Research-based Teacher Education: Finnish lgegruppen for lærerutdanningen (FFL... · PDF fileHigher Education ! Universities ! ... Conklin, 2010; Lunenberg, et al., 2007; ... Estonia:

www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto

Research-based Teacher Education: Finnish Perspective

Auli Toom, PhD, Adj.Prof. March 19th, 2013

19.3.2012 1 Auli Toom


§  The characteristics of research-based teacher education in Finland

§  The definition of research-based TE

§  The reasons and justifications behind the research-based TE programme

§  The students’ and teacher educators’ experiences of research-based teacher education

§  The effects of research-based teacher education for teachers

§  Challenges in developing research-based teacher education in the future

§  Reflections about the TE development process in Norway

Introduction

Auli Toom


§ independent since 1917, member of the European Union since 1995 § total area 338,000 km2, population 5.4 million (15,7 inhabitants / km2) §  two official languages: Finnish (91%), Swedish (5,4%) Sámi (0,03%) § Lutheran (78,3 %), Orthodox (1,1%) § immigrants: 4,8 % of population

Finland


The wide international interest towards Finnish schooling system §  PISA results (e.g. Reinikainen, 2012) §  The secrets of Finnish comprehensive school (Simola, 2005; Sahlberg,

2011) §  The specific characteristics of Finnish research-based teacher

education (Kansanen 1993, 2007; Niemi, 2012) Current viewpoints and teacher’s responsibilities (e.g. Toom & Husu, 2012) §  High goals and contents of national core curriculum (Vitikka et al., 2012) §  Pupils’ welfare and educational equity (Soini et al., 2010; Pyhältö et al.,

2011) §  Pupils with needs of special education (Hautamäki et al., 2000; Jakku-

Sihvonen, 2002) §  Multicultural issues (Paavola & Talib, 2010) à the relevance of Finnish (pre-service and in-service) teacher education?

Orientation

Auli Toom


§  In Finland, teacher education was placed to university context in 1979 (Koskenniemi, 1968; Lahdes, 1989; Kansanen, 1992)

§  The degree and curriculum were designed according to academic requirements: education as major subject, minor subjects, theses (BA, MA), practice periods, general studies (Hytönen, 1982; Jakku-Sihvonen & Niemi, 2006)

§  Research-based activities in university teaching and learning can include various kinds of activities (Healey, 2005; Kansanen, 2005; Elen, Lindblom-Ylänne & Clement, 2007; Goedhart, Finlayson & Lindblom-Ylänne, 2009)

§  Research-led curriculum

§  Research-oriented curriculum

§  Research-based curriculum

§  Evidence-based teaching

Research-based teacher education at the academic university context

25.3.2013 Auli Toom 5

D E D U C T I V E

I N D U C T I V E

I N T

U I

T I V

E

Research-based

Problem based, case approach

School based

Experiential, personal

Pedagogical thinking

The

way

of o

rgan

izin

g ac

tiviti

es

Different teacher education programmes (Kansanen, 2005)

R A T I O

N A L


PRACTISING TEACHING –TEACHER AS PRACTITIONER

PRACTISING RESEARCHING – TEACHER AS ACADEMIC

everyday thinking skills-based teaching teaching recipes, routines, tips

GENERAL LEVEL

metacognition reflection pedagogical thinking

producing research expertise

Making pedagogical decisions Inquiring one’s own work

RESEARCH-BASED TEACHER EDUCATION

(Krokfors et al., 2006)

adaptation consuming research knowledge-based

Two levels of research-based teacher education - the characteristics of twofold practice

Auli Toom

BASIC LEVEL


§  Every study unit connected with research: the conceptualization of practice

§  Overall competence of research methods: “All are known generally, one is known specifically.” §  Continuous courses of research methods: quantitative methods – qualitative methods §  Master’s thesis

§  Teachers as practitioner researchers §  Producer of the research: ability to conduct the research §  Consumer of the research: ability to understand and use research

results and information in own work

§  Direct access to doctoral studies (Kansanen, 2005; Hytönen, 1982)

Research-based approach in the practice of teacher education

Auli Toom


Understanding of the research-based approach: four dimensions (Toom et al., 2008)

Four dimensions I The context – Academic teacher education §  the special higher education context

§  the principles of organising academic studies

II The approach – Main organising theme of teacher education §  a general view of teacher education

§  a commitment

§  a profile of the department


Understanding of the research-based approach (cont.)

