Teacher Agency and Futures Thinking

This is a self-archived version of an original article. This version may differ from the original in pagination and typographic details. Author(s): Title: Year: Version: Copyright: Rights: Rights url: Please cite the original version: CC BY 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Teacher Agency and Futures Thinking © 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland Published version Varpanen, Jan; Laherto, Antti; Hilppö, Jaakko; Ukkonen-Mikkola, Tuulikki Varpanen, J., Laherto, A., Hilppö, J., & Ukkonen-Mikkola, T. (2022). Teacher Agency and Futures Thinking. Education Sciences, 12(3), Article 177. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12030177 2022   Citation: Varpanen, J.; Laherto, A.; Hilppö, J.; Ukkonen-Mikkola, T. Teacher Agency and Futures Thinking. Educ. Sci. 2022,12, 177. https://doi.org/10.3390/ educsci12030177 Academic Editor: Paul W. Richardson Received: 19 December 2021 Accepted: 25 February 2022 Published: 3 March 2022 Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Copyright: © 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). education sciences Article Teacher Agency and Futures Thinking Jan Varpanen 1, Antti Laherto 2,* , Jaakko Hilppö 2and Tuulikki Ukkonen-Mikkola 3 1Faculty of Education and Culture, Tampere University, 33100 Tampere, Finland; [email protected] 2Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Helsinki, 00014 Helsinki, Finland; [email protected] 3Department of Education, University of Jyväskylä, 40014 Jyväskylä, Finland; [email protected] *Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: Problems encountered in top-down school reforms have repeatedly highlighted the significance of teachers’ agency in educational change. At the same time, temporality has been identified as a key element in teachers’ agency, with teachers’ beliefs about the future and experiences of the past shaping their agentic orientations. However, research on teachers’ future orientations is typically limited to short-term trajectories, as opposed to long-term visions of education. To address this, we draw on a futures studies perspective to give more explicit attention to teachers’ long-term visions of their work. We argue that the method of future narratives, already well-established in the field of futures studies, is a fruitful methodological framework for studying these long-term visions. In this paper, we first show that the futures studies approach is theoretically compatible with the ecological model of teacher agency. We then outline the method of future narratives to point out the possibilities it offers. Finally, we illustrate our approach with an exploratory analysis of a small set of future narratives where teachers imagine a future workday. Our analysis reveals that the narratives offer a rich view of teachers’ longer-term visions of education, including instances of reflecting on the role of education in relation to broader societal developments. Our study suggests that this novel approach can provide tools for research on teacher agency as well as practical development of teacher education, addressing long-term educational issues and policies. Keywords: educational change; educational reform; chronotope; futures thinking; images of the future; narrative inquiry; professional agency; teacher agency 1. Introduction During the first decades of the new Millennium, research interest in teachers’ agency has rocketed. A plethora of studies employing teachers’ agency as a theoretical lens has been conducted across the field of education; see e.g., [ 1 – 6 ]. The main motivation for the interest in teachers’ agency is to be found in the school reforms that have taken place around the globe during the last three decades [ 7 ]. Teachers’ agency emerged as a key concept following problems that were encountered with top-down educational reforms [8–10]. One example of such earlier approaches to educational reform is the literature on teachers’ professional development. Most teachers’ professional development programmes and courses aim at diffusing educational innovations, and research-based development of such programmes has typically addressed teachers’ beliefs, attitudes and concerns facilitating or hindering that diffusion [ 11 – 13 ]. Although these studies tend to focus on teachers’ adoption of a reform/innovation, several studies on teachers’ professional development have acknowledged teachers’ role, not only in putting an innovation into operation but also changing and refocusing it [ 12 , 14 ]. However, these studies still frame the role of the teacher as a sort of “fidelity” [ 9 ] to a reform imported from elsewhere. In contrast, new kinds of approaches to educational reform have been pursued under the concept of teacher agency. The key idea is that teachers matter, not only in terms of their Educ. Sci. 2022,12, 177. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12030177 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/education Educ. Sci. 2022,12, 177 2 of 16 fidelity—or lack thereof—to the reform, but also by being creative agents who give shape and content to the reform [8,9]. Recent studies have increasingly emphasized time as a key element in conceptualizing professional agency [ 8 – 10 , 15 – 18 ]. Extensive research has already been conducted within the life course approach, which foregrounds the interplay of teachers’ agency and the experiences they have had during their professional and personal lives [ 17 , 19 ]. Similarly, research into teachers’ beliefs has opened up an avenue of investigating the role that orientations towards the future play in teachers’ agency [ 8 ]. However, explicit attention has not been paid to teachers’ images of the future with the result that teachers’ visions of longer-term professional purposes and the part they play in orienting teachers’ professional agency have not been brought to the fore. In this paper, we work towards remedying this shortcoming by introducing a novel methodological perspective inspired by the field of futures studies. More specifically, we argue that the methodological approach of future narratives is fruitful for studying teacher agency as it opens possibilities for studying teachers’ long-term visions. We begin in Section 2with theoretical work, showing that some of the key concepts from the field of futures studies [ 20 , 21 ] are compatible with and complement what has been called the ecological approach to professional agency [ 22 , 23 ]. We then (Section 3) describe the methodology of futures narratives in more detail and introduce an exploratory study of preschool and primary school teachers’ images of a future workday situated in the Finnish context. In Section 4, we illustrate the possibilities of the futures studies perspective on teacher agency with an experimental analysis of a small data set produced in our exploratory study. We conclude, in Section 5, by discussing the implications of our study for the literature on teachers’ professional agency and teacher training practices. 2. Theoretical Background 2.1. Professional Agency The concept of agency has its roots in sociology, where the structure-agency debate is a foundational question: Which should be considered a more fundamental aspect of social reality—social actors who constitute social structures, or social structures that constitute social actors? The intricacies of the dialectical relationship between structure and agency have inspired sociologists of various theoretical backgrounds [ 23 – 27 ] for the best part of the latter half of the 20th century. Although the importance of the concept of agency is not limited to the sociological analysis of the dialectic between structures and actors—see for example [ 28 ] for philosophical employment of the concept—it is precisely the tension between agency and structure that has proven fruitful in the field of education. Putting the concept of agency to work on the challenges of educational reform has provided an opening where a new kind of understanding of educational change has become possible. When viewed through the lens of agency and structure, educational reforms that reduce the teacher’s role to an implementer of procedures, prescribed from the above, are exposed as one-sided [ 9 ]. In such top-down models, there is an inherent emphasis on structure, that is, on rigid practices and discourses that seek to remove any contingencies— such as teachers—from the equation. While avoiding contingencies to secure good results might sound reasonable, the problem is that rigid prescriptions do not allow for finetuning or practical adjustments when faced with the changing realities of everyday life at school. Reforms that take account of teacher agency, on the other hand, have the benefit of relying on the judgment of the teacher on how to implement the principles inscribed in the curriculum. This makes it possible for the contents of the reform to be realized, even in unexpected circumstances. However, new issues emerge when teachers’ agency is affirmed. While in some of the literature teachers’ agency is seen as synonymous with change, either explicitly [ 5 , 29 ] or implicitly [ 30 ], it has also been found that teachers can employ their agency to resist change [ 31 ]. In the words of Priestley et al. [ 9 ] (pp. 210–211), this raises the question of “Agency for what?”—the concept of agency by itself does not yet tell us what kind of Educ. Sci. 2022,12, 177 3 of 16 influence the teachers in question are trying to have. Since it is not warranted to assume that teachers form a unitary group of people, all of whom share a particular set of beliefs about education, research on teachers’ agency has inquired into the various relations that shape the way teachers come to hold certain beliefs and not others. Due to the history of the concept of agency within sociology and the structure-agency debate, a natural direction in investigating the “for what” of teachers’ agency has been the context where the teachers operate. Consequently, extant research has revealed how a variety of contextual factors play their part in shaping teachers’ agency [ 2 , 30 , 32 , 33 ]. These and other studies show that teachers’ agency is both constrained and made possible by contextual factors. As Biesta and Tedder put it: “actors always act by means of an environment rather than simply in an environment” [ 22 ] (p. 137). Following Biesta’s and Tedder’s work, this approach to teachers’ agency has become to be known as the ecological model of agency [8,9,18,22]. Within the ecological approach, increasing emphasis has been paid to the temporality of agency in recent years. Several types of