Syftet med detta kapitel är att diskutera hur förväntningar på handledning och olika handledarkompetenser kan bidra till ett mer inkluderande arbetssätt. Det innebär att vi kommer belysa betydelsen av att klargöra förväntningar på handledning samt hur handledares kunskaper om lärandeteorier, kommunikation, etik, återkoppling och bedömning kan bidra till och stärka adeptens lärande och utveckling inom sitt ämnesområde. Kapitlet bygger bland annat på vår egen forskning (Davidsson & Stigmar, 2021; Davidsson & Stigmar, inskickad) som visar att det finns ett gemensamt innehåll och likartade undervisningsformer i handledarutbildningar för olika yrkesgrupper.

Avhopp från doktorandstudier är ett problem för universitet över hela världen och bör undvikas av flera skäl. Avhopp innebär personliga svårigheter och nederlag för doktoranden, handledare, examinator, institutionen, fakulteten och universitetet. Utöver oro och tidsförlust medför avhoppen kostnader och flera parter har därför intresse av ett framgångsrikt slutförande av doktorandstudierna. Tidigare forskning har pekat på att den främsta orsaken till avhopp är en dåligt fungerande relation mellan doktorand och handledare, och därför fokuserar vår studie speciellt på ickefungerande handledningsrelationer.  

Det är dock fortfarande oklart vad som orsakar ickefungerande handledningsrelationer, problem och konflikter. Doktorander hoppar ofta av sin utbildning utan att ge en förklaring (Sverdlik et al., 2018). För att summera problemet och kunskapsluckan så vet vi fortfarande inte vad som orsakar avhopp, dåliga relationer och konflikter mellan doktorander och handledare. Vi menar att handledare, behöver ökad förståelse för de bakomliggande orsakerna till avhopp och hur handledare kan bidra till en ömsesidig, pålitlig och robust handledningsrelation.

Syftet med studien är att klargöra orsaker till varför doktorander hoppar av sina forskarstudier. I syftet ingår att undersöka relationen mellan doktorand och handledare och ringa in vad som kan göras för att begränsa risken för avhopp. Syftet omfattar att lyfta fram vad som kännetecknar en solid och stödjande handledningsrelation enligt intervjupersonerna. I studien kartläggs både doktoranders och handledares perspektiv. Följande forskningsfrågor kommer att fokuseras:

RQ 1: vilka är orsakerna till att doktorander hoppar av?

RQ 2: vilka problem i doktorand- och handledarrelationen kan leda till avhopp?

RQ3: hur kan risken för avhopp begränsas?

RQ 4: vad kännetecknar en solid och stödjande handledningsrelation?

Data kommer att insamlas genom, en webbenkät till doktorander som hoppat av och handledare vid flera lärosäten. Uppföljande intervjuer på Zoom och/eller ansikte mot ansikte, med doktorander och handledare kommer också att genomföras.

Enkäterna kommer att vara webbaserade vari personuppgifter kommer att insamlas kring: kön, ålder, år för avhopp, antal terminer i doktorsutbildningen innan avhopp, antal handledare, ämne och avhandlingens inriktning. Avhoppare samt huvudhandledare (huvudhandledaren kommer i första hand kontaktas, om huvudhandledaren är omöjlig att få kontakt med, så kommer övriga handledare att kontaktas) kommer att erbjudas möjlighet att besvara enkätfrågor om: orsaker till avhopp från doktorsutbildningen; vilka specifika problem i förhållandet mellan doktorand och handledare som kan leda till avhopp; hur kan risken för avhopp begränsas samt vad som kännetecknar en solid och stödjande handledningsrelation?  

En innehållsanalys kommer att göras för att identifiera eventuella mönster och dra slutsatser i enkätsvaren från doktorander och huvudhandledare/handledare. Vilka generella orsaker till avhopp anges? Vilka problem i relationen mellan doktorander och handledare redovisas i enkätsvaren? Vilka åtgärder föreslår enkätrespondenterna för att begränsa risken för avhopp? Vad anges i enkätsvaren som kännetecken för en solid och stödjande handledningsrelation?

