| 1. |
- Jahnke, Anette, 1972, et al.
(författare)
-
Hållbar skolutveckling – utvecklat kollegialt lärande genom aktionsforskning
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Forskning pågår, session vid samverkanskonferens, Utbildningsvetenskapliga fakulteten, Göteborgs universitet, 30 oktober 2019.
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- I ett nationellt FoU-projekt (IFOUS-projekt) utbildas processledare i att handleda lärargrupper som ska utveckla sitt arbete med hjälp av aktionsforskning. (Aktions-)Forskare vid universitetet stödjer arbetet och studerar samtidigt vilka frågor lärarna ställer sig, och hur olika redskap (dialogkonferenser och digitala verkstyg för observation) möjliggör och/eller hindrar skolutvecklingsprocessen.
|
|
| 2. |
- Jahnke, Anette, 1972, et al.
(författare)
-
Utveckla undervisningen och skapa kunskap genom aktionsforskning
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Utveckla lärares praktik och profession VAD, VARFÖR, HUR OCH AV VEM? 2021:6 – Slutrapport från FoU-programmet Lärares praktik och profession. - Stockholm : Ifous. ; , s. 51-52
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 3. |
- Jahnke, Anette, 1972, et al.
(författare)
-
Vilka undervisningsrelaterade problemområden väljer lärare att undersöka i sin undervisning, och hur kan dessa val förstås?
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Pedagogisk forskning i Sverige. - 1401-6788.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Artikeln syftar till att fördjupa förståelsen för lärares professionalitet och samhälls-uppdrag genom att undersöka vilka undervisningsrelaterade problem lärare adresserar då det står dem fritt att välja, och hur dessa val kan förstås. Studien gjordes inom ett forsknings- och utvecklingsprojekt där lärare introducerades till aktionsforskning. Studien baseras på en enkät till 142 lärare där de beskrev sina problem. En kvalitativ innehållsanalys har gjorts, följt av ett hermeneutiskt tolkningsarbete av innehålls-analysens resultat och den procentuella fördelningen mellan olika problemområden. Studien visar att lärares problem riktas mot elevers: 1) ämnesmässiga kunskaper (35 procent); 2) mående (6 procent); 3) klassrumsbeteende och sätt att vara elev (58 pro-cent). Val av problem kan förstås utifrån att lärarna gjort en professionell bedömning (A), en de-professionell bedömning (B) eller att de verkställer en dold läroplan (C) som syftar till att forma ideala elever som är motiverade, ordningsamma och själv-gående. Resultatet synliggör vikten av att lärare självkritiskt och samhällskritiskt granskar upplevda problem, och att verksamma som har i uppgift att styra, leda, stödja och beforska lärares undervisning- och professionsutveckling självkritiskt och sam-hällskritiskt granskar innehåll i program, utbildningar, utvecklingsarbeten och forskningsprojekt. Resultatet väcker också normativa frågor om skolans samhälls-uppdrag – vilka elevideal ska betraktas som eftersträvansvärda i skolan, och varför?
|
|
| 4. |
- Olin, Anette, 1967, et al.
(författare)
-
Aktionsforskning i forsknings- och utvecklingsarbete. Att skala upp och skala ner på samma gång.
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Jahnke, A. (red.). Utveckla lärares praktik och profession. Vad, varför, hur och av vem? (2021:6, Slutrapport från FoU-programmet Lärares praktik och profession). Ifous.. - Stockholm : Ifous. ; , s. 33-50
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- I den första delen beskriver vi vårt arbete som forskare i programmet, det vill säga vårt arbetssätt för att stödja och samarbeta kring deltagarnas aktionsforskningsstudier, utvecklingen av kollektiva former för kollegialt lärande samt gemensam kunskapsproduktion. Därefter i en andra del presenteras tre forskningsanalyser, dels om hur aktionsforskningen kommit att spridas till skolorna i programmet, dels sammanfattningar av två påbörjade forskningsstudier som tittar närmare på vilket lärande som sker i dialogkonferensen samt vilka frågor lärare ställer sig i sin första aktionsforskningsstudie. I den tredje delen diskuterar vi den process som skett under programmets tre år, och hur den kan förstås i ljuset av relevant forskning och särskilt utifrån begreppen upp- och nerskalning.
|
|
| 5. |
- Olin, Anette, 1967, et al.
