Search results

The purpose of this paper is to describe pre‐school children's learning during a learning study, and their teachers’ awareness of each child's learning possibilities in relation to what they actually learned. The paper's aims are twofold; first, to focus on how to design learning study in pre‐school settings; and second, to study young children's (aged 4‐5) learning.

The data consist of three videotaped interviews with each participating child (n=39), three videotaped interventions and one videotaped interview each with three pre‐school teachers.

The results show: an increased learning outcome in all three groups; there is a discrepancy between what the children actually learned and the teachers’ awareness about the children's possibilities. The teachers’ awareness of the children's learning possibilities differ from what the children actually learned.

Learning study is usually used in school settings, but this paper shows its potential also in pre‐school settings. Beside this, the results indicate that there is a risk that if teachers’ expectations are too high or too low, they will affect children's abilities to learn in either a positive or a negative way by not offering the children sufficiently challenging tasks. By the use of learning study the teachers became aware of this discrepancy and were able to reassess their expectations for each child according to their abilities.

In the present discourse of university politics, collegiality has come to be viewed as a slow force – seemingly inefficient and conservative compared to popular management models. Concerns have thus been raised regarding the future prospects of such a form of governance in a society marked by haste and acceleration. One way to bring perspectives on this contentious issue is to perceive it in the light of the long history of the university. In this article, I derive insights about the shifting state of collegial governance through a survey of an intense period of reforms in Sweden c. 1850–1920 when higher education was allegedly engaged in a process of modernization and professionalization. Drawing on recent work in historical theory and science and technology studies (STS), I revisit contests and debates on collegiality in connection to a number of governmental commissions. Focusing on the co-existence – and collisions – of multiple temporalities reveals that overcoming potential problems associated with heterogeneous rhythms required an active work of synchronization by universities in order to make them appear timely, as higher education expanded along with the mounting ambitions of national politics, focused on centralization, efficiency, and rationalization. The analysis is structured around three focal issues for which collegial ideals and practices, including their temporal characteristics, were particularly questioned: (a) the composition of the university board, (b) the employment status of professors, and (c) hiring or promotion practices. Pointing at more structural challenges, this study highlights how collegiality requires a constant maintenance paired with an awareness of its longer and complex history.