| 1. |
- Angelaki, Stavroula, et al.
(författare)
-
Methods for inclusive design processes at the early stages of a research project in School Environments
- 2024
-
Ingår i: IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. - : IOP Publishing.
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper explores the use of participatory methods prior to designing interventions within a research project at a primary school in central Sweden. The approach presented in the paper is based on the principles of participatory design (PD), to enhance the use of these methods within the areas of educational research (ER), lighting, and architecture. This approach aims to include participants of educational spaces and incorporate their views prior to design interventions. Two workshops were designed to support teachers' participation through hands-on activities. Twenty-eight teachers participated in the workshops. Scale models corresponding to two of the school's classrooms were used to initiate discussions regarding the interconnection between spatial layouts, lighting, and learning activities. The workshops' data collection analysis assisted the research group in understanding the school's spatial and learning characteristics. The information gathered from the workshops provided additional knowledge and informed the research project in a way that allowed for further development and changes within the project related to the additional variables measured along with light. According to the analysis, there is a correlation between the activity and the desired layout of the space, while the type of equipment also varies according to the task.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Fransson, Göran, 1968-, et al.
(författare)
-
Dilemmatic Spaces in Educational Contexts : Towards a conceptual framework for dilemmas in teachers work
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Teachers and Teaching. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1354-0602 .- 1470-1278. ; 19:1, s. 4-17
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In this article, the concept of introducing and analytically using the concept of dilemmatic space in an educational context offers a potential to elucidate and deepen the understanding of the complexity of teachers’ everyday practise in work. Traditional ways of looking upon dilemmas is that they are related to specific situations where people react to conflicting values, obligations or commitments, ending up in situations where there often is no right way to act. However, the idea of a dilemmatic space, introduced by Honig (1996), offers a more complex understanding of dilemmas and their positioning and relations. Instead of being considered as specific events or situations, dilemmas are regarded as ever-present in peoples’ living space, as in a dilemmatic space. As seen as a relational category wherein one object is related to another(s), the spatial dimensions of dilemmatic space highlight the dynamics of dilemmas and dilemmatic spaces. These dynamics are important to recognize, for instance in relations to changeable boundaries of the space or issues dealt with that conjure up the dilemmas both on an individual and social level. These changing conditions of values, decision, responsibility and authority change the rules for relations, negotiations, and positioning, and thus the boundaries for the dilemmatic space and the dilemmas. In this article, the theoretical base for the idea of dilemmatic space is elaborated and connected to conditions for teachers’ work. Some conclusions are that new concepts force us to challenge pre-conceptions and involve us in new kinds of sense making processes. As such, the idea of dilemmatic space offers a broad theoretical framework to conceptualise dilemmas as well as the complexity of the educational contexts.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Fransson, Göran, 1968-, et al.
(författare)
-
Exploring a conceptual framework for research on Induction and Mentoring : Combining Policy enactment, task perception, and agency
- 2014
-
Ingår i: AERA conference, digital database.
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper focuses on the research questions that are emerging from the current reforms with consequences for Induction and Mentoring in various countries. The implementation focus is on the interplay between the new triad formed as a consequence of a Teacher Registration Reform in Sweden: head teacher/mentor/mentee as situated in a larger context of policy development and development in/of practice. The objective of this paper is twofold; (a) to elaborate and discuss a conceptual framework based on an interplay between the theoretical contributions of policy enactment (Ball, Maguire & Braun, 2012), task perception (Kelchtermans, 2009) and agency (Priestley and Biesta); (b) to discuss its possibilities for research within the field of induction and mentoring, and (c) provide an example of how it could be implemented in a study on induction and mentoring.
|
|
| 6. |
- Fransson, Göran, 1968-, et al.
