Conference Agenda

National governments and international organizations have made expanding access to well-prepared, effective teachers a central focus in national educational reforms (Akiba 2013). The U.N Sustainable Development Goal #4 makes providing students with access to highly-trained, professional teachers a global priority. Teacher education is now often scrutinized by national policy makers who often look to other nations for models that can be replicated e.g. (Sahlberg 2011). Yet, in the end, such policy borrowing often fails to achieve the goal of profound change in teacher education. Reform efforts are typically stymied by deeply institutionalized national differences in national public school organization, university structure, or cultures of instructional practice (Baker and LeTendre 2005; Tahirsylaj, Brezicha et al. 2015) In addition, the politicized nature of teacher educational reform (Tatto and Menter 2019), and the complex forces that affect teacher education policy debates (Wang, Odell et al. 2010; Earley, Imig et al. 2011) often means that the reforms must be sufficiently robust to survive contentious and rapidly changing political environments.

In this session scholars from Norway, Sweden and Hungary will present papers that document changes in teacher education in that originated from collaboration with the iSTEP (Inquiry into the Stanford Teacher Education Program) Institute. They will show how the iSTEP Institute served as a reform catalyst that embedded and transformed key institutional components (universities, classrooms and school governance) of teacher education in each nation. The analysis from these three nations provides a new approach to transforming educational institutions in order to reform and improve teacher education. Each of the three national case studies demonstrates the diversity of national educational environments in which the iSTEP Institute network has spread. They show how local actors used the network to transform heterogenous sets of institutions and allowed the core principles to be effectively instantiated in teacher preparation and professional development. Within each national case study, the authors address key points regarding the restructuring of teacher education, the influence of national political contexts around teacher reform, and the unintended issues that arose in adapting the program.

In addition to the three national case studies, one paper will provide background on how the iSTEP Institute was designed. This includes a foundation of key principles of powerful and effective teacher preparation developed over several decades by scholars such as Darling-Hammond (Darling-Hammond 1997; Darling-Hammond 2012; Shulman 1986) and others (Ladson-Billings 1995; Oakes, Lipton et al. 2018). During meetings and workshops of the iSTEP Institute participants explored the knowledge base of effective teacher preparation in their nations, including the key design features, while simultaneously utilizing the in-situ practices of the Stanford Teacher Education Participants were encouraged to consider the application of the fundamental theory- and research-based propositions to their own local, regional, and national contexts. For the teams from Norway, Sweden and Hungary, this inquiry and collaborative reflection resulted in the development of a set of norms and processes for transforming teacher preparation in their home institutions. They identified organizational linkages in anticipation of the need for local accommodations, while preserving core processes of change based on a shared value orientation around educational equity. This unique functioning of the iSTEP Institute stimulated us to refine the theory of a reform catalyst. Theory-driven transformation in teacher education is not new (see McLaughlin and Mitra 2001) but a true catalysts imbeds and transforms. Rather than requiring fidelity to the diffusing innovation (see (Rogers 1995), the network supports ongoing research that allows the innovation to evolve and to produce the kinds of visible improvements so critical to engaging teachers in change efforts (Hattie 2012).

This paper locates the iSTEP institute within the broad literature on global educational reform (e.g., Baker & LeTendre, 2005; (Darling-Hammond 2010) and teacher education (Tatto and Menter 2019). The transnational diffusion of the of the iSTEP Institute follows a collaborative, “grass-root” pattern, and the success of this diffusion suggests that efforts to reform teacher education need to be centered on key principles that are identified by both research and practice and are then elevated to a central theoretical status, leaving room for practical variation based on local conditions, national policies, and other contextual factors. We document that engagement of local practitioners as active researchers is critical to successful change efforts. As Kim, 2019 wrote: “In many ways, however, the ubiquitous challenge of bridging the divide between a controlled efficacy trial and a real-world effectiveness trial compels scholars to rethink the role of practitioners in experimental research.” However, this alone is not a sufficient condition for diffusion. The explicit focus on equitable access to learning for all students provides a unifying vision as well as a central metric to assess implementation success. The genesis of the iSTEP Institute and its founding principles focused participants on key pedagogical choices and decisions which they then applied to their own national context. Members began to connect with teacher educators around the world, and the evolution of a loose network of participant collaborators further opened up insights about how to adapt and apply the principles in differing national contexts. This ongoing, trans-national interaction sparked the realization that there is, in fact, a foundational set of principles of powerful teacher education (PTE) that draw from a substantial (yet evolving) body of research that can be applied globally. But that the instantiation of the core principles in practice requires a set of processes in order to adapt material and address differences in culture and the organization of schools as well as professional learning in different local and national contexts. This paper distinguishes between principles, processes, and practices and the relevance and influence of context, providing examples of how the broader project dealt with conflict or concerns about changes wrought by local adaptation.

