In the department BaSo of the University College Limburg teachers of secondary education are being trained to become reflective practitioners. However, based on feedback from external evaluators and an internal intervision group regarding student internships, this concept of the reflective practitioner needs more clarification for some faculty members. So the head of faculty has commissioned a research report which has two objectives. One it has to describe how research-driven the curriculum is and two it has to describe how the faculty members define research in teacher education.
As an outsider of the faculty, I was briefed about prior choices. The faculty had already chosen for a social constructivist approach and the staff were interested in practice-based research with a preference for action research, design research and ethnographic  methodologies.
Furthermore the scope of our research was defined between two books: Dit is onderzoek!/ This is Research! (Baarda, 2009) and Praktijkonderzoek in de school / Practice-based research within schools (Van der Donk & Van Lanen, 2009). They offer a rationale for this research project: a teacher needs to adopt a basic research stance which becomes visible in his seventh vocational competence (the ability to reflect and develop) (Kallenberge , 2007, quoted in Van der Donk & Van Lanen, 2009). This means a teacher has to continually question whether his praxis suits his students’ needs. He therefore needs to be curious, sensitive and reflective. The researcher/teacher should be curious which is defined as acknowledging you do not know something and eager to know it. Secondly, the teacher/researcher should be sensitive picking up signs of things which go wrong. Thirdly, the teacher/ researcher has to be willing to question his everyday, self-evident activities (Harinck, 2007 quoted in Van der Donk & Van Lanen, 2009). This self-reflection can be focused on their praxis, the vision on education and learning, and the codes they live by (Van Veen& Van de Ven, 2004 quoted in Van der Donk & Van Lanen, 2009). Finally, practice-based research should address problems teachers face; teachers should be able to implement its outcomes and it should improve the teacher’s profession  (Migchelbrink ,2008 quoted in Van der Donk & Van Lanen, 2009).
However, not every teacher perceives himself as a researcher. That is why we added Przybylska’s research indicating teachers predominantly see themselves as educators, teachers and carers rather than researchers or creators. On top of that they define these roles in a traditional way. So the educator is preoccupied with “forming personality, social competences, values and identity”. The teacher is still “the master”. The teacher dispenses knowledge, engages in “one-answer teaching”, and is “a source of information”. The carer creates  “ a safe environment” and deals with “disciplining” and “controlling” (Przybylska, 2011, p 24).
So our initial research questions are:
•    Which changes are based on research in our teacher training faculty?
•    Which methodologies do we use?
•    Which aspects of research are being taught?

Baarda, D. (2009). Dit is onderzoek! Groningen: Noordhoff Uitgevers. Ellis, C. (2004). The Ethnographic I. United Kingdom: AltaMira Press. Przybylska, I. (2011, volume 5, number 2). Teachers' perception of their roles. The Learning Teacher Journal , 15-32. Spinuzzi, C. (2005, volume 52, number 2). The Methodomogy of Participatory Design. Technical Communication , 163-174. Van Der Donk, C., & Van Lanen, B. (2009). Praktijkonderzoek in de school. Bussum: Uitgeverij Coutinho.