(författare)
-
Exploring a conceptual framework to understand how principals balance the partly contradictory tasks of evaluating and supporting newly qualified teachers
- 2017
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- In many countries it is argued that the “quality of teachers” is the most important school-related factor in pupils’ learning (Hattie, 2009; 2012). Teacher quality has become a key argument for teachers’ professional development. When it comes to newly qualified teachers (NQTs), in many countries the call for “teacher quality” has either led to reforms that support NQTs or reforms requiring an evaluation of their competence. In some countries these approaches are combined, with induction systems and mentoring that support NQTs and an evaluation of their skills to ensure quality. However, some research suggests that if the same person performs both roles it is more difficult to create and maintain a relationship based on confidence, openness and mutual trust that promotes risk-free learning (Author 1, 201*, Jones 2009). In some countries or states mentors perform both these roles (cf. Yusko & Feiman Nemser, 2008), whereas in others these two roles are separated so that mentors support and principals evaluate.The latter kind of system was introduced in Sweden in 2011, with mentors supporting NQTs and principals performing the evaluation (Government Bill, 2010/11). However, previous research shows that when the Swedish principals performed the assessment they also supported the NQTs (Author 1, Author 2, Author 3, 201*) in that they partly applied an instructional leadership (cf. REF) and gave post-observation feedback. However, being both an evaluator and supervisor can be challenging. For instance, Hinchey (2010) claims that teachers only improve their practice in relatively non-threatening contexts and that the assessment may challenge this (cf. Author 1, 201*; Range, Young & Hvidstone, 2013).A review of the research literature reveals that there is an urgent need for theoretical development in order to understand how principals enact and balance their roles as evaluators of NQTs and pedagogical leaders. In responding to this call, the purpose of the paper is: (a) to elaborate and discuss a conceptual framework that captures how principals enact and balance their roles as evaluators and pedagogical leaders in the context of evaluating NQTs and (b) to exemplify how data can be related to the framework.Theoretical frameworkThe emphasis on and combination of supportive and evaluative dimensions are contained in the framework of a four-way table that includes “formal and structured evaluation” vs. “informal evaluation” and “strong instructional leadership” vs. “weak instructional leadership”.The evaluation dimension is defined as the extent to which evaluations are scheduled, planned, directed by guiding formulae, how the different issues of the national standards are focused, time spent on the evaluation, the structure and focus of the follow-up discussions etc. The instructional dimension is defined as how and how much guidance is given and how the NQTs professional development are facilitated. Here the focus is on guidance and feedback that contribute to developing the instructional skills or pedagogical thinking of the NQT. Positive feedback relates to the content included in the table. Positive feedback in a general sense, without connection to instruction, thinking or a situation, is not included. For instance, positive feedback heard in the corridor, such as: ‘colleagues say you perform well’, is not included in this dimension. Guidance can be absent or present, more or less extensive, or constructive and detailed.Methods/methodologyThe framework is developed by reviewing the research literature in the areas of teacher induction (cf. (Hobson, Ashby, Malderez, & Tomlinson, 2009), evaluation of NQTs (cf. Yusko & Feiman Nemser, 2008) and principals’ instructional leadership (cf. Neumerski, 2013; LaPointe Terosky, 2016). Most of the literature relating to principals’ instructional leadership focuses on teachers in general and not specifically NQTs (cf. Tuytens & Devos, 2017), but is nevertheless valuable.Drawing on and combining supportive and evaluative dimensions result in a four-way table framework with the following axes: “formal and structured evaluation” vs. “informal evaluation” and “strong instructional leadership” vs. “weak instructional leadership”.This framework is then used in explorative analyses of data from a longitudinal research project in which five principals conducting a formal evaluation of NQTs are followed in the year of the evaluation. These five principals are regarded as cases. The NQTs being evaluated teach Years 4-6.Each principal is interviewed at least twice during the year (in total between 73-158 minutes), which forms the main data for the analysis. The interviews and analysis explore principals’ self-reported information regarding their strategies to enact and balance their role as evaluators and the support they provide. Using the software NVivo, codes are created based on content analysis (Miles, Huberman & Saldaña, 2014).Self-reported data needs to be looked at critically (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003). To validate this kind of data: (i) observations and recordings of post-observation conversations (tot. 72 minutes) are performed with two of the principals (A and C) and their NQTs, (ii) joint interviews are conducted with three principals (A, C and E) and their NQTs (in total 130 minutes) and (iii) observations of three of the principals’ observations (B, C, D) are carried out. A coherent design of these validating strategies is not possible due to ethical and practical reasons. Three of the NQTs did not feel comfortable with the participation of an external researcher during the observations and/or post-observation conversations. Some of the planned observations were cancelled due to illness, the unavailability of the informant or were performed ad hoc and informally and were not observed or recorded.Expected outcomes/resultsPositioning