The paper covers three interrelated study projects that were launched in order to explore teachers' pedagogical knowing. Within the study projects, teachers' pedagogical knowing was treated as a broad concept and practice. 'Pedagogical' was not simply what happened in schools and classrooms, it was also found 'inside' teachers and 'outside' institutions. Many of these personal features and cultural aspects collapsed into one another in teachers' pedagogical knowing. They were involved in their action and reflection and made combinations of such features as intellectual skills, virtues, habits of mind, appropriate social behavior etc. In addition, it was found important to treat a wide array of issues, at least in part, ethical by their nature. Theoretical framework The three sets of the studies used different but interrelated theoretical frameworks. The first set of the studies were based on the interpretation of teachers knowledge as phronesis (Noel, 1999; Tirri et al.,1999, Husu 2002). The second set of the studies employed the concept of relational knowing (Shotter, 1993; Hollingsworth et al.1995, Wertsch, 1998). The third set of the studies perceived the issues through the lens of pervasiveness of pedagogical knowing (van Manen & Li, 2002, Husu, 2002). The theoretical approaches were not regarded as separate nor autonomous entities. Contrary, they were interrelated and overlapped each other much like their target, pedagogical practice, does. Data and method In the first set of the studies narrative interview (N=29) was used as a research tool (Cortazzi, 1993, Mishler, 1986; Conle, 2000). Here, the aim was to establish broad outlines of the phenomenon studied. The second set of the studies employed narrative case reports as its data (N=26). The ethical conflicts experienced by early education teachers were analyzed by using the reading guide method (Brown et al., 1989, 1991). In the third set of the studies the aim was to obtain as accurate and authentic picture as possible of teachers' pedagogical knowing. In interviews (N=20), secondary school teachers were encouraged to tell about a real-life dilemma they had experienced in their work. The teacher's story acted as a core narrative (Riessman, 1993). Together, the three methodological approaches paved the way for narrative understanding of teachers' pedagogical knowing (Husu, 2002). Results Most actions teachers took in schools and classrooms were capable to express some moral meaning that, in turn, could influence others: students, parents colleagues etc. Frequently, it was a question of familiar, routine aspects of teachers' work that were conveying moral meanings. This could also happen without teachers being aware of it. It was hard to find a center that held together teachers' pedagogical action and knowing. In terms of the issues presented in the three set of the studies there could be many centers. Therefore, teachers' pedagogical knowing was considered as an activity that cut across many areas. According to the results, five areas stand out: Care and respect for students, the compelling power of teachers' personal justifications, the absence of a shared code of practice; the struggles to balance teachers' public and private roles, and the basic uncertainty within the profession. Conclusion Pedagogical knowing and action were both interpreted to be uncertain practical problems. While teachers had the responsibility for resolving them, their grounds for judgements and actions were often implicit and unclear. This was due to the fact that situations were already tied to other agents, histories, and institutional arrangements. Frequently, educational researchers find themselves unable to speak authoritatively about teachers' pedagogical knowing. For some, this can be a problem; for others, the situation can open up new possibilities. This presentation concludes on those positive landscapes. What does it mean if we start to 'live in a lesser form of knowing'? References Brown, L. M., Depold, E., Tappan, M., & Gilligan, C. (1991) Reading narratives of conflict and choice for self and moral voices: a relational method.In W. M. Kurtines & J. L. Gewirtz (Eds.), Handbook of Moral Behavior and Development. Volume 2: Research (pp. 25-61). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Brown, L. M., Tappan, M., Gilligan, C., Miller, B., & Argyris, D. (1989). Reading for self and moral voice: A method for interpreting narratives of real-life moral conflict and choice. In M. Packer & R. Addison (Eds.), Entering the circle: Hermeneutic investigation in psychology. Albany, NY: SUNY Press. Conle, C. (2000). Narrative Inquiry. Research tool and medium for professional development. European Journal of Teacher Education, 23(1), 49-63. Cortazzi, M. (1993). Narrative Analysis. London: The Falmer Press. Hollingsworth, S., Dybdahl, M., & Minarik, L. (1995). By chart, and chance and passion. The importance of relational knowing in learning to teach. Curriculum Inquiry, 23(1), 5-35. Husu, J. (2002). Representing the Practice of Teachers' Pedagogical Knowing. Finnish Educational Research Association: Research in Educational Sciences. (in press) Husu, J. (2002). Constructing etical representations from the teacher's pedagogical practice. Interchange - A Quarterly Review of Education, 33 (in press). Mishler, E. (1986). Research Interviewing: Context and Narrative. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Noel, J. (1999). On the varieties of phronesis. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 31(3), 273-289. Riessman, C. K. (1993). Narrative Analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Shotter, J. (1993) Conversational Realities: Constructing Life Through Language. London: Sage Tirri, K., Husu, J., & Kansanen, P. (1999). The epistemological stance between the knower and the known. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15(8), 911-922. van Manen, M. & Li, S. (2002). The pathic principle of pedagogical language. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(2), 215-224. Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as Action. New York: Oxford University Press.