ECER 2021 presentation

1. Anden information
Teacher educators experiencing agency
engaging in professional inquiry in teacher
education
ECER 2021
Birgitte Lund Nielsen, Claus Baagø Jepsen &
Mikkel Wiskerchen, VIA University College,
Aarhus, Denmark

2. Anden information
Background: The LULAB initiative
§ Research from the context of a Danish large-scale and collaborative
initiative (2019-2023) for systematically developing teacher education :
‘Teacher education as a laboratory for developing excellent teaching and
education’(acronym LULAB)
§ LULAB is an organizational and professional-pedagogical initiative
supporting teacher educators and other actors in teacher education
(student teachers and cooperative partners e.g. from schools) in LULAB
projects/professional inquiry Boyd and White, 2017
o Professional inquiry as a middle position between the `normal´ reflected
development of teaching based on evaluation and genuine practitioner research.
o The initiative is furthermore inspired by Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL)
approaches in higher education Kreber & Cranton, 2000; Mårtensson et al., 2011
§ ‘Laboratory' is used in a Dewey inspired understanding Staunæs et al. 2014,
o The inquiry-based approach emphasizes the vision of developing teacher education
through collaborative experiments

3. Anden information
LULAB projects – criteria and an example
§ A range of different
projects running –
participants apply
referring to the criteria
§ Not all teacher educators
have at present a LULAB
project, but the initiative
is for all – experiences are
shared etc. (SoTL as an
approach to development
in the full organsiation)
§ Outdoor teaching in the German language
§ A researcher in outdoor pedagogy in cooperation
with a teacher edcuator, students teachers and
pupils from a school
§ Student teachers’ microteaching in the outdoor
environment - later analysed at the college and
used in a new iteration (school placement)

4. Anden information
Background: Professional agency
§ Human agency at work Goller, 2017
§ ..capacity to make intentional choices and to act on these choices in ways that
makes a difference in their professional lives [..] skills, attitudes, and beliefs which
support individuals to act independently in order to transform workplace practices
§ We challenge the individual capacity aspect - agency as an emergent
phenomenon situated in a specific context Priestley, Biesta, Robinson, 2015
§ Teacher educators’ professional agency in bottom-up initiatives in the collegial
community Hökkä, Rasku-Puttonen & Eteläpelto, 2008; Hökkä & Eteläpelto, 2014
§ 3-dimensional model of agency in working life contexts Vähäsantanen et al., 2019
o 1) Influencing at Work
o 2) Developing Work Practices (Participation in Shared Work Practices and
Transforming Work Practices)
o 3) Negotiating Professional Identity
§ Agency as unfolded in a concrete dynamic context implying a research approach
with also qualitative and nested data Priestley et al., 2015
§ Relational agency as an emergent capacity to work with other practitioners and
draw on resources distributed across the system Edwards, 2005; 2015

5. Anden information
Research questions + Mixed Methods design
(Creswell & Clark, 2018)
Research questions
Interviews
§ With both teacher
educators and
student teachers,
at different points
in the LULAB
projects.
OBS: Main focus on
teacher educators
in this presentation
Repeated survey
§ Agency items & open reflections
§ First round October 2020
(repeated 2023)
§ Survey distributed to all teacher
educators from the university
college (N= 212), answers from
97 (46%).
§ 51% have themselves LULAB-
projects, 49% have not yet.
§ Non-response analysis
indicating that the answers are
relatively representatively
distributed
Miscellaneous
• Observation at
organisational
knowledge-sharing
events with
discussion across
projects
• Observation in the
context of LULAB
projects.
• Memo-logs
• “Case-artifacts”
§ In what ways and to what extent do the
teacher educators’ self-reports indicate
professional agency as conceptualized in
the 3-dimensional model of professional
agency in work contexts?
§ In what ways do the teacher educators
unfold and develop professional agency in
the dynamic context of LULAB as an
educational development initiative and in
the professional inquiry projects in LULAB?

