Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries: Access and Fairness (Educational Governance Research, 18) 3031080483, 9783031080487

Citation preview

Educational Governance Research 18

Annette Rasmussen Marianne Dovemark   Editors

Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries Access and Fairness

Educational Governance Research Volume 18

Series Editors Lejf Moos , Aarhus University, Copenhagen, NV, Denmark Stephen Carney , Roskilde University, Roskilde, Denmark Editorial Board Members Stephen J. Ball, Institute of Education, University of London, London, UK Neil Dempster, Institute for Educational Research, Griffith University,  Mt Gravatt, QLD, Australia Olof Johansson, Centre for Principal Development, Umeå University,  Umeå, Sweden Klaus Kasper Kofod, Department of Education, Aarhus University,  Copenhagen NV, Denmark John B. Krejsler , Danish School of Education (DPU), Aarhus University,  Copenhagen, Denmark Romuald Normand, Research Unit CNRS SAGE, University of Strasbourg,  Strasbourg, France Marcelo Parreira do Amaral, Institute of Education, Universität Münster,  Münster, Germany Jan Merok Paulsen, Teacher Education, Oslo Metropolitan University,  Oslo, Norway Nelli Piattoeva, Faculty of Education & Culture, Tampere University,  Tampere, Finland James P. Spillane, School of Education & Social Policy,  Northwestern University, Evanston, USA Gita Steiner-Khamsi, Teachers College, Columbia University,  New York, NY, USA Michael Uljens , Faculty of Education, Åbo Akademi University, Vaasa, Finland

This series presents recent insights in educational governance gained from research that focuses on the interplay between educational institutions and societies and markets. Education is not an isolated sector. Educational institutions at all levels are embedded in and connected to international, national and local societies and markets. One needs to understand governance relations and the changes that occur if one is to understand the frameworks, expectations, practice, room for manoeuvre, and the relations between professionals, public, policy makers and market place actors. The aim of this series is to address issues related to structures and discourses by which authority is exercised in an accessible manner. It will present findings on a variety of types of educational governance: public, political and administrative, as well as private, market place and self-governance. International and multidisciplinary in scope, the series will cover the subject area from both a worldwide and local perspective and will describe educational governance as it is practised in all parts of the world and in all sectors: state, market, and NGOs. The series: – – – –

Covers a broad range of topics and power domains Positions itself in a field between politics and management / leadership Provides a platform for the vivid field of educational governance research Looks into ways in which authority is transformed within chains of educational governance – Uncovers relations between state, private sector and market place influences on education, professionals and students. Indexing: This series is indexed in Scopus. Please contact Astrid Noordermeer at [email protected] if you wish to discuss a book proposal.

Annette Rasmussen  •  Marianne Dovemark Editors

Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries Access and Fairness

Editors Annette Rasmussen Department of Culture and Learning Aalborg University Aalborg, Denmark

Marianne Dovemark Department of Education and Special Education University of Gothenburg Gothenburg, Sweden

ISSN 2365-9548     ISSN 2365-9556 (electronic) Educational Governance Research ISBN 978-3-031-08048-7    ISBN 978-3-031-08049-4 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08049-4 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Foreword

Globalisation and Changing National Policy Enactments in Upper Secondary Schools in the Nordic Nations and their Impact on Social Justice Annette Rasmussen and Marianne Dovemark’s edited book, Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries: Access and Fairness, makes an important contribution to policy sociology in education and also to comparative education policy studies. Broadly, the chapters and the overarching introductory chapter document and analyse the substantial impact from the 1990s, of what they call market-oriented, transnational education policies, on the schooling systems, particularly upper secondary provision, of the five Nordic nations, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Iceland and Denmark. This focus on upper secondary schooling is an original contribution in itself with much policy research simply dealing with, in an undifferentiated way, schooling systems per se. Comparison can be made by readers of the volume between these documented and analysed reforms in upper secondary schooling in the five Nordic nations and commensurate reforms elsewhere. Additionally, several chapters also provide cross-national Nordic comparisons of upper secondary reforms, while comparisons between cities are also provided, for example, upper secondary provision in Reykjavik and Helsinki. Rasmussen and Dovemark, in their informative summative conclusion to the book, provide a comparative analysis across the chapters in the volume and across the ways neoliberal market reforms have built on earlier social democratic welfare state structures, commitments and provisions in the current structure and provision of upper secondary schooling in the five Nordic nations. The concepts of access, governance, choice and segregation are most effectively used to understand and describe the impact of the global upon these Nordic systems of upper secondary schooling. The new mode of educational governance, the focus of this collected volume, emphasises school choice, devolution of budgets and much decision-making to schools, and the use of test-based accountability and other outcome measures to steer schools at a distance from a post-bureaucratic state structure and to enable a quasi-market in education. The chapters adumbrate how this move from government to governance has affected questions of educational access, equality, opportunity structures and fairness in upper secondary schooling in variable v

vi

Foreword

ways across the Nordic nations. The international comparative evidence is clear that this set of policies based on neoliberal politics has exacerbated inequalities, reduced opportunities, and strengthened the correlation between students’ social class or socio-economic back grounds and school performance in nations around the globe (Chmielewski, 2019). More broadly, the evidence suggests that inequality has grown in nations across this period of neoliberal policy hegemony (Piketty, 2013), and we know that such growing inequality has equity effects in schooling systems. The book is important for a number of reasons. Up until the period after the Cold War, the perception of the Nordic nations was of very successful nations with a specific welfare state model, a social democratic one, as described by the Danish sociologist Esping-Andersen (1990) in his capitalist welfare state typology, with high taxation but inclusive provisions for all with much trust between citizens. This social democratic model of the welfare state was seen to create happy, comparatively socially equal, and highly democratic societies. This was a big government model of high taxation and an all-encompassing welfare state. Comprehensive ‘schooling for all’ was seen to be the complementary structure of schooling to the social democratic welfare state, linked to social equality, democracy, and social inclusion and cohesion purposes. Many in the rest of the world regarded this model as perhaps the ideal way of managing the tensions inherent in capitalism between capital and labour, and as sitting between the state authoritarianism of the Soviet model with the state managing/ controlling markets and free market capitalism of the USA. For the Cold War period, Ydesen (2022, p. 130) describes this type of welfare state as ‘an intermediate station between communism and capitalism’. The Nordic social democratic welfare state model saw a particular kind of state intervention in the market as necessary to ensuring a decent life for all citizens and the provision of comprehensive schooling for all as also central here. Yet, as this volume demonstrates very clearly that model and the notion of a Nordic social democratic welfare state model and Nordic model of schooling have been seriously challenged by the impact of a particular set of globally circulating policy ideas after the collapse of the communist world, the end of the Cold War and apparent victory of market capitalism, evidenced in the period from the early 1990s in the emergence of a global economy, the dominance of market ideas, a self-­ responsibilising individualism and choice discourses. In that political context, education policy became a central element of national economic policy, deemed central to the production of the necessary quantity and quality of human capital thought essential to the creation of an economy that was globally competitive. In their chapter, Lolle and Rasmussen also suggest insightfully that educational systems have been restructured to cater for the same logics as those underpinning national market economies. Across the globe, nations moved their governing apparatuses from bureaucratic structures to what has been called governance with much more involvement of the private sector and networks in the work of the state, ushering in a new mode of statecraft. The bureaucratic structure was reframed by New Public Management, which saw a thinned-out state, flatter structures, devolution of tasks to sites of

Foreword

vii

practice and enactment and accountability framed around centrally constructed audits and outcome measures. The neoliberal and New Public Management, different but complementary developments, the former about ‘freeing’ the market, the latter about reducing bureaucratic rigidity, emphasised individuals being responsible for their own well-being and also self-capitalising, investing in themselves as human capital, eliding welfare state care for all. This book insightfully illustrates the impact of that set of ideas on upper secondary schooling in the five Nordic nations and at the same time clearly demonstrates how that impact builds on the idiosyncratic features of the social democratic welfare state in each of the five Nordic nations. This volume is important because it shows how these transnational mobile ideas have affected the state, upper secondary schooling and the role of citizens in these Nordic nation states. But what is important in the analyses provided is that it is the specificities, the path dependencies of how the impact of these ideas have played out, taken form and manifested differently in the five Nordic nations, which are the focus of the book. These path dependencies are linked to national histories, cultures, politics and also the political persuasions of different governing parties in each of the nations at different times. This volume and the analyses of each of the chapters go well beyond glib references to the neoliberal and to new public management as bowdlerised ‘explain-alls’, but rather show how these play out in very specific and mediated ways in each of the five Nordic nations. The analyses proffered would thus suggest it is now more difficult to speak of a Nordic model of welfare states or of schooling and indeed the accounts provided show that there are now substantial differences between the five Nordic schooling systems, including in upper secondary schooling. For example, the neoliberal has probably had more impact in Sweden than in the other Nordic nations; Sweden has also seen more private sector involvement in schooling, with their so-called ‘free schools’ offering a model for the Academies in England. In the conclusion to the book, Rasmussen and Dovemark point out that Sweden is the only one of the five Nordic nations that allows for private sector for-profit provision of upper secondary schooling. As Jorgensen argues in his chapter, the neoliberal in Sweden has witnessed a shift from highly centralised governance of schooling to decentralisation and market-oriented governance, while recent political changes have seen some attempts at recentralisation. Illustrative of the marketisation and privatisation of schooling in Sweden, Dovemark and Nylund also provide an illuminating case study of the largest private provider of education in Sweden (AcadeMedia Ltd) and the symbiotic move from strong and centralised state regulation to a marketised and differentiated system. These granular, empirically based, but elegantly theorised (for example, most productive use is made of Bourdieu’s ‘thinking tools’ in a couple of chapters, including the concept of ‘institutional habitus’ derived from Bourdieu’s theorising) analyses of upper secondary schooling in the five Nordic nations are an important contribution, proffering accounts of the vernacular touching down in the Nordic nations of globally mobile political and policy ideas. They illustrate well the significance of path dependencies, but also the substantial policy changes that have been instantiated.

viii

Foreword

The arguments proffered are important for they demonstrate quite clearly that while the transnational ideas that circulate globally might be homogenising in a discursive sense that they always play out in very nuanced and different ways in these five different national contexts. We see substantial empirical evidence that their effects are not homogenising. Additionally, the analyses demonstrate how the nation remains important in terms of policymaking in education despite the impact of the global. There was a way in which much policy sociology, following the end of the Cold War and the increasing significance of International Large-Scale Assessments and rapidly circulating global policy ideas, that the nation and its education policymaking was seen to be affected by these exogenous global factors, global factors affecting national systems of schooling in a top-down and sometimes in topological ways. Think of the increased policy significance say of the OECD in respect of member nations and indeed of non-member nations who also participate in PISA. Think of the significance of the UN and UNESCO in relation to developing nations with the SDGs. Think of the impact of the European education policy space functioning through commensurate standards and indicators (Lawn and Grek, 2012). So, what we saw was what Clarke (2019) has called a ‘methodological globalism’ that replaced and rightly ‘methodological nationalism’ in social science research, and in research in policy studies and specifically in education policy studies. This was a methodological response to the acknowledgment of the significance of the global in national education policy production, recognition that the national and the global were no longer hermetically sealed off from each other. In terms of researching education policy and globalisation, Larsen and Beech (2014, p.  197) argued that ‘much globalisation research has focused on how the national has mediated the global. In either case, the emphasis is on the global and the national (or local) with the latter conceptualised implicitly as a ‘place’ influenced by outside forces’ (2014, p. 197). This is the focus of the volume; how globally mobile ideas have affected upper secondary schooling; ideas flowing from international organisations such as the OECD and the effects of supranational organisations such as the EU. However, we also need to go beyond this one-way, top-down impact of the global on the national, also on the local, and think about how the national also affects and helps constitute the global. Larsen and Beech are surely correct when they suggest that we need to move beyond these binaries, place/ space, local/global, national/international to understand and deal with the multiple geographies and cartographies of power and policy within which national education systems and policies are today located. This volume rightly reminds us that the national remains ever so important in respect of education policymaking (as does the local in terms of policy enactment), yet the global has had effects and works its way into the national in mediated and nuanced ways, as each chapter demonstrates. Across the more recent past we have seen the reassertion of nations and the emergence of strengthened nationalism in many nations. Brexit and the Trump Presidency and America First are good cases in point, but there are now manifestations of a form of xenophobic nationalism in all nations, including in the Nordic ones. Much

Foreword

ix

of this strengthened nationalism has been an ethnonationalism, a surreptitious form of racism, attempting to reassert an isomorphism between a particular(dominant) ethnicity and specific national territory. This situation has also been a response to the flows of refugees and migrants (ethnoscapes) and the greater diversity of national populations. A right-wing populism has rearticulated left criticisms of globalisation, while leaving the neoliberal impacts largely intact (Rizvi, 2022). It is interesting to speculate how this reassertion of national ethnos in the face of globalisation and the seeming loss of some economic sovereignty (Appadurai, 2006) has played out in the five Nordic nations and with what effects in schooling. Furthermore, it is correct to say that the nation state remained important even during the high period of globalisation following the end of the Cold War, as illustrated in this book, but just worked in different ways. We are at a point now in policy sociology in education where we need to move beyond methodological globalism and methodological nationalism in our policy research work. We need to understand the complex, multi-directional, top-down, bottom-up relationships and imbrications between the global, regional, national and local in both policy production and enactment. In Fast Policy, Peck and Theodore (2015) take as their focus the tensions between motion and fixity in contemporary policies (policy models and policy ideas) that flow across the globe. While the speed and the velocity of policy movements across the globe, across regions, is of interest to them, they still stress that ‘the achievement of policy outcomes remains a stubbornly localized, context-specific process’ (2015, p. xvi). Context matters in policy production and enactment, as this volume clearly shows. The chapters in this book also provide an empirical base for rethinking our methodologies in policy sociology in education in their accounts of the specific playing out of global discourses in specific national contexts. While we need to understand how the OECD and the EU and their policy regimes have affected the Nordic nations, we also need to interrogate how the schooling policies of the Nordic nations have in turn affected global agendas and also policies in other nations. On the latter, Ydesen (2022), for example, has shown the impact of ‘extrapolated nationalisms’ on the education agendas of the OECD during an earlier time, including those of the Scandinavian nations of Norway, Sweden and Denmark. Furthermore, the chapters in this book surely confirm that globalisation is taking place inside nations. This is an important contribution. Upper secondary schooling is important in terms of the sorting and selecting function of schooling as most students in the Nordic nations stay on to the end of secondary schooling (for example, schooling is mandatory until 18 in Iceland and in Finland; there is a right to 13 years of schooling in Norway). Upper secondary is either the route to university or to the labour market. Stefan Lund considers the changing balance between general and vocational curricula in upper secondary schooling in Sweden; specifically changes brought about by the1990 reform and then the 2011 reforms. The former stressed core subjects/knowledges for all in the upper secondary level; the latter in contrast saw a weakening of the critical citizenship discourses in general education and a weakening of a general education in the vocational strand with citizenship reduced to employability. The divide Lund avers

x

Foreword

is about constituting boundaries between those with different labour market and broader futures and framed by the neoliberal. Christian Jorgensen provides a comparative analysis of changes in the relationships between general and vocational education in upper secondary schooling in Sweden and Denmark. His observation that more unified upper secondary provision (Swedish reforms from 2011) reduces the impact of students’ socio-economic background, but increases social exclusion for the disadvantaged, while dual general/vocational provision reinforces socio-­ economic background effects and results in more inclusion of disadvantaged young people in upper secondary, is most salutary. He also notes how changes in the structure of upper secondary, along with neoliberal market reforms, have exacerbated the correlations between student background, curricula choice and achievement, confirming a lot of other research conducted elsewhere (cf Chmielewski, 2019). Anne Homme, Helene Eide and Kristin Hope consider the impact in two Norwegian municipalities (East County and North County) of the 2022 decision taken by the national government in Norway to mandate free school choice enrolments in upper secondary schooling across the eleven municipalities of Norway. They show how strengthening national regulatory capacity in this way weakened regional governing capacity with potentially very real equity effects. East County opposed this new mandatory approach because they argued, and research would support their arguments here, that this would increase school segregation according to students’ (socio-economic) backgrounds, ethnicity and lower secondary school grades (a surrogate measure of student backgrounds), with negative impact on matters of equity and fairness. North County, a sparsely populated municipality of geographical spread would see the need for new provision and some students having to be schooled away from home with potential impact on retention. In my view, we see here the ideological overriding equity concerns, the political overriding research evidence. This confirms the view that politics is often more important than evidence in policymaking in education; education policy is always an admixture of evidence, politics/ideology and professional knowledges. Berglind Magnusdottir and Sonja Kosunen offer a comparative analysis of upper secondary schooling in Reykjavik and Helsinki, Nordic cities, which are increasingly multicultural, class divergent and segregated, and market oriented in character. Their concern is with the social justice implications of the replacement of one school for all with responsibility now placed on individuals as consumers of upper secondary schooling. In their analysis they effectively utilised Bourdieu to demonstrate how even in these less stratified schooling systems and in less segregated societies reproduction still occurs, but functions in different ways in the two cities, with intergenerational social capital shown to be more significant in Reykjavik in terms of selection of upper secondary schooling and of university, where there is in Martin Trow’s terms, ‘universal provision’ of HE, than in Helsinki, where such social capital came to play in choice of specific university. These first four chapters in the book deal with access and governance issues, while the next section focuses on issues of segregation and fairness. In the first chapter of the second section, Marianne Dovemark and Mattias Nylund provide a brilliant account of how market and for-profit logics constitute meanings around

Foreword

xi

choice in upper secondary schooling in Sweden provided by the largest private education provider in Europe, AcadeMedia Ltd, in their cases of an academic school and a vocationally oriented one. They demonstrate in their close analysis that freedom of choice works in effect to reproduce the social division of labour, strengthening general and vocational education divides, and broadening choice divides between cities and rural areas. Like other research, they show that it is as much schools choosing students as students choosing schools, and of course for-profit run schools seek to attract ‘least resource-intensive students’. There are real social justice implications here. Anne Nevoy and Marieke Bruin outline the move from a social democratic commitment to school for all to differentiation (academic/vocational) at upper secondary level in Norway, set against the move from collective politics to individualistic, market driven ones. Specifically, they seek to explore how alternative programmes for those with special education needs in upper secondary provision relate to issues of social justice. Their findings are disappointing in terms of such considerations, suggesting these students, largely from disadvantaged backgrounds, are slotted into an educational impasse and are prepared for a life of employment precarity. Choice and competition in the governance of the Danish Gymnasium are the focus of the chapter by Elisabeth Lolle and Annette Rasmussen. They compare and contrast the impact of choice and competition on three such schools, named Cathedral, Modern Urban and Regional. They demonstrate different attitudes to autonomy and choice according to the location and functioning of choice in respect of schools being over-subscribed or under-subscribed. Their analysis goes on to show that ‘freedom of choice’ is anathema to democracy, because so-called ‘free choice’ is not available to all students because of different locations and resources. They also see here an inequitable threat to general access to upper secondary schooling. The concept, derived from Bourdieu, of ‘institutional habitus’ is innovatively used by Linda Maria Laaksonen and Anna-Maija Niemi to demonstrate how educational choice in differentiated upper secondary schooling in Helsinki works and functions in relation to social reproduction. Drawing on several ethnographic studies, they demonstrate alignment between socially stratified student enrolments and schools with different institutional habitus functioning in ways that have inequitable effects. There are also evident differences within schools, as students position themselves in varying ways in relation to the distinctive institutional habitus of a given school, with social justice implications. We see here the impact of schools, through the concept of institutional habitus, upon the production of inequality. Elsa Eiriksdottir, Kristjana Stella Blondal and Gudrun Ragnarsdottir document how selection works in thirteen upper secondary schools in Reykjavik, Iceland. They demonstrate that the academically focused grammar school and the academically focused comprehensive school are in great demand by students and over-­ subscribed by high performing students from well-off backgrounds. They argue thus that it is only such high performing academic students who actually have choice of school. We also know that academic success is a close proxy for social class background. They demonstrate a strong hierarchy across the thirteen schools

xii

Foreword

and the reinforcement of school segregation in terms of students’ class backgrounds and thus a tension between the commitment to social justice for all and the universal right to upper secondary schooling and the inequitable way the governance and practices of school choice actually work. This volume makes a significant contribution to policy sociology in education and to comparative education policy studies with Rasmussen and Dovemark’s concluding summative chapter being important in that latter respect. In its focus on issues of changing governance, provision and equity in upper secondary schooling in the five Nordic nations, it provides detailed, granular, empirically based and theoretically informed analyses of the changing mechanisms of the production and reproduction of inequality in what historically have been comparatively equal and socially just societies with less stratified schooling systems than in most other societies. The goal of the neoliberal reforms documented throughout, which was predicated on the assumption that competition and choice, in effect a market in schooling, would improve learning outcomes for all, is strongly challenged by the accounts provided in this book, which unequivocally demonstrate the impact of growing inequality and increased class-based segregation in society and in school provision, with negative effects on matters of social justice. This appears to be the case even if upper secondary provision is more comprehensive or divided along general/vocational lines. Given this inequitable reality has occurred and developed on the base of social democratic welfare states, the lessons of this excellent book are most salutary for all who want to see more equal and cohesive societies that respect and work with difference and which constructively seek to limit restrictions on opportunities and life chances being determined by an individual’s background and identity (socio-­ economic, gender, ethnic, etc). I recommend this book to all sociologists of education, to all policy sociology in education researchers and scholars, and to all those interested in comparative education. Professorial Fellow, Institute for Learning Sciences and Teacher Education Australian Catholic University, Brisbane, Australia

Bob Lingard

Emeritus Professor, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia

References Appadurai, A. (2006). Fear of small numbers: An essay on the geography of anger. Duke University Press. Chmielewski, A. K. (2019). The global increase in the socioeconomic achievement gap, 1964 to 2015. American Sociological Review, 84(3), 517–544. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122419847165.

