02. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Paper
Democracy at VET – Thoughts and Challenges from an Organisational and Didactical Approach
Henriette Duch
VIA University College, Denmark
Presenting Author: Duch, Henriette
Educating about democracy is a theme in the European and especially the Nordic educational system (Husfeldt & Nikolova, 2003; Hjort, 2013; Løvlie, 2015; Apple et al., 2022). This point implies thoughts of representative democracy at the organisational level and the didactical approach (Solhaug, 2008). Therefore, the idea of progressive pedagogy has impacted the discussions and development in the Danish educational system since the Second World War (Korsgaard, 2009; Freire, 2014). At the general upper education, the Danish gymnasium, democracy has a long history (Raae, 2009), while it is relatively new as a formal approach in the law for Danish VET. At VET, democracy has been mentioned since 2000, and the current law states that VET: ”contributes to developing the participants´ interest in and ability to participate in a democratic society actively” (Ministry of children and education, 2021). Research on democracy in Denmark often pays attention to how youth are socialised to participate in representative democracy, while other Nordic countries have a more developed tradition for research on democracy in the classroom. Some subjects, such as social science, teach about representative democracy (Christensen, 2015), while all subjects can develop students’ democratic experiences by participating in dialogues and decision-making in the classroom and, e.g. processes in group work (Børhaug, 2008; Emslie, 2009). The classroom diversity of subjects and the diversity of students - which is extensive in Danish VET - must be considered (Rönnlund et al., 2019; Nylund et al., 2020).
This paper aims to contribute to students’ experiences in democracy to encourage participation in society. Since Danish VETs offer more than 100 different courses, this paper focuses on social and health care. The research question is: how is the participants’ interest in and ability to participate in a democratic society understood and implemented in the VET colleges, workplaces and classrooms?
The Danish VETs are organised as a dual training system. This structure gives students the opportunities for experiences, enquires and reflections supporting the choice of new actions at school and work. Since school and the workplace do not always agree on solutions and discussions, the students experience the possibilities for learning through disagreement. This context creates opportunities that can be addressed in the classroom, e.g. in group work (Iversen, 2016; Collins et al., 2019).
Dewey inspires the theoretical approach in the paper. He stresses the importance of the interaction between school and the surrounding world. In his book Democracy and Education (2005) [1916], he writes that democracy is not only a way of ruling but a way of living. Understanding the effect on action contributes to reducing race and class division. However, for Dewey, education must educate human beings, not only citizens. He states that taking part in a profession creates the potential for the student to give societal benefit and achieves happiness. However, a school must not only educate the profession but also contribute to perspectives on history and how work is done. Education has to develop the students to find new perspectives on work and actions.
Dewey’s theory gives a framework for analysing organisational and didactical challenges in VET but the theory also suggest how democracy can be developed by reflection on action (Skov & Duch, 2023). Furthermore, the theory can initiate discussions about the current policy and debate of the role of VET. VET is often addressed in relation to low recruitment, high dropout rates and the lack of employees e.g. in the health care sector. However, VET also have a role in inclusion of diverse students to maintain and develop a democratic society.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe data collection runs from autumn 2021 to spring 2023. The starting point is one college, but the study includes other perspectives from two other colleges and workplaces. The methods used are documentary analyses, addressing policy at a national level, and interviews at an organisational level. Furthermore, action research and observation are used. Details on this research will be expanded on below.
The research project is initiated in the autumn of 2021, collecting documents and making documentary analyses on policy documents about democracy in VET. At the same time, organisational and didactical challenges and opportunities have been discussed in several meetings with a social and healthcare college. After that, semi-structured interviews are made with students at this college. Twelve students are interviewed in spring 2022. The students represent some of the diversities at VETs such as age, mother tongue, experience in the social and health care sector, educational background and the starting point at the course since some students do not have to attend the first half year at the course. The students are asked about their understanding of democracy and former experiences in family, educational settings and, e.g. spare time activities. The questions address participation at the organisational level at schools and didactical experiences in the classroom. Two researchers did participate in the interviews, and one took notes. The interviews are coded, categorised and analysed.
In autumn 2022, the organisational approaches to democracy are explored at three colleges by one interview with a manager at each college. The colleges have different geographical locations, and each college has two or more subdivisions at different locations. This information implies that students´ workplaces are at healthcare institutions in different municipalities with different policies, e.g. recruitment and support of the students during the time spent at workplaces. Therefore, three educational managers, each connected to one of the colleges representing different municipalities, are interviewed. The six interviews are transcribed, coded, categorised and analysed.
