Teacher educators’ understanding of research-based teacher education

Research has been highlighted as a key dimension in the development of teacher education quality. However, there are different understandings of how research is and should be linked to teacher educators’ competence. We examine changes in teacher educators’ attitudes towards research-based teacher education in Norway by comparing results from 2008 with those from 2021. Teacher educators’ attitudes have changed towards a more research-positive approach. The changes are to some extent related to more research-experienced staff, but the positive attitudes towards research-based teacher education seem also to be a matter of culture and teacher identity.

In the Nordic countries, teacher education programmes are shifting towards a research-based design, thus placing new expectations and requirements on teacher educators. In this study, we aim to explore teacher educators’ understanding of professional knowledge in research-based teacher education. We interviewed 16 Norwegian and six Finnish teacher educators. The teacher educators’ views of professional knowledge could be divided into two main categories – academic characteristics and personal characteristics – and three dichotomies were discussed: educational sciences versus subject sciences, research versus teaching and collaboration versus autonomy. Teacher educators come from various backgrounds and bring different experiences into teacher education. Thus, their understanding of professional knowledge in research-based teacher education seems to be dichotomous and multifaceted. The dichotomies that were uncovered and the tensions between them provide the foundation for further development of teacher education in Norway and Finland.

This paper examines the place of reflexivity in the ‘philosophies’ and practices of physical education (PE) teacher educators in Norway. Using a case study approach to one quite typical institution delivering physical education teacher education (PETE) in Norway, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 teacher educators. Analysis of the data generated by the study was inspired by the principles of grounded theory. Noteworthy among the findings was that the teacher educators viewed learning to teach PE in much the same way as they viewed PE itself—as an essentially practical process revolving around the teaching and coaching of sports skills. Consequently, there was little evidence that the teacher educators either engaged themselves or sought to develop in their students anything other than weaker forms of reflexivity; that is, focusing on the student teachers' development of their practical sporting and teaching skills. The discussion focuses on the contextual constraints—in the form of a combination of local and national contexts—that served to encourage the teacher educators at Nord University College to reproduce the kinds of (typically conservative) ideologies and practices in PETE that they were already habitually predisposed towards. In light of the evidence from this study, the paper concludes by reconsidering the claim that the rise of reflexivity as a dominant concept and a generic professional disposition has been one of the major trends in teacher education generally and PETE in particular.

Whilst voice and participation in schools continues to be of global interest, it is underexplored in the context of teacher education. Our work within teacher education in Norway and Ireland provided the opportunity to talk with student teachers, and we present our findings from group interviews conducted in both countries. In Norway, student teachers wanted to be heard and involved in addressing issues of relevance and quality in teacher education, viewing voice and participation as a human right, whilst in Ireland, student teachers wanted to be acknowledged as equal partners with staff whilst on practice placement in schools. Norway and Ireland promote democratic values espoused in voice and participation as fundamental to education, also within teacher education, but our findings indicate this is difficult in practice; student teachers expressed feelings of powerlessness. Despite this, student teachers believed in the importance of voice and participation for their learning and development as emerging professionals, arguing they would be better equipped as teachers to lead voice and participation work in schools if they were afforded more opportunities to experience it during their training. We propose, therefore, that teacher education can be enriched and improved by affording student teachers authentic opportunities to be heard and to participate actively in their learning. Furthermore, student teachers should be included in finding ways to develop voice and participation practices in teacher education.

This article focuses on how the new national curriculum for school and the new general plan for teacher education in Norway change the underlying premises for teaching and learning in today's schools. This has become particularly pressing as a result of the new educational reform 'Knowledge Promotion' whereby digital competence is now the fifth basic competence in all subjects at all levels as well as in the new teacher education in Norway. The aim of the article is to consider ICT in the light of these policy documents, relevant research studies, teacher education and the general digitisation of schools in the Norwegian context and formulate advices that may be useful for other countries. The question considered by the article is how the new curricula in school and the general plan for teacher education in Norway influence the underlying premises for teaching and learning in today's schools and teacher education Norway.

In this paper, we examine the complementary and differing state‐defined roles of beginning schoolteachers in England and Norway by investigating centrally mandated initial teacher preparation programmes in both countries. Through comparative analysis, we get to see the roles that the policy‐makers in London and Oslo seek to confer upon the educators of future generations of schoolchildren, as well as exploring opportunities for cross‐cultural policy learning. In broad terms, we found that centrally prescribed initial teacher training in England is, as its name implies, a training model that seeks to induct trainee teachers into the practical skills and willingness necessary for: instructing pupils in National Curriculum subjects, managing classroom activities, setting homework to consolidate and extend classroom work and providing pupils with a safe learning environment. Centrally prescribed initial teacher education in Norway is, as its name implies, an educative model whose goal is to help student teachers to: reflect and act upon the practical implications of educational theory, instruct pupils in National Curriculum subjects, display leadership in the classroom, act as a member of a caring profession, promote Norwegian values and provide pupils with a safe learning environment.

This paper investigates the feedback and assessment routines that are being established in the subject of pedagogy in the new model of Kindergarten Teacher Education (Barnehagelaererutdanning - BLU) in Norway. This scope is chosen due to the particular role of the subject of pedagogy in strengthening the understanding of the practice field, and in ensuring a coherent, professionally oriented perspective. The data comprise group interviews with three pedagogy teachers, two pedagogues from in-service kindergartens and one interview with one student. The gathered data were analysed according to guidelines for qualitative content analysis [1], and interpreted in the light of Cultural-Historical Activity Theory (CHAT). Results show that pedagogues both at BLU and in-service kindergartens experience many challenges connected to formative assessment and feedback practice: (a) a tacit, private and low-priority assessment culture; (b) current practice characterized by summative assessment methods; and (c) minimal collaboration between involved participants. In conclusion, the paper suggests the following improvements in the area of feedback and assessment in the new BLU: (a) establishing a closer and more reciprocal collaboration between all participants; (b) encouraging a shared understanding of central goals and methods in formative assessment, and (c) increasing the status of assessment work and ensuring time resources to involved teachers.

This article explores specific aspects of literacy practices in teacher education in Norway, building upon data collected within the research project Digital literacy and use of learning resources in teacher education in Norway (DigiGLU). Our main aim is to explore how teachers in different subject courses in teacher education (TE) design mandatory assignments, and how students respond to these designs. After the extensive TE-reform in 2010, in revised plans and documents guiding professional training, mandatory assignments (both form and content) were considered more important for the students’ learning process. In our investigation, the concepts of design for learning and design in learning, as described by Selander and Kress (2010), are considered fruitful as theoretical perspectives. The analysis focuses on oral presentations and traditional academic texts in four different TE-subjects. Our main finding, across subjects, is that there seem to be mismatches between the intentions behind the designs on the part of the assignment designers and the actual interpretation: hence the redesigned result by the receiver of the design. The article concludes with some reflections on why these mismatches occur, and what the implications might be for the students’ academic development and the possible transfer of certain literacy practices to their occupational lives.

Some of the main goals that education strives to achieve are certification and socialization. To achieve these goals in the best interest of the individual and society is a demanding challenge for all involved. In what context is the certification going to be used? Into what society are those educated expected to socialize? Teacher education is at the heart of the discussion as it is responsible for educating teachers whose task it will be to certify and socialize a new generation into a society, the nature of which is, to a large extent, still unknown. The aim of the NAFOL Year Book 2012 is to contribute to research-based knowledge in teacher education. The anthology consists of contributions from lecturers, invited guest professors, key note speakers, and PhD students in some way connected to the national graduate school for teacher education NAFOL during 2012. The anthology is thought of as an innovation combining the characteristics of a yearbook of a journal and the characteristics of a conference anthology.

This paper includes an analysis of legal acts concerning primary and lower secondary teacher education in Norway. The objective is to determine how multicultural education is perceived in these acts – whether it is regarded as a supplementary subject or as a mindset that underlies teacher education. The theoretical framework includes critical multiculturalism and multicultural education theory. A document content analysis approach has been applied during the analytical process, in order to reveal patterns related to culture, diversity, inclusion, multicultural education and multicultural competence. Furthermore, the findings have been placed in the Norwegian context, in order to shed light on the circumstances surrounding the documents. The main findings indicate that multicultural education is assigned a limited space and, according to the legal acts, should be included as a module integrated with the subject of pedagogy and pupil-related skills in teacher education.

The public school system in Norway was strengthened in the nineteenth century. The teaching profession became a central vocation during the nation-building process. The need for teachers with adequate qualifications was met through short-term teacher seminaries. In the twentieth century, these seminaries were improved upon and renamed ‘teacher schools’. Teacher education has undergone frequent reforms in recent decades. In 1973, general three-year teacher education was introduced for primary and lower secondary teachers, existing alongside the teacher education programmes in the universities. Criticism of this three-year teacher education strengthened, and teacher education changed from a generalist education (with competence in many school subjects) to a specialist education (with competence in a few subjects). One further step was the introduction of more rigorous entry requirements for teacher education programmes for both the primary and the secondary level. Another step was a division of the former general teacher education programme into separate programmes for years 1–7 and 5–10. In 2017, these two programmes were converted into five-year master’s degree programmes that are completed with a master’s thesis. Universities train teachers for grades 8–13 through either a postgraduate certificate of education that takes one year to complete, or five-year master degree.

