������ý

Background

The PilotSTEP project was started in the fall of 2017 as a result of our participation in iSTEP – a one week institute that convenes teams of teacher educators from around the world to observe teacher education at Stanford. We were inspired by thoughts about core values (which in the project became issues of democracy and fundamental values), about mentoring and recurring conversations about the teaching work (which in the project became horizontal networks and student meetings). In addition, we were inspired by a recently completed internal revision of the pre-school teacher program where a possible profiling was brought forward.

Based in an aim to strengthen the preschool teacher program at ������ý, three main questions have driven the project. These can be briefly described as 1/ to strengthen the connection between research and the preschool teacher education; 2/ to strengthen the relationship between theory and practice and 3/ to create a possible profiling. These questions were initially presented in the project and were the basis for the funding that the project received from both the Faculty Board for Teacher Education and the Faculty of Art and Social Sciences.

After presenting results in 2020 at various meetings with the preschool teacher program, and representatives of parts of the program, we have worked deliberately to test different forms and content and discussed the project’s results in terms of possible implementation in the program.

What have we done in the project?

Within the project, we have had meetings with a group of preschool student-teachers in what we call horizontal networks (the concept is further developed below). During their entire time in the education, 7 semesters, we have met this student group on approximately 70 occasions where we have talked in various ways about their future as teachers. We have also met parts of the group on a couple of occasions as newly graduated teachers. The starting points have focused on content of experiences from the teacher training, events in the outside world and/or their previous and ongoing experiences of the preschool as a workplace, as a parent or as preschool children themselves. We have also talked about other experiences of preschool (from the media, research, friends and relatives). In the vast majority of conversations, these contents have been related to as positive, students are eager to be trained as teachers, and as becoming teachers they have a need to discuss possible actions, although some difficulties have also been highlighted, which we develop in more detail below.

The theoretical foundations of the project

The PilotSTEP project is based on the idea that issues of democracy and basic values need to be highlighted and brought up for discussion in many different forms and contexts in order to become part of teachers’ knowledge. We know from previous research that it is difficult. One of these forms for discussions that we chose, we call horizontal networks. The concept is taken from theoretical assumptions about how teachers develop their readiness for action, their agency, and has been described by researchers as Teacher Agency (Priestley, et al. 2015). A horizontal network consists largely of equal positions where no one has a judging role in relation to others in the network. Research shows that horizontal networks are of great importance for teachers to develop in their professional role and to acquire desirable readiness for action. Teachers simply need to discuss their choices of actions in different situations with others who have similar experiences and knowledge in order to develop their readiness for action in this way. Translated into teacher training, we have through PilotSTEP chosen to create horizontal networks where researchers/teachers have not been grading the participating student-teachers and where the content has not in any way been assessed as good/bad, relevant/irrelevant, etc.

In the text below, answers to the questions that guided the project are presented. We have applied the first question to semesters 1, 2 and 5. We have applied the second question to semesters 3 and 4. Finally, the third question has been applied to semesters 6 and 7. The analytical conclusions presented naturally include the entire program.

To strengthen the connection between research and preschool teacher education

Results from the project

The results from our horizontal networks, where we researchers and students met, can be briefly summarized by the fact that we all shared experiences with each other around a content that was largely initiated by the students. In this way, personal experiences and proven experiences have met scientific basis and provided a more robust knowledge of the specific content. The student teachers have thus developed a certain readiness for action, partly by taking part of other people’s experiences, partly by conversing, asking about, being challenged about and discussing their own experiences.

Possible implementation

We know that value-based issues are focused more specifically in the initial parts of the program, and that our component regarding horizontal networks is about developing a form for democratic conversation and reflection. Based on our results and experiences of researchers and students meeting in horizontal networks, we have worked as follows:

In the first semester, the team of teacher educators received guidelines on literature on horizontal networks before they themselves let experienced preschool teachers participate in similar meetings and conversations with the students. We have contacted teacher educators to follow up on how the work with horizontal networks has gone and offered meetings with some form of input with a focus on the teaching team. On two occasions, we have met teacher educators from the first semester for further discussions about opportunities to work with horizontal networks in the teaching team. They found it rewarding to have these discussions with the research group. We were told about substantive aspects that have been tested. In semester 1, for example, the teacher educators have not been assessing the examination tasks for their own students, but for each other’s students.

Another example is that they plan to use the form of horizontal networks in their group meetings with the students in order to better relate the students’ questions and experiences.

In the second semester, what we call “researchers’ coffee-break-meetings” has been organized on three occasions during the spring. Researchers from PilotSTEP together with the teacher educators have met the students, via the digital platform zoom, in both large and small groups. The focus has been on the student group. Before these occasions, the teacher educators have met with researchers to inform about the content of the ongoing teaching. Other teacher training programs at KAU have adopted the idea of “researchers’ coffee-break-meetings” with positive results.