Det huvudsakliga bidraget med vår studie är att presentera fallbaserad kunskap kring allmänna orsaker till avhopp och specifikt om relationen mellan doktorand och handledare. Vidare kommer studien att redovisa en förståelse för vad som kännetecknar en gedigen handledningsrelation. Vår forskning kommer att ge såväl doktorander som handledare möjlighet att reflektera över hur de kan agera för att begränsa risken för avhopp och istället sikta på ett framgångsrikt fullföljande av doktorsutbildningen.

Referenser

Corcelles, M., Cano, M., Liesa, E., González-Ocampo, G., & Castelló, M. (2019). Positive and negative experiences related to doctoral study conditions. Higher Education Research & Development, 38(5), 922-939.

Högskoleverket (2012). Orsaker till att doktorander lämnar forskarutbildningen utan examen –  en uppföljning av nybörjarna på forskarnivå läsåren 1999/2000 och 2000/01. Rapport 2012:1 R.

Sverdlik, A., Hall, N. C., McAlpine, L., & Hubbard, K. (2018). The PhD experience: A review of  the factors influencing doctoral students’ completion, achievement, and well-being. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 13, 361-388. 

University teachers are expected to continuously improve their practice, but research about their viewpoints of future-ready universities is scarce. The paper contributes to educational research through paired Q methodology and investigates university teachers' shifting views of successful future learning environments, while being forced to move to fully digital solutions due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Four pre-pandemic (January 2020) and two while-pandemic viewpoints (November 2020) are qualitatively interpreted and show that lived experiences during the pandemic led to a polarization of participants' subjective perspectives. Despite challenging conditions, university teachers view digital and distance teaching more positively, but remain skeptical concerning technologically-enhanced on-campus learning environments. Results also indicate a largely unchanged consensus regarding the importance of critical thinking and creativity. This exploratory study's results allow forward-thinking dialogues about new policies in potentially ever more hybrid learning environments with various educational stakeholders, both within the case university in Sweden and other educational institutions.

Higher education (HE) today is a diversified area which has grown expansively over the last two decades in response to a rapidly changing educational and political climate (e.g., Englund, 2018). In this age of complexity, development and change are omnipresent and intrinsic parts of the university teacher’s practice, from the development of the teachers’ individual practice at microlevel, to the collaborative development of scholarly practice at the meso-level of the department, and to the strategic institutional approach at macro-level, which links to employment and promotion frameworks and the recognition of teaching quality (Bolander Laksov & Scheja, 2020). As changing demands has placed focus on learning and teaching, higher education in Sweden has followed the European development from quality assurance towards quality enhancement (e.g., Pelik, 2016; Nygren & Sjöberg, 2022). The universities are now responsible for developing their own quality assurance systems and more emphasis has been placed on ownership and the possibilities of influencing the process (Swedish Higher Education Authority), which has grown more complex. Through their professional teaching work, academic teachers are expected to strengthen a pedagogical "culture of quality" at the higher education institution (e.g., Elken & Stensaker, 2018).  

What we are witnessing is a more mature quality assurance work which is characterized by increased trust in the universities themselves and the ways in which they choose to organize their quality work. But we are also witnessing the heightened complexity of academic development where academic developers has become involved in work on all three levels (micro, meso, macro), for example, appointment procedures, career structures and promotion criteria. Academic developers have become central to the implementation of these strategies, which has greatly extended the range of their professional activities. This development goes hand in hand with the shift in focus from quality assurance to quality enhancement. By allowing the universities to develop their own quality assurance systems, the new quality assurance system signals a heightened awareness of the importance of ownership and to affect the process, which relates to national governance strategies of teaching and learning. As the changing educational and political demands on higher education have deeply affected the professional activities of the academic developer and the academic teacher, this article addresses the changes and challenges faced.