(författare)
-
Teacher agency in conversations about teaching practices when reading curriculum steering documents
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Paper presented at the NERA-conference, University of Oslo, Oslo 8-10 March, 2018.
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Teacher agency is an important aspect to consider when talking about teachers professional work. Expectations on teachers work have changed over time and resulted in increased demands, such as for example to manage self-control by interpreting steering documents for schools and making necessary changes in the pedagogical work to meet new requirements. The question is to what extent such an exercise can be used by teachers to draw from their pedagogical knowledge and experiences in an interpretation of the texts, or if it just becomes a question of following prescribed rules for pedagogical work. Teacher agency helps focusing on how teachers handle this acting space as professional educational actors when they are supposed to perform in line with the centrally and democratically decided aims for school. Teacher agency according to Priestley and others (2015) is based on an ecological perspective, which means that people's actions are seen as reflexive and creative abilities, which are influenced by conditions and prerequisites in the situations where the dealings take place. Agency is characterized primarily by intentionality. This means that the acting is governed by a particular purpose and that there is capacity to formulate possible action options in this direction. But the agency is also influenced by contextual factors such as culture as well as social and material structures. In order to fully understand agency, the interaction between individual capacity and contextual factors must therefore be taken into account. The study examines how conversations in teacher teams are conducted when teachers discuss their teaching practice based on reading a specific curriculum steering document. The steering document is about how to support pupils based on their specific needs to make it possible for everyone to reach the learning goals in the curriculum. Focus group conversations were used. The task for the teachers was to read the steering document in advance and to interpret the content collaboratively through the conversation. The purpose for the researchers was to listen to what the teachers themselves thought of as important aspects in this conversation and how they acted through the dialogue. The study's results show that language is a powerful asset in this work, which appears in the form of various ways of acting through language. The conversation is being guided by the guidelines in the document, but the teacher team is also questioning the content and constructing new knowledge using their own practical knowledge. The teachers' reflexive abilities are used to consider different acting options. Different forms of agency (improving, constructive and practice agency) are visualized linked to those different language acts. By identifying and describing different forms of agency in conversations, and what is underpinning it, the study contributes to visualizing how teachers act responsibly in situations where different expectations are supposed to be met. This can contribute to an input in the discussion about teacher professionalism in the Nordic educational research discussion. Priestley, M., Biesta, G., Robinson, S. (2015). Teacher Agency an Ecological Approach. London: Bloomsbury.
|
|
| 6. |
- Almqvist, Jonas, et al.
(författare)
-
Didactical Dilemmas in a Research and School Development Project
- 2019
-
Ingår i: ECER-conference, Hamburg, 3-6 September 2019.
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- In this paper, we will present a study of development dialogues between researchers and practitioners in a Swedish upper secondary school. In working with this project we have used and further developed an approach, inspired by the work of Kathleen Armour (Armour, 2014; Casey et al., 2016), that we have named Dialogue for Didactic Development (Almqvist et al., 2016; Almqvist et al., 2017; Olin et al., 2017; Olin et al. 2018). This is a method which was enacted and developed in a book project (Almqvist et al., 207) and which is now used in a large school development project in a Swedish municipality. The aim of the presentation is to describe and discuss didactical knowledge produced by researchers and practitioners together. The idea of didactic inquiry emphasizes both researchers and teachers as crucial actors in development of disciplinary knowledge about teaching (Carlgren, 2012; Ingerman & Wickman, 2015; Ko, 2018; Wickman, 2015). In our study, we highlight the notion that researchers’ and practitioners’ mutual knowledge production may have consequences for both practices. To be able do this, we turn to previous didactical research built on pragmatism, namely, the cooperative engineering and the didactic modeling approaches (cf. Hamza et al., 2018; Joffredo-Le Brun et al., 2018; Sensevy et al., 2013; Wickman et al, 2018). In our work, we have combined this line of didactical research with theories, methodologies and results from the field of action research (Almqvist et al., 2016; Almqvist et al., 2017; Olin et al., 2017; Olin et al. 2018). Action research contributes to this in many ways, but especially in its interest in changes of practices and what is at stake for the participants in collaborative work (cf. Edwards-Groves et al., 2016). The combination of these approaches makes it possible to study teachers’ and school leaders’ practice. In this work, the dialogue between participants (both practitioners and researchers) is central, both as a base for development and as a unit of analysis. Meetings between