6. Anden information
Some findings
§ The teacher educators (TE) experience to a relatively high degree to be
included in decisions about their work, BUT …
§ Answers about cooperation and realizing professional goals are more divided
AND OBS: open reflections
28%
8%
23%
26%
43%
32%
28%
43%
27%
41%
35%
27%
1%
16%
11%
3%
0%
2%
3%
0%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I try out new ideas in my work
I can realise my professional goals in my work
I actively collaborate with others in my unit
I can make decisions regarding my own work
Teacher educators experiences related to elements
of agency in their working life context
Very high degree High degree Some degree Low degree Very low degree

7. Anden information
§ The teacher
educators rated
their experience
of being heard
and contribute
higher in the
context of the
“close”
collaboration
around subjects
than in the
organisation as a
whole
22%
14%
16%
45%
38%
41%
21%
34%
28%
7%
7%
1%
1%
3%
3%
3%
14%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
I'm heard and my views are acknowledged
I have opportunities for participating
in decision-making processes
I make developmental suggestions
in collaboration with others
regarding my teaching subjects
Teacher educators experience of collaboration and
development related to teaching subjects
Very high degree High degree Some degree Low degree Very low degree Don't know
8%
2%
7%
28%
13%
28%
41%
43%
33%
12%
25%
18%
5%
11%
2%
6%
6%
12%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
I'm heard and my views are acknowledged
I have opportunities for participating
in decision-making processes
I make developmental suggestions
in collaboration with others
regarding my teaching subjects
Teacher educators experience of collaboration and
development in teacher education in general

8. Anden information
Some quotes from open reflections
§ In many cases there are not any possibilities to participate in decision
making or having influence at the decisions regarding the education
§ The developmental dimension is very much ”colonialised” by the
organisation, there are not much real dynamic left
§ I actually think there are good possibilities for having influence in the
organisation, but this is not supported by resources and time
§ We do to a very low degree meet process-plans for initiatives and
decisions
§ It is not clear what is decided at what levels
§ There is in no way enough time to discuss development of teaching (and
approaches to teacher education) when you think about the importance
of this – related to e.g. engagement
§ In general I miss rooms, possibilities and initiatives for something like
pedagogical development projects. LULAB appears to be a way forward

9. Anden information
10%
14%
20%
12%
29%
42%
34%
23%
5%
9%
2%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
No participation
in a LULAB
project
Participation in
a LULAB project
Experience of collegial collaboration in the work
community in general
Very high degree High degree Some degree Low degree Very low degree Don't know
28%
8%
47%
11%
21%
8% 14%
2%
58%
2%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
No participation
in a LULAB
project
Participation in
a LULAB project
Experience of collegial collaboration in relation
to the LULAB as an organisational initiative
Very high degree High degree Some degree Low degree Very low degree Don't konw
§ In the generic question
there are no significant
differences between
those having a LULAB
project and those not,
so no bias in the sense
of TE applying for
LULAB being more
collaboratively minded
§ Based on answers
about collegial
collaboration in
general and in LULAB it
is evident, that the TE
being in “the machine
room” in the
professional inquiry
projects experience
new possibilities for
collaboration and
influence

10. Anden information
23%
5%
32%
45%
36%
31%
2%
12%
5%
2%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Deltager eller har deltaget i LULAB-projekt
Har ikke deltaget i LULAB-projekt
I have the possibility for participating in decision
making in cooperation in subject related teams
25%
7%
41%
40%
27%
29%
0%
2%
7%
21%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Deltager eller har deltaget i LULAB-projekt
Har ikke deltaget i LULAB-projekt
I contribute myself with proposals for
development in cooperation in subject related
teams
No participation in a LULAB project
Participation in a LULAB project
No participation in a LULAB project
Participation in a LULAB project
§ So, the TE’s in
LULAB-projects
experience to a
high degree this
initiative as a frame
for collegial
cooperation
§ Agency related
factors are mainly
about the
possibility for
participating in –
and contributing
yourself – in
decision making
§ Not as strong
vicarious
experiences
(colleagues not in
the machine room)

