Umeå University's logo

Framing 

APL (arbetsplatsförlagt lärande) i svensk gymnasieskola behöver utvecklas utifrån utvärderingar som beskriver att erfarenhetsutbytet mellan lärare och andra som arbetar med elever på APL behöver förbättras, särskilt för elever i behov av särskilt stöd (t ex Skolverket, 2016). Tidigare forskning beskriver att många elever i behov av särskilt stöd tenderar att välja yrkesutbildningar i större utsträckning än sina jämnåriga studiekamrater (Björk-Åman, 2013). Anpassningar i olika former kan göras för att stötta elever på APL. I denna studie undersöks hur anpassningar kan utvecklas och implementeras, på två olika yrkesprogram på samma skola, Barn och fritid (BF) och Bygg och anläggning (BA). Dessa två program har olika könsprägling samt är även olika på annat sätt: BF utbildar för yrken där människans behov, lärande och utveckling är centralt. BA utbildar för yrken som är inriktade på konstruktion och produktion av varor, vanligen byggnader. Det gör att APL i dessa två yrkesprogram kan antas ha olika särdrag. 

Syftet med studien är att undersöka och analysera hur anpassningar utvecklas och implementeras i två olika yrkesprogram. 

De teoretiska begrepp som används i studien är främst klassifikation och inramning (Bernstein, 2000). Dessa begrepp har tidigare använts i forskning för att jämföra utbildningspraktiker sett till undervisningens karaktär, både till form och innehåll (t ex Olovsson, 2015). Även normkritisk pedagogik (t ex Björkman et al. 2021) kan vara till stöd för att förstå skillnader och likheter som framträder.

Methods or methodology 

I studien används fokusgruppsintervjuer med yrkeslärare och med skolans specialpedagoger. Vidare genomförs en enkät med de handledare som finns på de arbetsplatser där yrkeselever genomför arbetsplatsförlagt lärande (APL). 

Results or expected outcomes

 Genom fokusgruppsintervjuerna förväntas svar på hur lärare och annan skolpersonal arbetar under APLperioderna, och hur de förbereder sina elever för dem, deras arbete tillsammans med elevernas APL-handledare samt hur de betraktar sina elevers studieframgångar. Enkäten förväntas åskådliggöra hur lärarnas arbete uppfattas av APL-handledarna, hur APL-handledarna betraktar sitt uppdrag samt elevernas studieframgångar. Vi ser framför oss att det kommer att finnas skillnader i lärares och APL-handledares uppfattningar om det arbete som bedrivs före och under APL-perioderna, men också likheter. Dessa skillnader och likheter förmodas följa med yrkesbransch eller yrkesprogram, och möjligen även lärarnas utbildning och erfarenheter.

Artikeln, författad av forskare, förstelärare och skolledande personal, bygger på ett samverkansprojekt med målet att utveckla en gymnasieskolas kollektiva lärande. Artikeln syftar till att bidra till förståelse av vad ett sådant utvecklingsarbete kan innebära. Metoder som användes var enkätundersökning och intervjuer. Dataanalys genomfördes med stöd av tematisk analys i olika steg (jfr Braun & Clarke, 2006) och teoretiska begrepp som kollektivt och kollegialt lärande (Larsson, 2018) samt olika former av begreppet tillit (Jederlund, 2019). Resultaten visar att förstelärare som leder utvecklingsarbete påverkas av tidigare erfarenheter från utvecklingsarbete och att det är viktigt att lärare som medverkar känner tillit till enskilda kollegor, till den större grupp de ingår i samt till processen bakom utvecklingsarbetet. Samverkansprojektet bidrog till skapande av strukturer för fortsatt utveckling samt till insikt om att utvecklingsarbete främst handlar om att utveckla arbetssätt som är lämpliga för den egna verksamheten.