The present paper will present the results of a study of Swedish academic development units planned to be conducted in early 2023 and which focus on the areas of responsibilities and everyday practice of academic developers today. In the paper, we will discuss the implications for teachers and academic developers in this diversified context. Our aim is also to contribute with further knowledge and understanding of structural and organisational prerequisites for academic development in higher education.

References

Elken, M. & Stensaker, B. (2018). Conceptualising ‘quality work’ in higher education. Quality in  Higher Education, 24(3): 189-202.

Bolander Laksov, K. & Scheja, M. (2020). Akademiskt lärarskap. SULF Publications XLII.

Englund, C. (2018). Teaching in an age of complexity: exploring academic change and development in higher education. (Doctoral dissertation). Umeå: Umeå University.

Nygren, Å.  & Sjöberg, J. (2022). Om pedagogiskt kvalitetsarbete i högre utbildning: vägen framåt. Högskolepedagogisk debatt: Högskolan Kristianstad.  

Pelik, R. (2016). “Quality assurance and quality enhancement,” i Baume. D och Popovic. D. (Eds). Advancing Practice in Academic Development. London: Routledge: 142-156.

Stensaker, B. (2008b). Outcomes of quality assurance: A discussion of knowledge, methodology and validity. Quality in Higher Education, 14: 3-13. 

This article investigates how professional development courses for university teachers are viewed by different stakeholders, specifically students, university teachers, central university management, and the government. The particular focus of the investigation is on the relationship of theory and practice, disciplinary content, and forms of pedagogical knowledge. The results, based on interviews and documents, show that university teachers tend to ask for more practical, hands-on knowledge, whereas the government focuses on the theoretical content of pedagogical courses. Stakeholders were vague in their views about the content of pedagogical courses, indicating that professional development fails to be regarded as a strategic matter.

When stable and reliable practices were disrupted due to the global pandemic, university teachers were forced to promptly adapt. Through Q sorting and deliberative dialogues, this study reports how university teachers shifted their normative values concerning successful future learning environments during the first year of the pandemic. Results provide valuable insight into first-person accounts of lived experiences and suggest recommendations for the next phase of academic development, including a stronger focus on hybridity and student responsibility. In general, participants held more pedagogical discussions in times of crisis and emerged as more reflective practitioners.

Our study investigates how knowledge requirements are formulated in policy documents for a police education situated in an academic context. Through an explorative quantitative and qualitative content analysis, we seek to answerthe following questions: What knowledge requirements are presented in course syllabi for the first semester of fivedifferent police programmes in Sweden? What similarities and differences are there? The result implies that a highereducation policy frame dominates the design of curricula and program profiles. Lower-order cognitive skills are predominant in the knowledge requirements in the first semester of all police training programmes in Sweden, but witha balance of academic and professional practices, and of conceptual and contextual coherence in curricula. The universities differ mostly when it comes to knowledge requirements on a higher-order cognitive level, and here there isan imbalance in sequence and pace in curricula between different programmes. Both balance and variations are discussed with the aim of opening up for an innovative debate on knowledge requirements in police education.

I artikeln utforskas hur universitetslärares pedagogiska praktik har påverkats av den digitala omställningen under pandemin. Vi diskuterar särskilt kunskapsområden som digitala medier, design av fysisk och digital lärandemiljö, arbetsmiljö, riskbedömning, tillgänglighet och sociala relationer. Resultatet, som bygger på pilotstudien ”The Corona Crash Course” och aktuell forskning, visar att de kunskapsområden som tydliggjorts under den digitala omställningen främst handlar om genomförande av undervisning. Två nya kunskapsområden har identifierats: arbetsmiljö och riskbedömning. Nu behövs tid för reflektion och stöd så att universitetslärare kan utveckla en postpandemisk praktik som vilar på vetenskaplig grund.

