Pedagogiska meriteringsmodeller har inrättats vid ett flertal svenska lärosäten, men många tvekar eller är negativt inställda. I detta kapitel analyserar vi de olika argument som vi uppfattar förs fram emot att inrätta sådana modeller. Vi resonerar kring själva syftet med pedagogiska meriteringsmodeller, hur syftet förhåller sig till forskning om motivation och identifierar sex incitament som vi menar kan fungera som drivkrafter för pedagogisk utveckling. Avslutningsvis ges exempel på aktiviteter vid Stockholms universitet som är tänkta att bistå lärarnas och lärosätets pedagogiska utveckling. Utifrån de sex incitamenten jämför vi i vilken mån dessa aktiviteter kan tänkas stå sig i relation till en möjlig pedagogisk meriteringsmodell. Vår slutsats är att man kan nå flera incitament utan pedagogisk meriteringsmodell, men att en sådan kan bidra till att fler av dem nås på ett mer systematiskt sätt. Vi noterar också att det kan finnas risker med för stort fokus på yttre motivation i relation till pedagogisk utveckling.

This study reports findings from an interview study with eleven teacher educators from a physics teacher training program in Finland. They represented the four training environments that students encounter during their education, i.e. the Department of Physics, the Department of Mathematics and Science Education, the Department of General Pedagogy, and the Training School. Drawing on Gee’s theory of figured worlds, our analysis shows that the educators across the four training environments largely maintain the same vision of what the attributes of a “good” physics teacher are. Although working in different settings, the eleven educators appear to be working in concert, each contributing to the development of an agreed professional physics teacher identity for their trainees. The ideal physics teacher was found to be envisioned in terms of a subject expert and a research-based educationalist, whilst at the same time being psychologically fully matured and willing to develop as both a person and a teacher. We identify a number of factors in the Finnish teacher training program that are suggested to contribute to the coherence found. Some of the factors we identify are specific to the Finnish situation, such as teacher status in society, whilst others could potentially be implemented elsewhere, such as dedicated training schools and direct teacher influence in the design of the curriculum.

In this article, the methodological meaning of listening will be explored as an ethical-existential heeding. Grounded in an understanding of listening as a matter of heeding, I present a framework founded on Martin Buber’s dialogical philosophy entitled Calling and Responding, in which human being’s relation to the world is conceptualised as a process of paying heed to a summons from the Other – followed by a responsible response to that summons – and in turn calling the Other. Such an understanding of the interactions in-between self and the Other is based on the premise that one has an auditory disposition when perceiving and dealing with the world. I elaborate the Buberian foundation of the concepts comprising the framework, clarify the method of philosophical conceptualisation, and present practical examples from the context of pedagogical relations.

What does it mean to feel passionately for the subject one teaches? What does such a passion entail for those involved in the teaching–learning situation? This study focuses on the teacher’s passion for their subject. Nine scholarly texts were reviewed, which allowed for four distinct notions of passion to be discerned: i.e., romantic, friendly, erotic, and divine love. Findings showed also combinations of these notions as well as ontological variations. Inductively created themes revealed that the foundations of these different notions of passion ranged from love of the Truth and the Good to a calling from the subject, and that the character of these notions ranged from them being about intellectual and emotional allure to being about their being disclosed and brought to fulfilment. It also revealed what the different notions of love entailed for the teacher, the student, and the subject itself: for the teacher—from a demand to seek the good in the subject to a requirement to perceive the subject as a voice, the subject in turn making their life meaningful; for the student—from becoming part of the community of “we who love subject X” to a “homecoming of self-hood”; and for the subject itself—from beginning to reveal itself to holding teachers and students accountable. The usefulness of the findings for teacher education and research on teacher–student relations is discussed. 

I sessionen presenteras en studie där elva lärarutbildare vid en finsk fysiklärarutbildning intervjuats. Lärarutbildarna representerar de fyra kontexter som fysiklärarstudenten möter under sin utbildning: Fysikinstitutionen, Institutionen för naturvetenskapernas och matematikämnets didaktik, Pedagogiska institutionen och Övningsskolan. Studien är en del av ett VR-projekt där de olika föreställningar av “den gode fysikläraren” som kommuniceras till fysiklärarstudenter i fyra olika länder - Sverige, England, Singapore och Finland - kommer att jämföras.

