Computación y representación distribuidas (CRD)

There is an extensive body of research that addresses teacher education and questions about how professional knowledge for the teaching profession is organized in different models of teacher education. Zeichner and Conklin (2008) reviewed empirical research on teacher education programs in a North American context. While they identified different conceptions of teacher education, they also concluded that this research mainly addresses structural features at the surface level and fails to grasp the details of how knowledge and learning activities are organized. McEneaney and Meyer (2000, p. 8) argue, in a similar vein, that analyses of educational curricula in general often focus more on the way in which variations in educational content affect social stratification, inequalities, and variation in

student achievement, than on the actual cultural content built into the curriculum. Hence, knowledge is discussed more from the angle of its political implications than from the question of how it constitutes distinct routes for professional formation. McEneaney and Meyer (2000) also argue that such studies mainly concern applied or performed curricula (what is going on in educational settings) and experienced curricula (perceptions of different dimensions of teaching and learning).

Another strand of research concerns the effectiveness and relevance of different forms of knowledge included in teacher education programs. The studies in this strand differ in the advice that they offer. Walsh, Glaser, and Wilcox (2006), for example, argue for preparing teachers to follow research-based teaching scripts rather than developing teachers’ abilities to make informed choices regarding the methods for specific situations. Others have argued that to prepare teachers for the complexity of their work, teacher students have to meet a high level of rigorous intellectual and academic challenges (Goodlad & Inkster, 1990; Howey & Zimpher, 1989). Others, again, argue for the necessity of focusing extensively on

development psychology, theories about learning, cognition, motivation, and subject matter issues (Darling-Hammond & Fickel, 2006; Darling-Hammond et al., 2000). In this respect, Zeichner and Conklin (2008) discuss how teacher education programs differ in their

conceptual orientations, for instance, whether the overall idea is to ‘teach for social justice’ or ‘teaching as principled practice.’ The review of the research in an US context reveals diverse argumentations about what is regarded as important and what constitutes effectiveness in teacher education programs. These positions also hold different conceptions of the character of teachers’ knowledge relations and how such affiliations ought to be structured.

Research on teacher education in the Nordic context is broad, but a few researchers have discussed what kind of knowledge is included in teacher education curricula and how knowledge is organized. Ostinelli (2009) analyzes the structure and objectives in teacher education curricula in Finland and Sweden, amongst others, and argues that there seems to be a distinctive Nordic model of teacher education that emphasizes “the professionality of the teacher within a rigorous but flexible framework” (Ostinelli, 2009, p. 304). Other studies reach a different conclusion and argue that there are profound differences between the models and programs in the Nordic countries. A comparative study of Nordic teacher-training programs (Nordic Council of Ministers, 2009) concludes that Nordic teacher education programs are rather different with regard to their volume, structure, and content. Rasmussen

and Bayer (2010) analyze the different disciplines represented in teacher education, comparing teacher education programs in Canada, Singapore, Finland, and Denmark. The first three countries are among the top-performing nations on international student assessment tests and have university-based teacher education programs. The study shows that teacher education programs in all of these countries comprise a significant proportion of what the authors call professional knowledge, that is, knowledge that is produced within the

educational system, about the educational system, and for the educational system (Rasmussen & Bayer, 2010). Finland stands out with a program in which scientific knowledge (produced outside the educational system in a scientific mode) is most predominant, and the Danish program as the one in which philosophically oriented professional knowledge (reflection on educational theory, normatively oriented) is at the forefront (Rasmussen & Bayer, 2010, p. 2).

The focus on scientific knowledge in Finnish teacher education is widely confirmed by an extensive body of research (e.g. Jyrhämä et al., 2008b; Sahlberg, 2007; Westbury, Hansén, Kansanen, & Björkvist, 2005). The following principles have been accepted as guidelines for the present research-based teacher education in Finland:

x Teachers need a profound knowledge of the most recent advances in research in the subjects they teach. In addition, they need to be familiar with research on how something can be thought and learnt. Interdisciplinary research on subject content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge provide the foundation for developing teaching methods that can be adapted to different learners. x Teacher education in itself should also be object of study and research. This

research should provide knowledge about the effectiveness and quality of teacher education, implemented by various means and in different cultural contexts.

x The aim is that teachers internalize a research-oriented attitude towards their work. This means that teachers learn to take an analytical and open-minded approach to their work, and that they develop their teaching and learning environment in a systematical way. (Niemi & Jakku-Sihvonen, 2006, pp. 40- 41)

In other words, a research-based teacher education in the Finnish context refers to both the design of the program, as well as to a specific way of developing teachers’ thinking (Maaranen, 2009).

Paula Ensor (2004, 2006) provides general contributions to the understanding of curricula content through her discussions of contesting discourses on higher education

curriculum. She argues that different discourses “privileges particular modes of knowledge and their forms of organisation”. While her typology distinguishes between professional discourses, it does not examine these varieties in the selection and organizion of knowledge for professional programs as such. Muller (2009) takes this issue further and argues that there is an important relationship between the forms of knowledge selected to be included in curricula and how the knowledge is organized for educational purposes in the curricula. He distinguishes analytically between “curricula which have conceptual coherence and those which have contextual coherence” (Muller, 2009, p. 216) in order to grasp the types of relations that are given primacy. Conceptual coherence increases as the curricula are more conceptually tied to the core of the academic discipline. This holds a high level of codification and presumes a hierarchy of abstractions and conceptual difficulty. Hence, conceptual coherence also implies a sequential and vertical organization of knowledge, meaning that later elements depend on earlier elements having been grasped. According to Muller, “the more that conceptual coherence matters, the clearer must be the knowledge signposts, both

illustratively and evaluative.” This means that knowledge is structured in such way that it will “act as a visible corrective” (Muller, 2009, p. 216). Such knowledge is regulated in terms of adequacy according to scientific criteria. Contextual coherence evolves when the curricula content is tied to the professional context. Knowledge is segmentally connected, and the segments are adequate in a context and sufficient for a purpose. Muller underlines that professional curricula will typically include both types of relations, but they might differ in their emphasis. The distinction can be interpreted more as a continuum than as a dichotomy (Muller, 2009).

Rasmussen (2008) discusses the implication of transforming teacher education from holding a seminarium tradition, e.g., the Norwegian general professional program, to a research-based program, and he makes a distinction that resembles Muller’s. Rasmussen argues that the seminarium tradition in teacher education that is salient in some of the Nordic countries seems to be a hindrance for the development of teacher education into research- based programs. He argues that programs with strong historical roots in the seminar tradition and research-based programs hold two rather different logics when it comes to how

professional knowledge is perceived. Professional knowledge in the two cases holds different premises, relates to different systems with different preferences and criteria (Rasmussen, 2008, p. 331). Rasmussen continues by arguing that professional knowledge in the seminarium tradition holds the same logic as the theories of “praxis,” while professional

knowledge in a research-based teacher education program holds a logic closer to that found in the science of education. Professional knowledge according to the seminarium tradition can therefore be viewed as formative and fostering, and it focuses on upbringing and teaching. Professional knowledge is meant to provide the upcoming generation with knowledge and competencies of personal and societal importance and value (Rasmussen, 2008, p. 329), and holds quite normative implications. Professional knowledge is, to a great extent, about “what works” and “best practice,” and is evaluated on the basis of “its ability to solve context related problems” (Rasmussen, 2008, p. 330). Research-based professional knowledge holds the logic of scientific theory, aiming to explain phenomena, and not necessarily answering questions of how to intervene. Such knowledge has theoretical anchoring, is developed according to specific methodological criteria, utilizes an unambiguous set of concepts, and is evaluated based on validity and reliability. The two ‘logics of professional knowledge’ differ

substantially, and the transformation to a research-based teacher education cannot be reduced to a simple question of academization. The change has to be built on deeper and more fundamental transformative processes (Rasmussen, 2008).

In sum, research within the context of text production has focused on the organization and effectiveness of different teacher education programs. Furthermore, the findings from the Nordic countries show a diverse picture, with rather different epistemic profiles of teacher education programs. Finally, there is a lack of empirical studies focusing on curriculum discourses, especially when it comes to professional knowledge.