19. Ethnography
Paper
Critical and Comparative Case Study: Methodologies of comparing freedom of choice policies in education
Marianne Dovemark1, Annette Rasmussen2
1University of Gothenburg, Sweden; 2University of Aalborg, Denmark
Presenting Author: Dovemark, Marianne;
Rasmussen, Annette
Global education policies emphasising individualism and freedom of choice are seen to dominate education policies everywhere (Forsey et al., 2008), including in the Nordic countries. The Nordic countries share remarkable commonalities as being archetypal representatives of the social democratic welfare state (Arnesen et al., 2014; Blossing et al., Telhaug et al., 2006), and even so they have experienced radical versions of the liberal market economic models of education policy. Despite their common anchoring in a universal type of welfare state or maybe even due to this, we find that this could premise more radical approaches to neoliberal reforms and could cause new amalgams between welfare and competition state policies.
Thus, there are also important differences between the policies of the Nordic countries – degrees of privatisation, comprehensiveness (Dovemark et al., 2018), and/or distinctions between systems of general and vocational education (Nylund et al., 2018) – emanating from the local social, political, economic, and historical contexts. These differences are particularly pronounced in the way the systems of upper secondary education are structured and governed and therefore provide an argument for comparison. The differences add to the uneven consequences that apparently similar reforms have when enacted in different contexts (Ball, Maguire, & Braun, 2012; Rizvi & Lingard, 2010).
Especially since the 1990s, the societal and political preoccupation with freedom of choice has evolved immensely, with an increasing demand for knowledge about the ways school choices are made, where and for whom the freedom of choice applies, how students experience choice, and what freedom of school choice does to the structures of education. This has happened parallel to other moves linked with globalization of the economy that have profoundly changed the governance structures of education (Clarke, 2019; Lawn and Grek, 2012; Rizvi, 2022). In a Nordic context, this has involved transnational moves from focusing on values and benefits of the welfare state to market forces and individualism (Beach, 2010, 2018; Dahlstedt & Fejes, 2019; Krejsler, 2021; Rasmussen & Lingard, 2018). Such moves are seen to challenge the Nordic welfare states’ vision of ensuring access to education and provision of free education for all (Rasmussen & Dovemark, 2022).
On this background, we – like many other scholars before – consider the Nordic countries relevant cases for a critical study of market-oriented education political reforms. However, comparing is not a straightforward process but one that necessitates much consideration on parameters and levels to compare.
The paper proposal aims to follow up on existing comparisons on the phenomenon of school choice as understood, practiced, and experienced in the Nordic countries, where the free provision of education for all constitutes a welfare state pillar. It focuses specifically on exploring and comparing freedom of choice as central policy issue in the education systems of the Nordic region and addresses how education policies of freedom of choice appear and can be compared in the Nordic countries, how the policies influence and structure the ways students and parents ‘choose’ schools, and – in the light of freedom of choice policies – what happens to the welfare state visions of providing general and free access to education?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedIn the proposal the methodological challenge concerns the critical case study approach as a comparative tool. How can comparison be meaningfully done, when the studies that are to be compared are loosely structured and not easily comparable? According to Barlett and Vavrus (2017) there is a necessity to a conceptual shift in the social sciences, specifically in relation to culture, context, space, place, and comparison. They pose the questions; What is a case? and, What is a case study? where they, among other things, direct strong criticism to the idea of how to delimit the object of study, the case as a bounded system. Barlett and Vavrus critically review literature on case studies and argue for an approach called the Comparative Case Study approach (CCS). The CCS attends ‘simultaneously to macro, meso, and micro dimensions of case-based research. The approach engages two logics of comparison: first, the more common compare and contrast logic; and second, a “tracing across” sites or scales’ (p. 2) as individuals, groups, sites or states. They argue that comparative case studies need to consider two different logics of comparison. The first may identify specific units of analysis and then compare and contrast them. The second, processual logic seeks to trace across individuals, groups, sites, and time periods. With reference to Barlett and Vavrus we contend that boundaries are not found; they are made by social actors, including by researchers.
In our paper, we focus on the policies in Denmark and Sweden as critical case countries, where our focus is the methodology of comparing the policies – how can this be meaningfully done? We will use several examples from the two countries, including the comparison of different administrative units (municipalities, institutions, etc.) and will in this respect include ethnographic approaches as a central dimension.
