Author: Staffan Kling
Institution: University of Gothenburg, Sweden
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0557-2027
Author: Iwona Sobis
Institution: University of Gothenburg, Sweden
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0196-8454
Year of publication: 2018
Source: Show
Pages: 9-39
DOI Address: https://doi.org/10.15804/kie.2018.04.01
PDF: kie/122/kie12201.pdf

This article focuses on the Swedish reforms of upper secondary schools and their effects during the period of 1991–2017. The reforms were conducted in the spirit of New Public Management (NPM) and generated many more problems than solutions. The purpose of this article is to prepare a foundation for further research by mapping: What do we know about the NPM reforms within the Swedish upper secondary schools? What kind of knowledge is still missing and should it be developed? With the assistance of Roland Almqvist’s (2006) understanding for the NPM movement divided into three theoretical perspectives (marketization, contract management, and decentralization), we propose a literature study.
This study showed that the Swedish reforms of the upper secondary schools contributed to growing social segregation among students, students’ decreasing performance in science, reading and mathematics that proved to be under the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) average, and teachers experienced a lack of autonomy and de-professionalization. The political promises about “school for all” and “social inclusion” either were not fulfilled or the reform effects were not investigated well enough. Despite all research being done, we do not know what kind of Swedish upper secondary school represents a good practice for the future.

REFERENCES:

  • Adman, P. (2015). Vem värnar om skolans demokratiuppdrag? – En textanalys av 2009 års svenska gymnasiereform. Nordic Studies in Education, 34(2), pp. 102–115.
  • Alexiadou, N., Dovemark, M., Erixon-Arreman, I., Holm, A.S., Lundahl, L., & Lundström, U. (2016). Managing Inclusion in Competitive School Systems: The Cases of Sweden and England. Research in Comparative & International Education, 11(1), pp. 13–33. doi: 10.1177/1745499916631065.
  • Almqvist, R. (2006). New Public Management: Om konkurrensutsättning, kontrakt och kon­troll. Malmö: Liber.
  • Arnman, G., Järnek, M., & Lindskog, E. (2004). Choice – Fiction and Reality. Uppsala: STEP. Retrieved from: http://resources.ped.uu.se/repository/3/Publications/Step.Research.reports4.pdf (accessed: June 18, 2017).
  • Baudin, T., Jaara-Åstrand, J., & Jansson, B. (2016). Friskolornas speciella kösystem leder till segregation. Dagens Nyheter. February 09. Retrieved from: http://www.dn.se/debatt/friskolornas-speciella-kosystem-leder-till-segregation/ (accessed: April 27, 2017).
  • Beach, D., & Dovemark, M. (2011). Twelve Years of Upper-Secondary Education in Sweden: The Beginnings of a Neo-liberal Policy Hegemony. Educational Review, 63(3), pp. 313–327. DOI: 10.1080/00131911.2011.560249.
  • Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the Theory of Formative Assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), pp. 5–31. [n/a]. DOI: 10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5.
  • Daun, H. (2004). Privatization, Decentralization and Governance in Education in the Czech Republic, England, France, Germany, and Sweden. International Review of Education, 50(3), pp. 327–349.
  • Daun, H. (2006). Privatization, Decentralization and Governance in Education in the Czech Republic, England, France, Germany, and Sweden. Decentralization and Privatization in Education. In: J. Zajda (Ed.), The Role of the State (pp. 75–96). Dordrecht: Springer.
  • Dovemark, M., & Holm, A.S. (2015). Pedagogic Identities for Sale! Segregation and Homog­enization in Swedish Upper Secondary School. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 38(4), pp. 518–532. DOI: 10.1080/01425692.2015.1093405.
  • Drakenberg, M. (2001). The Professional Development of Teachers in Sweden. European Jour­nal of Teacher Education, 24(2), pp. 195–204. DOI: 10.1080/02619760120095589.
  • Edmark, K., Frölich, M., & Wondratschek, V. (2014). Sweden’s School Choice Reform and Equality of Opportunity. Labour Economics, 30, pp. 129–142. DOI: 10.1016/j.labeco.2014.04.008.
  • Eklund, S. (2012). Friskolor leder till segregation. Borås Tidning. November 08.
  • Erikson, J. (2017). A School for All or a School for the Labour Market? Analyzing the Goal Formulation of the 1991 Swedish Upper Secondary Education Reform. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 61(2), pp. 139–154. DOI: 10.1080/00313831.2015.1119726.
  • Erixon-Arreman, I. (2014). Student Perceptions of New Differentiation Policies in Swedish Post-16 Education. European Educational Research Journal, 13(6), pp. 616–631. DOI: 10.2304/eerj.2014.13.6.616.
  • Erixon-Arreman, I., & Holm, A.S. (2011a). School as “Edu-Business”: Four “Serious Players” in the Swedish Upper Secondary School Market. Education Inquiry, 2(4), pp. 637–657. DOI: 10.3402/edui.v2i4.22004.
  • Erixon-Arreman, I., and Ann-Sofie Holm. 2011 b. Privatization of Public Education? The Emergence of Independent Upper Secondary Schools in Sweden. Journal of Education Policy, 26(2), pp. 225–243.
  • Fredriksson, A. (2009). On the Consequences of the Marketization of Public Education in Sweden: For-profit Charter Schools and the Emergence of the ‘Market-Oriented Teacher’. European Educational Research Journal, 8(2), pp. 299–310.
  • Fredriksson, A. (2010). The Market and the Teachers: How the Organization of the School Conditions the Public Civil Servant Role of Teachers, Phocoena phocoena. Ph.D. diss., Gothenburg: Gothenburg University.
  • Frostenson, M. (2012). Lärarnas avprofessionalisering och autonomins mångtydighet. Nord­iske Organisasjonsstudier, 14(2), pp. 49–76.
  • Frostenson, M. (2015). Three Forms of Professional Autonomy: De-professionalisation of Teachers in a New Light. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 1(2), pp. 20–29. DOI: 10.3402/nstep.v1.28464.
  • Förordning om statsbidrag till skolhuvudmän som inrättar karriärsteg för lärare. SFS 2013: 70.
  • Förordning om ändring i förordningen (2017: 1108) om ändring i gymnasieförordningen (2010: 2039). SFS 2018: 27.
  • Gymnasieförordning. SFS 2010: 2039.
  • Hall, C. (2011). Förlängningen av de gymnasiala yrkesutbildningarna i Sverige: effekter på avhopp, utbildningsnivå och inkomster. Sökelys på arbeidslivet, 28(1–2), pp. 157–170.
  • Holm, A.-S. and Lundström, U. (2011). “Living with Market Forces” Principals’ Perceptions of Market Competition in Swedish Upper Secondary School Education. Education Inquiry, 2:4, 601-617, DOI: 10.3402/edui.v2i4.22002.
  • Holm, A.S. (2013). A Sea of Options: Student Perspectives on Market Competition in Upper Secondary Schools in Sweden. Nordic Studies in Education, 33(4), pp. 284–299.
  • Hood, Ch. (1991). A Public Management for All Seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), pp. 3–19. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.1991.tb00779.x.
  • Hood, Ch. (1995). The Public Management in the 1980s: Variations on a Theme. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20(2/3), pp. 93–109.
  • Jarl, M., & Rönnberg, L. (2017). Från riksdagshus till klassrum. Stockholm: Liber AB.
  • Kommittédirektiv 2012: 84. Utvärdering av effekterna av kommunaliseringen av skolväsen­det. Regeringsdirektiv.
  • Krönlein, C. (2012). Fler måste stå upp för valfriheten i skolan. Göteborgs-Posten. January 19.
  • Lind, T. (2017). Upper Secondary Schools and Sparsity: The Case of Northern Sweden. Scan­dinavian Journal of Educational Research. DOI: 10.1080/00313831.2017.1375005.
  • Lindberg, E. (2011). Effects of Management by Objectives. Studies of Swedish Upper Sec­ondary Schools and the Influence of Role Stress and Self-efficacy on School leaders, Phocoena phocoena. Ph.D. diss., Umeå: School of Business. Umeå University.
  • Lindberg, E., Wincent, J., & Örtqvist, D. (2013). Turning Stressors into Something Produc­tive: An Empirical Study Revealing Nonlinear Influences of Role Stressors on Self-effi­cacy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43(2), pp. 263–274. DOI: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00995.x.
  • Lindberg, E., & Wilson, T.L. (2011). Management by Objectives: The Swedish Experience in Upper Secondary Schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(1), pp. 62–75. DOI: 10.1108/09578231111102063.
  • Lindberg, E., & Wincent, J. (2011). Goal Commitment and Performance: An Empirical Study Incorporating Role Stress Literature to Reveal Functional and Dysfunctional Influences. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41(11), pp. 2634–2655. DOI: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00837.x.
  • Lund, S. (2008). Choice Paths in the Swedish Upper Secondary Education: A Critical Dis­course Analysis of Recent Reforms. Journal of Education Policy, 23(6), pp. 633–648. DOI: 10.1080/02680930802209743.
  • Lundahl, L. (2012). Educational Theory in an Era of Knowledge Capitalism. Studies in Phi­losophy and Education, 31(3), pp. 215–226. DOI: 10.1007/s11217-012-9304-9.
  • Lundström, U. (2007). Gymnasielärare – perspektiv på lärares arbete och yrkesutveckling vid millennieskiftet, Phocoena phocoena. Ph.D. diss., Umeå: Umeå University.
  • Lundström, U., & Holm, A.S. (2011). Market Competition in Upper Secondary Education: Perceived Effects on Teachers’ Work. Policy Futures in Education, 9(2), pp. 193–205.
  • Lundström, U., & Parding, K. (2011). Lärares upplevelser av friskolereformen – effekter av marknadiseringen av den svenska gymnasieskolan. Arbetsmarknad & Arbetsliv, 17(4), pp. 59–77.
  • Läroplan för gymnasieskolan (2011). [Curriculum for Upper Secondary School, 2011]. Skolverket. Retrieved from: https://www.skolverket.se/om-skolverket/publikationer/visa-enskild-publikation?_xurl_=http%3A%2F%2Fwww5.skolverket.se%2Fwtpub%2Fws%2Fskolbok%2Fwpubext%2Ftrycksak%2FRecord%3Fk%3D2705 (accessed: June 13, 2017).
  • Montin, S. (1992). Processes of Privatization in the Municipalities: Theoretical Points of Departure and Empirical Cases. Statsvetenskaplig Tidskrift, 1(1), pp. 31–56.
  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2013). Education at a Glance 2013. Table A1.2a: Percentage of the Population That Has Attained at Least Upper Secondary Education. OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/eag-2013-table7-en.
  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2016). Education at a Glance 2016. Table A1.2a: Percentage of the Population That Has Attained at Least Upper Secondary Education. OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/eag-2013-table7-en.
  • Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing Government. Reading, Mass: Addison Wesley.
  • Palm, T., Andersson, C., Boström, E., & Vingsle, Ch. (2017). A Review of the Impact of Formative Assessment on Student Achievement in Mathematics. Nordic Studies in Math­ematics Education, 22(3), pp. 25–50.
  • Panican, A., & Hjort, T. (2014). Navigating the Market of Welfare Services: The Choice of Upper Secondary School in Sweden. Nordic Journal of Social Research, 5, pp. 55–79. DOI: 10.7577/njsr.2075.
  • Parding, K. (2007). Upper Secondary Teachers’ Creation of Discretionary Power: The Ten­sion between Profession and Organisation, Phocoena phocoena. Ph.D. diss., Luleå: Luleå tekniska universitet.
  • Parding, K. (2011). Forskning om den svenska friskolereformens effekter en litteraturöversikt. Didaktisk Tidskrift, 20(4), pp. 231–247.
  • Pierre, J. (1993). Legitimacy, Institutional Change, and the Politics of Public Administration in Sweden. International Political Science Review, 14(4), pp. 387–401.
  • Proposition 1988/89: 4. Om skolans utveckling och styrning. Retrieved from: https://data.riks­dagen.se/fil/6F74CCF7-C44B-475F-ADFA-6197D4BE7D8F (accessed: June 13, 2017).
  • Proposition 1989/90: 41. Om kommunalt huvudmanskap för lärare, skolledare, biträdande skolledare och syofunktioner. Retrieved from: https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-lagar/dokument/proposition/om-kommunalt-huvudmannaskap-for-larare_GD0341 (accessed: June 13, 2017).
  • Proposition 1990/91: 18. Ansvarspropositionen: Om ansvaret för skolan. Retrievied from: https://lagen.nu/prop/1990/91:18 (accessed: June 13, 2017).
  • Proposition 1991/92: 95. Om valfrihet och fristående skolor. Retrieved from: https://data.riks­dagen.se/fil/5277FE6D-7C0B-47CB-AE25-7B2234DE5FBE (accessed: June 13, 2017).
  • Proposition 1992/93: 250. Om ny läroplan och ett nytt betygssystem för gymnasieskolan, komvux, gymnasiesärskolan och särvux. Retrieved from: http://data.riksdagen.se/fil/6684bbb3-3c78-4e34-806f-bc6073af5053 (accessed: June 13, 2017).
  • Proposition 2008/09: 199. Högre krav och kvalitet i den nya gymnasieskolan. https://data.riks­dagen.se/fil/D63823BB-2CF0-4A70-B4C6-006E1B0E1D5D (accessed: June 13, 2017).
  • Proposition 2012/13: 136. Karriärvägar för lärare i skolväsendet m.m. Retrived from: http://www.regeringen.se/rattsdokument/proposition/2013/03/prop.-201213136/ (accessed: June 13, 2017).
  • Quennerstedt, A. (2006). Kommunen – en part i utbildningspolitiken. Örebro: Pedagogiska institutionen.
  • Ringarp, J. (2012). The Problem of the Welfare Profession: An Example – The Municipalisa­tion of the Teaching Profession. Policy Futures in Education, 10(3), pp. 328–339. DOI: 10.2304/pfie.2012.10.3.328.
  • Ringarp, J. (2016). PISA Lends Legitimacy: A Study of Education Policy Changes in Germany and Sweden after 2000. European Educational Research Journal, 15(4), pp. 447–461. DOI: 10.1177/1474904116630754.
  • Ringarp, J., & Rothland, M. (2010). Is the Grass Always Greener? The Effect of the PISA Results on Education Debates in Sweden and Germany. European Educational Research Journal, 9(3), pp. 422–430. DOI: 10.2304/eerj.2010.9.3.422.
  • Rönnberg, L. (2011). Reinstating National School Inspections in Sweden. Nordic Studies in Education, 32(2), pp. 69–83.
  • Samuelsson, K., & Lindblad, S. (2015). School Management, Cultures of Teaching and Stu­dent Outcomes: Comparing the Cases of Finland and Sweden. Teaching and Teacher Education, 49, pp. 168–177. DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2015.02.014.
  • Sass, K. (2015). Understanding comprehensive school reforms: Insights from comparative his­torical sociology and power resources theory. European Educational Research Journal, 14(3–4), pp. 240–256. DOI: 10.1177/1474904115590055.
  • Skollag. SFS 2010:800.
  • SKL (2011). Kommunaliseringen av skolan – och vikten av att blicka framåt.
  • Söderström, M., & Uusitalo, R. (2010). School Choice and Segregation: Evidence from an Admission Reform. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 112(1), pp. 55–76. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9442.2009.01594.x.
  • Sundhage, I. (2017). 25 år av misslyckad kommunalisering. Bohuslänningen. April 21.
  • Svensson, G. (2012). Skolpolitik: du-reformen i skolan var enbart av godo. Sydöstran. May 03.
  • Thelin, M., & Niedomysl, T. (2015). The (Ir)Relevance of Geography for School Choice: Evi­dence from a Swedish Choice Experiment. Geoforum, 67, pp. 110–120. DOI: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2015.11.003.
  • Wermke, W., & Forsberg, E. (2017). The Changing Nature of Autonomy: Transformations of the Late Swedish Teaching Profession. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 61(2), pp. 155–168.
  • Wernstedt, R. (2013). The sorting of schools increases segregation. Dagens Nyheter. Novem­ber 07. Retrieved from: http://www.etc.se/nyheter/skolornas-sortering-okar-segregation (accessed: April 27, 2017).
  • Westling-Allodi, M. (2013). Simple-minded Accountability Measures Create Failing Schools in Disadvantaged Contexts: A Case Study of a Swedish Junior High School. Policy Futures in Education, 11(4), pp. 331–363. DOI: 10.2304/pfie.2013.11.4.331.
  • Wikström, Ch., & Wikström, M. (2005). Grade Inflation and School Competition: An Empiri­cal Analysis Based on the Swedish Upper Secondary Schools. Economics of Education Review, 24(3), pp. 309–322. DOI: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2004.04.010.
  • Zehavi, A. (2012). Welfare State Politics in Privatization of Delivery: Linking Program Con­stituencies to Left and Right. Comparative Political Studies, 45(2), pp. 194–219. DOI: 10.1177/0010414011421307.

Wiadomość do:

 

 

© 2017 Adam Marszałek Publishing House. All rights reserved.

Projekt i wykonanie Pollyart