This paper analyses student teachers interaction in different contexts in a one year teacher education program at the University of Oslo. The analysis focuses on the way teacher students make meaning of conceptional resources while working with a case concerning diversity (among pupils) 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).

The 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 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 into 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?

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. 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. Fosse, B.O. (2011): Lærerstudenters innramming og forståelse av tilpasset opplæring . En studie av kollektive læringsprosesser i ulike kontekster ved en praktisk-pedagogisk lærerutdanning. Ph.D dissertation, University of Oslo, Norway. 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.