11. Anden information
This is elaborated in the open reflections
from those having LULAB-projects
§ Motivation Ryan & Deci, 2017 : to be positioned as - and experience to be -
competent, to experience a level of autonomy and relatedness
o The projects have given time and room for concrete development, professional
dialogues and the experiments with new pedagogical approaches
o Inspiration and courage to experiment
o Collegial collaboration – possibility for deep involvement and discussions
§ Another central theme is the new way of collaborating with the
student teachers :
o An understanding of collaboration on developing activities or within a course
framework
o Creation of a “other space”, where students are “having a voice” and engage
in pedagogical debates
o In dialogues about the projects terms like this are used: “astounding
together”, “throw ourselves into”, “talking through to an understanding”

12. Anden information
Experiments in co-creation – teacher
educators and student teachers
§ Experiments are approached by teacher educators as either a method for
educational development OR as a way of teaching within a course Knudsen &
Adriansen 2014
§ Regarding the character of the cooperation in LULAB-projects there are
indications of co-creation.
o co-creation is occupying the space in between student engagement and
partnership (Bovill 2020)
o Either a whole-class activity or a few selected students
o Spaces for experiments gives way to new possibilities for didactical and
pedagogical reflections among the studens
o As the "rules of the game" are changed, the students seems to reflect more
open and critically on their learning in the current course.

13. Anden information
Knowledge sharing events – teacher educators
and student teachers (November 2019 +2020)
§ Student teachers
o ..it has been exiting to be a part of this – also hearing how the educators talk about
this …really cool to participate …
o So lovely to participate – being engaged together
o It is cool as a student to be enrolled, because it is cool to feel you are heard - this is
spreading among our peers
o LULAB-projects are practice-oriented, and this is a crucial request from our side as
student teachers
§ Teacher educators
o The bottom-up perspective in LULAB is central. LULAB is at the moment the only
context where we can find room for collegial dialogues. There are both directions
and freedom at the same time. We need to nurture and keep rooms like that
o It is a part of the DNA of teacher education that we are all the time concerned with
developing and qualifying the learning-processes to educate wellqualified teachers.
This represents a process of ‘Bildung - an approach to professional learning where we
are experimenting and exploring together”.

14. Anden information
At the moment we are analysing case-
data (interviews etc.) Some first points:
§ Teacher educators across cases: a positive experience of outcomes– to feel
reconized as a professional teacher educator (positioned as competent)
o Professional inquiry as a middle position! R & D
close to education
o Cooperation as co-creation
o Examples of negotiation of professional identity
§ Cooperation teacher-educators – student teachers
o Variation, not all phases in all projects
§ Positioning of the student-teachers as co-developers and their (somewhat tacit)
positioning of themselves
o The experimental approach - professional inquiry for the teacher educators – a way
of approaching and developing the education – the new possibilities they are given
appear to be mirrored in the way they position the student teachers
o The experimental approach is for the student teacher more related to the concrete
project – e.g. outdoor teaching in German language
1) Influencing at Work
2) Developing Work Practices
(Shared Work Practices
/Transforming Work
Practices)
3) Negotiating Professional
Identity
Vähäsantanen et al. 2019

15. Anden information
Conclusions – so far
§ The teacher educators experience in the LULAB projects a positive possibility
to participate in shared work-practices and in developing these (educational)
work practices. This is experienced as meaningful and motivating
§ Being part of a LULAB-project affect the experience of opportunities for
participating and contributing in decision making – and by so affecting the
professional agency as a teacher educator
§ The findings show the importance of yourself having hands-on in a LULAB
project, the vicarious experiences are not as strong so far – even though there
have been a range of arrangements with sharing and discussions by all
§ The possibilities to take a position as educational developer as teacher
educators appears to have been under pressure
o The teacher educators feel positioned as competent co-developers in LULAB
projects
o This is mirrored in the way they position the student teachers
§ Institutionalization is a critical challenge – to involve the full education – a
change of culture

