Reflection is an important issue in Japanese teacher education, as well as in other countries. Recently, the Japan Association of Universities of Education has reported various reflective practices in the Department of Teacher Education in national universities (2006). However, Japanese teacher education still lacks experience, theory and research on reflection. Thus it is necessary to learn from other countries. In some of the European countries and USA, it is noted that reflection is found in a contradictory situation. On one hand, reflection as a basic concept in teacher education is a consensus; on the other hand it is used most “un-reflectively” (Bengtsson 1994), and its practice and research tend to counteract educational reforms (Fendler 2002). In launching reflective teacher education in Japan, we must learn from others who have faced similar challenges. This paper focuses on why reflection in teacher education is difficult to realize, using the case of Norway. Norway, similar to the Japanese system, educates primary school teachers mainly in 4-years teacher education university colleges. Norway has had a tradition of reflective mentoring since the early 1980s, when Handal and Lauvås developed a mentoring strategy called the “action and reflection model” (1983). This reflective mentoring model is now dominant in teacher education in Norway as well as the rest of Scandinavia. However, recent research shows that reflection is not being realized as initially intended by the strategy. Sundli (2001) and Søndenå (2002) point out that the reflective mentoring model merely reproduces the given school culture and teachers. Skagen (1998, 2000) suggests a “model learning” based on apprenticeship instead of reflection. The question is this: Why is reflection among teacher students not being realized, despite of the dissemination of the model throughout the nation? Whereas the above-mentioned critique is based on field research on the practice of teacher education, this paper focuses on the wider structure in which the reflective mentoring model is implemented, in order to identify structural challenges. Analysis is carried out in three aspects: 1) dissemination and evaluation of projects of reflective mentoring, 2) attempts to overcome the critique of the model, and 3) mentors’ and teacher education institutions’ position in Norway.

This research uses the following materials to analyze three aspects of the implementation of reflective mentoring. 1) Evaluation reports of the reflective mentoring projects in Norway, e.g. a national project on reflective mentoring in kindergartens (1990) and a national project on reflective mentoring for newly qualified teachers (1998-). 2) Literature and textbooks on reflective mentoring (e.g. Lycke, Lauvås and Handal 2000, Skagen 2004, Stålsett 2006, Bjerkholt 2007) and curriculum on Pedagogical Mentoring subjects in universities/colleges (e.g. Stavanger University, Agder University). 3) Literature on history and culture in teacher education institutions in Norway and Scandinavia (e.g. Mathisen 2000, Carlgren & Marton 2002, Kvalbein 2003).

Three structural challenges to the practice of reflective mentoring in Norway are pointed out. These could explain some aspects of why reflection is difficult to realize: 1) Dissemination of the strategy and evaluation of mentoring projects focus on the method and subjective impression of the participants rather than the participants’ reflection; 2) The attempt to overcome the critique of the “action and reflection model” is done by adding supplemental models to it; and 3) The problematic position of mentors in Norwegian schools and the characteristics of teacher education institutions. The mentors are situated between the school and the teacher education institution. The teacher education institutions with a “seminar tradition” tend to focus on method rather than reflection. Some remaining possibilities of reflective mentoring are pointed out in a recent teacher education reform. Finally, implications for Japanese teacher education are discussed.