Shulman’s (1987) theorizing of the pedagogical content knowledge is important in analyzing the teacher learning in different domain areas. It contains content knowledge, knowledge of educational goals and purposes (curriculum), and knowledge of teaching methods and didactics. This model is, however, not sufficient in explaining teacher behavior in the classroom. What the lessons in the actual school situations are, depend on several contextual, situational and autobiographical factors (Ropo 2004 and 2009, Connelly & al. 1997; Meijer & al. 1999, Sotto 1994, Grossman, 1995).

Based on earlier research (Yrjänäinen 2011) the paper applies the so-called “DAP” (discourse, affordance, positioning) model formulated for the purpose of describing the teacher’s professional practical capabilities in the context. A human being’s capacity of action consists of ethical, moral, physical, psychological and social factors. Some of these factors arise from the upbringing people receive, with a direct relation to the relevant autobiographical processes, while others can be influenced by education. Activities taking place within a variety of discourses are connected with interpretations, searching and attaching values, as well as choices. In a multiplicity of situations and environments, affordances allow action. In keeping with affordances, a discourse involves positioning oneself in relation to other people along with the action that arises from the positions. (Yrjänäinen 2011.)

Classroom activities consist of discourses (D). The word "discourse" is a shorthand for "discursive formation," which is what Foucault (1972) called communication that involves specialized knowledge of various kinds. Discourse is controlled by objects, what can be spoken of; ritual, where and how one may speak; and the privileged, who may speak (Foucault 1977, 1980, 2003). A lesson in a classroom is connected with a variety of discourses, e.g. science, the subject matter, teaching, learning and the curriculum.

Human behavior is affected by affordances (A). Tanner and Jones (2002) defined an affordance as “a potential for action, the capacity of an environment or object to enable the intentions of the student within a particular problem situation”. (cf. Gibson 1977, 1979, Norman 1990). In the lesson situations the most important affordances, in which teachers either paid attention or omitted partly or totally, were e.g. students’ questions and answers to the teacher’s questions, students’ talk to each other, equipment for presenting and showing different phenomena.  

Positioning (P) is understood in this paper as a discursive concept. It refers to communication strategies a student applies towards a partner of a discourse.  It is sometimes described as a role that the teacher and the student takes in a specific situation but it is more dynamic and varying (see Davies and Harré 1990). Positioning is not, however, possible without perception of affordances in the discursive situations.

The research questions were the following:

a)      How did the teachers apply the DAP model in their lesson plans?

b)      What kind of conceptions and meanings teachers had about the model?

c)      How did the students describe the lessons applying the DAP model?

Berry, K. S. 2006. Research as Bricolage. Embracing Relationality, Multiplicity and Complexity. In Tobin, K. and kincheloe, J. (Eds). Doing Educational Research. A Handbook. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Pp. 87-115. Davies, B. and Harré, R. 1990. 'Positioning: The Discursive Production of Selves.' Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 20 (1), 43-63. Rpt. w modifications as Ch. 3 in Harré andvan Langenhove (eds). Positioning Theory: Moral Contexts of Intentional Action. Malden: Blackwell. Foucault, Michel. 1969. The Archaeology of Knowledge. Trans. A. M. Sheridan Smith. London and New York: Routledge, 2002. Gibson, J.J. 1977. The Theory of Affordances. In Perceiving, Acting, and Knowing, Eds. Robert Shaw and John Bransford. Hillsdale, N.J. Erlbaum. Grossman, P.L. 1995. Teachers’ knowledge. In Anderson & W. Lorin (Eds.), International encyclopedia of teaching and teacher Education. Oxford: Pergamon. pp. 20-24 Meijer, P.C. Verloop, N., & Beijaard, D. 1999. Exploring language teachers’ practical knowledge about teaching reading comprehension. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 59-84. Ropo, E. 2004. Teaching expertise: empirical findings on expert teachers and teacher development. In H.P.A. Boshuizen, R. Bromme, & H. Gruber (Eds.) Professional learning: Gaps and transitions on the way from novice to expert, 1-16. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Sotto, E. 1994. When teaching becomes learning. A theory and practice of teaching. London: Cassell. Tanner, H., & Jones, S. 2000. Using ICT to support interactive teaching and learning on a secondary mathematics PGCE course. Proceedings of the 2000 annual conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Sydney. from http://www.aare.edu.au/00pap/tan00226.htm Yrjänäinen , S. 2011. “Onks meistä tähän?” (“But, really, are we the right sort of people for this?” The Puzzle os Subject Teacher Education and the Teacher Student ‘s Professional Practical Capalities, Dissertation thesis, abstract in english). Acta Universitatis Tamperensis; 1586, Tampere University Press, Tampere.