This text has been translated from Norwegian with the assistance of GPT UiO.
– Which teaching program would you like to highlight for your colleagues at the faculty right now?
– It’s not difficult to choose which program I’d like to talk about at the moment! What the Department of Psychology has achieved is something quite extraordinary. We’ve created a programme that I believe others may look to in the future, also within other disciplines — a continuing education course for professionals who wish to work as child expert witnesses. The funding for this comes externally, from the Norwegian Directorate for Children, Youth and Family Affairs (Bufdir).
– The teaching will take place across six course modules over two years. There will be both internal and external lecturers and supervisors linked to the programme, ensuring that academic rigour and experience-based knowledge are interwoven, making the content both relevant and research-based. Among other things, we are integrating methodological innovations developed by my research group into the training, applying them to real cases that participants will work on. At this advanced level (equivalent to a cand.psychol degree), theory and models are toned down, while practical skill development is emphasised. We also integrate legal topics into our teaching so that the role and practice of expert assessment are kept at the centre.
– In terms of pedagogical approaches, we will produce podcasts and studio recordings covering various professional topics and approaches that we will then work with in a hands-on way during the course sessions. Participants will engage in role-play exercises both with each other and with actors portraying clients, commissioners, and decision-makers. We will also work with demonstrations of different interview techniques and assessment methodologies, giving participants the opportunity to quickly identify key aspects and apply them to their own roles in the “real” cases they complete under supervision.
– Classroom teaching will primarily be conducted through active participation, where participants contribute with questions and reflections in smaller groups on the topics being discussed, fostering genuine interaction and progress. Personally, I prefer to alternate between showing images — for example, news stories that illustrate different aspects of expert assessment — and making notes on the board of key concepts or points relevant to what I am discussing.
– Who are you collaborating with?
– We’ve been a team of administrative and academic staff developing the programme. I’d like to highlight Jostein Eikrem Kol?en from the administration, who kept an eye on regulations and deadlines; Head of Education Vibeke Moe, who helped us integrate different learning resources from the faculty; and Eleonora Brekke and Solv?r Fl?ten J?rgensen, who managed communication with the study administration. I also want to mention Head of Department Bj?rn Lau, who recognised that this was a feather in our cap and encouraged us throughout.
– Now that we’re up and running, my administrative right hand, Herman Solstad-Wiik, is the person I can lean on for all practical and administrative processes.
– As for academic collaborators, both internal colleagues and external practitioners are indispensable for delivering the programme. In particular, I’d like to mention Kirsten Sandberg and Camilla Bernt at the Faculty of Law, University of Bergen, as key partners — both in relation to the programme itself and to the research underpinning much of what we’ll be teaching.
– Bufdir also has a reference group for the programme, providing feedback and following up with us. In addition, we’re in dialogue with the Norwegian Psychological Association and the Norwegian Court Administration. I see them as important long-term partners, as they have the best overview of how this training contributes to the work of expert witnesses and the legal protection of children and families.
– In your opinion, what are the three most important factors for achieving good teaching in this field?
– Attention to participants’ needs, development, competence and engagement — in that order. We who teach must have great respect for our participants and their expertise. Ignoring that would be wrong and would weaken the programme. They bring valuable experience that should be shared and incorporated into the teaching — and we facilitate that.
– Competence is something to be expected when the University of Oslo launches a continuing education programme of this kind. It means we must stay up to date with scientific standards, which form the foundation of our teaching and practice. We also need to be aware of the latest guidelines and regulations.
– Engagement is about how we communicate knowledge, and it should strike a balance between seriousness, joy, and playfulness — preferably authentically.
– If you were to give one piece of advice to new teachers at the faculty, what would it be?
– Put yourself in the students’ position and design the teaching to suit them — rather than focusing on details that you personally find important for your own research work.