III The content – Curriculum of teacher education §  Educational theory, methodology and methods, BA and MA theses

§  The importance of methodological studies

§  Consumers and producers of educational research

‘We are not producing researchers’.

IV The aim – Teacher’s pedagogical thinking §  To develop students’ critical thought processes

§  To educate teachers who have an inquiring attitude towards their work

§  To educate teacher’s with professional confidence and agency


§  Students’ appreciation of research-based TE

§  Pedagogical content knowledge §  Theses (BA; MA), research seminar and research methods

§  Teaching practice periods and ways of supervision

§  Studies of educational theory and other studies of education

à Student teachers appreciate the research-based approach in TE

Students’ viewpoints to research-based teacher education (Byman et al., 2009)

25.3.2013 11


§  Students’ experienced implementation of the research-based approach in teacher education

§  was ranked lower than the attitudes towards the approach §  research-based approach in pedagogical content knowledge

courses and practicums was criticized

§  the students expected more scholarly argumentation, teaching based on research results, and an atmosphere of serious academic studies, a sort of feeling of being at university

à There is potential and willingness among the student teachers to increase the research-based approach at the everyday level of the courses

Students’ viewpoints to research-based teacher education (Byman et al., 2009)

25.3.2013 12


From the levels of research-based teacher education to pedagogically thinking teachers

EVERYDAY ACTION

Theories models

GUIDING PRINCIPLE – GENERAL IDEA

CONCEPTUALISATION OF ACTION

Research-based approach

Teaching

Evaluating Planning

SCIENCE OF EDUCATION

THEORETICAL KNOWLEDGE BASE OF TEACHING

ACADEMIC

EXPERTISE

PRACTICAL KNOWLEDGE PROFESSIONAL SKILLS OF TEACHING

THEORY – PRACTICE INTERACTION

(Kansanen, 1993; Krokfors, 2005)


TEACHER EDUCATION

The relationship between comprehensive school and TE

FINNISH SOCIETY

diversity – economic issues – support for education

COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOL

curricular demands – needs for special education – multiculturalism – pedagogical challenges

CIVILIZED CITIZEN humanity – ethical responsibility – zest for life


The structure of the Finnish educational

system

Higher Education §  Universities

§  Polytechnics

Upper Secondary Education

§  General Upper Secondary §  Vocational Education

Basic Education

Pre-School Education


Basic Education Act

General goals and time allocation (Council of State decree)

The national core curriculum of basic education

(Finnish National Board of Education)

Educational resources

(Publishers)

Local curriculum (Municipalities and schools)

Teacher education

(Universities)

Teaching and education

Steering system of basic education in Finland

(Vitikka et al., 2012) Auli Toom


§  An administrative document §  Part of the national steering system of education

§  Part of the international co-operation and development

§  An intellectual document

§  Defines and recreates knowledge that is culturally significant

§  Reveals current conceptions of knowledge

§  A pedagogical document §  A tool for teachers

§  Provides pedagogical advice and support

§  Sets guidelines for teaching and learning

The central role of the Finnish national core curriculum (Vitikka, 2004; Vitikka et al., 2012)

17 Auli Toom


§  Broad pedagogical freedom and responsibility (e.g. Toom & Husu, 2012)

§  Academic master level teacher education

§  Autonomy as pedagogical professional

§  Pedagogical thinking and research orientation towards teacher’s work

§  Pedagogical expert in classroom following the general aims and goals of teaching and education at schools

§  Equal and democratic relationship with pupils (National Core Curriculum, 2004; Harjunen, 2009) §  Construction of the local curriculum on school level §  Creation of supportive learning environment promoting interaction

§  Interaction with community and society

Finnish teachers as makers of the many

18 Auli Toom


Finnish teachers’ role requirements (cf. Buchmann, 1986; Beck, 2008; Husu & Toom, 2008; Toom & Husu, 2012)

§  Organising classroom activities, selecting the teaching methods and materials in line with local curriculum

§  Supporting each pupils’ full potentiality and caring of them pedagogically (Husu & Tirri, 2007; Husu, 2002)

§  Pedagogical collaboration with colleagues and multi-professional groups Finnish teachers’ personal characteristics and qualities §  Reflective approach towards teacher’s work (Kansanen et al., 2000;

Niemi, 1998; Husu, Toom & Patrikainen, 2008) §  Realisation of one’s own strengths and professional identity as teacher

(e.g. Kumpulainen, Toom & Saalasti, 2010, 2012) §  Strong commitment to teacher’s profession (Niemi, 2011)

Teachers’ responsible pedagogical action

19 Auli Toom


§  We know about the structures and curricula of TE in Finland, but not so much about the learning process of student teachers during TE à need for research §  Example: From Student Teacher to Experienced Teacher:

Learning an Active Professional Agency (Academy of Finland, 2012-2016)

§  We apply certain pedagogies in TE which affects on student teacher learning à we need to research on and develop it

§  Example: Supporting student teachers’ action-oriented knowledge construction – ACTTEA (EU, 2012-2015)

§  Changes at school à changes in TE

§  The development of systematic in-service TE in Finland

Challenges for developing the research-based TE in the future

25.3.2013 20


§  The development of professional agency should be supported already during teacher education in order to guarantee its continuity in professional practice of teachers.

