1. General description on research questions, objectives and methodology

This paper examines some aspects of an assumed hegemonic strategy in the Norwegian supervision tradition within teacher education. The introduction of the action- and reflection – (a-/r-) strategy in the 1980s is commonly regarded as an educational turnaround or a new regime of knowledge in Norwegian teacher training. The term knowledge regime is used primarily in educational policy to describe how "power, authority, values ​​and knowledge".

The a/r- strategy was designed in the 1970s and 80s under the impression from an international turn away from conduct orientation in educational research and teacher education towards faith in reflection as the new way to strengthen teacher education. When Donald Schön coined the phrase “the reflective practitioner” in the 1980s, it reinforced the interest in reflection as a key concept in professional practice. Schön used a versatile supervision term that encompasses learning with authority and model-learning (Schön, 1987). The a-/r- strategy design does not include living modelling traditions. The strategy's vision has elements in common with the anti-authoritarian and critical thinking that had considerable influence within the academic pedagogy in the 1970s and 80årene.

A national curriculum for up to one-year studies in educational supervision was designed in 1991, and the plan was based on the principles of the a-/and r-strategy (Carson and Isachsen, 2003; Aasen, 2007, p. 28; Sundli, 2001 and 2004: 140; Klemp, 2012: 10). During the 1990s studies in supervision theory was established by the vast majority of the nation's colleges and universities. Many Norwegian supervisors and other educators have been trained within this theorethical framework. This strategy has also had an impact in Sweden and Denmark, especially in teacher training. The ideal of the supervisor who does not give advice and directions on how the student teacher or the newly qualified teacher are to act operatively in the classroom, has an international prevalence. In the United States supervisors hardly ever give direct technical or methodological clues as to what was and how to teach, but also support more self-reflection of beginning teachers. Leading ideas are that each teacher must develop their own style ( Blömeke, S. & Paine, L.,2009).

Bibliography Bengtsen, S. S. E. (2012). Didaktik and idiosyncrasy. An examination of supervivion sessions at the university with a focus on the relationship between personal and professional content. Dissertation. Aarhus University, Denmark Bjerkholt, E. (2013). Opening of enclosed spaces. A qualitative study of the content and dialogues in supervision sessions among new teachers and local supervisors. Doctoral dissertation. University of Oslo Blömeke, S. & Paine, L. (2009). Career entry programs for teachers in an international comparison. journal for teacher education, 9 (3), 18-25.] Granlund, L. (2013). How to train the tutors ? A comparative study of teacher training for Waldorf schools and public education. Doctoral dissertation. Department of Sociology, University of Bergen Handal, G. and P. Lauvås (1982). On their own terms. A strategy for supervision teachers.. Lund: Studentliterature Handal, G. and P. Lauvås (1983, 1999). On their own terms. A strategy for supervision teachers. Oslo: Cappelen Handal, G. and P. Lauvås (1987). Promoting Reflective Teaching. Milton Keynes:Open University Press Lauvås, P. and G. Handal (1990, 2000, 2014). Supervision and practical vocational theory. Oslo: Cappelen Damm Academic Rosendahl, BL and Rønnermann, K. (2005): With the focus on clinical supervision in schools’ work form change. Institution for Pedagogy and Didactics, University of Gothenburg Educational Research in Sweden in 2005 year 10 No. 1 pp 35-51. Department for Pedagogy and Didactics, University of Gothenburg Schön, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey Bass Skagen, K. (2009). Supervision in practice. About school practice in Norwegian teacher education. Acta Didactica, 1, (3) [https .// www.journals.uio.no/index.php/adno/article/view/1036/915] Skagen, K. (2010a). What kind mentoring do beginning teachers need? In Høihilder, E. K. and K. R. Olsen (2010). Mentoring of new teachers in schools and kindergartens. Oslo: Pedlex Søndenå, K. and Sundli, L. (2004). Supervision on the practice field. Space for reflection and didactic innovation - or just cloning and mirroring? In Brekke, M. (Red). Norwegian teacher training didactics changing. Learning, teaching and education in the light of new research (s.128-151). Kristiansand: Høyskoleforlaget Aasen, E. (2014). Educational supervision of thought and action - a study of supervisors’ learning. Doctoral dissertation 2014. Stockholm University