing on Rasmussen, Qvortup, Doll, Lemke and Sabelli with enactmenttheory (Weick). Enactment theory gives a rationale for an understanding of professional identity
and the norms involved. This foundation serve as points of reference for the understanding of the
challenges the preservice training face in developing a research-based modell for teacher
training.The two perspectives are further developed and connected through four specific pillars in
the project where we draw on theory that can be related to the issues of enactment and complexity,
but are also being more specific in its relation to school teaching and learning and and teacher
education
4.3.1 Learning organization and co-configuration
The understanding of this pillar is based on theory linked to the methaphor of learning organisations
and co-configuration and to the activity theory of Engestrøm .The reorganizing of teacher education
at the UiT has as one its main characteristics a co-configuration of teacher education orientated
towards the development of evidence-based professional identity and new formulas of contingency.
This necessitates a dynamic, dialogic relationship between the multiple actors and contexts in
teacher education. It is a relationship marked by mutual learning and by the collaborative and
discursive construction of tasks (cf. Engeström and Middleton, 1996, Engeström, 2002, 2004). This
interdependency is predicated upon working alliances that are qualitatively different from
conventional team formations or consensus-built communities of practice (cf. Lave and Wenger,
1991; Nardi et al, 2000; Lathlean and LeMay, 2002). In co-configuration work participants are
required to recognise and engage with the expertise distributed across rapidly shifting professional
groupings e.g working with engineers, carpenters, ICT-experts. Crucially, co-configuration is a
participatory model. Participants are active in the shaping and reshaping of the learning system and
in the development of the interdependent learning relationships via which practice is transformed.
This implies a notion of interagency relationships that is not confined to collaboration between
professional interest groups but which includes pupils and parents as as active subjects.
Relationships between horizontal and vertical learning are integral to the analyses of organisational
learning. Engeström emphasises the importance of horizontal movement in expansive learning
processes situated in organisational fields that are moving toward co-configuration work. These
horizontal processes include boundary crossing, multi-voiced dialogue and negotiated knotworking
(Engestrøm,1987,1996,2001,2004)
Key questions researched in this pillar are: What are the horizontal and dialogical actions,
interactions and transactions being developed through co-configuration of teacher education in
Tromsø? How do the co-cofiguration of the inservice training through new contexts, partnerships
and dialouge conferences impact the quality of learning.
The general working hypothesis of this study is that expansive learning of the kind required and
generated by co-configuration is horizontal and dialogical. It creates knowledge and transforms
activity by crossing boundaries and tying knots between activity systems operating in divided multiorganisational fields (cf. Engeström, et al 1999).
4.3.2 Didactical theory
Traditional didactical theory are challenged by expectation related to more functionalistic
perspectives defining new norms for teaching and learning. Wenigers stated paradox that
professionalization through theoretical learning is significant in order to improve practice but at the
same time such professionalization contributes to sharpen the potential opposition between theory
and practice, especially when knowledge capital for use in practice is becoming more and more
elaborated. In this context we draw on perspectives from Klafki`s critical-constructive didactical
theory as well as more functionalistic oriented assessment theory (Black&Wiliam, Hattie) and
5
theories concernning the development of specialized content knowledge (SCK), knowledge of
content and student (KCS) and knowledge of content and teaching (KCT). and and theories of
content knowledge. (Shulman). Key questions researched in this pillar are :
Are new formulas of contingency developed in relation to evidence-based teaching and learning in
school for TS and teachers? How and why? Which formulas are unlearned?Why?
How do the formulas reflect the issues of enactment and complexity?
