Registration for teachers is to be introduced in Sweden July 1 2012 (SOU 2008:52). The reform includes: that newly qualified teachers must do a "probationary year” and be supported by a mentor. During this year the school leader are responsible for assessing whether the teacher is to be recommended being registered or not. The assessment is performed in relation to national standards developed by the Swedish National Agency for Education. The Teachers' Responsibility Board will be a new institution having the right to withdraw a teacher’s registration or to issue warnings. This reform changes a number of relational positions between teachers and a number of actors.  For instance, the relationship between the new teachers and the mentors is changing as the mentor can become involved in the formal assessment of the new teacher, a role mentors traditionally not has had neither in Sweden nor in other Nordic countries (Fransson, 2010; Fransson & Gustafsson, 2008). The relationship between teachers and parents are also change when parents are given the opportunity to formally report and question the teacher's registration, which can render the suspension of the registration or a warning. This could put teachers under pressure both to work harder and more in accordance with parents’ expectations, but also to protect him/herself, eg. a more extensive focus on documenting the educational activities to have the back free and also to adopt a more risk-free behavior (cf. Lindqvist & Nordänger, 2007). This way the reform can be a "tool” to discipline teachers and making them act within regimes of accountability and governmentality (cf. Devos, 2010). Such strategies appear in interviews with teachers who have been working for two years and were told to reflect over the hypothetical situation if it had existed a system with teacher registration, probation year and assessment when during their first year (Aspfors, Fransson & Heikkinen, forthcoming).

The reform also implies that that ‘new teachers’ not any more will be regarded as fully qualified (albeit not yet very experienced) until they have reached the required standard and fulfilled the requirements of the probationary year. Thus, they are to be recognized as someone in-between a student teacher and a fully competent and qualified teacher and colleague, making “new teachers” being conceptualized and re-constructed in quite a different, changing identities, roles, relations and positions. In this paper this is discussed in relation to neo-liberal regimes of governance, accountability and governmentality.  

Key words: Dilemmatic space, mentor, newly qualified teachers, positioning , teacher registration.

 Referenser:

Aspfors, J., Fransson, G. & Heikkinen, H.L.T. (fortcoming). Mentoring as dialogue, collaboration and/or assessment?. In P. Tynjälä, M.-L. Stenström (eds.) “Nothing is Permanent but Change”. Transitions and Transformations in Learning and Education. Elsevier.

Devos, A. (2010). New teachers, mentoring and the discursive formation of professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education Vol. 26. 1219-223.

Fransson, G. (2010). Mentors in dual roles, both to support and to assess? Analyses of opinions expressed in responses to a Swedish proposal on probationary year for new teachers. European Journal Teacher Education. 33(4), 371–386.

Fransson, G. (2009). Knowledge input in responses to a government inquiry concerning probationary year for new teachers; the role of mentors and headmasters. Paper presented at European Conference of Educational Research (ECER) in Vienna, Austria, 28-30 september 2009. Presented 28 september.

Fransson, G. & Gustafsson, C. (Eds.) 2008: Newly Qualified Teachers in Northern Europe. Comparative Perspectives on Promoting Professional Development. Teacher Education: Research Publications no 4. Gävle: Gävle University Press.

Lindqvist, P. & Nordänger, U.K. (2007). Better safe than sorry? Risk and educational research. Educational Studies, Vol. 33, No. 1, March 2007, pp. 15–27.

SOU. 2008:52. Legitimation och skärpta behörighetsregler [Swedish Government Official. Report 2008:52. Registration and stricter qualifying rules]. Ministry of Education and Research.