The general discourse on education stresses either the teacher’s or the student’s position. This article aims to contribute to a relational theory of teaching by discussing three significant concepts of teaching from the standpoint of Martin Buber’s relational philosophy. Feldman suggests that teaching implies being human in a particular way and in a particular context; Kelchtermans shows that a teacher’s ‘personal interpretative framework’ plays a crucial role in teaching and is constantly modified through interactions; Biesta defines the essence of teaching in terms of the relation between the teacher’s address and the student’s personal response. Although they all contribute to the relational theory of teaching, they also seem to neglect a vital dimension found in Buber’s philosophy – the exceptional moment when a teacher and a student turn to each other as ‘this particular other person’. As a supplement to the other concepts, this article outlines the concept of ‘teaching as a way of bonding’ and makes three suggestions: (1) bonding is a prerequisite for teaching; (2) there are qualitative differences between ‘social bonding’ and ‘relational bonding’; and (3) the teaching is ultimately best understandable in terms of ‘relational bonding’.

A growing body of international research demonstrates that supportive teacher–student relationships have multiple positive educational effects. In Scandinavia, the concept of relational competence is increasingly used to define the teacher’s ability to develop ‘good’ relationships. The overall purpose of this article is to contribute to the field by adopting an interactionist perspective. Drawing chiefly on T. Shibutani, but also on G.H. Mead and T. Scheff, the article aims to: (i) examine how the teacher–student relationship is constructed through nonverbal communication and (ii) discuss the implications regarding teachers’ relational competence in situated teaching. A detailed transcript of a classroom episode is interpreted and analysed using Shibutani’s concepts. The analysis reveals two parallel relational matrices, one ‘conventional’ and the other ‘interpersonal’. In the concluding section, it is argued that the relationship between the two matrices plays an important role in understanding teachers’ relational competence: the relationally competent teacher takes responsibility for his/her own actions, both as an educator in a conventional system and as a fellow being in an interpersonal system. Expressed differently, relational incompetence means overemphasizing one system at the expense of the other.

Forskning om lärares relationskompetens/relationella professionalism kan ses som ett delområde inom forskningsområdet relationell pedagogik. Det är under stadig tillväxt, synligt inte minst i Skandinavien (se t.ex. Juul & Jensen, 2003; Fibaek Laursen 2004; Aspelin, 2005; Holmgren, 2007; Sandvik, 2008; Nordenbo m.fl., 2008; Frelin 2010; Andrén, 2012; Herskind, Fibaek Laursen & Nielsen, 2014; Jensen, Bengaard Skibsted & Vedsgaard Christensen, 2015; Klinge, 2016 u.p.). Forskningens inflytande avspeglas i policydokument för lärarutbildningar, kanske särskilt tydligt i Danmark. Empiriska forskare och teoretiker har lagt in olika innebörder i begreppet men, som Herskind m.fl. (2014) framhåller, råder det tämligen god överensstämmelse om dess allmänna innebörd: lärares relationskompetens rör förmågan att samarbeta med- och forma relationer till elever samt möta elever i en autentisk och professionell kontakt. Det finns emellertid, som Jensen m.fl. (2015) konstaterar, ”need for a more adequate and precise theoretical starting point for studies in this field” (s. 203). Syftet med föreliggande presentation och artikel (Aspelin, 2016, u.p.) är att föreslå en relationsfilosofisk tolkningsram utifrån vilken grundläggande innebörder i begreppet lärares relationskompetens kan förstås. Stöd tas i Martin Bubers (1990) distinktion mellan ”det sociala” och ”det mellanmänskliga”. Utifrån den kan vi, menar jag, föreställa oss två former av relationskompetens; en där läraren med olika medel hanterar eller arbetar med sociala relationer (till elever och grupper av elever, mellan elever och mellan elev och lärandeobjekt) och en där läraren vänder sig till eleven som ”just denna bestämda andre” (Buber, 1990, s. 26) och där ett mellanmänskligt möte initieras. Formerna kan benämnas ”förhållningssätt till relationer” respektive ”förhållningssätt i relationer”, men även en rad andra teoretiska koncept, såsom ”punktuellt perspektiv” – ”relationellt perspektiv” (von Wright, 2000; 2006) och ”pedagogiskt tillvägagångssätt” – ”pedagogiskt möte” (Aspelin & Persson, 2012) kan aktualiseras. I slutet av presentationen förs Johan Asplunds (1991) begrepp ”fixeringsbild” fram, vilket antyder en riktning för hur tolkningsramen kan användas i empiriska studier.

A growing body of research reveals that a supportive, positive teacher-student relationship isan important element of successful education. From a Nordic perspective, a lot of researchhas explored teachers´ relational competence as a central part of teacher professionalism.The discourse focuses on the concept of relationship, and thereby also on the quality ofcloseness, i.e. on a close connection between teacher and student. This article aims at contributingto the field by conceptualizing relational competence in terms of both closenessand distance. The discussion is supported by three theories, Martin Buber´s, ThomasZiehe´s and Gert Biesta´s, in which the relationship between the two poles is problematizedand elucidated. The article proposes that relational competence should be located in the interfacebetween closeness and distance, i.e. that it is rather is about developing a well differentiated-than a close relationship to the student.

This article outlines a concept termed “creative relationships” which ultimately could be used as basic concept and discursive tool in entrepreneurship education. A specifying distinction between “creative co-operation” and “creative co-existence” is also tentatively introduced, and it is argued that both these aspects need to be recognized in the discourse. The concept “creative relationships” is built on a review and an analysis of three distinct relational conceptions of creativity; Hannah Arendt’s, Kenneth Gergen’s and Martin Buber’s. A main point of the analysis is that the concept of creativity, as well as its broader counterpart, entrepreneurship, is not comprehensible without recognizing its relational context. At the end of the article, the outlined concept is applied to the question of curriculum development in entrepreneurship education.

Relational competence has proven to be an important component in teacher professionalism. The overall purpose of this article is to adopt a social psychological perspective and discuss aspects of teachers’ relational competence. More specifically, the article aims to construct a theoretical concept for understanding the aspects of relational competence that concern regulating closeness and distance in the teacher-student relationship. In the concluding section, the result is presented in terms of “differentiation competence”. This concept labels a communication pattern characterized by fine-tuned regulation of closeness and distance in the teacher–student relationship and by ongoing coordination of verbal and nonverbal behavior. The emerging concept is illustrated by verbal and nonverbal communication in a classroom setting as portrayed in an episode from a fictional film, including detailed transcription, and interpretation.