Foreword

xiii

Clarke, J. (2019). Foreword. In N. Papanastasiou, The politics of scale in policy: Scalecraft and education governance (pp. v–xii). Policy Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvh9w1zj. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Princeton University Press. Larsen, M. A., & Beech, J. (2014). Spatial theorizing in comparative and international education research. Comparative Education Review, 58(2), 191–214. https://doi.org/10.1086/675499. Lawn, M., & Grek, S. (2012). Europeanizing education: Governing a new policy space. Oxford: Symposium Books. Peck, J., & Theodore, N. (2015). Fast policy: Experimental statecraft at the thresholds of neoliberalism. University of Minnesota Press. Piketty, T. (2013). Capital in the twenty-first century. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Rizvi, F. (2022). Education and the politics of anti-globalization. In F.  Rizvi, B.  Lingard, & R. Rinne (Eds.). Reimaging globalization and education (214–227). Routledge. Ydesen, C. (2022). Extrapolated imperial nationalisms in global education policy formulation: An historical inquiry into American and Scandinavian agendas in OECD policy. In D. Tröhler, N. Piattoeva, & W. Pinar (Eds.). World yearbook of education 2022: Education, schooling and the global universalization of nationalism (pp. 119–135). Routledge.

Acknowledgements

This book is the result of an online collaboration during the COVID-19 pandemic from 2019 to 2022. Work on the book was initiated as a symposium proposal for the European Conference on Educational Research in 2020, which was planned to take place in Glasgow. However, due to the COVID-19 lockdowns in Europe, this conference was cancelled. Meanwhile, we continued with the call for abstracts to carry on with the project of a Nordic volume and comparison of choice and governance in upper secondary education, and we succeeded in attracting contributors from the five countries in the Nordic region so that all the Nordic countries are represented twice in this book. We also opted once more for organising an ECER symposium with contributions from four countries (Norway, Sweden, Iceland, and Denmark) on the theme of the book. The symposium took place as an online event in September 2021. The contributions at the symposium are also central contributions in the book. The topic of the book is of great importance to the educational systems and young people’s access to education in the Nordic countries. The main questions of governance and choice concern the structure, regulation, and segregation within upper secondary education and how such processes are developing in relation to ensuring educational access and fairness for young people regardless of their origin and social background. The chapters of the book build on research carried out in collaboration with local educational contexts in the respective countries. These research projects have relied on close collaboration with schools and local actors at all levels, without whom the research would not have been possible. We are grateful to all the collaboration partners for their openness to invite researchers into the lives of schools, leaders, teachers, and students and for sharing their experiences with us and answering our questions. The chapters thus represent novel research findings that result from analyses that have not hitherto been published. The editors have enjoyed support from their respective departments at the universities of Aalborg and Gothenburg for time and resources to work on the book project. In particular, the Department of Culture and Learning at Aalborg University has

xv

xvi

Acknowledgements

contributed by funding a writing retreat in Skagen, Denmark, which allowed us to concentrate fully on doing the editorial work. We want to thank all the contributors for their willingness to publish their research as part of this book and for their productive collaboration during the writing process. As mentioned, the collaboration between the Nordic contributors has primarily been an online event. We wish to express our thanks to Emeritus Professor Bob Lingard, University of Queensland, for his valuable comments when acting as discussant at the ECER symposium 2021. Last but not least, we are very grateful for his contribution in the form of a foreword to this book. Viborg, Denmark

Annette Rasmussen

Varberg, Sweden March 2022

Marianne Dovemark

Contents

1

 Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries: Governance and Choice��������������������������������������������������������������������������    1 Marianne Dovemark and Annette Rasmussen

Part I Access and Governance 2

 Governing Students’ Access to Knowledge: A Critical Discourse Analysis of General Subjects in the Swedish Upper Secondary School Reforms Between 1990 and 2011����������������������������������������������������������������������������   21 Stefan Lund

3

 Social Inclusion and Equality in Access: Comparing Vocational Education in Sweden and Denmark ��������������   39 Christian Helms Jørgensen

4

 Governing School Choice in Norway: Why Local Educational Government Capacity Matters����������������������   57 Anne Homme, Helene Marie Kjærgård Eide, and Kristin Lofthus Hope

5

 Upper-Secondary School Choices in Reykjavík and Helsinki: The Selected Few in the Urban North����������������������������������������������������   77 Berglind Rós Magnúsdóttir and Sonja Kosunen

Part II Segregation and Fairness 6

 The Janus Face of ‘Freedom of Choice’ in Upper Secondary School Markets����������������������������������������������������������������������   99 Marianne Dovemark and Mattias Nylund

7

 Revisiting Just Education for Students Last in Line – A Norwegian Perspective��������������������������������������������������������  115 Anne Nevøy and Marieke Bruin xvii

xviii

Contents

8

 Choice and Competition in the Governance of the Danish Gymnasium School����������������������������������������������������������  135 Elisabeth Lauridsen Lolle and Annette Rasmussen

9

 Is Not All About Studying”. General Upper “It Secondary Schools’ Institutional Habitus Shaping Students’ Educational Choice Making��������������������������������������������������  155 Linda Maria Laaksonen and Anna-Maija Niemi

10 Selection  for Whom? Upper Secondary School Choice in the Light of Social Justice ������������������������������������������������������������������  175 Elsa Eiríksdóttir, Kristjana Stella Blöndal, and Guðrún Ragnarsdóttir 11 Comparing  Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary School in the Nordic Countries��������������������������������������������������������������  199 Annette Rasmussen and Marianne Dovemark

Contributors

Kristjana  Stella  Blöndal  School of Social Sciences, University of Iceland, Reykjavík, Iceland Marieke  Bruin  Department of Education and Sports Science, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway Marianne Dovemark  Department of Education and Special Education, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden Helene  Marie  Kjærgård  Eide  Department of Education, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway Elsa Eiríksdóttir  School of Education, University of Iceland, Reykjavík, Iceland Anne Homme  Department of Education, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway NORCE Norwegian Research Centre, Bergen, Norway Kristin Lofthus Hope  Department of Business Administration, Western Norway University College, Bergen, Norway Christian  Helms  Jørgensen  Department of People and Technology, Roskilde University, Roskilde, Denmark Sonja Kosunen  University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Linda  Maria  Laaksonen  Department of Education, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Elisabeth  Lauridsen  Lolle  Department of Culture and Learning, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark Stefan  Lund  Department Stockholm, Sweden

of

Education,

University

of

Stockholm,

Berglind Rós Magnúsdóttir  University of Iceland, Reykjavík, Iceland

xix

xx

Contributors

Anne Nevøy  Department of Education and Sports Science, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway Anna-Maija Niemi  Department of Education, University of Turku, Turku, Finland Mattias  Nylund  Department of Education and Special Education, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden Guðrún  Ragnarsdóttir  School Reykjavík, Iceland

of

Education,

University

of

Iceland,

Annette  Rasmussen  Department of Culture and Learning, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark

Chapter 1

Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries: Governance and Choice Marianne Dovemark

and Annette Rasmussen

Abstract  Education policies globally have seen shifts from ‘state control’ or ‘big government’ of the welfare state towards ‘governance’ and ‘efficient free markets’, where citizens become clients of the state and consumers of education. Reforms of upper secondary school in the Nordic countries widely adhere to such policies which have decentralised the governance of the schools. However, schools are also subject to general objectives and legislation. The changes lay the foundation for a new welfare model where the boundaries between the public and private sectors are blurred. As a vehicle for understanding the workings of education policies aiming to introduce market-oriented education, the Nordic countries serve in this volume as exemplary cases. They retain some features of the traditional universal welfare states and are often highlighted as model societies with high levels of happiness, social equality and democratic commitment as low levels of corruption, free education and health care for all. The key concern is to investigate and compare how the complex relationship between universal welfare policies emphasising educational access and market policies emphasising choice is handled in different local upper secondary education practices in the five Nordic countries. Keywords  Market-oriented policy · Governance · Choice · Access · Comparative studies

M. Dovemark (*) Department of Education and Special Education, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden e-mail: [email protected] A. Rasmussen Department of Culture and Learning, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 A. Rasmussen, M. Dovemark (eds.), Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries, Educational Governance Research 18, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08049-4_1

1

2

M. Dovemark and A. Rasmussen

Introduction Education policies in all parts of the world have become increasingly linked with globalisation of the economy, especially in the second period of globalisation, which has been under way since the 1970s and entails economic liberalisation and unprecedented redistribution of wealth from the poor to the rich (Piketty, 2017, p.  37). In associated trends, global education policies and governance have been increasingly shaped by flows of quantitative data from both national agencies and transnational organisations, such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and European Commission (Lawn, 2013). These policies have also entailed shifts from ‘state control’ or ‘big government’ of the welfare state towards ‘governance’ and ‘efficient free markets’, through which citizens become clients of the state and consumers of education (Forsey et al., 2008). Such policy changes have played major roles in the transformation and modernisation of social welfare and education systems. Following the globalisation, marketisation, New Public Management and an emphasis on individualism and individual responsibility have profoundly changed the relationship between states and their citizens. This has even occurred in the Nordic countries, traditionally regarded as archetypical social democratic welfare states (Arnesen, Lahelma, Lundahl & Öhrn, 2014). The social democratic education policies of the Nordic countries involved that schools should be inclusive, comprehensive with no streaming and with easy passages between the levels. A core concept in this vision of social democracy was to work for equality in practice by providing resources to those in need of the most help and support (Blossing et al., 2014). Since the mid-1980s, neoliberal thinking, policies and governance modes (including New Public Management arrangements and social technologies) have been introduced into all the Nordic countries’ education systems (Dovemark et al., 2018). The transition to neoliberal policies and new modes of governance is associated with less state and more market, involving the promotion of competition, economic efficiency and choice as instruments to deregulate and privatise state functions (Rizvi & Lingard, 2010). In education, it has involved transnational moves from focusing on values and benefits of the welfare state to market forces and individualism (Beach, 2010; Dahlstedt & Fejes, 2019; Krejsler, 2021; Rasmussen & Lingard, 2018). However, their modes of neoliberal governance have developed in different ways and with varying consequences for school types. Among other things, they have included the establishment of more and new types of institutions (including numerous small and private ones) and programmes that aim to maximise the national economic benefit of the systems that allocate resources to the most able students, but also mergers resulting in fewer and larger institutions (Rasmussen & Ydesen, 2019; Rasmussen & Lolle, 2021). Thus, upper secondary school reforms in the Nordic countries widely adhere to the mentioned global education policies that prioritise accountability, standards and

1  Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries: Governance and Choice

3

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 target students (Dovemark & Holm, 2017). 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 (Qvortrup, 2020). To understand the workings of transnational education policies intended to introduce market-oriented education (Krejsler, 2021), Nordic countries provide exemplary 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). Widely recognised characteristics of Nordic welfare states have included high degrees of trust among the inhabitants in both their institutions and each other as citizens. A major feature of the Nordic welfare model was public funding of welfare services, such as health care and education via public operating monopolies, in which expansion of the public sector was seen as a kind of democratic process. This welfare model was based on creation of high-quality welfare services that people from different classes wanted to use and support, which were fundamental requirements for justification of a correspondingly high taxation level. The notion that the Nordic model was exemplary is also strongly supported by welfare state typologies that defined the Nordic countries as having social-­ democratic types of regimes, characterised by principles of universalism and non-­ commodification of social rights (Esping-Andersen, 1990). However, the Nordic welfare states have some highly contrasting features that must be considered when addressing how global policies have induced transformations in national contexts that have hitherto prioritised universal access to education as a general good (Dovemark et al., 2018). The Nordic welfare states’ responses to the reformation pressures in education policies have varied so much that the validity of referring to a ‘Nordic model of education’ is now highly dubious (Lundahl, 2016). However, there are still common traits that constitute a general framework for understanding education’s role in the universal welfare state.

4

M. Dovemark and A. Rasmussen

Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Welfare States Throughout the twentieth century, education played crucial roles in the Nordic welfare states’ development and transformation. The extension of education at upper secondary level was part of the manifestation of democratic values in visions of ‘a school for all’ that developed and formed part of a unifying Nordic culture (Blossing et al., 2014). Upper secondary school can now also be considered an extension of general education, at least in Sweden, Norway and Iceland, where almost all young people of a cohort start some kind of upper secondary education. Participation in upper secondary education generally widened in all Nordic countries (Nevøy et al., 2014), and in Sweden it is now considered part of a mass education system (Wahlström, 2018). It has been a persistent political vision to keep the students together in an untracked system and postpone an ‘irreversible choice’ between a general academic and a vocational track for as long as possible (Gesser, 1976). However, despite similarities in the way the countries developed their school systems to support the welfare political agenda of furthering education for all, and ensure equality of opportunities, the overall structure of their upper secondary school systems differs. There is now a spectrum from an integrated model, combining vocational and academic tracks in single institutions in Sweden to complete institutional separation of these tracks in Denmark. Such differences are linked, among other factors, to different practices of demos and nation-building histories (Raae, 2011). The variations associated with the introduction of neoliberal education policies in the Nordic countries have been compared in several studies. However, they have mainly focused on compulsory school (Blossing et al., 2014; Telhaug et al., 2006) or upper secondary school (Nylund et al., 2018) regimes in two or three countries. This has left knowledge and research gaps on variations in the consequences of neoliberal governance reforms and discourses of free choice for student access to upper secondary school across the five Nordic countries. In this volume, we address these gaps by analysing and comparing empirical findings on educational governance and school choice in them, seeking to elucidate how and why different responses to the neoliberal reforms emerged in upper secondary education in the Nordic countries. With a general objective to critically examine and compare governance and choice in upper secondary education in the five countries, the contributions focus on the following questions: 1. How has student access for upper secondary schools developed in relation to welfare state policies? 2. What reforms have influenced the institutional structure and governance of upper secondary education? 3. What does school choice mean to the institutional structure and new needs for regulation? 4. How does the governance of upper secondary education play out in relation to segregation – socially and geographically?

1  Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries: Governance and Choice

5

Attaching importance to regional distinctions in the cases of Nordic countries, our key concern is to investigate how the complex relationship between universal welfare policies emphasising educational access and market policies emphasising choice is handled in different local upper secondary education practices.

A Comparative Case Study Approach This volume contains studies carried out on the basis of various methodological and analytical points of departure such as comparative, case, discourse and reanalysis, all of which are different ways of dealing with the common study object, educational governance and school choice and how and why different responses to neoliberal reforms emerge in upper secondary education in the Nordic countries. These different departures of analysis are then in turn compared in the last chapter. Below, we clarify the main differences between the points of departure and how we, influenced by Bartlett and Vavrus (2017), consider the final comparative case study approach in the last chapter. Comparative analysis is the general term for surveys that focus on describing and analysing differences through comparisons. The comparative analysis is made on a national level, in the same way as, for example, Jørgensen’s comparison of Denmark’s and Sweden’s diverging varieties of governance and organisation of upper secondary vocational education and their implications for social justice and equality. Here, the comparative focus is on difference. Discourse analysis, on the other hand, focuses on language. Dovemark and Nylund’s critical discourse analysis of a free school company’s marketing material emphasises language as a means of power and examines and analyses the relationship between discourses and power. The critical discourse analysis seeks to clarify the role of discourses in maintaining power relations such as reproducing the social division of labour. The volume also contains and largely builds on case studies. A case study can be defined as an in-depth, detailed examination of a particular case within a real-world context (Stake, 1995). For example, Rós Magnúsdóttir and Kosunen explore how the educational choices of young people in highly selective upper secondary schools are constructed in the academic track in Iceland and Finland. In addition to the mentioned analyses above, the volume contains a reanalysis by Nevøy and Bruin. Reanalysis can be defined as bringing one’s attention back to data in order to understand them in new conceptual contexts. In this volume, Nevøy and Bruin investigate how the so-called alternative programmes in upper secondary education in Norway relate to issues of social justice. The chapter is based on a critical reanalysis and synthesis of results from three previous studies. In the last chapter, we then move on to another comparative level. We analyse and compare empirical findings on educational governance and school choice, where we compare across the countries how and why different responses to neoliberal reforms emerge in upper secondary education in the Nordic region. According to Bartlett and Vavrus (2017), there is a necessity for a conceptual shift in the social

6

M. Dovemark and A. Rasmussen

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?’, in which they, among other things, direct strong criticism to the idea of how to delimit the object of study, that is, the case as a bounded system. Another question is, Why compare? Green (2004, p.  42) poses the questions: ‘Why should we be interested in a comparative perspective’ and ‘How can we adopt it?’ Green stresses the fact that it is rare that the same types of sources exist from each case that is going to be compared. This is also the case for this volume, in which we want to examine some characteristics or qualities of the similarities and differences that emerge in research in relation to governance and choice in the five Nordic countries. Thus, we will carry out a juxtapositional comparison (Green, 2004) of the different chapters, addressing the main themes of the book – governance, access, school choice and segregation – from the perspective of each country’s own fields of upper secondary school. We will further draw on the comparative case study approach as outlined by Bartlett and Vavrus (2017). Bartlett and Vavrus (2017) critically review literature on case studies and argue for a new approach: the comparative case study (CCS) approach. The CCS approach ‘attends simultaneously to macro, meso, and micro dimensions of case-based research, and it engages with two logics of comparison: first, the more common compare and contrast logic; and second, a “tracing across” sites or scales’ (Bartlett & Vavrus, 2017, p. 6), which include sites as individuals, groups, states and scales across time periods. The multi-sited ethnography (Marcus, 1998) is an equivalent example of comparing across sites and scales. The different logics of comparison involve two steps of analysis, which is first to identify specific units of analysis to compare and contrast them and second to trace across individuals, groups, sites and time periods. With reference to Bartlett and Vavrus (2017), we also contend that boundaries are not found; they are made by social actors, including us as researchers. We understand boundaries as process-oriented, and we are aware that some studies in this volume may be more pre-structured than others; the degree of flexibility will depend on the study’s aims and the researcher’s motivations, skills, interests, available time and resources. But even though the studies are different, we find them suitable to compare, contrast and trace across different sites, finding empirical knowledge around the common study object: educational governance and school choice and how and why different responses to neoliberal reforms emerge in upper secondary education in the Nordic countries. We argue that educational governance and school choice are the phenomena that we compare and contrast across the Nordic countries. The Nordic region is our general case: the Nordic countries and the appearances of the phenomena within them constitute the units for comparison and thus feature the comparative case study in this volume. Instead of an a priori bounding of the case units, ‘the CCS heuristic features an iterative and contingent tracing of relevant actors—both human and non-­ human—to explore the historical and contemporary processes that have produced a sense of shared place, purpose, or identity with regard to the central phenomenon’ (Bartlett & Vavrus, 2017, p. 10).