4.3.3. New tools for new literacy in teaching and learning
The understanding of this pillar is based on the perspective of learning as mastery and appropriation
of cultural tools, a perspective that is rooted in a sociocultural approach, which has the aim to
account for the relationship between mental processes and their cultural, historical and institutional
settings. The concepts of affordances and constraints of tools are incorporated into a conceptual
framework on use of tools, and how this is applied in understanding and analysing tools and
mediated actions in developing teacher competences in university school contexts. New tools are
defined on the basis of Vygotskys`s distinction between pscychological and material toos and
Wertsch`concept (cultural) tools. Key questions researched in this pillar are:
How do new tools impact students’ and teachers’ actions and interactions and transactions in
practice, in the school context and what are the challenges connected to them?
What are the contextual and cultural factors that explain how, why and for what reasons certain
tools are adopted, whether as standalone tools or as integrated with older or more established tools?
4.3.4. Redefining Professional Identity
This study appoaches identity formation from a psycho-sociological perspective. From this
viewpoint, identity is constructed though interaction with the outside world. Personal and
professional identity are theorethically distinguished although they are deeply united in teachers
work. In contemporary educational studies, the question of professional development is often
connected to reflection (Korthagen&Vasalos 2005) and the process of extending teachers selfknowledge (Hamacheck 1999). The personal history approach in techer education may serve as a
meaningful way of preparing student teachers towards their professional practice. This is underlined
by Goodson (2003, pp. 53-54) in suggesting focusing on both the personal and professional aspects
of teching in order to achieve new and diffferent kinds of perspectives on developing one`s
practice.. This kind of holistic approach may be seen through the term ”reframing” (Schön) or
through Mezirows theory of transformative learning. In current educational research the term
identity is increasingly allocated to the context of discourses. The work of Bakhtin is a central basis
for dialogical, multiple identity, which is seen as constructed and produced by different discourses(
Moen&Gudmundsdottir, 2002).The other apporoach is sociocultural where identity is situated in a
larger socio-cultural matrix (Smith&Sparks,2008). Postcolonial epistemology opens up for uttering
of multiple voices, in mutual respect. Different kinds of actors with different modes of ordering in a
network define and shape one another, also through Othering one another. Each practice also
generates its own reality, and this performativity can tell us of a heterogeneous network of
knowledge production. But theory is only translated into practice if it is enacted – in practice and
generates realities (Law 2007). From this perspective, the context has an essential role in teacher
identity. Development in technology and in the distribution of the learning system widen the
possibilities for different learning trajectories as part of teacher education.
Key questions researched in this pillar are:
How do teacher students develop their professional identities? What identity work processes are
evolving in the university schools. How is it manifested?
How do differences and similarities challenge borders between theoretical and practical knowledge
traditions
6
5.Methodology
The scale of this project and the number of participants taking part as reseachers with their specific
subprojects, practice teachers and TS contributing through their master projects raises the issue of
what methodology could underpin the overall theoretical and material basis of the project and the
project aims. It is an additional challenge in the project that the accredidation of schools still is in
process and it is part of the theoretical basis that schools and practice teachers shuld be involved in
the operationalization of of research issues, methodology and activity schedules. The theoretical
basis and key concepts are – as system and complexity theory- abstract and not contextualized yet.
This has to be done in cooperation with the participants, through the planned processes in the
project.
It can be argued that complexity theory can provide a valuable theoretical underpinning for action
research. Furthermore, action research provides a valid methodological approach to the study of
complexity. According to Underwood (2000), complexity provides three key implications in the
social sciences. Firstly, it places an increasing stress on self-organisation and a realistic awareness
that sociological phenomena often cannot be forecast. Secondly, the theory recognises that all living
organisms are self-steering within certain limits and that their behaviour therefore can be steered
from the outside only to a very moderate extent. Thirdly, complexity theory highlights the
continuous emergence of new levels of organised complexity within society. the complexity
paradigm requires a shift in thinking, although it makes more explicit what many social scientists
and practitioners have known as they recognized that human institutions are not amenable to
prediction and manipulation in simple linear terms .
Few authors have drawn an explicit connection between action research and complexity theory,
however recent action research literature provides indications that this might be beginning to occur.