the principals in the framework of the four-way table with the axes “formal and structured evaluation” vs. “informal evaluation” and “strong instructional leadership” vs. “weak instructional leadership” enables their actions to be positioned differently. Four out of the five teachers are positioned more towards “strong instructional leadership” and “formal and structured evaluation”, albeit with different emphases on the two dimensions. The fifth principal (E) is positioned more towards “informal evaluation” and “weak instructional leadership”. This principal describes his/her leadership as ‘leadership on the run’.The overall conclusion is that the theoretical framework enables principals to be positioned according to how their evaluative and supportive roles vary. Also, the quality of the data, for instance with regard to quantity, focus on relevant issues and different kinds of data (e.g. self-reported narratives, narratives from other actors such as NQTs, and first-hand information from the researchers’ direct observations) gives a much more informed analysis of the positioning in the framework. However, in this small-scale study, the different kinds of data do not contradict each other, but strengthen the conclusions and the positioning.Thus, the framework facilitates an understanding of how principals facilitate NQTs professional development in a context in which evaluative and supportive dimensions are applied. The framework could also be used to analyse how mentors balance the supportive and evaluative dimensions.ReferencesAuthor 1 (201*). [details removed for peer review]. Article published in international peer-reviewed journal.Author 1, Author 2 & Author 3 (201*). [details removed for peer review]. Paper presented at an International Annual Conference.Government bill 2010/11:20 Legitimation för lärare och förskollärare [Registration for Teachers and Pre-School Teachers]. The Swedish Government. Hattie, J. 2009. Visible learning: a synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: New York: Routledge.Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: maximizing impact on learning. London: Routledge.Hinchey, P.H. (2010). Getting teacher assessment right: What policymakers can learn from research. Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center.Hobson, A. J., Ashby, P., Malderez, A., & Tomlinson, P. D. (2009). Mentoring beginning teachers: what we know and what we don't. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(1), 207-216.Jones, M. (2009). Supporting the supporters of novice teachers: An analysis of mentors’ needs from twelve European countries presented from an English perspective. Research in Comparative and International Education 4, no. 1: 4–21.LaPointe Terosky, A. (2016): Enacting instructional leadership: perspectives and actions of public K-12 principals, School Leadership & Management,Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M. & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: a methods sourcebook. (3. ed.) Los Angeles: Sage.Neumerski, C. M. (2013). Rethinking Instructional Leadership: A Review of What Do We Know About Principal, Teacher, and Coach Instructional Leadership, and Where Should We Go from Here? Educational Administration Quarterly 49 (2): 310–347.Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903. Range, B. G., Young, S. & Hvidston, D. (2013) Teacher perceptions about observation conferences: what do teachers think about their formative supervision in one US school district?, School Leadership & Management, 33:1, 61-77.Tuytens, M. & Devos, G. (2017) The role of feedback from the schoolleader during teacher evaluation for teacher and school improvement, Teachers and Teaching, 23:1, 6-24,Yusko, B., & Feiman Nemser. S. (2008). Embracing contraries: Combining assistance and assessment in new teacher induction. Teach
|
|
| 7. |
- Fransson, Göran, 1968-, et al.
(författare)
-
Mentors and mentoring in a dilemmatic space : Analysis of changed preconditions for mentoring due to a Teacher Registration Reforms
- 2012
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- In this conceptual article, we argue that there is a need for a more elaborated theoretical perspective when discussing dilemmas in teachers’ work. Thus, we introduce the conceptual frame of dilemmatic space in educational settings and argue that introducing and analytically using the conceptual frame in an educational context offers a potential to elucidate and deepen the understanding of the complexity of teachers’ everyday work practices. Traditional ways of looking at dilemmas infer that they are related to specific situations in which people react to conflicting values, obligations or commitments and where there is often no right way to act. However, the idea of a dilemmatic space offers a more complex understanding of dilemmas and their positioning and relations. Instead of being regarded as specific events or situations, dilemmas are considered as ever-present in people’s living space, as in a dilemmatic space. As space is seen as a relational category wherein one object is related to another or others, the spatial dimensions of dilemmatic space highlight the dynamics of dilemmas and dilemmatic spaces. These dynamics are important to recognise, for instance, in relation to the changeable boundaries of the space or issues that conjure up the dilemmas at an individual and social level. These changing conditions of values, decisions, responsibilities and authority change the rules for relations, negotiations and positioning, and thereby the boundaries of the dilemmatic space and the dilemmas themselves. In this article, the theoretical base for the idea of dilemmatic space is elaborated on and connected to conditions for teachers’ work. Some conclusions are that new concepts force us to challenge pre-conceptions and involve us in new kinds of sense-making processes. As such, the conceptual frame of dilemmatic space offers a broad theoretical framework with which to conceptualise dilemmas and the complexity of educational contexts.
|
|
| 8. |
- Fransson, Göran, 1968-, et al.
