The purpose of the study is to investigate how primary school teachers understand the concept of research-based teaching. The data is collected through qualitative research interviews and analyzed via life-world phenomenology. The study's overall conclusion is that teachers are complacent about research-based knowledge or exclude it from their teaching. The result shows five different dimensions; external, internal, relational, conscious critical and unconscious. The two categories of internal and relational dimension can characterize the meaning of teacher as researcher. These two categories show teachers understanding and being an example that a practice paradigm of research-based teaching is under development.
This paper presents Gert Biesta’s ontological critique of ‘the global evidence movement’, and performs a critique of his use of systems theory as a foundation for his ontological counter-position. We attempt to show how systems theory, as well as the prevailing understanding of evidence based education, are inadequate for describing and conceptualizing educational processes. Through his use of systems theory as a starting point for an educational ontology, Biesta approaches an acceptance of a functionalistic and anti-humanistic position, which we show is incompatible with educational processes, and thus inappropriate as a foundation for an ontology of education. As an alternative, we offer a reading of Hannah Arendt, and present her concepts of natality and plurality as more suitable starting points for a formulation of an ontology of education.
The objective of this study was to investigate the role of teaching experience to obtain teacher self-efficacy for inclusive reading instruction in Sweden and Norway. 471 in-service teachers from both countries filled out questionnaires about their self-efficacy beliefs and other personal and contextual variables. Despite minor educational differences, we found that the Swedish teachers outperformed their Norwegian counterparts’ self-efficacy for inclusive reading instruction. Teaching experience was a significant contributor of such self-efficacy for teachers from both countries, while the contribution from other variables differed. We conclude that our findings should have consequences for teacher education in nurturing self-efficacy for teaching reading in diverse classrooms.
The Norwegian Qualifications Framework, the Norwegian footprint of the EQF, recommends a turn from considering teaching (input) to considering learning (output) in Norwegian higher education. This study investigates the understanding and realization of the turn amongst scientific staff at a Norwegian university. This study defines the turn from teaching to learning in terms of (i) use of learning outcomes in teaching and planning; (ii) use of student-active forms of learning; (iii) formative assessment. Drawing on material consisting of 14 qualitative interviews, the study discusses how staff understands the turn and whether it is taking place. The results of the study is negative in so far that both teaching and the planning of teaching follows a traditional track. Planning is predominantly based on the syllabus. Teaching is predominantly instructional. Possible reasons why the turn is not taking place is considered and two curricular principles presented. The notion of formative assessment paper is also discussed in the paper.
How do students who succeed with their studies go about studying? What characterizes good teaching that promotes appropriate ways to study? This article highlights these issues by describing and comparing contributions from the three research perspectives; Student Engagement, Students’ approaches to learning, and Self-regulated learning. Despite overlap, each of the perspectives gives distinctive contributions to understanding what influence students’ learning. This article argues that vital knowledge about what affects and promotes students' learning is overlooked if research from only one or two of the perspectives is taken into consideration. Practical implications and need for further study are discussed.
3-2018, årgang 38
Nordic Studies in Education kommer med 4 nummer i året.
John B. Krejsler (+45) 871 63 835
Christian Ydesen (+45) 994 02 320
Anna Slotte (+358) 294 140 972
Satu Perälä-Littunen (+358) 408 053 770
Elisabeth Bjørnestad +47 22452055