The capacity of action research to address complex issues was pointed out, metaphorically, by
Kemmis & McTaggart (1988) when they described action research as a way of managing complex
situations critically and practically. Does it mean that a complex approach of learning can only be
relative? According to Morin, the promotion of the paradigm of complexity suggests researchers to
reflect on the contradictions, complementarities and antagonisms inherent to the relationships
between generality and singularity. Any system requires a subject who isolates it, cuts it up,
qualifies it, hierarchizes it, based on her/his selective interests and the cultural and social context of
scientific knowledge. In educational sciences,systems always involve human factors.physical
entities. In addition to a history, they always involve meanings, values, and behaviors, which are
never indifferent to the researchers who study them, may it beconsciously or not. One way to reflect
on the dialogic between generality and singularity is to take into consideration the implication of the
researcher her/himself.
The Openness of Action Research to Mixed Method Approaches
Action research are thus a key methodological approach in the project. The institution has as part of
its staff researchers with theoretical publications in the field and experience through decades using
and developing the methodology in their research project. In the instituional context this basis is
very well catered for. It is ,however, reflected in the different subporjects that this is not a sufficient
methodological basis for the variety of approaches connected to the foour pillars. The range of
methods varies from design studies connected to the appropriation of new tools, narrative and
biographical approaches and mixed methods combining qualitative and quantitative data. The
discourse analysts Koselleck (2004 and Fairclough (1995 og 2005) are regarded to represent a basis
for connecting a theoretical and a methodological platform.Åkerstørm Andersen points to the basic
similarities between perspetives in discourse analytic and system theoretical perspectives.
Complexity theory focus on using concepts and the concepts of teaching and learning are key
concepts in Qvortrup and Rasmussens texts. At the same time we regard their ambition to liberate
the concepts from their traditional normative their strength.
7
Common to the methodological approaches in the project is the ambition to generate output from
the projects that can be continually be used to feed forward and feed back and thus create individual
and organizational learning.
6. Subprojects within the overall framework
The table below shows the researcher from the institution taking part in TET. amounting to 14
researchers connected to 10 subprojects. All projects will develop partnership with the university
schools sfter they are selected and operationalize detailed plans for the subject through this
partnershipin thereafter.
Title
Coordinator
Knowlegde
assemblies in
Teacher
Education
Torun G.
Ekeland og
Kirsten E.
Stien
What New
Learning are
developing
through the coconfiguration of
theory and
practice
Professional
learning and
dialogue
conferences
Vegard
Nergård
Transformative
Learning in
Teacher
Education.
Gerd Stølen
Developing
Maths
Knowledge for
Teaching
Using social
media as tool for
academic
learning and
networking
Writing
strategies and
tools for
teaching and
assessment.
Ove Dragseth
Research
ambition
Students'
experiences in
shaping
professional
identification.
Additional
theory
Postcolonial
theory
Methodology
Pillar
Action
research
methodology
Professional
Identity
Learning
organization
and coconfiguration
Learning
organization
and coconfiguration
Situated
learning theory
Criticalconstrutive
didactical
theory
Transformative
learning theory
Dialogueconferenc
combined with
qualitative and
quantitativ
data
Biographical,
longitudinal
and reflexive
methodology
Didactical
theory
Cognitive
guided
instruction
Design study
Didactical
theory
Vygotsky
Wertsch
Action reseach
Text analysis
New tools
for new
literacy
Empirical
study action
research
New tools
for new
literacy
Stipendiat
Karin Rørnes
Stipendiat
Stipendiat
The contribution of
dialogue
conferences to
research-based
practice
How do teacher
students develop
their professional
identities
Develop/use
knowledge to raise
quality of teaching
maths
Lisbet
Exploring
Rønningsbakk blogging as a tool
for learning and
professional
identity
Audhild
What awareness
Nedberg,
and training is
Kjell
important for
Heggelund
teachers to foster
professionalism in
writing across
Professional
Identity
8
Appreciative
appraisal and
virtual dialogue
Odd Arne
Thunberg
Line Husjord
Aesthetic, New
Tools in
Linguistics
Tove Leming
Annelise
Brox Larsen,
Anne Eriksen
Connecting new Kari Doseth
literacy learning Opstad
and assessment
for learning with Post doc.
the new
curriculum
models e.g. art
and crafts
learning areas
How can virtual
dialogues
contribute to
reflective and
organisational
learning?
