Yrkesämnesdidaktik på universitet: Mål, innehåll, arbetssätt och examination
[Vocational subject didactics at university: Learning goals, content, working methods and exams]
The purpose of this article is to investigate learning goals, content, working methods and examinations in the vocational didactic sections of the vocational teacher education programme. In a case study, a total of forty study guides from one vocational teacher education programme have been analysed in order to answer what central content is highlighted, how the goals are examined, and what course literature is used in vocational subject didactics in a selected vocational teacher education programme at a Swedish university. The aim of the analysis, based on Hiim’s (2010) model, is to find both clearly expressed and more latent elements. The results answer questions on what the subject didactics contain in three different courses. Vocational teacher educators plan their teaching with regard to the goals of vocational subject didactics, but the interpretation of goals varies among different educators and within different vocational subjects. The result also gives some indications of what could be general differences and similarities within and between different didactics teacher groups and/or vocational subjects. The analysis of the study guides also shows that educational background and the form of employment of educators seem to be of importance.
Andersén, A. (2010). Social representations and social identity in Swedish folk high schools: An application of Duveen and Lloyd. Papers on Social Representations, 19(1), 10.11–10.14.
Asghari, H. (2014). Från uppväxt till lärargärning: En livsberättelsestudie med åtta yrkeslärare på industritekniska programmet. Doktorsavhandling, Karlstad: Fakulteten för humaniora och samhällsvetenskap, Pedagogiskt arbete, Karlstads universitet.
Asghari, H. & Kilbrink, N. (2018). Två yrkeslärares berättelser om bedömningshandlingar på industritekniska programmet. Nordic Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 8(1), 23–43. https://doi.org/10.3384/njvet.2242-458X.188123
Dahlgren, L.O. (1990). Undervisningen och det meningsfulla lärandet. Linköping: Universitetet i Linköping, Lärarutbildningen.
Delmar, C. (2010). ”Generalizability” as recognition: Reflections on a foundational problem in qualitative research. Qualitative studies, 1(2), 115–128. https://doi.org/10.7146/qs.v1i2.3828
Fejes, A. & Köpsén, S. (2014). Vocational teachers’ identity formation through boundary crossing. Journal of Education and Work, 27(3), 265–283. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2012.742181
Hiim, H. (2010). Pedagogisk aksjonsforskning. Tilnærminger, eksempler og kunnskapsfilosofisk grunnlag. Oslo: Gyldendal Norsk Forlag AS.
Hiim, H. (2013). Praksisbasert yrkesutdanning: Hvordan utvikle relevant yrkesutdanning for elever og arbeidsliv? Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk.
Hiim, H. (2015). Kvalitet i yrkesutdanningen: Resultater fra et aksjonsforskningsprosjekt om yrkesforankring av innholdet i yrkesutdanningen. Norsk Pedagogisk Tidsskrift, 99(02), 136–148.
Högskoleförordning. (1993). Svensk författningssamling 1993:100. Hämtad 10 mars 2018 från http://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-lagar/dokument/svensk-forfattningssamling/hogskoleforordning-1993100_sfs-1993-100
Morse, J.M. (1999). Qualitative generalizability. Qualitative health research, 9(1), 5–6. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973299129121622
Nickolaus, R. & Abele, D.G.S. (2009). Teacher training for vocational schools in Germany: Structures, problems, perspectives. Stuttgart: University of Stuttgart, Institute for Educational Science and Psychology, Department of Vocational and Economic Education.
Ongstad, S. (2004). Fagdidaktik som forskningsfelt. I Norges forskningsråd. (Red.), Kunnskapsstatus for forskningsprogrammet kupp: Kunnskapsutvikling i profesjonsutdanning og profesjonsutøving (s. 30–69). Oslo: Norges forskningsråd.
Robson, J., Bailey, B. & Larkin, S. (2004). Adding value: Investigating the discourse of professionalism adopted by vocational teachers in further education colleges. Journal of Education and Work, 17(2), 183–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080410001677392
Schofield, J.W. (2002). Increasing the generalizability of qualitative research. I A.M. Huberman & M.B. Miles (Red.), The qualitative researcher's companion (s. 171–203). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Sjøberg, S. (2001). Science and technology in education: Current challenges and possible solutions. Oslo: University of Oslo.
Copyright (c) 2019 Annelie Andersén, Hamid Asghari, Maria Petersson
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
NJVET is an open access journal, this means anyone can access, freely download and read the journal. There are no commercial interests for Linköping University Electronic Press or the Nordic network for vocational education and training (NordYrk) in publishing the journal. From 2021 NJVET publishes all articles under the Creative Commons License CC-BY 4.0.
The core idea of open access is that copyright remains with the authors. However, we publish with the agreement of the authors that if they decide later to publish the articles elsewhere, the publisher will be notified, prior to any acceptance, that the article has already been published by NJVET.
When publishing with NJVET, it is with the agreement of the authors that if they make their articles available elsewhere on the internet (for example, on their own websites or institutional websites), that they will do so by making links to the articles as published in NJVET using the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) numbers of the articles and acknowledge in the text of the sites that the articles have been previously published in NJVET.