ASSIST
Structured in-service training for pre
school assistants and pre-school
teachers.
Report on workpackage 2
By Elisabeth Almaz Eriksen
Oslo University College
October 2008
This is a report on the work and reflections done in relation to what is called workpackage 2
in the Lifelong learning funded project: “ASSIST”- Structured in-service training for preschool assistants and pre-school teachers. The leader of this workpackage has been Elisabeth
Almaz Eriksen representing Oslo University College (P2) The cooleaders have been three
representatives from Gävle University College in Sweden. The three teachers and researchers
are Elisabeth Bjørklund, Ingrid Nordqvist and Jan Grans (P8). In addition we have had an
ongoing dialogue with the coordinator and leaders from Sagene district : Mari Gakkestad,
Lene Sivertsen and Kari Eriksen. (P1).
An important part of this workpackage was also been the organizing of a workshop in the city
of Dortmund. The partner which was in charge of this was Brigitte Vedder from FABIDO, in
the city of Dortmund in Germany, (P3). In this report, the abbreviations P1, P2, P8 and P3
refer to these partners.
The aims of workpckage 2 are described in the application to the Lifelong learning program1
as:
1. In Europe, adapt the Sagene model (SAMO) to the training needs of our partner
organizations, as identified in work package 1.
2. To develop an in-service training program for pre-school assistants and pre-school
teachers
3. Assure transferability across educational systems
Further more, the application describes 4 activities which are to be conducted in order to
reach the aims:
ACTIVITY
1. On the basis of the Sagene model and the
common training needs develop a training
model.
RESPONSIBILITY
HIO(P2 )and Gavle (P8) are responsible.
Sagene district (P1) contribute.
Also in communication with other partners.
2. Adapt curriculum to the partners needs
HIO (P2) and Gavle (P8) are responsible.
Sagene district (P1) contribute.
Also in communication with other partners.
1
Ringnes, Grethe. 2007. Life Long Learning programme, 2007-2013. Leonardo da Vinci. Application form:
Multilateral Transfer of innovation. “ASSIST”- Structured in-service training for pre-school assistants and
pre-school teachers. Pg. 39. Email: mari.gakkestad@bsa.oslo.kommune.no.
2
3. A workshop in the City of Dortmund.
to discuss the experiences of the training
model and curriculum so far
P2 is responsible.
P3 responsible organizer
All partners participate
4. Workpackage summary to document the
overall training program and curriculum to
be used for testing in WP3.
P2 is responsible
1. Common understanding of tasks in work package 2
1.1 Adapt curriculum to the partners needs
The communication between P2 and P8 has primarily been through the use of emails and
video meetings. The communication between P2 and P1 has been through a combination of
meetings in the district of Sagene, emails and telephones. The communication with P3 has
been through email.
In order to ensure that P2, P8 and P1 had a common understanding of the tasks in work
package 2 it was necessary to start a dialogue about unclear points in relation to the required
activities mentioned above. P2 therefore initiated this process by sending out a working
document to both P1 and P8, where unclear points where pinpointed, and followed up by a
suggestion to interpretation. Furthermore P2 had a meeting with P1, and few days later a
video meeting with P8 where these issues were discussed and clarified. Firstly it was of
special concern for P2 to define what was meant in the application to Life long learning
programme with activity 2: “Adapt curriculum to the partners needs “. Secondly it was
important to start a process of clarifying how we interpreted our task in developing a training
model.
Firstly we shall document the reflections concerning what was meant by curriculum in the
application to Leonardo Da Vinci? Text books to all the partner countries in relation to themes
in the ASSIST course? In P2`s view it was not wise to interpret the concept of “curriculum”
out from “traditional” American curriculum tradition. This would imply that the model would
function as an authoritative agency, containing which textbooks the teachers in each country
should use in the training of their participants. 2As one of the aims of work package 2 is to
assure transferability across educational systems, P2 did not see this aim to be combinable
with prescribing textbooks in the training model. Each district should be free to choose:
Textbooks in their native language, research and authors that are compatible with childhood
and knowledge constructions in their country/district and the theoretical foundations within
ASSIST. This theoretical foundation is described in chapter 2 and 3 in the ASSIST course
plan.