(författare)
-
Mentors, Mentoring and Dilemmatic Spaces: A contribution to theoretical renewal for understanding mentoring
- 2012
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper contributes to theoretical renewal in mentoring research by using the conceptual framework of dilemmatic space to analyze and discuss how Swedish mentors’ roles, positions and relations change as a result of the Swedish government’s recent implementation of a teacher registration reform and a probation year for newly qualified teachers. The paper builds on an existing content analysis of the policy document concerning the teacher registration reform. The results of this study’s relational analysis show that mentoring emerges as tensions between central and local governments as policies construct boundaries that lead to political acts that become part of everyday practices through roles, negotiations and positioning, which ultimately have an effect on mentors and mentorship.
|
|
| 9. |
- Fransson, Göran, 1968-, et al.
(författare)
-
New Regimes of Assessment, Grading and Accountability : Analysing Reform-based Dilemmas in Educational Settings
- 2011
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper is based on a meta-analysis of earlier research relating to how the last decade’s reforms in Sweden concerning national tests, earlier grading and an increased focus on criterion-referenced grading changes the prerequisites for teachers’ work and their professional development, identity and relations, and, more specifically, how such reforms lead to dilemmas that affect their everyday work. Ironically, rather than solving a certain kind of problem or dilemma, inconsiderate political proposals and “easy-fix” whims at policy level that are not always applicable to teachers’ work sometimes cause new dilemmas (cf. Biesta, 2007; Convery, 2009; Kubler LaBoskey, 2006; Norwich, 2010). The difference between a problem and a dilemma is that the former can be solved to satisfaction, whereas the latter cannot be satisfactorily solved but leaves some kind of reminder (Denicolo, 1996; Berlak & Berlak, 1981).The theoretical framework draws on the concept of dilemmatic space and aims to offer a more complex understanding of dilemmas and their positioning and relations (cf. Honig, 1996). Approaching educational settings through the lens of dilemmatic space implies always considering teachers’ work in relation to the dynamics of individual, social, political and contextual factors. Seen as a wider system, the concept of dilemmatic space analytically opens additional dimensions, such as possibilities to connect the dilemmas of teachers’ everyday work with the influences, constraints and considerations of the local community and with reforms, intentions or statements at different policy levels.We argue that dilemmas should not be regarded as specific events or situations, but as being ever present in people’s living “spaces”. That is, people do not just acknowledge dilemmas as specific situations to react to, but always “react” in relation to “dilemmatic spaces.” As a consequence, dilemmas are not “out there” per se, but are social constructions resulting from political decisions that underlie contextual conditions. The concept of dilemmatic space makes it possible to approach what individuals construe as dilemmatic. Such an analytical move also makes it possible to visualise how dilemmas emerge in a space between individuals and a specific context (Fransson & Grannäs, submitted). For teachers, it means that in their work they sometimes find themselves in dilemmatic situations that are characterised by micro-political manoeuvres and where their judgment forms the basis for relational work expressed e.g. through negotiations and the positioning of others (cf. Frelin, 2010).In this paper we analyse how the last decade’s reforms of national tests and earlier grading and an increased focus on criterion-referenced grading in a goal-oriented approach have changed the prerequisites for teachers’ work, professional development, identity and relations.The findings showed that educational reforms change boundaries and positions, e.g. between teachers, pupils, head teachers and parents. Criterion-referenced grading increases the power of pupils to scrutinise the grading, which then causes dilemmas for teachers as to how to find an appropriate balance between learning activities and administrative issues related to assessment and grading (Vetenskapsrådet, 2010). Furthermore, the emergence of “extremely credit-focused pupils” leads to conflicts between teachers, pupils and head teachers over non-graded school tasks (Fransson & Grannäs, forthcoming).National tests reveal some imbalance between the grading that teachers do and national test scores (Skolverket, 2009). This leads to teachers’ professionalism being questioned and the establishment of groups of national experts to re-examine teachers’ grading. Research indicates that politicians change the assessment system to demonstrate efficiency (Lundahl, 2006). Micro political negotiations also lead to aspects other than achievement influencing the grading process (Klapp Lekholm & Cliffordson, 2008) and external pressure like this can result in grade inflation (Wikström, 2006) – all of which results in a call for teachers’ professional development.Teachers and head teachers are thus expected to manoeuvre in dilemmatic space and deal with dilemmas like learning activities, assessment, grading, public reputation and professional autonomy.