In spring 2023, action research will take place in one of the colleges. A group of teachers at the college will participate in four meetings about didactical approaches to democracy. The teachers will develop their teaching in between the meetings and get new experiences, followed by collective reflection at the meetings. The researcher will observe three different examples of teaching.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsDemocracy is addressed later at VET than in primary school and the gymnasium as another secondary education in Denmark. Few formal documents concretise how democracy can be addressed, organisational and didactical, even though the law has this as a goal. Analysing interviews with students shows a diversity of former experiences, with some active in society and at college and some deliberately try not to interfere and express their opinions. Their different attitudes do not correlate with the students’ different backgrounds.
At the organisational level, managers understand democracy in different ways and relate to different kinds of activities at college. They also describe democracy by using other terms such as `bildung´ and participating in the college community and the outside world. In the municipalities, the interviews with managers indicate understandings, e.g., workplace democracy, recruitment and integration.
Especially one of the managers from the first involved college addresses the didactic and teaching framework. However, it is expected that the action research and the observations can unfold and give examples from the classroom.
Summing up, students attend college with different experiences and understandings of democracy, and colleges involve students in different kinds of activities. However, the attention to the diversity of the students’ perspectives is not explicated, and it is not clear if the organisation, the teachers and the students are reflecting on the actions even though democracy is seen as an ideal in society and education. Some of the municipalities give examples of the students’ diversity and the challenges to teach and involve in democratic processes at the workplace. The observations are expected to unfold the potentials and challenges in the different subjects in the classroom.
By addressing democracy the importance of VET is stressed: to recruit and educated the required labour force and to include diverse students in the society.
ReferencesApple, M. W., Biesta, G., Bright, D., Giroux, H. A., Heffernan, A., McLaren, P., Riddle, S., & Yeatman, A. (2022). Reflections on contemporary challenges and possibilities for democracy and education. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 54(3), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220620.2022.2052029
Børhaug, K. (2008). Educating voters: political education in Norwegian upper‐secondary schools. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40(5), 579-600. doi: 10.1080/00220270701774765
Christensen, A. S. (2015). Demokrati- og medborgerskabsbegreber i grundskolens samfundsfag i Danmark, Norge, Sverige og Tyskland. Nordidactica (1), 64–92.
Collins, J., Hess, M. E.;Lowery, C. L. (2019). Democratic Spaces: How Teachers Establish and Sustain Democracy and Education in Their Classrooms. Democracy and Education, 27 (1), 1-12
Dewey, J. (2005) [ 1916]. Demokrati og uddannelse [Democracy and Education]. Klim.
Emslie, M. (2009). ‘Practise what you teach’. Journal of youth studies, 12(3), 323-336. DOI: 10.1080/13676260902810833
Freire, P. (2014). Pedagogy of Solidarity: Paulo Freire patron of Brazilian education. Left Coast Press
Hjort, K. (2013). Ny nordisk skole – fællestræk, forskelle og fremtidige dilemmaer. Dansk pædagogisk Tidsskrift (1), 7-16
Husfeldt, V., & Nikolova, R. (2003). Students’ Concepts of Democracy. European Educational Research Journal, 2(3), 396–409. https://doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2003.2.3.6
Iversen, L. L. (2016). Uenighetsfellesskab – en inkluderende innfallsvinkel til medborgerskap. In C. Lenz, P. Nustad, & B. Geissert (ed.), Faglige perspektiver på demokrati og forebygging av gruppefiendtlighet i skolen (p. 22-33). Særtrykk fra Dembra-publikasjon.
Korsgaard, O. (2009). Demokrati som pædagogisk værdi. Vera (49), 13–17.
Løvlie, L. (2015). John Dewey, phenomenology, and the reconstruction of democracy. Nordisk tidsskrift for pedagogikk og kritikk, (1) 1-13. https://doi.org/10.17585/ntpk.v1.104
Ministry of children and education [Børne- og Undervisningsministeriet] (2021). Bekendtgørelse om erhvervsuddannelser BEK nr 2499 af 13/12/2021.