practitioners and researchers are being arranged and developed in the project. One ambition is to create knowledge in the intersection between the two fields of action research and didactics, two fields that are both interested in the development of the teacher profession and school development. If and how the collaboration between researchers and teachers may occur is, in this perspective, not an uncontested area of knowledge, and depends on underlying views of theory and practice as well as how professional learning may be framed (Carlgren, 2012; Hamza et al, 2018). Thus, one crucial question in development work is how the relation between the participating actors in a practice is constituted. Hence, the basic idea of the project is to use research and practice in reflection on and development of concrete didactic dilemmas. In our previous studies in the project, we have concentrated on the two forms of recognition identified by Ricœur, namely recognition of oneself and the notion of mutual recognition between participants (Almqvist et al., 2016; Olin et al., 2017; Olin et al. 2018). In this paper we focus on the third form of recognition, namely recognition of something. We understand this as the didactical dilemmas recognized by the practitioners in the project. Method The empirical material analyzed in this study is produced in a research and development project in Landskrona, a municipality in the southern part of Swedish. The project centers on school development on the basis of teaching challenges. In the very center of the work are didactical dilemmas identified and described by practitioners. These dilemmas are written as cases by the practitioners, describing the problem that they have identified, together with a description of how the dilemma is handled by them in practice. Three experts (researchers and teachers) from different fields contribute with comments on the case from their different perspectives. The comment is based on the case and has to be of a reasoning nature. It can, for example, be about (1) Strengthening: The arguments and points presented by the case author are highlighted, confirmed and discussed. (2) Supplementing: The comment points to things that may be missing in the description of the case and complements additional aspects of how the dilemma has been dealt with in other contexts. (3) Problematizing: The starting points on which the case is based are challenged and nuanced. In this way, the commentary is about changing focus and suggesting alternative ways of understanding the current dilemma. A collaborating author (researcher) pulls together and summarizes the case and the different comments, and finally, the practitioner discusses and reflects on the comments. We see the last section of each dialogue as very central. This is where the practitioner’s voice and agency become most evident in the dialogue. The empirical material consists of eleven didactical development dialogues organized in eleven chapters in a forthcoming anthology. For the study presented in this paper, we have made a qualitative analysis of the chapters, focusing on the practitioners’ dilemmas. More specifically, we have concentrated on the last section of the case descriptions, analyzing the knowledge that is expressed in practitioners’ reflections about their own development based on their case description and the three comments they have received. Expected Outcomes In the analysis of the dialogues, we have found three categories of dilemmas, with sub-categories. These correspond very well with the three different kinds of relations expressed in the didactical triangle, namely teacher-student, teacher-content and student-content. Our findings about practitioners’ identification and handling of didactic dilemmas are the following. First, the teachers handle dilemmas related to the relation between teacher and student. This concern issues such as individualization while working with large heterogenic student groups, teaching students to become independent, teachers’ and students’ respective responsibilities in the classroom, and how to act in and change the school system in order to enhance the prerequisites for teaching. Secondly, the teachers handle dilemmas related to the relationship between teacher and educational content. They select, opt out and organize educational content and teaching method, teach study technique and hand out homework. Thirdly, teachers handle dilemmas related to the relationship between student and educational content, which means that they handle dilemmas concerning for example students’ difficulties to understand a task or a content of some kind and students’ different prerequisites for learning. The study indicates that the researchers and practitioners who are participating in the development dialogues mutually contribute to the construction of knowledge. The dilemmas that the teachers identify are in a way very general, but they are also specific and situational in the sense that they concern the teachers’ work in specific classrooms. In development dialogues, teachers and researcher contribute with new ways of understanding and dealing with didactical dilemmas. This becomes very obvious when reading and analyzing the concluding remarks made by the practitioners. References Almqvist, J., Hamza, K., Olin, A. (2016). Didactical investigations for professional development. Paper presented at ECER in Dublin, August 22-26 Almqvist, J; Hamza, K. & Olin, A. (Eds.)(2017). Undersöka och utveckla undervisning [Investigating and Developing Teaching]. Lund: Studentlittteratur. Armour, K.(Ed.)(2014). Pedagogical cases in physical education and youth sport. Oxon: Routledge. Casey, A.; Goodyear, V. & Armour, K. (Eds.)