This article explores the criteria for ‘good research’ employed by lecturers in traditional universities and institutes of higher professional education. The implementation of research-related activities in the latter created a repositioning of both types of Dutch institutions, similar as in many European higher education systems. The higher education institutes state their mutual difference is based on different types of research and research education, being more fundamental (or ‘Mode 1’) versus being more applied (or ‘Mode 2’). Lecturers’ criteria for‘good research’ potentially have a considerable influence on the research character in different higher educational types, both in education and research. Hence, this study assumes that the presumed institutional differences can be seen in their lecturers’ criteria for ‘good’ research. In a focus group and interview study, participants were asked to elaborate on personal examples of ‘good’ and ‘nongood’ research. A thematic analysis resulted in six themes on ‘good research’. The differences between both groups of lecturers found are related to the value of the research, and do not reach the core of research quality. This shows how the policy intent to steer on institutional differences actually is successful, but also limited. Implications are discussed.
MULTIFILE
Until 2012 Fontys OSO used a triangle as a conceptual framework to visualize the key concepts in the programme. Recently this was transformed into a visual model: the triade. The essentials of this triade are the central position of the student as a professional, a collaborative approach of knowledge sharing and development and embeddedness in the society. Students are challenged to integrate their own experience (the person), the essentials of their practice (=praktijk) and theoretical insights (= theorie).
In the European policies to increase the quality of teachers, much attention is given to the upgrading of qualifications. However, in European debates on teacher education, e.g. within the context of the Education & Training 2020 program, discussions about the qualification level are mostly restricted to initial teacher education. This raises the question what possibilities there are to raise the qualification level of teachers already working in schools. From this perspective, there is a need to take a closer look at in-service Master’s qualification programs, at existing arrangements and programs, at their focus and their impact on the professionalism of teachers. The paper addresses issues with respect to the conditions for successful in-service Master’s level qualification programs and reflects on content elements that should be part of the curriculum of these programs. In answering the question what content elements should be part of inservice Master’s programs that extend the minimum standards for teachers, the paper focuses on the ‘secondary role’ of teachers that extends beyond the primary process of teaching and learning and connects this to the concept of extended professionalism (Hoyle 1975, Stenhouse 1975). The paper concludes with a frame of reference that can be used to analyse the contribution of in-service Master’s level qualification programs to the professionalism of teachers.
MULTIFILE