Our aim can be summed up as comparing educational governance in Denmark and Sweden with a special focus on the phenomena of school choice, and with special regard to the very process of comparison. Our intention is to compare and contrast for which reason we must depart in the critical case study (Stake, 2008). It is the comparison itself (the method) that is in focus - i.e. the method comparing policies and its outfall across countries.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsSchool reforms in the Nordic countries widely adhere to the mentioned global education policies that prioritise accountability, standards, and individual choice. Freedom of choice has become a mantra that is largely unquestioned, although it involves massive complexities for both those having to choose and those governing education. Much is at stake for the students, institutions, and both regions and communities trying to ensure that education possibilities are as widely available as possible. When opening school choice for students, the schools must compete for applicants and in response to the challenge the schools do what they can to targeted students (Dovemark & Holm, 2017; Dovemark & Nylund, 2022). The reforms have decentralised the schools’ governance, as decisions regarding distributions of students and provision of education programmes have been widely delegated to local levels of government, the schools themselves, or private investors. However, schools are also subject to general objectives and legislation obliging them to strive to meet efficiency criteria including high quality and high completion rates, while ensuring the provision of varied and geographically available educational opportunities.
To understand the workings of transnational education policies intended to introduce market-oriented education (Krejsler, 2021), Nordic countries provide exemplary and critical cases. They retain some features of traditional universal welfare states and are often highlighted – including in their self-understanding – as model societies with high levels of happiness, social equality, and democratic commitment, together with low levels of corruption and free education and health care for all (e.g., OECD Better Life Index).
ReferencesAhonen, S. (2014). A school for all in Finland. In U. Blossing, G. Imsen, & L. Moos (Eds.), The Nordic education model. ‘A school for all’ encounters neo-liberal policy (pp. 77–93). Springer, Dordrecht.
Arnesen, A. L., Lahelma, E., Lundahl, L., & Öhrn, E. (2014). Unfolding the context and the contents: Critical perspectives on contemporary Nordic schooling. In A. L. Arnesen, E. Lahelma, L. Lundahl, & E. Öhrn (Eds.), Fair and competitive? Critical perspectives on contemporary Nordic schooling (pp. 1–19). Tufnell Press
Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., & Braun, A. (2012). How schools do policy. Policy enactments in secondary schools. Routledge.
Barlett, L. & Vavrus, F. (2017) Comparative Case Studies; An Innovative Approach, Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education, Vol. 1(1), 5-17
Beach, D. (2010). Socialisation and commercialisation in the restructuring of education and health professions in Europe: Questions of global class and gender. Current Sociology, 58(4), 551–569. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392110367998
Beach, D. (2018). Structural Injustices in Swedish Education: Academic Selection and Educational Inequalities. Palgrave Macmillan.
Blossing, U., Imsen, G. & Moos, L. (2014). Nordic Schools in a Time of Change. In Blossing, U., Imsen, G. & Moos, L. (eds. 2014). The Nordic education model: ‘A school for all’ Encounters Neo-liberal Policy. Springer, 1-14.
Brady, D., & Broski, A. (2015). Paradoxes of social policy: Welfare transfers, relative poverty, and redistribution preferences. American Sociological Review, 80(2), 268–298.
Dovemark, M. & Holm, A.-S. (2017a) Pedagogic identities for sale! Segregation and homogenization in Swedish upper secondary School. British Journal of Sociology of Education. Vol 38(4), 518-532, DOI. 10.1080/01425692.2015.1093405.
Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
Green, L. N. (2004) Forms of Comparision. In Deborah Cohen & Maura O’Conner (ed.) Comparision and History. Europe in cross-national perspective, 41-56, NY: Routledge.
Nylund, M., Rosvall, P.-Å., Eiríksdóttir, E., Holm, A.-S., Isopahkala-Bouret, U., Niemi A.-M. & Ragnarsdóttir, G (2018). The academic–vocational divide in three Nordic countries: implications for social class and gender, Education Inquiry, 9:1, 97-121, DOI: 10.1080/20004508.2018.1424490Rasmussen, A. & Dovemark, M. (2022, eds.). Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary Educationin the Nordic Countries. Springer.
Rizvi, F. & Lingard, B. (2010). Globalizing Education Policy. London and New York: Routledge.Telhaug, A.O., Mediås, O.A. & Aasen, P. (2006). The Nordic Model in Education: Education as part of the political system in the last 50 years. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, vol. 50, no. 3, 245-283.
19. Ethnography
Paper
A Tale of Two Worlds: Local and Finnish Teachers experiences of working in a Finnish International School in Asia
Sinead Matson, Maija Salokangas
Maynooth University, Ireland
Presenting Author: Matson, Sinead;
Salokangas, Maija
Finland’s PISA standings in the last decade have resulted much interest in its pedagogies and curriculum across the globe – not just amongst the education community, but also among economists, INGO’s, and corporate business. This interest has led to a rise in ‘borrowing’ what Finland does, i.e., ‘Finnish Education’ by other countries, in the hope to replicate their PISA success. Some of the countries importing the Finnish curriculum, are worlds away from day-to-day life in Finland, culturally, societally, and politically. Which leads one to question, what is it exactly that is being imported and expected to produce the same results; how is it being implemented; and to what cost?
