When Teaching Materials Encounter the Curriculum
Translational Processes in GF2 Teaching in Vocational Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/lt.v10i17.161783Keywords:
teaching materials, curriculum, sociomateriality, Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK), vocational education and training (VET)Abstract
This article examines how the intentions of vocational education curricula are enacted, displaced, and transformed in teaching through teachers’ use of instructional materials in Basic Course 2 (GF2). Drawing on a sociomaterial perspective combined with TPACK, the study analyses three qualitative case studies from blacksmithing, electrical engineering, and culinary education, based on 105 hours of systematic observations. The analysis shows that instructional materials do not function as neutral tools but as active co-actors that structure the rhythms of teaching, participation patterns, and epistemological orientations. Curriculum intentions are not implemented linearly but are negotiated and reshaped through translational processes shaped by the material and institutional logics of the instructional materials. The article identifies three types of translation – realising, displacing, and transformative – which reveal how professional knowledge and identity are produced in practice. The study points to the need for a more critical and reflective approach to the development and use of instructional materials in vocational education.
References
Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT–TPCK: Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education, 52(1), 154–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.07.006
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Brinkmann, S., & Tanggaard, L. (2020). Kvalitative metoder: En grundbog. Hans Reitzel.
Børne- og Undervisningsministeriet. (2023). Bekendtgørelse om erhvervsuddannelsen til gastronom (BEK nr. 373 af 8. april 2023). Børne- og Undervisningsministeriet. https://www.retsinformation.dk/eli/lta/2023/373
Børne- og Undervisningsministeriet. (2025a). Bekendtgørelse om erhvervsuddannelsen til elektriker (BEK nr. 182 af 5. marts 2025). Børne- og Undervisningsministeriet. https://www.retsinformation.dk/eli/lta/2025/182
Børne- og Undervisningsministeriet. (2025b). Bekendtgørelse om erhvervsuddannelsen til smed (BEK nr. 144 af 8. februar 2025). Børne- og Undervisningsministeriet. https://www.retsinformation.dk/eli/lta/2025/144
Edwards, R., & Fenwick, T. J. (Eds.). (2012). Researching education through actor-network theory. WileyBlackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118275825
Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (2011). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes (2nd ed.). The University of Chicago Press.
Fenwick, T., Edwards, R., & Sawchuk, P. (2015). Emerging approaches to educational research . Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203817582
Fenwick, T., & Landri, P. (2012). Materialities, textures and pedagogies: Socio-material assemblages in education. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 20(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2012.649421
Flyvbjerg, B. (2011). Case study. I N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (4th ed.,pp.301-316). Sage.
Gissel, S. T. (2024). Læremidlet som løftestang til at omsætte og realisere læreplanens intentioner. Styrelsen for Undervisning og Kvalitet. https://www.uvm.dk/-/media/filer/uvm/udd/folke/pdf24/dec/241204-vidensbidrag-til-ekspert-gruppe-for-fagfornyelsen.pdf
Gissel, S. T., Carlsen, D., Buch, B., & Skov, L. I. (2021). Læremidler og læremiddelbrug i L1 i Danmark: Læreres ibrugtagning, didaktisering og redidaktisering af didaktiske, semantiske og funktionelle læremidler i danskundervisningen. Learning Tech, (9), 80–119. https://doi.org/10.7146/lt.v6i9.124762
Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2009). Towards new documentation systems for mathematics teachers? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 71(3), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-008-9159-8
Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (2019). Ethnography: Principles in practice (th ed. ). Routledge.
Hansen, J. J. (2019). Læringsplatformsdidaktik: Læringsplatforme som rammefaktor, didaktisk værktøj og læringssted. LT, (6), 32–55. https://doi.org/10.7146/lt.v4i6.110925
Harris, J., Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2009). Teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Learning Activity Types: Curriculum-based Technology Integration Reframed. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(4), 393–416. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2009.10782536
Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70.
Krumsvik, R. J. (2014). Teacher educators’ digital competence. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 58(3), 269–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2012.726273
Mohler, E., & Rudman, D. (2022). Negotiating the Insider/Outsider Researcher Position within Qualitative Disability Studies Research. The Qualitative Report, 27(4), 1023-1038.https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5047
Mulcahy, D. (2012). Affective assemblages: Body matters in the pedagogic practices of contemporary school classrooms. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 20(1), 9–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2012.649413
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). SAGE.
Pepin, B., Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2017). Refining teacher design capacity: Mathematics teachers’ interactions with digital curriculum resources. ZDM, 49(5), 799–812. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-017-0870-8
Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining Key Concepts in Research on Teachers’ Use of Mathematics Curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211–246. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075002211
Sørensen, E. (2001). The Materiality of Learning: Technology and Knowledge in Educational Practice (1st ed..). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511576362
Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Pareja Roblin, N., Tondeur, J., & Van Braak, J. (2013). Technological pedagogical content knowledge – a review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(2), 109–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00487.x
Winther Bülow, M. (2024). Læremidler og professionsudvikling i en ny kunstig virkelighed. POLIS – Tidsskrift for Samfundsfagsdidaktik. https://tidsskrift.dk/POLIS/article/view/148107
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Forfatterne og Læremiddel.dk.
Må ikke bruges kommercielt.
