Session Information
10 SES 09 B, Research on Programmes and Pedagogical Approaches in Teacher Education
Paper Session
Contribution
This paper analysis student teachers interaction in different contexts in a one year teacher education program at the University of Oslo. The paper analyze the way teacher students make meaning of conceptional resources while working with a case concerning diversity at campus, and the way the same students make meaning of diversity while reflecting on their own teaching during their practice in school.
Bridging the learning between activities at campus and in school is a recurring problem in studies of teacher education (Darling-Hammond 2006).
This has led to policy reforms with intentions to bridging the gap between theory and practice. One central solution has been different kinds of partner ships between universities, colleges and practice schools (Darling-Hammond 2006). Since the mid-1990s there has been a growing effort in teacher education research to understand what and how teacher students learn from case methods (Grossman 2005).
In Norway the PLUTO project (2000-2003), was a national reform project that developed partnerships between university and practice schools by using case-based methods and collective learning processes. The idea was to cross borders focusing on knowledge for practice (jf. Cochran-Smith & Lytle 1999). My study is based on data collected during the PLUTO project.
This paper argues that despite the work with boundary crossing cases transforming concepts and knowledge appropriated at campus into reflection on teaching in schools is not at clear-cut/ easy matter.
Theoretical framework:
Sociocultural and dialogical theory offers one way to conceptualize the social construction of knowledge and to analyzing situated learning processes. By focusing on the participants meaning-making it is possible to explore what is talked about and how tools and sociocultural context are made part of their talk and action (Linell 2009).
We create meaning by interacting with others and the word. How we make meaning is strongly contextual (Vygotsky 1978, 2001, Wertsch 1998, Linell 2009). Key concepts in dialogical theory are interactivity, contextuality, semiotic mediation and moral and evaluative communicative construction (Linell 2009). Dialogues take place in and through words. The dialogical perspective implies that thinking and problem solving takes place in the world rather than in the individual brains. Therefore, in meaning-making there is interdependency between the activity, the persons involved, the contexts and the resources available.
This study also has focus on concept development, drawing on Vygotskys theories on scientific - and everyday language. Further on ‘appropriation’ (Wells 1999) and ‘meaning’ and ‘sense’ (Vygotsy 1978, 2001)
From this backdrop I raise the following research questions:
How do teacher students make meaning in the different contexts in teacher education? What tools or resources are available in the situations, and how are they used? How and when are the objects of the activity made an object of inquiry? How do the students transform knowledge appropriated at campus in to reflections on their own teaching during their practice in school?
Method
Expected Outcomes
References
Cochran-Smith, M. & Lytle, S. L. (1999): Relationships of Knowledge and Practice: Teacher Learning in Communities. I A. Iran-Nejad & P. D. Pearson (eds.): Review of research in education. American educational research association, Washington, DC. Cochran-Smith, M. & Fries, K. (2005): Researching Teacher Education in Changing Times: Politics and Paradigms. I M. Cochran-Smith & K. M. Zeichner (eds.): Studying Teacher Education. The Report of the AERA Panel on Research and Teacher Education. Lawrence Erlbaum Associate, Inc. USA. Darling-Hammond, L. (2008): ”The case for university-based teacher education” (1999). I M. Cochran-Smith, S. Feiman-Nemser, D. J. McIntyre & K. E. Demers (eds.): Handbook of research on teacher education. Enduring Questions in Changing Contexts. Routledge/Taylor & Francis group and the association of teacher educators. Grossman, P. (2005): Research on Pedagogical Approaches in Teacher Education. I M. Cochran-Smith & K. M. Zeichner (eds.): Studying Teacher Education. The Report of the AERA Panel on Research and Teacher Education. Lawrence Erlbaum Associate, Inc. USA. Jahreie, C. F. & Ottesen, E. (2010). Learning to become a teacher. Participation across spheres for learning. I V. Ellis A. Edward & Smagorinsky, P.(eds.), Cultural-Historical Perspectives on Teacher Education and Eevelopment. Learning Teaching. Routledge. Taylor & Francis Group Jordan, B. & Henderson, A. (1995): Interaction Analysis: Foundations and Practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4 (1): 39-103. Linell, P. (2009): Rethinking Language, Mind, and World Dialogically. Interactional and Contextual Theories of Human Sense-Making. Information Age Publishing, Inc. Charlotte, NC. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978): Mind in Society. The development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Vygotsky, L. S. (2001): Tenkning og tale. Gyldendal Akademisk. Wells, G. (1999): Dialogic Inquiry Toward a sociocultural Practice and Theory of Education. Cambridge University Press. Wertsch, J. V. (1998): Mind as Action. New York: Oxford University Press.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.