Conference Agenda
Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
Please note that all times are shown in the time zone of the conference. The current conference time is: 19th Aug 2026, 21:29:38 EET
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | ||
23 SES 05 C: Teacher education
Paper Session | ||
    | ||
23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Paper What is Teacher Education in Policy Terms? Different Imaginaries of the Teacher and Teacher Education in England and France Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium Presenting Author:We often take what a teacher is for granted. A common view is that a teacher is a person who teaches in a school. However, in different contexts this breaks down. For example, distinctions between certified and non-certified teachers (Mathou et al. 2022), what level one teaches at (Farges 2017), and different pathways taken into the profession including second career teachers (Coppe 2024). There is a diverse profile of people who teach in the classroom, and consequently, a diversification of the very meaning of what a teacher is —both in terms of common imaginary of what a teacher is, and through institutional redefinitions of what a teacher is shaped by changing political conditions of entry into the teaching profession (Coppe, Sarazin et al. 2022, Coppe 2024). What a teacher is is fundamentally connected with how they are educated and, in turn, how they are educated is deeply entwined with the political imaginary(ies) of what a teacher ought to be. The concept of an imaginary of the teacher is rooted in the work of Benedict Anderson (2006 [1983]) on nations as imagined communities; we draw on his work to envision the conceptualisations of the teacher as an imaginary. As such, imaginary refers to a socio-cultural construct of what something is in an ontological sense. Such an imaginary, we theorise, connects policy and policy discourse to conceptions of what is a teacher and what and what they ought to become. We seek to understand this through analysing teacher education. As Menter (2023 : 4) elegantly puts it: “By their teacher education ye shall know them”. The current state of diversity and ongoing trends of diversification in teaching workforces raise fundamental questions not only about the imaginary of teachers but also about the imaginary of initial teacher education — about what it is, what it aims to be and what kind of professionals it seeks to cultivate — aspects we explore in this paper considering the intertwinement between the imaginary of teacher education and the imaginary of teachers as expressed in teacher education policy and policymaking. To contextualize the issues: Teacher education policy is changing across Europe in for example Norway (Helgetun, Powell et al. 2018), France (Prost 2014), the United Kingdom and Ireland (Menter 2016), and Belgium (Cattonar, Dumay et al. 2023). This has been linked to the performance of the education system in a globally competitive world alongside regional processes of harmonisation of education (e.g., Bologna process) and local tentative definitions of what constitute a good teacher, good teacher education, and a good teacher educator (Helgetun 2022, 2023), as well as shortages of teachers due to issues of recruitment and retention (Coppe 2024). Moreover, what education stakeholders consider a teacher is and ought to become are often at the heart of political debates and is eventually expressed through teacher education provision and certification policy (Menter 2023, Swennen 2024). Wilkins (2023) recently pointed out that in the past years, teacher education policies have taken a new turn, with some contexts increasing the role of universities in initial teacher education (e.g France), while others have moved toward minimising their involvement (e.g., England). Therefore, in this study, we analyse how teacher education policy has changed over time in England and France, and how these changes have altered the discourse, that is the conceptualisation, of what a teacher is in policy terms through shifting the imaginary of the teacher. In so doing, the article aims to illuminate the relation between the teaching professions and the state, as well as the power of the state to shape the teaching professions. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used The research was comprised of document analysis of policy documents and national inspectorate reports on ITE (N=44 for England and N= 47 for France), analysis of ITE discourse in press releases found in the French Agence Éducation et Formation (AEF, N = 272), the British Educational Research Association (BERA) presidential addresses (N=34), publications and statements by key stakeholder organisations in teacher education (UCET, NASBTT and unions in England, unions in France) analysis of ITE requirements (Teachers standards/national curriculum in ITE in England and Teachers standards/maquette de formation in France), and expert elite interviews of actors in teacher education and teacher education policymaking in England (N=20) and France (N=20) to understand the policymaking process and get insider views on teacher education policy. In addition, to better understand the link between teacher education and teachers’ imaginary at the level of policy as practice we compared the ITE curriculum/program focus and lecturer backgrounds of three ITE providers in France (INSPE of Grenoble, INSPE of Lyon, and INSPE Paris-Créteil), as well as a PGCE provider (University of Oxford), a B.Ed and PGCE provider (Sheffield Hallam), and a SCITT (South Farnham) in England. The choices were based on personal experiences of the first author with these institutions. The different and asymmetrical data collected were then compared and analysed using the circular method of the research process (Helgetun and Decuypere 2023) and constant comparison (Zapp, Helgetun et al. 2018) to triangulate what teacher education policy is, how teacher education policy conceptualises the teacher, and who influences the making of teacher education policy. In addition, the data was analysed by establishing who the key players were (who was mentioned in documents and interviews), what the views were and the rationale for the view (rhetoric and sources of evidence), and the discursive framing of policy. We then compared the historical narratives to look at similarities and differences in the two cases. This comparison then enabled a contrasting view, which improves the understanding of each case and enabled us to see the relation between a teacher imaginary and teacher education as expressed in policy. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings Our results shed light on how there is a plurality of imaginaries of the teacher and ITE across time and space. In England, the liberal systemless system ensures an end-product focus centred on standards set by government and enforced by inspections, as outcome not methods are emphasised. In France the historic educative-state ensures both legitimacy for the state structure and top-down bureaucratic delivery of not only standards but also curriculum of ITE in a dual focus on outcome and method through an imaginary centred on the teacher as an agent of the Republic and the state as the only valid guarantee of good education. Interestingly, a lot of the same concerns over teacher education were apparent across both time and space based on our analysis. Firstly, it seems three strong forces are locked in competition over who should conduct ITE: Teachers themselves, academics in education, and academics in the disciplines. Moreover, there is contention over where ITE ought to take place (teacher’s colleges, in schools, in universities), which is anchored in different institutional views on what a teacher is and how where they are educated is symbolically important and goes beyond considerations of teachers’ standards and ITE requirements. These concerns and subsequent contestations lead to a lack of unity which enables the state to arbitrate and decide the final shape of ITE and by extension, what a teacher is. Thus, the dominant imaginary of the teacher is in both England and France determined by state policy. Moreover, we also see those imaginaries of what a teacher is are fluid and shift over time and space, but are linked as past policy and discourse feeds into the emergent imaginaries. References Anderson, B. (2006 [1983]). Imagined communities. London: UK, Verso. Coppe, T. (2025). The expanded presence of second-career teachers: Redefining the teaching profession and career. The teaching profession in a globalizing world: Governance, Career, Learning. X. Dumay, L. Paine and T. Sorensen. Coppe, T., M. Sarazin, V. März, V. Dupriez and I. Raemdonck (2022). "(Second career) teachers' work socialization as a networked process: New empirical and methodological insights." Teaching and Teacher Education 116. Farges, G. (2017). Les Mondes enseignants. Identités et clivages. Paris, France, PUF. Helgetun, J. B. (2022). The importance of context: Teacher education policy in England and France compared. The Palgrave Handbook of Teacher Education Research. I. Menter, Palgrave-Macmilan. Helgetun, J. B. (2023). The global and the local: Idea flows, contexts, and the influencing of education policy in the 21st century. International Encyclopedia of Education. R. Tierney, F. Rizvi and K. Ercikan, Elsevir. Helgetun, J. B. and M. Decuypere (2023). "One thing can be more than one thing a comparative study of the teacher professionalization app TeacherTapp." Learning, Media and Technology 00(0): 1-17. LeTendre, G. K., Helgetun, J. B., Woo, H., & Ikoma, S. (2026). The