Resultaten visar att de fyra utbildningskontexterna i stort sett förmedlar samma idealbild av ”en god fysiklärare” till sina lärarstudenter. Inom ramen för Furuhagen, Holmén & Sänttis (2019) konceptualisering ”Visions of the ideal teacher” visar studien att lärarutbildarna leds av företällningen om “den goda fysikläraren" som “a research-based educationalist” men också som “a psychologically fully matured professional" och “a subject expert.Resultaten visar att lärarutbildarna vid de fyra olika utbildningskontexterna i samstämmighet strävar mot samma idealbild av den goda fysikläraren där var och en bidrar med sin specifika del av studentens kompetens, och med ömsesidig tillit till att de andra utbildningskontexterna bidrar med sin specifika del.

Resultatet står i motsättning till fynden i projektets studie av en svensk fysiklärarutbildning, där man istället fann fyra konkurrerande idealbilder av den gode fysikläraren (Larsson, Airey, Danielsson & Lundqvist, 2018).

Vad händer om man anlägger ett dialogfilosofiskt perspektiv på didaktiska relationer? Vilka aspekter av relationen mellan läraren och studenten får man syn på då? Eller mellan studenten och det ämne hon studerar, alltså själva lärandeprocessen? Och hur kan vi i så fall tänka ifråga om relationen mellan läraren och det ämne hon beforskar och undervisar i? I den här presentationen utvecklas den didaktiska triangelns tre relationer inom ramen för en konception som utarbetats med utgångspunkt i Martin Bubers dialogfilosofi (1993a; 1993b; 1994).

Konceptionen till-tal och an-svar bygger på att människans tillvaro karaktäriseras som en existentiell dialog där man blir tilltalad av sina existensupplevelser och svarar an på detta till-tal i sina existensframträdanden. Genom att begreppslägga relationen mellan läraren och studenten, mellan studenten och stoffet och mellan läraren/forskaren och ämnet som en fråga om till-tal och an-svar framträder andra dimensioner som exempelvis kognitivistiska och sociala perspektiv på lärande inte uppmärksammar.

I presentationen utvecklas de dimensioner som framträder ur konceptualiseringen till-tal och an-svar. Såsom sammanhållet koncept rymmer till-tal och an-svar båda delar av det kallelse-koncept som enligt Cecilia Nahnfeldt (2006) kommit att schabloniseras som ett kvinnligt ”till-tal” som står för modrande, lydnad och anpassning och ett manligt ”an-svar” som står för ansvar, trofasthet och företagsamhet. När detta utläggs som en process framträder dimensionerna som en fråga om att hörsamma – an-svara – till-tala. I lärarens relation till studenten kan detta förstås som en fråga om att läraren är sann/äkta och står till studentens tjänst på ett sätt som är avpassat studentens svårigheter eller styrkor, att hon tar ansvar för att stötta studentens lärande genom att utöva kärleksfull ledning och att hon utmanar studenten genom att våga engagera sig och provocera studenten med nya perspektiv, kunskaper och uppgifter (Jons 2008). Vilka dimensioner framträder då när relationen mellan studenten och stoffet begreppsläggs inom ramen för till-tal och an-svars-konceptet, alltså, med andra ord, när lärande förstås om en existentiell dialog i form av till-tal och an-svar mellan studenten och stoffet (Jons 2014)? Och, slutligen, om vi försöker tänka forskning och undervisning som en fråga om att vi som forskare och lärare i hörsammar, an-svarar och till-talar vårt ämne? Presentationen utvecklar dessa aspekter och diskuterar konsekvenserna av de dimensioner som framträder när didaktiska relationer begreppsläggs på dialogfilosofisk grund.

I boken Towards a Pedagogy of Higher Education. The Bologna Process, Didaktik and Teaching formulerar Gunnlaugur Magnússon och Johannes Rytzler en teori om undervisning i högre utbildning som vilar på utbildningsvetenskaplig grund. De vill med detta erbjuda ett alternativ till den, som de karaktäriserar det, hegemoniska och ideologiska diskurs som pådriven av Bolognaprocessens utbildningspolitik och -policy kommit att handla om  fördefinierade lärandemål, konstruktiv länkning mellan lärandeaktiviteter och lärandemål samt studentcentrering grundlagd i konstruktivistisk lärandeteori. Med hjälp av policyanalys, pedagogisk filosofi och didaktisk teori belyser Magnússon och Rytzler konsekvenserna av denna grundläggning och mejslar därefter fram ett teoretiskt bidrag som möjliggör en högskolepedagogisk disciplin grundad i utbildningsvetenskap.

In 2008, I developed a theoretical framework aimed at affording new ways to understand and talk about the pedagogical relation between a teacher and her student (Jons 2008). In the spirit of Deleuze & Guattari’s (1994) ideas that philosophy is a matter of discerning new aspects in familiar phenomena by means of conceptual acrobatics, I wanted to explore the possibility to perceive the teacher-student relation in a new light. Taking a departure in Martin Buber’s philosophy of dialogue, the framework came to be characterised by an ontological dialogicity with ethical overtones. The framework, named “Calling & Responding”, enabled an understanding of the teacher-student-relationship as including dimensions of calling, paying heed, and responsible responding. 