|
|
| 10. |
- Fransson, Göran, 1968-, et al.
(författare)
-
Rektorer och lämplighetsprövningen av nyutbildade lärare : En rapport från forskningsprojektet Rektors arbete och lämplighetsprövning av nya lärare: En studie av rektorers förändrade arbetsvillkor efter införandet av lärarlegitimation
- 2017
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Den 2 mars 2011 beslutade riksdagen att införa en legitimation för lärare och förskollärare samt att nyexaminerade lärare och förskollärare skulle genomgå en introduktionsperiod. Under denna introduktionsperiod skulle de få stöd av en mentor samtidigt som rektor eller förskolechef skulle bedöma deras lämplighet för yrket.För rektorerna innebär lämplighetsprövningen av nyexaminerade lärare nya arbetsuppgifter och ett formaliserat uppdrag att bedöma lärares skicklighet. Detta i samband med att rektorers arbetssituation har befunnits vara intensiv med en uppsplittrad vardag där många snabba beslut måste tas väcker frågor kring hur arbetets förutsättningar påverkar lämplighetsprövningen, och hur lämplighetsprövningen påverkar arbetsförhållanden och yrkesroller.I juni månad 2014 inbjöds 646 rektorer att besvara en enkät rörande lämplighetsprövningen. 248 rektorer svarade vilket ger en svarsfrekvens på 39 % (n=248). 159 kvinnor (64 %) och 89 män (36 %) besvarade enkäten. Nästan 60 % av rektorerna hade varit rektor på sin nuvarande enhet i tre år eller mindre. 77 % av rektorerna var verksamma vid kommunala skolor medan 23 % var verksamma vid fristående skolor.Resultaten visar att rektorernas upplevelse av lämplighetsprövningen är att den i huvudsak, om än i varierade grad, upplevts meningsfull och att rektorerna känt sig tillfreds med de lämplighetsprövningar de genomfört. Det förekommer mer spriddaåsikter om i vilken mån lämplighetsprövningen varit väl investerad tid och kraft. Lämplighetsprövningen har konkurrerat med många andra arbetsuppgifter men det finns ändå en tendens att rektorerna som grupp anser att den investerade tiden och kraften varit värt utfallet.Det råder oenighet kring i vilken mån lämplighetsprövningen bidragit till mer positiva relationer mellan rektor och den nya läraren, men att det råder relativt stor enighet om att lämplighetsprövningen inte nämnvärt försämrat relationerna. En sammantagen tolkning av detta är att något mer positiva relationer med de nya lärarna etablerats och att båda parter lärt känna varandra såväl professionellt som privat. Endast 12 % av rektorerna anger att de har fått någon utbildning i att genomföra lämplighetsprövningen. Rektorerna har haft ett begränsat stöd av huvudman eller andra rektorer vilket skapat ett frirum att genomföra lämplighetsprövningen på sitt eget sätt. Samtalen med mentorn har varit viktiga för rektorns bedömning. Vidare framträder lärarkollegiets informella bedömning dels som en viktig komponent i rektors formella bedömning, dels som ett viktig komplement till i rektors formella bedömning. Av de 137 lämplighetsprövningar som genomförts rådde viss tveksamhet i 10 fall och i två fall uppgav rektorerna att det råddestor tveksamhet. Samtliga 137 lärare bedömdes dock efter introduktionsperiodens slutsom lämpliga.Rektorers tilltro till politiker har påverkats negativt av alla turer kring lärarlegitimationen och att lämplighetsprövningen slutligen avvecklades. 73 % av rektorerna anser att deras förtroende för politiker minskat, medan 6 % anser att förtroendet ökat.
|
|