For decades, the research community has consistently critiqued the borrowing of international policy as questionable policy tool (Rizvi & Lingard, 2009; Cheng, 1998) particularly in relation to borrowing from Finland (Simola, 2005; Salokangas & Kauko, 2015). The ‘businessification’ of education has been highlighted and critiqued (Viruru; 2005) and it is evident that the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) standardised test (PISA) has created the conditions for what Viruru calls an ‘imperialist project’ which may lend itself to a corporate driven agenda (2009). This critique is even more stark in a post-covid world where discourses of ‘catching up’ and ‘knowledge economies’ are dominating not only the educational policy space but also the political and economic arenas. This leads to the posing of important questions, such as the purpose(s) of education and its ability to (re)produce social inequalities and neoliberal values (Giroux, 1983; 2020). It also poses questions about ‘what works’ in the educational space, and for whom (Biesta, 2010)?
One example of ‘borrowing’ is the growth of Finnish international schools in the Majority world. The schools are privately own businesses who purchase the Finnish curriculum, import and localise it, employ a mix of Finnish and local teachers, and establish a fee-paying school. These schools have been established in various locations across the globe (e.g., Oman, Maldives, Qatar, Morocco, Vietnam, India, and Kazakhstan) and cater for middle class and elite children from early childhood to second level education. The study sets out to explore and compare stakeholder perceptions of how Finnish education travels to different national, cultural, social, and political contexts. The wider research study asks:
- What is the “Finnish education” that is being exported?
- How does “Finnish Education” as stakeholders understand it, travel to these varied national and local contexts?
- How are democracy and participation understood and practiced in these schools and how possible “collisions” of different approaches to the same are handled in the school community?
- Who is the clientele of these schools what implication their involvement has on the local community?
The wider project employs the use of case study approach, and this paper examines a phenomenon that was observed in a case site between local teachers and Finnish teachers. The study employs a postcolonial framework and draws on a multidisciplinary lens to examine the intended and unintended consequences of exporting a model of education from the Minority World to fee paying, private schools in the Majority World.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe study draws from an ethnographic research tradition through carrying out participant observation and use of multiple sources of data including reflective research diaries and photographic and visual methods. This paper discusses one of the initial findings. The study involved a ten-day fieldwork visit to the school and local communities, during which data was gathered through participant observation, ethnographic methods, and through formal interviews with teacher and school leaders. Both researchers were involved in data collection, analysis, and sense making, in order to capture the social and cultural complexities embedded in these schools. One of the research team spent time in each classroom during the visit and the other researcher spent the school week observing and taking part in the youngest class in the school. Formal interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. Research notes and transcripts were thematically analysed using an interpretive lens and MAXQDA software.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsDespite disparities in salary and training, local teachers seem to thrive in the working conditions of the school. They spoke of the autonomy they experience in their practice, and how their own private time is valued and protected by school leadership. They gave examples of how they can plan their lessons and prepare for class within their working day and were not expected to do unpaid extracurricular activities in the evenings or weekends and holidays. The local teachers were also observed to do a lot of invisible work, helping the Finnish teachers navigate the local customs, values, and ways of life. They spoke about this in more depth in interviews and seemed surprised that it had been noticed. They also discussed how they would help orientate new local teachers to navigate the Finnish teachers’ values, customs, and ways of being.
The same conditions were observed to be very different for the Finnish teachers, who reported feeling constrained in their teaching and not particularly true to their authentic teaching or selves. The docking of salaries, clocking in and out, and the requirement to stay in the school to plan led to the Finnish teachers feeling under surveillance, and not trusted as much as they were in Finland. They were observed by the researchers as being in a ‘hypervisible’ state (Settles, Buchanan & Dotson, (2019), both in the school and local community. The teachers reported feeling watched and listened to, ensuring they were paying close attention to strict local values and customs, particularly those religious in nature. They also mentioned their trips outside of the city as opportunities to be more relaxed and having to gear themselves up when going back to “reality”. ‘Reality’ seems to be a very different world to the Finnish teachers than the world the local teachers inhabit.
ReferencesBiesta, G. (2010). Why 'What Works' Still Won't Work: From Evidence-Based Education to Value-Based Education. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 29, 491-503.
Cheng, K.M., 1998. Can education values be borrowed? Looking into cultural differences. Peabody journal of education, 73(2), pp.11-30.