temporalities can be discerned in theories of agency. Archer [ 24 ] argues that agency always takes place in a temporal series, where the agent is conditioned by existing structures, the agent’s actions transform said structures and eventually result in new structures which in turn condition future agents. Archer’s theory has been employed to good effect in individual studies [ 34 , 35 ]. However, the downside of this approach is that it is not possible to live through a series. We do not move from the past to the present and then to the future. Our experience of time is not that of a series but a form—the present is the only time that exists, while the past and the future subsist or insist on the present; for an imaginative analysis of this, see [ 36 ] (pp. 100–118). It is perhaps for this reason that the majority of studies drawing on the ecological approach to study teachers’ agency have followed the work of Emirbayer and Mische [ 23 ] in distinguishing the past, the present and the future as temporal dimensions that structure agency from within [8,9,16–18,22]. For Emirbayer and Mische, agency consists of three dimensions that resonate with each other—“the chordal triad of agency” [ 23 ] (p. 970), to borrow their fitting expression. The iterative dimension is mainly orientated towards the past. It describes the way agency involves the selective reproduction of existing (habitual) ways of action. The projective dimension, in contrast, is mainly oriented towards the future. It draws attention to agency involving the imagining of possible futures that might be different from the habitual ways of acting. The practical-evaluative dimension, which is focused on the present, is a balancing act where the past habits and future projects are evaluated and acted on in response to problems encountered in the now. Of the three dimensions of time included in Emirbayer and Mische’s conceptualization, the future has so far received the least attention in the literature on teachers’ agency. The past has received careful attention in that the influence on their agency of the various experiences the teachers have encountered during their life course has been examined in several studies [ 15 , 17 , 19 , 33 ]. Furthermore, the way the three dimensions of agency come together in the present has received explicit attention [ 9 , 16 , 18 ]. Although many of the aforementioned studies include the projective dimension, it has yet to be examined with the help of an explicit engagement with the future. In the few studies that have discussed the projective dimension in detail, the results have emphasized short-term goals [ 8 , 10 , 16 ]. For example, Biesta et al. [ 8 ] found that the teachers involved in their study held beliefs focused on short-term purposes. That is, longer-term visions of educational purpose were absent from their data. Similarly, Rajala and Kumpulainen [ 10 ] identified four agentic orientations toward educational reform. Although there are short flashes of long-term visions in their data, their results, in general, are in line with those of Biesta et al. [ 8 ]. It is difficult to know whether these results are due to the teachers not having such beliefs, or due to data collection procedures where no explicit attention was given to long-term beliefs. Thus, answers to the question of “Agency for what?” remain ambiguous in the sense that it is difficult to discern whether the teachers Educ. Sci. 2022,12, 177 4 of 16 orient their agency towards the immediate future or whether there are long-term aims that remain hidden. 2.2. Futures Thinking To develop a better understanding of the long-term projections teachers have in response to educational reform, it is useful to complement the ecological model of agency with theoretical and methodological perspectives on futures thinking drawn from the fields of futures studies (e.g., [ 37 – 39 ]) and youth studies (e.g., [ 40 – 42 ]). A typical approach to analyze futures thinking in the field of futures studies is that scenarios, or images of the future, can be created from various orientations [ 20 , 21 , 43 , 44 ]. The first type of orientation discusses what the future is likely to be (probable futures), and rests on an extrapolation of current trends. We connect this type of futures thinking with Emirbayer’s and Mische’s [ 23 ] iterative dimension of agency, demonstrating capacities to selectively recognize, locate and implement familiar schemas (experiences, habits and trends). The two other types of futures thinking concern what the future could be (possible futures), and what it should be (preferable futures) [ 21 ]. Both possible and preferable scenarios demonstrate capacities to imagine alternative possibilities by hypothesization of experience and imaginative distancing [ 23 ]—detaching oneself from constraining assumptions, schemas, habits and traditions. These are central to the projective dimension of agency. Imagining preferable futures further demonstrates a capacity to start off from one’s dreams, hopes and aspirations, which is another characteristic of the projective dimension of agency. Techniques used in this third type of futures thinking involve visioning the future and the backcasting method [ 20 , 45 ], which strongly relate to the projective dimension of agency as actors “move ‘beyond themselves’ into the future and