In this study, we explore the topic: How can teacher specialists in Building and Construction strengthen their role as teacher specialists at their school through an experience-based master's degree?

Teacher specialist for vocational education is a position that has been tested for five years in Norwegian schools, and the scheme has drawn inspiration and knowledge from several other countries that have similar functions in their schools. In parallel with the piloting of the function, an experience-based master's degree for teacher specialists has also been offered. This education has been structured around three thematic pillars: vocational subjects, vocational didactics, and school development/organizational development. The education has been developed and carried out by an interdisciplinary team at the university.

The teacher specialists contribute to school development at their school and within their subject discipline. By being professionally updated on theory, research and new teaching methods, the intention is that they should be able to function as a local resource that builds a bridge between theory and practice, and between the management and other teachers at the school (Kringstad & Lønnum, 2021).

Research on school development often addresses questions related to knowledge, relations, and leadership/management for new teacher roles (Helstad & Mausethagen, 2019). Our analysis is based on these three dimensions as a theoretical framework.

The knowledge dimension is characterized by several factors. Lortie (1975) demonstrated that teachers continuously alternate between experience-based knowledge and theoretical and pedagogical knowledge. Traditionally, teachers have freedom to make their own choices of didactic and methodological approaches, and teachers often feel that their knowledge development is their own responsibility (Hopmann, 2015). The profession has been characterized by an egalitarian culture where all teachers have the same responsibility. However, teachers today experience an expectation of the use of evidence-based knowledge and that test results should be a basis for their teaching (Coburn & Talbert, 2006). This can lead to needs for new and more specialized roles.

The dimension of relations is mainly about how interaction develops in different contexts in the school, such as in classrooms and laboratories, amongst the teachers and in the entire school organisation. The principal has overall responsibility for the relationships at the school, but all teachers must contribute to develop the relationships with students and colleagues (Møller & Ottesen, 2011). It is important to focus on developing relationships to succeed with school development.

The dimension of leadership/management in school development includes giving directions, creating visions, and establishing relationships that support the work (Leithwood & Louis, 2012). Irgens (2013) claims that leadership is created in relations, when mutual trust characterizes the interaction between people, and we experience that others can be trusted. In this perspective, we see that power, trust and relationships are closely linked in the community. Accountability is also important in this dimension, where quality systems and indicators to promote students’ learning are developed (Helstad & Mausethagen, 2019). Traditionally, management has been linked to the principal as an individual. However, this is now regarded as a matter where more of the staff participate, with or without formal leadership positions. To succeed with school development, leaders must create conditions for professional learning communities where as many as possible contribute (Hargreaves & O’Connor, 2018; MacBeath et.al, 2018). They do not always succeed in this (Morud & Rokkones, 2020). The term distributed leadership is well established and refers to a practice where leadership is created and executed by people together (Spillane, 2006).

Based on these three dimensions, we have analysed our data material with the aim of identifying how the education has contributed to the teacher specialists' development and role performance. 

The study was conducted as a qualitative interview study with a phenomenological approach (Kvale, et al., 2015). It is based on interviews with eight vocational teachers who completed a three-year, part-time, experience-based master's education for teacher specialists in Building and construction. These eight teachers constitute the entire group who completed the education. They were interviewed seven months after submission of their master's thesis. The vocational teachers represent five different upper secondary schools in Norway, with a wide geographical and demographical spread. The study is part of the research project "Investigations into experiences with further education for vocational teachers", and the project has been registered with NSD . Four semi-structured interviews were conducted, where the vocational teachers were interviewed in pairs. In advance, we had developed an interview guide based on our knowledge of the field and topics we wanted to gain more insight into. Semi-structured interviews facilitate follow-up questions, exchange of views and reflection during the interview (Kvale et al., 2015). The interviews were done on Teams. Each interview lasted approximately 50 minutes. One of the interviews was conducted with all three researchers together, two of the interviews were conducted with two, and one interview was conducted by one researcher. When there were several interviewers, we had, in advance, allocated who would be responsible for the various questions. Audio recordings were made, and the interviews were subsequently transcribed and anonymized. The interviews were jointly analyzed by the researchers. We read through the transcripts and became familiar with the data material. Furthermore, the data set were coded while our approach to the coding were continuously discussed. The process has clear parallels to collective qualitative analysis, as Eggebø (2018) describes it. The coding cycle was carried out as an open coding process with an inductive approach (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). We found statements and quotes which we sorted and grouped into different codes. In the next level of analysis, the codes were sorted, and final categories were developed according to a thematic analysis process (Johannesen et al., p. 278 ff., 2018)

Through the analysis process, three categories were developed: i) academic benefit, ii) gain for the school and iii) the role of the school leadership. The findings show that the teachers have achieved a professional benefit which has been of great importance on several levels. The interaction between vocational and professional components is highlighted as important for the development of the individual's competence. The students' professional development has become important for their local schools, due to involvement of colleagues in work requirements and learning activities during the education. It is also clear that the school leadership's involvement is of decisive importance for the development of knowledge both for the individual and for the school as an organization. The findings are discussed based on three dimensions for new teacher and leadership roles (Hellstad & Mausethagen, 2019): knowledge, relations, and leadership/management. Considering the knowledge dimension, we see that the teacher specialists have improved their professional and assessment skills. They feel well prepared to take on greater professional challenges. As they have improved their sharing of knowledge with colleagues, they experience that all students at the school receive better teaching which contributes to increased motivation and mastery. In light of the relational dimension, we find that work requirements during the education, with expectations of involvement of colleagues, contributed to improvement of interdisciplinary collaboration at the schools. They take more responsibility for interaction between various actors in vocational training, and experience that this improves students' training. Through the leadership/management dimension, we find that the teacher specialists have gained greater impact at those schools led by a principal with clear strategies for distributed management. At other schools, where distributed leadership is not practiced, challenges are experienced related to contributing to school development.

Coburn, & Talbert, J. E. (2006). Conceptions of Evidence Use in School Districts: Mapping the Terrain. American Journal of Education, 112(4), 469–495. https://doi.org/10.1086/505056 Eggebø, H. (2020). Kollektiv kvalitativ analyse. Norsk Sosiologisk Tidsskrift, 4(2), 106–122. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.2535-2512-2020-02-03 Hargreaves, A. & O'Connor, M. (2018). Collaborative professionalism: When teaching together means learning for all. Corwin. Helstad, K. & Mausethagen, S. (2018). Nye lærer- og lederroller – nye vilkår for skoleutvikling? I K. Helstad & S. Mausethagen (Red.), Nye lærer- og lederroller i skolen (s. 13-28). Universitetsforlaget. Hopmann. (2015). 'Didaktik meets Curriculum' revisited: historical encounters, systematic experience, empirical limits. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 2015(1), 27007. https://doi.org/10.3402/nstep.v1.27007 Irgens, E. (2013). Utvikling av ledelsesformer i skolen. I G. Engvik, T. Hestbek, T.L. Hoel & M.B. Postholm (Edt.), Klasseledelse for elevers læring (p. 41-66). Akademika forlag. Johannessen, L., Rafoss, T. W. & Rasmussen, E. B. (2018). Hvordan bruke teori?: Nyttige verktøy i kvalitativ analyse. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Kvale, S., Brinkmann, S., Anderssen, T. & Rygge, J. (2015). Det kvalitative forskningsintervju. Oslo: Gyldendal akademisk. Leithwood, K. & Louis, K.S. (2012). Linking Leadership to Student Learning. Jossey-Bass. Lortie, D.C. (1975). Schoolteacher. A sociological study. University of Chicago Press. Lønnum, & Kringstad, T. (2021). Hvilke forhold påvirker lærerspesialistenes arbeid? En nærstudie av 25 logger skrevet av lærere på videreutdanning for lærerspesialister i norsk. Nordisk Tidsskrift for Utdanning og Praksis = Nordic journal of education and practice, 15(2), 19–35. https://doi.org/10.23865/up.v15.2549 MacBeath, J., Dempster, N., Frost, D., Johnson, G. & Swaffield, S. (2018). Strengthening the Connections between Leadership and Learning. Challenges to Policy, School and Classroom Practice. Routledge. Morud, & Rokkones. (2020). Deling av kunnskap og kompetanse er ingen selvfølge for deltakere i Yrkesfaglærerløftet. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.7577/sjvd.3776 Møller, J. & Ottesen, E. (2011). Rektor som leder og sjef – om styring, ledelse og kunnskapsutvikling I skolen. Universitetsforlaget. Spillane, J. P. (2006). Distributed leadership. Jossey-Bass. Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics and Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for developing Grounded Theory, 2nd edition. Sage Publications, Inc.