Secondly it is relevant to mention that an important character of the SAMO model was that it
had been developed at an institutional level of the Norwegian childcare system. In this way
the model may be characterized as a decentralized curriculum model. The ASSIST model
may be said to be developed at a regional level. Still it has been an ideal that the ASSIST
2
Gundem, Bjørg Brandtzæg & Hopmann, Stefan (red.) (1998). Didaktik and/or curriculum:
an international dialogue. New York: P. Lang, pg.48.
3
model conserves the decentralized character of the SAMO model. This is because it is
believed that a decentralized model has better chances than a centralized model to adjust to
the felt needs for empowerment among the staff in the kindergartens/ preschools, than a
sentralized framework curriculum. By defining aims, goals and content some frames are
given. But the choice of literature, themes and theories within the classes is up to much local
deliberation.
Therefore it is more natural to make use of a European understanding of the concept
“curriculum”. The German educationalist Wolfgang Klafki has suggested that “curriculum”
and didaktik are not far apart, not least because they are concerned with a parallel set of issues
or questions3:





The questions of teaching and learning goals?
The question of the topics and content that follow?
The question of organizational forms, teaching and learning methods and
procedures?
The question of teaching and learning media?
The question of the way in which learning results and forms can be controlled
and judged?
Both P1 and P8 agreed to this understanding of what is meant by “Adapt curriculum to
partners needs”.
Questions as mentioned above have therefore been central in the development of the ASSIST
course. In the plan to the ASSIST course, there is therefore a clear description of aims,
outcomes, content, learning forms, organizational forms and evaluation forms.
1.2 Develop a training model
The first aim of work package 2 is to develop a training model, on the basis of the Sagene
model, and the common training needs. How should P2 and P8 interpret their role in
“developing a training model?” What should be our focus when seeking to develop the model
further?
In the meeting with P1, Lene Sivertsen responded that there seemed to be a need to help the
teachers to be more focused in their classroom teaching. This need is one of the reasons why
the plan for the ASSIST course has clear aims and outcomes connected to each theme.
P2 expressed a wish to look into an issue mentioned in the SAMO report from 2006/2007.4
This evaluation report pointed out a need to ask whether it is possible to link theory and
3
Gundem, Bjørg Brandtzæg & Hopmann, Stefan (red.) (1998). Didaktik and/or curriculum: an international
dialogue. New York: P. Lang, pg.47.
4
Loven, Liv R. 2008. Kompetanse nærmest brukeren 2006/2007 Evalueringsrapport.
Unpublished internal report: Liv Ragnhild Loven
liv.ragnhild.loven@bsa.oslo.kommune.no
4
practice even closer together in the course. Would it be interesting to look into a more
inductive approach to organizing the learning forms. This developmental idea was both
embraced by P1 and P8. The answer to the question of what parts of the SAMO model we
chose to develop further may be summarized in the following:






Explicit theoretical foundation of the learning model.
Closer link between theory and practice through written and practical tasks.
Clearer theoretical foundation and expectations to mentors/ mentorees and
mentoring sessions.
Clearer expectations to teachers through description of aims, outcomes and
themes.
A focus on themes which have found to be common training needs of staff
with little or no higher education in all partner countries.
Evaluation forms which are closely linked to the aims of the ASSIST course.