§  Pedagogical practices of teacher education should provide

§  adequate opportunities for student teachers to actively participate and engage in pedagogical practices (Lunenberg, et al., 2005), and

§  offer an arena for student teachers to carry out active, mindful and responsible authorship during teacher education (Turnbull, 2005).

§  The challenges for promoting professional agency in teacher education have been identified, but little is known empirically about its development during teacher education (Zeichner, 2005; Zeichner & Conklin, 2010; Lunenberg, et al., 2007; Toom et al., 2010).

Supporting the development of professional agency during TE

25.3.2013 21


§  The research project focuses on teacher learning, learning of professional agency and regulators of professional agency in teacher education and in various professional contexts

§  Multi-method, longitudinal study (surveys, videos, interviews) §  Participants: three teacher cohorts: first year student teachers (class

teacher, subject teacher, special education), teachers in the induction phase (in the last year of studies and 2 first years at work), experienced teachers

§  The benefits of research project for teacher education

§  Research results on teacher learning and its regulators in various contexts and teacher’s professional phases, especially in transfers

§  Helps in identifying various learning patterns, resources and challenges of learning and teaching

§  Research results about the impact of teacher education for student teacher learning and professional agency

§  Researchers: Kirsi Pyhältö (HU), Auli Toom (HU), Janne Pietarinen

(UEF) & Tiina Soini (TaU)

From Student Teacher to Experienced Teacher: Learning an Active Professional Agency (Academy of Finland, 2012-2016)


§  Development and research project focusing on student teacher learning and reflection in practice periods of teacher education

§  Starting points: §  What knowledge student teachers find useful in their teaching? à

action-oriented knowledge (Mena Marcos, 2011, 2012) §  How can we find it? à the procedure of guided reflection (Husu &

Toom, 2007, 2008, 2009) §  What we are going to do? à video-recordings of student teachers’

lessons, lesson analyses à international video library §  We aim to develop new pedagogies in teacher education

Participants: §  University of Tartu, Estonia: Docent Äli Leijen, Docent Margus

Pedaste, Professor Edgar Krull §  University of Helsinki, Finland: Docent Auli Toom §  University of Turku, Finland: Professor Jukka Husu §  University of Salamanca, Spain: Ass. Prof. Juan Jose Mena Marcos §  University of Utrecht, The Netherlands: Prof. Paulien Meijer

Supporting student teachers’ action-oriented knowledge construction – ACTTEA (EU, 2012-2015)


The procedure of video-guided supervision during teaching practice in TE (ACTTEA 2012-2015)

Auli Toom - ACTTEA 2012-2015

max 2 days

WRITTEN REFLECTION IN POFO/REPORT

max 1 week

What happens in this incident?

Why is this incident important and meaningful?

What is the more general

meaning of this incident in a wider context?

At the end

Auli Toom - ACTTEA 2012-2015

VIDEOTAPED LESSON

Classroom

events

VIDEOTAPING Done by student

teacher at classroom

Focus on teacher’s

action

Incident

Incident

Incident

Incident

INDEPENDENT REFLECTION

2 CRITICAL INCIDENTS: Positive, empowering Challenging, difficult

Classroom events chosen by the student teacher according to her/

his aims for teaching practice

A) INDEPENDENT REFLECTION or

B) PEER REFLECTION

What happens in this incident?

Why is this incident important and meaningful?

How has this incident affected to your thinking and actions?

What is the more general

meaning of this incident in a wider context?

What will you do

with that you have understood?

What happens during the lesson?

What are the

most important incidents (2) for you during the

lesson? Why?


§  Description of practice – practice is viewed as it is (What can I see? What is under the surface? What do I interpret from practice? What can I learn?)

§  Analysis of practice – practice is put into pieces (Which are the essential elements of practice? What do I observe and understand? What can I learn?)

