Abstract:

Teacher education in Norway has always been tightly governed. This paper will discuss the tightness with reference to:
- The number of objectives in the four latest curricula for teacher education (1992, 1999, 2003, 2010).
- The number and structure of objectives in at least one other Nordic country.

The focus will be: To which extent is the format of the curricula, which are based on the European Qualification Framework (and thus related to the European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System, ECTS) of use for certification of teachers moving from one country to another?

The framework for discussing teacher education curricula will be curriculum theory, and literature on traditions in teacher education, more generally (Zeichner, 1983 is an early contribution), and in a European persepctive (Hopmann & Hopmann,1997).
In a recent European perspecive, the qualification framework is a way of thinking of education, closely related to the European Union ideology of free markets, also with regard to labor (freedom of mobility). According to Cort (2010), this work originated in vocational education, but has spread to higher education. Cort discusses the framework in several perspectives, including transparency and comparability. With reference to comparisons of teacher education programs, we will claim it is of course of some interest that foreign and national teacher education programs are described in some detail, if one shall import teachers. But there are limits to how many objectives it is possible to provide training for, if the objectives are not covered in the teacher's country of origin.

In a Norwegian context, higher education, including teacher education, is regulated by what is called ‘National qualification framework for higher education’, which is based on the European framework. Osdal & Madsen (2010 p 176) are concerned that the use of this framework will turn into an exercise in the use of verbs, a 'verb-game'.

In the 2010 teacher education curriculum, all subjects, including practice, are complying with this framework, which distinguishes between ‘knowledge’, ‘skills’, and ‘general competency’. It is barely debatable that knowledge and skills are important components in competency. However, the understanding of skills is very wide. The placement of a given theme under a headline seems random, possibly as function of the fact that the third category in reality includes the two former.

So far, the analysis has been limited to the latest Norwegian curricula; the comparison with other country(ies) will be undertaken in the early fall of 2013.

References:
Cort, P. (2010). Stating the obvious: the European Qualifications Framework is not a neutral evidence-based policy tool. European Educational Research Journal, 9, pp. 304-331.
Hopmann, B. W. & Hopmann, S. (1997). Tendenser og dilemmaer i lærerutdanning.. In R. Grankvist, S. Gudmundsdottir & M. Rismark (eds.) Klasserommet i sentrum. Festskrift til Åsmund Lønning Strømnes. (The classroom in the Center. Festschrift to ÅLS.) Trondheim: Tapir, pp. 141-162.
Osdal, H. & Madssen, K.-A. (2010). Norsk i allmennlærarutdanninga – mangfald og likskap. ) In P. Haug (ed.) Kvalifisering til læraryrket. (Qualification for the work as teacher.) Oslo: Abstrakt, pp. 169-190.
Zeichner, K. M. (1983). Alternative paradigms of of teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 34, no 3, pp 3-9.

Keywords:

European Qualification Framework, teacher edcucation, mobility of teachers.