Baker, D. and G. LeTendre (2005). National Differences, Global Similarities: World Culture and the Future of Schooling. Stanford, CA, Stanford University Press. Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). The Flat World and Education. New York, Teachers College Press. Darling-Hammond, L. (2012). Powerful Teacher Education: Lessons from Exemplary Programs. San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass. Hattie, J. (2012). Visible Learning for Teachers. New York, Routledge. Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). "Toward a Theory of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy." American Educational Research Journal September. Sahlberg, P. (2011). Finnish Lessons. New York, Teachers College. Shulman, L. (1986). "Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching." Educational Researcher February 4-14. Tahirsylaj, A., et al. (2015). Unpacking Teacher Differences in Didaktik and Curriculum Traditions: Trends from TIMSS 2003, 2007, and 2011. Promoting and Sustaining a Quality Teacher Workforce. G. LeTendre and A. Wiseman. New York, Emeral: 147-195. Tatto, M. and I. Menter, Eds. (2019). Knowledge, Policy and Practice in Teacher Education. New York, Bloomsbury Academic. Wang, J., et al. (2010). "Understanding Teacher Education Reform." Journal of Teacher Education 61: 395-402.

Several national evaluations have pointed to severe challenges in Norwegian teacher education, particularly regarding fragmentation and disconnect to practice (Norgesnettrådet 2002, Norwegian Agency for Quality Assurance in Education [NOKUT] 2006, Lid 2013, Finne, Mordal et al. 2014, Advisory Panel for Teacher Education [APT] 2020). To meet these concerns, in addition to the restructuring reforms referred above, during the last years, several reforms have been implemented in Norwegian teacher education. At present, there are four main pathways to become a teacher in Norway. All pathways have a designated national curriculum, but common for all Norwegian teacher education is the emphasis on programs that are “integrated and relevant for the profession, and research- and practice-based” (i.e., national curriculum for 5-year integrated secondary master’s program (KD 2013). In this paper, we will focus on the University of Oslo which provides two of the national pathways to teaching in Norway, the 5-year integrated lower and upper secondary master’s program, as well as the one-year add-on program. In the time leading up to the reform, the programs at the University of Oslo met substantial critique from its candidates, echoing national and international critique on teacher education, and arguing it was too fragmented and disconnected to the profession. The critique was uttered in internal seminars and evaluations, but culminated in 2010, with several pamphlets in public university newspapers. Faculty at the teacher education program at the University of Oslo had been considering reforming the program, and a visit to iSTEP in 2010 provided the catalyst needed to begin the reform work. In the years leading up to reform, and through the reform implementation, faculty worked to redesign their overall program and its constituent parts. This included developing an international comparative research project looking at coherence and linkage to practice in teacher education. The group who attended iSTEP included faculty from pedagogy and subject didactics, teacher candidates, and school partners who jointly developed a pilot model for teacher education which was implemented in the fall of 2012. This process also served as a starting point for professionalizing teacher education. As a result of the iSTEP process, faculty developed the CATE study (Coherence and Assignments in Teacher Education) which was funded by the Norwegian Research Council in 2012-2017 and investigated eight teacher education programs around the world.

Advisory Panel for Teacher Education [APT] (2020). Transforming Norwegian Teacher Education: The Final Report for the International Advisory Panel for Primary and Lower Secondary Teacher Education, NOKUT. Finne, H., et al. (2014). Oppfatninger av studiekvalitet i lærerutdanningene 2013 [Perceived study quality in teacher education 2013]. Trondheim, Norway, SINTEF. KD (2013). Forskrift om rammeplan for PPU for trinn 8-13. Norgesnettrådet (2002). Evaluering av allmennlærerutdanningen ved fem norske institusjoner. Rapport fra ekstern komité. Norgesnettrådets rapporter. Norwegian Agency for Quality Assurance in Education [NOKUT] (2006). "Evaluering av allmennlærerutdanningen i Norge 2006. Del 1: Hovedrapport [Evaluation of general teacher education in Norway 2006. Part 1: Main report]." from http://www.nokut.no/Documents/NOKUT/Artikkelbibliotek/Norsk_utdanning/Evaluering/alueva/ALUEVA_Hovedrapport.pdf.

The reform context in Hungary was affected by the Hungarian government movement to reduce the number of early school leavers to less than 10 percent by 2020. The University of Miskolc took part in the Project EFOP-3.1.2-16-2016-00001, entitled “Methodological renewal of public education to reduce early school leaving” project that supported the measures to reduce early school leaving. This project focused on renewing the content of teacher training and in-service training to facilitate a change in pedagogical approach. Within this project, researchers focused on “methodological training of teachers to prevent early school leaving without qualification.” One major professional development aspect was Complex Instruction (CI). Complex Instruction sought to implement the specific professional content of interventions according to the needs of institutions. Complex Instruction supports the prevention of school leaving via a rich set of professional tools and services. Complex Instruction helped to improve the organizational culture of schools and, on the other hand, to increase the student retention capacity of schools by expanding the methodological repertoire of teachers. This led to the initial connection with the iSTEP program. Hungary provides an example of how the iSTEP Institute worked as a catalyst in a country characterized by a fractious political environment and contentious debates about university curriculum. It provided commitment to embedding the principles into a program context. The iSTEP Institute provided a new focus on practice-based teacher education that served as a catalyst for advancing practice-based teacher education throughout Hungary. Despite the challenging socio-political context, the focus on equity -- derived from the foundational Complex Instruction Program -- was retained. Faculty began working to establish strong relationships with schools – a novelty in the Hungarian context and indicative of the power of the network to transform existing institutional arrangements. The Institute also served to elevate a norm for high-quality PD for teacher mentors and strengthen coherence between the university curriculum and teaching practices in schools.

Project EFOP-3.1.2-16-2016-00001

In Sweden, university-based teacher education programs have been the dominant path to teaching since the late 1970s. In 1977, a period of higher education reform transferred teacher education from teacher education colleges to higher education institutions (Furuhagen et al., 2019). In January 2020, teacher education programs were offered by 27 out of a total of approximately 50 higher education institutions (HEIs) in Sweden. The majority of HEIs are public authorities. There have been frequent teacher education reforms in Sweden—program structure and curriculum were reformed in 1988, 2001, and 2011 (Åstrand, 2017). The reforms are founded on different ideas on “the contents and aims of teacher education” (Furuhagen et al., 2019, p. 795). The 2001 reform was based on an ideal of a general teacher while the 2011 reform resulted in separate programs and degrees for class (grades 1-3 or 4-6) and subject teachers (grades 7-9 and upper-secondary schools). Sweden faces a shortage of certified teachers and there is a demand for alternative routes to teacher certification. Within this reform context, the University of Gothenburg began by establishing an innovative teacher education program with the neighboring municipality, the City of Gothenburg. A key element of success was the establishment of a joint commitment to integrating the work of schools and the university. Representatives from municipal government became involved in facilitating connections between the university and schools where teacher education candidates were placed. The partners evinced a depth of commitment to subject matter pedagogy and to the continued evolution of teacher education policy and reform in Sweden. In reflection, iSTEP catalyzed a promotion of the principles of powerful teacher education and helped to integrate these into policies and practices in the Swedish context. The collaborative project documented in this chapter was designed to build a teacher education program guided by the core principles of a program vision, coherence and opportunities to enact practice. It is our understanding that these principles, as elaborated by Klette and Hammerness (2016), mainly refers to conceptual coherence as defined by Hammerness (2006). A basic assumption in our work is that collaborative institutional arrangements—structural coherence—facilitate conceptual coherence, i.e. support the establishment of a program in which faculty, teachers and principals have a common understanding of good teaching and learning and where students’ opportunities to enact practice are strong and lively.

Åstrand, B. (2017). Swedish teacher education and the issue of fragmentation: Conditions for the struggle over academic rigour and professional relevance. In Hudson, B. (Ed.), Overcoming fragmentation in Teacher Education Policy and Practice (pp. 101-152). Cambridge University Press. Furuhagen, B., Holmén, J. & Säntti, J. (2019). The Ideal Teacher: Orientations of Teacher Education in Sweden and Finland after the Second World War. History of Education, 48(6), 784–805. Klette, K. & Hammerness, K. (2016). Conceptual Framework for Analyzing Qualities in Teacher Education: Looking at Features of Teacher Education from an International Perspective. Acta Didactica Norge, 10(2), 26–52 Hammerness, K. (2006). From Coherence in Theory to Coherence in Practice. Teachers College Record, 108(7), 1241–1265.