Conference Agenda

A key responsibility of governments across countries, and a major element of government spending, is the state provision of high-quality education (Blikstad-Balas, Tengberg, & Klette, 2022). Education is argued to increase equity, to eradicate poverty, to drive sustainable development, and enable peace and democracy – and it is a key factor shaping global economic and social development (OECD, 2010, 2016; UNESCO, 2017). The question of how education is provided has become a political and politicized topic that generates debate and contestation (Menter, 2017; Wyse et al., 2017). Though everyone agrees that questions of educational quality and progress are of critical interest there is no shortage of opinions about how teachers should fulfil their important mandate as educators.

The core ambition of the Nordic research center Quality in Nordic Teaching (QUINT, cf. www.uv.uio.no/quint) is to explore what quality in teaching is, and how we could investigate it both generically and in subjects. As such, QUINT contributes to a broader international attempt to conceptualize and capture different aspects of teaching quality (Charalambos & Praetorius, 2020). In the first volume QUINT published, basic principles and pitfalls of researching quality in teaching are elaborated on (Blikstad-Balas, Klette, & Tengberg, 2022). The point of departure is the claim that research in quality teaching should distinguish between generic as well as subject-specific and even domain-specific notions of quality. For example, comparing quality teaching in mathematics and L1 (also known as Language arts) of course differ substantially; similarly, within the L1 subject different domains’ quality criteria, such as teaching literature as compared to teaching language, vary; and even within the same domain, such as literature teaching, variety is found. A second claim is that a multidimensional model for capturing teaching quality that distinguishes between prescribed, experienced and documented dimensions of quality teaching could help us nuance our understanding of quality in teaching (Elf, 2021; Hansen, Elf, Gissel, & Steffensen, 2019).

This symposium presents three studies focusing on quality teaching within a particular subject, L1. As such, we explore quality teaching from a subject-specific/Fachdidaktik perspective (ref. Klette & Vollmer). The three projects apply different research designs that illuminate the multidimensionality of subject-specific quality studies. In the first presentation, Blikstad-Balas presents the research design and findings from the LISA Nordic project emphasizing characteristics of reading practices across Nordic countries. Their findings suggest that practices of reading vary, to some extent, across Nordic countries, and that this has implications for our understanding of ‘quality reading’. In the second presentation, Tina Høegh, Marie Slot & Michael P. Jensen present findings from the Connected Classroom Nordic project focusing the digitalized classroom, materials and devices handled in the classroom and the dialogues supporting the student work, topic and goals. In the third presentation, Hansen and Elf report theory development and findings from a Nordic comparative small-scale intervention project on inquiry-oriented literature teaching, including studies of how a prescribing model of literature teaching is being translated and transformed, due to local national curricula and historically and culturally embedded quality criteria, in Swedish, Norwegian and Danish contexts.

For discussion we ask whether it is possible to contest narrow discourses on quality teaching often dominating public debates as well as public management. We suggest that L1 research should aim at exploring, documenting and even honoring varieties in quality teaching taking back the notion of quality based on sound empirical research. More broadly, subject-specific/Fachdidaktik research should discuss what the underlying values and norms embedded in research on quality in teaching are, and to what extent this research could be generalized and inform practice and even the policy-oriented domain of quality teaching communicated through programmatic curricula.