teacher and the state: A comparative analysis of Nordic and East Asian nations: Emerald Publishing. Menter, I. (2016). UK and Irish teacher education in a time of change. Teacher education in times of change. G. Beauchamp, L. Clarke, M. Hulme et al. Bristol, Policy Press University of Bristol: 19-37. Menter, I. (2023). Teacher Education Research in the Twenty-First Century. The Palgrave handbook of teacher education research. I. Menter. Online, Palgrave Macmillan. Ozouf, J. and M. Ozouf (1992). La République des instituteurs. Paris, Seul. Prost, A., Ed. (2014). La formation des maîtres de 1940 a 2010. Rennes, France, Presses universitaires de Rennes. Swennen, A. (2024). "Research on teacher education: mirror and compass." European Journal of Teacher Education 47(1): 1-4. Wilkins, R. (2023). Policy foundations of education. Bloomsbury Publishing. 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Paper Remaking Teacher Education in the European Education Area: Teacher Professional Identity in the Shadow of European Integration, Policy Entrepreneurship, and Digital-Transformation. 1: UCD Dublin, Ireland; 2: University of Warsaw, Poland; 3: University College of Teacher Education Vienna, Austria Presenting Author:This paper examines how the European Commission's expanding role in education policy – particularly through the European Education Area (EEA) and European Universities Initiative – is reshaping teacher professional identity in an era of digital transformation. Building on work previously presented at ECER 2025 (cf Galvin et al., 2025) and subsequent analyses of EU crisis-driven governance (Palmowski & Gornitzka, 2025; Sorensen & Dumay, 2025), we argue that teacher education has become a strategic site where multiple EU policy agendas converge: digital transformation, labour market responsiveness, research excellence, and European identity formation. Digital platforms and artificial intelligence increasingly influence pedagogical practices (Manca & Ranieri, 2017; Berendt et al., 2020), requiring teacher educators to rethink the approaches and purposes anchoring their work (Goodwin et al., 2023). For instance, Ranieri (2022) emphasizes the value of moving beyond technical skills toward ethical dimensions and responsible professional identity. Other policy agendas press different priorities. The OECD Learning Compass 2030 positions teacher agency as key to addressing global trends (OECD, 2019) a line echoed in EU initiatives like the Digital Education Action Plan and frameworks such as EU DigCompEdu and EU GreenComp. This construction of agency is not however without its issues (Hughson 2024). These developments can we propose be better understood within broader shifts in European education governance. Palmowski & Gornitzka (2025) demonstrate how policy entrepreneurs within the Commission have leveraged crises – Brexit, COVID-19, technological vulnerability including the surge in AI – to fundamentally alter governance dynamics. Through the European Universities Initiative and the European Research Area, the Commission has established unprecedented direct relationships with education institutions, increasingly bypassing traditional member-state hesitancies and the gatekeeping of experts such as professional teacher educators. This represents what Chou et al. (2017) identify as "multi-level, multi-issue, and multi-actor" governance – vertical authority shifts, horizontal policy connections, and heterogeneous stakeholder involvement. Recent Commission policy actions on teacher education exemplifies these dynamics. We suggest that policy entrepreneurs in DG EAC have framed teacher transformation as crisis requiring urgent response, positioning reform as essential to EU competitiveness.Thus through competency frameworks and funding mechanisms that focus on strengthening initial training and teacher continuous professional development, the Commission has created apparent empowerment – emphasizing teacher "agency," "capability," and "resilience" – while in reality seeking to reconstruct professional identity to better serve EU integration objectives. This raises critical questions: Whose interests are served by the "agentive," "digitally competent", "skills-focused" teacher? How do seemingly neutral frameworks embed particular power relations? Where does the space exist for profession-led identity development centred on social justice? And how are these "travelling policies" vernacularized – negotiated, resisted, or transformed – within Member State contexts (Revyakina and Galvin,2023) ? Drawing on identity theory (Burke & Stets, 2022), governance analysis (Palmowski & Gornitzka, 2025; Chou et al., 2017), policy vernacularization theory (Revyakina & Galvin, 2023), and post-structural policy analysis (Ball, 2012; Lingard, 2024; McMahon, 2024), we