Margareta Sandström Kjellin Mälardalen University, Sweden

1. Pupils’ and Teachers’ understanding of the Nature of Classroom Dialogue in Sweden Margareta Sandström Kjellin Mälardalen University, Sweden

2. Citizenship according to Eurydice (2005) 1. Political literacy 2. Attitudes and values 3. Active participation of pupils

3. A case study of the ’attitudes and values’ aspect • Sandström Kjellin & Stier (2007) report five national case studies of performance of the ’attitudes and values’ aspect • The classroom dialogue was horizontal only in Sweden • The Commission of the European communities suggest that future Europeans will need certain ’key competences’ One suggested competence is ’interpersonal, intercultural, social and civic competence’

4. The Swedish National curriculum Since 1994 each school is responsible for their own school’s development A set of ’fundamental values’ should be the basis for all work in schools The fundamental values include that pupils should be involved in making decisions of for example the character of the classroom dialogue

5. Two goals for the school Goals to be attained = to master basic skills of for example reading and writing Goals to strive towards =to master more ’sophisticated’ skills, based on the fundmental values. The purpose is to educate citizens who can particpate in a public debate on problems of modern society (= ’citizenship’/sustainable development)

6. Confusion about the goals The goals are being reconsidered: the fundamental values will still be emphasized; the National Curriculum will contain the overarching goals In the national syllabuses there will be only one type of goals; they will concern the subject knowledge

7. The new goals The expression ’to have attained the goals’ will not be used any more Instead, the goals will describe ’in what direction’ the instruction goes There will be only one kind of goals, but they will not be equivalent to the previous Goals to attain

8. To categorize values mediation Colnerud (2004) suggests that you distinguish between: Moral instruction (when teachers tell pupils what is right and what is wrong) Moral conversation (when teachers and pupils consider moral problems) Moral interaction (when the teacher genuinely listens to the pupils and shows confidence)

9. Aims of this paper • To report and discuss a study in which 15-year-old pupils at a Swedish multi-cultural school describe how values are mediated in the classroom in comparison to how their teachers describe this. Did the pupils, and the teachers, describe the classroom dialogue as • moral instruction • moral conversation and/or • moral interaction?

10. Theoretical inputs Bourdieu (1993): values are culture-specific Durkheim (1956): values are transmitted over generations in the socialisation and enculturation process Heath (1983): common social background favours teacher-pupil interaction Ogbu (1997): Belonging to the same ’speech community’ favours teacher-pupil

11. Methodological approach A case study performed at one specific school, a diverse secondary school in mid-Sweden Participants were all 42 teachers and 76 (=50% of the ) 15-year-old pupils 19 focus group dialogues were used to collect data (5 groups of teachers, and 14 groups of pupils)

12. Method … Teachers and pupils were not asked exactly the same questions, and they were not asked explicitly how the classroom dialogue was Colnerud’s distinction was used to categorize the retorts in the dialogues The participation in the dialogues was self-estimated

13. Results: participation in the dialogues 83% of the teachers and 84% of the pupils ’had absolutely/to some extent brought forward their views The pupils made comments like”This was fun/good/nice” etc Some of the teachers made comments like ”this was good/profitable” etc., and some made comments like ”this was a waste of time/not natural/felt forced” etc.

14. Result: Character of the classroom dialogue • All groups mentioned ’moral instruction’ • 80% of the teacher groups mentioned ’moral conversation’, and 50% of the pupil groups did so • 80% of the teacher groups mentioned ’moral interaction’ and 64% of the pupil groups did so

15. Results: moral education Moral instruction was mentioned to 54% by the pupils and to 14% by the teachers Moral conversation was mentioned equally by pupils and teachers (9%/8%) Moral interaction was mentioned to 37% by the pupils and to 78% by the teachers The pupils tried to interact with the focus group moderators

16. Categorization: moral instruction ”If you sort of step into the classroom with a box of sweets:’what have we said about the rules’?” (pupil) ”… make them understand that when someone is talking you should listen” (teacher)

17. Categorization: moral conversation ”There are certain countries in Asia where people don’t have the same rights as we have in Sweden. We talk about why it is like that there but not here. It is different societies” (pupil) ”It’s when they start asking ’why do you say this’? Then they will say ’in my country it is like this’ and then I will encourage them to talk and we will compare” (teacher)

18. Categorization: moral interaction [about teachers] ”Best friends – you can talk with many of the teachers about anything. They can talk to us also about almost anything” (pupil) ”When pupils have brought up a subject that they, that feels very important right then […] because then they will forget, I think, that you are a teacher and they see you more like an adult or just a partner in the conversation maybe” (teacher)

19. Discussion The participation was high for both groups; the pupils’ comments were more positive The pupils thought that ’moral instruction’ was delivered more than the teachers did The teachers thought that ’moral interaction’ occurred more than the pupils did The fact that the pupils tried to interact with the moderators is seen as a sign that they were used to being allowed to interact with adults

20. Continuation of the project … The teachers were trained to guide each other at solving problems The result was that the problems they presented were A. on general level (3) B. group level (6) C. on individual level (3)

21. A. For the problems on general level, advice were given about moral instruction and structural measures B. For the problems on group level, advice were given about moral instruction/conversation/interaction and also structural measures C. For the problems on individual level, advice were given about moral instruction and conversation and also about structural measures

22. Conclusions There was a trusting relationship between the pupils and the adults in this study; this is seen as a prerequisite for teenagers to take an interest in the adult world How can teachers combine this moral education with the changes planned as regards the focus on ’basic skills’? This is also seen as a sign that these pupils are encouraged to develop the key competence ’interpersonal, intercultural, social and civic competence’ How can teachers combine this moral education with the changes planned as regards the focus on ’basic skills’?