Drawing on classroom data (observation data and observation instruments, student perspective surveys and copies of students’ work) from Language Arts classrooms (grade 7/8) in respectively Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Iceland we explore what characterizes the L1 subject across these countries, in particular how the different countries embed reading in their instruction. and to what degree digital reading is emphasized. What are students reading across the Nordic countries – and for what purposes? To what degree are the different countries fostering students reading of narrative and non-fictional texts? Using Nordic classroom data for such an endeavor is especially interesting since the Nordic countries share many structural similarities (e.g. a comprehensive, non-tracked, non- streamed model of schooling; the tradition of national curricula; and an emphasis on inclusive and heterogeneous classrooms, and high ambitions for digitalization). On the other hand, there are interesting cultural differences in instructional practices across the Nordic countries such as the amount of whole class teaching and classroom discussions (Klette et al., 2017), the role of technology (Olofsson et al., 2011) and scores on international achievement tests (Nordic Council of Ministers 2018, OECD, 2018). In the presentation, we will focus on what and how teachers are using texts in their classroom instruction. We will analyse, quantitatively and qualitatively, what specific texts students are reading across the Nordic countries, and how this work is being done in the classroom We will also look into how different countries embed digital reading and critical judgment of texts to a limited degree. A key aspect for us is to explore whether there is a ”Nordic way” or a common profile across the national contexts, which is why we also will compare the main similarities of L1 teaching to international research. Preliminary findings suggest that while there are some differences across countries, the Nordic L1 teachers prioritize reading, and to a large extent they prioritize traditional print reading rather than digital reading. There are interesting differences across countries when it comes to text length (which is also found in PISA 2018) and the ways texts are used. These findings will be discussed in light of the analytical framework for investigating teaching quality developed within QUINT.

References: Klette. K et al (2018). Justice through participation: Student Engagement in Nordic Classrooms. Education Inquiry, Volume 9 (1), pp 57-77. Magnusson, C. G., Roe, A., & Blikstad‐Balas, M. (2019). To what extent and how are reading comprehension strategies part of language arts instruction? A study of lower secondary classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 54(2), 187-212. Nordic Council of Ministers (2018). Northern Lights on PISA and TIMSS, Copenhagen: Council of Ministers Unit. OECD (2018). PISA 2015 Results in Focus, Paris: OECD Olofsson A.O. et al (2011).Uptake and Use of Digital Technologies in Primary and Secondary Schools – a Thematic Review of Research. Nordic Jourmal of Digital Literacy, Vol.6. No 04 pp 207-225.

The aim of the QUINT-project Connected Classrooms Nordic (CCN) is to explore what constitutes quality in teaching in relation to digitalisation of education, through bringing together researchers, professional teachers and students in collaborative video based, longitudinal investigations of contemporary teaching in digitally rich classrooms in the Nordic countries. The project is designed as a three-year longitudinal study, where the same teachers and students are followed with video recordings from each school year. The video recordings are made with multiple cameras, focusing on both the teachers’ instructions and the students’ activities on computers and other digital resources. From the recordings, examples from the teaching are selected in relation to an analytic framework based on previous research in digitalisation of Nordic classrooms. The selected clips are discussed in focus groups with teachers as well as students with a focus on the consequence of digitalisation for teaching quality. The paper presentation focuses on the dialogue in which a teacher holds clear for the students the topics and goals with the activities during a lesson. In this study, among many different CCN-interests, we look at three instances during a lesson in the Nordic classrooms: a) preparation/instruction, b) teacher-support during the lesson of the students’ work to follow up on the goals and instructions, and c) the ending of the lesson. By comparing a fairly common progression of activities during a lesson in a secondary school class and by following this dialogic thread in context, we can discuss the research question ‘What is quality L1 education’ through the teacher’s interaction with the students around digital and physical technologies and materials. The method is a video ethnographic approach and micro-studies (dialogue and gesture), of the dialogues student-teacher as well student-student (Høegh, 2017), but also student-technology. Exploration of the practice architecture (Kemmis et al. 2014), that these teaching progressions in four Nordic countries produce, makes it possible to describe the teacher’s teaching path, the student development, and the participatory rhythms (Blue, 2019; Leander & Hollett, 2017).