Giroux, Henry A. (1983). Theory and resistance in education: a pedagogy for the opposition. South Hadley, Mass : Bergin & Garvey.
Giroux, Henry A. (2020) On Critical Pedagogy. 2nd Edition. London: Bloomsbury.
Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2009). Globalizing education policy. Routledge.
Settles, I. H., Buchanan, N. T., & Dotson, K. (2019). Scrutinized but not recognized: (in)visibility and hypervisibility experiences of faculty of color. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 113, 62-74.
Simola, H. (2005). The Finnish miracle of PISA: Historical and sociological remarks on teaching and teacher education. Comparative education, 41(4), 455-470.
Salokangas, M. and Kauko, J. (2015). Borrowing Finnish PISA success? Critical reflections from the perspective of the lender. Educacao e Pesquisa, 41. pp. 1353-1364.
Viruru, R. (2005). The impact of postcolonial theory on early childhood education. Journal of Education 35 (1), 7-30
Viruru, R. (2009). CHAPTER 7: Postcolonial technologies of power: Standardized testing and representing diverse young children. Counterpoints (New York, N.Y.), 369, 100-118.
19. Ethnography
Paper
An Ethnographic Perspective of the Hidden Time Dimensions of the Curriculum. A Case Study of International Schools.
Joanna Leek1, Gabriela Dobinska2, Malgorzata Kosiorek3, Agata Marciniak4, Marcin Rojek5
1University of Lodz; 2University of Lodz; 3University of Lodz; 4University of Lodz; 5University of Lodz
Presenting Author: Leek, Joanna
Three-quarters of an hour can be one lesson hour. Five days define the week and constitute a weekly lesson schedule. Two semesters in combination with holidays define a school year. Time divisions are commonly known, are obvious, visible, and apparent in schools. They have a linear character with a clear beginning or end point, like a school year or a lesson hour. However, not everything is linear when it comes to school time. Challenges in relation to time arise when it is squeezed into other dimensions when time is hidden and non-apparent, and when we cannot define its beginning or its end. When we talk about a school lacking time for something, it is a self-contradictory expression as time is not a phenomenon that can be saved or multiplied. There is no point in focusing on searching for lost time, but it would be interesting to look closer at where time is hidden within the curriculum, how time affects its educational efficiency, and to determine precisely what the educational functions of time within the curriculum are. Drawing on the theory of school practices of Kemmis et al. (2014) and functionalists’ theories of school (Merton, 1969), the presentation will offer a conceptually rich analysis of the temporal organization of educational practices within the classroom.
In classical physics, there is a notion of time as an arrow of infinitesimal moments which flow in a constant stream. This means that time is conceived of as a uniform and linear series of ‘now-points’, a concept in which the past is ‘no-longer-now’, the future is the ‘not-yet-now’, and the present always flows from the past to the future. In this understanding, anything that happens begins and ends at some point in time. In some sense this corresponds to our understanding of ‘clock time’, which constantly moves in one direction – from the past to the future, always escaping the present. The linear perception of time is understood in the classic Aristotelian-cum-Kantian sense where time is the infinite a-priori ‘ruler’ that solidly grounds everything from physics to metaphysics (progression in education is linear). Rappleye and Komatsu (2016) contend that such an understanding of time posits perpetual progression and forward movement. Such an understanding of time within the school activities assumes the forward-moving concept of time. Under this assumption, progress in education is linear (Rappleye & Komatsu, 2016), and education is about gaining knowledge, skills or competencies that are predefined and fixed in time (i.e. school year) (Biesta, 2013). In this understanding, progress is often assessed through high-stakes tests, which restricts teaching and learning (Holt, 2002). This time regime where schools are “fast” derives from the Holt (2002) appeal of ‘slow schools’ which offer temporal space for discussions, analysis, scrutiny and resolution.
A curriculum in Tyler’s (1957) understanding is all the learning experiences planned and directed by the school to attain its educational goals. In our study, the curriculum as set of courses (subjects) that learning institutions offer in the form of subjects and lessons explicitly taught in the classroom (McLean & Dixit, 2018). The hidden curriculum is considered to be part of an unintended learning process created by a school culture and school environment that influences their growth and development i.e., the acquisition of experiences, knowledge, and skills (Berg et al., 2017; Giroux, Penna, 1979). Unintended learning processes may involve practices that happen in schools for which certain times are dedicated such as notetaking, sitting still or asking a question, which for this study are time-related practices. Bloom (1972), considers activities like school teaching about time, order, neatness, promptness, and docility to be unintentional lessons.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedTo identify educational functions related to time within the curriculum, 21 non-participant observations in 11 international schools in Poland were used. The classroom observations covered subjects including biology, maths, geography, economics and physics lessons. Each observation lasted between 45 and 90 minutes depending on the lesson duration in selected schools. Non-participant observation is when the observer observes the group passively from a distance without participating in the group’s activities. Neither does the observer try to influence them or take part in group activities (Mack et al., 2005).
In addition, semi-structured conversations sometimes also called post-observation interviews with teachers and students were conducted after each classroom observation, with an aim to provide “room for negotiation, discussion, and to give interviewees an opportunity to expand on their responses” (Mann, 2016, p. 91). Another aim of these semi-structured interviews was to understand the rationale for the lesson design and the selection of teaching activities and materials. With specific regard to the lesson, teachers were asked one general question: “How do you think the lesson went?” This encouraged them to reflect on their lessons.
For the study, we posted the following research questions:
1. What are the educational functions of time within the curriculum?
2. What are the hidden time dimensions of the curriculum?
3. How does time affect the educational efficiency of the curriculum?
Instrument: there was 2 instruments developed – one for observations and second for post-observation interviews. Both instruments were developed with an aim to search relations to time in classroom activities. To identify these activities we used Kemmis, et.al. (2014) theory of school practices that distinguished such practices as student learning, teaching, professional learning, leading and researching. Another useful theory adapted for our study and particular for instrument development, is the theory of the temporal organization of daily life of Southerton (2020). Temporal dimensions of school activities were searched under categories like periodicity, sequence, tempo, duration and synchronicity.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsFollowing study revealed that despite commonly held opinions about the slow pace of school life, time within classroom practices makes lessons a dynamic process. Our observations showed that multitasking is a form of temporal binding or chrononormativity (Freeman, 2010) where time is used to push forward individual decisions and actions toward maximum productivity that delimits flexibility and freedom against particular social norms of “maximum productivity”.
A distinctive feature of classroom practices implemented in the curriculum are rhythmic class-room practices, power of fixed schedules, time negotiations of teachers and students concerning how much time really matters to complete a task. Strategies that teachers and students undertook contained all the elements of school temporality, i.e. periodicity (work planning, lesson preparation, meeting the imposed schedule/work plan deadlines); sequence (linearity allowing the manoeuvring of one’s own resources to achieve the assumed goal within a given time-frame thanks to which students and teachers remain stable); the pace (which varies and depends on the waves of work); duration (the physicality of time, its instrumental character enables the maintenance of order and time management, e.g. bell, clock); synchronization (the latter learn time management, independence in learning and responsibility for a completed task).
Time provides orientation for learning and emotional well-being where repeated activities provide a certain emotional safety and stabilisation. The temporal organization of school practices determines the educational functions of the curriculum and their time inflexibility and non-linearity constitute a functional part of a hidden curriculum. Teachers and students reproduce a particular time hegemony, however, the power of time is not as strong as the norms of time being negotiated within curriculum practices. Teachers’ agency is perceived as an individual’s action that is conditioned by a variable mix of creativity, autonomy and reflexivity which opens up the potential for innovation and the unexpected.
ReferencesBerg, L. A., Jirikowic, T., Haerling, K., & MacDonald, G. (2017). Navigating the hidden curriculum of higher education for postsecondary students with intellectual disabilities. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 71(3), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2017.024703.
Giroux, H. A., & Penna, A. N. (1979). Social education in the classroom: The dynamics of the hidden curriculum. Theory & Research in Social Education, 7(1), 21-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.1979.10506048.
Kemmis, S., Wilkinson, J., Edwards-Groves, C., Hardy, I., Grootenboer, P. & Bristol, L. (2014). Changing education, changing practices. Singapore: Springer.
Mack, N., Woodsong, C., Macqueen, K. M., Guest, G. & Namey, E. (2005). Qualitative Research Methods: A Data Collector’s Field Guide. North Carolina, US: Family Health International.
Rappleye, J., & Komatsu, H. (2016). Living on borrowed time: Rethinking temporality, self, nihilism, and schooling. Comparative Education, 52(2), 177–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2016.1142736
Southerton, D. (2020). Time, consumption and the coordination of everyday life. Palgrave MacMillan.
Tyler, R. W. (1957). The curriculum-then and now. The Elementary School Journal, 57(7), 364–374. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1086/459567.
Vandenbroeck, M., & Peeters, J. (2008). Gender and professionalism: A critical analysis of overt and covert curricula. Early Child Development and Care, 178 (7-8), 703-715.
Wren, D. J. (1999). School culture: Exploring the hidden curriculum. Adolescence, 34(135), 593-596.
|