1.3 Terminology
The main task of this work package was to develop an in-service training program for preschool assistants and pre-school teachers. What then should we call this in-service training
program? In the application it is referred to as a “manual” and a “curriculum.” Neither “The
ASSIST in service training program” nor an “ASSIST manual” seem to be fitting titles. The
concept of a manual may easily give associations towards a handbook which prescribes what
to do in detail. We have strongly recommended the benefits of a decentralized curriculum
model. In light of this, it would seem as a contradiction to call the product “a manual”. In this
report we have also conveyed that the definition and understanding of the term curriculum
may also vary widely. The term “ASSIST training model” gives associations to skill training,
which again is associated with the limitations of learning theory within behaviourism. Within
behaviourism the focus is solemnly on tangible output. The focus is not on learning and
development related to cognition and reflection. The learner is viewed as a passive recipient
of reinforcement.5 This stands in strong contrary to the view of learner and learning which is
expressed in the plan to the ASSIST course.
The title “ASSIST curriculume” could have been used. Yet we believe that the discussion
under 1.1 exemplifies that the term curriculum gives very different kinds of expectations,
depending on how one is used to define the term. Therefore we have ended up calling the
product of work package 2: THE ASSIST COURSE/ The plan to the ASSIST course.
5
Engelsen, Britt-Ulstrup. 2006. Kan læring planlegges?: arbeid med læreplaner- hva, hvordan, hvorfor.
Gyldendal akademisk. Oslo.
5
2. Collaboration between P2 and P8
After agreeing on a common understanding of the tasks, P2 sent out a suggestion to outline
for the ASSIST course plan, and a suggestion to division of work between P2 and P8. After a
constructive dialogue, we agreed on a division of work which all parts could settle with.
Although we had a clear division of responsibility, we have read and commented on the parts
of each other. In regards to the chapters in the plan to the ASSIST course, the main authors
have been:
Elisabeth Almaz Eriksen:
Chapter 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9 and 10.
Reflection note 1 and 2
Quantitative/ qualitative evaluation forms
Elisabeth Bjørklund:
Chapter: 2, and parts of chapter 1.
Ingrid Nordqvist and Jan Grannäs:
Analyzation of the mapping from workpackage 1.
Chapter 5 and 6, in collaboration with Elisabeth Almaz Eriksen.
2.1 The themes in the ASSIST course
How did we choose the themes for the ASSIST course?
The themes in chapter 5 and 6 derive from the mapping of training needs among staff with
little or no higher education in kindergartens/ preschools in the partner countries. 6Based on
empowerment theory and HR theory described in chapter 2 in the ASSIST course plan, we
found it to be a natural consequence to focus on the felt needs of this target group. The themes
in the ASSIST course draw on the results from both the preferred topics and an analysis of the
answers in the open questions in the survey. Nordqvist and Grans seeked to fill out the
implications of the closed categories with the information which this group reported about in
the open questions. (Attachment 1).
The themes presented in the ASSIST course are therefore in our opinion the themes which
received the most attention in total from the informants within the target group of ASSIST.
6
Gakkestad, Marit (2008). Assist structured-in-service training for pre-school assistants and
pre-school teachers. Work package 1 report. “presentation of the Sagene model and mapping
of the current situation: www.tjorn.se/assist
6
One may see from the mapping that there are important differences between the various
countries concerning the expressed needs. E.g. the theme “The organization you are working
within” was the theme which received the absolute highest score among the participants from
Italy. When summarizing the preferred themes among all the partner countries, this theme
ended as the least preferred topic. Still we chose to keep the theme, since they scored to high
in Italy, and therefore might be relevant in other European countries as well. This was a way
of trying to compensate for the constraints of the task in work package 1: Finding out the
common needs of participants in very different cultures and contexts.
However the training model is not depended on a fixed set of themes. The learning needs may
vary in different settings, and the success of the model leans on local ability to make adequate
adjustments. In the plan for the ASSIST course we therefore recommend the use of a mapping
of learning needs among the participants with little or no higher education before all ASSIST
courses start. We therefore suggest that the mapping forms which were used in work package
1 should be revised by Sagene, in order for these to be used in an eventual future
implementation of ASSIST in the fall of 2009.