(2016). Digital technologies and learning in physical education. Pedagogical cases. Oxon: Routledge. Carlgren, I. (2012). The learning study as an approach for “clinical” subject matter didactic research. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies, 1(2), 126-139. Edwards-Groves, C.; Olin, A & Karlberg-Granlund, G. (2016). Partnership and recognition in action research: understanding the practices and practice architectures for participation and change. Educational Action Research, 24(3), 321-333. Hamza, K., Palm, O., Palmqvist, J., Piqueras, J., & Wickman, P.-O. (2018). Hybridization of practices in teacher-researcher collaboration. European Educational Research Journal, 17(1), 170-186 Ingerman, A., & Wickman, P.-O. (2015). Towards a teachers' professional discipline: Shared Responsibility for didactic models in research and practice. In P. Burnard, B.-M. Apelgren & N. Cabaroglu (Eds.), Transformative teacher research (pp. 167-179). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Joffredo-Le Brun, S.; Morellato, M.; Sensevy, G. & Quilio, S. (2018). Cooperative engineering as a joint action. European Educational Research Journal, 17(1), 187-208. Ko, P.Y. (2018): Beyond labels: what are the salient features of lesson study and learning study?, Educational Action Research. Published online 11 October 2018. Olin, A., Almqvist, J & Hamza, K. (2017). Didactics, dialogue and development. Paper presented at the ECER conference, August 22-25, 2017. Olin, A., Lenzen, B & Sensevy, G (2018). Professional development and recognition. Paper presented in the double symposium Comparative Didactic Analyses of Science Education and Physical Education and Health in Sweden, Switzerland and France, at ECER in Bolzano. Sensevy G, Forest D, Quilio S, et al. (2013) Cooperative engineering as a specific design-based research. ZDM – The International Journal on Mathematics Education 45(7): 1031–1043. Wickman, P.-O. (2015). Teaching learning progressions: An international perspective. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education (2nd ed., pp. 145-163). New York: Routledge. Wickman, P.-O., Hamza, K., & Lundegård, I. (20
|
|
| 7. |
- Almqvist, Jonas, et al.
(författare)
-
Didactical Investigations for Professional Development
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Paper presented at ECER conference, 22-26 August 2016, Dublin.
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The research presented in the paper is part of a large research project built on a comparative didactics approach (cf. Almqvist & Quennerstedt 2015; Ligozat et al 2015) with the overall ambition to search for and analyze different teaching traditions in order to optimize the possibility to find effective and fruitful teaching approaches. One of the aims in the project is to use and develop didactic knowledge and concepts in cooperation with teachers (cf. Sensevy et al 2013, Wickman 2015). In this paper we will present and discuss a way for researchers to participate in teachers’ development of teaching. Teaching is a complex, transactional process affected by numerous contingencies both within and outside the classroom. Thus, it is necessarily underdetermined by any theories about teaching and learning. Just like medicine or engineering, didactic knowledge therefore needs to be developed in interaction between more general, ”theoretical” models of teaching, and the actual practices which these theories are intended to support (Wickman, 2015). This realization is consistent with current views of teacher professional development as needing to involve teachers in collaborative and inquiry-based projects grounded in problems identified by the teachers themselves (McNicholl, 2013; Sensevy et al 2013; van Driel, Meirink, van Veen, & Zwart, 2012). The idea of didactic modelling or inquiry goes beyond these notions by emphasizing not only teacher learning and the development of local practice but also the successive modification and refinement of the theories themselves (Lijnse & Klaassen, 2004; Wickman, 2012). From that point of view, researchers in didactics and practicing teachers are seen as different but equally crucial actors in the joint construction and successive development of disciplinary knowledge about teaching. Neither teacher professional learning nor didactic research primarily proceeds by substituting old ideas with new ones. Instead knowledge, personal as well as institutional, is transformed bit-by-bit through noticing of and reflection upon consequences for both practice and theory (Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002; Wickman, 2012). Through this kind of joint and reciprocal work, generating personal as well as institutionalized knowledge which is thoroughly and continuously mangled through actual practice (Pickering, 1995), teachers as a collective may develop a common basis for their choices of content and methods for teaching (Wickman, 2015). However, the ambition to find ways for researchers too contribute to educational development is not new. A research field with long experience of and knowledge about development work where researchers and teachers collaborate is the action research field. Action research is a broad field both in a geographical as well as theoretical sense (Somekh & Zeichner, 2009), including different purposes, conditions, philosophical starting-points and forms for inquiry. Nevertheless, there are also characterizing features in all variations of action research. According to Reason and Bradbury (2001), action research always has an emergent developmental form; it deals with practical issues, supports human development, is founded on knowledge-in-action and aims at participation and democracy (p. 2). The role of teachers in educational research has been an essential topic for decades especially in critical theoretical approaches such as Participatory Action Research (PAR).