construct changing images of where they think they are going, where they want to go, and how they can get there from where they are at present” [23] (p. 984). Our suggestion of connecting individuals’ futures thinking to Emirbayer’s and Mische’s [ 23 ] dimensions of agency finds support also from extant literature on the field of futures studies. Scholars in futures thinking have argued that employing the two latter ways of thinking (possible and preferable) by telling stories about alternative future scenarios widens our futures views [ 20 , 46 , 47 ]. In contrast, not questioning ’automatic’ future-thinking patterns keeps us from considering alternative futures [ 48 ] and, thereby, effectively manifests the dominant future narrative as reality, limiting possibilities for the realization of alternative futures. Constructing a novel conceptual apparatus by connecting the notions of probable, possible and preferable futures with the iterative and projective dimensions of agency emphasizes the question of “Agency for what?” at the expense of the ecology surrounding this question. If we are to remain true to Biesta’s and Tedder’s [ 22 ] insight that agency always happens in an environment and also by means of that environment, it is necessary to also ask the question “agency in what?” since an orientation is always an orientation in relation to something. In other words, we need to complement the agentic orientations with the notion that, like the figure-background pairing in Gestalt psychology, agency has its background or space. Given the emphasis on temporality that is a focus in the present study, we rephrase this background productively as a temporal landscape in which and through which the various actors are revealed as agents. That is, instead of a space or environment that sustains agency, we might speak of a time-space that sustains agency. 2.3. Chronotope The kind of background we are talking about here is already present in Emirbayer’s and Mische’s definition of agency: “Agency is the temporally constructed engagement by actors of different structural environments—the temporal relational contexts of action—which —-reproduces and transforms those structures—-” [ 23 ] (p. 970, italics ours; see also [ 22 ]) Similarly, the concept of chronotope, derived from the works of Bakhtin [ 49 ], is emerging in educational research as a tool to analyze the time-spaces that underlie and structure Educ. Sci. 2022,12, 177 5 of 16 various educational activities [ 50 ]. Furthermore, Adam’s extensive theorization of time and, more specifically, her concept of ‘timescape’ has been applied to similar ends in educational contexts [51]. Without getting into theoretical detail about the differences between the three, we slightly prefer the Bakhtinian term chronotope for its straightforwardness. After all, the word is a derivation and combination of the Greek words chronos and topos, which mean time and place, respectively. Originally, Bakhtin developed the concept of chronotope as a tool to distinguish between different novel genres [ 49 ]. The flow of time and space of a Greek drama is significantly different to the time and space in a German Bildungsroman and hence also makes visible the novel’s characters’ actions in different ways. To use Bakhtin’s words [ 49 ] (p. 250), “the chronotope makes narrative events concrete, makes them take on flesh, causes blood to flow in their veins”. The chronotope is time embodied in space and as such, it has unique representational powers: it allows us to see the temporalrelational field that grounds the actors’ agency (ibid.). The chronotope is the temporal background of agency made visible [49] cf. [23]. This naturally raises the question of how the chronotope is able to achieve this. The answer lies in the notion of emergence [ 23 ] (p. 968). The flow of time is constituted by events that emerge, events that appear seemingly out of nowhere, and events that are suddenly just there. Emerging events are the building blocks of time. Strictly speaking, however, the emerging events themselves are not chronotopes. Rather, the chronotopes “are the organizing centers for the fundamental narrative events of the novel. The chronotope is the place where the knots of narrative are tied and untied. It can be said without qualification that to them belongs the meaning that shapes narrative” [ 49 ] (p. 250). Thus, in our interpretation, the chronotope is to be found behind the manifest events as a structure that gives shape to whatever is in the foreground. This makes it possible to apply the chronotope to futures thinking. We consider futures images to be inherently chronotopical. By its very nature, a future image depicts some future event or, more typically, a series of events. These events also have some relation to the present with the result that they manifest a relationship between “the old and the new” [ 23 ] (p. 968). It is this relationship that constitutes the flow of time. If this relationship is to make any sense as a coherent narrative, it needs to have an organizing center that weaves the different strands together. Thus, embedded in a future image is a chronotope that acts as a gravitational center for the agentic orientations around it and which can be made visible with the help of analysis. 3. Materials and Methods 3.1. The Context of the Study and Participants To illustrate the novel approach, we have theoretically outlined above, we employ a small data set produced in a study of Finnish educational reform. Recent efforts at reforming the Finnish education system form the background for the study. The Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture founded the Forum for Teacher Education in 2016 to develop teachers’ professional competencies. The aims of the forum are, inter alia, to develop Finnish teachers as future-oriented experts who create new pedagogical innovations, use new learning environments, and develop their own competencies and working communities [ 52 ]. The context of the study is the development project “InnoPlay” initiated by the Forum. The InnoPlay project is implemented by three Finnish universities. A key motivation for the project is the recent addition of learning about technology to the national curriculum for early childhood education and the increasing importance of this domain in the primary school curriculum. The project aims at developing pedagogical models for pre-primary education, in which technology education is approached through child-centered means of exploratory and inventive learning and play [ 53 ]. Thus, although the InnoPlay project does not aim at educational reform per se, it does lead to the kind of situation familiar to studies on teacher agency, where teachers need to position themselves in relation to Educ. Sci. 2022,12, 177 6 of 16 new pedagogical practices. This makes it a suitable context for exploring the opportunities presented by the futures studies approach. The data for the study were collected as part of a further training course carried out in one of the universities involved in the InnoPlay project during the year 2019. In the course, lectures, seminars, workshops and reflective tasks were employed to work on relevant themes. Central topics were children’s participation and agency in the learning process, learning about and with technology, and ways of supporting and guiding children’s design processes. Seven primary school teachers and five preschool teachers participated in the course. The teachers were recruited via an existing network of collaboration between the university and the municipality. For a more detailed description of the project, see [54]. 3.2. Data In line with our futures studies perspective, we employed teachers’ writings on the future as the data production technique. Narrative inquiry is an established methodological approach in qualitative social science, and is increasingly used also in educational research [ 55 ]. Future narratives, like the ones we employed here, have previously been used in research on youth’s images of the future [ 56 , 57 ] and agency [ 40 , 41 ]. Images of the future have, for a long time, been a significant research interest in the fields of sociology, ethnography, science and technology studies (STS), youth studies and futures studies. During the past decade, educational researchers as well have realized the importance of understanding and addressing individuals’ images of the future in order to respond to the burning challenges of all education due to the global sustainability crisis [ 58 ]. Indeed, images of the future are of high educational interest since they are products of our beliefs, values, hopes, fears and knowledge, and are deeply tied to our perceived agency (e.g., [ 56 ]). The data were produced during a seminar day in December 2019. Of the twelve teachers participating in the course, nine were present at the meeting where the data were produced. The nine teachers were given the task of individually writing a short, snapshot image of their professional future under the heading “My workday in 2040”, resulting in nine hand-written writings about one page long each. No limitations were placed on the teachers’ choice of content, except the title. Long-term future trajectories of school reforms and their prospective influence on teachers’ work had not been discussed during the training course. Thereby, no explicit guidance on future orientation was given to the respondents. Perhaps because of that, however, many of the participants were at a loss on how to start with the task. In response to this, a senior researcher (who is not an author in this paper) spoke a few words on how one might go about the writing. Although they did not offer any specific instructions for content, it is possible that something was produced in the data based on their instructions that would not have been there otherwise. Since no recording was made of the advice, its effects on the data are impossible to analyze. 3.3. Analysis Our analysis of the data was iterative and interpretive in nature. To use a fitting expression by Jackson and Mazzei [ 59 ], we “plugged in” the conceptual framework of our study with the data in a series of readings aimed at a detailed and complex understanding of the snapshot images of a future workday produced by the teachers. To explore the possibilities offered by the futures studies framework, we chose two analytic questions: (1) What kind of chronotope/s manifest in teachers’ images of a future workday? (2) What kind of orientation/s of professional agency manifest in teachers’ images of a future workday? The data analysis started with two researchers (the first and second author) independently acquainting themselves with the data and identifying sentences (or groups of sentences) that manifest some kind of orientation towards the future. All the writings contained plenty of such sentences, albeit not quite all sentences were seen as relevant for the analysis. Educ. Sci. 2022,12, 177 7 of 16 Following this initial familiarization, the two researchers engaged with the data in a second iteration, this time reading the data in light of Emirbayer and Mische’s [ 23 ] chordal triad of agency. At this point, careful attention was paid to connecting passages of data with the sub-categories of iterative and projective dimensions of agency [ 23 ]. This iteration of the analysis offered insights into “agency for what” by helping us establish two distinct orientations where one or other of the dimensions was the dominant voice of the chord. However, at this point, we were unable to accurately conceptualize the “agency in what”. These results were discussed together with the third and fourth authors. Based on the shared discussion—a sort of triangulated abductive reasoning [ 60 , 61 ]—the chronotope was identified as a potentially useful tool for better understanding the background for agency present in the data. This led to the final layer of the analysis, which was conducted in a similar fashion to the second iteration, with the two lead authors first creating an initial reading, which then became the object of a shared discussion between all four authors. Whereas plugging the data into Emirbayer and Mische’s [ 23 ] concepts followed a relatively theory-driven approach, the final iteration of analysis was more data-driven with the chronotope offering a suitable conceptualization for what had already been perceived to be present in the data, even if it had so far eluded thematization. 3.4. Research Ethics In conducting the study, we followed the guidelines for good and responsible research ethics given by the Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity [ 62 ]. Signed research permission based on informed consent was asked from the municipality, pre-primary and primary units, and teachers. Participation in the study was voluntary, the teachers’ anonymity was protected, and instructions on how to interrupt the study were given. The names of the preschool and primary school units have been withheld and quotations have been anonymized. 4. Results We illustrate the opportunities offered by the futures studies approach with the help of two images of a future workday drawn from the teachers’ writings. We chose these two writings to exemplify the key orientations of teachers’ futures thinking we identified through our analysis. In the first Section 4.1, we describe the chronotope of the images of a future workday, and in the second Section 4.2, we describe the orientations of professional agency. We present the two short writings in their entirety immediately below and quote individual passages from them throughout our analysis. The writings have been translated from Finnish by the authors of this paper as accurately as possible and the line numbers have been added for ease of reference. Image of the future #1: 1. Age groups have been abandoned; 2. Books have been entirely abandoned in the primary school as well; 3. The students have personal laptops with digital books; 4. The students progress at their own pace and do assignments according to their grade level; 5. Having completed the assignments of one level, they move on to the next level; 6. They can move forward to further studies at different ages; 7. The teacher is mainly an aid and helps with the assignments if needed; 8. The students order their preferred dishes to a food machine. Image of the future #2: 9. The preschool will be more and more automated; 10. The children have their personal computer stations where learning happens; 11. Learning problem-solving and developing individual thinking are emphasized; 12. Investigating and recognizing phenomena is becoming more and more important; 13. Principles of sustainable development are already present in all activities; Educ. Sci. 2022,12, 177 8 of 16 14. The problem we wrestle with is how to coexist, the weakening of social 15. and emotional skills; 16. Another big problem is students who may be little 17. less academically competent. To where do we guide them in life? 18. Or, we have returned to the old ways, because 4.1. The Chronotope in Images of a Future Workday The main result of our analysis of the chronotopes was the existence of a single overarching chronotope in the data. As we were working on our analysis of the orientations of professional agency (Section 4.2), it became clear that, although we were able to identify distinct agentic orientations, these orientations seemed to converge around a process that was depicted in a remarkably unified way across the data. It was this unity that provided the incentive for employing the concept of chronotope. Thus, the very existence of such an overarching chronotope is the main result of our analysis. In what follows, we describe in more detail the features that define the chronotope with the help of the two exemplifying images of a future workday. First, a theme of individual learning is clearly visible in the data. In the first writing, on lines one and three through six, we read that school classes based