1  Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries: Governance and Choice

7

In contrast to the sense of ‘(static) culture within a (bounded) group’, we understand culture as something that undergirds a CCS approach, providing strong justification for the importance of examining ‘processes of sense-making as they develop over time, in distinct settings, in relation to systems of power and inequality’ (Bartlett & Vavrus, 2017, p. 11). The CCS approach insists on attention to social interactions, which requires considering the context of the study, rethinking and extending it in line with Burawoy’s extended case method (2009), e.g. ‘from the microprocesses to macroforces, looking at the way the latter shape and indeed are shaped by the former’ (Burawoy, 2009, p. 17). In this volume, we analyse and compare empirical findings on educational governance and school choice, seeking to elucidate how and why different responses to the neoliberal reforms emerge in upper secondary education in and across the Nordic countries.

Conceptualising the Educational Challenges To address the posed questions, we conceptualise four key terms, access, governance, choice and segregation, in the following sections.

Access The provision of equitable access to education, regardless of gender, social class and geographical location, has traditionally been a cornerstone of Nordic education policy and regarded as an essential tool for promoting social justice and democracy through education (Lundahl, 2016). To further the idea of ‘a school for all’, the Nordic countries strive to ensure that everyone has equal access through open and widespread educational provision (Blossing et  al., 2014). The democratic vision also encompasses provision of general education, understood as an identity-­ moulding function of democratic socialisation (Telhaug et  al., 2006), in which access to knowledge required for all aspects of life, personal development and continued education is a key priority. This understanding of access entails the foundation of education on a public system, free of charge for everyone, from elementary school to university, allowing access regardless of economic resources or geographic location and bringing ‘learning closer to home’ (Panitsidou & Papastamatis, 2009). The applicability of the term ‘school for all’ to all levels of schooling is a distinguishing feature of the Nordic region in terms of educational provision as part of their general welfare systems (Arnesen & Lundahl, 2006). In all Nordic countries, the states ensure provision and funding of central welfare services, so public elements account for about 80% of their welfare services, including education (Sivesind, 2018). Politically, however, there have been major shifts in attempts to address social differentiation in education and associated problems, from strong state governance

8

M. Dovemark and A. Rasmussen

and ideas of collective uniformity towards approaches based on freedom of choice and competition. Access to education is now provided through various market mechanisms, which enable students and parents to choose schools, courses and subjects based on preferences and interests rather than fixed structures and residential area (Fjellman, 2019). Such changes, including the introduction of new ownership structures, raise challenges for universal provision. Most notably, they may substantially increase limitations to accessibility and difficulties in providing balanced development and equal welfare services in all parts of countries due to variations in diverse geographic and demographic factors. Access is associated with key concepts, including accessibility, provision and democracy (cf. Rasmussen & Lolle, 2021). For the purposes of comparison across the chapters, access to upper secondary school refers here to the extent to which students have the possibility to enrol and participate in a given programme of a main track, either academic/general or vocational. Although the organisation of upper secondary school varies, educational law and policy in all Nordic countries still stipulate that opportunities to acquire upper secondary education must be as equitable as possible so that all citizens can fully realise their educational potential.

Governance The changes following public sector reforms have led to new methods of governing society and schools, most notably shifts from government to governance, i.e. from direct control by the state to control through and by networks (Ball, 2008, p. 41). Networks may have many forms and objectives, such as analysis of relevant phenomena, trying things out, getting things done quickly and efficiently and/or avoiding established public sector lobbies or needs to consider established interests (Ball, 2008, p. 157). Governance also involves suites of policies and processes related to marketisation, management and performativity (Ball, 2008). It rests on the notion that market competition and pursuit of self-interest are more effective drivers of improvement than addressing more general social and educational issues by striving to establish and maintain a high level of social equity in the whole population of a country. The introduction of ‘New Public Management’ is a key element in this movement, which seeks to replace professional-ethical regimes in schools with entrepreneurial-­ competitive regimes (Gibb, 2002). With reference to the concept of performativity presented by Lyotard (1984), Ball contends that actors in the educational system are encouraged to see their own development as a requirement for the system to perform well, and thus connected to the development of their institutions. It involves ‘technologies of power’, and a culture of regulation involving use of judgements and comparisons of individuals’ or organisations’ performance that supposedly provide objective measures of productivity (Jeffrey & Troman, 2012). Transformations of governance in education have occurred in all OECD countries. The transformed modes of governance have been built on macrosocial

1  Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries: Governance and Choice

9

foundations, and follow trends in other public policies, including decentralisation and increases in accountability, school autonomy and school choice that have subjected governments across the globe to convergent pressures and demands (Maroy & Pons, 2019, p.  61). Governance practices vary among countries and thus are expressions of a vernacular globalisation, which entails incremental construction on preceding regimes and practices in specific educational systems (Lingard & Ozga, 2007; Rizvi & Lingard, 2010). In this sense, each chapter in this book analyses a vernacular expression of similar globalisation trends.

Choice A transformation including extensive decentralisation and marketisation of the education sector has occurred, despite differences, in all of the Nordic countries (Antikainen, 2010; Beach, 2010; Dovemark et al., 2018). These changes have been analysed at national level and described as moving education away from systems of collective negotiation, inclusion and equality to systems based on, and defined in terms of, competition, individual responsibility, entrepreneurialism and freedom of choice (Antikainen, 2010; Arnesen & Lundahl, 2006; Beach, 2010; Dovemark, 2004; Lundahl, 2002). According to Forsey et al. (2008, p. 9), choice is one of the ‘key economic and social slogans of our time’. The idea or discourse of choice offers attractive promises of democracy, freedom, equality and possibilities to blow up the boundaries of social reproduction. The concept of freedom of choice evokes desires for autonomy and self-expression, and is often mentioned and contrasted with concepts such as bureaucracy, coercion, homogeneity and regulation. Opposing freedom of choice is considered undemocratic. So, a politician today can repeatedly and stridently champion ‘freedom of choice’ with little risk of being questioned, and the idea has been coopted into a political agenda ‘aimed at shifting the coordinating functions of society away from nation states and bureaucracies towards economies and markets’ (Forsey et al., 2008, p. 11). We, at least those living in rich parts of the world, are considered as customers who are willing to pick and choose in all sectors, such as education, health services and telecoms provision, rather than just as citizens. In this volume, we illustrate how ‘freedom of choice’ is expressed in the Nordic countries’ various upper secondary school systems, features of their varying regimes and pathways of school choice as well as results of the choices and variations. Choosing a school is shown to have become a complicated process in which local knowledge, interest in education and degrees of motivation of both parents and their children have become vital indicators. We also show that although the Nordic countries’ education systems have followed general global trends, changes have been locally negotiated and at times redefined in terms of processes and purposes (cf. Antikainen, 2010).

10

M. Dovemark and A. Rasmussen

Segregation School segregation and educational inequity are crucial elements to consider in any analyses of school choice and the notion of ‘a school for all’. They affect every student and their parents one way or another, raising questions about core ideals of equity and fairness. Segregation may be based on various kinds of division, e.g. social, racial, gender or geographical. For example, we are strongly aware of the major gender differences between various vocational programmes (see Dovemark and Nylund in this volume). However, for the purpose of this comparison, we mainly focus on segregation in relation to the choice of upper secondary school programme and school, including the specialisation and social reproduction that accompany these choices. As mentioned above, there are both similarities and differences in upper secondary education regimes and structures among the Nordic countries. Despite differences in national models of upper secondary education, they all offer academic and vocational programmes or tracks, with clear differentiation in levels of general studies and separation/differentiation of students. The main selection criterion for the academic tracks is previous scholastic achievement, and the education focuses much more on acquisition of general knowledge and development of general understanding than development of specific occupational skills. In sharp contrast, the vocational education aims at fostering mastery of a trade or occupation. The primary selection criterion is not academic achievement but employability in terms of motivation to become a skilled worker in a particular trade. The vocational principle is especially relevant in educational systems where educational programmes are geared directly towards labour market needs and provide qualifications that are recognised by professional associations and employees. The normative preference for vocational education is usability of education for labour market actors (Verdier, 2013). There have always been differences between the education policies and systems of the five Nordic countries, in the organisation of vocational education and training, for example (Raae, 2011). These include differences between Sweden and the other countries in its comprehensive organisation of upper secondary education, including apprenticeship training. Since 2011, when stronger division between academic and vocational programmes was introduced, vocational education has no longer provided general eligibility for university studies in Sweden, as it had done since the early 1990s (Lundahl et al., 2010; Nylund, 2013). Clearly, some segregation in upper secondary education is based on the division between academic and vocational programmes, but some may also be based on school choice. For example, Söderström and Uusitalo (2010) quantitatively showed that in Stockholm a reform of 2000 that abolished all residence-based admission rules provided most benefits for those who obtained the highest grades, as new options became available and school district borders no longer limited their school choices. Thus, the grade-based admission system increased the separation of students to schools according to their ability. The study also showed that although the reform was supposed to reverse effects of residential segregation on school

1  Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries: Governance and Choice

11

segregation, it actually increased segregation in all considered dimensions, particularly ethnic and socioeconomic. For example, Söderström and Uusitalo found that the segregation between migrants and natives increased more than would be expected solely through increased sorting by ability.

The Structure of the Book and Its Chapters This book includes ten chapters that are intended to illuminate important aspects of governance and access to education. There is no claim to cover the complex outcomes of market-oriented education comprehensively. Instead, they focus on specific aspects of education’s marketisation and its effects in the five Nordic countries. The chapters are arranged in two parts. Part I deals with issues around access and governance, while Part II deals with issues around segregation and fairness. These issues partially overlap. For example, freedom of choice entails (of course) governance problems related to ensuring educational provision and access for all students. Thus, the chapters overlap to varying degrees, but we have divided them into these two parts to clarify their foci for the reader.

Part I: Access and Governance In his chapter, entitled Governing Students’ Access to Knowledge: A Critical Discourse Analysis of General Subjects in the Swedish Upper Secondary School Reforms between 1990 and 2011, Stefan Lund discusses the increasing and changing importance of upper secondary school education for young people’s incorporation into the so-called knowledge society. Lund argues that people’s acquisition of education and knowledge are major determinants of their life chances, at least in Sweden. A sign of these changes in societal conditions is the introduction of certain specific core subject courses (such as Swedish, Mathematics and English) for students enrolled on all upper secondary educational programme. Lund discusses potential implications of these core subjects for young people’s societal incorporation. Using critical discourse analysis, he analyses the policy rhetoric between two educational reforms in 1994 and 2011, showing that it included strong assertions that introducing the core subjects in upper secondary education would increase opportunities for individual incorporation and societal development in various ways. Among other aspects, Lund focuses on links between policy discourses and wider societal meaning systems that define and legitimise what is regarded as an effective and desirable organisation of vocational and academic preparatory programmes in upper secondary education. In his chapter, Social Inclusion and Equality in Access: Comparing Vocational Education in Sweden and Denmark, Christian Helms Jørgensen’s starting point is the Nordic welfare states’ formation of a comprehensive public school system

12

M. Dovemark and A. Rasmussen

without dead ends to reduce social inequality in education. Despite similarities between their comprehensive schools, there are significant differences at upper secondary level between Denmark and Sweden concerning unification of the vocational and general programmes. The two countries constitute the most diverging varieties of governance and organisation of upper secondary vocational education, and Jørgensen explores their implications for social justice and equality. He compares the main reforms in the two countries since the early 1990s and identifies some unintended consequences, which indicate a conflict between two political aims of universal access. One is to ensure that all young people have opportunities to access higher education. The other is to provide all young people with opportunities to complete upper secondary education and gain access to working life. This is a general dilemma for education policy, which he shows has been managed differently in Sweden and Denmark with different implications for young people’s post-­ secondary opportunities. In their chapter, Governing School Choice in Norway: Why Local Educational Government Capacity Matters, Anne Homme, Helene Marie Kjærgård Eide and Kristin Lofthus Hope discuss how governing the provision of upper secondary school is seen as a considerable challenge for society, as well as for individuals. From a Norwegian perspective, they focus on county municipalities’ possibility to decide between two main models for enrolment for upper secondary education: (1) free school choice or (2) the principles of the neighbourhood school. Since the Norwegian Government recently has decided to implement free school choice as a mandatory enrolment policy for upper secondary education nationally from 2022, the authors argue the importance of exploring the rationale behind different strategies for enrolment of students for upper secondary school and the variety of enrolment models to secure local governmental capacity in upper secondary education. By making use of the analytical concept governing capacity, the authors examine and compare possible consequences for governing capacity in two Norwegian counties that govern upper secondary education enrolment differently. By comparing counties with different institutional structure and governance of upper secondary education, they illuminate and explore how different models of enrolment both respond to and influence regional educational challenges. In the last chapter of Part I, Upper-Secondary School Choices in Reykjavík and Helsinki: The Selected Few in the Urban North, Berglind Rós Magnúsdóttir and Sonja Kosunen explore how the educational choices of young people in highly selective upper secondary schools are constructed in the academic track. Empirically, it is based on a qualitative case study comparing these processes in Iceland and Finland. Recent educational reforms have reformulated the role of matriculation examinations as a means to access higher education in both countries, which puts new pressure on accessing relevant institutions of upper secondary education. Magnúsdóttir and Kosunen particularly focus on choices of upper secondary schools in Reykjavík and Helsinki, the choice processes and how identity formation within the chosen school is perceived by those who end up in the highest-ranking schools. The study is theoretically based on choice as a product of the relationship between habitus and field, as conceptualised by Bourdieu (1984).

1  Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries: Governance and Choice

13

Part II: Segregation and Fairness In the first chapter of Part II, The Janus Face of ‘Freedom of Choice’ in Upper-­ Secondary School Markets, Marianne Dovemark and Mattias Nylund focus on how different brands within Sweden’s biggest education venture capital company, AcadeMedia Ltd., through the information schools provide on their websites calls for different student subjects. Using the lens of Alhusser’s (1971/2008) concept of ‘ideology’, the analysis in this chapter illustrates how ‘freedom of choice’, in the context of the choice of upper secondary school is, in fact, a highly structured process. Rather than free, the authors argue, it is a process heavily framed by ideology, with websites hailing students from different social groups with different messages regarding who they are and who they are to become. Thus, ‘freedom of choice’, the authors argue, is more correctly understood in this context as part of an ideological reproduction of the social division of labour in which the concept itself is an expression of an ideology about how a society, education and a human can be understood. In the next chapter, Revisiting Just Education for Students Last in Line: A Norwegian Perspective, Anne Nevøy and Marieke Bruin investigate how the so-­ called alternative programmes in upper secondary education relate to issues of social justice. Drawing on Dewey’s models of social justice, the chapter is based on a critical reanalysis and synthesis of results from three previous studies conducted in a Norwegian context that explored various alternative programmes in upper secondary education. The theoretical lens used for the synthesis is based on concepts developed by Gewirtz, Young and Connell. The authors emphasise that social justice in education is concerned with multiple issues: not only equal access to an educational service but also the nature of the service itself and its consequences, for both the society and individuals. The reanalysis addresses justice in the intersection of a neoliberal educational system involving free choice on one hand, and the vision of equal opportunities in socially just education on the other. In the following chapter, Choice and Competition in the Governance of the Danish Gymnasium School, Elisabeth Lauridsen Lolle and Annette Rasmussen discuss a major structural reform in 2007 that restructured general upper secondary education in Denmark. This involved changes in ownership structure, and governance elements including funding, regulation and provision. From direct responsibilities of the counties, the upper secondary schools became self-managed in terms of hiring and firing staff, administrative matters and governance under the aegis of the Department of Education regarding student intake, educational content, administration, exams, censorship, evaluations and quality assurance. Funding also shifted to a value-added grants system. Empirically, the chapter is based on studies of national regulations, education policy documents from two regions and interviews with school leaders and boards that illuminate views from critical institutional points, representing very small and very large student populations. To obtain understanding of the associated politics, involving numerous actors on different levels and their governance roles, the authors apply the enactment policy concept presented by Ball et al. (2012).

14

M. Dovemark and A. Rasmussen

In the penultimate chapter, “It Is Not All About Studying”: General Upper Secondary Schools’ Institutional Habitus Shaping Students’ Educational Choice Making, Linda Maria Laaksonen and Anna-Maija Niemi discuss two major recent policy reforms in Finland overlapping in time: a reform of higher education institutions’ student admission and a general upper secondary education reform. The ongoing reforms strengthen the role of matriculation examination as a selection criterion for higher education in Finland. The reforms have also clearly strengthened the importance of general upper secondary education as a whole and direct young people’s attention to differences between various upper secondary schools and their profiles. Using an ethnographic approach, the authors explore how general upper secondary school students’ educational choices have been constructed. They particularly address how choices relate to possible future higher education admission strategies and the choices’ relations to educational reproduction, social class and ethnicity. The authors stress that officially there are no dead ends in the Finnish education system, as the aim is to provide possibilities for access to higher education for everyone who has completed vocational or general upper secondary education. Using a theoretical lens based on Bourdieu’s concepts field and habitus, the authors analyse the studied students’ choices. Finally, in the chapter entitled Selection for Whom? Upper Secondary School Choice in the Light of Social Justice, Elsa Eiríksdóttir, Kristjana Stella Blöndal and Guðrún Ragnarsdóttir discuss education policy in Iceland. Their starting point is that major aims of education policy in Iceland are to provide inclusive and comprehensive education for all citizens, including upper secondary schooling that is open to all students of all ages throughout their life. They explore how institutional governing structures of schools and programme selection perpetuate and reflect social inequalities. Based on a longitudinal cohort study involving use of a questionnaire administered to all students at the end of compulsory education (tenth grade) in the Reykjavik metropolitan area in 2014, the authors analyse systematic patterns in students’ school and programme choices. They consider relations of these patterns to students’ social and economic backgrounds, engagement, academic performance and future expectations. The authors have also used official data on students’ progress at upper secondary level and standardised grades at the end of compulsory education.

References Antikainen, A. (2010). The capitalist state and education: The case of restructuring the Nordic model. Current Sociology, 54(4), 530–550. Arnesen, A.-L., & Lundahl, L. (2006). Still social and democratic? Inclusive education policies in the Nordic welfare states. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 50(3), 285–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313830600743316 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,

1  Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries: Governance and Choice

15

L. Lundahl, & E. Öhrn (Eds.), Fair and competitive? Critical perspectives on contemporary Nordic schooling (pp. 1–19). Tufnell Press. Ball, S. J. (2008). The education debate. The Policy Press. Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., & Braun, A. (2012). How schools do policy. Policy enactments in secondary schools. Routledge. Bartlett, L., & Vavrus, F. (2017). Comparative case studies; an innovative approach. Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education, 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 Blossing, U., Imsen, G., & Moos, L. (2014). Nordic schools in a time of change. In U. Blossing, G. Imsen, & L. Moos (Eds.), The Nordic education model: ‘A school for all’ encounters neo-­ liberal policy (pp. 1–14). Springer. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Harvard University Press. Burawoy, M. (2009). The extended case method. Four countries, four decades, four great transformations, and one theoretical tradition. University of California Press. Dahlstedt, M., & Fejes, A. (2019). Market forces in Swedish education. In M. Dahlstedt & A. Fejes (Eds.), Neoliberalism and market forces in education (pp. 1–12). Routledge. Dovemark, M. (2004). Ansvar, flexibilitet och valfrihet. En etnografisk studie om en skola i förändring [Responsibility, flexibility and freedom of choice. An ethnographic study about a School in Transmission]. Diss. University of Gothenburg. Dovemark, M., & Holm, A.-S. (2017). Pedagogic identities for sale! Segregation and homogenization in Swedish upper secondary school. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 38(4), 518–532. Dovemark, M., Kosonen, S., Kauko, J., Hansen, P., Magnúsdóttir, B., & Rasmussen, P. (2018). Deregulation, privatisation, and marketisation of nordic comprehensive education: Social changes reflected in schooling. Education Inquiry. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2018.1429 Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Princeton University Press. Fjellman, A.-M. (2019). School choice, private providers and differentiated mobilities in Swedish metropolitan school markets: Exploring through a counterfactual approach. International Journal of Educational Research, 98, 171–191. Forsey, M., Davies, S., & Walford, G. (Eds.). (2008). The globalisation of school choice? Symposium Books. University of Western Australia. Gesser, B. (1976). Skolsystem och social skiktning [Schoolsystem and social stratification]. In S. Lundberg, S. Selander, & U. Öhlund (Eds.), Jämlikhetsmyt och klassherravälde i avancerade kapitalistiska samhällen [Equality myth and class domination in advanced capitalist societies] (pp. 23–73). Bo Cavefors bokförlag. Gibb, A. A. (2002). In pursuit of a new ‘enterprise’ and ‘entrepreneurship’ paradigm for learning: Creative destruction, new values, new ways of doing things and new combinations of knowledge. International Journal of Management Reviews, 4(3), 233–269. Green, L. N. (2004). Forms of comparison. In D. Cohen & M. O’Conner (Eds.), Comparison and history. Europe in cross-national perspective (pp. 41–56). Routledge. Jeffrey, B., & Troman, G. (Eds.). (2012). Performativity in UK education. Ethnographic cases of its effects, agency and reconstructions. E&E Publishing. Krejsler, J. B. (2021). Skolen og den transnationale vending. In Dansk uddannelsespolitik og dens europæiske og angloamerikanske forbindelser [The School and the Transnational Turn]. Nyt fra Samfundsvidenskaberne. Lawn, M. (Ed.). (2013). The rise of data in education systems collection, visualisation and use. Symposium Books. Lingard, B., & Ozga, J. (Eds.). (2007). The RoutledgeFalmer reader in education policy and politics. Routledge.