|
|
| 8. |
- Almqvist, Jonas, 1968-, et al.
(författare)
-
Teaching Traditions in Classroom Practice : A Comparative Didactic Approach
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Didactics in a Changing World. - Cham : Springer Nature. ; , s. 55-65, s. 55-65
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Teachers make a lot of choices and handle different kinds of didactical dilemmas in their everyday teaching. Research on teaching traditions in classroom practice show that didactical challenges often do not have any clear or obvious solution, but rather needs to be made visible, problematized and discussed by teachers. In this chapter, we illustrate and discuss how comparative didactics as a growing research area may contribute to a deeper understanding of teaching in different subjects. We take our departure in research in the Nordic and French traditions of didactics and describe how research contribute to analyses, critical discussions about and development of teaching and classroom practice. More specifically, we argue that comparative didactics should be seen as a way of dealing with questions about similarities and differences in teachers’ selection of content and manners of teaching and how these selections may influence classroom practice and students’ learning. In the chapter, we focus on, illustrate and discuss two characteristics of comparative didactics. First, one of the overall ambitions of comparative didactics is to analyze what is taken for granted in different educational practices and to identify things not possible to see without doing the comparisons with other practices. Second, the comparisons between educational practices contribute with knowledge of a wide range of alternative ways of selecting goals, content and manners of teaching and can be used in the development of teaching. We focus on these questions with the specific ambition to focus on issues about teaching, classroom practice and educational content.
|
|
| 9. |
- Almqvist, Jonas, et al.
(författare)
-
Undersöka och utveckla undervisning. Professionell utveckling för lärare.
- 2017
-
Bok (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Boken erbjuder konkreta och autentiska exempel på hur beprövad erfarenhet och utbildningsvetenskaplig forskning kan användas som stöd för utveckling av såväl undervisning som didaktisk kunskap. Detta sker genom att forskare och lärare möts i så kallad didaktisk utvecklingsdialog om och utveckling av konkreta undervisningsfall där lärare berättar om hur de hanterat ett dilemma i sin undervisning. Nio kapitelredaktörer har samordnat den skriftligt baserade dialogen mellan lärare och forskare utifrån specifika fall. Varje kapitel består av en inledande beskrivning av fallet, som åtföljs av kommentarer och reflektioner från forskare och erfarna lärare, och avslutas med en reflektion av läraren över vad som framkommit i dialogen och vilken relevans det har för lärarens fortsatta undervisningspraktik. Undersöka och utveckla undervisning är avsedd att användas av såväl lärarstudenter som yrkesverksamma lärare. Genom att den hanterar både konkreta undervisningsfall och hur forskning och beprövad erfarenhet kan användas för att reflektera över dessa, passar den flera områden i den utbildningsvetenskapliga kärnan, såsom didaktik, utvärdering och utveckling samt läroplansteori.
|
|
| 10. |
- Blossing, Ulf, et al.
(författare)
-
Uppdrags- och processdrivna skolorganisationer med rum för mellanledare
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Presentation vid Utbildningsvetenskapliga fakultetens samverkanskonferens Forskning Pågår, Göteborg, 31 oktober 2017.
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- En studie i samarbete med Helsingborgs kommun har följt ett tjugotal skolor och förskolor över tre år. Med enkäter och intervjuer analyseras förändringen av drifts- och utvecklingsorganisationerna på flera enheter mot att bli uppdrags- och processdrivna. På flera enheter har en kraftig ökning av personalens uppdrag som specialister och utvecklare för kollegor skett. Viktiga samordnande roller tas av mellanledare, bl.a. processledare och förstelärare. Bidraget fokuserar på de mekanismer som stöttat förändringen.
|
|