Analysis and conclusion

In general, we believe that it is valuable for the students - and for researchers - to meet and talk about different content we share regarding preschool practice and teachers’ work. The participating researchers have not been prepared more than just having general research-based knowledge of the areas concerned (except when the focus has been on digitization where one of us researchers has specific competence). We have also touched on questions about becoming a teacher, in general and in relation to specific subjects/areas.

To strengthen the relationship between theory and practice

Results from the project

The results we have seen from the project indicate that teacher students have to some extent experienced a gap between the campus based and the practicum based parts in the subject based third and fourth semesters. There is a desire among students to discuss proven experience to a greater extent together with local teachers and their work team at the practicum preschool. In addition, it has been perceived as a shortcoming not to have been able to test the scientific based content that was part of the campus courses. We want to emphasize that the students are still largely satisfied with their practicum periods, but that there is potential for improvement.

Possible implementation

In the third and fourth semesters we have focused on strengthening the connection between theory and practice, where we specifically targeted practicum based education and local teacher educators.

Local teacher educators have been informed about the results from the project. In meetings with teacher educators in the subject based semesters, the conversations have touched on changes that have already begun within the program to strengthen the connection between theory and practice. Among other things, it has involved developing projects in collaboration with the municipalities, which gives the students the opportunity for in-depth thoughts and reflections on how planned teaching can be implemented. The goals for practicum education are now more clearly linked to the content of the subject courses – work that has already been carried out in collaboration with practicum managers in the program. Here, we currently see no need for further improvement measures.

Analysis and conclusion

In order to maintain a strong relationship between theory and practice, we believe that it is necessary to have continuous dialogues between teacher educators on campus and in practicum about the content and goals of the practicum courses. Scientific perspectives need to be highlighted in relation to proven experience during practicum. It is also important that students are given opportunities to see differences and similarities between teaching based on proven experiences and scientific grounds - and how personal experiences can be further developed into proven experiences. The method for conducting these dialogues can advantageously take place via horizontal networks, where student representatives, practicum teacher educators, campus teacher educators, and researchers are included. This design can contribute to strengthening the knowledge and experience of both students, teacher educators (campus and practicum). Furthermore, these experiences can be passed on to the supervisor training courses, constitute content in practice based action research etc..

A possible profiling

Results from the project

Some experiences from the project that relate to the connection to democracy education in the preschool are that the students who participated in the project themselves feel strengthened in their knowledge of the preschool’s value base and democratic mission. This applies to both the forms that we used, including horizontal networks and deliberative conversations, and the content that we talked about and that directly or indirectly affected how preschool teachers can work with preschool democracy education. We have received some such indications from students who have had a study break and after returning, telling us that the new context/course does not contain the same reflective depth as among the students who followed the project from the start. This knowledge is strengthened by reports; research and development work that overall bear witness to difficulties in talking about values and democracy in preschool, which is therefore perceived as difficult to practice in a conscious way.

Possible implementation

At the program council meeting in the spring of 2021, we presented both background, results and thoughts about implementation regarding profiling of the program.

We have had a meeting with teacher educators in the sixth semester about the possibility talk about and support students to reflect on fundamental values and democracy in relation to the subjects (mathematics or language) studied. The responsible teacher educators believe that this is entirely possible and already exists, but may need to be emphasized further. We have participated in a Zoom meeting with the students to discuss how they can think and reflect on subject knowledge and values/democracy. During the meeting with students and teachers, they showed an awareness of the content in the curriculum for preschool about democracy and fundamental values. We got access to texts from 36 (of 94 in total) students who wanted to share their tasks with us, and it is only these texts that we can comment on. After reading through these texts, we note that in 23 of these the students do not mention neither democracy nor fundamental values. In 13 texts the concepts are mentioned and in 10 of these the concepts are more developed where the students also refer to the concepts in their discussions. The results show that most students who do not explicitly write the words democracy or fundamental values do not make any analysis that extends beyond children learning in mathematics or language, while those who clearly mention these concepts also have clear thoughts about why it is important from a wider societal perspective, fully in accordance with the curriculum. A few, despite the lack of concepts, have thoughts about participation and influence or that it is possible to generalize to other subject contents, but not which ones.

In addition, we have had meetings with course managers in the seventh semester about the possibility of introducing a heading about the preschool’s fundamental values and democratic missions in the template for the students’ independent work. The intention was thus to strengthen the students’ readiness to act, to think and to discuss in terms of democracy and fundamental values, regardless of subject content (which is a reality in preschool practice). We have also worked out a proposal for text for such a heading in the template. However, we have encountered some practical problems and unfortunately our proposal has not been seen as possible to implement at the moment.

