On a Mission to Break Ground for a More Democratic School System
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7577/njcie.4916Keywords:
LK20, student participation, interdisciplinary topics, problem-based learning , student-centred learningAbstract
The importance of building democratic competency in the face of current global challenges cascades down into national curricula. Illustratively, in 2020, Norway introduced a new national curriculum that conveyed an expectation that students should experience a democratic school society in practice. In response to this new curriculum, in 2019, an upper secondary school in Norway decided to embark on a mission to develop and implement a new pedagogical model. The ambition was to increase the students’ sense of codetermination and participation in school, the local community, and society at large. Subsequently, an interdisciplinary pedagogical model has been in development at the school, in which the subject content is organized according to overarching topics. These topics are presented to students as quests called learning missions.
Through in-depth interviews with teachers and leaders currently working on developing the new pedagogical method at the school, the current article investigates the challenges and opportunities the participants encountered in this process. The data have been coded through a stepwise deductive-induction method and analyzed using Bernstein’s concepts of classification and frame. The participants identified the inflexible organizational structures of the school—such as the school administrative system, the building, assessments, and the set timetable—as aspects that made it challenging for the school to depart from the dissemination-based approach to education. Inversely, the implementation of interdisciplinary topics in the Norwegian National Curriculum is one example of a structural change that the participants thought had opened up more flexibility. However, the participants experienced that this flexibility was not extended into the regulations controlling how time is spent in school or the assessment forms. Hence the article concludes that structural changes are necessary to enable the growth of pedagogical models that can increase students’ codetermination, active participation, and real-life experiences in schools.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Andreassen, S.-E. (2016). Do we understand the curriculum? (Forstår vi læreplanen?) [UiT The Arctic University of Norway]. Munin: Open research archive. https://munin.uit.no/bitstream/handle/10037/9671/thesis_entire.pdf?sequence=3
Andreassen, S.-E., & Tiller, T. (2021). Rom for magisk læring: En analyse av læreplanen LK20. Universitetsforlaget.
Bergene, A. C., & Solbue Vika, K. (2022). Questions for school-Norway: Analysis and results from the Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training´s survey in relation with the evaluation of the Subject Renewal (No. 15; p. 96). The Nordic Institute for Studies of Innovation, Research and Education. https://www.udir.no/contentassets/4e546a7ee2744062adf940c1a3ef3292/nifu_2022_sporring_fagfornyelsen.pdf
Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R. F., Waddington, D. I., & Pickup, D. I. (2019). Twenty-first century adaptive teaching and individualized learning operationalized as specific blends of student-centered instructional events: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 15(1–2), e1017. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1017
Bernstein, B. (1973). On the classification and framing of educational knowledge. In Knowledge, education, and cultural change. Routledge.
Biseth, H., Seland, I., & Huang, L. (2021). Strengthening connections between research, policy, and practice in Norwegian civic and citizenship education. In B. Malak-Minkiewicz & J. Torney-Purta (Eds.), Influences of the IEA Civic and Citizenship Education Studies (pp. 147–159). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71102-3_13
Biseth, H., Svenkerud, S. W., Magerøy, S. M., & Rubilar, K. H. (2022). Relevant Transformative Teacher Education for Future Generations. Frontiers in Education, 7. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2022.806495
Blaskó, Z., da Costa, P. D., & Vera-Toscano, E. (2019). Non-cognitive civic outcomes: How can education contribute? European evidence from the ICCS 2016 study. International Journal of Educational Research, 98(2019), 366–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2019.07.005
Boese, V., Alizada, N., Lundstedt, M., Morrison, K., Natsika, N., Sato, Y., Tai, H., & Lindberg, S. (2022). Autocratization changing nature? Democracy report 2022. Varieties of Democracy Institute (V-Dem). https://v-dem.net/media/publications/dr_2022.pdf
Bonwell, C., & Eison, J. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom [George Washington University]. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED336049.pdf
Bubb, S., & Jones, M.-A. (2020). Learning from the COVID-19 home-schooling experience: Listening to pupils, parents/carers and teachers. Improving Schools, 23(3), 209–222.
Chi, T. H. M., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243.
Deslauriers, L., McCarty, L. S., Miller, K., Callaghan, K., & Kestin, G. (2019). Measuring actual learning versus feeling of learning in response to being actively engaged in the classroom. The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(39). https://doi.org/10.1073
Economist Intelligence Unit. (2022). Democracy Index 2021: The China challenge. https://www.eiu.com/n/campaigns/democracy-index-2021/
Fullan, M. (2020). System change in education. American Journal of Education, 126(4), 653–663. https://doi.org/10.1086/709975
Fullan, M., Quinn, J., & McEachen, J. (2018). Deep learning: Engage the world. Change the world (Kinde). Sage Publications.
Hanney, R., & Savin-Baden, M. (2013). The problem of projects: Understanding the theoretical underpinnings of project-led PBL. London Review of Education, 11(1), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/14748460.2012.761816
Hoskins, B., Saisana, M., & Villalba, C. M. H. (2015). Civic competence of youth in Europe: Measuring cross national variation through the creation of a composite indicator. Social Indicators Research, 123(2), 431–457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-014-0746-z
Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., & Freeman, A. (2015). NMC Horizon report K-12 edition. The New Media Consortium. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED593612
Karseth, B., Kvamme, O. A., & Ottesen, E. (2020). Fagfornyelsens læreplanverk: Politiske ambisjoner, arbeidsprosesser og innhold (No. 1). https://www.uv.uio.no/forskning/prosjekter/fagfornyelsen-evaluering/
Kosberg, E., & Grevle, T. E. (2022). Review of International civic and citizenship survey data analyses of student political efficacy. In R. Desjardins & S. Wiksten (Eds.), Handbook of civic engagement and education. Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham.
Ministry of Education and Research. (2017). Core curriculum – values and principles for primary and secondary education. Laid down by Royal decree. The National Curriculum for the Knowledge Promotion 2020. https://www.udir.no/lk20/overordnet-del/?lang=eng
Ødegård, G., & Svagård, V. (2018). Hva motiverer elever til å bli aktive medborgere? [What motivates students to become active citizens?]. Tidsskrift for Ungdomsforskning, 18(1), 28–50. https://journals.oslomet.no/index.php/ungdomsforskning/article/view/2995
OECD. (2022). Trends Shaping Education 2022. OECD Publishing. https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/trends-shaping-education-2022_6ae8771a-en
OECD Future of education and skills 2030: Learning Compass 2030, (pp. 1–150). (2019). OECD. https://www.oecd.org/education/2030-project/contact/OECD_Learning_Compass_2030_Concept_Note_Series.pdf
Ottesen, E., Colbjørnsen, T., & Gunnulfsen, A. E. (2021). Fagfornyelsens forberedelser i praksis: Strategier, begrunnelser, spenninger (No. 2; p. 114).
Prince, M. (2004). Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research. Journal of Engineering Education, 3, 10.
Sant, E. (2019). Democratic Education: A Theoretical Review (2006–2017). Review of Educational Research, 89(5), 655–696. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654319862493
Schleicher, A. (2015). Schools for 21st-Century Learners: Strong Leaders, Confident Teachers, Innovative Approaches | READ online. https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/schools-for-21st-century-learners_9789264231191-en
Shekhar, P., Borrego, M., DeMonbrun, M., Finelli, C., Crockett, C., & Nguyen, K. (2020). Negative student response to active learning in STEM classrooms: A systematic review of underlying reasons. Journal of College Science Teaching, 49(6), 45–54.
Sohl, S., & Arensmeier, C. (2015). The school’s role in youths’ political efficacy: Can school provide a compensatory boost to students’ political efficacy? Research Papers in Education, 30(2), 133–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2014.908408
Swain, J., & King, B. (2022). Using Informal Conversations in Qualitative Research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21, 16094069221085056. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221085056
Tjora, A. (2019). Qualitative Ressearch as Stepwise-Deductive Induction. Routledge.
Westheimer, J. (2015). What Kind of Citizen? Educating Our Children for the Common Good (Kindle edition). Teachers College Press.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Tessa Eriksen Grevle
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Declaration on copyright
- The author/s will keep their copyright and right of reproduction of their own manuscript, with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License, but give the journal a permanent right to 1) present the manuscript to the public in the original form in which it was digitally published and 2) to be registered and cited as the first publication of the manuscript.
- The author itself must manage its financial reproduction rights in relation to any third-parties.
- The journal does not provide any financial or other remuneration for contributions submitted.
- Readers of the journal may print the manuscripts presented under the same conditions that apply to reproduction of a physical copy. This means that mass reproduction of physical copies or production of copies for commercial purposes is not permitted without the agreement of the author/s.