16

M. Dovemark and A. Rasmussen

Lundahl, L. (2002). Sweden: Decentralization, deregulation, quasi-markets  – And then what? Journal of Education Policy, 17(6), 687–697. https://doi.org/10.1080/0268093022000032328 Lundahl, L. (2016). Equality, inclusion and marketization of Nordic education: Introductory notes. Research in Comparative & International Education, 11(1), 3–12. https://doi. org/10.1177/1745499916631059 Lundahl, L., Erixon Arreman, I., Lundström, U., & Rönnberg, L. (2010). Setting things right? Swedish upper secondary school reform in a 40-year perspective. European Journal of Education, 45(1), 46–59. Lyotard, J.  F. (1984). The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge. Manchester University Press. Marcus, G. E. (1998). Ethnography through thick and thin. Princeton University Press. Maroy, C., & Pons, X. (2019). Chapter 3: Theoretical framework. In Accountability policies in education. A comparative and multilevel analysis in France and Quebec (Educational governance research 11) (pp. 53–94). Springer. Nevøy, A., Rasmussen, A., Ohna, S.  E., & Barow, T. (2014). Nordic Upper Secondary School: Regular and Irregular Programmes  – Or Just One Irregular School for All? In U.  Blossing, G. Imsen, & L. Moos (Eds.), The Nordic education model: ‘A School for all’ encounters neo-­ Liberal policy (pp. 191–210). Springer. Nylund, M. (2013). Yrkesutbildning, klass och kunskap. En studie om sociala och politiska implikationer av innehållets organisering i yrkesorienterad utbildning med fokus på 2011 års gymnasiereform [Vocational education, class, and knowledge. A study of the social and political implications of content organization in vocational education with a focus on the 2011 Upper secondary school reform]. Diss. University of Örebro. 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. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/20004508.2018.1424490 Panitsidou, E., & Papastamatis, A. (2009). European lifelong learning educational policy in the light of the Lisbon agenda: the greek case. Review of European Studies, 1(1), 2–8. Piketty, T. (2017). Capital in the Twenty-first century. Harvard University Press. Qvortrup, A. (2020). Gymnasiet anno 2019. In A.  Qvortrup (Ed.), Gymnasiet i udvikling [The Gymnasium in Development] (pp. 19–46). Hans Reitzels Forlag. Raae, P. H. (2011). The Nordic model of education and the Danish «gymnasium». Nordic Studies in Education, 32, 311–320. Rasmussen, A., & Lingard, B. (2018). Excellence in education policies: Catering to the needs of gifted and talented or those of self-interest? European Educational Research Journal, 17(6), 877–897. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904118771466 Rasmussen, A., & Lolle, E. L. (2021). Accessibility of general adult education. An analysis of the restructuring of adult education governance in Denmark. Adult Education Quarterly. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0741713621Q996236 Rasmussen, A., & Ydesen, C. (2019). Cultivating excellence in education. A critical policy study on talent (Educational governance research 12). Springer. Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2010). Globalizing education policy. Routledge. Sivesind, K.  H. (2018). Blir skandinaviske velferdstjenester svekket av markedsreformer? Forholdet mellom offentlige, kommersielle og ideelle velferdstilbydere [Will Scandinavian welfare services be weakened due to market reforms? The relationship between public, commercial, and ideal welfare providers]. Tidsskrift for velferdsforskning, 2018(01), 70–76. Söderström, M., & Uusitalo, R. (2010). School choice and segregation: Evidence from an admission reform. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 112(1), 55–76. Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. SAGE. 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, 50(3), 245–283.

1  Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries: Governance and Choice

17

Verdier, P.-H. (2013). The political economy of international financial regulation. Indiana Law Journal, 88(4), 1405–1474. Wahlström, H. (2018). Gymnasielärares mentorshandlingar. En verksamhetsteoretisk studie om lärararbete i förändring [upper secondary teachers’ mentoring actions. An activity-theoretical study about changes in teachers’ work], Diss, University of Gothenburg. Marianne Dovemark is a senior researcher and Professor Emerita of Education at the University of Gothenburg. Her main research interests are in the sociology of education concerning policy and politics related to the marketization of education and the personalization of learning. Theoretically, she belongs to a critical tradition, methodologically in critical ethnography. She is a member of the board of the international research journal Ethnography and Education. She has undertaken research and published extensively in the field of personalized learning and marketization of education. One of her latest contributions, co-authored with Professor Dennis Beach, is a chapter in the edited volume Neoliberalism and Market Forces in Education. Lessons from Sweden.  

Annette Rasmussen is an associate professor in the Department of Culture and Learning, Aalborg University. Her main research interests are in ethnographic approaches to education policies and practices, which she has studied in several school and learning contexts. She is a member of the board of the international research journal Ethnography and Education. In her recent research, focus is on policy issues of employability, performativity and talent, especially in relation to social background and inequality. One of her latest publications on this is Cultivating Excellence in Education. A Critical Policy Study on Talent, which is co-authored with Professor Christian Ydesen and published in the Educational Governance Research Series.  

Part I

Access and Governance

Chapter 2

Governing Students’ Access to Knowledge: A Critical Discourse Analysis of General Subjects in the Swedish Upper Secondary School Reforms Between 1990 and 2011 Stefan Lund

Abstract  In the knowledge society, the populations’ acquisition to education and knowledge has become of crucial importance for democratic and economic development, but also for each and everyone’s life chances. One sign of such societal process is the introduction of certain general subject courses in Swedish upper secondary education (Swedish, Mathematics, English etc.). At the core of this chapter’s descriptions and interpretations are the readings of four Governmental Bills between 1990 and 2011. This chapter’s point of departure is the changing policy rhetoric regarding what kind of general knowledge different categories of upper secondary school students need in order to meet various demands in society. It will be shown how such policy initiatives come to play an active part in the structuring of young people’s acquisition of knowledge. The ways in which the upper secondary education curriculum is organized predefine who will gain admittance to such knowledge and who will not. Keywords  Knowledge society · Educational policy · Upper secondary education · Neo-liberalism · Critical discourse analysis

S. Lund (*) Department of Education, University of Stockholm, Stockholm, Sweden e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 A. Rasmussen, M. Dovemark (eds.), Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries, Educational Governance Research 18, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08049-4_2

21

22

S. Lund

Introduction Educational reforms enacted during the 1990s in Sweden were founded on neoliberal ideas (Beach, 2010; Lund, 2008). This period has been described as marking a transformation from an educational system that emphasized state regulation and uniformity to one defined in terms of decentralized local school markets, school vouchers, students’ freedom of choice, and competition (Antikainen, 2010; Arnesen & Lundahl, 2006; Lundahl, 2002). After finishing compulsory schooling, Swedish students can choose between municipal and independent upper secondary schools and among various academic and vocational preparatory programs. According to education policy rhetoric, this represents an attempt to broaden the range of options for students’ educational choice paths compared to the upper secondary education of the past. One important purpose of the reforms was to increase social mobility and students’ motivation for and interest in their studies. Another was built on the belief that school competition would increase school quality. An often-forgotten aspect of these school choice reforms is that they were combined with a social justice perspective: Namely, marketization and students’ freedom of choice were combined with general subject courses and thus, universal admission to university studies. As proposed in a Governmental Bill (1990/91:85) and introduced in the new curriculum of 1994 (Lpo-94), regardless of upper secondary school program, students are obligated to take certain general subject courses (Swedish, Mathematics, English, Physical Education, Social Sciences, Natural Sciences, Religious Instruction, and Art/Music/Drama): “Solid general knowledge becomes necessary – for all – in a world where knowledge is constantly changing” (Governmental Bill, 1990/91:85, p. 44). It was argued that such a broad education would prepare all students for a rapidly changing labour market and lifelong learning in a pluralistic and individualized society: For those who are now entering working life, it is practically impossible to be employed if you haven’t finished upper secondary school… a broad general knowledge base is the most important tool for the individual to be able to handle and master a changing reality. (Prop. 1997/98: 169, pp. 15–16)

The reform also built on the argument that upper secondary education should prepare all students for university studies (Governmental Bill, 1992/93:250). In other words, a neoliberal governance of education was combined with a social justice perspective through a notion of equality, social cohesion, and broad inclusion for all students in upper secondary education. In 2011, when a new curriculum was introduced (Gy 11), the policy rhetoric had changed. While school choice and competition between schools remained untouched, the political conviction regarding general subjects within vocational and academic preparatory programs was reformed. The importance of general subjects for all students regardless of program was replaced with an argumentation on the significance of vocational students being trained and developing professional skills rather than knowledge in general subjects, and asserting that academic preparatory programs should more clearly prepare students for university studies:

2  Governing Students’ Access to Knowledge: A Critical Discourse Analysis…

23

The government believes that upper secondary school, more clearly than today, must prepare students for working life and further vocational training or for further studies at universities and colleges, respectively… The government therefore proposes that the scope of some of the current general subjects in vocational programs be reduced in order to provide more space for professional specialization. (Governmental Bill, 2008/09:199, p. 79)

In vocational education, the emphasis dedicated to general subjects fell from 750 to 600 credits, out of a total of 2500 credits/3 years of full-time studies. This was most obvious in the general subjects of Social Sciences and Swedish, whose respective required credits fell from 200 to 100 (cf. Nylund & Virolainen, 2019). This chapter’s point of departure is the changing policy rhetoric regarding what kind of general knowledge different upper secondary school students need in order to meet various demands in society. In addressing this, the chapter will enable a critical discussion of how policy discourses define and regulate what is regarded as necessary and desirable knowledge for different student groups.

Knowledge-Based Society Scholars in the social sciences have pointed out that people face changing life conditions in times of transition (e.g. Beck, 1998; Giddens, 1991; Habermas, 1999). We have entered late modernity, with the traditional industrial society having been replaced by a post-industrial, knowledge-based service sector. People’s living conditions are filled with contradictions and uncertainties, with increased demands for individuality, making autonomous and informed choices, and being flexible and changeable in relation to labour market conditions. People may switch back and forth between education and work, high- and low-income jobs, and work and unemployment during their lifetime. Walther and Plug (2006) call these switches yo-yo transitions. Lindblad and Popkewitz (1999) state that changes in the labour market have also changed the conditions for education and teaching. Society no longer needs a workforce that dutifully carries out a specific lifelong occupation. The educational system should therefore prepare students for flexibility, lifelong learning, and a preparedness to relearn. Thus, education has come to play an increasingly important role in the societal incorporation of young people. The opportunity for a youth to start working immediately after finishing compulsory school is largely non-existent today; in policy documents and research, the possession of an upper secondary degree is described as a necessity for labour market entrance (Governmental Bill, 2008/09:199; Lindensjö & Lundgren, 2000). The high-tech industry, healthcare, banking, or whatever industry it may be is dependent on constant renewal, which requires increasing degrees of knowledge production. This process in turn coincides with the “educational revolution” and its increased opportunities for higher education (Habermas, 1999). In the 1920s, 2% of an age cohort participated in upper secondary education (Lund, 2006). Today, 44% of the population aged 25–64 have a post-­ upper secondary education (SCB, 2021). Further, admittance to education cannot

24

S. Lund

simply be understood in terms of individual employability or as the foundation of a country’s economic growth (Rees et al., 1997). In a detraditionalized, pluralistic, multicultural society, the maintenance of shared values and norms, in one way or the other, becomes something that the educational system is expected to consider and manage (Fritzell, 1998). In a knowledge-based society, the development of knowledge itself is a decisive driving force that opens up new spaces for action on both an individual and a societal level (Stehr, 2001). With the constant development of new and in-depth knowledge in all sectors of society, it will also be necessary for the knowledge as such to be documented and disseminated. Not everything can be learned from the culturally borne “stock of knowledge” that is available (cf. Habermas, 1987, p. 128) – because, frankly, upper secondary school students grow up in different families, which affects their school performance and educational choices (Salovaara, 2021). Different groups of young people have unequal opportunities to get access to this knowledge and its resources, values, and norms. Thus, education and its predefined acquisition of knowledge are not based on the principle of free access and thus become socially stratifying (Stehr, 2001). In the Swedish context, from a historical perspective, vocational education has generally attracted students from working-class families with low educational capital. Meanwhile, children from middle-class families with high educational capital have chosen an academic preparatory program to a higher extent than others have (cf. Mellén, 2021). In this chapter, my point of departure is that a focus on a changing educational policy in relation to general subjects will show how such policy initiatives come to play an active part in the structuring of young people’s acquisition of knowledge. The ways in which the upper secondary education curriculum is organized predefine who will gain admittance to such knowledge and who will not.

Method and Theoretically Informed Interpretations At the core of the forthcoming descriptions and interpretations are my readings of four Governmental Bills (1990/91:85, 1992/93:250, 1997/98:169, 2008/09:199). These have been chosen with regard to the ways they have made changes to upper secondary education between 1990 and 2011. Beyond these texts, I have also read the two curricula marking the beginning and end of my investigated period (Lpo 94 and Gy 11). Finally, I have read various departmental reports that lay out the major arguments for the Governmental Bills and curricula. I mean to analyse these policy texts using critical discourse analysis. The concept of discourse transcends the dichotomy between language and action as two separate aspects of people’s lives. Fairclough (1995) asserts that it is possible to understand language as social practice. A discourse consists of specific knowledge claims that construct the world in a certain way. What constitutes valuable or less valuable knowledge? For whom, and for what reasons? Thus, language/texts have social implications. A discourse is collectively connecting and, in this sense, also

2  Governing Students’ Access to Knowledge: A Critical Discourse Analysis…

25

differentiating. It legitimizes certain policy actions at the same time as it excludes others. The underlying rationality that is enshrined in policy documents is therefore also related to different discourses. Thus, educational policy discourses dictate what can be said and thought at a specific time and place, which in turn both regulates upper secondary school students’ admittance to common or specific forms of knowledge and gives such action meaning: “Discourse is a practice not just of representing the world, but of signifying the world, constituting and constructing the world of meaning” (Fairclough, 1992, p. 64). This interpretation of discourse also visualizes a power dimension in education policy. On the one hand, educational policy discourses dictate the conditions for the pedagogical practice in which the teachers and students find themselves, and on the other, they also define what kind of knowledge different student groups should obtain. Thus, education policy structures the pedagogical practice in certain specific directions, e.g. through organizational, ideological, or economic control systems (Ball, 2003).

Theoretically Informed Interpretations In the following paragraphs, I will show my starting points in analysing educational policy discourses, beginning with a few brief clarifications. Discourse analysis is not about empirical “findings”; discourses are constructed by the researcher and the research object. How the researcher names them depends on the topic in focus and the theorizing of data, but also on secondary empirical insights (Winther-Jorgensen & Phillips, 2000). Therefore, my analytical interest is not to “discover” and construct “new” discourses with an empirical basis. Rather, the research interest in this chapter is to analyse educational policy discourses in relation to general subjects and their assumed relevance for different student groups in upper secondary education. My theoretically informed analysis of policy discourse is based on two different discursive claims regarding how to incorporate upper secondary school students into the knowledge society. These two discourses are constructed through the relationship between the individual and society and are in turn defined by different courses of action. These are perceived as language acts, and I describe them as discursive imperatives, that is, roughly, given their principles, exhortations, and use (Sundberg, 2005). In some respects, a discursive imperative can be considered to be associated with linguistic arguments. In this chapter, they are analytical tools that help me analyse policy texts (cf. Fairclough, 1992) – that is, looking at the ways in which education policy texts argue and implement a certain course of action. However, the concept of the discursive imperative should also be understood in a deeper, more comprehensive way. The discursive imperative describes not only the underlying foundations of a certain course of action but also what is perceived as a legitimate way of describing a certain phenomenon at a given historical time (cf. Foucault, 1993).

26

S. Lund

The concept thereby takes on another compelling function in addition to the more reflexive concept of “political argument”. It fulfils three analytical functions here. Firstly, the use of the concept of discursive imperatives points out that this type of discourse analysis essentially has a social and societal focus. Secondly, the discursive imperatives point out a discourse’s core content and boundaries in relation to other discourses. Thirdly, educational policies’ emphasis on different discursive imperatives has changed over time. By focusing the analytical lens on these discursive imperatives, such changes can be visualized. In the economic discourse, participation in education is related to a rational calculation and a belief that a well-educated population is a fundamental resource on an internationally competitive labour market. Thus, the effects and outcome of the educational system are related to the discursive imperatives of employability and international competitiveness. The primary function of the educational system is to foster employability and compete globally with competence rather than salaries. This is a political steering that is measured by numbers instead of ideology or symbolic principles (Lund & Sundberg, 2012). As a backdrop to this theoretically informed starting point, the general subjects for all students, regardless of their choice of upper secondary school program, are directed at helping the individual and society gain economic prosperity. The active-citizen discourse is based on democratic values. This discourse is built on the assumption that the fundamental purpose of education is to cultivate the development of children’s values and moral fitness for an active and independent participation in democratic society: “respect for human rights and the fundamental democratic values on which Swedish society rests” (Swedish Educational Act, 2010:800, § 4). In Sweden, since the post-war period, school policy has had strong moral ambitions as both a force for equality and justice and a source of civic education (cf. Honneth, 2015; Tognato, 2018). Its emphasis on the equal distribution of knowledge (exemplified in this chapter by general subjects) involves reducing the boundaries between different groups and an overall ambition to educate students who willingly “...engage in public discourse and question authority” (Tognato, 2018, p. 151). As a backdrop to this theoretically informed starting point, general subjects are based on a principle of shared access to knowledge and have the potential to foster individual autonomy and develop the democratic society. In sum, the concepts of “discourse” and “discursive imperatives are used in order to visualize the main content/arguments of and boundaries between the economic and active-­ citizen discourses, and thus also changes in the ‘orders of discourse’” (Fairclough, 1992, 1995). In this context, orders of discourse concern the discursive aspects of the ongoing policy struggle involving how to develop, organize, and legitimize formalized upper secondary education. As I will show later, the relationship between the economic and active-citizen discourse changes over time – changes in the orders of discourse that establish a historically given truth claim. Thus, changes in the orders of discourse also address an ongoing social and cultural change (Fairclough, 1992, 1995). As a first step in the following interpretations and analyses, I will discuss the discursive imperatives within the economic discourse and the changes that took

2  Governing Students’ Access to Knowledge: A Critical Discourse Analysis…

27

place between 1990 and 2011. I will then repeat this procedure for the active-citizen discourse. Finally, I will discuss the relationship between the economic and active-­ citizen discourses and discuss what changes in the order of discourse could mean for future generations of youths.