3. Workshop in Dortmund, 15-17. September 2008
The workshop in Dortmund gave a valuable opportunity to develop the draft to the ASSIST
course in a unique cooperation between practitioners and preschool teacher educators
In June 2008 a revised outline to the ASSIST model was sent out to the partners, together
with a suggestion to program for the workshop in Dortmund in September 2008. (Attachment
2 and 3).
The partners/cities/ districts were:
1) City of Dortmund (FABIDO)(Germany)
2) Commune Di Milano, Milano (Italy)
3) The Municipal Kindergartens of Amaroussion (Greece)
4) Municipality of Motala (Sweden)
5) The Education Department Tjörn (Sweden)
6) Sagene District, City of Oslo (Norway)
Two weeks before the workshop, a draft to the ASSIST course was sent out to the partners. In
addition, the partners received a document containing 9 questions which P2 and P8 wanted
the partners to consider and comment on in their feed back. Now follows a summary of the
feedback given by the partners during the workshop, supplemented by comments on the
actual changes which have been made in the draft.
3.1 Summary of feedback from partners, and reflections by P2 and P8
1.) In general- is the ASSIST manual/ brochure version understandable
2.) How comprehensive should the course information to the participants be?
All participants thought the brochure and manual were understandable on a general level.
They also agreed to have two versions:
Version 1: For leaders/ teachers and mentors
Version 2: Brochure for participants.
7
Version 1 implies that leaders, teachers and mentors receive the plan for the ASSIST course,
which gives a thorough description of the theoretical foundation.
Concerning the brochure, Tjörn was the only partner which thought it contained too much
information to the participants. On the other hand both Dortmund and Sagene emphasised that
it was important that the brochure contained detailed information to the participants.
P2 and P8 concluded that in the future there might be a need to make a flyer for ASSIST,
which may serve as advertisement for new participants. Most of the participants who will
attend the testing of ASSIST course will have been introduced to the concept through the
mapping, in work package 1. Therefore we believe it is advisable that the brochure that we
now are about to make with a web designer, contains detailed information about the themes,
outcomes and tasks.
Dortmund was the only partner which commented that they found the language in the
ASSIST course plan/ brochure to be at a too high academical level. Hopefully this will be
easier when the material is translated. Yet, P2 and P8 have made some effort to change the
content information in the brochure so it is more accessible and advertising in its form.
Sagene pointed out that they didn`t find the information in the course plan to be at a too high
level, since it is intended for teachers and leaders.
3.) Are there too many themes in the course?
In the first draft to the ASSIST course, the plan consisted of 7 themes + 2 optional themes.
The idea was that the optional themes could be exchanged with one or two of the 7 themes.
In addition each leader group was given the freedom to exchange more of the themes with
others which they believe were important in their contexts.
All partners wanted a reduction of the amount of themes. The partners felt the amount of
themes were overwhelming, and constraining. 4 out of 5 partners commented that: “We can’t
possibly cover 7 themes”. It became clear that plan didn’t emphasis the need for local
deliberation choice and adjustments well enough.
By reducing the amount of themes the partners meant that this would make it clearer to local
leader groups that they must chose how many evenings they focus on each theme. This will
give more local responsibility and freedom to each local leader group. P2 was concerned that
by taking out one or several themes- central content would disappear from the course as an
explicit choice for local leader groups. When asking the partners what themes they wanted to
leave out the, partners replied that they didn’t want to delete any of the tasks or themes. It
became clear that the partners were calling for a restructuring of the themes.
The first draft contained the following way of structuring the themes:
Themes in ASSIST:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Introduction to ASSIST- life long learning
Children, communication and establishing a group identity
Language development
Children with special needs/ cooperating partners/ facilitating learning
Activity and creativity
Communication and conflict resolution in relation to parents
Child neglect and abuse/ Cooperating partners
8
Optional themes
8. Communication with colleagues
9. The organisation you are working within
The final draft to the ASSIST course plan contains the following way of structuring the
themes:
Themes in ASSIST:
1
2
3.
4.
5.
6.
Introduction to ASSIST- lifelong learning.
Communication with children, parents and/or colleagues.
To meet the needs of all children /cooperating partners.
Learning through interaction.
Child neglect and abuse/ cooperating partners.
The organization you are working within.
This shows that the amounts of themes were not reduced. Instead the themes were
restructured, placing more themes under some of the headings. This was in line with what the
partners wanted, and was agreeable for P2 and P8.
In addition P2 and P8 chose to add a paragraph about minimum requirements:
“All ASSIST courses must include the first introduction session. In addition
all ASSIST courses must include minimum two of the remaining themes. Within theme: 2, 3
and 4 there are various subthemes which one may choose from. In relation to each theme in
ASSIST, there is either a small written task or a practical task. The participants should
perform a task related to the theme taught in class. The tasks in the ASSIST model may be
adjusted to local needs.”
4.) Are there too many outcomes connected to each theme?
More than half of the partners thought there were too many outcomes. We have therefore
chosen to reduce the amount of outcomes to 2-3 outcomes per theme/subtheme.
5.) Are the suggested tasks recommendable?
In general the partners agree that it is very positive that the course includes tasks for the
participants. The partners believe this may be an adequate way of stimulating reflection over
theory and practice both for the participants and for their working institutions. The fact that
the participants must perform these tasks, may contribute to learning in the kindergartens/
preschool institutions. Knowledge of the tasks may help some teachers to be fore focused in
their teaching. The partners believed it is important that the tasks are adjusted to local
institutions and cultures. Some partners wandered if the tasks needed to be more concrete. We
hope that the local leader groups will revise the tasks, and make the cultural adjustments
needed.
6.) Do you believe it is ethically advisable to ask the participants to answer the questions
concerning their “background” in the: Reflection note 1, 2 and the midway, qualitative
and quantitative end evaluation?
9
3 out of 5 partners answered that they didn`t believe asking the questions concerning the
partners “background” in the evaluation forms would be a problem. Yet two of the partners
stressed the importance of anonymity. The size of the participating group and the relations
between the participants and leaders will affect whether answering the questions concerning
background will be a threat to the participants anonymity or not. P2 and P8 therefore found it
to be important to take such situations into consideration. At the same time it is of great value
to the later evaluations if as many as possible have filled out the background information.
Therefore we chose to add the following choice:
“If you believe that your anonymity is threatened by filling out the background information, you have
the right to leave all or some questions blank. Still we ask you to kindly fill inn a codeword.”
The quantitative and qualitative end evaluation forms, and the midway evalutationform have
not been sent out yet. P8 will revise these again, as a part of the test evaluation, which they
are in charge of.
6.1.) Is it ethically advisable to ask the participants to answer the question concerning
their sick leave in the evaluation forms?
2 of the 5 partners reported that they didn`t have a problem with sick leave, indicating that
they were neutral to this question.
2 of the other 5 partners reported that they believed this would be problematic. Dortmund
explained the reason for this, being that they don`t keep lists of employers sick leave. Now
that Dortmund is not longer a partner, this concrete problem does not exist at present time. In
Amarouission it seemed it was ethically problematic to ask about this.
Milan suggested that the question should be rephrased to:”Do you think that the experience of
this training has improved or changed your involvement in your job?”A similar question is
already in the evaluation form.
Sagene reported that they thought it was important to somehow evaluate whether a course
affects sick leave. This is because it is interesting to see if there is a connection between
competence growth, and a reduction in high sick leaves.
The evaluation form has not yet been sent out to the partners as this is part of work package 4,
which P8 is in charge of. It will be up to P8 what they chose to do with this question in the
evaluation form.
7.) Publishing channels- which should we use?
Should the “Manual” be published in paper in 5 languages?
