The Transformation of Teaching Habits in Relation to the Introduction of Grading and National Testing in Science Education in Sweden

In Sweden, a new curriculum and new methods of assessment (grading of students and national tests) in science education were introduced in grade 6 in 2012/2013. We have investigated what implications these reforms have for teachers’ teaching and assessment practices in order to explore the question of how teachers transform their teaching habits in relation to policy reforms. Interviews with 16 teachers teaching science in grade 6 (Y6), over 3 years after the reforms were introduced, were analysed. Building on the ideas of John Dewey, we consider teachers’ talk about their everyday practice as expressions of their habits of teaching. Habits of teaching are related both to individual experiences as well as institutional traditions in and about teaching. A categorisation of educational philosophies was used to teachers’ habits of teaching to a collective level and to show how habits can be transformed and developed over time in specific sociocultural contexts. The teachers were categorised as using essentialist and/or progressivist educational philosophy. In the responses to the introduction of grading and national testing, the teachers took three approaches: Their habits being reinforced, revised or unchanged in relation to the reforms. Although the responses were different, a striking similarity was that all teachers justified their responses with wanting to do what is best for students. However, how to show care for students differed, from delivering scientific knowledge in alignment with an essentialist educational philosophy, to preparing students to do well on tests, to supporting their development as individuals, which is in alignment with a progressivist educational philosophy

Teachers as co-designers:Scientific and colloquial evidence on teacher professional development and curriculum innovation

Item does not contain fulltextTeachers are increasingly acting as co-designers of curriculum materials, because this process can positively affect their professional development while also yielding resources that are relevant and useful for their teaching practice. This study explores evidence related to the claim that involving teachers in collaborative design is worth the effort. We used two data sources: papers from scientific journals, reflecting the researcher’s perspective, and from professional journals, providing a colloquial corpus reflecting the teacher’s perspective. We conclude that the colloquial corpus justifies our claim that co-design is gaining momentum, but that the scientific corpus is still limited in number of articles. We were able to identify common patterns across the professional articles that complement the patterns identified in the scientific corpus. At the same time, two distinct pictures of design teams emerge from these two corpora, with different process characteristics as well as reported effects