[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-601049-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-601049-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","students-redesign-of-mandatory-assignments-in-teacher-education","Students’ Redesign of Mandatory Assignments in Teacher Education","","Students’ Redesign of Mandatory Assignments in Teacher Education examines literacy practices in Norwegian teacher education through data from the DigiGLU project. The study investigates how teachers across different subject courses design mandatory assignments and how teacher students interpret and respond to these designs. After the 2010 TE-reform, assignments were treated as crucial for learning. Findings show mismatches between designers’ intentions and receivers’ interpretations, shaping students’ academic development and potential transfer of literacy practices to professional lives.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/students-redesign-of-mandatory-assignments-in-teacher-education/601049/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/students-redesign-of-mandatory-assignments-in-teacher-education/601049.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"mieayamfan","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-01","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",5,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What is the main purpose of the article?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"To explore how teachers design mandatory assignments in teacher education and how students respond to these designs.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"What theoretical perspectives guide the analysis?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Design for learning and design in learning, as described by Selander and Kress (2010).",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"What is the article’s key finding?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Across subjects, there are mismatches between assignment designers’ intentions and how students interpret the redesigned assignments.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},601049,1792170909,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,100,105,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":97,"show_sort_weight":98,"slug":99},"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":101,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":55,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":115,"language":139,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144},962090893677,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_3d24733baf745e90a7e4bdd5f77d97b2","Drange, [E.-M. D. et](E.-M. D. et) al. (2017). Students’ Redesign of Mandatory Assignments in Teacher Education. Designs for Learning, 9(1),1–9, DOI: [https://doi.org/10.16993/dfl.69](https://doi.org/10.16993/dfl.69)  \n\n| RESEARCH\u003Cbr>Students’ Redesign of Mandatory Assignments in Teacher Education\u003Cbr>Eli-Marie D. Drange, Gro-Renée Rambø and Nils Rune Birkeland |\n| --- |\n| This article explores specific aspects of literacy practices in teacher education in Norway, building upon data collected within the research project Digital literacy and use of learning resources in teacher education in Norway (DigiGLU). Our main aim is to explore how teachers in different subject courses in teacher education (TE) design mandatory assignments, and how students respond to these designs. After the extensive TE-reform in 2010, in revised plans and documents guiding professional training, mandatory assignments (both form and content) were considered more important for the students’ learning process. In our investigation, the concepts of design for learning and design in learning, as described by Selander and Kress (2010), are considered fruitful as theoretical perspectives. The analysis focuses on oral presentations and traditional academic texts in four different TE-subjects. Our main finding, across subjects, is that there seem to be mismatches between the intentions behind the designs on the part of the assignment designers and the actual interpretation: hence the redesigned result by the receiver of the design. The article concludes with some reflections on why these mismatches occur, and what the implications might be for the students’ academic development and the possible transfer of certain literacy practices to their occupational lives. |\n| Keywords: Mandatory assignments; teacher education; design for learning; oral presentations; academic texts; teacher students |\n\nAim and Scope  \nThere is a growing concern about the importance of creating a school that gives the young generations the skills needed to manage personal life and professional expectations in an ever more complex 21st century society (Kalantzis & Cope, 2012; Krumsvik, 2012; Voogt, Erstad, Dede, & Mishra, 2013) . Influenced by OECDs DeSeCoinitiative, Definition and Selection of Competencies (Knain, 2001, 2005; Rychen & Salganik, 2003), which is important in the design of PISA-tests, policy makers and politicians have defined such skills through education reforms and guidance documents in several countries across Europe, emphasising skills related to the use of new technology. Traditionally educational institutions play important roles in how societies design for learning and for the distribution and preservation of knowledge. In this, producing, mediating and reflecting on texts and text practices have always been important. However, the emergence of new digital media is changing the premises for text production and reception both inside and outside the educational institutions, and we might ask whether the privileged role of these institutions will prevail in the future community.  \nUniversity of Agder, NO  \nCorresponding author: Eli-Marie D. Drange ([eli.m.drange@uia.no](eli.m.drange@uia.no))  \nIn Norway a new comprehensive curriculum reform was presented by the Ministry of Education in 2006, covering primary and secondary education and training (K-13) . With this reform, known as the Knowledge Promotion Reform (LK-06), increased focus was placed on outcomebased education, and the guidance documents recognise five basic skills: oral skills, reading, writing, digital skills and numeracy (Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training, 2012) . In the subject curricula these five basic skills are integrated and adapted to each subject. The importance of acquiring digital skills is furthermore reformulated and intensified in the official government report,“Students’ learning in future schools”(Government, 2014) . Higher educational institutions have also faced conspicuous ch","cbCaihrZeUuR501x","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaihrZeUuR501x","pdf",366099,"English","# Aim and Scope\n## Context: digital skills and curriculum reforms\n## Mandatory assignments in teacher education\n## Research questions and design types","[{\"question\":\"What is the main purpose of the article?\",\"answer\":\"To explore how teachers design mandatory assignments in teacher education and how students respond to these designs.\"},{\"question\":\"What theoretical perspectives guide the analysis?\",\"answer\":\"Design for learning and design in learning, as described by Selander and Kress (2010).\"},{\"question\":\"What is the article’s key finding?\",\"answer\":\"Across subjects, there are mismatches between assignment designers’ intentions and how students interpret the redesigned assignments.\"}]","Students’ Redesign of Mandatory Assignments in Teacher Education | PDF",1792091884,23]