AbstractIn Sweden as well as internationally the teaching and research nexus has been described as the defining charac-teristics of higher education promoting generic skills such as information analysis and critical reflection. Vertically Integrated Projects has been proposed as one educational strategy where research and teaching are linked by in-viting students to take active part in actual research projects. The strategy is well aligned to Scholarship of teaching and learning enabling the transition from a teacher-centred accepted knowledge to a student-centred perspective where students are invited as producers of knowledge. The aim of the current study was to explore students’ experiences of participation in a research-based learning activity with academia and industrial partners, designed as a qualitative explorative study using focus group interviews. Findings describe not only factors students find motivating for learning, but also their experience of being part of professional life with its benefits and challenges.

PurposePrevious research has pointed to a lack of studies concerning supervision training courses. Consequently, the literature has little to suggest, and the research field is underexplored, so questions around the content and design of supervision training courses remain unanswered and need to be addressed systematically. The main aim of the present study is to explore and map whether shared content and design exist in supervisor training courses across different vocations.

Design/methodology/approachA syllabus analysis is used in order to investigate characteristic features in supervisor training courses related to the professions of dentist, doctor, psychologist, police officer and teacher.

FindingsThe results point to the existence of shared content in the different courses, such as an emphasis on learning and supervision theories, feedback, ethics, assessment and communication. Furthermore, the results conclude similarities in design of the courses, such as a problem-based approach, seminars, lectures and homework. Thus, there are common theoretical approaches to important supervisory competences.

Practical implicationsOur results intend to offer possibilities to learn from different professions when improving supervisor training courses but may also constitute a starting point for developing a shared model of interprofessional supervisor competences. Furthermore, the results may support possible cooperation in interprofessional courses. This could include arranging interprofessional courses, where one part is shared for participants from the included professions and another part is profession-specific.

Originality/valueWe seek to contribute to the research field of supervision at workplaces with knowledge and ideas about how to learn from different professions when developing and improving supervisor training courses.

What are the motives for offering or engaging in higher education teacher training courses? This question is of interest for educational developers, teachers, university managers, and policy makers in order to design courses and to meet stakeholders’ expectations. Previous research has mainly focused on the impact of higher education development courses on teacher practice and student learning. Few studies have investigated the motives behind these courses. In this paper, the motives are investigated among students, teachers, university management, and the government. The study is based on national and local documents on educational development and on interviews with representatives from four Swedish universities. The results show that all stakeholder groups are in favour of compulsory courses but the motives differ. Students, management, and government embrace an institutional perspective on educational development, in line with a social efficiency perspective on the purposes of higher education emphasising usefulness, function, and the production of skills. University teachers, on the other hand, have a more individual-oriented view

Is there a shared content and structure in multiprofessional supervision training?The aim of this syllabus analysis is to gain a deeper understanding of the content and structure of supervision, from a supervisor perspective, and if a shared core and structure among different professions exists in practical supervision training. Our study centers the following question: Does a common content and structure/teaching methods among different professions exist in supervision training courses? If so, what are the characteristic features of this content and structure in supervision training courses? In focus is practical supervision training, ie organized supervision, offered to qualified professionals, such as medical doctors supervising doctors and dentists receiving specialized clinical training, police officers tutoring and assessing police cadets and teacher educators preparing working teachers to become internship supervisors sometimes called cooperating teachers. Method: our empirical study is built on 15 local syllabuses which were reviewed. According to Bowen (2009), a content analysis is a process of organising information into categories related to central research questions. This process involves identifying and recognizing pertinent information. The analysis involves four stages; decontextualisation, recontextualisation, categorization and compilation. Conclusions: based on the preliminary results of our study, the content of the five professions’ supervision training, revealed several similarities. Thus, all training programs, in different forms, include: supervision theories and practical training; learning and teaching theories; communication and feedback training; ethics and methods for assessment. As for the structure of the supervision training courses, i.e. how they are organized and what teaching methods are used: lectures; different forms of seminars, practical training and discussions are frequent. Some courses are problem-based, include homework or role play. To sum up, the content and structure of the syllabuses included in our study manifest a common pattern.