§  Language of practice – the wholeness and pieces of practice are discussed (Which concepts do I use? What are the elements of practice? What kind of structures of practice can I see? What can I learn?)

§  Evaluation of practice – the elements and processes of practice are discussed (What is the most essential element of practice? Where should I focus in the wholeness? What can I learn? What can I apply in my own work as teacher?)

Teaching of practice in teacher education (Grossman, 2007)


§  Really ambitious, systematic, thorough and well done work

§  Research-based development work

§  Quantitative and qualitative empirical data from all the actors in TE

§  Site visits; specific characteristics of each institute

§  Analyses of teacher education curricula along the specific criteria

§  Comparison of the curricula, various profiles of the institutes

§  Analyses of the quality of learning environment in TE

§  Analysis and reflection on the importance of teaching practice

§  Recommendations for the changes based on the data

§  How will you continue the systematic research on TE after the actual development and change process?

Reflections about the TE development process in Norway

25.3.2013 26


§  Recruitment of students to teacher education

§  What kind of academic entrance exam is used?

§  What are the criteria for selection?

§  General “core curriculum” for teacher education

§  What are the major guidelines or organising theme of TE curriculum?

§  What are the aims, core contents, pedagogy and ways of assessment?

§  What kind of specific characteristics of institutions are possible within this framework?

§  Relevance of TE to teacher’s work

§  How well does the TE serve the needs of teacher’s real work?

§  Do the teachers stay in teacher’s work? What kind of feedback do the professional teachers give?

Reflections about the TE development process in Norway

25.3.2013 27


§  Design of the TE programme is always a part of the educational system in a certain context

§  It should serve both the immediate and future needs set for teachers and education

§  Systematic and research-based development of TE is recommended

§  Continuous work and negotiations with teacher educators, researchers, students, representatives from schools, policy makers, surrounding society

§  Hope for a better society and individual life §  Education as a resource of hope (cf. Amsler, 2009; Sahlberg, 2007) §  Brighter individual and societal futures through education

Conclusions

25.3.2013 28


THANK YOU!

For further information, please contact Dr., Adj.Prof. Auli Toom ([email protected])

29


Ahonen, S. (2000b). What happens to the common school in the market? Journal of Curriculum Studies, 33(4), 483-493.

Ahonen, S. (2003). Yhteinen koulu: tasa-arvoa vai tasapäisyyttä? [Common school: equal or even?]. Tampere: Vastapaino.

Amsler. (2009). Promising futures: Education as a resource of hope in post-socialist society. Europe-Asia Studies, 61(7), 1189-1206.

Beck, S. (2008). The teacher’s role and approaches in a knowledge society. Cambridge Journal of Education, 38(4), 465-481.

Buchmann, M. (1986). Role over person: Morality and authenticity in teaching. Teachers College Record, 87(4), 529-543.

Elen, J., Lindblom-Ylänne, S. & Clement, M. (2007). Faculty development in research-intensive universities - The role of academics’ conceptions on the relationship between research and teaching. International Journal for Academic Development, 12 (2), 123–139.

Goedhart, M., Finlayson, O. & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2009). Research-based teaching in higher level chemistry education. In I. Eilks & B. Byers (Eds): Innovative methods of teaching and learning chemistry in higher education. London, UK: RSC Publishing. ISBN 978-1-84755-958-6, pp. 61-84.

Hargreaves, A. (1998). The emotional politics of teaching and teacher development: With implications for educational leadership. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1(3), 315-336.

Harjunen, E. (2009). How do teachers view their own pedagogical authority? Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 15(1), 109-129.

Hautamäki, J., Arinen, P., Hautamäki, A., Ikonen-Varila, L., Kupiainen, S., Lindblom, B., et al. (2000). Oppimaan Oppiminen Yläasteella. [Learning to Learn at Upper Level of Comprehensive School]. Oppimistulosten arviointi 7/2000. Helsinki: Opetushallitus.

Healey, M. (2005). Linking research and teaching: Exploring discilinary spaces and the role of inquiry-based learning. In R. Barnett (Ed.), Reshaping the university: New relations between research, scholarship and teaching (pp. 67-78). Poland: Society for Research into Higher Education and the Open University Press.

Husu, J. (2002). Representing the Practice of Teachers’ Pedagogical Knowing. Research in Educational Sciences 9. Turku: Finnish Educational Research Association

Husu, J., & Tirri, K. (2007). Developing whole school pedagogical values - A case of going through the ethos of good schooling. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(4), 39-401.

