This paper scrutinizes 12 development managers’ (i.e. teachers and principals) and two researchers’ practice of continuing professional development in a research circle. A research circle is based on an epistemology whit roots in a Nordic tradition of folkbildning (folk enlightment). This tradition is built on a notion of pedagogy wherein the participants’ knowledge and experiences are valued and provide the point of departure for further knowledge production. The aim of the paper is to highlight tensions and issues in the practice of the research circle and to examine whether this practice develops a ‘communicative space’ where a sustainable democracy can increase, or not. We explore how the practice is constrained and enabled by using practice architectures as a theoretical frame. Foucault’s notion of power as productive is adopted as an analytical tool, to scrutinize the relatings among the participants. The methodological approach is action research. The project is running over one year (10 sessions/3 hours once a month) and started in February 2014. Hence, we do not have results at this particular moment. All the sessions will be audio recorded, individual interviews and parts of the participants’ and researchers’ diaries from the sessions will be used as sources of data. Following questions are of interest and will be followed up in the paper presentation: What kind of critical aspects can be found in the practice of research circles? What are the benefits of such collaboration for the practitioners and the researchers?

This paper is based on a project that was attempting to develop the educational use value of computers with young school children 6-9 years as tools for learning to write and read. The project was developed in the form of an action research project that gave me the opportunity to combine practical relevance with the scientific requirements that exist in academia. Teachers were given the opportunity to reflect on their own practice and professional roles, and they were encouraged to think about and eventually change any ingrained approaches in relation to how they work with pupils when helping them to develop writing and reading proficiencies. In this study we used various tools to make everyday life visible and take action, to observe what was happening in the classroom and for reflection on what happened. By using various tools such as focus groups, observations, conversations with teachers and pupils, evening meetings/sessions and journal writing we tried to create an opportunity for reflection, documentation and teacher and researcher development. In the paper results are based partly on our common evening meetings and the discussions and reflections that took place there and partly from individual conversations with teachers at Tower School. The basis for our discussions and reflections on our joint meetings were the teachers’ and researcher’s diary entries and the researcher’s classroom observations. Prior to the meetings prepared teachers by asking yourself the questions that they wanted to discuss the basis of their diary entries. We formed joint meetings on the basis of what has happened in the classroom. The project ran well over the course of just one year. After a year, education restructuring in the region resulted in significant changes within the organization of comprehensive schooling. These changes were significant at the School in that they significantly affected the working conditions for teachers (through redundancies and transfers), their pupils (through teacher changes) and the researcher (through the changed conditions for conducting action research). I applied the concept of Practice Architecture as a theoretical framework for analysing these developments and their effects.

In schools in Sweden today researchers are encouraged through national policies that highlight the importance of research in the teaching profession in relation to school improvement to work with school teachers in local development projects. In autumn 2007 I was contacted by one of the teachers at a local school, about my willingness to participate in one such project that was attempting to use computers with young school children 6-9 years as tools for learning to read and write. This paper is based on this project. It was carried out in the academic years of 2008/2009 and 2009/2010 at a school that I have called Tower School: an 0-9 school in Sweden. We developed the project in the form of an action research project. Action research was seen as highly suitable by all involved parties as it is an approach where research is conducted in cooperation with participants in practice in an attempt to improve that practice or its outcomes in some respect. Action research gave me the opportunity to combine practical relevance with the scientific requirements that exist in academia. Teachers at Tower School were given the opportunity to reflect on their own practice and their professional roles, and they were encouraged to think about and eventually change any ingrained approaches in relation to how they work with pupils when helping them to learn to read and write and develop reading and writing proficiencies. The project was organised on the basis of an action research question that could be phased in the following way: How can we use the computer together with pupils as a tool that can help the development of better reading and writing competencies amongst young school pupils? In this study we used various tools to make everyday life visible and take action, to observe what was happening in the classroom and for reflection on what happened. By using various tools such as focus groups, observations, conversations with teachers and pupils, evening meetings/sessions and journal writing we tried to create an opportunity for reflection, documentation and teacher and researcher development. The use of tools like these is common in action research. The tools are meant to complement each other and are a condition for the development and operation of a learning effect. By reflecting and discussing individually and in groups an intention is to create a new understanding of the operation. The use of tools is an opportunity to gain insight into practice. The action research project began well and ran well over the course of just over one year. However, after a year education restructuring in the region resulted in significant changes within the organization of comprehensive schooling. These changes were significant at Tower School in that they significantly affected the working conditions for teachers (through redundancies and transfers), their pupils (through teacher changes) and the researcher (through the changed conditions for conducting action research). The aim with this present paper is to focuses on the effects of these changes on the research process. Often it is taken for granted that everything runs smoothly in empirical research. But what happens to research and school development in a school under change when components in the organization and running of schools begin perhaps to break down? This can occur when social structures change. But what consequences does this have for an action research approach in an ongoing study? One can speak of certain principles of action research and certain conditions that are required in order to implement these principles in practice. One of these is continuity of participation and access to the field, another is time for reflection and a third is the development of stable social relations and critical friendship groups. The restructuring of education in the region destabilised the school and troubled the preconditions for action research. Using first hand materials from my own investigation and combining these with data from other sources regarding the effects of restructuring on schools, the people in them and the relationships these people are able to form with each-other and with people from outside (not the least researchers of course) in the present paper I will discuss how the importance of action research at school and its strengths and weaknesses can be undermined when an organization begins to change in ways that teachers and researchers can do little about. Some tentative conclusions will be drawn about the implications of unforeseen change and unstable conditions of labour for planning and conducting action research.

This paper is based on a project that was attempting to develop the educational use value of computers with young school children 6-9 years as tools for learning to write and read. Often it is taken for granted that everything runs smoothly in empirical research. But what happens to research and school development in a school under change when components in the organization and running of schools begin perhaps to break down? This can occur when social structures change. But what consequences does this have for an action research approach in an ongoing study? One can speak of certain principles of action research and certain conditions that are required in order to implement these principles in practice. One of these is continuity of participation and access to the field, another is time for reflection and a third is the development of stable social relations and critical friendship groups.

Initially the overall aim of this thesis was to describe and analyse what was happening in the educational activities when teachers at a school that I have called Tower School introduced the computer as a tool for helping pupils who were learning to write and read. Key questions concerned the issue of improvement. Did introducing the computer as a tool in the teaching and learning process help the pupils with their learning or not and, if so, in what ways. The research approach chosen was an action research approach. Action research is concerned with professional practice and improvement. It is contextual and oriented toward action processes and change. The initial phase of the research went more or less according to plan. I followed the development process of the introduction and use of the computer as a learning tool, met regularly with the teachers and together with them developed a good working relationship. After about a year things changed. With the restructuring that was taking place in the region changes began to take place also at Tower School and this had effects on the research. In addition to the initial aim to research changes related to student learning a second purpose developed. This purpose was to describe and analyse how political governance and underlying societal forces might influence what happens in school development. There were two reasons for this new extra dimension. One was a methodological interest in relation to planning action research projects at times of political change in the education sector. The other was an educational theoretical interest connected to the school as a policy-driven organization. My interest here was for changes in the political economy at the macro level and how the network of macro-political and economic relations affected the micropolitical level of the school, its classrooms, participating teachers in these classrooms, their students and me as a researcher?