The Economic Discourse In the economic discourse at the beginning of the 1990s, the educational policy rhetoric concerning the relationship between upper secondary education and general subjects is based on two discursive imperatives: (i) that general knowledge is the main source of the individual’s opportunities for employability, flexibility, and lifelong learning and (ii) that a highly educated population with general knowledge is able to adjust to an uncertain future and is thus the foundation of a country’s economic growth (cf. Rees et  al., 1997). Basic skills in Swedish, Mathematics, and English, for example, are considered a prerequisite for continued learning in the labour market contexts a young person will encounter during their life (SOU, 2002: 120). In this very respect, the upper secondary school reforms of the 1990s emphasize general subjects, which can be interpreted as a response to the knowledge relativism and uncertain labour market conditions that are said to characterize the knowledge society (Thavenius, 1999): The new type of upper secondary school will educate people who will be active on the future labour market. Changes happen fast. It is impossible to make exact predictions today about what international influence, increased competition, new technologies, and changing work organizations will mean for society and thus also for education. Upper secondary education must therefore not only provide a good amount of general knowledge as the basis for handling change and the development of each citizen. (Governmental Bill, 1990/1991:85, pp. 50–51)

Another aspect related to general subjects and the development of personal competence is the individual’s ability to adapt to the conditions of the changeable labour market (Beck, 1998). In a society where work tasks are exposed to a constant pressure to transform and raising of knowledge requirements, the individual is required to have the ability and readiness to learn and relearn new things within their profession. The introduction of general subjects for all students is also regarded as an important part of the educational policy effort involving upper secondary school programs opening future study opportunities: “Upper secondary education’s most important task is to prepare students for university studies… This means that no programs may become a dead end” (Governmental Bill, 1997/98:169, p. 18). This statement has a historical dimension that falls back on insights made retrospectively from the previous upper secondary education, in which especially the degrees of the vocational preparation programs were perceived as a dead end regarding further education trajectories (SOU, 1997:107). The general subjects thereby have special significance for the relationship between a changing labour market and the individual life project. These subjects are

28

S. Lund

expected to give all students general eligibility for university studies and opportunities for further learning, but also to meet the new demands on the labour market: “The changes in working life place great demands on vocational education content and quality. It is, among other things, in order to meet these requirements that vocational education in the new upper secondary school has an increased element of core subjects” (SOU 1997:107, p. 122). At a societal level, there is an explicit policy expectation that a preparedness for lifelong learning will create a skilled, technically competent, and flexible labour force, which is considered crucial for a society’s economic competitiveness (cf. Ball et al., 2000). Here, a formal education fills an important function: “…a country with a well-educated population has a competitive advantage in relation to countries that do not have this…investments in education are one of the most effective methods for creating growth in a country” (SOU, 2002:120, p. 87). The policy interest in the ability of upper secondary education to prepare students for continuous and lifelong learning can be seen as a consequence of the labour market conditions. That is, the population’s readiness for a flexible work life and continuous development of individual competencies is regarded as a tool for economic competition in an increasingly globalized world. In other words, nations with a population with a high level of education have advantages in long-term global competition. It is then also possible to talk about the notion that society as well as the individual can invest in education to obtain financial gain (Foskett & Hemsley-Brown, 2001). This strong policy belief in knowledge as a tool for economic development is clarified: “Workers’ knowledge and other intangible assets are the strategically most important resources. We can see today that intangible investments are increasing at a much faster rate than investments in real capital” (Ds, 1997:78, p. 16). In such policy rhetoric, economic prosperity is a result of a highly educated workforce with a broad knowledge base that enables a flexible attitude towards their professional career, with a readiness to learn new things and/or change their working trajectory. Upper secondary school students’ expertise in general subjects is largely a prerequisite for labour market-related gains. It therefore becomes relevant to offer all students a broad education that can be useful in a number of sectors instead of, as in the previous upper secondary education, educating vocational students for specific work competencies.

Governing for Different Social Positions As Nylund and Virolainen (2019) state, the most explicit changes in the 2010 upper secondary school reform (Gy 11) involve the vocational preparatory programs. Entrepreneurship and a stronger emphasis on meeting the demands of the labour market’s line of business are introduced as important aspects of students’ employability (Governmental Bill, 2008/09:199). It is stated that the previous upper secondary education was too uniform and that high proportions of students had failed to meet the knowledge objectives needed for labour market entrance (SOU,

2  Governing Students’ Access to Knowledge: A Critical Discourse Analysis…

29

2008:27). The vocational education had concentrated too much on general subjects and therefore offered too little time/space for developing students’ professional skills, and the academic preparatory programs had not prepared students well enough for successful university studies (Governmental Bill, 2008/09:199). It is thus argued that upper secondary education must be more specialized, which will prepare students for either the labour market’s various vocational professions or admission to various types of higher education. The policy conclusion is that the number of general subject courses in vocational programs must be reduced: Vocational training cannot have too much general content. The government therefore proposes that the scope of some of the current general subjects in vocational programs be reduced in order to provide more space for professional specialization. (Governmental Bill, 2008/09:199, p. 79)

As mentioned in the introduction, the time spent on general subjects in vocational programs was indeed reduced, and the content of the remaining general subject courses was changed. In the Governmental Bill (1990/91:85), policymakers had argued that all students should develop equal knowledge in general subjects. Meanwhile, according to the curriculum of Gy 11, general subject courses are to adjust to the main content of the program. Further, in order to attain general competence for university studies, vocational students must extend their program syllabus. In other words, the essence of what kind of knowledge would be needed in the future on the vocational labour market had changed. The main ambition  – that vocational education should prepare students for employability and that a well-educated workforce is the best way to compete in a globalized world  – is, interestingly enough, based on rhetoric similar to that in the 1990s: There is a shortage of skilled labour in certain occupational areas, where the employees normally receive their basic vocational training in upper secondary school. At the same time, at present some programs do not correspond to the labour market’s needs. The rapid development of technology and methods places new demands on the content and topicality of upper secondary schooling. Educational content must be adapted to developments in various industry and professional areas. (Governmental Bill, 2008/09:199, p. 39)

The difference between the studied time periods involves a different view regarding the importance of general subjects in a knowledge society. Firstly, in the curriculum Gy 11, it is argued that students in vocational programs more effectively should finish upper secondary education in due time and that they also have different interests and ways of learning in comparison with students in academic preparatory programs. In my interpretation, these arguments relate to the assumption that students in vocational education are typically not interested in general subjects, which was regarded as a major reason for dropout and unfinished upper secondary education (cf. Governmental Bill, 2008/09:199; SOU, 2008:27). Secondly, the broad knowledge base of the previous upper secondary education had made it impossible to achieve the development needed in various vocational occupations. The conclusion is to connect the steering of the content in vocational education to various labour market branches:

30

S. Lund To ensure high quality in upper secondary education, a strong commitment to strengthen the collaboration between schooling and the trade and business industry and the public sector is required. A well-functioning collaboration is one prerequisite for upper secondary school to be able to offer education with sufficient topicality and quality. (Governmental Bill, 2008/09:199, p. 39)

In this sense, the changes in the discursive imperatives of employability and international competition not only change the governing of content; labour market branch organizations were also given more influence over students’ development of required knowledge: “The Government believes that the suggested changes for vocational education highlighted in this Governmental Bill will increase the professional knowledge and contribute to more young people entering working life” (Governmental Bill, 2008/09:199, p. 55). In my interpretation, the baseline in this new form of policy regulation is pragmatic. It is taken for granted that vocational students are not interested in learning about general subjects, and neither do general subjects seem to be important on the future labour market. The previous argumentation in the 1990s of lifelong learning and a flexible workforce are bracketed. It is presumed that vocational students are primarily interested in getting a job and developing their professional skills, while students at academic preparatory programs want to be prepared for various university studies. The discursive imperatives within the economic discourse have changed: (i) It is assumed that a more effective upper secondary education will provide students in vocational education with specialized and context-bound knowledge, and students in academic preparatory programs with general and generic knowledge in their field of study (cf. Nylund & Virolainen, 2019), and that (ii) in order to be competitive in a globalized labour market, students should be able to develop specified knowledge and expertise for their future professions. This change also means that the knowledge base in vocational education is horizontal – i.e. it can be of use in a specialized but also limited labour market sector. In academic preparatory programs, the knowledge base is vertical – i.e. it can be used within a broad spectrum of social and work-related practices (cf. Thavenius, 1999).

The Active-Citizen Discourse I will now turn my interest to changes within the active-citizen discourse. In this discourse, the educational policy rhetoric concerning the relationship between upper secondary education and general subjects is legitimized by other discursive imperatives. The active-citizen discourse at the beginning of the 1990s is based on two discursive imperatives: (i) that individuals need consistent and general knowledge in order to actively take a stand on important work-based and social issues and (ii) that an equal educational system will provide society with autonomous citizens who can actively influence and develop democracy. In other words, the discursive civic-forming imperatives are based on equality and hopes for expanded societal

2  Governing Students’ Access to Knowledge: A Critical Discourse Analysis…

31

solidarity, rather than the employability, competition, and efficiency of the economic discourse. At the individual level, general subjects, in their central meaning, involve fostering individuals to take a moral stand, and to be able to orientate themselves and make vital decisions in an increasingly fragmented and societal complexity: “A broad general knowledge base is the most important tool for the individual to be able to handle and master a changeable reality” (Governmental Bill, 1997/98:169, p. 16). Upper secondary education is to develop civic competencies that compulsory school has laid the foundation for. Citizens have to take a stand on complicated issues concerning their own lives. Consequently, policymakers find that all upper secondary school students need the broad and general knowledge offered by the general subjects. With this starting point, I now follow Englund’s (1995) reasoning about educational reforms in compulsory school. Education is perceived as a social right, whereby the goal is to shape future citizenship. This principle of equality has its heritage in compulsory school, but in the 1990s can be considered to apply to upper secondary education. All students who start an upper secondary education program are obligated to study general subjects: In this perspective, it is necessary that the education in upper secondary school contain a core of general subjects that give each student, regardless of the direction of the education, a common knowledge to build on. This is a further step in the effort to guarantee equality. (Governmental Bill, 1990/91: 85, p. 50)

Knowledge in general subjects is not just a matter of the individual’s ability to make decisions concerning their own life; it is also about a development of formal democracy. “In an active social life, all citizens need good knowledge of Swedish, the Social Sciences, the Natural Sciences, English, etc. to be able to participate in public debate and influence societal development” (SOU, 1996:1, p. 16). Citizens are therefore in need of “…more lasting knowledge that constitutes the common frame of reference that everyone in society needs” (National Curriculum, Lpf 94, p. 8). This is required for their participation in the democratic process of society. Biesta (2003) takes two different positions in his discussion of education and democracy. He talks about educating for democracy and educating through democracy. In the former, democracy is perceived as a teaching content in which students’ knowledge about how to make democratic decisions or how differences can be handled should also generate certain collective values ​​that are characteristic of a democracy. This position involving democracy as an educational content could, at a societal level of the participant model, be regarded as the individual’s opportunities to participate in the decision-making apparatus of formal democracy. In the Governmental Bill (1990/91:85), the general subjects’ relationship with democratic participation is exemplified through knowledge in the natural sciences: “The necessary environmental awareness presupposes a scientific literacy that includes the entire people, if the decisions are to be tangible for democratic debate and for democratic decision-­ making” (p. 44).

32

S. Lund

However, Biesta (2003) believes that there is also another common way of perceiving the relationship between democracy and education. He calls this policy rhetoric as education through democracy, which is also highlighted in the National Curriculum: “Teaching must be conducted in democratic working methods and develop students’ ability and willingness to take personal responsibility and actively participate in society” (National Curriculum, Lpf 94, p. 8). For a student to, so to speak, “become” democratic, it is not enough to just be taught about democratic values ​​and procedures; teaching and learning should also take place in democratic-­ oriented classrooms. As I have described, the relationship between the individual upper secondary school student and society cannot be understood in the same functional way here as in the economic discourse. I would like to point out that this is because the discursive imperatives have another starting point for the relationship between schooling and social incorporation. In order to be able to develop a personal attitude regarding the questions that the complexity of society requires of the individual, they must place their subjective experiences and interests in relation to the cultural values and norms that society represents. It is also in this process towards increased individual autonomy that the relationship to society exists. In this respect, the development of democracy presupposes autonomous individuals who can understand societal problems and argue for the validity of their own positions. The general subjects’ task in upper secondary education is, thus, to provide each student with an equal knowledge base in order to strengthen the individual student’s autonomy in order to improve flexibility, individual decision-making, and participation in public and/or workplace-related debates (Nylund & Rosvall, 2020).

Governing for Different Democratic Participation In the state investigation (SOU, 2008:27) and Governmental Bill (2008/09:199) that resulted in a new National Curriculum (Gy 11), the relationship between general subjects and the discursive imperatives of the active-citizen discourse has disappeared. The active-citizen discourse is present in the Governmental Bill (2008/09:199) – “The upper secondary school aims for students to gain knowledge and skills that will help them develop into responsible persons in their professional and community life” (p. 36) – and in the National Curriculum (Gy 11), but the link between developing democratic citizens and general subjects is absent. The strong emphasis on general subjects from both the economic and active-citizen discourses in the 1990s has been replaced by a strictly strategic economic discourse that defines and structures different student groups’ needs for knowledge in terms of each individual after their own interests, life plans, and previously proven educational ability: Upper secondary school education has become increasingly homogeneous. The differences between programs have decreased and the scope of theoretical courses has increased. All students in national and specially designed programs are forced to enrol in basic eligibility for higher education, regardless of the goals, talents and interests of the individual student.

2  Governing Students’ Access to Knowledge: A Critical Discourse Analysis…

33

The core subject courses are largely governed by a traditional academic perspective…Many programs with vocational character subjects have become too theorized with too little time for vocational subjects. To some extent, they have a structure that is not adapted to the labour market. Despite the theorizing of upper secondary school, students from study preparation programs are less prepared for university than is desirable. (SOU, 2008:27, p. 675)

Thus, changes within the active-citizen discourse visualize a change from an attempt to provide equal knowledge for all towards a belief that students in vocational- and academic-oriented programs need different forms of knowledge. In my interpretation, such a change also signals a return to Sweden’s parallel school system of the 1950s (Lund, 2006), namely, that different groups of students are presumed to have various obligations in order to sustain and develop a democratic society.

Access to General Knowledge: Critical Remarks So far, I have described and presented my interpretations of changes within the economic discourse and active-citizen discourses between the 1990s and 2011. In this final section, I will turn my interest to the relationship between these discourses and the orders of discourse that structure the access to knowledge for upper secondary school students. One way to understand the relationship between the economic and active-citizen discourses in the 1990s reforms is to follow Wallin (1997), who argues that the major intention of these reforms is to improve students’ democratic and civic competence. He bases this interpretation on the fact that the introduction of general subjects for all students is a historically unique change in educational policy. Wallin (1997) states that these changes also create new learning conditions for upper secondary school students to develop common cultural values and equal opportunities for active democratic participation. However, there is a fundamental theoretical and empirical problem with Wallin’s interpretations. In my understanding of the policy rhetoric, his interpretation is one-sidedly connected to the active-citizen discourse. As I have shown, the introduction of general subjects for all during this time period also has strong connections to the economic discourse. Namely, students’ knowledge in general subjects is viewed as an individual and societal investment that will promote employability and global competitiveness (cf. Lindensjö & Lundgren, 2000). I would therefore like to emphasize that it is actually the relationship between these two discourses that lends legitimacy to the 1990s policy reforms involving general subjects in the knowledge society. In other words, it is not possible to exclude the discursive imperatives of either the economic or the active-citizen discourse, if the 1990s reforms are to be perceived as reasonable and legitimate on a societal and an individual level. If such orders of discourse are to become legitimate in terms of policy, teaching practice, and public opinion, upper secondary school’s general subjects must provide equal knowledge for all students regardless of their choice of program. This will also place certain demands on the outcome of these courses. If upper secondary

34

S. Lund

school students in, for example, the Social Sciences program and the Vehicle and Transport program do not develop equivalent knowledge through the general subject courses, the upper secondary educational system can be criticized on an individual as well as a societal level. Several researchers have shown that the distribution of equal knowledge to all is a political illusion (cf. Ask, 2007; Berggren, 2013; Hill, 1998; Lund, 2006; Malmgren, 1992). The general subjects’ curriculum is equal in content and study goals, but in teaching practice is transformed into different knowledge and learning outcomes. Students’ participation in a program-specific context thus becomes synonymous with the institutional understanding of what kind of knowledge a certain group of students need. Frykholm and Nitzler (1993) suggest a number of explanations for these patterns of teaching. For instance, they argue that the content of teaching, in a principled sense, is structured by students’ and teachers’ dominant ways of constructing meaning in schooling practices. These meaning structures are linked to the nature of the specific student groups’ future social positions and work tasks. In this sense, the policy texts that preceded the new National Curriculum (Gy 11) could be interpreted as a pragmatic way of handling an inequality of schooling practice. Another interpretation is that this reform is linked to rational calculations of how to make the neoliberal educational system more efficient, namely, that the most strategic way to raise educational standards and maintain some sort of national efficiency in upper secondary education is through social and knowledge differentiation. Michael Apple (1998) argues that a neoliberally based education policy’s emphasis on economic efficiency overlooks the possibility of pluralistic and diverse educational pathways. Based on a neoliberal economically based worldview, the strong differentiation of the students’ assumed future needs for general knowledge between vocational and academic preparatory programs can be seen as a response to a perceived need to maximize the economic outcome of education: “The world is intensely competitive economically, and students  – as future workers  – must be given the requisite skills and dispositions to compete efficiently and effectively” (Apple, 1998, p. 183). In my interpretation, the absence of active-citizen discourse in the educational policy rhetoric concerning general subjects is one of many examples of how neoliberal-­influenced policies prevent social cohesion and effectively create social boundaries between different groups in the knowledge society. Access to knowledge thus visualizes power relations. The reduced access to general knowledge for students in vocational education also means that their future opportunities for adapting to new demands for knowledge and lifelong learning in an unpredictable labour market are made more difficult in relation to the 1990s. Even more obvious is the obstruction of equal democratic participation. The active citizenship of students in vocational education can be interpreted as being reduced to simply becoming employable, paying your taxes, and not becoming a social and economic burden on society. In times when fake news, political populism, and nationalism question academically produced knowledge, unequal access to general knowledge in upper secondary education goes well beyond a neoliberal understanding of developing human

2  Governing Students’ Access to Knowledge: A Critical Discourse Analysis…

35

capital (better workers) and economic growth. It’s about strengthening future generations’ ability to see beyond their self-interests, and their willingness to participate in an ongoing critical debate, which democratic societies so heavily rely on.

References Antikainen, A. (2010). The capitalist state and education: The case of restructuring the Nordic model. Current Sociology, 58(4), 530–550. Apple, M.  W. (1998). Education and new hegemonic blocs: Doing policy the ‘right’ way. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 8(2), 181–202. Arnesen, A.-L., & Lundahl, L. (2006). Still social and democratic? Inclusive education in the Nordic welfare states. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 50(3), 285–300. Ask, S. (2007). Vägar till ett akademiskt skriftspråk (Diss.). Växjö University Press. Ball, S.  J. (2003). Class strategies and the educational market: The middle classes and social advantage. Routledge. Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., & Macrae, S. (2000). Choice, pathways and transitions Post-16: New youth, new economies in the global city. Routledge. 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. Beck, U. (1998). Risksamhället. Daidalos. Berggren, J. (2013). Engelskundervisning i gymnasieskolan för mobilisering av ungdomars livschanser (Diss.). Linnaeus University Press. Biesta, G. (2003). Demokrati: ett problem för utbildning eller ett utbildningsproblem? Utbildning & Demokrati. Tidskrift för didaktik och utbildningspolitik, 12(1), 59–80. Ds. 1997:78 Gymnasieskola i ständig utveckling. Englund, T. (1995). Utbildningspolitiskt systemskifte [Education political system change], HLS. Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Polity. Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis. Longman. Foskett, N., & Hemsley-Brown, J. (2001). Choosing futures. Young people’s decisionmaking in education, training, and careers markets. Routledge. Foucault, M. (1993). Diskursens ordning. Brutus Östling. Fritzell, C. (1998). Skolans värdegrund: Samhällsutveckling och pedagogikens demokratisering [The value basis of school: Development of society and Democratising of pedagogy]. Utbildning & Demokrati. Tidskrift för didaktik och utbildningspolitik., 2, 41–55. Frykholm, C.-U., & Nitzler, R. (1993). Working life as pedagogical discourse: Empirical studies of vocational and career education based on theories of Bourdieu and Bernstein. Journal of Educational Studies, 25(5), 433–444. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernitet och självidentitet [Modernity and self-identity]. Daidalos. Governmental Bill 1990/91:85. Växa med kunskaper: om gymnasieskolan och vuxenutbildningen. Governmental Bill 1992/93:250. Ny läroplan och ett nytt betygssystem för gymnasieskolan, komvux, gymnaslesärskolan och särvux. Governmental Bill 1997/98:169. Gymnasieskola i utveckling: kvalitet och likvärdighet. Governmental Bill 2008/09:199. Högre krav och kvalitet i den nya gymnasieskolan. Habermas, J. (1987). The theory of communicative action. Volume two. The critique of functionalist reason. Polity. Habermas, J. (1999). Den postnationella konstellationen. Daidalos. Hill, M. (1998). Kompetent för “det nya arbetslivet“? Tre gymnasieklasser reflekterar över och diskuterar yrkesförberedande studier (Diss.), Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.