Blue, S. (2019). Institutional rhythms: Combining practice theory and rhythm analysis to conceptualise processes of institutionalization. Time & Society, Vol. 28(3) 922–950 Høegh, T. (2017). Methodological Issues in Analysing Human Communication: The Complexities of Multimodality. In: Creativity and Continuity – Perspectives on the Dynamics of Language Conventionalisation, edited by D. Duncker and B. Perregaard. U Press Kemmis, S., Wilkinson, J., Edwards-Groves, C., & Hardy (2014). Changing Practices, Changing Education. Springer Singapore. Leander, K. M. & Hollett, T. (2017). The embodied rhythms of learning: From learning across settings to learners crossing settings. International journal of educational research, Vol. 84 Page 100-110. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijer.2016.11.007

This presentation highlights the ongoing Quality Literature Education (QUALE) project within QUINT. QUALE is a small-scall qualitative intervention of an inquiry-oriented approach to literature education carried out in Denmark, Norway and Sweden. In the project, we explore how learning resources designed for a large-scale intervention project in Denmark that tested a program theory for inquiry-oriented literature teaching (the so-called KiDM project, cf. Hansen et al., 2019) could be translated and transformed into Swedish and Norwegian and used in local Swedish and Norwegian schools. We hypothesize that the empirically supported KiDM model of quality teaching will be transformed, to a lesser or higher degree, when used by participating teachers and students in different school contexts, and this variety is co-shaped by the unique constellation of didactic reality, didactic theory and didactic practice in different countries (O'Dowd, Winther-Jensen, & Wikander, 2015). However, we also hypothesize that due to the existential structure of literature as well as language and cultural similarities in Nordic L1 subjects, it is possible to extend, in meaningful ways, the KiDM program theory and learning resources across Nordic borders. Methodologically, the QUALE project applies a multi-case qualitative comparative design across national contexts which involves researchers from both Denmark, Sweden and Norway. Sharing and analysing data in a joint intersubjectively validating effort, we ask: i) How do students and teachers in Swedish, Norwegian and Danish classrooms transform inquiry-oriented design material for literature education in L1 classrooms?; ii) how do teachers perceive the effects and interpret an inquiry-based approach in relation to contextual factors, needs and potentials for conducting literature education of a high quality?; and iii) to what extent does local and/or national contexts, such as curricula, systemic constraints and local school resources, co-shape teachers’ and students’ transformations and understandings? Preliminary analyses of the project’s developmental and first intervention phases (Christensen, 2021; Gabrielsen, 2021; Randahl, Olin-Scheller, & Blix, 2021) suggest that the basic model and resources for inquiry-oriented teaching resonate with and at the same time challenge Nordic L1 teachers’ literature teaching practices. For discussion, we argue that the QUALE project could be interpreted as one case of a pluralistic approach to teaching quality. Engaging in subject-specific studies of teaching help us understand that a ‘surplus of quality’ (Elf, 2021) is found in teaching. Dependent of the subject- and domain-specific unit of analysis and the situated nature of teaching, a rich variety of qualities for teaching is found.

Charalambos, C. Y., & Praetorius, A.-K. (2020). Creating a forum for researching teaching and its quality more synergistically. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 67, 1-8. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100894 Elf, N. (2021). The surplus of quality: How to study quality in teaching in three QUINT projects. In M. Blikstad-Balas, K. Klette, & M. Tengberg (Eds.), Ways of Analysing Teaching Quality: Potentials and Pitfalls (pp. 53-88). Oslo: Scandinavian University Press. Hansen, T. I., Elf, N., Gissel, S. T., & Steffensen, T. (2019). Designing and testing a new concept for inquiry-based literature teaching. Contribution to a special issue Systematically Designed Literature Classroom Interventions: Design Principles, Development and Implementation, edited by Marloes Schrijvers, Karen Murphy, and Gert Rijlaarsdam. L1 - Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 19. doi:10.17239/L1ESLL-2019.19.04.03 Hansen, T. I. (2023). PHENOMENOLOGICAL EXPLORATION IN LITERATURE EDUCATION. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 23(1), 1–26. doi.org/10.21248/l1esll.2023.23.1.382 O'Dowd, M., Winther-Jensen, T., & Wikander, L. (2015). Comparative Education in the North. In S. Jokila, J. Kallo, & R. Risto (Eds.), Comparing times and spaces : historical, theoretical and methodological approaches to comparative education (Vol. 69, pp. 31-56). Jyväskyl: Fera. Finnish Educational Research Association, Jyväskyla, Research in Educational Sciences = Kasvatusalan tutkimuksia.