Nylund, M., Ledman, K., Rosvall P.-Å. & Rönnlund, M (2020). Socialisation and citizenship preparation in vocational education: Pedagogic codes and democratic rights in VET-subjects, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 41 (1), 1-17. DOI: 10.1080/01425692.2019.1665498
Raae, P. H. (2008) Når demokratiet er i konflikt med sig selv? Norsk Pedagogisk Tidsskrift. 92 300-313
Rönnlund, M., Ledman, K., Nylund, M., & Rosvall, P. (2019). Life skills for ‘real life’: How critical thinking is contextualised across vocational programmes. Educational research, 61(3), 302-318. DOI: 10.1080/00131881.2019.1633942
Skov, T. H. & Duch, H. (2023). Gruppearbejde som en demokratisk aktivitet. In H. Duch (ed.). Gruppearbejde på ungdoms- og videregående uddannelser – begrundelser og perspektiver. En studiebog til undervisere og lærerstuderende. Frydenlund
Solhaug, T. (2008). Kritiske blikk på skolens opplæring til demokrati. Norsk Pedagogisk Tidsskrift 92 (4) 255–261
02. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Paper
Democracy Learning through Participation in Germany’s Dual System – a Bernsteinian Approach
Gabriela Höhns
BIBB, Germany
Presenting Author: Höhns, Gabriela
Rosvall and Nylund (2022) summarise an apparent consensus among researchers that democracy learning might more easily be addressed in school settings than in workplaces, ‘since hierarchies that might be discussed or questioned are embedded in workplace settings. Thus, workplaces may be less safe spaces for learning democracy…’. Yet from a psychologistic perspective, Schnitzler (2017) showed that in German regulated company transmission in the dual system (DS), learners acquire political skills. This presentation follows Rosvall’s and Nylund’s reference to Basil Bernstein’s conceptual language to investigate the DS’s social-structural conditions that make the acquisition of political skills or learning for and through democratic participation possible.
Drawing on Bernstein’s (2000) notion of ‘pedagogic culture’, the presentation uses a theoretical framework developed by Hoadley and Galant (2017) (henceforth: H+G) to analyse the power (and control) relations within the DS with the company as primary transmission site. Hoadley and Galant explain that Bernstein conceived of pedagogic culture as a container. Besides two other dimensions, economy and bias, which are not considered here, the shape and stability of the container are relevant for what it contains, what is being transmitted. Stability, H+G point out, is about forms of control, which are analysable as Bernstein’s framing relations. Prior research (Höhns 2018, 2022) showed that in Germany’s DS, against expectations, learners (trainees/apprentices) can and do take control over the framing relations, including also the hierarchical relation to their trainers. These findings corroborate Schnitzler’s excavation of ‘political skills’: When learners choose whom to learn from and what to learn, they have to practise political skills, in order to do so in a contextually adequate way. Shape ‘refers to the social division of labour in the school (or other educational institution, such as the DS; addition GH), the academic identity of the institution and its learners, and the basis of authority’ (H+G, p. 1189). To explain the concept ‘division of labour’, H+G refer to Ingersoll (1995), who states that the division of labour is fundamentally about power and implies a hierarchical relationship. For the possibilities of democracy learning and the acquisition of political skills, the division of labour and the basis of authority of the transmitters in the company, the primary transmission site, are key. Therefore, this presentation approaches the question: How did DS graduates experience the shape of pedagogic culture in the DS, in particular the division of labour, and on what basis did they ascribe authority to their company trainers?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe empirical basis for this presentation is an analysis of 30 problem-centred interviews with dual system graduates about their vocational training. They had acquired different Berufe (a particular Germanic conceptualisation of occupation) in differently sized and organized companies. Problem-centred interviews (Witzel and Reiter 2012) are open interviews with some guidance to keep the narration focussed on the theoretically perceived aspects of a social problem, such as vocational learning in the company and at other sites. The interview guide drew strongly on Basil Bernstein’s (e.g., 1990, 2000) conceptual language as sensitizing concepts, but also included other questions, for instance, about learning in the VET school.
Following H+G (2017, p. 1192), who measure shape in terms of classifications (boundary strengths) between contexts and agents, this presentation investigates the boundaries between contexts and agents in the DS, as perceived by the respondents. More precisely, these boundaries concern experiences in different transmission contexts. To ensure generalisation at the level of DS, the presentation complements respondents’ narrations with references to macro-social provisions (mainly the Vocational Training Act).
Concerning the basis of authority, the presentation summarises narrations about how respondents perceived the relationship to trainers and colleagues in the company.
This exploration of classifications within the DS restricts itself to a description of empirical indicators. The development of a systematic analytical grid for the measurement of boundary strengths, as H+G did, must be left to future research, possibly with an improved data base that would include also the perspective of transmitters.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsNotwithstanding the restricted data base, the findings are expected to reveal a complex division of labour within the DS between the training company and other sites which the respondents have to navigate, with experiences complementing or contradicting each other.
Concerning the company transmitters’ ascribed authority, the findings presumably will show more variance than just the position as a basis. The respondents were able to give different reasons why they turned to whom with questions, and what they appreciated about their trainers and colleagues.
For democracy learning, the expected findings will suggest that the complex division of labour in the DS challenges learners to take responsibility and, at times, to contest the transmitter’s authority. Trainees/apprentices have to make transmitters (company trainers) explain, check or practise what is not part of the usual day-to-day routine in the company, but what they need to know for the VET school and for the examination which is organised and carried out outside the training company. In other words, in relation to the construct ‘Beruf’, the authority of company transmitters may be limited. The division of labour in the DS is not hierarchical, but requires consensus, starting from the macro social level where the social partners develop, modify and change Berufe, in obligatory consensus, down to the transmission in the company, between transmitters and acquirers.
Concurrently the findings cast light on the social aspects of the construct ‘Beruf’, which overarches the complex division of labour between transmission sites and which has more to it than a knowledge dimension.
Bernstein's conceptual language, pedagogic culture and shape, together with stability, seem to be promising for further, more detailed analyses of the conditions for democracy learning also in (regulated) company transmission.
ReferencesBernstein, B. (1990). Class, Codes and Control, Vol. IV - The structuring of pedagogic discourse. Routledge.
Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity (Revised ed.). Rowman & Littlefield.
Hoadley, U., & Galant, J. (2016). Specialization and School Organization: Investigating Pedagogic Culture. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 37(8), 1187-1210.
Höhns, G. (2018). Pedagogic practice in company learning: the relevance of discourse. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 70(2), 313-333. Höhns, G. M. (2018). Pedagogic practice in company learning: the relevance of discourse. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 70(2), 313-333.
Höhns, G. (2022). The social construction of vocational education - possibilities for change towards status improvement Journal of Vocational Education & Training.
Ingersoll, R. (1993). Loosely Coupled Organizations Revisited. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 11, 81-112. Retrieved from https://repository.upenn.edu/gse_pubs/554
Rosvall, P.-Å., & Nylund, M. (2022). Civic education in VET: concepts for a professional language in VET teaching and VET teacher education. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2022.2075436
Schnitzler, A. (2017). Die Entwicklung von politischen Fertigkeiten in der beruflichen Erstausbildung [The development of political skills in vocational education and training] Dissertation. Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität. Bonn.
Vocational Training Act from 23.03.2005, 931 ff retrieved from http://www2.bgbl.de/Xaver/start.xav?startbk=Bundesanzeiger_BGBl
English version: http://www.bmbf.de/pub/BBiG_englisch_050805.pdf
Witzel, A., & Reiter, H. (2012). The problem-centred interview. Sage.
02. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Paper
Opportunities for Critical Thinking, Social Inclusion and Democratic Participation in Vocational Students' Citizenship Education
Kristina Ledman1, Katarina Kärnebro1, Christina Ottander2
1Department of education, Umeå university, Sweden; 2Department of science and mathematics education, Umeå university, Sweden
Presenting Author: Ledman, Kristina;
Kärnebro, Katarina
Current societal challenges such as the war in Europe, the pandemic and global warming highlight the importance of all students – regardless of age and choice of study – being prepared for their roles as democratic citizens by being given opportunities to develop their citizenship knowledge. In this context, critical literacy as a means to counteract fake news and conspiracy theories is an essential prerequisite for democracy (Barzilai & Chinn 2020; Osborne et al. 2022). In this newly started project, we focus on citizenship education for vocational education and training (VET) students in upper secondary education. In Sweden, VET students have been identified as less likely to participate in democratic processes in society. Our definition of citizenship education builds on Bernstein’s (2000, xx-xxi) Pedagogic rights, i.e., i) individual enhancement (confidence for critical understanding), ii) social inclusion, and iii) participation, which includes the ability to take part and act in democratic processes. The concept of ‘citizen’ is understood here as being situated and dependent on which other identities – such as gender and sexuality, age, social class and functional ability – are attributed to individuals and groups (see Yuval-Davis 2008). This is significant in the study, as the VET programmes to a large extent are gender-differentiated contexts. Arnot (2009) shows in her analyses of citizenship, education and gender how discourses about citizens often become gendered because different knowledge and abilities are associated with identities.
As upper secondary vocational education is organized very differently in different national contexts (Kap 2015) also within Europe and the Nordic countries (Jørgensen et al. 2018) it is difficult to make international comparisons of vocational students’ citizenship education. Generally, VET students devote only a small proportion to citizenship education (Nylund et al. 2017). VET programmes include compulsory short courses in History, Social studies, Religion and Science studies and citizenship formation is a clearly stated motive behind the inclusion of these four subjects in the VET curriculum (Ledman 2014). We refer to these subjects as citizenship oriented. Studies have shown that VET programmes are often characterised by socialisation into workplace and industry cultures, and that knowledge content is contextualised in accordance with prevailing conditions, rather than being aimed at promoting critical thinking and questions about how things could be different (Nylund et al. 2020; Rönnlund et al. 2019). Research on vocational students' citizenship formation has been done in vocational subject-teaching contexts (Rosvall et al. 2020) and in the citizenship-oriented subjects separately (e.g., Ledman 2015, Nordby 2019, Kittelmann Flensner 2015; Sigauke, 2013). However, there is a lack of knowledge about the conditions these four subjects together create for vocational students' citizenship formation and how the students themselves perceive the development of their citizen identities.
The aim is to shed light on the vocational students' citizenship formation process during their three-year education, in relation to the content made available to them through the citizenship-oriented subjects. i) How do the students perceive the content and teaching approaches of the citizenship-oriented subjects and how do these subjects promote critical thinking and social inclusion, and prepare them to act as citizens? ii) What opportunities for citizenship formation - in the form of pedagogical rights and social positions - do teachers of History, Science Studies, Social Studies and Religion create for vocational students in their teaching? iii) What overall conclusions can be drawn about the vocational students' citizenship formation process with regard to a) differences between the various VET programmes, and b) about how citizen identities are formed in relation to social positions (gender, class, ethnicity) and professional identities?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe project includes longitudinal interviews with students (DS1) and teacher interviews, in combination with observations and analysis of teaching material (DS2). The programmes initially selected for the study are the Health and Social Care Programme, the Industry Programme and the Trade and Administration Programme.
DS1) Group interviews with students are conducted once a year for three years. The interviews are designed as targeted open interviews, as a tool to understand the respondents’ thoughts and to elicit their subjective experiences (Lantz, 2007). We want to capture the students' experiences of the teaching and content of each subject, and how they perceive that the different kinds of knowledge provided by the four subjects can be related to each other and implemented in other contexts. The analysis draws on Pedagogic rights (Bernstein 2000) and we will identify instances of teaching where the students perceived a) they gained critical understanding b) experienced that they were part of a group and social community and c) experienced teaching that provided knowledge and a will and perceived ability to exert influence in working life and society. In this first stage, we will use classification and framing to identify teaching content and approaches. In a second stage, we will apply a comparative analysis and focus on differences and similarities between the different programmes, student groups and subjects.
DS2) builds on interviews with teachers of social studies, history, religion and science studies, in combination with observations of their teaching and analysis of their teaching materials and teaching plans. The interviews focus on how the teachers plan and carry out their teaching of the vocational students based on the conditions provided by the steering documents, the organisation of the teaching and perceptions and expectations of the students. This is followed by observations of 2-3 lessons (cf. Adolfsson & Alvunger 2017). Overall, the empirical material provides in-depth knowledge of what the students experience in the context of citizen-oriented teaching. We highlight processes in the pedagogical recontextualisation arena (Bernstein 2000) and identify which pedagogical codes and opportunities for citizenship formation dominate the teachers’ teaching practices, and how these vary between programmes and subjects. We also use gender regimes as a model for analysing the local power order through four dimensions (Connell 2009) and by analysing the empirical evidence intersectionally (Yuval- Davies 2008), since we want to shed light on the teachers’ perceptions of citizenship education and vocational students in the different programmes.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe preliminary results from pilot interviews with teachers indicate that in all four subjects it is important to anchor the teaching in the contexts the students are in. Students’ response to citizenship education seems to differ depending on vocational cultures in the programmes and the different conditions of the schools and the local communities. Furthermore, all teachers acknowledge that there are differences in opportunities for citizenship formation between the various VET programmes. When comparing the Industrial programme with Health and Social Care programme, the latter programme gives the students more opportunities to practice democratic rights. In a survey we conducted in a study preluding this project, we found that the majority of the students had a positive attitude the content of the citizenship oriented subjects, and that they were likely to perform formal democratic rights, as voting. However, a significant part of the students (around 25%) did neither perceive themselves as participants in society, nor interested in or having competence to be involved (Knekta et al. forthcoming). By the longitudinal design and student interviews, we will be able to gain a deeper understanding of VET students citizenship formation, both in relation to subject education and specific programme. The focus on the students’ citizenship formation through their perspective on knowledge and how citizen identities are formed in relation to social positions (gender, class, ethnicity) and professional identities contributes to broadening the understanding of citizenship education for VET students.
ReferencesAdolfsson, C. & Alvunger, D. (2017). The selection of content and knowledge conceptions in the teaching of curriculum standards in compulsory schooling. I Wahlström, N. & Sundberg, D. (red.) Transnational curriculum standards and classroom practices. Routledge.
Arnot, M., (2009). Educating the gendered citizen. Sociological engagements with national and global agendas. London: Routledge.
Barzilai, S., & Chinn, C. (2020). A review of educational responses to the “post-truth” condition: Four lenses on “post-truth” problems. Educational Psychologist, 55(3), 107–119.
Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity. Rowman & Littlefield pbl.
Connell, R. W. (2009). Om genus. Daidalos.
Kap, H. (2015).Comparative studies of vocational education and training. Stockholms univ.
Kittelmann Flensner, K. (2015). Religious education in contemporary pluralistic Sweden. University of Gothenburg.
Knekta et al (forthcoming). To actively engage in society: VET students perspectives on Civic Bildung.
Lantz, A. (2007). Intervjumetodik. Den professionellt genomförda intervjun. Studentlitteratur.
Ledman, K. (2014). Till nytta eller onytta: argument rörande allmänna ämnen i ungas yrkesutbildning i efterkrigstidens Sverige. Nordic Journal of Educational History,1(1):21-43.
Ledman, K. (2015) Navigating historical thinking in a vocational setting: teachers interpreting a history curriculum for students in vocational secondary education, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 47:1, 77-93, DOI: 10.1080/00220272.2014.984766
Nordby, M.S. (2019). Naturfag for yrkesfagelever – hva teller som kunnskap? Doktorsavhandling nr 2019:11, Norges miljö- og biovetenskaplige universitet, Norge.
Nylund, M. et al. (2017). The vocational–academic divide in neoliberal upper secondary curricula: the Swedish case. Journal of education policy, 32(6):788-808.
Nylund, M. et al. (2020). Socialisation and citizenship preparation in vocational education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 41, (1).
Osborne, J., Pimentel, D., Alberts, D., Barzilai, S., Bergstrom, C., Coffey, J., Donovan, B., Kivinen, K., Kozyreva, A., & Wineburg, S. (2022). Science Education in an age of misinformation. Stanford University, Stanford.
Rosvall, P-Å., Ledman, K., Nylund, M., & Rönnlund, M. (2020). Yrkesämnena och skolans demokratiuppdrag. Gleerups Utbildning AB
Rönnlund, M, Ledman, K, Nylund, M & Rosvall, P-Å (2019) Life skills for 'real life': How critical thinking is contextualised across vocational programmes. Educational research. 61:3.
Sigauke, A. T. (2013). Citizenship Education in the Social Science Subjects. Australian Jour-nal of Teacher Education, 38(11).
Jørgensen, C.H., Olsen, O.J. & Persson Thunqvist, D. (red.) (2018). Vocational Education in the Nordic Countries: Learning From Diversity. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Yuval-Davis, N., 2008. "Intersectionality, citizenship and contemporary politics of belonging". I Siim, B. & Squires, J. (red.). Contesting citizenship. Routledge.
|