36

S. Lund

Honneth, A. (2015). Civil society as a democratic battlefield: Comments on Alexander’s the civil sphere. In K.  Peter & S.  Giuseppe (Eds.), Solidarity, justice and incorporation: Thinking through the civil sphere (pp. 81–95). Oxford University Press. Lindblad, S., & Popkewitz, T.  S. (1999). Education governance and social integration and exclusion: National cases of educational systems and recent reforms. Uppsala Reports on Education 34. Lindensjö, B., & Lundgren, U. P. (2000). Utbildningsreformer och politisk styrning. HLS. Lund, S. (2006). Marknad och medborgare: elevers valhandlingar i gymnasieutbildningens integrations- och differentieringsprocesser [Market and citizens: students’ choices…] (Diss.). Växjö University Press. Lund, S. (2008). Choice paths in the Swedish upper secondary education: A critical discourse analysis of recent reforms. Journal of Education Policy, 23(6), 633–648. Lund, S., & Sundberg, D. (2012). Kunskaper för en ny tid: Pedagogisk kritik av samtidens kunskapspraktiker. Utbildning och Demokrati: tidskrift för didaktik och utbildningspolitik, 21(2), 5–14. Lundahl, L. (2002). Sweden: Decentralization, deregulation, quasi-markets and then what? Journal of Education Policy, 17(6), 687–697. Malmgren, G. (1992). Gymnasiekulturer: Lärare och elever om svenska och kultur [Gymnasium Cultures: Teachers and Students on Swedish and Culture] (Diss.), Lunds University. Mellén, J. (2021). Stability and change: Exploring policy formations, options, and choice in Swedish upper secondary education (Diss.). Gothenburg Studies in Educational Sciences. National Curriculum (Gy 11). Läroplan för gymnasieskolan. Avalible: https://www.skolverket.se/undervisning/gymnasieskolan/laroplan-­p rogram-­o ch-­a mnen-­i -­g ymnasieskolan/ laroplan-­gy11-­for-­gymnasieskolan Nylund, M., & Rosvall, P.-Å. (2020). Yrkesutbildningens demokratiska uppdrag: möjligheter och hinder. In P.-Å. Rosvall, K. Ledman, & M. Nylund (Eds.), Yrkesämnea och skolans demokratiska uppdrag [Occupational themes and the democratic mission of school] (pp. 141–156). Gleerups. Nylund, M., & Virolainen, M. (2019). Balancing ‘flexibility’ and ‘employability’: The changing role of general studies in the Finnish and Swedish VET curricula of the 1990s and 2010s. European Educational Research Journal, 18(3), 314–334. Rees, G., Fevre, R., Furlong, J., & Gorard, S. (1997). History, place and the learning society: Towards a sociology of lifetime learning. Journal of Education Policy, 12(6), 485–497. Salovaara, V. (2021). Structured agency: Students’ scope of action in the transition phase from basic education to upper secondary education in Finland (Diss.). University of Helsinki. SCB. 2021. Available: https://www.scb.se/hitta-­statistik/sverige-­i-­siffror/utbildning-­jobb-­och­pengar/utbildningsnivan-­i-­sverige/ SOU 1996:1 Den nya gymnasieskolan – hur går det? SOU 1997:107 Den nya gymnasieskolan – problem och möjligheter. SOU 2002:120 Åtta vägar till kunskap – en ny struktur för gymnasieskolan. SOU 2008:27 Framtidsvägen – en reformerad gymnasieskola. Stehr, N. (2001). Modern societies as knowledge societies. In G.  Ritzler & B.  Smart (Eds.), Handbook of social theory. Sage. Sundberg, D. (2005). Skolreformernas dilemman: En läroplansteoretisk studie av kampen om tid i den svenska obligatoriska skolan (Diss.). Växjö University Press. Swedish Educational Act 2010:800. Thavenius, J. (1999). Läroplanen och kulturerna. In L. G. Andersson, M. Persson, & J. Thavenius (Eds.), Skolan och de kulturella förändringarna (pp. 143–162). Studentlitteratur. Tognato, C. (2018). The civil life of the university: Enacting dissent and resistance on a Colombian campus. In C. A. Jeffrey & T. Carlos (Eds.), The civil sphere in Latin America (pp. 149–176). Cambridge University Press. Wallin, E. (1997). Gymnasieskola i stöpsleven: då nu alltid. Perspektiv på en skolform. Liber. Walther, A., & Plug, W. (2006). Transitions from school to work in Europe: Destandardization and policy trends. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 113, 77–90. Winther-Jorgensen, M., & Phillips, L. (2000). Diskursanalys som teori och metod. Studentlitteratur.

2  Governing Students’ Access to Knowledge: A Critical Discourse Analysis…

37

Stefan Lund is Professor of Education at the Department of Education at Stockholm University, Sweden. His research interests revolve around cultural sociology, sociology of education, educational policy, multicultural education and sociology of sport. Lund’s current research interest is connected to how modes of immigrant incorporation are performed in the local development of desegregation policies in Sweden. His latest book contribution is the edited volume Immigrant incorporation, Education and the Boundaries of Belonging.  

Chapter 3

Social Inclusion and Equality in Access: Comparing Vocational Education in Sweden and Denmark Christian Helms Jørgensen

Abstract  The purpose of this chapter is to examine how vocational education and training at upper secondary level (VET) contributes to social justice in education. It does so by comparing the two most differing Nordic VET systems, those of Sweden and Denmark. The chapter examines the historical trajectories of VET in the two countries from the 1970s until today. It examines political reforms to manage two key challenges for VET, on the one hand the challenge of providing direct access to employment and on the other hand the challenge of providing access to higher education. The chapter demonstrates how the organisation and governance of upper secondary VET in the two countries contributes to social justice in different ways. It finds that the key aims of securing social inclusion and employment of all young people and at the same time securing equal opportunities for progression to higher education constitute a basic dilemma for education policy. Education policies in Sweden and Denmark represent two different answers to this dilemma, and the chapter considers the strengths and weaknesses of these answers. The reasons for the limited success of recent reforms are explored, and some of the opportunities for the future development are considered. Keywords  Social justice · Vocational education and training · Education policy · Social inclusion · Nordic countries · Educational governance

Introduction The Nordic countries have all pursued egalitarian and socially inclusive aims of education, and they are recognised internationally for their undivided and comprehensive school systems (Wiborg, 2009). These school systems are linked to the C. H. Jørgensen (*) Department of People and Technology, Roskilde University, Roskilde, Denmark e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 A. Rasmussen, M. Dovemark (eds.), Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries, Educational Governance Research 18, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08049-4_3

39

40

C. H. Jørgensen

Nordic type of welfare state and the universalistic youth transition system (Walther, 2006). Despite these shared traditions, upper secondary school systems differ significantly in the Nordic countries (Jørgensen, 2018). These differences are rooted in the historical struggles over the organisation of upper secondary education and particularly the relation between the two tracks: general education, to prepare for progression to higher education, and vocational education and training (VET), to prepare for entry into working life. While general upper secondary schools (gymnasiums) are quite similar across the Nordic countries, the VET systems at this level exhibit significant differences. VET systems have historical roots in apprenticeships that were regulated as part of the labour market (Michelsen & Stenström, 2018). In addition, the distribution of apprenticeships was regulated through supply and demand in the labour market for employment and the training market for apprenticeships. Apprentices were employed by training companies and paid according to agreements negotiated by labour market organisations. The employment relations and training contracts of apprentices were initially managed with little involvement of the state. VET was included under the neo-corporatist regulation of the labour markets, which became institutionalised in the first half of the twentieth century in the Nordic countries (Elvander, 2002; Engelstad & Hagelund, 2016). This corporatist governance involved a close collaboration of labour market organisations and the state, which supported the development of highly regulated and densely organised labour markets (Andersen et al., 2014). During the first half of the twentieth century, the ascending Social Democratic governments succeeded in reforming capitalism, and the labour movement became integrated into a consensual regulation of working life (Engelstad & Hagelund, 2016). The state left the governance of VET to labour market organisations. In Denmark, this was reinforced by legislation that gave them formal responsibility for drawing up the curriculum and supervising the quality of training. In Sweden, labour market organisations were responsible for VET, but they rejected legislation and state intervention in VET (Olofsson & Thunqvist, 2018). In the period after 1945, VET was gradually included in the expanding state education systems under Social Democratic state governance (Rothstein, 1996). For Social Democratic governments, the strong welfare state aimed to limit the dominance of the traditional social elite and extend welfare to all dimensions of citizens’ lives (Esping-Andersen, 1990). A key element of this political strategy was to replace the stratified and selective school system with a public, comprehensive system in an attempt to weaken the traditional class-based society (Blossing et  al., 2014; Wiborg, 2009). For the VET systems, this entailed a marginalisation of employers’ control over the training of young people and the reduction of work-­ based learning in VET. This was realised most profoundly in Finland and Sweden and only partly in Denmark and Norway. In Denmark, the corporatist governance in VET was reinforced by the state through reforms in the interwar period. This control has been maintained until the present, though state involvement has been growing since the 1970s and marketisation since the 1990s (Jørgensen, 2018). In Sweden, the regulation of the VET system was also left to labour market organisations in the 1940s, but this was not

3  Social Inclusion and Equality in Access: Comparing Vocational Education…

41

supported with a binding legal framework. The large Swedish employers opposed state interference in VET and took little interest in maintaining apprenticeships (Dobbins & Busemeyer, 2014). Apprenticeships lost ground in the 1960s, and a state-led and school-based VET system was gradually integrated into a comprehensive upper secondary school (Nilsson, 1981, 2011). Thus, upper secondary vocational education in Denmark and Sweden represents two different outcomes of the contention between the state and labour market organisations over the organisation and direction of VET.  The VET systems in Denmark and Sweden offer different educational opportunities and transition pathways for young people. This difference most noticeably concerns young peoples’ access to higher education and skilled employment after the completion of upper secondary education. The question of access to educational progression and working life for all young people has become critical for two reasons. First, the growing enrolment of students in higher education, which results from “academic drift” of young peoples’ educational choices, has increased the expectations of VET to offer all students eligibility for higher education. Second, changes in the labour market have made the situation more precarious for early school leavers and young people not in education, employment or training (the NEET group). This has highlighted the significance of VET in providing access to working life for disadvantaged youth, who do not opt for higher education (Busemeyer, 2015). However, by reinforcing the connections of VET to the labour market, VET can become a dead end without access to educational progression at the post-secondary level. Social justice in upper secondary school thus concerns both of the two main progression routes for young people after completion: access to higher education and access to working life. This chapter examines how access in this dual perspective has been managed by reforms and different forms of VET governance in Denmark and Sweden over the last decades. First, it draws the conceptual framework for the analyses and, second, examines the historical background for the divergent development of VET in Sweden and Denmark. Third, it reviews political reforms in the two countries to manage the issue of access to educational progression and working life. Finally, the reasons for the limited success of these reforms and their unintended consequences are explored. Some recent reforms in the two countries indicate a convergence of international efforts to manage these political challenges. This chapter is based on comparative studies of the historical and current development in a major research project of upper secondary VET in the Nordic countries (Jørgensen et al., 2018; Michelsen & Stenström, 2018). The research includes analyses of policy documents, white papers and previous studies of Nordic VET systems. In addition, it draws on recent studies on transition, inclusion and selection in the Nordic upper secondary schools (Dovemark et al., 2018; Frønes et al., 2020; Jørgensen, 2019; Jørgensen et al., 2019).

42

C. H. Jørgensen

Conceptual Framework Regarding governance, upper secondary VET in the Nordic countries occupies a more complex and contested terrain than state-led general upper secondary schools. VET is shaped by both education policy and employment policy, and VET has increasingly achieved an important role in social welfare policy because policy makers see VET as a measure to reduce the NEET group. Historically, VET was organised as part of the labour market, and VET was not included in the formation of a universal state education system until after 1945 (Wiborg, 2009). VET is situated both between the education system and the employment system and between secondary school and higher education. However, the linkages of VET to working life and to higher education differ significantly among the Nordic VET systems. Upper secondary VET systems are heterogeneous, as VET covers a wide variety of different public and private sectors and industries with different configurations of stakeholders. This complexity is mirrored in the structures of VET governance. International comparative research on VET has studied national differences and historical shifts of governance and developed typologies of governance (Busemeyer & Trampusch, 2012). However, actual VET systems typically combine different forms of governance, and the historical shifts seldom involve total transformations of the systems (Gonon, 2016). This chapter draws on historical institutionalism (Mahoney & Thelen, 2010; Thelen, 2004), which emphasises that institutional change not only takes place as displacement, where one institutional regime replaces another. More frequently, it involves processes of layering, where the new institutions combine with the existing institutions, or drift and conversion, where the functioning of the institution changes without transforming the existing formal structures. National differences between VET systems are conceptualised in comparative VET research and in the comparative political economy of skills (Busemeyer & Trampusch, 2012; Gonon, 2016; Greinert, 1999; Thelen, 2004). These theoretical approaches demonstrate how the governance of VET is connected to social class alliances, production regimes and labour market relations. Therefore, the context for studies on the governance of VET differs from research on the governance of compulsory and general education (Blossing et al., 2014). The latter type of research has highlighted the impact of neoliberal reforms of education, including decentralisation, marketisation and privatisation (Dovemark et al., 2018). The state’s direct control of education has given way to educational markets, students’ choices and networks of private organisations and multiple stakeholders. This is explained as a shift from government to governance (Hudson, 2007). This explanation is only partially valid for VET due to the specific character regarding the governance of VET, especially in Denmark, where the state never assumed the leading role. The involvement of private training providers, training markets and multiple stakeholders in the governance structures has a long history in most VET systems. A significant contribution to the literature on the governance of VET comes from the political economy of skills (Busemeyer & Trampusch, 2012), which differentiates between VET systems in two dimensions: one concerning the extent of

3  Social Inclusion and Equality in Access: Comparing Vocational Education…

43

employer involvement and the other the extent of public commitment to skill formation. Public commitment is high in all the Nordic countries, but employer engagement differs significantly, especially between Sweden and Denmark. The Swedish VET system is categorised as state-led, while the Danish VET system is categorised as collective skill formation. This highlights an important difference between these two VET systems regarding employer involvement. The categorisation, however, is not very adequate considering the complex governance structures of these VET systems and their changes since the early 1990s. Greinert (1999) has developed a related conceptualisation that is relevant for the analysis of two Nordic VET systems in this chapter. He identifies three ideal types of governance in VET. One is state governance by centralised, legal-bureaucratic regulation and the allocation of resources. This corresponds to the Social Democratic type of political management based on the national standardisation of educational provisions and centrally defined curricular standards to ensure equal educational opportunities for all (Rothstein, 1996). State governance was dominant in steering the Swedish upper secondary school in connection with the formation of the unified gymnasium in the early 1970s until the liberalisation of the early 1990s. The second ideal type of VET governance is corporatist, which is historically rooted in the pre-­ modern guild systems. Currently, it is expressed in the institutionalised cooperation and regulation of the Nordic labour markets (Andersen et al., 2014; Elvander, 2002). In the Danish VET system, corporatist governance dominates the regulation of work-based training in apprenticeships. The third type is market-based governance, which regulates the distribution of work-based apprenticeships in the regular Danish VET system and in the Swedish post-secondary apprenticeship (färdigutbildning). More recently, different forms of marketisation associated with New Public Management have been part of the neoliberal turn in education since the 1980s (Blossing et al., 2014). This chapter explores how different forms of governance in VET have affected young peoples’ access to education and working life. Their access depends not only on education and employment policies but also on other changes in the welfare state that influence young peoples’ school-to-work transitions. To analyse youth transitions in a broader perspective, Walther (2006) used the concept of transition regime and categorised the Nordic countries as representing universalistic transition regimes. He emphasised the comprehensive school system, universal social rights and the support for young peoples’ personal development. This description appears somewhat idealised, considering the political changes during the latest decades (Jørgensen et al., 2019). However, this raises an important point in taking a holistic view of the diverse policies and institutions affecting young peoples’ opportunities for access in their post-compulsory transitions.

44

C. H. Jørgensen

 istorical Background for Divergence of Upper H Secondary VET Denmark and Sweden are generally categorised as representing different types of governance of VET systems (Busemeyer & Trampusch, 2012). However, ideal types should not be mistaken for empirical governance structures, which, as the result of processes of layering and conversion, combine elements from different forms of governance. In the historical development of the Nordic VET systems, some common patterns can be identified. Corporatist arrangements were historically dominant in both Danish and Swedish VET systems, as apprenticeships were regulated as part of working life – and mainly still are in Denmark (Michelsen & Stenström, 2018; Nilsson, 1981). In the interwar period, Swedish municipalities organised school-based VET programmes parallel to apprenticeships. In Denmark, supplementary school-based training was organised as part of the apprenticeship system, and from the first Apprenticeship Act of 1889, the attendance of vocational schools was included in the training of apprentices. After 1945, VET in both countries presented a fragmented and diverse landscape shaped by sectoral and local interests of corporatist institutions. In traditional industries in Denmark, VET was important for the definition of job demarcations, vocational identities, the division of work, remuneration and union power and membership. Therefore, the labour market partners had strong interests in VET, and the governance and organisation of VET differed from general upper secondary education. In both countries, VET programmes were weakly standardised and had strong links to sectoral interests. In the postwar period, this was considered inadequate for meeting the requirements of industry and the large youth cohorts leaving compulsory schools. The Social Democratic governments were critical of the employers’ control of work-based training in VET and sought to integrate VET under a coherent system of state governance. The aim was to provide equal opportunities for access to education for all young people after compulsory school and thereby reduce social inequalities (Brandal et  al., 2013). As a result, school-based forms of publicly provided VET expanded at the expense of apprenticeships, and the role of corporatist governance weakened. This political process developed differently in Sweden and Denmark and resulted in different forms of upper secondary VET systems after the reforms in the early 1970s. In Sweden, the diverse vocational and trade schools were merged with the gymnasiums, which thus became a common post-compulsory school for all young people. At the same time, vocational education expanded to cover new areas, such as social work, health and clerical occupations that appealed to women. The establishment of the unified upper secondary school entailed the marginalisation of the labour market organisations in the governance structure for VET. In Denmark, the Social Democratic governments’ policy in the early 1970s included plans for a 12-year undivided school that would offer access to higher education for all young people. However, the formation of a comprehensive upper

3  Social Inclusion and Equality in Access: Comparing Vocational Education…

45

secondary school was opposed by major labour market organisations and the right-­ wing parties in Parliament (Jørgensen, 2018). As a result, the Danish upper secondary school maintained a stronger tracking than similar schools in the other Nordic countries, and VET continued as a modernised apprenticeship system under corporatist governance. In both countries, a series of education reforms for decentralisation, marketisation and liberalisation were introduced in the early 1990s. These reforms were passed in explicit opposition to the previous Social Democratic state-led steering and planning of the education systems. The ensuing formation of education markets based on the students’ free school choice and competition between the educational providers reshaped the institutional landscape during the next two decades. They also changed the patterns of institutional selection, segmentation and stratification in the education system. In the same period, some other education reforms were implemented that had great significance for the role and position of upper secondary VET (Jørgensen, 2018). In Denmark, the “education for all” programme was initiated in 1993, and in Sweden, a reform in 1991 realised the equalisation of the vocational and general programmes of the upper secondary school (Olofsson & Thunqvist, 2018). The following examines the purposes and effects of these reforms with an interest in their consequences for access and social justice in education.