Analysis and conclusion

We conclude that it is very important that students are given a structured task, where didactic reflections in relation to democracy or fundamental values must be articulated. Without this, few students do that kind of reflection and we risk ending up in the same lack of preparedness for action that the School Inspectorate (Skolinspektionen, 2018) in its report and previous research shows, namely that preschool teachers have difficulties talking about the concepts of democracy and fundamental values. This also makes it difficult for them to accomplish teaching that takes these contents of the curriculum seriously.

Regarding profiling of the program, we believe that the need remains. Profiling would in itself contribute to the clarification of issues of democracy and fundamental values repeatedly through the education. The aspects that we pointed out in semester 6 and 7 can and should be incorporated in all terms, for example through clear requirements in the course plans for reflections in relation to the writings of the curriculum and other governing documents about democracy and fundamental values.

Why democracy and fundamental values? A strong focus on these issues is needed at a time when democracy is increasingly challenged by anti-democratic movements. It is, as we see it, about taking a new and in-depth approach to the wordings that higher education should contribute to strengthening democracy in society and to nurture teachers as bearers of democratic values. A constantly changing concept of democracy can be discussed and problematized in “research coffee-breaks” with students, teacher educators and other researchers. We see that within this theme there are issues of a more specific nature such as gender, diversity, sustainable development, etc.

Concluding remarks

The project has been presented in several different contexts; conferences, networking meetings and seminars. We have also presented our results and thoughts to representatives of preschool teacher programs at other Swedish and Norwegian universities. Several teacher training programs are very interested and have questions about how parts of our results can be implemented in their training courses. At the moment, we cannot clarify any results, but we will be happy to get back to the faculty board of education when we have something to present from our collaboration partners.

������ý in December 2021

Annica Löfdahl Hultman, Katarina Ribaeus, Ann-Britt Enochsson and Ebba Hildén

References

Enochsson, A-B., & Ribaeus, K. (2020). “Everybody has to get a chance to learn”: Democratic aspects of digitalisation in preschool. Early Childhood Education Journal, 49(6).

Publications from the project (updated in 2023)

Enochsson, A.-B., Hildén, E., Löfdahl Hultman, A. & Ribaeus, K. (2021, Nov 3–5). Student teachers views on digitalization in preschool. NERA 2021, Odense, Denmark.

Enochsson, A.-B. & Ribaeus, K. (work in progress) Digitalisation in preschool from a democracy perspective: Student teachers’ developing views.

Enochsson, A.-B. & Ribaeus, K. (2021). ”Everybody has to get a chance to learn”: Democratic aspects of digitalisation in preschool. Early Childhood Education Journal, 49(6), 1087–1098. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-020-01117-6.

Hildén, E. & Ribaeus. K. (2018) Förskollärarstudenters möten tillsammans med forskare: innan, under och efter VFU. In M. Johansson & L. E. Johansson (Eds.). Verksamhetsförlagd utbildning inom professionsutbildning: utvecklings- och forskningsprojekt från sjuksköterskeprogrammet och lärarutbildningen. (Rapport 2018:2) (pp. 73–90). ������ý.

Hildén, E., Löfdahl Hultman, A., Ribaeus, K. & Enochsson, A.-B. (2021, Nov 3–5) “You should be nice and cheerful” – collegial leadership in preschool, Sweden. NERA Congress 2021, Odense, Denmark.

Löfdahl Hultman, A., & Ribaeus, K. (2021). ”Det verkar som om de vill att vi ska hoppa av”: Förskollärarstudenters lärartillblivelse i en performativ lärarutbildning. Tilde. Skriftserie nr. 3. Ämnet som blev. Rapporter från den fjärde nationella konferensen i pedagogiskt arbete. Umeå University.

Löfdahl Hulman, A., Ribaeus, K., Enochsson, A.-B. & Hildén, E. (2023). Att förstå handlingsberedskap i förskollärarutbildningen. In Å. Olsson & K. Bengtsson (Eds.), I väntan på inkludering: Vänbok till Kerstin Göransson (������ý Studies 2023:21)(pp. 69–83). ������ý��Press.

Ribaeus, K., Enochsson, A-B., & Löfdahl Hultman, A. (2020). Student teachers’ professional development: Early practice and horizontal networks as ways to bridge the theory-practice gap. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 43(1). .

Ribaeus, K & Löfdahl Hultman, A. (2022) Teacher educators’ perspectives on shaping a preschool teacher education while dealing with internal and external demands. Journal of Praxis in Higher Education, 4(1), 179-99.

Ribaeus, K.: (work in progress): From mission to vision: Achieving democratic teacher agency.

��

��