The purpose of this study is twofold: (1) to survey whether dissertations have been rejected in connection with the examining committees’ sessions and, if so, upon which grounds, and (2) to conduct a problematizing discussion about the pros and cons of written criteria for doctoral dissertations. In Survey One (1984–2003), responses came from the humanities, law, and social sciences in six established universities. In Survey Two (2004–2017), responses came from the same disciplines at ten universities. The surveys are based on searches in electronic databases and written responses from the faculty offices. The results show eighteen cases of rejected dissertations. Five of the dissertations are written in law and five in arts, theater, culture, and film studies. Three areas appear to be particularly critical for the rejection: akribeia (accuracy and precision), methodological issues, and results and analysis.

Based on a study at two Swedish universities, this article aimed to identify teacher educators’ use of digital tools and subsequent need for digital competence in higher education. Methodically, a digital survey was distributed via e-mail to 405 teacher educators representing two faculties at the two universities; in total, 105 teacher educators responded. The survey included 16 questions, with closed- and open-ended varieties. Two theoreticalfoundations were used: the TPACK model and, as a complement, computer self-efficacy. Through analysis of self-reported use, competence, and need for professional training in digitalization in teaching, results show that teacher educators do not use digital tools primarily for pedagogical purposes. Thus, they need extensive pedagogical support in creating digital teaching. Further, teacher educators need to identify the pedagogical surplus value in their own teaching and learning context with digital tools to increase motivation for concrete, effective, and subject-oriented successful examples as presented by experienced teachers.

The aim of this study was to identify teacher educators' use of digital tools and needs of digital competence in higher education. The research questions were: a) How do teacher educators use digital tools and evaluate their competence to effectively practice ICT in teaching situations? b) What training do teacher educators need to make students functional online? The findings of the study are intended to help teacher educators to better meet the needs and challenges students encounter in their education and to influence and design online-based learning activities supported with different digital tools in higher education programs. Research shows that digital tools for pedagogical purposes is still poorly integrated in teacher education programs and there is a need for innovative solutions as an important part of teachers professional competence of using ICT for students learning (Tømte et al., 2015). Moreover, teacher educators have a fundamental role in training teachers for teaching and serve as role models for ICT-based teaching (Ungar & Baruch, 2016). According to Koehler et al. (2013) digital technologies, by contrast to traditional pedagogical technologies, are protean (i.e. usable in many different ways), unstable (rapidly changing) and opaque (the inner workings are hidden from users). The use of technology also needs to be developed professionally by tutoring and underlying educational pedagogy (Lakkala & Ilomäki, 2015) as well as to enhance understanding of the skills, dispositions, and knowledge for teaching-learning contexts where information and communication technologies are increasingly pivotal (Forbes & Khoo, 2015). The current study includes both quantitate and qualitative data from a digital survey with closed-ended questions, and open-ended questions from two faculties including teacher educaters at two different universities in Sweden. 105 respondents participated (26%). Two theoretical foundations are applied to analyse different aspects of the teachers’ use and need of ICT knowledge and competence: 1) The TPACK model and the interaction between the three knowledge domains: pedagogical knowledge, technical knowledge and content knowledge (Koehler, Mishra & Cain, 2013), and 2) three dimensions of Computer Self-Efficacy (CSE); magnitude, strength and generalizability (Compeau & Higgins, 1995). Results show that all teacher educators in our study use digital tools in planning and executing teaching. However, teacher educators do not use digital tools primarily for pedagogical purposes, and thus need extensive pedagogical support in creating digital teaching and learning environments, as well as to identify the pedagogical surplus value in their own teaching and learning context, in order to increase motivation for training of concrete, effective and subject-oriented successful examples presented by peers. The main conclusions that ought to be relevant and applicable for teacher educators worldwide are that; a) since the teacher educators do not use digital tools primarily for pedagogical purposes, extensive and continuing pedagogical support is needed in the field of creating digital teaching and learning environments; b) teacher educators need to identify the pedagogical surplus value in their own teaching and learning context with digital tools, in order to increase motivation for concrete, effective and subject-oriented successful examples presented by experienced teachers. References Compeau, D. R. & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer Self-Efficacy: Development of a Measure and Initial Test. MIS Quartely, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 189-211. Forbes, D. & Khoo, E. (2015). Voice over distance: a case of podcasting for learning in online teacher education. Distance Education, 36(3), 335-350. Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P. & Cain, W. (2013). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Journal of Education, 13-19. Lakkala, M., & Ilomäki, L. (2015). A case study of developing ICT-supported pedagogy through a collegial practice transfer process. Computers & Education, 90, 1-12. Tømte, C., Enochsson, A. B., Buskqvist, U. & Kårstein, A. (2015). Educating online student teachers to master professional digital competence: The TPACK-framework goes online. Computers & Education, 84, 26-35. Ungar, O. A. & Baruch, A. F. (2016). Perceptions of teacher educators regarding ICT implementation. Interdisciplinary Journal of e-Skills and Life Long Learning, 12, 279-296.