 State-Led and Undivided Upper Secondary School for All A in Sweden The undivided and unitary upper secondary school in Sweden, which included both academic and vocational programmes, was realised in two steps. The first step was the 1971 reform, which contributed to an increase in the proportion of young people who started in one of the upper secondary VET programmes. The VET programmes were broadened, and the extent of work-based internships was reduced to about 6% of the study time. The learning goals concerning citizenship and academic knowledge were strengthened, and the role of the general subjects was increased. Beginning in the 1980s, more students progressed from VET to higher education. Women in particular took advantage of this, and thereby, this helped reduce inequality between men and women in higher education (Olofsson & Thunqvist, 2018). However, even after the reform in 1971, there were significant differences between the general and vocational programmes in terms of the content and length of the educations provided, the teachers’ education and the students’ social background. The trade union movement found that the reform was insufficient for reducing class-based inequalities in education and for reinforcing a democratisation of working life (Lundahl, 1997). The Swedish reform in 1991 took further steps to give the academic and vocational programmes equal status by extending the vocational programmes from 2 to

46

C. H. Jørgensen

3 years. In addition, all upper secondary programmes obtained a strong common core of general subjects, and hereby, all programmes would give opportunities for direct educational progression to the tertiary level. This was an important initiative for reducing the traditional social inequalities in the recruitment for higher education. With these opportunities for progression, the vocational programmes would no longer be a dead end in the education system. The state-led Swedish unified upper secondary school became an icon for a Nordic equality-oriented education policy that aimed to reduce inequalities concerning gender, spatial location and social class (Blossing et al., 2014). In comparative studies, Sweden belongs to a limited number of countries that have reduced the importance of socioeconomic background for young people’s educational results (Erikson & Rudolphi, 2010; Rudolphi, 2014). However, parallel to the de-tracking of upper secondary education, the reforms of the 1990s initiated a significant liberalisation and marketisation of the education system, which had the opposite effect (Dovemark et al., 2018; Lundahl et al., 2010; Lundahl et al., 2013). Since the late 1980s, the effect of parental education on student achievement has increased in Sweden due to the growing segregation of students across schools (Gustafsson & Yang Hansen, 2018). In a study of Swedish school leavers in the period 1991–2012, Andersson et al. (2021) concluded that pupils’ performance in school has become increasingly linked to family, neighbourhood and school context. The 1991 reform, like the previous reform, was expected to make VET more attractive and increase the progression to higher education from VET. In this respect, the result was disappointing. After the reform, there was no increase in the share of students continuing into higher education, nor could any positive effect be identified on students’ sense of citizenship (Persson & Oscarsson, 2010). A more worrying effect was a sharp increase from 10% to more than 30% in the share of students who did not complete upper secondary school in the period after the reform (1991–1996). In particular, the socially disadvantaged and academically weak students did not complete (Murray & Sundin, 2008). In addition, the majority of students in the vocational programmes did not acquire eligibility for higher education, and in 2015, only 16% of VET graduates continued on to post-secondary education 1 year after completion of upper secondary school (Kuczera & Jeon, 2019). Moreover, the reform weakened the connections of VET to the labour market, and this made the transition from VET to working life more difficult and contributed to the high youth unemployment rates in Sweden (Olofsson & Panican, 2017). The reform was meant to increase equality in access to higher education but was identified as a reason for an increase in the share of non-completing students. Hall (2012) showed that especially students with low grades from primary school did not complete. There is, however, some disagreement about the precise reasons why a third of students in VET did not complete after the reform. Some emphasise the effects of a simultaneous reform of the grading system that made it more difficult to complete (Nylund, 2013; Rudolphi, 2014). The academisation of VET had negative consequences, especially for students from families with a low level of education (Olofsson & Panican, 2017). The reform was implemented in a period when Sweden experienced a severe economic downturn in the early 1990s, which led to a sharp

3  Social Inclusion and Equality in Access: Comparing Vocational Education…

47

rise in youth unemployment. This drew attention to the problem of the weak connection of VET to the labour market. Unlike the Danish apprenticeships, the Swedish VET programmes are only preparatory. The training of specific occupational skills is postponed until after graduation from upper secondary school. This contributes to making the transition from VET to the labour market more difficult and protracted in Sweden than in Denmark. The results of the realisation of a comprehensive upper secondary school in Sweden were thus contradictory. The main purpose of the reform was to increase equality of opportunities regarding access to higher education. However, the reform was associated with an increased marginalisation of disadvantaged youth in upper secondary school, as it became more academic and bookish. This was an argument for the shift in political direction, which took place with the reform of the Swedish VET system in 2011. The shift took steps in the direction of the Danish VET system by reducing the academic content of VET and introducing a new apprenticeship programme (Andersson et al., 2021; Olofsson & Thunqvist, 2018). The reforms in the same period in Denmark had another aim, namely, to increase social inclusion in vocational education with a reform programme starting in 1993.

Social Inclusion in the Danish Apprenticeship System In a reform of Danish VET in 1991, the plans for a unified upper secondary school were finally buried, as the traditional apprenticeship system was merged with the reformed VET programmes that emerged from the 1970s. The separation of VET from the academic upper secondary school has been retained until today. The differences between the academic and the vocational programmes are substantial and include both the purpose of the programmes, the governance structures, the learning cultures and the students’ social backgrounds. The strong division of the upper secondary school reinforces the selection of the students in the two tracks according to their parents’ educational backgrounds (Holm et al., 2013; Wahler et al., 2016). In addition, half of the vocational programmes are highly segregated by gender, and access to these programmes is very challenging for young people belonging to the gender minority (Jørgensen, 2015). The Danish VET system is more similar to the German than to the Swedish VET system. The German education system ranks among the highest in Europe regarding inequalities of educational opportunities due to its strong and early forms of tracking and stratification (Blossfeld et  al., 2016; Pfeffer, 2015). The VET system in Denmark does not provide general eligibility for higher education and thereby sustains the biased social recruitment for higher education. An exception is the new hybrid programme (eux) introduced in 2011, which provides access to higher education and access to skilled employment with a journeyman’s certificate (Jørgensen, 2017). Though this programme has a small volume, it represents a promising educational innovation in the direction of a comprehensive school.

48

C. H. Jørgensen

There are several reasons why comprehensive school was not realised in Danish upper secondary education as it was in Sweden. One reason is that the Social Democrats in Denmark never achieved the parliamentary strength that the party gained in Sweden. Another is that the Danish trade union federation did not support the merging of VET into a comprehensive school even though this could have reduced social sorting and inequality. This is related to the strong tradition in Denmark of craft unionism in contrast to the early establishment of industrial unions in Sweden (Dobbins & Busemeyer, 2014). As the control of VET is crucial for skilled workers’ organisations in Denmark, they opposed the replacement of the corporatist governance by a Swedish type of state control. A strong argument for maintaining the divided and selective school system until today is the political concern for marginalised youth, the NEETs. Since the 1980s, this concern has been given higher priority in education policy than the aim of offering all young people access to higher education. The negative long-term effects of being part of the NEET group have been demonstrated in various reports and white papers. A political argument in Denmark for maintaining apprenticeships as a separate track in upper secondary education is that apprenticeships give disadvantaged students direct access to subsequent employment. This was paralleled by a renewed political interest in apprenticeships internationally, including in Sweden (Andersson et al., 2015). Since the 1980s, the apprenticeship model of VET has received unwavering support from Danish labour market organisations. None of the key stakeholders has questioned the separation of VET from the gymnasiums, but various initiatives have been proposed to create broader pathways from VET to post-secondary education (Jørgensen, 2017). A key argument for maintaining the apprenticeship model as a separate track is the high employment rates of newly educated apprentices. This argument is supported by numerous international comparative studies that demonstrate the advantages of upper secondary apprenticeship systems for school-to-work transitions (Gangl, 2001; Müller & Gangl, 2003; Raffe, 2014; Shavit & Müller, 2000; Wolbers, 2007). These advantages are linked to the specific quality of apprenticeships, which give young people access to a meaningful learning environment and a vocational identity and closely link VET to working life. In apprenticeships, the socialisation and integration into working life takes place during the programmes, and in Denmark, half of apprentices gain employment in the training company immediately after completion. In workplaces, students get access to occupational communities and identities, which guide them in the transitions from compulsory school to the labour market (Colley et  al., 2003; Hegna, 2019). Many disadvantaged and school-weary youth find the learning environments of workplaces more meaningful than schools, and this helps them complete upper secondary education. However, the socially inclusive role of apprenticeships does not apply to all. As apprenticeships are mostly distributed through informal social networks and a training market, access to apprenticeships is difficult for ethnic and gender minorities. This is due to a combination of employers’ discrimination and minority groups’ weaker social networks (Imdorf, 2017).

3  Social Inclusion and Equality in Access: Comparing Vocational Education…

49

Upper Secondary Education for All in Denmark In the period when the Swedish comprehensive school expanded to the upper secondary level, the goal of “education for all” was adopted for the Danish upper secondary school. For the next two decades, the VET system had the main responsibility of making early school leavers and the NEET group complete upper secondary education. During the 1990s, this policy sought to adapt the educational programmes to the requirements of the diversified group of disadvantaged youth. An example is the Free Youth Education (den Fri Ungdomsuddannelse) programme from 1993, which offered a highly flexible and individualised programme composed mainly of the students themselves. Along the same lines, a reform of the VET system in 2000 required that all students draw up an individual basic VET programme, and a VET reform in 2004 made it possible to complete a vocational education in multiple separate steps. The aim of this individualisation and flexibility was to adapt the education system to the needs and interests of young people. With a new liberal-conservative government in 2001, emphasis shifted, and the problem of dropout and non-completion was placed more with the students than with the education system (Jørgensen, 2016). A reform of VET in 2006, inspired by New Public Management, imposed stricter state control of the vocational schools to raise the retention of students. It was supplemented with financial incentives for retention through psychological guidance, mentoring schemes, ability-based streaming of students and other social policy measures to reduce student dropouts (Jørgensen, 2016). Parallel to this shift in education policy, a significant shift took place in employment policy. Starting in the mid-1990s, active labour market policy for young people has been put into place. The intention was to reduce the NEET group by activating all young people in education or employment instead of receiving social benefits. Since the mid-1990s, the requirements on young people to be activated have become stricter. The municipalities’ outreach work has been intensified, and unemployed young people are increasingly meeting demands for immediate activation. The social benefits have been reduced, and sanctions have been tightened. The group of young people covered has been extended to include everyone up to the age of 30, and young people can be forced to start in education. Until the reform in 2015, vocational schools had the main responsibility for activated young people, who frequently had complex social and psychological problems. In addition, vocational schools had few opportunities to reject the enrolment of these young people and were required to retain them in education (Jørgensen, 2016). This shift from soft initiatives to hard requirements for the NEET group has succeeded in making almost all young people start in upper secondary education after ending compulsory school. At the same time, the dropout rates in VET programmes have risen sharply. Only half of the students who start a VET programme complete it. In addition, indications show that the activation and inclusion policy has contributed to a chain of self-reinforcing negative effects for the VET system. The activation policy has made the dropout rates and the share of disadvantaged youth in VET

50

C. H. Jørgensen

grow. This has contributed to lowering the reputation of VET and has reduced the enrolment of high-performing and resourceful students. Employers who provide apprenticeships have become more critical of the qualifications of the young people who apply, and this has aggravated the shortage of apprenticeships. An unintended consequence of the policies for social inclusion is a critical decline in the enrolment of students in VET. At the same time, a major shortage of skilled labour has been predicted. These unintended consequences of initiatives for social inclusion brought about a new reform of vocational education in 2015, which limits the access of disadvantaged youth to VET.  The reform introduced new entrance requirements. To be admitted in VET, students must have passed the final exam in compulsory school in the Danish language and math. The reform was remarkable because research demonstrated that the restriction of access would exclude many young people who would be able to complete the programme (Hvidtfeldt & Tranæs, 2013). In addition to the new entrance requirement, access to a large share of the 107 VET programmes is limited by quotas, which are set every year based on the current unemployment rate in the occupation. After 5 years, the reform has failed to achieve its key objectives – to raise the enrolment and retention of students in VET. One of the reasons for this failure is that the initiatives of the reform had serious unintended consequences. The reform focused narrowly on increasing the recruitment of youth directly from compulsory school, but these initiatives led to an unexpected reduction in the number of adult students.

 overnance, Access and Unintended Consequences G of Education Policy The organisation and governance of upper secondary VET is very important for young people’s access to educational progression and working life. Different types of VET governance are associated with different forms of stratification and selectivity in the upper secondary school system and its patterns of inequality (Rudolphi, 2014; Triventi et al., 2016). The comparison of Denmark and Sweden has referred to three different ideal types of governance of VET, and the examination indicates that these ideal types are associated with different ways of regulating access to VET (Jørgensen, 2018, 2019). With Social Democratic state-led governance, students’ access and progression is determined by meritocratic standards, which are measured by educational performance (grade point averages). Upper secondary education prioritises young peoples’ educational demands and adapts the size of the programmes to meet their demands. Emphasis is on citizenship and on providing equal opportunities for progression to higher education. With neo-corporatist governance, access to VET is regulated by the labour market demand for skilled labour. In the Danish case, this takes place through the limited supply of apprenticeships and by quotas for the number of students that can be

3  Social Inclusion and Equality in Access: Comparing Vocational Education…

51

enrolled in the VET programmes. Emphasis is on vocational/professional skills and work-based socialisation into the occupation. Lastly, with market-based governance, access is regulated through supply and demand in an education and training markets. Young peoples’ demand and purchasing power in this market is shaped by the educational resources they dispose of from their family background. The supply of education is shaped by the cost and benefits for the educational institutions and the profitability of education for private providers. In Sweden, private providers can go bankrupt and leave thousands of students without schools (Dovemark et  al., 2018). Emphasis here is on the students’ employability and the skills requirements of the employers. The examination of reforms in Denmark and Sweden indicates that the reforms in both countries had considerable unintended consequences. In Sweden, the reform in 1991 aimed to reduce social inequality in students’ access to higher education, but it also made the school-based VET programmes more academic and weakened their links to the labour market. This made it more difficult to retain disadvantaged and school-weary youth and provide access to working life. In Denmark, the VET reforms prioritised the inclusion of academically weak and disadvantaged young people. This weakened students’ access to higher education and strengthened the position of VET as a dead end in the education system. This analysis is in line with other comparative studies of inequalities of opportunities in upper secondary education. A tension has been expressed in the contrast of upper secondary VET being a safety net for disadvantaged youth while also being a diversion of youth from higher education (Bol & van de Werfhorst, 2013; Holm et al., 2013; Saar & Martma, 2021; Shavit & Müller, 2000). In particular, VET systems based on the apprenticeship model are socially inclusive for some disadvantaged youth, but they also represent an educational dead end by leading young people away from higher education. In addition, neoliberal reforms in both countries have increased the decentralisation and marketisation of upper secondary schools. Marketisation has been most profound in Sweden, which opened for the privatisation of schools and for-profit ownership of schools by equity funds (Dovemark et al., 2018). The marketisation, decentralisation and “municipalisation” in Sweden have resulted in increasing segmentation and larger between-schools differences in students’ socioeconomic backgrounds and their educational attainments (Andersson et al., 2021; Gustafsson & Yang Hansen, 2018). In Denmark, vocational schools have weak links to the municipalities, and liberalisation has resulted in successive mergers of vocational schools and the closing of smaller local schools. In contrast to the decentralisation in Sweden, Denmark has seen a concentration of upper secondary VET in fewer and larger educational institutions. In 2020, Sweden had 1273 upper secondary schools that offer vocational programmes (Statista, 2021), while Denmark only had 89 vocational schools offering VET programmes, frequently though with several local branches (DEG, 2021). The concentration of schools in Denmark has limited young peoples’ access to VET in peripheral municipalities (Larsen, 2017). Outside the larger cities, only one vocational school is typically accessible for students in a reasonable distance from their home, and therefore, students’ free school choice has

52

C. H. Jørgensen

not resulted in larger between-school differences or social segmentation. For students in VET, the critical question is not primarily the choice of school but to find a company where they can get an apprenticeship contract. Considering the diverse and unintended results of the reforms of the upper secondary VET systems in Denmark and Sweden, it is relevant to ask which of the two VET systems is most favourable for social equality in education. The comparison indicates that the answer depends on whether the interest is in equality in access to higher education or in the social inclusion of disadvantaged youth in education and working life. The experiences from the reforms in the two countries indicate that these two objectives are difficult to achieve at the same time. They constitute a dilemma for education policy (Jørgensen et al., 2018). The stratified Danish upper secondary school is more selective with regard to the students’ social origin and gender compared to comprehensive school systems. However, the separate apprenticeship in Denmark’s system offers a more direct and inclusive pathway to skilled employment for non-academically oriented youth. Examining the relation between school tracking and equality of opportunity, Brunello and Checchi (2007) found that a reduction of tracking in upper secondary education tends to reduce the role of parental privilege but also tends to increase social exclusion for disadvantaged youth. The comprehensive upper secondary school in Sweden is dominated by the ideals of the academic track, and this makes VET appear as an option only for low-performing students (Olofsson & Panican, 2017). The Swedish comprehensive school is less selective but also is less inclusive for school-weary young people and provides less support for their transition to working life. These built-in tensions can help explain the more recent political shifts in the two countries. Sweden, in 2011, introduced a new upper secondary apprenticeship programme. It marked a shift from the goal of the 1991 reform to ensure that all young people had a common basis of general knowledge. The introduction of uniform national standards throughout the country and across gender divisions and social divides was a key means of egalitarian education policy. It was subsequently criticised for being inflexible, especially in relation to students who had difficulties coping with the new academic requirements in VET. When the universal and comprehensive upper secondary school was established, opposition to centralised state governance and standardisation increased. The Social Democratic reforms for equality in the education system appeared as a policy of state-driven equalisation and standardisation, which conflicted with diverse individual interests and local requirements. The neoliberal reaction against the unified school rose parallel with new social movements that called for diversity and recognition of minorities’ rights. In an analysis of the equality-oriented education policy in Sweden, Englund and Quennerstedt (2008) argued that the meaning of the concept of equality shifted in this process. It changed from meaning that all have an equal right to the same and uniform education to meaning that everyone has equal rights to an education adapted to individual needs. This shift interacted with the neoliberal deregulation and decentralisation in the 1990s, which were presented as measures for increased flexibility, diversity and

3  Social Inclusion and Equality in Access: Comparing Vocational Education…

53

local influence. As a result of liberalisation, the Swedish education system shifted from representing strong and centralised state governance to being the most decentralised and market-oriented governance in the Nordic region (Lundahl et al., 2013). More recently, education in Sweden has seen an increase of state control and evaluation, a kind of recentralisation (Dovemark et al., 2018). In Denmark, a significant political shift came with the reform in 2015, which ended 20 years of measures to include early school leavers in VET and bring them into working life. The reform was a reaction to the negative consequences of these inclusion policies, which made the esteem of and enrolment in VET decline. The reform introduced entrance requirements in VET, new talent streams and eligible high-level courses. In addition, the reform extended a new hybrid programme in VET (eux), which combines both types of qualifications, a journeyman’s certificate and eligibility for higher education. The aim of the reform was to raise the status of VET, attract more high-performing students and redirect students from the gymnasiums to VET. The reforms in the 1990s in both countries had unintended consequences, which contributed to later shifts in education policy. The subsequent reforms in 2011 and 2015 brought the upper secondary schools of the two countries closer to each other. The initiatives in the latest reforms demonstrate that the tension between equality and inclusion can be managed, but this involves dealing with contradictions and dilemmas in education policy. The analysis has indicated that political reforms can have unintended and contradictory effects. This also applies to reforms that seek to combine social equality with social inclusion. The new Swedish apprenticeship programme was not successful, mostly because it did not provide access to higher education (Andersson et al., 2021). The hybrid Danish eux programme, in contrast, quickly became popular. However, the experience from the introduction of vocational gymnasiums in the 1980s demonstrates that it can have unintended consequences. When the most ambitious VET students opt for the eux programme, this can make regular VET programmes appear to be even more of a second-rate option for the academically weak students. This does not mean that reforms that combine social equality and social inclusion are hopeless, but it points to the limits of an equality-oriented education policy when the social inequalities in society are increasing, and the education system becomes increasingly individualised and marketised.

References Andersen, S. K., Dølvik, J. E., & Ibsen, C. L. (2014). Nordic labour market models in open markets. ETUI. Andersson, I., Wärvik, G.-B., & Thång, P.-O. (2015). Formation of apprenticeships in the Swedish education system: Different stakeholder perspectives. International Journal for Research in Vocational Education and Training, 2(1), 3–24.