Developing
alternative
aesthetic and
kinesthetic
learning
trajectories
Integrating literacy
learning and
academic content
through new
models for
teaching, learning
and assessment.
Conversation
Action
learning and
research
communication
theory
Mixed
methods:
Observation,
interviews,
triangulating,
text analysis
Assesssment
theory, lesson
study model
Mixed method
action
research,
interview,
survey
Didactical
6. Literature and References
Andersen, Niels Åkerstrøm (1999) Diskursive analysestrategier. København: Nyt fra Samfundsvidenskaberne.
Argyris, Chris & Schön, A. Donald (1996): Organizational LearningII,Theory, Method and Practice. Reading Massachusetts.
Addison-Wesley.
Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content Knowledge for Teaching: What Makes It Special? Journal of Teacher
Education, 59(5), 389-407.
Bateson, Gregory (2005): Mentale systemers økologi. København: Akademisk forlag
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998) Inside the Black Box: raising standards through classroom assessmentLondon: School of Education,
King’s College.
Brown, J., & Isaacs, D. (2005). The World Café : Shaping Our Futures Through Conversations That Matter. San Francisco: BerrettKoehler Publishers, Inc.
Bruner, J. (1985). Narrative and paradigmatic modes of though. In E. Eisner (Ed.),Learning and teaching the ways of knowing. (84th
yearbook of the National Society of the Study of Education) (pp. 97–115).Chicago: University of ChicagoPress.
Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge: Harvard University Press
Carpenter, T. P. (1999). Children's mathematics: cognitively guided instruction. Portsmouth, N.H.: Heinemann.
Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1990) Becoming Critical: Education, Knowledge and Action Research.
Geelong: Deakin University
Day, Ch. (1999) Developing Teachers - The Challenges of Lifelong Learning.London: Sage.
Dierkes, M. et.al. (eds.) (2001): Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge. Oxford University Press
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restament of the relations of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston: D: C th.
Doll,W.et.al.(eds)(2005) Chaos, Complexity and Culture.Peter Lang.
Educational Horizons winter 2007 Darling-Hammond,L. and J.Baratz-Snowden excerpts from A Good Teacher In Every Classroom:
Preparing the Highly Qualified Teachers Our Children Deserve.
Elbaz-Luwich, F., Moen, T., & Gudmundsdottir, S. (2002). The multivoicedness of classrooms. Bakhtin and narratives of teaching.
In R. Huttunen, H.L.T. Heikkinen & L. Syrjala (Eds.), Narrative research: voices of teachers and philosophers (pp. 197–218).
Jyvaskyla: Jyvaskylan Yliopisto.
Engeström, Y. (1987) Learning by Expanding: an activity-theoretical approach to developmental research (Helsinki: Orienta-.
Engeström, Y. (2001a) Expansive learning at work: toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization, Journal of Education and
Work, vol. 14 (1), pp.133-156.
Engeström, Y. (2001b) The horizontal dimension of expansive learning: weaving a texture of cognitive trails in the terrain of health
care in Helsinki. Finland. Paper presented at the international symposium 'New Challenges to Research on Learning', March, 2001,
University of Helsinki, Finland.
Engeström, Y. (2004) New forms of learning in co-configuration work. Paper presented to the Department of Information Systems
ICTs in the contemporary world’ seminar, LSE, January 2004.
Engeström, Y., & Middleton, D. (Eds.) (1996). Cognition and communication at work. Cambridge, UK:
9
Fairclough, Norman (1995) Critical discourse analysis: the critical study of language. New York: Longman Publishing.
Fullan,M. (2007)The New Meaning of Educational Change. Teachers College
Goodson, I. (2003). Developing life and work histories of teachers. In I. Goodson &A. Hargreaves (Eds.), Professional knowledge,
professional lives. Studies in Education and change (pp. 49–62). Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Goodson, I., & Hargreaves, A. (1996). (Eds). Teachers’ professional lives. London:Falmer PressGoodson
Gumundsdottir, S. (1995). The narrative nature of pedagogical content knowledge. In H. McEwan & K. Egan (Eds.), Narrative in
teaching, learning, and research (pp. 24–39). New York: Teacher College PressGumundsdottir, S. (1995). The narrative nature of
pedagogical content knowledge. In H. McEwan & K. Egan (Eds.), Narrative in teaching, learning, and research (pp. 24–39). New
York: Teacher College PressHaugaløkken og Ramberg: NTNUs partnerskapsmodell – evaluering og analyse. Ntnu 2005
Hamacheck 1999 Hamacheck, D. (1999). Effective teachers: what they do, how they do it, and the importance of self-knowledge. In
R.P. Lipka & T.M. Brinthaupt (Eds.), The role of self in teacher development (pp.189–225). State Universityof New York Press.
Hargreaves, Andy 2004: Læring og undervisning i kunnskapssamfunnet. Utdanning i en uttrygg tid, Abstrakt Forlag AS, Oslo
Hattie, J. and H. Timperley:: The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research; Mar 2007; 77, 1; Academic Research Library
Hattie, John (2009) Visible learning, A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement, Routledge
Heggen, K (2005): Fagkunnskapens plass i den profesjonelle identiteten. In Norsk Pedagogisk Tidsskrift nr. 6
Hopkins, D. (2002) A Teacher’s Guide to Classroom Research. Buckingham Philadelphia:
Huberman, M. (1995). Working with life-history narratives. In H. McEwan & K.Egan (Eds.), Narrative in teaching, learning, and
research (pp.127–166). New York: Teacher College Press.
Imsen, Gunn 2009: Lærernes profesjonalitet og nye styringsregimer. I: Bedre skole. 1/2009,
Klafki, Wolfgang (2001) Dannelsesteori og didaktikk – nye studier, Forlaget Klim
Kartlegging av praksisopplæringen i lærerutdanningene .Sluttrapport November 2007Kunnskapsdepartementet
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988) The Action Research Planner. Geelong: Deakin University Press.
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2000) Participatory action research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln
(Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 567-605). Thousand Oaks: Sage
Koselleck, R.(2004):Futures Past by. Columbia univ. Press
Korthagen, Fred. A.J (2001) Linking practice and theory, The Pedagogy of Realistic Teacher Education, Lawrence Erlbaum
Korthagen, F.A.J. (2001). Linking practice and theory. The pedagogy of realistic teacher education. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Korthagen, F.A.J. (2004). In search of the essence of a good teacher: towards a more holistic approach in teacher education. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 20(1), 77–97.
Korthagen, F., & Vasalos, A. (2005). Levels in reflection: core reflection as a means to enhance professional growth. Teachers and
Teaching: theory and practice,11(1), pp. 47–71.
Lave, Jean & Wenger, Etienne (1991/2008) Situated learning, Legitimate peripheral participation, Cambridge University Press
Lathlean, J. and Le May, A. (2002), Communities of practice: an opportunity for interagency working. Journal of Clinical Nursing,
11: 394–398. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2702.2002.00630Lathlean and LeMay, 2002.
Lave, J. and E. Wenger (1991): Situated Learning - Legitimate Periphal Participation. Cambridge University Press.
Law, J (1994): Organizing Modernity, Oxford UK – Cambridge
Law, J. (2007) Actor Network Theory and Material Semiotics, in B. Turner (eds.) Social Theory West Sussex, pp. 141-158. Blackwell
Lieberman, A.(1988)(ed.) Building a Professional Culture in Schools. Teachers College Press, N.Y.
Lithner, J. (2008). A research framework for creative and imitative reasoning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 67(3), 255-276
Loughran, J. (2006). A response to “Reflecting on the self”. Reflective Practice,7( 1)43–53.
Lødding, B. og N. Vibe: Utdypende undersøkelse av funn i Elevundersøkelsen om mobbing, urettferdig behandling og diskrimering.
Rapport 48/2010. Nifu
Mason, M.(ed)(2008) Complexity Theory and the Philosophy of Education. Wiley-Blackwell
Qvortrup, Lars (2001): Det lærende samfund: hyperkompleksitet og viden København: Gyldendal
Qvortrup, Lars (2004): Det vidende samfund : mysteriet om viden, læring og dannelse Viborg: Forlaget UP
Mezirow, J.: Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. John Wiley 1991,
Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Open Univer Press Nardi et al, 2000;
Nielsen, K. og S. Kvale (1999): Mesterlære som aktuell læringsform. In Nielsen, K. og S. Kvale (red.): Mesterlære - Læring som
sosial praksis. Oslo: ad Notam
Rasmussen, Jens (1996) Sosialisering og læring i det refleksivt moderne. København
Rasmussen, Jens (2004) Undervisning i det refleksivt moderne: politikk, profession, pædagogik. København: Reitzel
Rea in Bush & Middlewood, (2005). Leading and Managing People in Education. London: Sage.
Noffke, S.: Professional, Personal and Political Dimensions of Action Research. P. 251-304 in Review of Research in Education,
no.22, 1997
Sadler (in Gibbs & Simpson, 2004. Does your assessment support your students’ learning? Journal of Learning and eaching in
Higher Education, 32(2), pp. 175-187
Schön,D,A.(1983)
The
Reflective
Practitioner:
how
professionals
think
in
action
London:
Senge, P.M. 1999: Den femte disiplin, Kunsten å utvikle den lærende organisasjon.: Egmont
Smith, B., & Sparkes, A.C (2008). Contrasting perspectives on narrating selves and identities; an invitation to dialogue. Qualitative
Research, 8(1), 5–35.
Shulman, L.S. (1986). Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. EducationalResearcher, 14(2), 4–14.
Ulvik, Marit (2008): Hvorfor vil ikke lærere jobbe i skolen? I: Utdanning
Underwood, M. (2000) Complexity.Vygotsky, L.S. (1987) The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky: Vol.1, Problems of general
psychology. Including the volume Thinking and speech. New York: Plenum. (N. Minick, Trans.)
Westbury, Ian: ”Didaktik and Curriculum studies: Two sides of the same coin?” I: Gundem, Bjørg Brandtzæg og Hopmann, Stefan:
Didaktik and/or Curriculum, 1998, New York: Peter Lang Westbury
Wertsch, J.V. (1991) Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge,
White Paper nr. 11,2008-2009: Læreren. Rollen og Utdanningen.
Merrill, B. and L. West (2009): Using biographical methods in social research. Los Angeles:Sage.
10
Salling Olesen, H. (2007): Professional Identities, Subjectivity, and Learning. Be(com)ing a General Practitioner. In West, L.,
Alheit, P., Siig Andersen, A. and M. Merrill (eds): Using Biographical and Life History Approaches in the Study of Adult and
Lifelong Learning: European Perspectives. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Schön, D. (1983): The Reflective Practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14
Skemp, R. R. (1976). Relational Understanding and Instrumental Understanding: Mathematics Teaching Wahlgren, B. et al. (2002):
Refleksion og læring - kompetenceudvikling i arbejdslivet. København: Samfundslitteratur.
West (1996): Beyond Fragments. Adults, Motivation and Higher Education. London: Taylor & Francis.
Weick, K. E. (1988). ‘Enacted sensemaking in crisis situations’. Journal of Management Studies,,305–25,17.
.
.
.
.
11