The paper is based on a study at two universities in Sweden with the aim to identify and analyse teacher educators' expressed use and needs of digital competence in higher education. The research questions are: a) How do teacher educators use digital tools? b) How do teacher educators evaluate their competence to effectively use ICT? c) What training do teacher educators need to make students functional online? Methodically, a digital survey was distributed via e-mail to 405 teacher educators representing two faculties at the two different universities, 105 respondents answered (26%). The survey included 28 questions with both closed-ended questions (Likert six-point scale), as well as open-ended questions. Two theoretical foundations are applied to analyse different aspects of the teacher’s use and need of ICT knowledge and competence: 1) The TPACK model and the interaction between the three knowledge domains: Pedagogical knowledge (PK), Technical knowledge (TK) and Content knowledge (CK), and 2) three dimensions of Computer Self-Efficacy (CSE), magnitude, strength and generalizability. Results show that 92.3% of respondents use a laptop and 18.3% use interactive boards in their work. Further, respondents who report a low competence regarding digitalization of teaching (16.3%) report a significantly higher need of training (p<0.05) compared to respondents reporting a high competence (27.9%). Also, respondents who report a high competence regarding digitalization of teaching, report creating digital learning environments as something unproblematic to a significantly higher extent (p<0.001) compared to respondents reporting a low competence. 26.3% of the teacher educators (n=15) want trainings in content knowledge and 17.5% (n=10) in technical knowledge, as well as interactions between them. The findings show that all teacher educators use digital tools in planning and executing teaching. However, few teacher educators rate their ICT competence as high and want more training regrading subject didactic knowledge in the students teaching practice.

This article depicts four Nordic cases from the field of Vocational Teacher Education. The aim of the article is to compare statements, challenges and values that form vocational teacher programmes in the Nordic countries. Moreover, the aim of this article is to study common threads, contents, professional progress follow-up and learning examination practices in the Nordic vocational teacher programmes. In this article we describe one national example from each country. The examples come from Malmö University of Educational Sciences in Sweden, Metropolitan University College in Denmark, Olso Metropolitan University in Norway and Haaga-Helia School of Vocational Teacher Education in Finland. The article is a result of desk-analysis, interviews and collaborative writing. The findings indicate that the four countries and examples have a lot in common, but also differences e.g. related to strategies, values and practices. While an academic / scientific orientation have been chosen in Sweden, Norway and Denmark, competences form the basis for vocational teacher education in Finland. In conclusions we present an overview of the programmes and discuss the position of VET more generally in these countries and how it challenges vocational teacher education.

The aim is to explore the absence or presence of, and motives for, research at centers for academic development and to problematize the research situation among academic developers. Boyer's and Healey's theories are used as lenses for the analysis based on the questionnaires that were used for data collection. The conclusion is that research is a challenged and sensitive field at university centers for academic development, teaching positions and research funds are needed. Research is usually not included in the mission for centers; staff does not normally hold research positions. Unclear research directions and opposing interests, weaken the centers’ possibility to hire qualified staff and deliver high-quality teaching.