Since 2011, the first end-of-term grading in Swedish nine-year compulsory school in the social studies subjects (civics, geography, history and religious studies) has started in Year 6. Before this, the grading had started in Year 8. Grading in Year 6 is carried out in relation to knowledge requirements (assessment criteria) in each social studies subject, and according to the Swedish national curriculum (SNAE, 2011), the starting point is that the subjects should be separated in both teaching and assessment (Claesson & Lindblad, 2013). A subject-separated approach to teaching and assessment in the social studies subjects is also common internationally (VanSledright, 2011). However, students in Swedish compulsory school should concurrently be given the opportunity to work in a subject-integrated manner (SNAE, 2011). Subject-integrated teaching, internationally often referred to as curriculum integration (Ferguson-Patrick, Reynolds and Macqueen, 2018), is considered to promote a more holistic student understanding of social studies subject matter - for example, key global issues (Jorgensen, 2014).

In Year 6, it is also possible to set a summarised grade in the social studies subjects, a grade that covers all subjects if the teaching has mainly been integrated (Swedish Education Act 2010: 800). Nevertheless, Olovsson & Näsström (2018) indicate that subject-integrated teaching and summarised grading in the social studies are quite rare in Swedish schools. In addition, Olovsson and Näsström (2018) describe that the subject-separated knowledge requirements has affected teachers’ choice of teaching form in favour of subject-separated teaching instead of subject integration. From a student learning perspective, this can be questionable: it has been argued that subject-integrated teaching in the social studies can provide more meaningful learning than what is developed in preparation for assessment in the individual subjects, such as “Standard Grade” (Fenwick, Minty & Priestley, 2013) which previously existed in the Scottish educational system.

Moreover, the assessment of students’ learning in subject-integrated social studies teaching has proven to be complicated and demands a great deal of attention to work out well (Harris, Harrison & McFahn, 2011). Assessment in subject-integrated teaching, with its unclear subject boundaries, can lead to unclear assessment criteria and can be connected to the concept of integrated code (Bernstein, 2000). The question of how to set grades in the social studies subjects, whether subject-separated or summarised, can affect the entire teaching process and students’ learning (cf. Samuelsson, 2014).

This study highlights and problematises the situation described above and shows how teachers and students in two classes, in Year 5 and 6 in Swedish compulsory school, approach assessment and develop summarised grading in four subject-integrated thematic units in the social studies subjects, 

Aim and Research questions: The aim of the study is to investigate and analyse the assessment and grading practice in subject-integrated thematic units in the social studies subjects, and how practice can be developed to promote effective summarised grading and student learning.  

The research questions are:

- How are assessment and grading carried out in conjunction with the subject-integrated teaching?

- How do students approach assessment and grading in conjunction with subject-integrated teaching?

- How do teachers approach assessment and develop summarised grading in the social studies subjects based on subject-separated knowledge requirements?

The results will be analysed in relation to Bernstein’s (2000) concepts of integrated code and collection code, and Gresnigt et al.’s. (2014) summary of approaches to integration, including a view that more complex knowledge can be developed during more complex integration. In addition, the indigenous perspective of social studies (Four Arrows, 2014) may be used, to analyse the provision of a holistic view of the social studies subjects. 

Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used: Data collection was carried out in two classes in two schools in northern Sweden, during the Spring terms of 2019 and 2020. Both schools set summarised grades for Year 6 in the social studies subjects. The teaching was conducted in four thematic units in the social studies subjects. Each thematic unit consisted of about 6-12 lessons, with a length of about 40-70 minutes, over a period of 2-4 weeks. The collected material is in the form of classroom observations, audio recordings of lessons, interviews with teachers and students, informal conversations with teachers, and written material such as teachers’ notes regarding assessment and grading. The classes’ teachers planned and conducted teaching and assessment, and the researcher also acted, but to a low extent, as a discussion partner during teachers’ planning. Analysis of the empirical material is based on an interpretive approach, using concepts and processes from thematic analysis (Guest, MacQueen & Namey, 2012; Braun & Clarke, 2006). 

Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings:  Assessment, in relation to the knowledge requirements, was increasingly emphasised as end-of-term grading approached in Year 6. 

Regarding subject integration, several types of integration were identified, both during individual lessons and throughout the thematic units. More complex integration (Gresnigt et al., 2014) occured to some extent in the thematic units, but occurred less in Year 6, where teachers chose to plan thematic units in which one subject was the main subject and the other subjects were supplementary. The students’ acquired knowledge in the thematic units in Year 6 formed the basis for the end-of-term-grading, and the assessment took place in relation to the knowledge requirements in the individual subjects (cf. Bernstein, 2000). The teachers tried to find ways with subject-integrated teaching as a basis, and weave together the knowledge requirements of the different subjects, but found the task very challenging. In some parts, regarding the knowledge requirements, the subjects could interact, but in other parts  interaction was more difficult. 

After completing the thematic units, the two teachers in some respects were contented. They have experienced the advantages with subject integration, and in some aspects they assert that their assessment skills have improved. However, on an overall level, they are still not contented with the structure and content of the national curriculum assessment system, particularly in terms of what knowledge they want the students to develop in social studies. In terms of opportunities for students to acquire a more holistic view, and in terms of the greater understanding of key global issues that the common core of the subjects can provide (Four Arrows, 2014), the benefits of subject integration in the social studies can probably be attained only to a lesser extent. This is due to the shortcomings of  the existing Swedish national assessment system.

• Teaching shows patterns of different discourses of learning in varying degrees of integration.
• When grading is introduced, the subject knowledge discourse turns more dominant.
• Students show greater engagement in higher degrees of integrated teaching directed by overarching curriculum objectives.
• Macro policies direct the characteristics of the teaching, but there are variations in the strength with which different policies are implemented.

Purpose: The purpose is to analyse how teaching and learning take place in integrated social studies teaching in relation to various curriculum goals and what consequences the teaching has for students’ approaches to learning.

Design/methodology/approach:Ethnographic fieldwork is used in ten integrated thematic units conducted in four classes in four Swedish schools, with students in Years 5 and 6.

Findings: The grading in Year 6 contributes to the integrated teaching being more adapted and directed towards subject knowledge goals. Students are very committed and involved in higher degrees of integration and discourses of learning connected to overarching curriculum objectives and are more focused and performance-oriented when the subject knowledge discourse creates a dominant pattern.

Practical implications: Teaching in social studies should consist of the whole range of learning discourses, and how different knowledge conceptions can affect teaching and students’ learning should also be considered

This study aims to describe and analyse two cases in Swedish upper primary school, of subject-integrated theme works in social studies subjects, specifically on key global issues. This research was conducted in the context of subject-integrated teaching in social studies subjects being currently quite rare, and that social studies subjects are sometimes neglected in early school years. However, based on previous research, subject-integrated teaching in these subjects may promote students’ learning on key societal and global issues. Working with two student groups in two schools, this study was based on classroom observations, interviews with teachers and students, and students’ written reflections. In the study, it is concluded that in subject-integrated theme work, it is important to permit the subjects to integrate in a rewarding way, with careful and well-thought-out teacher planning. However, there is also a need for openness and flexibility in ongoing teaching, especially when it may be conducive for students’ learning to link to other subjects’ content. In this manner, a comprehensive view of the social studies subjects can promote students’ interest in and commitment to learning on key global issues and on the social subjects overall, particularly regarding their common core. Thus, subject-integrated teaching can develop students’ global citizenship skills and their will to engage in solving key global problems, at present and in the future.

Det har från statligt håll under många år funnits en ämnesövergripande ambition för undervisningen i SO i årskurs 4–6 i svensk grundskola. I och med införandet av den nuvarande läroplanen (Lgr 11) fick dock de enskilda SO-ämnena (geografi, historia, religionskunskap och samhällskunskap) en mera framträdande roll i kursplanerna. Lgr 11 innebar också att betyg infördes från årskurs 6, med kunskapskrav för varje SO-ämne. Lgr 11 föreskriver dock också att eleverna ska ges möjligheter att arbeta ämnes-övergripande. Det finns dock indikationer på att undervisningen i SO i årskurs 4–6 på många skolor, inte sker ämnesövergripande. Studiens syfte är att beskriva och analysera möjligheter och utmaningar som lärare i årskurs 4–6 ser med ämnesövergripande undervisning i SO. Det empiriska materialet består av semi-strukturerade intervjuer med sex lärare. Resultaten, analyserade främst i relation till Blanck (2014), Ross (2006a) samt Carlgren (2016) visar att möjligheter som lärarna anger med ämnesövergripande undervisning i SO är att det kan ge eleverna helhetsförståelse och sammanhang, utifrån lärarnas beskrivningar av vad som är gemensamt för SO-ämnena. Utmaningar för ämnesövergripande undervisning gäller främst bedömning och betygsättning i förhållande till kunskapskraven i varje SO-ämne. Lgr 11:s summativa bedömningsfokus avspeglar sig i lärarnas resonemang, och påverkar även deras undervisningspraktik, främst på så sätt att det försvårar elevers utveckling av de mer komplexa kunskaper som ämnesövergripande undervisning kan ge.

For many years, at the state level, there has been an ambition for subject-integrated teaching in years 4–6 in Swedish compulsory school. However, with the introduction of the current national curriculum (Lgr 11), the individual social studies subjects (civics, geography, history and religious studies) became more prominent in the national syllabi. Lgr 11 also included a new grading system, now starting from year 6, with knowledge requirements for each social studies subject. However, Lgr 11 also stipulates that students should be given the opportunity to work subject-integrated. But there are indications that current teaching in social studies in years 4–6 at many schools, does not occur subject-integrated. The purpose of the study is to describe and analyse teachers' views of opportunities and challenges regarding subject-integrated teaching in social studies in years 4–6. The study is based on interviews with six teachers. The results, analysed mainly in relation to Blanck (2014), Ross (2006a) and Carlgren (2016), show that the teachers state that the potential in subject-integrated teaching is that it can develop students' understanding of the whole, based on the teachers' descriptions of what is common for the social studies subjects. Challenges for subject-integrated teaching mainly concern assessment and grading, in relation to the knowledge requirements in each subject. The summative focus in Lgr 11 is also reflected in the teachers' views, and also affects their teaching practice, primarily in such a way that the summative focus makes it difficult for students to develop the more complex knowledge that subject-integrated teaching can provide.

Sweden introduced a new national curriculum (Lgr11) for the compulsory school in 2011. It included new syllabi for the school subjects and a grading system now starting from school year 6. Social studies (civics, geography, history and religious studies) and natural sciences (biology, chemistry and physics) received syllabus with knowledge requirements for each respective subject. Despite the sectioning, Lgr11 encourages subject-integrated teaching and, when teaching has mainly been subject-integrated, summarised grades in both social studies and natural sciences are possible in school year 6. The purpose of this study is to investigate, analyse and compare to which extent teaching in school year 4-6 is subject-integrated and whether the grades in school year 6 are summarised in social studies as well as natural sciences. In the autumn of 2017, principals from 113 schools comprehending school years 4-6, completed a questionnaire. The results, also analysed in relation to Bernsteins theoretical model, show that teaching in each individual subject, as well as alternation between subject-integrated teaching and teaching in the individual subjects is most common. Fully subject-integrated teaching in social studies and nature sciences respectively is the least common practise. Three quarters of the schools give grades in the individual subjects. In schools with fully subject-integrated teaching, it is more common with summarised grades than grades in the individual subjects. However, this is more common in social studies than in the natural sciences. Almost all of the schools that teach in the individual subjects also give grades in the individual subjects.