54

C. H. Jørgensen

Andersson, E. K., Hennerdal, P., & Malmberg, B. (2021). The re-emergence of educational inequality during a period of reforms: A study of Swedish school leavers 1991–2012. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science, 48(4), 685–705. Blossfeld, H. P., Buchholz, S., Skopek, J., & Triventi, M. (Eds.). (2016). Models of secondary education and social inequality: An international comparison. Edward Elgar Publishing. Blossing, U., Imsen, G., & Moos, L. (Eds.). (2014). The Nordic education model: ‘A school for all’ encounters neo-liberal policy. Springer. Bol, T., & Van de Werfhorst, H. G. (2013). Educational systems and the trade-off between labor market allocation and equality of educational opportunity. Comparative Education Review, 57(2), 285–308. Brandal, N., Bratberg, Ø., & Thorsen, D.  E. (2013). The Nordic model of social democracy. Palgrave Macmillan. Brunello, G., & Checchi, D. (2007). Does school tracking affect equality of opportunity? New international evidence. Economic Policy, 22(52), 781–861. Busemeyer, M.  R. (2015). Skills and inequality: Partisan politics and the political economy of education reforms in western welfare states. Cambridge University Press. Busemeyer, M. R., & Trampusch, C. (Eds.). (2012). The political economy of collective skill formation. Oxford University Press. Colley, H., James, D., Diment, K., & Tedder, M. (2003). Learning as becoming in vocational education and training: Class, gender and the role of vocational habitus. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 55(4), 471–498. DEG. (2021). Danske Erhvervsskoler og –Gymnasier. https://deg.dk/ Dobbins, M., & Busemeyer, M. R. (2014). Socio-economic institutions, organized interests and partisan politics: The development of vocational education in Denmark and Sweden. Socio-­ Economic Review, 13(2), 259–284. Dovemark, M., Kosunen, S., Kauko, J., Magnúsdóttir, B., Hansen, P., & Rasmussen, P. (2018). Deregulation, privatisation and marketisation of Nordic comprehensive education: Social changes reflected in schooling. Education Inquiry, 9(1), 122–141. Elvander, N. (2002). The labour market regimes in the Nordic countries: A comparative analysis. Scandinavian Political Studies, 25(2), 117–137. Engelstad, F., & Hagelund, A. (Eds.). (2016). Cooperation and conflict the Nordic way: Work, welfare, and institutional change in Scandinavia. Walter de Gruyter. Englund, T., & Quennerstedt, A. (2008). Likvärdighetsbegreppet i svensk utbildningspolitik. In T. Englund & A. Quennerstedt (Eds.), Vadå likvärdighet? Studier i utbildningspolitisk språkanvändning (pp. 7–35) Daidalos. Erikson, R., & Rudolphi, F. (2010). Change in social selection to upper secondary school—Primary and secondary effects in Sweden. European Sociological Review, 26(3), 291–305. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Princeton University Press. Frønes, T. S., Pettersen, A., Radišić, J., & Buchholtz, N. (2020). Equity, equality and diversity in the Nordic model of education. Springer. Gangl, M. (2001). European patterns of labour market entry: A dichotomy of occupationalized versus non occupationalized systems? European Societies, 3(4), 471–494. Gonon, P. (2016). Zur Dynamik und Typologie von Berufsbildungssystemen—eine internationale Perspektiv. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 62(3), 307–322. Greinert, W.-D. (1999). Berufsqualifizierung und dritte industrielle Revolution. Nomos-Verlags-Gesellschaft. Gustafsson, J.-E., & Yang Hansen, K. (2018). Changes in the impact of family education on student educational achievement in Sweden 1988–2014. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 62(5), 719–736. Hall, C. (2012). The effects of reducing tracking in upper secondary school evidence from a large-­ scale pilot scheme. Journal of Human Resources, 47(1), 237–269. Hegna, K. (2019). Learner identities in vocational education and training—From school to apprenticeship. Journal of Education and Work, 32(1), 52–65.

3  Social Inclusion and Equality in Access: Comparing Vocational Education…

55

Holm, A., Jæger, M. M., Karlson, K. B., & Reimer, D. (2013). Incomplete equalization: The effect of tracking in secondary education on educational inequality. Social Science Research, 42(6), 1431–1442. Hudson, C. (2007). Governing the governance of education: The state strikes back? European Educational Research Journal, 6(3), 266–282. Hvidtfeldt, C., & Tranæs, T. (2013). Folkeskolekarakterer og succes på erhvervsuddannelserne. Syddansk Universitetsforlag. Imdorf, C. (2017). Understanding discrimination in hiring apprentices: How training companies use ethnicity to avoid organisational trouble. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 69(3), 405–423. Jørgensen, C. H. (2015). Some boys’ problems in education: What is the role of VET? Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 67(1), 62–77. Jørgensen, C.  H. (2016). Shifting problems and shifting policies to reduce students’ drop-out: The case of vocational education policy in Denmark. In S. Bohlinger, K. A. Dang, & G. Klatt (Eds.), Education policy (pp. 325–353). Peter Lang. Jørgensen, C.  H. (2017). From apprenticeships to higher vocational education in Denmark  – Building bridges while the gap is widening. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 69(1), 64–80. Jørgensen, C. H. (2018). The modernisation of the apprenticeship system in Denmark 1945–2015. In S. Michelsen & M.-L. Steenström (Eds.), Vocational education in the Nordic countries: The historical evolution. Routledge. Jørgensen, C. H. (2019). Young peoples’ access to working life in three Nordic countries: What is the role of vocational education and training? In H. Hvid & E. Falkum (Eds.), Work and wellbeing in the Nordic countries: Critical perspectives on the world’s best working life (pp. 155–174). Routledge. Jørgensen, C. H., Olsen, O. J., & Persson Thunqvist, D. (Eds.). (2018). Vocational education in the Nordic countries: Learning from diversity. Routledge. Jørgensen, C.  H., Järvinen, T., & Lundahl, L. (2019). A Nordic transition regime? Policies for school-to-work transitions in Sweden, Denmark and Finland. European Educational Research Journal, 18(3), 278–297. Kuczera, M., & Jeon, S. (2019). Vocational education and training in Sweden. OECD Publishing. Larsen, K. T. (2017). Laboured learning: Investigating challenged localities through a geography of vocational education. Ph.D. dissertation. Aalborg University. Lundahl, L. (1997). Efter svensk modell: LO, SAF och utbildningspolitiken 1944–90.. Boréa. Lundahl, L., Arreman, I. E., Lundström, U., & Rönnberg, L. (2010). Setting things right? Swedish upper secondary school reform in a 40-year perspective. European Journal of Education, 45(1), 46–59. Lundahl, L., Arreman, I. E., Holm, A.-L., & Lundström, U. (2013). Educational marketization the Swedish way. Education Inquiry, 4(4), 497–517. Mahoney, J., & Thelen, K. (Eds.). (2010). Explaining institutional change: Ambiguity, agency, and power. Cambridge University Press. Michelsen, S., & Stenström, M. L. (Eds.). (2018). Vocational education in the Nordic countries: The historical evolution. Routledge. Müller, W., & Gangl, M. (Eds.). (2003). Transitions from education to work in Europe. Oxford University Press. Murray, Å., & Sundin, S. (2008). Student flows and employment opportunities before and after implementation of a third year in vocational programmes at upper secondary school. European Journal of Vocational Training, 44(2), 110–130. Nilsson, L. (1981). Yrkesutbildning i nutidshistoriskt perspektiv: yrkesutbildningens utveckling från skråväsendets upphörande 1846 till 1980-talet samt tankar om framtida inriktning. Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis. Nilsson, A. (2011). Apprenticeship in decay? Sweden 1940–1965. Svenska Historikermötet.

56

C. H. Jørgensen

Nylund, M. (2013). Yrkesutbildning, klass & kunskap: En studie om sociala och politiska implikationer av innehållets organisering i yrkesorienterad utbildning med fokus på 2011 års gymnasiereform (Doctoral dissertation, Örebro Universitet). Olofsson, J., & Panican, A. (2017). An education policy paradigm that fails upper secondary school pupils. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 69(4), 495–516. Olofsson, J., & Thunqvist, D. P. (2018). The modern evolution of VET in Sweden (1945–2015). In S. Michelsen & M. L. Stenström (Eds.), Vocational education in the Nordic countries: The historical evolution. Routledge. Persson, M., & Oscarsson, H. (2010). Did the egalitarian reforms of the Swedish educational system equalise levels of democratic citizenship? Scandinavian Political Studies, 33(2), 135–163. Pfeffer, F. T. (2015). Equality and quality in education. A comparative study of 19 countries. Social Science Research, 51, 350–368. Raffe, D. (2014). Explaining national differences in education-work transitions. European Societies, 16(2), 175–193. Rothstein, B. (1996). The social democratic state: The Swedish model and the bureaucratic problem of social reforms. University of Pittsburgh Press. Rudolphi, F. (2014). Educational inequalities in Sweden: Past, present and future in a comprehensive school system? Scuola democratica, 2, 1–14. Saar, E., & Martma, L. (2021). The safety net and the diversion effects of vocational upper-­ secondary education in European countries. Journal of Education and Work, 4, 1–14. Shavit, Y., & Müller, W. (2000). Vocational secondary education. Where diversion and where safety net? European Societies, 2(1), 29–50. Statista. (2021). https://www.statista.com/markets/422/topic/523/sweden/ Thelen, K. (2004). How institutions evolve. The political economy of skills in Germany, Britain, the United States, and Japan. Cambridge University Press. Triventi, M., Kulic, N., Skopek, J., & Blossfeld, H.  P. (2016). Secondary school systems and inequality of educational opportunity in contemporary societies. In Models of secondary education and social inequality (pp. 3–24). Edward Elgar Publishing. Wahler, S., Buchholz, S., & Møllegaard, S. (2016). Educational inequalities in tracked Danish upper secondary education. In Models of secondary education and social inequality (pp. 197–209). Edward Elgar Publishing. Walther, A. (2006). Regimes of youth transitions. Choice, flexibility and security in young people's experiences across different European contexts. Young, 14(2), 119–139. Wiborg, S. (2009). Education and social integration: Comprehensive schooling in Europe. Palgrave Macmillan. Wolbers, M. H. J. (2007). Patterns of labour market entry. A comparative perspective on school-to-­ work transitions in 11 European countries. Acta Sociologica, 50(3), 189–210. Christian Helms Jørgensen has a PhD in Educational Studies (1999) and is professor mso at Roskilde University since 2013. His research focus on education policy, educational governance and planning, vocational education with a comparative perspective (especially the Nordic countries), workplace learning and social and gender inequalities in young peoples’ transitions from education to working life.  

Chapter 4

Governing School Choice in Norway: Why Local Educational Government Capacity Matters Anne Homme, Helene Marie Kjærgård Eide, and Kristin Lofthus Hope

Abstract  Among different initiatives for change and improvement of upper secondary education, in 2020, the Norwegian government decided to implement free school choice as mandatory enrolment principle for upper secondary education nationally from 2022, restricting the regional autonomy to decide on enrolment principle. This chapter explores the rationale behind different strategies for distribution of students for upper secondary school. The analysis relies on a multi-level governance perspective (Bache I, Flinders MV, Multi-level governance. Oxford University Press, 2004) and the analytical concept governing capacity (Lodge M, Wegrich K (eds.), The problem-solving capacity of the modern state: governance challenges and administrative capacities. Oxford University Press, 2014). Governing capacity includes formal, structural and procedural features of the governmental administrative apparatus as well as informal elements such as how the features work in practice (Christensen T, Lægreid P, Rykkja LH, Organizing for Crisis Management: Building Governance Capacity and Legitimacy. Public Administration Review, 76, 2016). By comparing two Norwegian counties with different institutional structure and governance of upper secondary education, this chapter illuminates and explores how the different principles of enrolment both respond to and influence regional educational challenges. We argue that the local conditions for upper secondary education challenge an equal principle of free school choice across the country. A. Homme (*) Department of Education, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway NORCE Norwegian Research Centre, Bergen, Norway e-mail: [email protected] H. M. K. Eide Department of Education, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway e-mail: [email protected] K. L. Hope Department of Business Administration, Western Norway University College, Bergen, Norway e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 A. Rasmussen, M. Dovemark (eds.), Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries, Educational Governance Research 18, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08049-4_4

57

58

A. Homme et al.

Keywords  Upper secondary education · Enrolment · Free school choice · Government capacity · County municipalities

Introduction Enrolment of students for upper secondary school and early school leaving are viewed as considerable challenges for society, as well as individuals. Early childhood efforts, as well as the importance of transition phases between education levels, are important to their further success in education and the labour market later (see Alexiadou et al., 2019; Markussen, 2010; Mogstad & Rege, 2009). An overall aim for upper secondary education in Norway is to provide both students and society with the necessary prerequisites for future welfare, as well as economic and sustainable development (Department of Education, n.d.). Moreover, all students will acquire basic skills and experience both mastery and challenges. County municipalities are responsible for providing upper secondary education within each county. In addition, the county municipalities own the public upper secondary schools within the county. Thus, county municipalities are dependent on governing capacity to provide for education quality, high graduation rates and few dropouts. Up until now, county municipalities have chosen between three options for student enrolment in upper secondary education: free school choice (1), geographically limited free school choice within the county (2) and the right to attend school as close to home as possible (‘the principle of the neighbourhood school’) (3) (Department of Education, 2021a). Among different initiatives for change and improvement, the Norwegian government in 2020 decided to implement mandatory free school choice enrolment in upper secondary education nationally, starting in 2022 (Department of Education, 2020), restricting regional autonomy in terms of enrolment options. The government’s motivation for the amendment to the Education Act was to ensure that all students would have a greater opportunity to choose which school to attend (Department of Education, 2019, 2021a). However, following the parliamentary elections in September 2021, the amendment was reversed (Department of Education, 2021b). This chapter addresses the question of how the national governing of upper secondary education challenges the geographical regulation of provision and access. Norway is a diverse country in terms of inhabitants, socio-demographic characteristics and geography. Consequently, local1 governmental decisions in education have been viewed as both a necessity and a resource for educational success. Among the 11 counties in the country, three practise the free school choice model, two practise the geographical limited free school choice model and the remaining six  In Norway, municipalities operate primary and lower secondary schools, while county municipalities operate upper secondary schools. Altogether, 95.75% of students in primary and lower secondary education attend public schooling. In upper secondary education, 91.8% of students attend schools that the county municipalities operate (Statistics Norway, 2021). 1

4  Governing School Choice in Norway: Why Local Educational Government Capacity…

59

practise the neighbourhood school enrolment model. By instituting only one mandatory enrolment model, local governments in all 11 counties face a decrease in the opportunity to make local adjustments and decisions. Therefore, to illuminate possible consequences, this chapter aims to examine the rationale for regional enrolment models to secure local governing capacity of upper secondary education. The scope of this chapter is twofold. First, we briefly examine educational governing capacity at the state and regional levels. Then, by comparing two counties in Norway, we explore possible consequences for governing capacity when implementing free school choice as mandatory for all secondary schools. By comparing counties with different institutional structures and governance of upper secondary education, we illuminate and explore how current enrolment models respond to and influence regional education challenges. The chapter argues that a common model of free school choice nationwide is a challenge to the capacity to govern upper secondary education at the county level. Moreover, national regulations reduce the autonomy of the county municipalities. The chapter is based on interviews with key actors representing national and county municipality education authorities, national education statistics and documents concerning the national consultation on free school choice.

 iverging Enrolment Strategies for Upper Secondary D Education: Possibilities and Limitations In the past two decades, how different enrolment strategies have made secondary education accessible for all has received considerable attention. Following the policy shifts towards increased educational marketisation, more attention has been paid to enrolment in secondary education internationally and within Nordic countries (Dovemark & Holm, 2017; Fjellman, 2019; Fjellman et al., 2018). In this line of research, the most attention has been paid to the consequences from differing enrolment models on equality, segregation (Serediak & Helland, 2020) and students’ learning outcomes (Allen, 2006; Grøgaard, 1999, 2000, 2002; Hanushek et  al., 2004; Haraldsvik, 2014; Hoxby, 2001, 2002; Sandsør & Kirkebøen, 2015). Furthermore, Feng et al. (2018) have argued that enrolment in secondary schools through free school choice may affect teacher mobility, as signals of poor school quality may lead to teachers leaving lower performing schools. From the body of research on different enrolment strategies in primary and lower secondary schools in Norway, we know that parents care about school quality, admission opportunities affect settlement patterns and more school choices might reduce residential segregation (Fiva & Kirkebøen, 2013; Machin & Salvanes, 2010). However, in upper secondary education, free school choice is not a parental decision, but instead is determined by students’ choices and lower secondary school grading, i.e. free school choice in secondary education is a grade-based enrolment model.

60

A. Homme et al.

Investigations of free school choice have focussed on how grade-based enrolment influences segregation based on ethnicity, gender and socioeconomic background. Across several Norwegian studies, a common conclusion is that grade-based enrolment or free school choice leads to stronger segregation by grades, socioeconomic background and ethnicity between schools, and – simultaneously – greater equality within each school (Andersland, 2017; Haraldsvik, 2014; Lødding & Helland, 2007; Serediak & Helland, 2020). Also, when simulating differing enrolment models for admission into secondary schools in the capital city Oslo, Serediak and Helland (2020) found that the grade-based model, besides creating the strongest segregation, in fact leads to fewer students getting admitted to their first school of choice, compared with other models. Other Nordic studies indicated similar effects. For instance, Soderstrøm and Uusitalo (2005) found that segregation by grades, family background and immigrant background increased when enrolment to secondary school changed from local school admission to grade-based admission in Stockholm. Likewise, Böhlmark et  al. (2015) concluded that free school reform, introduced in Sweden in 1992, has led to increased segregation by ethnicity and family background. In Norway, research concerning enrolment in secondary education mainly has been conducted in densely populated municipalities and counties (Andersland, 2017; Haraldsvik, 2014; Lødding & Helland, 2007). Therefore, a limitation in this research is that the various enrolment models are implemented and investigated in contexts in which students can choose from multiple schools offering the same educational programmes. Thus, these studies’ findings may not be transferable to more rural areas, where options for students’ free choices are much more limited. In Norway, this is of particular concern, as many counties responsible for secondary school enrolment are sparsely populated, stretching over large geographical areas. Falch et  al. (2013) found that travel time influences dropout rates in secondary school. Likewise, when investigating upper secondary completion rates in the northernmost county in Norway, Wiborg and Rønning (2005) found that being away from home negatively affected students. In both studies, the conclusion is that shorter travel times can reduce dropout rates in upper secondary schools, particularly among students with lower grades. Still, existent research investigating the influences from decentralised decisions and governing capacity on enrolment in secondary schools is limited. A few studies have investigated decentralisation’s effects, such as Galiani et al. (2008), who found that moving the responsibility for schools from central to local governmental levels led to better results in student performances in Argentina. Likewise, Salinas and Solé-Ollé (2018) found the same effect in Spain, and that the shift in governmental responsibility led to reduced dropout rates. However, we know little about how national decisions influence regional governing capacity when it comes to enrolment in Norwegian secondary schools.

4  Governing School Choice in Norway: Why Local Educational Government Capacity…

61

Analytical Framework Our analysis relies on a multi-level governance perspective (Bache & Flinders, 2004) that implies an understanding of governance as continuous negotiations between decision-makers and stakeholders at different levels (Marks, 1993), as well as mutual dependence between levels. We use the analytical concept of governing capacity (Lodge & Wegrich, 2014), which includes formal, structural and procedural features of the governmental administrative apparatus, as well as informal elements, such as how features work in practice (Christensen et al., 2016). At the heart of problem-solving, Lodge & Wegrich, 2014 distinguish between four capacities  – regulatory, delivery, coordination and analytical  – which will be discussed below. Regulatory capacity refers to state and county control capacity. Legislation and regulations, as well as control of schools, are necessary to impose this capacity. Regulatory power can be soft or hard, and both are inherent in regulatory capacity. Formal legislation and standardisation, such as a national mandate for enrolment in upper secondary education, comprise hard regulatory power at the state level, while soft regulatory power connects information that counties obtain with different types of support offered to municipalities, counties and schools. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD, 2011), the decentralised Norwegian educational system suffers from a lack of information about local performance. Thus, over the past decade, an increase in information capacity resulting from measures such as statistics on completion of upper secondary education and a website containing information on national basic education statistics have been notable. Still, tensions exist between regulatory capacity at the state and local levels. Delivery capacity entails the government’s capacity to put policy into practice, i.e. make things happen, under the idea that power is exercised to provide public services in practice. This form of capacity is related directly to the resources available to ‘make things happen’ and, consequently, to ensure that certain services are maintained. Accordingly, it is highly relevant that the resources deployed into local school systems are sufficient, as well as relevant, to secure enrolment of all students in upper secondary education. Coordination capacity refers to how counties coordinate joint efforts from organisations representing different sectors, such as education, health, social services and the labour market. Thus, coordination capacity concerns connecting supporting mechanisms between counties and municipalities, as well as between school owners and schools. Examples of such coordinating mechanisms include reporting, communication, meeting points, dialogues, organisation and management. Thus, a challenge for coordination capacity is to facilitate collaboration between different experts at both the organisational and school levels to provide the most effective service. Analytical capacity at the county and state levels comprises information about future and ongoing developments at the school level. Within the governing problem

62

A. Homme et al.

of enrolment and completion of secondary education, analytical capacity is related to the analysis of information about student dropout rates, evaluations, research and advice. Of special relevance here is the information produced at the county level about enrolment and completion, as well as the advice drawn from research on enrolment principles (cf. Serediak & Helland, 2020). The way counties pay attention to and analyse their schools’ performance levels is vital for analytical capacity. