In Sweden, professional learning practices are going through transformative changes. Since the beginning of 2000 there has been a growth of so-called ‘close-to-practice research funders’, supporting practice-based research that also enhances professional learning through collaborative research and development. Another newly introduced change is a national professional development program built on university courses. These changes are supported by policymakers, universities and school owners (municipalities and private school companies) since they predict positive outcomes, although in different ways. Policymakers and school owners strive for research-informed school development and best practice evolvement on large scale. For universities, new areas for expansion open up when existing responsibility for pre-service teacher training expands to in-service education, and close-to-practice research provide new opportunities to fund research in and with schools. These new conditions create tensions in practice when different expectations manifest themselves through actors’ and stakeholders’ actions in the new landscape of professional learning and research (Jarl et al., 2025; McGeown & Sjölund, 2025). A case study of a new form of research institute will be presented to exemplify and problematize how these conditions are expressed in practice and how they contribute to system learning. School owners’ national organizations fund the institute and decide what knowledge and development areas to organize R&D-programs around. In every program, around 200-400 teachers, principals, development leaders and school directors from different municipalities/private school companies participate. Researchers with relevant research are connected to each program. I have been involved in two programs so far, from which I will use data and experiences in a critical, meta-reflective, action research self-study (Olin et al., 2020). The programs nurture practice-based research and research-informed school development to happen on a larger scale than both school actors and researchers have previously experienced. Professional learning happens on many levels at the same time in collaboration between researchers and practitioners. These conditions also shape constraints and tensions. The research becomes questioned if it doesn’t immediately lead to practice improvements. The role of researchers as critical friends becomes a challenge. Also, expectations vary in relation to what kind of knowledge production is desirable in relation to both professional learning and research. Hence, even though the new infrastructure for research-practice partnership may seem challenging in many ways, it also opens up new possibilities with promising prospects in sight. An over-arching question concerns what kind of learning comes out of these large-scale initiatives and how that will impact system learning outcomes.

Jarl, M., Liljenberg, M., Andersson, K., & Taube, M. (2025). The importance of organizational capacities for collaborative research: boundary crossings within a Swedish research–practice partnership. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 11(2), 107–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/20020317.2024.2369344 McGeown, S., & Sjölund, S. (2025). Research‐practice partnerships in education: Benefits, challenges, methodological considerations and key enablers for change. British Journal of Educational Psychology. DOI: 10.1111/bjep.12785 Olin A., Francisco S., Salo P., Pörn M., Karlberg-Granlund G. (2020). Collaborative Professional Learning for Changing Educational Practices. In: Mahon K., Edwards-Groves C., Francisco S., Kaukko M., Kemmis S., Petrie K. (eds) Pedagogy, Education, and Praxis in Critical Times (pp.141-162). Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6926-5_7