16. Anden information
References
§ Knudsen, H., & Adriansen, H. K. (2014). Eksperimenterende ledelsespraksis - en monstrøs undervisningsform. In D. Staunæs, H. Adriansen, K. Dupret, S. Høyrup, &
N. C. M. Nickelsen (Eds.), Læringslaboratorier og -eksperimenter (pp. 127–155). Aarhus Universitetsforlag.
§ Biesta, G., Priestley, M. & Robinson, S. (2017). Talking about education: the significance of teachers’ talk for teacher agency. Journal of Curriculum Studies 49(1),
38-54.
§ Bovill, C. (2020). Co-creation in learning and teaching: the case for a whole-class approach in higher education. Higher Education, 79(6), 1023–1037.
§ Boyd, P. & White, E. (2017). Teacher educator professional inquiry in an age of accountability. I P. Boyd and A. Szplit (eds). Teachers and teacher educators learning
through inquiry: International perspectives, 123-142. Krakow: Attyka.
§ Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2009). Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next generation. New York: Teachers College Press.
§ Creswell, J.W. & Clark, V.L.P (2018). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, third edition. Los Angeles: SAGE.
§ Edwards, A. (2005). Relational agency: Learning to be a resourceful practitioner. International Journal of Educational Research 43, 168–182.
§ Edwards, A. (2015). Recognising and realising teachers’ professional agency. Teachers and Teaching - theory and practice 21 (6)
§ Eteläpelto, A., Vähäsantanen, K., Hökkä, P. & Paloniemi, S. (2013). What is agency? Conceptualizing professional agency at work. Educational Research Review 10,
45-65
§ Eteläpelto, A., Vähäsantanen, K., Hökkä, P. & Paloniemi, S. (2014). Identity and agency in professional learning. I S. Billett, C. Harteis og H. Gruber (eds).
International Handbook of research in professional and practice based learning, 645-672. Dordrecht: Springer
§ Hökkä, P., Rasku-Puttonen, H., & Eteläpelto, A. (2008). Teacher educators’ workplace learning: the interdependency between individual agency and social context.
In S. Billett, C. Harteis, and A. Eteläpelto (Eds.) Emerging perspectives in workplace learning. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
§ Hökka, P. & Eteläpelto, A. (2014). Seeking new perspectives on the development of teacher education: A study of the Finnish context. Journal of Teacher
Education, 65(1), 39-52.
§ Kreber, C. & Cranton, P. (2000). Exploring the scholarship of teaching. Higher Education, 71(4), 476- 495.
§ Lunenberg, M., Dengerink, J. & Korthagen, F. (2014). The Professional Teacher Educator: Professional Roles, Behaviour, and Development of Teacher Educators.
Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
§ Priestley, M., Biesta, G., & Robinson, S. (2015). Teacher agency: An Ecological Approach ecological approach. London: Bloomsbury Academic
§ Ryan, M.R. & Deci, E.L. (2017). Self-determination theory. New York: The Guilford Press
§ Staunæs, D. et al. (eds) (2014). Læringslaboratorier og - eksperimenter. Aarhus: Aarhus Universitetsforlag.
§ Tack, H. & Vanderlinde, R. (2014). Teacher educators’ professional development: Towards a typology of teacher educators’ researcherly disposition. British Journal
of Educational Studies, 62(3), 297-315.
§ Vähäsantanen, K. (2015). Professional agency in the stream of change: Understanding educational change and teachers' professional identities. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 47, 1-12
§ Vähäsantanen, K. et al. (2019). A novel instrument to measure the multidimensional structure of professional agency. Vocations and Learning, 12, 267–295.