Husu, J., & Toom, A. (2010). Opettaminen neuvotteluna – oppiminen osallisuutena: Opettajuus demokraattisena professiona [Teaching as negotiation – learning as participation: Teacher work as democratic profession]. In A. Kallioniemi, A. Toom, M. Ubani, & H. Linnansaari (Eds.), Akateeminen Luokanopettajakoulutus: 30 Vuotta Teoriaa, Käytäntöä ja Maistereita [Academic Class Teacher Education: 30 Years of Theory, Practice and Masters] (pp. 133–147). Research in Educational Sciences 52. Turku: Finnish Educational Research Association.

Husu, J., Toom, A., & Patrikainen, S. (2008). Guided reflection as a means to demonstrate and develop student teachers’ reflective competencies. Reflective Practice, 9(1), 37–51.

Jakku-Sihvonen, R. (2002). Main results of the assessments concerning primary and secondary education between 1995 and 2002. In R. Jakku-Sihvonen (Ed.), Evaluation and Outcomes in Finland Main Results in 1995-2002 (pp. 11–27). Evaluation 10/2002. Helsinki: National Board of Education.

References

Auli Toom 30


Kansanen, P. (1993). Outlining a model of teacher’s pedagogical thinking. Discussions on some pedagogical issues. University of Helsinki: Department of Teacher Education.

Kansanen, P. et al. (2000). Teachers’ pedagogical thinking: Theoretical landscapes, practical challenges. New York: Peter Lang.

Kumpulainen, K., Toom, A. & Saalasti, M. (2009). Video as a cultural landscape for reflection and identity work in teacher education. In M. César, & K. Kumpulainen (Eds.), Social interactions in multicultural settings (pp. 349–375). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

Kumpulainen, K., Toom, A. & Saalasti, M. (2012). Video as a potential resource for student teachers’ agency work. In E. Hjörne, G. van der Aalsvoort & G. de Abreu & (Eds.), Learning, social interaction and diversity – exploring school practices (pp. 169-187). Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei: Sense Publishers.

National Core Curriculum in Finland (2004). Helsinki: Finnish National Board of Education.

Niemi, H. (2011). Educating student teachers to become high quality professionals – a Finnish case. CEPS Journal, 1(1), 43–66.

Niemi, H. (2012). The societal factors contributing to education and schooling in Finland. In H. Niemi, A. Toom & A. Kallioniemi (Eds.), Miracle of Education: The principles and practices of teaching and learning in Finnish schools (pp. 19-38). Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei: Sense Publishers.

Pyhältö, K., Soini, T., & Pietarinen, J. (2011). A systemic perspective on school reform: Principals' and chief education officers’ perspectives on school development. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(1), 46–61.

Reinikainen, P. (2012). Amazing PISA results in Finnish comprehensive schools. In H. Niemi, A. Toom & A. Kallioniemi (Eds.), Miracle of Education: The principles and practices of teaching and learning in Finnish schools (pp. 3-18). Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei: Sense Publishers.

Renner, A., & Brow, M. (2006). A hopeful curriculum: Community, praxis, and courage. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 22(2), 101–122.

Sahlberg, P. (2011). Finnish lessons: What can the world learn from educational change in Finland. Columbia University: Teachers College Press.

Simola, H. (2005). The Finnish miracle of PISA: Historical and sociological remarks on teaching and teacher education. Comparative Education, 41(4), 455–470.

Soini, T., Pyhältö, K., & Pietarinen, J. (2010). Pedagogical well-being: Reflecting learning and well-being in teachers’ work. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 16(6), 735–751.

Toom, A. & Husu, J. (2012). Finnish teachers as ‘makers of the many’: Balancing between broad pedagogical freedom and responsibility. In H. Niemi, A. Toom & A. Kallioniemi (Eds.), Miracle of Education: The principles and practices of teaching and learning in Finnish schools (pp. 39-54). Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei: Sense Publishers.

Troman, G. (2000). Teacher stress in the low-trust society. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 21(3), 331-353.

Vitikka, E., Hurmerinta, E. & Krokfors, L. (2012). The Finnish National Core Curriculum: Structure and development. In H. Niemi, A. Toom & A. Kallioniemi (Eds.), Miracle of Education: The principles and practices of teaching and learning in Finnish schools (pp. 83-96). Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei: Sense Publishers.

References

Auli Toom 31

Documents

Research-based Teacher Education: Finnish lgegruppen for lærerutdanningen (FFL... · PDF fileHigher Education ! Universities ! ... Conklin, 2010; Lunenberg, et al., 2007; ... Estonia: