The objective of this study is to explore the gap between, on the one hand, the latest Swedish curricula for compulsory school, in terms of the pupils’ collaboration, responsibility for their academic success, and their grades, and on the other hand, pupils’ everyday life, which is characterised by digital technology and a sharing mentality. This chapter describes curricular features such as self-regulated learning in formal education in Sweden and discusses how these could be understood from the perspective of learner doing schoolwork. The study focuses on how learners, 14–16 years of age, cope with taking responsibility for their own learning in a school setting dominated by constant assessing and grading. Based on classroom observations, audio-visual recordings and interviews with pupils (n = 27), the study examines what learners in the last 2 years of compulsory school at a municipal lower secondary school, do and say when they assist peers with schoolwork without the teachers’ awareness. The study shows that the pupils are more loyal to friends than to the formal school system and are willing to forego fair grading as a result. For example, pupils took collective responsibility for individual writing assignments by writing original texts for peers and revising their peers’ assignments. Some pupils did not complete much (if any) of the required reflecting and writing themselves. Instead of taking responsibility for their own learning, many saw it as their responsibility to achieve high grades. The study finds that the informal social strategies pupils use when assisting peers reproduce social injustices. The results illustrate the complexity of academic integrity in the juxtaposition between a curricular framework requesting collaboration, individual grading, and the pupils’ own responsibility for their learning and the everyday sharing by underage pupils through digital devices. Some consequences are discussed, such as how the current generation of learners, who rely on friends in social networks instead of developing autonomy and self-reflection, might impact future civil society.

Contribution

Worldwide, there is today a clash between on learners’ regard on attending school and doing schoolwork, and on teachers’ regard on pupils’ schoolwork that partly can be attributed to the digitalization and Generation Z’s sharing culture. In the last two Swedish curricula for compulsory school, it is stated that the pupils should learn to write texts individually. However they should learn to write texts together with others, too, and also learn to revise classmates’ texts (Swedish National Agency for Education, 2011; 2022). In spite of this, there are no guidelines for the teachers if, and in such case how, these co-written texts are to be assessed or graded. This presentation will focus on how teachers at a Swedish municipal lower secondary school reflect on the results from a previous study carried out at their school and their everyday teaching experience. The results from the previous study showed a complex system of how pupils used digital technology to assist classmates with schoolwork out of the teachers’ supervision in order to enhance their grades. The pupils’ informal interaction with peers was called “Backstage pedagogy”(Rönn, 2023a) and showed how the pupils, their last two years of compulsory school, relied on informal social networks with classmates to take shortcuts with schoolwork (e.g. Rönn 2022; 2023b; Rönn & Pettersson, 2023). Examples of these shortcuts without the teachers’ awareness was that more high achieving peers logged in on friends’ Google classroom accounts, both inside and outside school, and wrote original texts for them or made comprehensive revision of the texts. These texts were later handed in to the teachers as individual achievements for grading. Other examples were that more high achieving pupils received requests from classmates to forward pictures of their completed individual writing assignments to them – so they could modify the text and hand it in to the teachers as their own achievement. Yet another example was that leaked National tests, which had leaked from other schools nationwide, were shared on the class Snapchat group so the pupils in the class could practice before the due test day. By applying these strategies the pupils sidestepped the grading system on both a local and national level. The previous study was based on observations, audio-visual recordings, and semi-structured interviews with pupils in a class their last year of compulsory school (aged 14-16) and had a very strong pupils’ perspective. The results have been reported back to the teachers at the school after the pupils left compulsory school.  In an up following study the teachers are to be interviewed to give their perspective on the pupils’ “Backstage pedagogy”.  

Goffman’s (1959/1990) theatre metaphor of interaction in social life was used as a theoretical tool for the analysis; backstage is where social interaction takes place to improve the desired impression given to others, e.g. an “audience” frontstage. The concept backstage (backstage pedagogy) is used to describe the pupils’ interaction with peers out of the teachers’ awareness in order to improve their grades – and teachers are regarded as the audience frontstage who see a touched-up version of some of the pupils assignments and achievements.

The aim of this study is to explore and describe the teachers’ regard on the pupils’ informal social strategies to enhance their grades at their school.

Interviews with the teachers will be conducted.

The research questions are:

1. How has the awareness of pupils’ strategies in assisting peers “backstage” out of the teachers’ supervision in order to improve their grades changed the teachers regard on teaching and learning?
2. What are their regard on other kinds of assistance with writing assignments, such as parents’ involvement and AI?

Method

The study will be based on interviews with teachers at a Swedish municipal lower secondary school (all interviews are not yet conducted). At a previous study at the same school, an ethnographic study was carried out where one class was in focus (Rönn, 2023a). That study had a strong pupils’ perspective, and the focus of the study was how pupils assist peers with schoolwork without the teachers’ awareness. Observations from lessons and breaks at the school during several months and video-recordings from the classroom during lessons were conducted when the pupils were in 8th grade. The following year, when the pupils were in 9the grade, the last year of compulsory school 18 semi-structured interviews with pupils were conducted. Approximately 50% of the pupils at the school have a foreign background and originated from Africa, Asia, Europe and South America. In order to gain the pupils’ confidence, a strategic choice was initially made not to spend much time with the teachers at the school. Once the pupils had left school, the results were reported back to the teachers and the head teacher, and they were devastated by the findings and strategies the pupils used to assist peers without the teachers’ awareness in order to enhance their grades. However the teachers have been interested in the findings and how these alter their regard on their every day work as teachers. In this study, the focus is on the teachers: What changes have they made in their way of teaching? This presentation will be based on semi-structured interviews with teachers at the school, both “old” teachers who have been working there since the previous study was conducted – as well as with “new” teachers who have started to work at the school after the data collection for the first study had finished. Thus, the focus changes from the pupils “backstage” to the teachers “frontstage”. This change of perspectives will add to a more comprehensive picture of the effects of curricula in education in general as well as of the strong focus on assessing, grading and measurable results in compulsory school. The interviews with the teachers will be recorded, transcribed and analyzed. The teachers will be asked to give their informed consent, and the study will be in line with the General Data Protection Regulation.

Expected Outcomes

The first study has lead to changes; the teachers rely more on handwritten and oral assignments now and less on digital technology, and they insist that all writing assignments shall be carried out during lessons and they have inspired teachers at other schools in the municipality to change their ways of teaching (e.g. Rönn, 2025, forthcoming). While relying on Backstage Pedagogy, many pupils do not show their (own) weaknesses to their teachers and as a consequence they hinder the teachers from seeing their needs - which can lead to more elevated grades. This year digital national tests starts to be implemented, which give fewer opportunities for the pupils to get access to (and practice on) leaked tests beforehand. The teachers tell that more pupils than ever ask what will happen if they do not attend the national tests. Preventing pupils from writing assignments at home has resulted in problems with the pupils’ parents at other schools in another part of the municipality where the guardians have higher educational level; the parents complain because they are no longer allowed to help their children with their writing their assignments. This illustrates another perspective of pupils’ “backstage” that teachers have to relate to. The presentation is of interest for everyone working in educational settings where learners can be assisted by others (parents, siblings, classmates, friends and AI) in order to improve their grades without the teachers’ awareness. Pupils who do not do their reading, reflecting, and writing themselves enter a vicious circle that is difficult to break/leave. If pupils start to rely on others to assist them in compulsory school, the need for further assistance in upper secondary school and higher education will probably increase/follow. This may lead to problems related to development of knowledge, academic integrity – and what future citizens are fostered.

BACKGROUND/CONTTEXT

Learners often assist each other with tasks given to them by their teachers (e.g. Gustafsson, 2014). In doing so the line between helping and cheating may be blurred; teachers can encourage pupils to work together, or might say that the pupils should not assist each other. The latest Swedish curricula for compulsory school state that pupils should take a personal responsibility for their learning as well as learn to write texts on their own and together with peers (Swedish National Agency for Education, 2011; 2022). However, there are no guidelines indicating for how the co-written texts are to be assessed and/or graded (Rönn, 2023a). Many pupils take responsibility for having an assignment to hand in to the teachers – but not necessarily for their learning. For example more high achieving pupils log into peers’ Google classroom accounts and write texts for them, share pictures of their completed writing assignment with peers to be reformulated in their “own words” (Rönn, 2023a), and share leaked National tests on the class’ Snapchat group (Rönn, 2023b). These sharing activities seemed unproblematic for the pupils. Injustices related to gender, socio-economic features and language mastery in the language of instruction (Swedish) were reproduced in these social strategies. It is important to gain knowledge about how pupils assist each other with school work and their regard on assisting peers.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Where do pupils draw the line between what they consider helping peers and cheating? 