In extending the philosophical exploration, the framework of Calling & Responding was later applied to the relation between the student and the content (Jons 2014), enabling learning to be understood as a matter of the student and the content being involved in a dialogue where the student pays heed to the subject calling her, and, in accomplishing assignments, responding responsibly to that calling.

I am now working on applying the framework of Calling & Responding to the relation between the teacher and her subject. While educational scholars acknowledges love and passion to be involved in their relation to the subject (Arendt 1994; Palmer 2007; Kreber; 2009; Aldridge 2019), the models conceptualising the teacher-subject-relation has been criticised for conveying a too rational and static notion of the relation (Gudmundsdottir 1990; Worden 2015). My aim therefore is to explore the affordances of conceptualising the phenomenon of preparing a subject for teaching as a matter of the teacher paying heed to the subject and responding to it responsibly. 

The presentation will give detailed accounts of each of these pedagogical relationships when conceptualised inside the framework of Calling & Responding

Developing Relational Competence: design and results of a course for higher education faculty 

The presentation reports experiences from a course on relation competence designed for faculty at Stockholm university, delivered for the first time during 2019. Encompassing 7,5 ECTS, the course activities and meetings were spread over one year, with five course meetings in the spring semester and three in the autumn semester. All of the participants were taking the course in their spare time, and on a voluntarily basis, i e not as a part of the 15 ECTS university pedagogy that is mandatory in order for faculty to teach at Stockholm university.  

The teaching-learning-activities employed in the course were chosen from diverse sources that suggests content and methods for developing dimensions of relational competence. The content elaborated on in the course was chosen from both Swedish and international sources (e g Aspelin 2017; 2018; Bingham & Sidorkin 2004; Frelin 2010; Jons 2008a; b; 2009; 2011; 2012; 2015; 2016; Ljungblad 2016). In addition, the participants’ experience from educational practices was emphasized as an important source of content in the teaching learning activities employed. 

The methods chosen consisted of video analysis as suggested by Jonas Aspelin and colleagues (2018), critical friends shadowing as suggested by Dahlgren and colleagues (2006), core reflection as suggested by Korthagen and colleagues (2005; 2013), critical incident analyses  as suggested by Green Lister and Crisp (2007), drama exercises as suggested by Berg, Höglund Arveklev, Larsson, and Lepp (2016) and reflective learning logs as suggested by Moon (2004; 2006). 

The final course examination allowed for a choice of either developing a course module or a collegial professional development plan in relational competence, or alternatively, a Self-study (Buck & Akerson 2016; Loughran et al 2004) focusing their own development during the course

In the presentation, these activities will be detailed, methods and content related to one another, followed by an account of the results of a small survey among the participants after finishing the course as regards to three questions: 1) What were your incentives for taking the course?, 2) What have you learned during the course?, and, 3) How did you learn what you learned in the course?

In this session we present preliminary findings from an interview study with eleven educators from a Finnish physics teacher training programme. The educators represent the four environments where the education takes place: the Department of Physics, the Department of Mathematics and Science Education, the Department of General Pedagogy, and the Training School. The study is part of a larger Swedish Research Council project comparing the different disciplinary values that are communicated to future physics teachers across four countries (Sweden, England, Singapore and Finland) .

Interviews were coded in TRANSANA software, and analysed using Gee’s (2014, p. 95) theory of figured worlds which he describes as “taken-for-granted” theories that are shaped and normed through social and cultural interactions. In our study we apply Gee’s concept to descriptions of a ‘good’ physics teacher. Preliminary analysis shows that the educators across the four training environments largely communicate the same figured world. Although working in different settings, the eleven educators appear to be working in concert, each contributing to a shared vision of what is needed to develop the professional physics teacher identities of their trainees.

The figured world we identify characterizes a ‘good ‘physics teacher in terms of a range of competencies, such as: student centredness, inclusive teaching, knowledge of PCK, physics for society, assessment skills, relationships and leadership and teacher professionalism.

Taken together, the four departments appear to cover all the desired competencies of a ‘good’ physics teacher and there is mutual trust across the four environments. The training school was seen as the place where all of the desired competencies are brought together, applied and evaluated.

These findings are in stark contrast to findings for Sweden where four competing models of the goals of the educational programme were identified (Larsson, Airey, Danielsson & Lundqvist, 2018).