Bridging a gap: in search of an analytical tool capturing teachers’ perceptions of their own teaching

  • Lennart RolandssonEmail author
  • Inga-Britt Skogh
  • Sirkku Männikkö Barbutiu


Computing and computers are introduced in school as important examples of technology, sometimes as a subject matter of their own, and sometimes they are used as tools for other subjects. All in all, one might even say that learning about computing and computers is part of learning about technology. Lately, many countries have implemented programming in their curricula as a means to address society’s dependence on, and need for programming knowledge and code. Programming is a fairly new school subject without educational traditions and, due to the rapid technological development, in constant change. This means that most programming teachers must decide for themselves what and how to teach. In this study, programming teachers’ teaching is studied. With the aim of exploring the connection/possible gap between teacher’s intentions and the teacher’s instructional practice, an expansion of the conceptual apparatus of phenomenography and variation theory is tested. In the article, phenomenography and variation theory and the suggested supplementary theoretical tool (Georg Henrik von Wright’s model of logic of events) are briefly presented and then deployed upon one selected case. Findings reveal that teachers’ intentions (reflected in their actions) include an emphasis (of teachers’ side) on the importance of balancing theory and practice, using different learning strategies, encouraging learning by trial-and-error and fostering collaboration between students for a deeper understanding of concepts. In conclusion, logic of events interpretations proves to be useful as a complementary tool to the conceptual apparatus of phenomenography.


Phenomenography Logic of events Teacher Action Intention Intentionality Object of learning Object of teaching Programming education 



We gratefully acknowledge financial support from the Swedish research council.


  1. Andretta, S. (2012). Ways of experiencing information literacy: making the case for the relational approach. Oxford: Chandos Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arvidson, P. S. (1992). The field of consciousness. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 28(4), 833–856.Google Scholar
  3. Bowden, J. A. (2000). The nature of phenomenographic research. In J. A. Bowden & E. Walsh (Eds.), Phenomenography (pp. 1–18). Melbourne: RMIT University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bowden, J., & Marton, F. (1998). The university of learning: Beyond quality and competence in higher education. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, N. C. C., Sentance, S., Crick, T., & Humphreys, S. (2014). Restart: The resurgence of computer science in UK schools. Transactions on Computing Education, 14, 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Curley, E. M. (1985). The collected works of spinoza. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  7. del Sorbo, M., & Hervás, F. (2013). Mind the Science and technology skills gap. European Commission.Google Scholar
  8. Gurwitsch, A. (1964). The field of consciousness. Pittsburg: Duquesne University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Gurwitsch, A., & Embree, L. E. (1985). Marginal consciousness. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Häggström, J. (2008). Teaching systems of linear equations in Sweden and China: what is made possible to learn? Diss. Göteborg : Göteborgs universitet, 2008. Göteborg.Google Scholar
  11. Harris, L. R. (2011). Phenomenographic perspectives on the structure of conceptions: The origins, purposes, strengths, and limitations of the what/how and referential/structural frameworks. Educational Research Review, 6, 109–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hickerson, R. (2007). The history of intentionality: theories of consciousness from Brentano to Husserl. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  13. Kant, I. (1998). The Cambridge edition of the works of Immanuel Kant. Critique of pure reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Lager-Nyqvist, L. (2003) Att göra det man kanEn longitudinell studie av hur sju lärarstudenter utvecklar sin undervisning och formar sin lärarroll. Göteborg Studies in Educational Sciences 195 Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.Google Scholar
  15. Larsson, J., & Holmström, I. (2007). Phenomenographic or phenomenological analysis: does it matter? Examples from a study on anaesthesiologists’ work. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Health and Well-being, 2, 55–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lindblad, S. (1985). Den osynliga tekniken. In Forskning om utbildning, vol. 1.Google Scholar
  17. Lindblad, S. (1994). Lärarna. Samhället och skolans utveckling. Stockholm: LHS.Google Scholar
  18. Linde, G. (1993). On curriculum transformation. Explaining selection of content in teaching. Stockholm: HLS Förlag.Google Scholar
  19. Marton, F. (1986). Phenomenography: A research approach to investigating different understandings of reality. Journal of Thought, 21(3), 28–49.Google Scholar
  20. Marton, F. (2014). Necessary conditions of learning. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  22. Marton, F., & Pang, M. F. (2006). On some necessary conditions of learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 193–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Marton, F., & Tsui, A. B. M. (2003). Classroom discourse and the space of learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  24. Moran, D. (2013). Intentionality: Some lessons from the history of the problem from brentano to the present. International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 21(3), 317–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Naeslund, L. (1991). Lärarintentioner och skolverklighet. Stockholm: HLS Förlag.Google Scholar
  26. Pang, M. F. (2003). Two faces of variation: On continuity in the phenomenographic movement. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47(2), 145–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pang, M. F., Linder, C., & Fraser, D. (2006). Beyond lesson studies and design experiments—Using theoretical tools in practice and finding out how they work. International Review of Economics Education, 5(1), 28–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rolandsson, L. (2011). Teachers’ beliefs about learning programming. In Inga-Britt Skogh & Marc de Vries (Eds.), Technology teachers as researchers-philosophical and empirical technology education studies in the Swedish TUPP research school. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  29. Rolandsson, L. (2015). Programmed or not: A study about programming teachers’ beliefs and intentions in relation to curriculum (Doctoral thesis). Retrieved from “Digitala Vetenskapliga Arkivet”. ISBN: 978-91-7595-463-9.Google Scholar
  30. Skogh, I-B. (2001). Teknikens värld—flickors värld: En studie av yngre flickors möte med teknik i hem och skola. In Studies in educational sciences (vol. 44). Stockholm: HLS Förlag.Google Scholar
  31. Skogh, I.-B. (2013). The theory of logic of Events—A tool for understanding students’ behaviour. An example of a philosophical approach to a pedagogical problem. In: Proceedings. First Annual Conference Philosophy: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow (PYTT 2013).Google Scholar
  32. Spiegelberg, H. (1982). The phenomenological movement: a historical introduction (3rd ed.). The Hague: Nijhoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Svensson, L. (1997). Theoretical foundations of phenomenography. Higher Education Research and Development, 16(2), 159–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. von Wright, G. H. (1971). Explanation and understanding. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  35. von Wright, G. H. (1983). Determinism and the study of man. In Georg Henrik von Wright: In Philosophical papers of Georg Henrik von Wright. Vol 2: Practical reason, Ithaka, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  36. von Wright, G. H. (1998). In the shadow of Descartes: essays in the philosophy of mind. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Yates, C., Partridge, H., & Bruce, C. (2012). Exploring information experiences through phenomenography. Library and Information Research, 36(112), 96–119.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Department of Education, EDUUppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden
  2. 2.The School of Education and Communication in Engineering Science, ECEKTH Royal Institute of TechnologyStockholmSweden
  3. 3.Department of Computer and Systems Sciences, DSVStockholm UniversityKistaSweden

Personalised recommendations