Building bridgesBuilding partnerships implies building bridges between different and sometimes isolated worlds. And building bridges is something the Scots are good at! However, passing the famous and impressive Forth Bridge and approaching Dundee, I was also reminded that bridges can collapse, as the nearby Tay Rail Bridge did in 1879. So there was no better place to have the annual conference of the Teacher Education Policy in Europe Network than Dundee. They know the importance of building sustainable bridges between different worlds. Without such bridges, no partnerships between these worlds are possible.Input and inspirationThe conference theme 'Building Partnerships' was elaborated in three keynote presentations, over 70 presentations, a panel discussion, and many professional dialogues during the breaks. Professor Hannele Niemi, the chair of the TEPE board, identified teacher education as part of an ecosystem, in which different actors and subsystems are dependent on each other. One actor or subsystem cannot survive without relations with other actors in the educational world or in society as a whole. Professor Kari Smith from Norway did a great job by creating a conceptual framework during the first keynote as a starting point for the discussions. She emphasised the importance of shared goals, shared responsibilities, mutual respect, and shared power. From her experience with teacher education in Norway, she gave inspiring examples of partnerships at different levels, such as the Norwegian national PhD school for teacher educators (NAFOL) and the international forum for teacher educator development (INFOTED).On the second day, Professor Ronald Sultana from Malta emphasised the perspective from Southern Europe, where education is a matter of life and death. In this context, collaboration with partners outside the world of education is essential. NGOs can be of great value in strengthening the societal responsibility and social engagement of (teacher) education. In the third keynote, Gillian Hamilton gave a concrete example of to where partnerships can lead by presenting the Scottish College for Educational Leadership.Partnerships can bridge several subsystems. The keynotes illustrated that partnerships in teacher education can focus on relations between teacher education institutes and* students* other departments within universities* other higher education institutions* international partners* the practice field* teachers and teacher councils* policy makers* NGOs* and (tomorrow's) society as a whole.This broad variety of partnership was illustrated by presentations during the four rounds of parallel sessions offering a wide source of inspiration and food for thought for the participants.Personal reflectionsIt is impossible to summarise all the discussions that took place during the keynotes, the parallel sessions, the panel and during the breaks. So I will restrict myself to some personal reflections and questions that came up during the conference, and that require further discussion within or outside the TEPE network.First of all, my impression is that we need a stronger analysis of the dynamics and conceptual elements of partnerships. For me, the concepts of boundaries and boundary crossing (Akkerman & Bakker, 2011; Engestrom, 2001; Wenger, 1998) are helpful in this. In my opinion, building a partnership is not about integrating two subsystems into one, nor is it about formal agreements and criteria that need to be met to be considered as a partner in a partnership. However, it is about creating spaces for a shared professional dialogue where participants from different subsystems meet, exchange their understandings and interpretations of issues and create opportunities for mutual learning based on mutual respect. Several presentations referred to such 'third spaces' (Zeichner, 2010) or 'boundary zones'. …

There is growing concern within the field of education regarding how the implementation of national frameworks based on the European Qualifications Framework displaces tacit and less traditionally formalized knowledge from policy. This issue is particularly salient concerning national frameworks that regulate early childhood teacher education, in which knowledge and competencies about caring are crucial, though under-articulated. The proportion of under three-year olds who participate in government subsidized early childhood education and care programs in Norway has risen from 37% in 2000 to over 82% in 2016. Amidst this historic rise, the word ‘care’ was removed from Norway’s most recent National Framework for Early Childhood Teacher Education. Whilst policy analyses generally focus on the content of policy texts, in this article, I examine the circumstances surrounding the curious disappearance of text, namely the key concept of care. Combining a Foucauldian concern with discourse with Malabou’s concept of plasticity, this article reports on a plastic discourse analysis of the removal of care from the newest framework for early childhood teacher education in Norway.

There is a gap between policies regarding the use of digital technology in higher education in Norway and what is practiced. Therefore, we have conducted a comparative study of teacher education in Norway and New Zealand. Using Herzberg’s two-factor theory, this study investigates what motivates teacher educators to use digital technology when teaching. Although the professional application of digital tools is more frequent in New Zealand than in Norway, the ability to use digital technology seems to be greater in Norway than in New Zealand. Based on Meier’s formula (performance = abilities × motivation), teacher educators’ performance is considered a result of their abilities and motivation. This indicates that motivation is a key element in understanding why the use of digital tools is more frequent amongst New Zealand teacher educators. When explaining their motivation for using digital technology, Norwegian teacher educators mentioned nine motivation factors and nine hygiene factors. The hygiene factors relate to the mandatory policy and the work conditions when teaching online. New Zealand teacher educators explained their motivation with 14 motivational factors and only four hygiene factors. New Zealand teacher educators seemed to be more motivated to work with digital technology than their Norwegian counterparts. This lack of motivation is one reason that could explain why the application of digital tools seemed lower in Norway than in New Zealand. Norwegian teacher educators explained that the main reason they use digital tools is the top-down implementation of government policy. Therefore, a fundamental challenge in the use of digital technology in Norway is the policy related to its implementation; as a part of the job environment, policy creates job dissatisfaction. Teacher educators from both countries highlighted achievement and policy as their main reasons for using digital technology, but Norwegian teacher educators were especially critical of their own country’s policy.

Background and purpose: The purpose of this article is to shed light on how the research projects of 140 PhD candidates in the National Research School for Teacher Education in Norway (NAFOL) respond to the challenges faced by Norwegian teacher education regarding the demand for higher competence and a stronger research base. The concept of NAFOL is of interest from an international perspective because of its focus on facilitating teacher educators to achieve a PhD. Since 2001, Norwegian educational policy has had a strong focus on strengthening teacher education and making it more research-based than before. From 2017, all new teachers in Norway are expected to take a master’s degree. In order to accomplish this, there is a need for many new supervisors with a PhD in teacher education institutions. NAFOL is a unique project: a consortium of 23 participating network institutions within teacher education. The research school includes 140 research fellows, all of whom wish to achieve a PhD suitable for work in teacher education. The research school is funded by the Norwegian Research Council, originally for a project period from 2010 to 2016. The research school has had a positive external midway evaluation, and the project period has been extended with four cohorts of students to the end of 2021. However, this study is the first one looking into the research projects of this young generation of teacher education researchers. The research question posed in this article is: how do the research projects of the NAFOL PhD candidates contribute to the research base in teacher education? Main argument: The main argument in this article is that the potential impact of this research school is dependent on the quality of the large number of PhD projects connected to teacher education and education in general developed within the research school. The quality is likely to be good because, among other reasons, these projects are scrutinised by the research school community. The challenges these research projects face, located as they are between solidarity regarding grants from the funds financing the PhD candidates, solidarity with the aims of education, and the wish to contribute to innovation, might prove to be able to be met. These research projects have the potential to create innovation in teacher education research through ‘border crossing’ between different educational discourses, as well as through creating new knowledge in meta-studies based on the results from several projects. Sources of evidence and method: In this article, project abstracts from 140 PhD candidates participating in NAFOL are analysed in terms of their theme and problem formulation. The analysis is inspired by discourse analytical thinking – namely that in a certain situation, several conditions for action exist. In this study, these conditions for action are made apparent in the choice of theme and problem formulation in the research projects. The content analysis is focused on ‘signal words’, because these words might signal positioning in different educational discourses. Results: In the study, three main discourses can be seen as influencing the choice of topic and the problem formulation in the projects: a goal-oriented educational discourse, a ‘Bildung’ (i.e. character formation, or personal growth – ‘danning’ in Norwegian) and democracy discourse, and a critical knowledge-producing discourse. These discourses are constituted when the PhD candidates start their research projects but the conditions for action are ever-changing and, hence, the findings in this study cannot, of course, be considered as ‘final’. The development of these discourses within the research community of NAFOL is one way of scrutinising the research projects in order to make a contribution to qualified teacher education research. Conclusion: ‘Border crossing’ between discourses in research projects concerned with what might be, and what can make a difference in a knowledge society could be a key way of enhancing the future for a young generation of researchers in teacher education. The research projects carried out by the PhD candidates in NAFOL have the potential to develop both new knowledge and new discourses of importance for Norwegian teacher education, as well as for a broader international context regarding professional development in teacher education and education in general. The view of the teacher education profession – and on what a teacher educator can be – could become more fully informed than before the candidates’ participation in the research school.