A study of professional ethics in teacher education indicated that student teachers in their didactic plans mostly did not attend to ethics (Cronqvist, 2015) and therefore, a new didactic model could be needed. A didactic model called Didethics was created theoretically in order to visualize ethical aspects of teaching. Since ethics is embedded in all teaching, it is crucial to pay attention to ethics in planning, but also in implementation and follow-up, which the model does. The theoretical model Didethics was tried in practice in combination with videopapers, a multimodal text covering selected recorded video sequences with associated reflective texts. During student teachers´ school-based education they were filming some sequence when they were acting and then chose different clips and reflected on them in a paper. As a follow-up on campus, student teachers showed their clips and told about their reflections. As part of the work, student teachers were asked to use the clips to reflect on didactic questions from the model and the function of the model as a tool. The aim of this study is to try how the theoretically created didactic model, Didethics, functions in practice to visualize ethics. Student teachers´ videopapers are analyzed in order to find answers to the following questions:

• How do student teachers use the model?
• How does the model affect the expressions of ethics, implicit and explicit?
• How do student teachers experience the didactic model, Didethics, in the education of children?
• How do student teachers experience the didactic model, Didethics, in their own learning?

Previous research on teacher education and students´ learning, relevant to the need to make ethics in teaching visible, is about the importance of students´ dispositions and earlier experiences in teacher education (Schussler & Knarr, 2013; Johnson, 2008; Sockett, 2009; Dottin, 2009).There seems to be a lack of attention to how dispositions and previous understandings influence education and the shaping of professional role. Researchers demand a teacher education that systematically attends to students´self-consciousness about what values they express and their judgment in context (Schussler, Stooksberry & Bercaw, 2010). Values verbalized by students are not always aligned to how they act in context (Johnson, 2008). They often enact values unaware of how children perceive their actions and therefore, self-awareness need to be supported (Schussler & Knarr, 2013).

Lazarus & Olivero (2009) state that “videopapers are multimedia documents that integrate and synchronise video, images and text in one non-linear, cohesive document” (p 256). The combination of words and acting, seeing and verbalizing can be a useful tool in teacher education in order to visualize and make explicit tacit knowledge (Smith & Krumsvik, 2007). Ethics of teaching is often mentioned as tacit knowledge, both difficult to notice in actions and to verbalize. Therefore, the combination of the didactic model and videopaper is interesting to try.  Previous research in the area of teacher education has shown that videopapers can lead to increased reflection among the involved participants (Almås & Krumsvik, 2008; Smith & Krumsvik, 2007). They can also help bridging theory and practice (Lazarus & Olivero, 2009). In this study, videopaper is used as empirical data to examine how the didactic model, Didethics functions in order to visualize ethics. The ability of videopapers to represent practice is highly interesting.

The combination of videopapers and the didactic model, Didethics, to visualize ethics in teaching, to find different strategies to support reflection and to bridge the gap between theory and practice makes the study most relevant to development of teacher education internationally.

The study was implemented in a course in Swedish with focus on didactics for teachers working in grades 7-9 (pupils from 13 to 16 years old). This course is held in the second semester of teacher education but three of the students were in their sixth semester, studying together with students from the second semester out of economical reasons. Altogether, nineteen student teachers were participating.

In preparation for the assignment, a combined lecture and workshop about the model was given. In the workshop, students made concrete planning of their teaching, using the model. Problems that occurred were that the students had not met their supervisors yet and therefore did not know if they were able to use the planning and no one of the supervisors participated in their own lecture about the model and therefore were not able to support the students in using the model. It is unclear how this affected student teachers´ abilities to use the model.  When students came back from school-based education, they got technical help to make clips from their recordings. Out of these clips, they wrote reflections on their choices of teaching methods, content, judgment and meanings of professional ethics.

The analysis was made phenomenologically with the aim to understand the didactic model´s ability to visualize ethics in teaching as a phenomenon.  At first, videopapers were read carefully several times to get a grasp on the whole. Thereafter, meaning units out of research questions were marked for each paper (Dahlberg, Dahlberg & Nyström, 2008). The analysis was thereby moving from the whole to the part and then back to the whole again. Out of this movement in the analysis and the meaning units, a division was made, based on whether the model was mentioned, reflected on, if ethics or professional ethics were mentioned, if meanings of professional ethics could be identified more or less distinctly as they are formulated in the model and if meanings of professional ethics were mentioned even if connections to the model were missing. Papers without any connections to the model, ethics or meanings of professional ethics at all, were separated. Words in the markings of meaning units are “model”, “method” and “reflection” and these meaning units form patterns (clusters) in the material (Dahlberg et al., 2008).