Should the “manual” be published only on internet? Only on the ASSIST web page?
All participants agreed that 5 translated versions on our ASSIST web page was the best way
of publishing the ASSIST course plan. Tjörn informed us that the web page has the following
address: www.tjorn.se/assist
8.) Collaboration between ASSIST and Preschool Teacher institutions?
Through a dialogue with P1, P2 has come to the understanding that they see a developmental
potential in ensuring the communicative and/ or academic level of the teachers. Because of
this P2 believes it is interesting to discuss whether the ASSIST model should suggest some
degree of collaboration/ network with a national preschool teacher institution?
10
This could involve that the local administrative / managing body of ASSIST must sign some
kind of contract with one or several preschool institutions, assuring that they will provide
mentoring to future teachers.
Further it could involve that the teachers must agree to be mentored by a teacher at a
preschool institution beforehand and after his/her lecturer. This mentoring may be provided
through the use of email, telephone and/or skype/video camera. This way physical distance is
not a hinder.
8.1 Do you envision this type of collaboration to be possible in your county/country?
All partners were positive to this type of collaboration, and 3 out of 5 reported that some
extent f collaboration already existed. This was in Tjörn, Milan and Sagene. In Amorouission
such collaboration could be difficult, yet they wanted to try to get in touch with the University
of Athens to check out such possibilities. The possibility of applying the government or
municipality for such collaboration was mentioned.
On the basis of this overall positive feedback, chapter 9.3 in the ASSIST course plan strongly
recommends some level of collaboration with an early childhood college/university.
8.2 If you believe finances would be a big problem connected to the suggestion above; - are
there possibilities of applying for funding to this type of collaboration in your country?
Exept for Norway, none of the partners knew of such possibilities in their countries. The
partners wanted to look into this possibility in their home countries.
9. Question for Sagene (P1) to check out:
P1: “Leonardo can not give certificate. But we can give an ASSIST certificate.”
P1 is in charge of this.
As the coordinators of the project, P1 also had a few additional comments:
- They stressed the importance of a committed local leader group.
- They also underlined the importance of “anchoring” the project in the leader group.
- They wish that others than leaders teach, yet they must be qualified.
-
They also advised the local leader group to organize 3-4 meetings for the mentors
during the year. This advice has lead to an amendment in the plan to the ASSIST
course under 9.3.
-
P1 called for clearer information about those not attending the total course in the plan
for the ASSIST course.
P2 regrets that there has not been made any changes in the draft to meet this request.
Therefore there may be a need to add more information on this issue in the final plan for
ASSIST.
4. Attachments
Attachment 1: Analysis of the mapping of training needs among staff in partner countries.
Attachment 2: Outline to ASSIST model.
Attachment 3: Program for workshop in Dortmund.
11
5. References
Engelsen, Britt-Ulstrup. 2006. Kan læring planlegges?: arbeid med læreplaner- hva, hvordan,
hvorfor. Gyldendal akademisk. Oslo.
Gakkestad, Marit (2008). Assist structured-in-service training for pre-school assistants and
pre-school teachers. Work package 1 report. “presentation of the Sagene model and mapping
of the current situation: www.tjorn.se/assist
Gundem, Bjørg Brandtzæg & Hopmann, Stefan (red.) (1998). Didaktik and/or curriculum: an
international dialogue. New York: P. Lang.
Loven, Liv R. 2008. Kompetanse nærmest brukeren 2006/2007 Evalueringsrapport.
Unpublished internal report: Liv Ragnhild Loven liv.ragnhild.loven@bsa.oslo.kommune.no
Ringnes, Grethe. 2007. Life Long Learning programme, 2007-2013. Leonardo da Vinci.
Application form: Multilateral Transfer of innovation. “ASSIST”- Structured in-service
training for pre-school assistants and pre-school teachers. Source:
mari.gakkestad@bsa.oslo.kommune.no
12