on age groups have been abandoned; the students have their personal laptops, and they progress at an individual pace. In the present, schools in Finland are organized according to class levels and learning happens in groups, with the age group progressing together through the curriculum. In this image of the future, such communality has been replaced by individuals progressing according to personal ability and engagement. This idea was expressed in a remarkably similar fashion throughout the data. In the first image of the future, the flexibility of individual paths also applies to progressing to the higher levels of education (see line six). In the second writing, the theme of individualization appears in lines nine through eleven. Here, we again find that the students have their personal workstations and computers. Learning is directed mainly at developing the individual’s skills for problem-solving and autonomous thinking. In this image of the future, we also find the ethos of individuality expressed in negative terms when the writer notes (on lines 14–18) two challenges that occupy us in the future depicted here: coexistence and finding a suitable path in life for children that are not particularly talented in academic subjects. Coexistence has become a problem because of the excessive focus on the individual. Similarly, those individuals who lack any special skills have trouble finding their place in society. Second, the teachers see that the practices of individual learning are supported by technology. The most straightforward example of this is that both images of the future involve students having personal computers (lines 3 and 10). We also find on line 9 an explicit statement that the preschool is more and more automated. Similarly, the passage on lines 3 through 7 taken as a whole suggests that it is precisely the laptop that makes individual learning paths possible. The writer of the second image of the future goes as far as suggesting that learning happens in individual workstations (line 10). In both writings—and this was true of the data in their entirety—the technological tools that enable individualized learning are rather simple. Nothing more is needed than a computer where assignments can be completed autonomously and at their pace. Thus, the increasing application of already existing technologies makes individualized learning possible. Third, given the emphasis on technology as an enabler of learning, it is no surprise that the role of the teacher in both writings, and the data as a whole, is close to what Biesta [ 63 ] has described as “a guide on the side” (p. 1). Instead of the traditional role of a teacher that lectures to the children on a particular topic—“the sage on stage” [ 63 ]—the teacher is perceived to offer guidance and support where it is needed without interfering too much with the learning occurring at the workstations. In the first writing, this is stated explicitly on line 7, where it is noted that the teacher is a kind of helper who assists with the assignments when needed. More details are needed for the second writing, however, especially given our insistence in Section 4.2 below, that this image of a future workday Educ. Sci. 2022,12, 177 15 of 16 24. Archer, M.S. Being Human: The Problem of Agency; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2000. 25. Giddens, A. Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure, and Contradiction in Social Analysis; Palgrave: London, UK, 1979; Volume 241. 26. Goffman, E. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1974. 27. Howarth, D. Discourse; Open University Press: Buckingham, UK, 2000. 28. Arendt, H. The Human Condition; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 2013. 29. Singh-Pillay, A.; Samuel, M.A. Life sciences teachers negotiating professional development agency in changing curriculum times. Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 2017,13, 1749–1763. [CrossRef] 30. Rivera Maulucci, M.S.; Brotman, J.S.; Fain, S.S. Fostering structurally transformative teacher agency through science professional development. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2015,52, 545–559. [CrossRef] 31. Hökkä, P.; Vähäsantanen, K. Agency-centred coupling—A better way to manage an educational organization? Int. J. Leadersh. Educ. 2014,17, 131–153. [CrossRef] 32. Chapman, S.; Wright, P.; Pascoe, R. “I’m really worried for my teaching spirit”: Professional agency, curriculum change and the primary arts specialist teacher. J. Curric. Stud. 2020,52, 577–592. [CrossRef] 33. Eteläpelto, A.; Vähäsantanen, K.; Hökkä, P.; Paloniemi, S. What is agency? Conceptualizing professional agency at work. Educ. Res. Rev. 2013,10, 45–65. [CrossRef] 34. Panti´c, N. A model for study of teacher agency for social justice. Teach. Teach. 2015,21, 759–778. [CrossRef] 35. Panti´c, N. An exploratory study of teacher agency for social justice. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2017,66, 219–230. [CrossRef] 36. Deleuze, G. Difference and Repetition; Bloomsbury: London, UK, 2014. 37. Ahvenharju, S.; Minkkinen, M.; Lalot, F. The five dimensions of Futures Consciousness. Futures 2018,104, 1–13. [CrossRef] 38. Bell, W. Foundations of Futures Studies: Human Science for a New Era: History, Purposes and Knowledge; Transaction Publishers: New Brunswick, NJ, USA, 1997; Volume 1. 39. Rubin, A. Hidden, inconsistent, and influential: Images of the future in changing times. Futures 2013,45, 38–44. [CrossRef] 40. Cuzzocrea, V.; Mandich, G. Students’ narratives of the future: Imagined mobilities as forms of youth agency? J. Youth Stud. 2016 , 19, 552–567. [CrossRef] 41. Heggli, G.; Haukanes, H.; Tjomsland, M. Fearing the future? Young people envisioning their working lives in the Czech Republic, Norway and Tunisia. J. Youth Stud. 2013,16, 916–993. [CrossRef] 42. Heikkilä, K.; Nevala, T.; Ahokas, I.; Hyttinen, L.; Ollila, J. Nuorten Tulevaisuuskuvat 2067: Näkökulma Suomalaisen Yhteiskunnan Kehittämiseksi; TUTU eJulkaisuja 6/2017; Turun Yliopisto: Turku, Finland, 2017. 43. Hicks, D.; Holden, C. Visions of the Future: Why We Need to Teach for Tomorrow; Trentham Books: Stoke-on-Trent, UK, 1995. 44. Voros, J. A generic foresight process framework. Foresight 2003,5, 10–21. [CrossRef] 45. Robinson, J.B. Futures under glass: A recipe for people who hate to predict. Futures 1990,22, 820–842. [CrossRef] 46. Carabelli, G.; Lyon, D. Young people’s orientations to the future: Navigating the present and imagining the future. J. Youth Stud. 2016,19, 1110–1127. [CrossRef] 47. Sharpe, B.; Hodgson, A.; Leicester, G.; Lyon, A.; Fazey, I. Three horizons: A pathways practice for transformation. Ecol. Soc. 2016 , 21, 47. [CrossRef] 48. Hutchinson, F. Educating beyond Violent Futures; Routledge: London, UK, 1996. 49. Bakhtin, M. The Dialogic Imagination; University of Texas Press: Austin, TX, USA, 1981. 50. Ritella, G.; Rajala, A.; Renshaw, P. Using chronotope to research the space-time relations of learning and education: Dimensions of the unit of analysis. Learn. Cult. Soc. Interact. 2020,31, 100381. [CrossRef] 51. Bennett, A.; Burke, P.J. Re/conceptualising time and temporality: An exploration of time in higher education. Discourse Stud. Cult. Politics Educ. 2018,39, 913–925. [CrossRef] 52. Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture. Available online: https://minedu.fi/Opettajankoulutusfoorumi (accessed on 24 February 2022). 53. InnoPlay 2018–2022. Craft, Design and Technology Learning (STEAM) in Early Childhood Education. Available online: https: //blogit.utu.fi/innoplay/en/craft-design-and-technology-education-steam-in-the-early-years/ (accessed on 24 February 2022). 54. Ukkonen-Mikkola, T.; Varpanen, J. Integrated initial and continuing training as a way of developing the professional agency of teachers and student teachers. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2020,96, 103–189. [CrossRef] 55. Connelly, F.M.; Clandinin, D.J. Stories of experience and narrative inquiry. Educ. Res. 1990,19, 2–14. [CrossRef] 56. Angheloiu, C.; Sheldrick, L.; Tennant, M. Future tense: Exploring dissonance in young people’s images of the future through design futures methods. Futures 2020,117, 102527. [CrossRef] 57. Rasa, T.; Laherto, A. Young people’s technological images of the future: Implications for science and technology education. Eur. J. Futures Res. 2022, in press. 58. Laherto, A.; Rasa, T. Facilitating transformative science education through futures thinking. On the Horizon 2022, in press. 59. Jackson, A.Y.; Mazzei, L.A. Plugging one text into another: Thinking with theory in qualitative research. Qual. Inq. 2013 ,19, 261–271. [CrossRef] 60. Flick, U. Triangulation in qualitative research. In Companion to Qualitative Research; Flick, U., Kardoff, E., Steinke, I., Eds.; SAGE: London, UK, 2004; pp. 178–183. Educ. Sci. 2022,12, 177 16 of 16 61. Leinonen, J.; Brotherus, A.; Venninen, T. Children’s participation in Finnish pre-school education-Identifying, Describing and Documenting Children’s Participation. Tidsskr. Nord. Barnehageforsk. 2014,7, 1–16. [CrossRef] 62. Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity. Responsible Conduct of Research and Procedures for Handling Allegations of Misconduct in Finland; Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity: Helsinki, Finland, 2012. 63. Biesta, G. The Rediscovery of Teaching; Routledge: Abingdon-on-Thames, UK, 2017. 64. Branchetti, L.; Cutler, M.; Laherto, A.; Levrini, O.; Palmgren, E.; Tasquier, G.; Wilson, C. The I SEE project: An approach to futurize STEM education. Vis. Sustain. 2018,9, 10–26. [CrossRef] 65. Levrini, O.; Tasquier, G.; Barelli, E.; Laherto, A.; Palmgren, E.; Branchetti, L.; Wilson, C. Recognition and operationalization of Future-Scaffolding Skills: Results from an empirical study of a teaching-learning module on climate change and future. Sci. Educ. 2021,105, 281–308. [CrossRef] 66. Rasa, T.; Palmgren, E.; Laherto, A. Futurising science education: Students’ experiences from a course on futures thinking and quantum computing. Instr. Sci. 2022. [CrossRef] 67. Paige, K.; Lloyd, D. Use of futures scenarios as a pedagogical approach for science teacher education. Res. Sci. Educ. 2016 ,46, 263–285. [CrossRef] 68. Buntting, C.; Jones, A. Futures thinking in the future of science education. In The Future in Learning Science: What’s in It for the Learner? Corrigan, D., Buntting, C., Dillon, J., Jones, A., Gunstone, R., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 229–244. [CrossRef] 69. Levitas, R. Utopia as Method: The Imaginary Reconstitution of Society; Palgrave: London, UK, 2013. 70. Sahlberg, P. The fourth way of Finland. J. Educ. Chang. 2011,12, 173–185. [CrossRef]