‘It is like a hammer and toothbrush; you need it for the rest of your life’ – Five Norwegian teachers’ experiences of working at a ‘thinking school’
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7577/njcie.4347Keywords:
thinking school approach, pupil's learning, teachers as professionalAbstract
This article investigates how a group of Norwegian teachers experience working at a ‘thinking school’ (i.e. a school that cooperates with UK-based consultancy Thinking Matters). The context is curriculum development in Norway, where schools and teachers are given increasing freedom in terms of what methods to apply and what content to teach while being expected to reflect and develop collectively as professional communities. In this setting, it is interesting to see how teachers utilise the tools and models offered by an external actor and how they negotiate between these and their own pedagogical ideas as well as the demands put on them by the curriculum. We approached this study by firstly analysing two documents published by Thinking Matters, and secondly by asking how the teachers experience the effects of the thinking school approach on pupils’ learning and themselves as professional teachers. We interviewed five teachers who emphasised several positive aspects of working within the thinking school approach. However, in this article, we also identify some tensions resulting from the adoption of a whole-school approach that emphasises the methods that teachers should use and that pupils should master as a way of achieving the overarching aims of the curriculum.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Alvesson, M., & Skjöldberg, K. (2018). Reflexive methodology: New vistas for qualitative research (3rd ed). Sage.
Biesta, G. (2006). Beyond learning: Democratic education for a human future. Paradigm.
Biesta, G., Priestley, M., & Robinson, S. (2015). The role of beliefs in teacher agency. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and practice, 21(6), 624–640. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1044325
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Brinkmann, S., & Kvale, S. (2018). Doing interviews (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011) Research methods in education (7th ed.). Routledge.
Dedering, K., Goecke, M., & Rauh, M. (2015). Professional background and working practices of consultants in school development: Initial empirical findings from Germany. Journal of Educational Change, 16, 27–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-014-9241-1
Engelsen, B. U. (2006). Kan læring planlegges? Arbeid med læreplaner – hva, hvordan, hvorfor [Can learning be planned? Working with curricula – what, how, why?] (7th ed.). Gyldendal akademisk.
Fullan, M., & Kirtman, L. (2019). Coherent school leadership: Forging clarity from complexity. ASCD.
Gundem, B. B. (1993). Rise, development and changing conceptions of curriculum administration and curriculum guidelines in Norway: the national—local dilemma. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 25(3), 251–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027930250304
Hilt, L. T., Riese, H., & Søreide, G. E. (2019). Narrow identity resources for future students: The 21st century skills movement encounters the Norwegian education policy context. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 51(3), 384–402. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2018.1502356
Hodgson, J., Rønning, W., Skogvold, A. S., & Tomlinson, P. (2010). På vei fra læreplan til klasserom. Om læreres fortolkning, planlegging og syn på LK06 [From curriculum to classroom. On teachers’ interpretation, planning and views regarding LK06]. Nordlandsforskning, NF-rapport, 3/2010
Jank, W., & Meyer, H. (2006). Didaktiske modeller [Didactic models]. Hans Reitzels forlag.
Klafki, W. (2001). Kategorial dannelse. Bidrag til en dannelsesteoretisk fortolkning av moderne didaktikk [Categorical Bildung. Contributions to a Bildung-theoretical interpretation of modern didactics]. In E. L. Dale (Ed.), Om utdanning—klassiske tekster [About education – classical texts] (pp. 167–304). Gyldendal Akademisk.
Kools, M., Stoll, L., George, B., Steijn, B., Bekkers, V., & Gouëdard, P. (2020). The school as a learning organisation: The concept and its measurement. European Journal of Education, 55(1), 24–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12383
Kvernbekk, T. (2011). The concept of evidence in evidence-based practice. Educational Theory, 61(5), 515–532. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5446.2011.00418.x
Lipman, M. (2003). Thinking in education. Cambridge University Press.
Ministry of Education and Research. (2016). St.meld nr. 28 (2015-2016), Fag – Fordypning – Forståelse. En fornyelse av kunnskapsløftet. [Subjects - Emersion - Understanding. A renewal of the knowledge promotion]. https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/e8e1f41732ca4a64b003fca213ae663b/no/pdfs/stm201520160028000dddpdfs.pdf
Ministry of Education and Research. (2017). Core curriculum – values and principles for primary and secondary education. https://www.udir.no/lk20/overordnet-del/om-overordnet-del/?lang=eng
Norwegian National Research Ethics Committees. (2016). Guidelines for research ethics in the social sciences, humanities, law, and theology. https://www.etikkom.no/en/
Pettersvold, M., & Østrem, S. (Eds.). (2019). Problembarna [Problematic children]. Cappelen Damm.
Ryen, E. (2020). Klafki’s critical constructive Didaktik and the epistemology of critical thinking. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 52(2), 214-229.
Skedsmo, G., & Mausethagen, S. (2017) Nye styringsformer i utdanningssektoren – spenninger mellom resultatstyring og faglig ansvar [New forms of governance in the education sector]. Norsk pedagogisk tidsskrift, 2, 169-179.
Thinking Matters. (n.d.-a). Our History. https://www.thinkingmatters.com/about/history
Thinking Matters. (n.d.-b). Beyond Rosenshine, https://www.thinkingmatters.com/assets/uploads/Beyond-Rosenshine.pdf
Thinking Matters. (n.d.-c). Thinking Schools – What are they. https://www.thinkingmatters.com/thinkingschools-what-are-they
von Humboldt, W. (2000). Theory of Bildung. In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann, & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice: The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 57–61). Routledge.
Westbury, I. (1998). Didaktik and curriculum studies. In B. Gundem, & S. Hopmann (Eds.), Didaktik and/or curriculum (pp. 47–78). Routledge.
Yin, R. K. (2017). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. Sage Publications.
Young, M. (2008). Bringing knowledge back in. Routledge.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Erik Ryen, Kirsti Marie Jegstad
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Declaration on copyright
- The author/s will keep their copyright and right of reproduction of their own manuscript, with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License, but give the journal a permanent right to 1) present the manuscript to the public in the original form in which it was digitally published and 2) to be registered and cited as the first publication of the manuscript.
- The author itself must manage its financial reproduction rights in relation to any third-parties.
- The journal does not provide any financial or other remuneration for contributions submitted.
- Readers of the journal may print the manuscripts presented under the same conditions that apply to reproduction of a physical copy. This means that mass reproduction of physical copies or production of copies for commercial purposes is not permitted without the agreement of the author/s.
