University–school collaboration as an arena for community-building in teacher education

References

• Cochran-Smith, M., and S. Lytle. 2009. Inquiry at a Stance- Practitioner Research for the Next Generation. New York: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Daza, V., G. Bjørk Gudmundsdottir, and A. Lund. 2021. ““Partnerships as Third Spaces for Professional Practice in Initial Teacher Education: A Scoping Review”. Teaching and Teacher Education 102: 2–12. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2021.103338.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards, A. 2010. Being an Expert Professional Practitioner: The Relational Turn in Expertise. Oxford: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y. 1987. Learning by Expanding. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit Oy.
   Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y. 1999. “Activity Theory and Individual and Social Transformation.” In Perspectives on Activity Theory, edited by Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, and R.-L. Punamäki, 19–38. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y. 2007. “Putting Vygotsky to Work: The Change Laboratory as an Application of Double Stimulation.” In The Cambridge Companion to Vygotsky, edited by H. Daniels, M. Cole, and J. Wertsch, 363–382. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y. 2008. From Teams to Knots: Activity-Theoretical Studies of Collaboration and Learning at Work. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511619847.
   Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y. 2015. Learning by Expanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y., and R. Engeström. 1986. “Developmental Work Research: The Approach and an Application in Cleaning Work.” Acta Psychologica Fennica 11, 211-227.
   Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y., R. Engeström, and M. Kärkkäinen. 1995. “Polycontextuality and Boundary Crossing in Expert Cognition: Learning and Problem Solving in Complex Work Activities.” Learning and Instruction 5 (4): 319–336. doi:10.1016/0959-4752(95)00021-6.
   Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y., and A. Sannino. 2010. “Studies of Expansive Learning: Foundations, Findings and Future Challenges.” Educational Research Review 5 (1): 1–24. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2009.12.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y., and A. Sannino. 2012. “Whatever Happened to Process Theories of Learning?” Learning, Culture and Social Interaction 1 (1): 45–56. doi:10.1016/j.lcsi.2012.03.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y., and H. Toivainen. 2011. “Co-configurational Design of Learning Instrumentalities.” In Learning across Sites: New Tools, Infrastructures and Practices, edited by S. Ludvigsen, A. Lund, I. Rasmussen, and R. Säljö, 33–52. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y., J. Virkkunen, M. Helle, J. Pihlaja, and R. Poikela. 1996. “The Change Laboratory as a Tool for Transforming Work”. Lifelong Learning in Europe 1 (2): 10–17.
   Google Scholar
• Etienne, W., R. McDermott, and W. M. Snyder. 2002. Cultivating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
   Google Scholar
• Farrell, R. 2021. ““The School-University Nexus and Degrees of Partnership in Initial Teacher Education”. Irish Educational Studies 1–18. (ahead of print). doi:10.1080/03323315.2021.1899031.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fontana, A., and J. Frey. 2000. “From Structured Questions to Negotiated Text.” In Handbook of Qualitative Research, edited by K. Norman, Denzin, and Y. S. Lincoln, 645–672. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Geertz, C. 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Glesne, C. 2011. Becoming Qualitative Researchers: An Introduction. 3rd ed. Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Gudmundsdottir, S. 2001. “Narrative Research in School Practice.” In Fourth Handbook for Research on Teaching, edited by V. Richardson, 226–240. New York: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Kamberelis, G., and G. Dimitriadis. 2011. “Focus Groups. Contingent Articulations of Pedagogy, Politics, and Inquiry.” In Handbook of Qualitative Research, edited by N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln, 545–561. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Kvale, S., and S. Brinkmann. 2015. Det Kvalitative Forskningsintervju [The Qualitative Research Interview]. 3rd ed. Oslo: Gyldendal Norsk Forlag.
   Google Scholar
• Leontèv, A. 1981. “The Problem of Activity in Psychology.” In The Concept of Activity in Soviet Psychology, edited by J. V. Wertsch, 37–71. Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, .
   Google Scholar
• Lincoln, Y. S., and E. G. Guba. 1986. “But Is It Rigorous? Trustworthiness and Authenticity in Naturalistic Evaluation.” New Directions for Program Evaluation 1986 1986 (30): 73–84. doi:10.1002/ev.1427.
   Google Scholar
• Lincoln, Y. S., and E. G. Guba. 2000. “The Only Generalization Is: There Is No Generalization.” In Case Study Method: Key Issues, Key Text, edited by R. Gomm, M. Hammersley, and P. Foster, 27–40. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Loughland, T., and H. Thi Mai Nguyen. 2018. “Boundary Objects and Brokers in Professional Experience: An Activity Theory Analysis”. In Educating Future Teachers: Innovative Perspectives in Professional Experience, J. Kriewaldt, A. Ambrosetti, D. Rorrison, R. Capeness, edited by. 71–87. Singapore: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-5484-6_5.
   Google Scholar
• Merriam, S. B. 2015. Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation. 4th ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Education. 2016a. Regulations Relating to the Framework Plan for Primary and Lower Secondary Teacher Education for Years 1–7. Oslo: Ministry of Education.
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Education. 2016b. Regulations Relating to the Framework Plan for Primary and Lower Secondary Teacher Education for Years 5–10. Oslo: Ministry of Education.
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Education and Research. 2018. Teacher Education 2025: National Strategy for Quality and Cooperation in Teacher Education. Oslo: Ministry of Education and Research.
   Google Scholar
• NESH. 2016. “The National Committee for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities”. https://www.etikkom.no/en/ethical-guidelines-for-research/guidelines-for-research-ethics-in-the-social-sciences–humanities-law-and-theology/
   Google Scholar
• Olsen, R. 2021. “Flerstemmighet I Veiledningssamtaler? En Kasusstudie Om Triadisk FoU-veiledning I Grunnskolelærerutdanningen [“multivoicedness in Mentoring Conversations? A Case Study on Triadic R&D Supervision in Initial Teacher Education”].” NORDVEI Nordisk tidsskrift i veiledningspedagogikk 6 (1): 1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Postholm, M. B. 2008. “The Start-Up Phase in A Research and Development Work Project: A Foundation for Development.” Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (3): 575–584. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2007.08.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Postholm, M. B. 2019. Research and Development in School: Grounded in Cultural Historical Activity Theory. Boston: Brill Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Postholm, M. B. 2021. “The Importance of the Start-Up Phase in School-Based Development for Learning and Enduring Change.” European Journal of Teacher Education 44 (4): 572-586. doi: 10.1080/02619768.2020.1793944
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riessman, C. K. 2008. Narrative Methods for the Human Sciences. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Strauss, A., and J. Corbin. 1998. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 2nd Ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Virkkunen, J., and D. Newnham. 2013. The Change Laboratory: A Tool for Collaborative Development of Work and Education. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Wenger, E. 1998. “Communities of Practice Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zeichner, K., K. A. Payne, and K. Brayko. 2015. “Democratizing Teacher Education”. Journal of Teacher Education 66 (2): 122–135. doi:10.1177/0022487114560908.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar