lnu.sePublications
Change search
Refine search result
1 - 33 of 33
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Adolfsson, Carl-Henrik
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    En slutrapport från projektet: Lärande skolor och förskolor i Kalmar kommun: Forskning och lokalt skolutvecklingsarbete i samspel2015Report (Other academic)
  • 2.
    Adolfsson, Carl-Henrik
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education and Teacher's Practice.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education and Teacher's Practice.
    Evaluating School Improvement Efforts: Pupils as Silent Result Suppliers, or Audible Improvement Resources?2018In: International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, ISSN 1694-2493, E-ISSN 1694-2116, Vol. 17, no 6, p. 34-50Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This article contributes to a perspective of school development, where pupils‟ experiences of the teaching they encounter are regarded as a result of improvement work. In a three-year research collaboration with four nine-year compulsory schools in a large Swedish municipality, researchers have continuously conducted group interviews with different actors, collected relevant documentation and reported their preliminary analyses to the schools. In the light of previous research, the results show that the development areas that have been in focus in the schools have in some cases had an impact on the teaching. However, no homogenous change is evident. Rather, the variation between classrooms, teachers and subjects is great, especially if the pupils‟ perspectives are taken into consideration. The pupils‟ experiences and voices on how the improvement work materialises in the classroom contribute to explaining the connections, or lack of them, between the school and classroom levels. 

  • 3.
    Adolfsson, Carl-Henrik
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education and Teacher's Practice.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education and Teacher's Practice.
    Evaluating teacher and school development by learning capital: a conceptual contribution to a fundamental problem2019In: Improving Schools, ISSN 1365-4802, E-ISSN 1475-7583, Vol. 22, no 2, p. 130-143Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In light of an international policy movement to increase focus on students’ academic achievement, the question of how to improve schools has become an important issue at all levels in the school system. Substantial resources have been invested in reforms to improve conditions for pupils’ learning. Great expectations and responsibility are often placed on teachers in terms of their professional development (PD), the aim being to improve their teaching practices. Consequently, the question of how to evaluate the results of school improvement programmes, including teachers’ PD, has arisen. However, there is a lack of theoretical concepts that can capture the outcomes of such development in a qualified way. Taking inspiration from the research on teachers’ PD and theories relating to teachers’ knowledge and capabilities, the aim of this study is to outline a conceptual framework that can serve as an analytical tool when evaluating both school improvement initiatives in general and school actors’ learning in particular. Four types of learning capital that are intended to reflect the central aspects of teachers’ and school organisations’ learning and the capabilities linked to teaching practice and its development are outlined. This conceptual framework is applied and exemplified based on the results of a three-year research project evaluating a school improvement programme in a Swedish municipality. Finally, some conclusions are drawn regarding the different types of analysis possible with the current conceptual framework related to the evaluation of school improvement efforts.

     

  • 4.
    Adolfsson, Carl-Henrik
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Lärande grundskolor i Stockholm stad: En slutrapport2017Report (Other academic)
  • 5.
    Adolfsson, Carl-Henrik
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education and Teacher's Practice.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education and Teacher's Practice.
    The Local Education Authority’s Implementation of a Capacity-building model for school improvement – obstacles and possibilities2019In: Presented at ECER 2019, 2019Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    General description on research questions, objectives and theoretical framework (600 words)

    In school systems around the world, there is an increasing focus on pupils’ academic achievements and school results. This has resulted in an intensified control of pupils’ levels of achievement (cf. PISA) and increasing demands for school actors and decision-makers to improve schools. In this respect, Sweden is no exception. Ages of declining student achievement, decreased equality between schools have spurred an intensive critique against the Swedish school system and triggered a more state-regulated governing of the school system in terms of several national reforms, which altogether aim to take control over the schools’ outcome (Wahlström & Sundberg, 2017; Adolfsson, 2018). In light of such a policy movement the Local Education Authorities (LEA) and schools’ responsibility for pupils’ achievement and equality have been highlighted and strengthened in Swedish policy. In addition, to ensure the quality of the teaching and the professionalism of the teachers, a revision of the Swedish Education Act was carried out in 2010. This revision stipulated, among other things, that all schools and local school authorities must conduct a systematic improvement work. This had led to a discussion of how school on a local basis can build capacity to improve themselves. In this context, LEA, in the Swedish municipalities, have become important policy actors (Wahlström & Sundberg, 2017b). To strengthen the schools own capacity for improvement, but also to increase the control over the schools’ processes and outcomes, the construction and implementation of different quality systems has been an important strategy for the local education authorities (Adolfsson & Alvunger, 2017; Håkansson & Sundberg, 2016).

    In this paper, we will put this ‘meso-level’, i.e. the relationship between LEA and the schools, in focus. We mean that this is an important, but many times overlooked, relationship when it comes to understand processes and outcomes related to the implementation of local quality systems and school improvement initiatives (Rorrer, Skrla & Scheurich, 2008). Based on an ongoing three-year research project in a major municipality in Sweden, the overall aim is to investigate a LEA: s attempt to implement a new quality system at the schools in the municipality, as a way to control and strengthen the schools’ improvement work. The following research questions are addressed in the paper:

    1. How and which central aspects of the schools’ improvement work tries LEA control and strengthened through the implementation of a new quality system?

    2. In what w   ay do school actors respond to LES’s attempt to implement the quality system?

    3. Which different factors can be distinguished as notably important for the outcome of the implementation process?

    The relationship between the LED and the current schools are understood and analysed from a neo-institutional theoretical perspective (Scott, 2008). From this perspective, three dimensions can be highlighted regarding how institutions (in this case the LED and the current schools) seek to control and affect other institutions, respond to external pressure and seek legitimacy: regulative (rules and sanctions), normative (prevalent norms, expectations and ideals ), and cognitive-cultural/discursive (shared conceptions and frames of meaning-making). This perspective enable us to elucidate the character of the different strategies and actions that LED undertake in the implementation of the new quality model. To understand the implementation processes that occurred at the different schools, theoretical inspiration is acquired from implementation theory (Fixen et al. 2005; Lundquist, 1987; Lipsky, 1980). This theory put analytical focus on central implementation factors such as clarity, school actors knowledge, legitimacy, time, leadership, organisation, school culture etc, which thus help us to understand the result of the implementation processes of the different schools. 

    Methods/methodology (400 words)

    The overall research project, which this specific study is conducted within, has a mixed-method inspired design. The aim with such an approach is to deepening the understanding of the current research questions being addressed through obtaining different, but complementary data on the phenomenon that stand in focus for the study (Cresswell, 2010; Cresswell and Clark, 2007). In this specific sub-study, we have followed the education authority’s implementation process at six different schools in the current municipality. The current schools are located in areas with differences in socioeconomic and ethnic backgrounds and each school was followed for a school year, which made it possible to contextually place and understand the implementation process within the structure, organization and culture of the schools.

    In line with the theoretical points of departure and the general aim to elucidate patterns of the local school authority’s implementation of the new quality system and school actors’ understanding and response of the quality system, following methods and empirical data have been used. i) content analysis of central policy documents ii)  observations (n=xx) iii) 24 semi-structured interviews with key actors at the different schools (n=50). Accordingly, an extensive empirical material have been collected. To conduct a contextual understanding of each school, central documents regarding the local schools’ organisation, policy and vision, leading and management structure, pupils’ achievement, school improvement strategies were at a first step analysed. This contextual understanding was important for the next step, when data related to LEA implementation of the new quality system at the single schools were collected. This was carried out through participating observations at the different kinds of meetings that occurred amongst LEA and the current schools. Finally, as a way to deepen the understanding of the school actors’ response to the new quality system, semi-structured interviews with central key actors at the single school were carried out.

     

    Expected outcomes (300 words)

    The relationship between the LEA and the schools will finally be discussed and problematized in light of the following preliminary results:

    -          The implementation of the quality system occurred through a number of steps: 1. an introduction meeting between represents from the LEA and key actors from the schools 2. a quality dialogue two months later and 3. a quality seminary arranged by the LEA where the principals from the involving schools were participating. In contrast to a more traditional ‘regulative’ strategy of governing the schools, the LEA’s implementation of the current quality system, in terms of these different activities, was characterized by a more normative and discursive way of controlling the schools’ improvement work (i.e. soft governance).

    -          We could distinguish a variety in the initial stage of the implementation process regarding in what degree the school actors consider the LEA’s quality system as legitimate. The same variety between the schools was notably concerning how they perceived the idea and the purpose behind the new quality system but also how LEA’s system should be incorporated with their own local quality systems.

    -          Factors that may explain these differences in the implementation process is firstly, a notably ‘knowledge-gap’, that existed between the schools. That is, principals and other key actors’ knowledge and competencies about local systematic quality work in terms of, for example, data collection, interpretation and using different methods of analysis, seem to be crucial for the implementation process. A second crucial factor seems to be how the principals organized his or her school improvement work, including delegation of responsibility and how different school actors’ knowledge and competencies were used in an appropriate way.

  • 6.
    Adolfsson, Carl-Henrik
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    sundberg, Daniel
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Karlsdotter, Anna
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Lärande skolor och förskolor i Kalmar kommun: Forskning och lokalt skolutvecklingsarbete i samspel - En delrapport2014Report (Other academic)
  • 7.
    Gerrevall, Per
    et al.
    Växjö University, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, School of Education.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Växjö University, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, School of Education.
    Projektarbetet 100 poäng – det första året2004Report (Other academic)
  • 8.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education and Teacher's Practice.
    Att leda lärande som förskolechef - pedagogiska möjligheter och utmaningar2018In: Att leda lärande: En vänbok till Per Gerrevall / [ed] Krantz, Joakim & Sundberg, Daniel, Kalmar, Växjö: Linnaeus University Press, 2018, p. 233-258Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 9.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Leadership for learning in the preschool: preschool managers' perspectives on strategies and actions in the systematic quality work2017Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Systematic quality work is an important commitment for Swedish preschools. The latest changes to the regulations and curriculum for the Swedish preschool have increased the expectations for follow-up and documentation of each child’ s experiences and proficiencies in the curriculum’ s target areas, as well as how this is linked to quality development work in the preschool in general (cf. Sverige, 2010; The Ministry of Education 2010). Within the preschool manager function lies a special responsibility for the planning, monitoring and development of these activities and for ensuring that the systematic quality work is carried out in conjunction with the staff, guardians and children. Research on principals’ leadership in schools has generated a solid base of knowledge over time, but, in the Swedish context it seems that the research has paid less attention to the preschool manager’ s leadership. This paper focuses on preschool managers’ leadership as it relates to quality development and learning for the staff. It builds upon the results of a previous study where 18 preschool managers, in a questionnarie with open-ended questions, expressed their understanding of their own leadership in the systematic quality work (cf. Håkansson, 2016). The results from the study showed, among other things, a tension between linear and interactive forms of governance in the systematic quality work, but also that knowledge gaps among the staff could lead to uncertainties that the preschool manager has to address. In the study, there were traces of what can be characterised as leadership for learning (ibid.). The research reported in this paper is a qualitative follow-up interview study with ten of the preschool managers mentioned above. The main purpose of the paper is to contribute to a deeper understanding of preschool managers’ leadership of systematic quality work in Swedish preschools. Three research questions are adressed: 

    What strategies and substantial leader actions do the preschool managers use in the systematic quality work?

    How do the preschool managers handle knowledge gaps and uncertainties around the systematic quality work among the staff?

    In what ways do the general governance of the systematic quality work from the municipality influence the preschool managers leadership for learning in practice?

    The theoretical framework of this study is based on curriculum theory (i.e. the frame factor theory, Lundgren, 1989), which among other things, pay attention to three components in the understanding of, for example, the outcome of teaching, or in this case preschool managers leadership in the systematic quality work – frames/preconditions, processes, results. In this study it is chiefly the internal and organisational preconditions and how they influence processes and outcomes that are in focus. Other research-based points of departure for the study is the school improvement research carried out in recent decades which have helped to highlight what it is that characterises successful development work and leadership (cf. Hallinger 2011; Hargreaves and Fullan 2012), but also the knowledge base around professional and collegiate learning, which in this context is related to the preschool managers’ leadership (Stoll, 2009). Also important as a framework and related to the mentioned empirical research is the research on school principals in general but also and particularly research related to preschool managers (c.f. Hallinger, 2011; Nihlfors, Jervik Steen, and Johansson, 2015; Ang, 2011; Ho 2011). Of special interest here is for example the concept of ’leadership for learning’ developed in a British preschool context (cf. Siraj-Blatchford and Manni (2008). This study investigates in particular some aspects which relates to the preschool managers’ leadership, such as effective communication and openness around expectations, monitoring and assessment of practices and developing collegiate learning as well as a collaborative culture. 

    The overall research approach in the study is qualitative and the main source of material consists of interview data, complemented with documents describing the tools of the preschools’ systematic quality work. Ten preschool managers have been interviewed, four of them in pairs. The preschool managers’ management teams have also been interviewed but that data is not reported in this paper. The interviews were carried out on site at the different preschools around Sweden.

    The preschools are situated in municipalities of different sizes, ranging from bigger towns to smaller commuting villages. The interviewed preschool managers are experienced and educated for the task at hand, although not all of them had participated in the national educational programme for school leaders, which is not mandatory for Swedish preschool managers. The interview guide was built upon the earlier mentioned components: frames/preconditions, processes, results, which emanate from the so called frame factor theory (Lundgren, 1972; 1989). Examples of questions/themes from the interview guide are:

    Preconditions: General: (external conditions; proportion of educated staff; grouping of children et cetera). Internal: Describe how the systematic quality work is organised in the preschool (quality groups; responsibility, ”key persons” et cetera).

    Processes: What long-term strategies do you as a preschool manager use in the systematic quality work? What are the motives? What are your expectations on the staff’s systematic quality work and its impact on daily work? What concrete leader actions are used in the systematic quality work?

    Results: Do you have examples on how the leadership leads to collegiate learning among the staff? Can you give examples on how the general governance of the systematic quality work from the municipality influence your leadership?

    Each interview lasted approximately 60-70 minutes and was recorded with a dictation machine. All the preschool managers had allotted time for the interviews and the themes/questions seemed to contribute to an open dialogue and room for alternative perspectives. This is important as the study is qualitative in nature and designed to create material that is as rich and personally coloured as possible (cf. Cohen, Lawrence, and Morrison 2000 ). The transcripts of the interviews cover more than 50 pages of text and have been analyzed in several steps both deductively and inductevily. Generic categories, preliminary patterns and new questions that arose were tested interactively (cf. McDonald et al. 2014; Bryman, 2002). 

    The results of the empirical analysis will be presented in terms of thematic categories related to the three research questions. Within ongoing analyses it is, for example, obvious that preschool managers use at least three different forms of long-term strategies in the systematic quality work: Long-sightedness through a) organizational solutions (staff allocated to follow-up, evalutation and improvement), b) substantial persistence (for example, recurring important content in the daily work with the children, such as reading aloud), c) systematic use of certain methods/tools in the systematic quality work (cf. replication in science). The results also show that, so far, preschool managers’ expectations on the staff proceed from several perspectives related to for example a) the content of the preschool teachers’ work and their cognitive approach view of children, values, engagement et cetera, b) different actions from the preschool manager (relational actions, formal actions, feed back et cetera). These results will in turn be related to the question of the knowledge gap around the improvement work among the staff in terms of different leader actions for different knowledge levels. When it comes to the overall governance of the systematic quality work in the preschool and how it influence preschool managers leadership that will be discussed in light of the well known concepts top-down, and bottom up (cf. Fullan, 1994; Hopkins et.al., 2014). The preliminary results show that preschool managers handle the governance in an independent way, but at the same time they need a balance between top down and bottom up strategies from the superior level to create a meaningful discussion around quality on their own preschool.

  • 10.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education and Teacher's Practice.
    Leadership for learning in the preschool: preschool managers’ perspectives on strategies and actions in the systematic quality work2019In: Educational Management Administration & Leadership, ISSN 1741-1432, E-ISSN 1741-1440, Vol. 47, no 2, p. 241-258Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This article presents the results of a qualitative study with the aim of contributing to an under- standing of preschool managers’ leadership in systematic quality work in a Swedish context. In line with the Education Act and the preschool curriculum, systematic quality work is compulsory in all Swedish preschools. This consists of several steps, including data collection, documentation and self-evaluation for the purpose of professional development and quality improvement. With the aid of interviews, preschool managers’ perspectives on leadership actions, with an emphasis on a leadership for learning, have been analysed in relation to local conditions and previous research. The results show that preschool managers balance the demands for loyalty to the municipality’s quality system’s requirements with their own preschool’s independence in the systematic quality work. In different ways they emphasise the organisational, content-related and methodological aspects of their long-term strategies, but also use relational and organisational leadership actions and feedback to show how they expect the staff to carry out their work with the children and collaborate with colleagues. The preschool’s conditions, such as the staff’s education levels, affect how the systematic quality work is organised and led. The importance of preschool managers’ professional knowledge – a content-related dimension – is discussed in relation to previous research on the concept of leadership for learning. One of the study’s conclusions is that the preschool’s leadership emphasis on organisational solutions could impede the preschool’s quality development. 

  • 11.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Växjö University, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, School of Education.
    Lärande mellan policy och praktik: Kontextuella villkor för skolans reformarbete2006Doctoral thesis, monograph (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Abstract

    Håkansson, Jan (2006). Learning between policy and practice. Contextual conditions for reform activity in schools. Acta Wexionensia No 95/2006. ISSN:1404-4307, ISBN: 91-7636-510-7. Written in Swedish with a summary in English.

    Considerable changes have characterised the past decades’ education policy. These changes apply to all types of schools within the Swedish education system. This thesis treats issues of professional teacher development, the introduction of project work in upper secondary school as well as quality audits in the school system. While intending to problematise and intensify discussions on the school reforms’ significance for school development, the thesis focuses on the conditions for practitioners in-depth reflection and deliberative learning in relation to various development measures in school. The overall purpose is to contribute to a deeper understanding of the relation between policy and practice with respect to school staff’s learning processes, which is constituted in policy and practical contexts examined here. One intention here is to present an analysis of the learning aspects in the explicit development measures formulated in policy documents. Another intention is to analyse learning, which is rather implicitly attached to the implementation of policy. The three reform processes have been studied in a broad socio-theoretical perspective on policy and learning. Yet, inspiration was also provided by a critical action research approach. Discursive and dialectic perspectives on policy, practice and learning are significant for carrying out the empirical studies, but also for the analysis of the empirical material. The study depicts myriad and controversial relations between policy, practice and learning. With respect to professional teacher development projects in partial study A, one outcome is that the policy’s transparent character interplays with creative learning aspects both in policy and practice. Regarding the introduction of project work in upper secondary education, partial study B establishes that the unclear and implicit policy character can be related to preserving learning aspects in the official discourse, yet, it can be creative when applied in practice. The policy on quality audits in the school system as examined in partial study C can be referred to as uncommunicative with an orientation towards preserving learning aspects, while there is possibilities within local evaluation and quality audits for an orientation towards creative learning aspects. On the whole, these reform processes are part of what can be identified as hybrid integration patterns in line with communicative perspectives and perspectives on set objectives. The results in this thesis illustrate a potential for improved participation aided by extended possibilities for communication within the framework of a deliberative perspective on governing schools. It is of great significance to pay attention to this in future reforms.

    Keywords: communication, critical action research, deliberation, learning, policy, school reform.

  • 12.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Lärarkvalitet ur forskningens perspektiv2017In: Att bedöma lärarkvalitet: Skicklighet, lämplighet & kompetens / [ed] Per Gerrevall, Stockholm: Natur och kultur, 2017, 1, p. 31-40Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 13.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Organising and leading systematic quality work in the preschool: Preschool managers' perspectives2016In: School Leadership and Management, ISSN 1363-2434, E-ISSN 1364-2626, Vol. 36, no 3, p. 292-310Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Preschool managers’ responsibility for and leadership of systematic quality work has come to the fore in connection with changes made to the Swedish preschool curriculum. The aim of this study is to contribute to the understanding of preschool managers’ leadership and management of the systematic quality work in Swedish preschools with reference to three specific domains: (i) governance, leadership/management and organisation, (ii) content and methods and (iii) development work and collegiate learning. Using qualitative methods, 18 preschool managers’ perspectives of leading systematic quality work have been analysed in relation to previous research. The results show a tension between linear and interactive forms of governance in the systematic quality work, but also that knowledge gaps among the staff can lead to uncertainties that the preschool manager has to address. At the same time, the results show the diversity of and variation in how children’s development and increased proficiency are documented, while the documentation of the quality of the work focuses on learning environments rather than on teaching and teacher competence. In the study, there are traces of what can be characterised as leadership for learning. This needs to be investigated more closely using other methods in future research.

  • 14.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education and Teacher's Practice.
    Resultatanalyser på vetenskaplig grund - men vilken?2018In: Att leda skolor med stöd i forskning: Exempel, analyser och utmaningar / [ed] Rönnström, Niclas & Johansson, Olof, Stockholm: Natur och kultur, 2018, p. 191-231Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 15.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Skolutveckling genom lärares lärande och karriärutveckling: Hörnstenar i rektorns och förskolechefens pedagogiska ledarskap2016In: Ledarskap, utveckling, lärande: Grundbok för rektorer och förskolechefer / [ed] Maria Jarl & Elisabeth Nihlfors, Stockholm: Natur och kultur, 2016, p. 199-219Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 16.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Structured teaching and classroom management - the solution for the decline of Swedish school results?: Conclusions drawn from a comparative meta-synthesis of teaching and learning.2015In: Teachers and Teaching: theory and practice, ISSN 1354-0602, E-ISSN 1470-1278, Vol. 21, no 5, p. 584-602Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    With a basis in conclusions from a comparative meta-synthesis of teaching and learning, the question of structured and teacher-led teaching in Swedish comprehensive schools is discussed and analysed. The aim is to illustrate the development of results and changes in teaching patterns in Swedish comprehensive schools in relation to new regulations in the curriculum concerning structured teaching. The result shows that in current research there is some support for structured teaching but, at the same time, a gradual and parallel development of the pupil’s personal discovery and learning is emphasised. Regardless of the grade of structure, the quality of interaction and communication in teaching seems to be conclusive. One superior teaching dimension consists of structure and interaction.

  • 17.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Systematiskt kvalitetsarbete i förskola, skola och fritidshem: Strategier och metoder2013 (ed. 1)Book (Other academic)
  • 18.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Systematiskt kvalitetsarbete i förskola, skola och fritidshem: Strategier och metoder2017 (ed. 2)Book (Other academic)
  • 19.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Vad hände efter ”Hattierevolutionen”?: Undervisningsrenässansen i det svenska skolutvecklingsarbetet2015In: Paideia, ISSN 1904-9633, no 9, p. 52-60Article in journal (Refereed)
  • 20.
    Håkansson, Jan
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Adolfsson, Carl-Henrik
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Learning schools in Sweden – principals understanding of on-going school improvement in an era of accountability2014In: ECER 2014, The Past, the Present and the Future of Educational Research: 03. Curriculum Innovation, 2014Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Over the last two decades there has been a general transnational policy trend towards major emphasis on learning outcomes. In Sweden – like in many other countries – there is an on-going discussion about pupils’ academic achievement, not to mention due to Swedish pupils’ low results in different international knowledge comparisons (cf. Ball et al., 2012; Grek, 2009).

    During the last years there has also been an extensive discussion on how research can help developing schools in terms of professional development for teachers and principals but also raising students’ achievement. School improvement combining scientific evidence and the proven experience is attracting a wide interest, especially in the international research. There are several attempts from different perspectives addressing questions related to professional learning and development for teachers and principals, school and teacher effectiveness, school improvement, curriculum innovation et cetera (cf. Day et al., 2012).

    In Sweden the situation is more modest according to research efforts in the school development field, although there are important and interesting results from collaborations between school researchers and school improvement efforts (cf. Håkansson & Sundberg, 2012; Blossing, 2008).  

    The Education Act of 2010 is part of a top-to-bottom curriculum reform in Sweden, which has put further pressure on municipalities and schools to implement new syllabuses, clearer goals and knowledge demands and a new grading system (cf. Utbildningsdepartementet (The Ministry of Education), 2008; 2011). At the same time there is still high expectations and demands on performance improvements and school-based development work. So what does it mean working with school-development under the external pressure? Our previous research shows that there is a differentiated picture appearing when it comes to local actors’ arguments of content areas of curriculum development. Howsoever the strongest arguments were the result and the inspection argument, there are also other motives for choosing specific curriculum areas as a starting point for school-improvement, for example previous development work adjusted to the new curriculum, lack of competencies, signals from the staff et cetera (cf. Sundberg, Håkansson, Adolfsson, 2013)

     

    The starting point for this paper is an on-going three-year research project in six Swedish compulsory schools with the general purpose of exploring and developing theoretical, methodological and practical knowledge for school improvement. A vital question is how local actors (i.e. principals in this case) comprehend the parallel process of local improvement work and external pressure in terms of accountability and performance improvement. As part of this broader aim the purpose of the research presented in this paper is to elucidate principals’ understanding of the school improvement work after one year, in regard to estimated changes/results, chosen strategies and local conditions. The following research questions are addressed in the paper:

     

    • In what way do principal understand school changes related to local conditions and strategies in terms of:

     

    a)     content areas covered on teacher level?

    b)    their own leadership and learning?

    c)     capacity-building for school development?

     

    The first theoretical starting point in this paper is a “classical” framework of curriculum theory (i.e. the frame-factor theory with its different levels of analysis – the societal/ideological level, the curriculum level and the teaching and classroom level, cf. Lundgren 1989).  In this context we above all use elaborations of the frame-factor theory describing pedagogical processes in terms of frames/conditions – processes – results (c.f. Lindensjö & Lundgren, 2000).  A second theoretical starting point used in this research is aggregated knowledge from the field of school effectiveness and improvement. During the last decades important empirical findings has emerged as well as theoretical models explaining and supporting successful school development and school leadership (cf Fullan, 2001; Hargreaves & Fullan, 2012; Hallinger, 2011).

    Method

    In connection to the mentioned elaboration of the frame-factor theory, Fullan (2001) means that educational processes must be studied and analysed in relation to its external and its internal conditions. Stoll (2009) emphasizes the importance of internal and external actors supporting and creating the necessary conditions, culture and structures. The concept “capacity-building” is used trying to take into consideration the “multifaceted” characteristics of school development and also show that school improvement essentially deals with creating capacity for learning (c.f. Stoll 2009; see also Fullan, 2006). Our analytical framework and the tools for analysing data, take into consideration the mentioned starting points searching for evidence related to changes in the schools linked to capacities in terms of research-based strategies but also principals insights in i) curriculum content areas, ii) teaching and student learning, iii) the school’s potential for educational change, iv) morals and values in their leadership (cf. Stoll, 2013). In order to explore and analyse the on-going school improvement process and changes after one year through principals’ understanding, different qualitative methods have been used. The most important sources are the qualitative group interviews with principals (n=13) at the end of the first year, but also sound recordings and field notes from eight planning meetings with the principals during the first year (from January to December 2013). Furthermore we have also analysed planning documents from the schools showing local goals, school-based activities and evaluation plans. The group interviews were carried out in two groups in December 2013 following a semi-structured interview-guide. Each group consisted of six or seven principals and the interviewer was a research assistant who had not met the group before. The questions were structured according to the above-mentioned structure for pedagogical processes: frames/conditions – processes – results, but organized in the other way (i.e. observed changes/results were discussed first). Each interview were taped and lasted for approximately one and a half hour. All sound recordings, field notes and other documents (approximately 50-70 pages of text) have constituted the foundation for the analysis in several steps.

    Expected Outcomes

    The results of the empirical analysis will be presented in terms of qualitative differences in principals descriptions of changes in teacher consciousness related to for example curriculum areas like classroom management, or support to pupils’ development of language. These qualitative differences can also be about – in a general sense – teachers’ consciousness of curriculum reform, content areas or school improvement (question a). Secondly the results will show patterns of principals learning related to leadership in school development, ability of analysis and time perspective in school improvement (question b). Finally the result and discussion will pay attention to capacity-building in schools related to Swedish curriculum reform (Lgr 11), different forms of external support from the research group and teaching improvement (question c).

    References

    Ball, Stephen, Maguire, Meg & Braun Annette (2012). How Schools du Policy. Policy enactments in secondary schools. London and New York: Routledge. Blossing, Ulf (2008). Kompetens för samspelande skolor: om skolorganisationer och skolförbättring. 1. uppl. Lund: Studentlitteratur. Fullan, Michael (2001). The new meaning of educational change. 3. ed. New York: Teachers College Press Fullan, M. (2006). Turnaround leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Grek, Sotiria (2009). Governings by numbers: the PISA effect in Europe. Journal of education policy, 24(1), p. 23-37. Hallinger, Philip (2011). Leadership for Learning: Lessons from 40 Years of Empirical Research. Journal of Educational Administration, v. 49 n. 2 p. 125-142 2011. 18 pp Hargreaves, Andy & Fullan, Michael (2012). Professional capital: transforming teaching in every school. New York: Routledge Håkansson, Jan & Sundberg, Daniel (2012b). Utmärkt undervisning. Framgångsfaktorer I svensk och internationell belysning. [Excellent teaching. Success factors in the light of Swedish and international research; in Swedish]. Stockholm: Natur & Kultur. Lindensjö, Bo & Lundgren, Ulf P. (2000). Utbildningsreformer och politisk styrning. [Curriculum Reforms and Policy; in Swedish]. Stockholm: HLS förl Lundgren, Ulf P. (1989). Att organisera omvärlden: en introduktion till läroplansteori. 2. [dvs 4.] uppl. [Organizing the Surrounding World: Introduction to Curriculum Theory; in Swedish] Stockholm: Utbildningsförl. på uppdrag av Gymnasieutredningen. Stoll, Louise (2009). Capacity building for school improvement or creating capacity for learning? A changing landscape. Journal of Educational Change. 10:115–127. Stoll, Louise (2013). Leading Professional Learning Communities. In Wise, Christine, Bradshaw, Pete & Cartwright, Marion (ed). Leading Professional Pracitce in Education. London: SAGE. Sundberg, D., Håkansson, J. & Adolfsson, C. (2013). The Recontextualisation of curriculum reform: Local curriculum innovation under the accountability regime of the New Swedish Curriculum, Lgr11. Paper presented at the ECER 2013, Creativity and Innovation in Educational Research. Utbildningsdepartementet (The Ministry of Education) (2008). Regeringens proposition 2008/09:87. Tydligare mål och kunskapskrav – nya läroplaner för skolan [Government Bill 2009/09:87. Clearer Goals and Knowledge Demands – new curriculums for the school: in Swedish]. Utbildningsdepartementet (The Ministry of Education) (2011). Läroplan för grundskolan, förskoleklassen och fritidshemmet 2011 (Lgr 11). [Curriculum for the Compulsory School, Preschool Class and the Leisure-time Centre 2011; in Swedish]. Stockholm: National Agency for Education.

  • 21.
    Håkansson, Jan
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Adolfsson, Carl-Henrik
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Learning schools in Sweden – principals understanding of on-going school improvement in an era of accountability2014In: Teachers Matter - But how?, 2014Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Learning schools in Sweden – principals understanding of on-going school improvement in an era of accountability

    Over the last two decades there has been a general transnational policy trend towards major emphasis on learning outcomes. In Sweden – like in many other countries – there is an on-going discussion about pupils’ academic achievement, not to mention due to Swedish pupils’ low results in different international knowledge comparisons (cf. Ball et al., 2012; Grek, 2009). The Education Act of 2010 is part of a top-to-bottom curriculum reform in Sweden, which has put further pressure on municipalities and schools to implement new syllabuses, clearer goals and knowledge demands and a new grading system. At the same time there are still high expectations and demands on performance improvements and school-based development work. So what does it mean working with local school-development under such an external pressure?

    The starting point for this paper is an on-going three-year research project in six Swedish compulsory schools with the general purpose of exploring and developing theoretical, methodological and practical knowledge for school improvement. The purpose is to explore how local school actors (principals in this case) understand and handle the parallel process of, on the one hand, external pressure to improve students achievement and, on the other hand, the local school-based curriculum development. In the light of such a tension, what are the principals understanding of:

                          - The selection of content areas for curriculum development?

                          - Principals own leadership and learning?

                          - The schools’ capital building, for school improvement?

    The first theoretical starting point in this paper is a “classical” framework of curriculum theory (i.e. the frame-factor theory with its different levels of analysis – the societal/ideological level, the curriculum level and the teaching and classroom level, cf. Lundgren 1989). A second theoretical starting point used in this paper is theories about school actors’ and organizations’ learning (Schulman & Schulman, 2004; Resnick, 2010). The concept capital refers to individuals and organizations resources, in terms of skills and abilities, which can be used to act and make desirable changes. Schulman & Schulman (2004) distinguish between four different aspects of the capital concept: Moral, Curricula, Venture and Technical capital. These distinctions make it possible, in the analysis process, to study and better understand what forms of capital building emerge in schools and which capital building that seems to be the most important, and why?

     

    Method

    In order to explore and analyse the on-going school improvement process and changes after one year through principals’ understanding, different qualitative methods have been used. The most important sources are the qualitative group interviews with principals (n=13) at the end of the first year, but also sound recordings and field notes from eight planning meetings with the principals during the first year (from January to December 2013). Furthermore we have also analyzed planning documents from the schools showing local goals, school-based activities and evaluation plans.

    Expected Outcomes

    The following aspects of the result will be discussed:

    -          Principals’ autonomy in relation to the local authority: a paradox?

    -          Principals’ learning – an unexpected result from the local school improvement work.

    -          The schools’ strategies focused, in the first hand, on the curriculum and technical capital building. How can this be understood in the light of an increased trend of accountability?

    -           Schools’ selection of content – accountability dependent but also challenged by local curriculum development.

    (some important) References

    Ball, Stephen, Maguire, Meg & Braun Annette (2012). How Schools du Policy. Policy enactments in secondary schools. London and New York: Routledge.

    Fullan, Michael (2001). The new meaning of educational change. 3. ed. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Grek, Sotiria (2009). Governings by numbers: the PISA effect in Europe. Journal of education policy, 24(1), pp. 23-37.

    Hargreaves, Andy & Fullan, Michael (2012). Professional capital: transforming teaching in every school. New York: Routledge.

    Lundgren, Ulf P. (1989). Att organisera omvärlden: en introduktion till läroplansteori. 2. [dvs 4.] uppl. [Organizing the Surrounding World: Introduction to Curriculum Theory; in Swedish] Stockholm: Utbildningsförl.

    Resnick, Lauren (2010). Nested Learning for the Thinking Curriculum. Educational Researcher. Vol 39 no. 3, pp. 183- 197. 

    Schulman, Lee S & Schulman Judith  (2004). How and what teachers lean: a shiftning perspective. Journal of curriculum studies, vol 36, no 2, 257-271.

    Stoll, Louise (2009). Capacity building for school improvement or creating capacity for learning? A changing landscape. Journal of Educational Change. 10:115–127.

  • 22.
    Håkansson, Jan
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Adolfsson, Carl-Henrik
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Sundberg, Daniel
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Building School Improvement Capacity and Learning Capital: A Swedish Case Study2015In: Education and Transition. Contributions from Educational Research. ECER 2015, European Conference on Educational Research, Budapest, September 7-11, 2015Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In school systems around the world there is an increasing focus on students' academic achievement and school result. Sweden is no exception in that respect. Parallel to an intensified control of pupils' level of achievement (cf. PISA), there are increasing demands for school decision makers to gradually improve students' academic performance. The question of how schools are changing and improving thus becomes an important issue for all levels, from policy makers to professionals in schools, but also for researchers. Several decades of research on how school’s improvement efforts ultimately affect student learning highlights the importance of paying attention to the balance between "... individual initiative and school/system change, between internal and external resources and ideas, between pressure for accountability and support for change, and between independence and collaboration "(Hopkins et al., 2014). In this context, the coordination of top-down and bottom-up strategies in schools' improvement work seems to be crucial (Fullan, 1994). At the same time, research shows that the building of schools' development capacity is primarily focused on professional learning and development for principals and teachers, which in turn is expected to improve teaching and student learning (cf. Day, 2012; Stoll 2009). From previous studies of local school improvement work, the results show changes in aspects of principals’ and teachers’ learning, which can be connected to certain improvement strategies (Adolfsson & Håkansson, 2014). This paper will investigate these indications further.

    The focus of this paper is to explore schools' capacity building for improvement in terms of professional learning as strategies over time change character from top-down to bottom-up, a perspective seemingly little illuminated in past research. Within the framework of an ongoing three-year research project in six Swedish compulsory schools, the intention here is to elucidate the way in which top-down and bottom up strategies affect schools' improvement in general and the schools' capacity for development of different forms of learning capital in particular. The following research questions are addressed in the paper:

    •In what ways are principals' leadership and learning but also teachers' understanding of their teaching and the improvement work in terms of learning capital, related to changes in school improvement strategies?

    •What changes in schools overall learning capital and capacity building can be found in relation to changed strategies to initiate and manage local school improvement work?

    The theoretical foundation of this study is based on curriculum theory (cf. Lundgren, 1989). From school improvement research there are also certain concepts to acknowledge. One crucial concept is the “nested school system”. It consists of a number of nested sub-systems, e.g. the classroom, teachers working teams, school leadership teams, the local authority et cetera (Resnick, 2010). Although these systems are related internally, school improvement work in each system rests on specific rationalities and incentives (i.e. loosely coupled). Another important concept is “capital”, which refers to different learning qualities in the capacity building of school improvement. Shulman and Shulman (2004) distinguish four forms of capital defining different qualities of schools' capacity building in terms of learning: i) moral or cultural capital, ii) curriculum capital, iii) instructional capital, iv) change capital. The moral or cultural capital means ability to engage in school and teacher team collaborative work and learning about teaching, while curriculum capital involves significant dimensions of teachers' assignments, such as knowledge of school subjects, curriculum, syllabuses, teaching strategies, et cetera. Instructional capital is about the ability to translate theoretical knowledge into practical teaching, while change capital contains the step from participation and training in different school improvement activities to the incorporation of (more or less) changed and more effective ways of teaching (ibid.).

    Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used

    The paper draws on a “classical” theoretical and methodological framework of curriculum theory (i.e. the frame-factor theory), with its different levels of analysis – the societal/ideological level, the curriculum level; and the teaching and classroom level (cf. Lundgren 1989). In order to study and analyse ongoing school development processes and changes in schools’ capital building, different kinds of sources have been used. Throughout the ongoing evaluation project data from the schools’ improvement work have been collected (e.g. local documents, interviews and survey studies with students, teachers, principals, and officials from the local authority), to support analyses of learning capital on different levels.

    The main type of source used in this study is focus group interviews with principals (n=8) and teachers (n=80). Another is recordings and field notes from planning meetings that continually were held during the project with principals. In the beginning of the project two group interviews with all participating principals where carried out. After two years a second round of interviews followed up these interviews, with the same principals. A semi-structured interview-guide was used and the interviewer was a research assistant who had not met the group before. In addition approximately 20 group interviews with teachers were carried out. The main focus in these principal and teacher interviews was experiences and views on the schools’ improvement work in general and change in schools’ capacity building, principals’ and teachers’ learning in particular.

    Keeping with the theoretical points of departure, the analysis follows a two-step procedure. In the first step the newly collected empirical data was compared to data from previous interviews and planning meetings. With the capital concept (Shulman & Shulman, 2004), the focus in this step of the analysis was to elucidate patterns of change over time in the school’s capacity building. In connection to the frame-factor theory and in accordance with Fullan (2001), meaning that educational processes must be studied in relation to both their external and their internal conditions, these results were in a second step analysed in relation to a continous shift from top down strategies to bottom up strategies for initiation and implementation of local school improvement work.

    Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings

    The results of the empirical analysis will be presented in terms of changes in schools learning capital and capacity building in relation to changed strategies to initiate and manage local school improvement works. In light of the thesis that different strategies will support different qualities (capital) of the schools’ capacity building in their local improvement work, the results indicate that changes from an emphasis on top-down strategies to an emphasis on bottom-up strategies seems to create conditions for other forms of capital within the scope of the local school improvement work. For example, bottom up (horizontal) strategies seem to in greater extent support the schools’ moral and venture capital building, compared to top down (vertical) strategies. These changes will be discussed in terms of how shifts in school strategies appear in: i) principals' leadership and learning, and ii) teachers' understanding of their teaching and the improvement work.

    In light of the concept of the “nested school system” it will finally be argued that different aspects of learning capital are necessary for successful and solid school improvement work. Moreover the results indicates that the organization of local school improvement work has to actively engage all the sub-systems of the school system (i.e. re-couple the nested systems). In other words, successful school improvement strategies, where different aspects of the capital building are included, seem to comprise a balance between top down and bottom up strategies (c.f. Hopkins et al, 2014),

    References

    Adolfsson, Carl-Henrik & Håkansson, Jan (2014). Learning schools in Sweden – principals understanding of ongoing school improvement in an era of accountability. Contribution to the ECER-konference in Porto, September 2014.

    Day, C. (Ed) (2012). The Routledge international handbook of teacher and school development. London: Routledge.

    Fullan, M. (1994). Coordinating Top-Down and Bottom-Up strategies for Educational Reform. In Anson, R.J. Systemic reform. Perspectives on Personalizing Education. Washington: US Department of Education.

    Hopkins, D., Stringfield, S., Harris, A., Stoll, L, & Mackay, T. (2014). School and system improvement: a narrative state-of-the-art review. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, vol. 25, No 2, 257-281.

    Lundgren, U.P., (1989). Att organisera omvärlden: en introduktion till läroplansteori. (Organizing the Surrounding World: Introduction to Curriculum Theory; in Swedish). Stockholm: Utbildningsförlaget på uppdrag av Gymnasieutredningen.

    Resnick, Lauren B. (2010). Nested System for the Thinking Curriculum. Educational Researcher, vol. 39 No. 3  183-197.

    Shulman, L. S. & Shulman, J. H. (2004). How and what teachers learn: a shifting perspective. Journal of curriculum studies, vol. 36, No. 2, 257-271.

    Stoll, L. (2009). Capacity building for school improvement or creating capacity for learning? A changing landscape. Journal of Educational Change. 10, 115-127.

  • 23.
    Håkansson, Jan
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Health, Social Work and Behavioural Sciences, School of Education, Psychology and Sport Science.
    Sundberg, Daniel
    Forskning om undervisning och lärande – en internationell och nationell översikt.: Huvudrapport från CARL-projektet (Comparative Analysis of Research on teaching and Learning)2012Report (Other academic)
  • 24.
    Håkansson, Jan
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Health, Social Work and Behavioural Sciences, School of Education, Psychology and Sport Science.
    Sundberg, Daniel
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Health, Social Work and Behavioural Sciences, School of Education, Psychology and Sport Science.
    Research reviews and knowledge politics:: The representation and construction of the international research field on teaching and learning 1990-20092010In: ECER 2010: Education and Cultural Change: Network: 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education, 2010Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    There is a salient international and national interest in research based educational policy and reform. The main drivers in this development have been the increasing volume on knowledge and statistics on education in different parts of the world available for comparison and learning. Research and knowledge reviews have been assumed to improve educational policy making as well as making better use of available educational knowledge. The transnational export/import of research/knowledge reviews is however also systems part of the new governance of education as responses to the demands of audit and performance. They are means for not only representing but also constructing and codifying educational knowledge. A selection of constitutive international research reviews in the field of teaching and learning s provide with the empirical data analysed (for example the McKinsey report, OECD-reports on the performances of educational systems, John Hatties meta analysis “Visible learning”, Cambridge Primary Review). The results will be discussed in terms of what role transnational research and knowledge reviews play in representing/constructing the knowledge field of teaching/learning and carry out boundary-work between educational research, policy and practice.

  • 25.
    Håkansson, Jan
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Health, Social Work and Behavioural Sciences, School of Education, Psychology and Sport Science.
    Sundberg, Daniel
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Health, Social Work and Behavioural Sciences, School of Education, Psychology and Sport Science.
    Skolförbättringsarbete: förutsättningar, strategier och resultat i pilotprojekt 2010-2012, Linnéregionen2012Report (Other academic)
  • 26.
    Håkansson, Jan
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education and Teacher's Practice.
    Sundberg, Daniel
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education and Teacher's Practice.
    Utmärkt ledarskap i skolan: Forskning om att leda för elevers måluppfyllelse2018 (ed. 1)Book (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    Runt om i världen har ett nytt fjärde generationens paradigmkring skolförbättring gett forskningsresultat medstor potential för ökad måluppfyllelse. Vissa avtryck börjar nu ta form i svenska skolor, men ännu har inga större resultatförbättringar märkts. Så hur väl håller internationellt etablerade modeller som Timperleys för kollegialt lärande, eller andra metoder för utveckling av undervisningen?

    I boken Utmärkt ledarskap i skolan får vi en sammanfattning av vad den senaste internationella skolförbättringsforskningen säger om attleda utvecklingen av undervisning och lärande. Utifrån inblickar i svenska skolor uppmärksammas såväl möjligheter som fallgropar i utvecklingsarbetets olika faser.

    Genom att belysa ett hållbart ledarskap i skolan får vi de nycklar vi behöver för systematiska och långsiktiga förbättringar med fokus på elevernas lärande. I Utmärkt ledarskap i skolan får du som skolledare, förstelärare och lärare kompetensutveckling och handledning i ditt dagliga pedagogiska ledarskapsarbete.

  • 27.
    Håkansson, Jan
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Health, Social Work and Behavioural Sciences, School of Education, Psychology and Sport Science.
    Sundberg, Daniel
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Health, Social Work and Behavioural Sciences, School of Education, Psychology and Sport Science.
    Utmärkt undervisning: Framgångsfaktorer i svensk och internationell belysning2012 (ed. 1)Book (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    Undervisning ska bygga på vetenskaplig grund, men vad innebär det i så fall? Vad finns det för forskningsstöd och evidens för de olika idéer, strategier och metoder som förekommer i skolan? Finns det till exempel några generellt hållbara principer och strategier för undervisning som är oberoende av ämne, elevernas ålder och de nationella och kulturella sammanhangen? Vilken betydelse har informations- och kommunikationsteknik (IKT), specialpedagogik och mångkulturalism?

    Utmärkt undervisning handlar om vad vi kanlära från de viktigaste internationella och svenska forskningsöversikterna från de senaste två decennierna. De viktigaste forskningsresultaten kring lärarens betydelse, sambandet mellan undervisningsstrategier och elevers lärande och bedömningens roll belyses från flera olika perspektiv. Det är första gången en sådan översikt har gjorts i Sverige, och fram tonar en bild av lärarens yrkesidentitet i både ett internationellt och ett nationellt perspektiv.

    Huvudtemat i boken är vad som kan anses vara god och framgångsrik undervisning. Författarnas grundsyn är att kunskapsutveckling inom undervisningsområdet bygger på en ömsesidig och långsiktig dialog mellan erfarenhetsgrundad och teoretiskt grundad kunskap.

    Sammantaget ger boken en översiktskarta som rektorer, lärare, lärarstudenter, utbildningspolitiker och en intresserad allmänhet kan navigera i.

  • 28.
    Sundberg, Daniel
    et al.
    Växjö University, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, School of Education.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Växjö University, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, School of Education.
    Forskningssamverkan i policy och praktik: mot en integrativ modell på utbildnings- och skolområdet.2007In: Integrativ didaktik i olika ämnesperspektiv / [ed] Fritzell, C. & Fritzén, L., Växjö: Växjö university press , 2007Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 29.
    Sundberg, Daniel
    et al.
    Växjö University, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, School of Education.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Växjö University, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, School of Education.
    Skolans inre arbete och skolans resultat2009In: Vad påverkar resultaten i svensk grundskola?: kunskapsöversikt om betydelsen av olika faktorer, Stockholm: Skolverket , 2009, 1, , p. 264p. 207-258Chapter in book (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    Vad påverkar resultaten i svensk grundskola? Hur kan man förklara förändringar i elevernas resultat? Skolverket har initierat denna kunskapsöversikt i syfte att bredda och fördjupa kunskapen om vilka faktorer som påverkar resultaten i svensk grundskola. Rapporten innehåller en sammanställning av forskning inom fyra breda områden; samhällsförändringar, reformer, resurser och skolans inre arbete. Dessutom ingår en fördjupad genomgång av resultatutvecklingeni i svensk grundskola utifrån olika utfallsmått.

  • 30.
    Sundberg, Daniel
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Utbildningsvetenskaplig forskning i utbildningspolitiken: en analys av olika modeller för mediering2015Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    I denna rapport analyseras det förändrade samspelet mellan utbildningsforskningen och utbildningspolitiken. Genom att särskilt fokusera de s.k. intermediära organisationernas ökade betydelse för att sprida, kommunicera och understödja policyrelevant kunskap för beslutsfattande adresseras frågor om forskning och evidens i utvecklingen och reformeringen av utbildning och skola. Rapporten bidrar med genomgång av forskningen kring forskningsmediering, de centrala begreppen och distinktionerna. I en internationell och nationell litteraturgenomgång identifieras tre ramverk/modeller för forskningsbasering av policy/praktik. Samtliga exemplifieras med intermediärer som verkar internationellt och i norden inom utbildningsområdet genom sin produktion av kunskaps- och forskningsöversikter riktade till beslutsfattare. I resultatdelen ges också en bild av det framväxande svenska intermedieringslandskapet. I det avslutande kapitlet sammanfattas de viktigaste slutsatserna kring resultaten för Skolforskningsinstitutets vidkommande.

  • 31.
    Sundberg, Daniel
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Utmärkt skolutveckling: Forskning om skolförbättring och måluppfyllelse2016Book (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    Vad säger egentligen internationella mätningar omden svenska skolans tillstånd? Stämmer debatten om svenska elevers sjunkande resultat? Behöver svensk skola förändras – och i så fall hur? För den som vill ta sig an skolutveckling på vetenskaplig grund sammanfattar Utmärkt skolutveckling de viktigaste slutsatserna från internationell skolforskning och visar på betydelsefulla framgångsfaktorer. Skolans skyldighet att enligt skollagen bedriva systematiskt kvalitetsarbete är ofta klämt mellan krav på höjda resultat och skolförbättring inom hela läroplanens område. Men det är inte enbart ett svenskt skoldilemma. I dag har det vuxit fram en rik flora av internationella studier som lägger en grund för forskningsbasering av skolors lokala skolutvecklingsarbete. Finns det kanske gemensamma lärdomar att dra från dessa skolors väg mot ökad kvalitet och förbättrad måluppfyllelse? Författarna utforskar och redovisar i denna bok insikter och resultat från internationell forskning och erbjuder en karta över vetenskapligt förankrade vägval och strategier för skolutveckling. Utmärkt skolutveckling vänder sig främst till skolledare, lärare, skolhuvudmän och politiker som vill få vägledning i hur man kan förbättra skolors resultat.

  • 32.
    Sundberg, Daniel
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Health, Social Work and Behavioural Sciences, School of Education, Psychology and Sport Science.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Health, Social Work and Behavioural Sciences, School of Education, Psychology and Sport Science.
    Adolfsson, Carl-Henrik
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Health, Social Work and Behavioural Sciences, School of Education, Psychology and Sport Science.
    Innovative leaning environments: a case study of entrepreneurial learning in the Swedish primary school2011Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    There is an increasing pressure for educational systems and schools to actively engage in a series of global changes and adjust to a growing knowledge-intensive society. Internationally, there is talk about certain “21st century competences” in order to equip the pupils for the challenges of the future. While the new reforms and policy initiatives were being introduced, the gap between theory and practice has become increasingly evident (something which is also called the great disconnect). The need for the contextual micro-cases in order to identify and analyse conditions and results of change is evident.

    In the current Swedish case-study, the teaching’s and learning’s core processes have been in focus. Based on case studies of entrepreneurial learning, which in many contexts is highlighted as a key competence for the future, we have analyzed how this innovative approach has been designed, implemented and resulted in changes concerning new learner identities, new pedagogical approaches (in terms of scheduling, grouping, interaction between substances, assessment of learning) and new content focus (entrepreneurial competences) in a Swedish primary school years 6 – 9. The research has been based on a variety of methods in  form of document analysis, interview with the headmaster, project managers and teachers, focus group interviews with students and classroom observations. ILE's framework "Learning Principles" of what characterises an effective learning environment have, on both empirical data collection and its analysis, served as an analytical framework.

    The results of the analyses point to a series of lessons learned on how to design, implement and maintain innovative learning environments. It concerns, for example, including different groups of students and supporting various successful learning identities, so as to balance the necessary subject knowledge with more generic skills / competencies and to organize a formative assessment that can follow and support such skills. The case study also takes up and demonstrates the role of the teacher's active leadership in the actual development of innovative learning environments. Lastly, the current study addresses what we have identified as key challenges in order to bring about changes by means of analysis of the empirical case.

  • 33.
    Sundberg, Daniel
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Håkansson, Jan
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    Adolfsson, Carl-Henrik
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Education.
    The Recontextualisation of Curriculum Reform: Local Curriculum Innovation Under the Accountability Regime of the New Swedish Curriculum, Lgr112013In: ECER 2013, Creativity and Innovation in Educational Research: Network: 03. Curriculum Innovation, 2013Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    During the last two decades, transnational organizations and agreements are increasingly important as actors, networks and shaping forces in curriculum-making, and this also applies to the formation of the Swedish curriculum. The international education policy movement towards standards-based curriculum has been characterized by top-down accountability and linear dissemination (Andersson-Levitt 2008, Sivesind & Karseth 2011). However, several research studies reveal how the translation to national cultural education traditions also implies tensions and contradictions. Differences between different levels of curriculum has been theorized in for example distinctions between intended, implemented and enacted curricula (Conelly 2008). A major issue facing externally mandated reform is the ‘implementation gap’. In this paper we will address factors in how curriculum is contextualised and reconceptualised (Bernstein 2000, Wahlström & Sundberg 2012) as it translated from transnational curriculum scripts to national and local school curriculum development and innovation. The paper draws on a “classical” theoretical framework of curriculum theory (i.e. the frame-factor theory), with its different levels of analysis – the societal/ideological level, the curriculum level; and the teaching and classroom level (cf. Lundgren 1989). With reference to Bernstein (2000), the three different discursive levels can be related to each other, by the concept of recontextualisation. The concept of recontextualisation – how meanings travel between contexts - addresses crucial assumptions of curriculum reform. First, it challenges an assumption of curriculum as a means for direct policy control and secondly, it challenges the assumption that larger global macro-social contexts have unmediated impact on the local context. From Michael Fullan’s seminal study on educational change follows that to implement educational changes, the educational process must be studied and analyzed in relation to both its external and its internal conditions (Fullan 2001). Recent debate in the field of curriculum studies suggests that centrally initiated curriculum change is unlikely to be successful unless it actively engages the practitioners who are the local change agents. In mediating curriculum reform, the intrinsic logic of the curriculum policy is significantly modified to match the institutional logics of the setting where it is enacted (Meyer 2006). This paper draws upon empirical data to explore school-based curriculum development in response to the new curriculum policy, Lgr 11, in Sweden (the National Agency for Education 2011, Government Bill 2007:28). The purpose is to explore how the curriculum reform, Lgr 11, is reconceptualised, understood and related to school development by the local authority, school management and teachers in some selected municipalities. By questionnaires and interviews with local curriculum actors, the contextual adaptations in order to manage and organise new curriculum policies are analysed. The following research questions are addressed in the paper: 1. What are stakeholders’ understandings of the room for manoeuvre in curriculum innovation in implementing the new curriculum policy, Lgr 11? 2. How, and with what arguments is the selection of content areas for curriculum development made in implementing the new curriculum Lgr 11? 3. What change and improvement strategies have been used to meet the demands of the new curriculum policy, Lgr 11? Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used In order to explore and analyse how the curriculum Lgr 11 specifications are translated by the local authorities/schools into a school curriculum, local documents analysis, surveys and interviews with curriculum developers, school leaders and teachers have been conducted. The mixed-method approach followed a three-step procedure. In the first step, nine local educational authorities were selected representing a broad variety of municipalities in terms of population sizes, socio-economic conditions and educational achievement levels. Empirical data were collected by in a semi-structured questionnaire to key curriculum actors. In this, qualitative and explorative survey, key issues in implementing and adapting to the curriculum policy was identified. Based on these answers four cases for further investigation were selected. In the second step, follow-up, in-depth interviews with four informants (local authority development officers) from different local education authorities were conducted. In the semi-structured interviews the strategies for curriculum innovation and change was further elaborated and conceptualised. In the third step a teacher survey was constructed and conducted in one of the selected municipalities (n= 277). In this online questionnaire teacher’s perception of the intended curriculum, the implementation process of the new curriculum and; the relation between curriculum implementation and local development work was investigated. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The results of the empirical analysis (question 1 and 2) will be presented in terms of patterns of arguments among key curriculum actors. The case studies show how different key players in local curriculum implementation raise arguments and prioritize areas for curriculum innovation variously due to local needs, national ambitions as well as international trends and future social and cultural scenarios. The results of the case studies also highlight central features of how central curriculum actors navigate in local change processes under the enactment of the curriculum Lg11 (question 2). The case studies indicate a wide variety of strategies used in trying to adapt and merge the local development work with external pressures on accountability. The results points to some central dilemmas in steering, organizing and drive local curriculum innovation. In addition, the investigation of curriculum recontextualisation also highlights mismatches between the intrinsic logics of the curriculum policy and the institutional logics when it comes to describing, valuing and judging the outcomes of curriculum innovation (question 3). There are, the results indicate, tensions between external expectations on short-term results on the improvement of pupils’ achievements and long-term improvement outcomes acknowledging the complex relations between institutional mechanisms and emerging practices. References Andersson-Levitt, Kathryn M. (2008). Globalization and curriculum. In: Michael F. Connelly, ed.: The Sage Handbook of Curriculum and Instruction. London: Sage Publications. Bernstein, Basil (2000). Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. Connelly, Michael F. ed. (2008): The Sage Handbook of Curriculum and Instruction. London: Sage Publications. Curriculum for the Compulsory School, Preschool Class and the Leisure-time Centre (2011). Stockholm: National Agency for Education. Fullan, Michael (2001): The New Meaning of Educational Change (3rd ed.). London: Routledge Falmer Press. Government Bill 2007:28. Tydliga mål och kunskapskrav i grundskolan. Förslag till nytt mål- och uppföljningssystem [Clear Goals and Knowledge Requirements in Compulsory School Education. Proposal for a New System of Goals and Monitoring]. Stockholm: Swedish Government Official Reports. Lundgren, Ulf P. (1989) Att organisera omvärlden [Organising the World Around Us]. Stockholm: Utbildningsförlaget. Meyer, John W. (2006). World models, National Curricula, and the Centrality of the Individual. In: Benevot, Aaron & Braslavsky, Cecilia: School Knowledge in Comparative and Historical Perspective. Hong Kong: CERC Studies in Comparative Education 18. Sivesind, Kirsten & Karseth, Berit (2010): Conceptualising curriculum knowledge within and beyond the national context. European Journal of Education( 45)1 Sundberg, Daniel & Wahlström, Ninni (2012). Standards-based curricula in a denationalised conception of education – the case of Sweden. European Journal of Education Research, Volume 11, Number 3, 2012.

1 - 33 of 33
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf