Umeå University's logo

Research topic/aim: This study situates teacher education within contemporary Swedish society, permeated by generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools like ChatGPT, including complex algorithmic (dis)information streams and deepfakes (Örtegren & Olofsson, 2024). The study explores how institutional leaders, primarily deans and directors with strategic responsibilities at 20 Swedish teacher education institutions, perceive and respond to generative AI within their institutions, and how they understand their role in creating conditions enabling teacher educators and student teachers to use generative AI in reflective, critical, and ethical ways.  

Theoretical framework: This study adopts a postdigital lens. This lens suggests a shift from earlier views of digital technology (e.g., generative AI) as something exclusive and object-like toward a contemporary understanding of it as deeply integrated into society’s cultural and educational practices. It positions the institutional leaders within a broader understanding of the socio-technical systems in which teacher education is constituted (Knox, 2019, p. 368). 

Methodology/research design: In this national qualitative study, institutional leaders from all Swedish teacher education institutions offering programmes for school years 4–6 (N = 20) were interviewed using a semi-structured format. The participants were identified through their representation in the national body for teacher education, the Teacher Education Convent (in Swedish, Lärarutbildningskonventet). The interviews were conducted between May and August 2025, guided by one theme on “AI in teacher education now and in the future – from a leadership perspective”. A thematic analysis was carried out following Braun and Clarke’s (2019). 

Expected results/findings: The analysis revealed five main themes reflecting how institutional leaders perceive and respond to generative AI in teacher education as well as how they understand their role in creating conditions to use generative AI in reflective, critical, and ethical ways. The main themes were: (1) Organisational culture, policy and capacity for change, (2) Assessment and examination practices, (3) Professional digital competence and generative AI literacy, (4) Responsibility, democracy, and value systems, and (5) Ethics, data, and the limitations and risks of generative AI. The results underscore the central role of leadership in shaping institutional conditions that support critical, ethical, and pedagogically sound applications of generative AI in teacher education.  

Relevance to Nordic educational research: This Swedish study provides the Nordic research community with new and empirically grounded insights into how institutional leadership in postdigital teacher education engages with digitalisation and generative AI. It also offers opportunities for comparative reflection on organisational structures, leadership practices, and ethical considerations in teacher education institutions across the Nordic countries. 

References:

Braun, V., Clarke, V., Hayfield, N., & Terry, G. (2019). Thematic analysis. In P. Liamputtong (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in health social sciences (pp. 843–860). Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.   

Knox, J. (2019). What does the ‘postdigital’ mean for education? Three critical perspectives on the digital, with implications for educational research and practice. Postdigital Science and Education, 1(2), 357–370.  

Örtegren, A., & Olofsson, A.D. (2024). Pathways to professional digital competence to teach for digital citizenship: Social science teacher education in flux. Teachers and Teaching, 30(4), 526–544.