METHOD AND THEORY

An ethnographic method design comprising  observations, video recordings and semi-structured interviews (N=18) with pupils (aged 14-16) their last two years of compulsory school was applied. This presentation’s findings are based on the interviews with pupils in one class. The pupils gave their written consent. Goffman’s theatre metaphor comprising impression management and the concepts of backstage and frontstage was used as an analytical tool; in social life people aim at giving an intended impression to others. These impressions/actions can be prepared either “backstage”(out of the audience’s gaze) in order to, later on, be performed in front of the intended audience. In this study “backstage” was regarded as activities carried out between pupils out of the teachers’ awareness in order to improve their grades, while frontstage was regarded as the writing assignments the pupils handed in to the teachers for grading as a part of their impression management.

MAIN RESULTS

The pupils mentioned several reasons to cheat (taking shortcuts with school work): a) keeping pace with classmates, b) not caring about school work, c) having an easy life now and enjoying leisure time, and d) preventing risking to get an F (not passing grade). Helping and cheating had one thing in common: improving one’s grades. Pupils often did not regard giving answers to peers during lessons as cheating, but rather as helping each other. The pupils gave numerous examples of helping and cheating on tests inside the classroom, copying pieces of homework, doing writing assignments for peers, and cheating orally during ordinary lessons.

 A distinction was made between cheating during test-taking and ordinary lessons; cheating during test taking was considered the most serious kind of cheating. Numerous pupils regarded cheating as something desirable and frequently occurring, and that only the teachers thought of it as cheating. However, one pupil claimed that it is cheating if a friend does the writing assignment for you. 

The pupils’ amount of effort was of importance. It was “less“ cheating if the pupil had tried on their own first (without succeeding) and it was not cheating to copy for peers, as long as it was to prepare for an upcoming test. If an activity is considered cheating or not depends on where it took place (inside or outside of the classroom), the kind of activity (watching someone’s test during test-taking in the classroom or looking at the answer key) during lessons, whether the pupil had made own efforts or not – and eventually whose perspective was in focus; the teacher’s or the pupils’. 

From the pupils’ perspective almost nothing was considered cheating; looking at the National Tests beforehand was not cheating and it was not the pupils’ responsibility in the sense that if the teachers had not failed in keeping the tests safe they would never have leaked. The distinction between helping and cheating seemed to be an adult/teacher/researcher conception of pupils’ regard on doing school work rather than the pupils’ own regard. 

The concept of cheating seemed to be related to a teacher’s perspective on pupils’ assignments, and did not seem to be something that the majority of the pupils had reflected upon before the interviews. There seemed to be contradictions in the pupils’ narratives. Several factors were implicated in trying to make a distinction between helping and cheating (if there at all is one from a pupils’ perspective). During a group interview, the researcher emphasized that the focus of the study was the pupils’ perspective on cheating. A boy responded: Then I would say that nothing is cheating.

It all came back to the teachers, and the intended impression of their knowledge the pupils aimed at giving to the teachers; what goes on backstage between pupils is not regarded as cheating, while from a teachers’ frontstage perspective it is cheating. 

MAIN AUDIENCE FOR THIS CONTRIBUTION

The main audience for this contribution is researchers, teachers and parents who are interested in ethical issues amongst learners, and how these can be related to policies and fostering learners to become democratic citizens. What is the pupils’ focus when taking responsibility for their learning: the process of learning or the results/grades? It is important to understand how pupils think about collaborating with others and what behaviours they are willing to do in order to improve their grades without the teachers’ awareness. Understanding these issues from the pupils’ perspective can help us understand how and why they make use of AI to generate texts. 

Due to societal changes, today’s youth have grown up with internet, screens, social media and a sharing culture; “sharing is caring”. The aim was to provide an account of pupils’ informal social strategies when they assisted classmates with schoolwork.  

The study’s theoretical framework was Goffman’s (1959/1990) theater metaphor, where interaction in social life is enacted either frontstage (in front of an “audience”) or backstage (with no public eyes, and where frontstage performances are prepared). Pupils’ informal social interaction with classmates out of the teachers’ sight is considered as taking place backstage. An ethnographic research design was applied, comprising observations, audio-visual recordings and semi-structured interviews with pupils in one class when the pupils were 14 and 15 years old (Year 8 and 9). An innovative research design rendered possible to get access to what pupils say and do backstage (without the teachers/audience awareness) in order to give a good impression of themselves to the teachers and improve (or at least not lower) their grades.  

Backstage pedagogy (Rönn, 2023a) turns out to be a complex system of assisting peers which pupils use to prevent teachers from seeing their weakness and giving a touched-up impression of their knowledge and skills. It is facilitated by the pupils’ everyday use of media participating, also when doing schoolwork.  

Some of the pupils’ backstage pedagogy was to a) log into classmates’ Google classroom-accounts and write original texts for peers, b) switch computers with friends behind the teachers’ back where the more high-achieving one wrote original texts for the classmate, and to c) share leaked national tests (they had leaked nationwide) on the class’ Snapchat-group (Rönn, 2023b). The visual learning’s “Where?”, “Where to?” and “How?” deviate when the assessing teacher is unaware of who has written the handed-in text. As a consequence, there might be a mismatch in teachers’ feedback and aim to provide for pupils’ needs.

An assessing/grading dilemma occurs at both a local and national level, and some of the pupils’ backstage pedagogy can conflict with pedagogical aims (Rönn, 2023a). Suggestions for dealing with pupils’ backstage pedagogy could be to repeatedly discuss with pupils the (short-term) advantages and (long-term) disadvantages with sharing cultures and schoolwork, and to emphasize the difference between information (just a click away) and knowledge (which takes time and efforts) (Rönn, 2024/2025. Forthcoming). Because of societal changes and learners’ sharing culture, this study is of interest for the Nordic countries.   

In formal Educational contexts, Neoliberal reforms have had a far-reached impact and has fundamentally altered how educational settings define their commission, comprising the emphasis on measurable outputs, effectiveness, the commodification of knowledge, as well as creating entrepreneurial and competitive citizens who take individual initiatives. In, for example, higher education quality assessment and performativity have replaced both debates and intellectual inquiries. (Olssen & Peters, 2005).  

Neoliberal educational “solutions” has been regarded as inescapable without focusing on harmful long-term consequences, and a main solution to educational issues has often been the implementation of more neoliberal reforms such as for example the teachers’ reforms at Swedish upper secondary schools – which turned out to reduce the teachers’ teaching in favour for improving results (Erlandson, et al. 2023). However, the authors argue that in local practices the implementation of the reforms may result in micro-political actions.  

Some lower secondary school pupils in a Swedish municipally school acted on, and resisted, the emphasised focus on measurable results and performativity by outsourcing their schoolwork to classmates without the teachers’ awareness; e.g. some pupils logged into peers’ Goggle classroom accounts and wrote original texts for others. This resulted in that some obtained elevated grades with little (or no) efforts (Rönn, 2023).  

Researchers should not merely describe and analyze burdening conditions. They should actively contribute to changes. Beach and Vigo-Arrazola (2021) have explored and identified cases where researchers have participated in activism and have described empirical examples where efforts have led to successful transformation.      

The purpose of this Workshop is to share the participants’ insights from various Nordic educational contexts and to try to promote ideas of how neoliberal reforms could be disarmed and/or resisted at a local level.  

The Workshop will be designed as following:

Brief introduction by the chair. Presentation of neoliberal educational reforms and their impact in different educational contexts (higher education, upper secondary school, and compulsory school).

Discussions in groups (according to the participants’ experience and interest). Which are some of the major (negative) effects of New Public Management and Neoliberal educational reforms? Short debriefing to everyone from all groups.

New discussions (same groups): How could these effects be addressed and/or resisted? In collaboration with whom might these effects be resisted? What wiggle room is there for teachers and researchers? Short debriefing.

This ethnographic study in education, based on observations, audio-visual recordings and interviews, explored pupils' supportive interactions in a year eight class at a Swedish school. Goffman's dramaturgical theory of the presentation of self was used as a theoretical framework with a focus on the pupils' interactions with their classmates in backstage spaces when they prepare performances in the form of writing assignments to be handed in to teachers. Some pupils took responsibility for having an assignment to hand in to teachers, but not for their learning process in planning their work and writing the assignment themselves, in line with the formal requirements of a goal-oriented school system. The findings showed that pupils applied informal social strategies when managing formal individual assignments. Some examples of these strategies were: swapping computers with classmates during lessons and writing for peers, logging in to peers' Google Classroom accounts and writing for them, and forwarding pictures of completed written assignments to peers to be reformulated in their peers' "own words". The intention of these interactions was to portray a favourable impression of themselves and their abilities to the assessing teachers. The pupils' strategies tended to reinforce classic socially reproductive patterns and generate inequalities between pupils; pupils with higher levels of social and economic capital seemed to profit more and achieve better grades than others. These informal networking strategies co-existed with, and were in opposition to, the formal school context, and were difficult for teachers to detect due to their taking place backstage, out of teachers' sight.

Over the last decades, formal schooling has changed towards an enhanced focus on the individual pupil’s achievements. This comprises formative assessment such as visualizing pupils’ learning processes, as well as summative assessment in terms of increased number and importance of National tests. However, little is known, from a pupils’ perspective, about how pupils together with classmates relate to the extensive focus on assessment of the individual’s achievements in formal education; what do today’s pupils, who have grown up with digital technology and social media, say and do out of the teachers’ supervision when dealing with individual assignments? In line with ethnographic educational research, this thesis explores and analyses how educational structures are imposed upon subordinate groups. This thesis gives an account of, from a pupils’ perspective, the pupils’ backstage pedagogy regarding formal schoolwork inside and outside school. The applied analytical tool is Goffman’s (1990) theater metaphor of social life; in this study, pupils’ interactions with peers out of the teachers’ supervision when doing schoolwork are regarded as carried out backstage, preparing an intended impression of their abilities and know-how to present to the assessing teacher. Based on observations, an innovative and discreet staging of audio-visual recordings, and semi-structured interviews with the pupils in one class at a Swedish municipal lower secondary school where approximately 50 % of the pupils had a foreign background, the results show that pupils applied a backstage pedagogy. Outside the teachers’ supervision and awareness, they informally interacted with classmates and used social strategies when dealing with formal individual assignments. The pupils’ regard for grades was the linch pin of their activities; some pupils a) swapped computers with peers and wrote original texts for classmates, b) copied peers’ assignments, c) logged into classmates’ Google classroom accounts and wrote original texts for peers, and d) shared leaked National tests on the class’s Snapchat group. These actions led to dilemmas in the teachers’ assessing and grading of individual pupils as well as in implementing fair, impartial grading. In looking forward, the thesis discusses the phenomenon and impact of backstage spaces comprising parents, siblings, Artificial Intelligence and ChatGPT to improve grades. 

In Sweden, as in numerous other countries, national tests are common in contemporary education. Over the last few years, the national tests have leaked in Sweden, which has been reported by the Swedish National Agency for Education and mainstream media. This article, based on a part of a more comprehensive study, explores and provides knowledge about how students in a Swedish municipal lower secondary school respond to leaked materials relating to national tests, and includes an analysis from a students' perspective of the rationales students provide to justify their reactions. Students in one school class were interviewed their last year of compulsory school (aged 15). In 13 individual interviews and three group interviews, the students talked about national tests being extensively leaked nationwide and how they shared pictures of leaked materials in the class Snapchat group. This enabled some students to practice beforehand and score better, while a few students dissociated themselves from the leaks. The leaked materials were regarded as the knowledge requirements for compulsory school, and the leaks seemed to be unproblematic for most of the students.

In contemporary ways of thinking about education there is an enhanced focus on individual students’ results and less on students’ collaborative processes for attaining good results. This may appear peculiar, given that the Swedish curriculum for the nine-year compulsory school states that students should be given opportunities to compose texts together with others and give and receive feedback on them. This is also in line with societal desires to motivate students to take responsibility for their lifelong learning. The evolving ethnographic research design, comprising observations, audio-visual recordings and follow-up interviews with students at a Swedish lower secondary school (Years 8 and 9), investigated the informal social strategies that students enacted when doing formal schoolwork and how they reflected on them. Goffman’s (1959/1990) dramaturgical metaphors of the back region, front region and impression management were applied as theoretical points of departure. The findings showed that some students worked hard at their schoolwork in ways that corresponded with societal desires and ideal learning curves. Other students aimed at more effortless achievements and relied heavily on peers and digital devices when taking shortcuts to produce formal assignments. These students’ potential learning curves showed a broken arrow of knowledge development, resulting in assessment dilemmas for teachers and possible mismatches in their grading.