examine in this paper how an increasingly coalescent EU policy architecture is remaking teacher professional identity. We analyze the interplay between multi-level governance dynamics, crisis-framed policy entrepreneurship, and prescribed identity formations. Moving beyond top-down analysis, we examine vernacularization – how EU prescriptions are assembled, refused, or melded with existing practices. Our analysis is based in an ongoing project seeking better understanding of the tensions increasingly observing between profession-led and policy-driven identity construction, identifying spaces for resistance and alternative formations prioritizing social justice over instrumental competitiveness. The present paper draws particularly from an EU policy interrogation method we are developing to move beyond the Commission’s stated goals and uncover the actual, often hidden, motivations and outcomes that underscore education policy in recent times. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used Our research employs an innovative mixed-method design combining governance analysis and discourse studies, structured around Palmowski & Gornitzka's (2025) multi-level, multi-issue, and multi-actor framework and critical discourse study drawing from Krzyżanowski & Forchtner (2016),. We analyze teacher education policy through three intersecting analytical dimensions: vertical authority shifts between EU, national, and institutional actors; horizontal connections across policy domains (digital transformation, labour market, research, identity formation); and power dynamics among diverse stakeholders including policy entrepreneurs, European organizations, national institutions, and teacher unions. The analytical framework we are developing integrates multiple theoretical perspectives. Critical discourse analysis following Ball (2012), Lingard (2024), and McMahon (2024) examines how key signifiers (agency, competence, capability, resilience) function in policy texts, what subject positions are made available or foreclosed for teachers, how crisis is framed to necessitate particular reforms, and what alternatives remain invisible or delegitimized. Identity theory (Burke & Stets, 2022) explores how professional identity is socially constructed through policy discourse and the tensions between multiple identity standards (professional, organizational, European). Policy vernacularization theory (Revyakina & Galvin, 2023) analyses how "travelling policies" meet embedded national contexts through processes of assemblage, refoulement (rejection/pushing back), and meld (blending with existing local practices). Data used are drawn from primary and secondary sources including EU policy documents spanning 2016-2025, such as EEA Council Conclusions, Digital Education Action Plan, European Universities Initiative documentation, EU DigCompEdu and EU GreenComp frameworks, and the European Strategy for Universities. Implementation and response documents include Commission staff working documents, European Universities alliance strategic plans, national transposition documents from Ireland, Poland, and Austria, and policy stakeholder position papers from European University Association, European Trade Union Committee for Education, and national teacher education associations. Governance documents include Council Working Party records, EU Monitor and semester reports, and Commission evaluation reports relating to EEA activity such as the Erasmus+ Teacher Academies action. Our analytical model proposes four distinct phases. This present paper concentrates on the first two phases: ‘Governance mapping’ documents teacher education's emergence in EU policy architecture, identifies key policy entrepreneurs and their strategies, and maps multi-level authority distributions, multi-issue policy connections, and multi-actor networks. An extensive critical discourse-analysis based in policy vernacularisation is used to systematically explore these key Commission policy documents on the EEA and the forthcoming ‘Teachers & Trainers Agenda’. This foregrounds identity prescriptions, activities around ‘crisis’ framing, ideations on inclusion/exclusion dynamics, and policy interstices - what remains unspoken in all of this. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The proposed paper address and draws-out the EU's expanding role in policy for teacher education in Europe – driven by policy entrepreneurs leveraging crisis framings within multi-level, multi-issue, multi-actor governance dynamics. We suggest this is a coherent and ongoing effort to fundamentally reconstructing teacher professional identity. While policy discourse emphasises empowerment through agency, capability, and resilience, the underlying architecture of recent EC education policy initiatives instrumentalises teachers for EU strategic objectives – particularly, we would argue, digital transformation and economic competitiveness. What we are seeing even in these early stages of our work represents a significant shift where the initiative in professional identity formation increasingly lies with policy-makers rather than the teaching profession itself. Competency frameworks, funding mechanisms, and institutional dependencies create powerful compliance incentives while the language of empowerment obscures deeper power relations. However, this policy hegemony is neither complete nor uncontested. Spaces remain for professional resistance, alternative formations, and identity work centred on social justice rather than instrumental competitiveness. Professional associations, critical scholarship, institutional adaptation, and alternative networks provide resources for teachers and teacher educators to negotiate, subvert, or refuse prescribed identities. The challenge, as we see it, is to move from responsive to proactive professional identity work – from receiving policy framings to articulating profession-led alternatives. Ultimately, the question is not whether teacher transformation requires changes in teacher education – it clearly does. The question is who determines what those changes should be, in whose interests, and according to what values. Our analysis suggests that currently, policy entrepreneurs are seeking to capture this process. Reclaiming it for the profession is both possible and necessary. The proposed paper is intended as a contribution to the argument for doing so. References Ball, S. J. (2012). Politics and policy making in education: Explorations in sociology. Routledge. Burke, P. J., & Stets, J. E. (2022). Identity theory: Revised and expanded. Oxford. Chou, M.-H., Gornitzka, Å., Ravinet, P., & Vukasovic, M. (2017). Higher education governance and policy: An introduction to multi-issue, multi-level and multi-actor dynamics. Policy and Society, 36(1), 1-15. European Commission. (2017). European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators (DigCompEdu). Publications Office of the European Union. European Commission. (2022). GreenComp: The European sustainability competence framework. Publications Office of the European Union. Galés, N. L., & Gallon, R. (2019). Educational agility. In Rethinking Teacher Education for the 21st Century: Trends, Challenges and New Directions (pp. 98-111). Galvin, C., Madalinska-Michalak, J., & Revyakina, E. (2024). The European Union Erasmus+ Teacher Academies Action. In Key Issues in Teacher Education Brill. Galvin, C., Revyakina, E., Madalińska-Michalak, J., Zavyalova, K., & Zavatta, G. (2025, September). Rethinking the social and professional identity of teachers - Emerging issues in policy for teacher education in a digital/postdigital era. Paper presented at ECER 2025, Belgrade, Serbia Goodwin, A. L., Madalińska-Michalak, J., & Flores, M. A. (2023). Rethinking teacher education in/for challenging times: Reconciling enduring tensions, imagining new possibilities. European Journal of Teacher Education, 46(5), 840-855. Hughson, T. A. (2024). The OECD and epistemic (de)colonisation: Globalising visions for knowledge in the Learning Compass 2030. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 54(1), 74–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2022.2078955 Krzyżanowski, M., & Forchtner, B. (2016). Theories and concepts in critical discourse studies: Facing challenges, moving beyond foundations. Discourse & society, 27(3), 253-261. Lingard, B. (2024). A political sociology of education policy: By Gunter Helen M. Bristol, England, Policy Press. Madalińska-Michalak, J. (2024). Teacher professional ethics, teaching, and quality in context: A commentary. In Teacher Ethics and Teaching Quality in Scandinavian Schools (pp. 66-75). Routledge. McMahon, S. (2024). Using poststructural policy analysis for social justice. In Rights and Social Justice in Research (pp. 79-98). Policy Press. OECD. (2019). OECD Learning Compass 2030. OECD Publishing. Palmowski, J., & Gornitzka, Å. (2025). In the shadow of the EU's crises: The changing dynamics of the European knowledge area, 2014–25. Journal of European Integration. Purdy, N., & Galvin, C. (2025). Values and social conscience in education: Towards an education that nurtures values, ethos and ethics. In A. Lynam & C. McGuckin (Eds.), Contemporary Issues in the Psychology of Education. IGI Global. 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Paper Educating Fast-Track Primary Teachers in Sweden: Policy Enactment in Alternative Routes into Teacher Education University West, Sweden Presenting Author:Across Europe and internationally, alternative and fast routes into teacher education have been introduced as fast policy responses to persistent teacher shortages (Hardy et al., 2018; Imig & Assunção Flores, 2025; Lampert & Dadvand, 2024; White et al, 2025). In Sweden, this development has taken a concrete form through the introduction of a shortened alternative route into primary teacher education, known as KPU-75, targeting academics with prior higher education degrees but without pedagogical training. Introduced in 2022 as a government-initiated pilot project, KPU-75 comprises 75 ECTS credits and is designed to be completed within one academic year (U2021/05029; SFS 2021:1336). While officially motivated by concerns about teacher shortages, policy texts also position the programme as a means of renewing teacher professionalism by attracting academically qualified career changers into the profession (U2021/00301). At the same time, the programme is characterised by a high degree of central regulation regarding structure, scope, and content, and a strong emphasis on practice-oriented knowledge. Research on alternative routes and other fast policy initiatives into teacher education has shown that such programmes often generate tensions between academic, professional, and instrumental logics, and that they may have unintended consequences for teacher professionalism and the knowledge base of the profession Ayadorova, 2024; Ball, 2016; Mayer & Mills, 2021; Tatto, 2021; Werler, 2019). In the Swedish context, empirical research on KPU-75 is still limited and has primarily focused on policy texts or student motivations. There is, consequently, a lack of studies examining how this alternative teacher education policy is enacted in practice. Against this background, the present study aims to analyse how the alternative primary teacher education programme KPU-75 is enacted at the six Swedish universities that currently offer the programme within the pilot initiative. Drawing on a policy enactment perspective (Ball 2015; Ball et al. 2011, 2012), the study conceptualises policy not as something that is linearly implemented, but as something that is actively interpreted, translated, and negotiated within local institutional contexts. The study is guided by the following research questions:
By focusing on policy enactment at the institutional level, the study contributes empirically to research on alternative routes into teacher education and theoretically to discussions on how contemporary teacher education policies shape teacher professionalism. The findings are expected to be of relevance to international debates on fast-track teacher education, policy governance, and the future of research-based teacher education in contexts marked by teacher shortages. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used The study adopts a qualitative research design informed by the policy enactment framework developed by Ball and colleagues (Ball, 2015; Ball et al., 2011, 2012). From this perspective, policy is understood as both text and discourse, as well as text and practice, and attention is directed towards how policy meanings are constructed through situated institutional practices. Empirically, the study is based on a comprehensive document analysis of eight alternative primary teacher education programmes (KPU-75) offered at six Swedish universities. The dataset consists of official programme plans, course syllabi, study guides, and examination assignments from the first cohort of students enrolled in the programmes during the academic years 2023 and 2023–2024. In total, the dataset comprises documentation from 61 courses and 211 examination tasks, covering both primary grade specialisations (P–3 and 4–6) and all subject profiles offered within the programmes. The analysis was carried out in several stages. First, an analytical mapping was conducted for each programme, focusing on course structure, credit distribution, subject content, and forms of assessment. Second, a qualitative content analysis examined how different forms of teacher knowledge, such as subject knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, research-based knowledge, were articulated and prioritised across the programmes. Finally, cross-case comparisons were used to identify patterns of variation, tension, and convergence in how the policy was enacted across institutional contexts. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings Preliminary analyses indicate that the programmes are constructed in close alignment with the external conditions specified in the national policy (U2021/05029; SFS 2021:1336). This alignment is evident in, for example, course titles, overall programme structure, and the distribution of credits across subject areas. In this sense, the enactment of the policy appears largely compliant with the national policy text governing KPU-75. At the same time, the analysis reveals resistance to the national policy text and discourse. While all programmes prioritise what is framed in policy as “the most necessary” content, several universities also include elements that the national policy has explicitly excluded. This applies in particular to areas such as curriculum theory and didactics, philosophy of science and research methodology, and, to some extent, evaluation and school development work. Across the programmes, a strong emphasis is placed on teaching planning, curriculum use and assessment practices. In addition to being explicitly prescribed in the national policy, this focus appears to be shaped by the format of the education itself. Despite explicit efforts of the universities to incorporate a scientific perspective and to frame the programmes research-based, the preliminary findings indicate that course content and assessment tasks tend to prioritise highly practical aspects of teacher work. Professional competencies are primarily constructed in terms of classroom management, planning, documentation, and assessment, while more theoretically oriented or critically analytical forms of knowledge receive less emphasis. Taken together, the findings suggest that the enactment of this alternative programme is characterised by a narrowing of the professional knowledge base. The KPU-75 policy and practice also risk reshaping teacher professionalism in ways that privilege instrumental competence over theoretical, and research-based perspectives. References Aydarova, E. (2023). Intermediary Organizations, Technocratic Discourses, and the Rise of Accountability Regimes in Teacher Education. Journal of Teacher Education, 75(1), 29-42. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224871231174835 (Original work published 2024) Ball, S. J. (2015). What is policy? 21 years later: Reflections on the possibilities of policy research. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 36(3), 306–313. https:// doi: 10.1080/01596306.2015.1015279 Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., Braun, A., & Hoskins, K. (2011). Policy subjects and policy actors in schools: some necessary but insufficient analyses. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 32(4), 611–624. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2011.601564 Ball, S.J., Maguire, M., & Braun, A. (2012). How schools do policy: Policy enactments in secondary schools. Routledge. Hardy, I., Rönnerman, K. & Beach, D. (2018). Teachers’ work in complex times: the ‘fast policy’ of Swedish school reform. Oxford Review of Education, 45(3), 350–366. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2018.1546684 Hardy, I., Jakhelln, R., & Smit, B. (2021). The policies and politics of teachers’ initial learning: the complexity of national initial teacher education policies. Teaching Education, 32(3), 286–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2020.1729115 Imig, D., & Assunção Flores, M. (2025). International trends in contexts marked by teacher shortages: implications for teacher education, professionalism and the teaching profession. Journal of Education for Teaching, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2025.2593888 Lampert, J., & Dadvand, B. (2024). Teachers at the speed of light: alternative pathways into teaching and implications for social justice. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 52(3), 276–287. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2024.2323929 Mayer, D., & Mills, M. (2021). Professionalism and teacher education in Australia and England. European Journal of Teacher Education, 44(1), 45–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1832987 SFS 2021:1336. Förordning om försöksverksamhet med kompletterande pedagogisk utbildning som leder till grundlärarexamen eller ämneslärarexamen [Decree on Experimental Activities with Supplementary Pedagogical Training Leading to a Degree of Primary or Secondary School Teacher]. Riksdagen. Tatto, M. T. (2021). Professionalism in teaching and the role of teacher education. European Journal of Teacher Education, 44(1), 20–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1849130 U2021/00301. Ökad kvalitet i lärarutbildningen och fler lärare i skolan [Increased quality in teacher education and more teachers in schools]. Regeringen. U2021/05029. Uppdrag att anordna en försöksverksamhet med kompletterande pedagogisk utbildning som leder till grundlärarexamen eller ämneslärarexamen [Assignment to organise a pilot project with supplementary pedagogical training leading to a Bachelor of Science in Primary Education or a Degree of Subject Teacher]. Regeringen. White, S., Bourke, T., Mills, R., Mills, M., van Leent, L., Wood, C., & Readette, M. (2025). Career change teachers: solving the teacher shortage? European Journal of Teacher Education, 48(1), 97–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2024.2407546 | ||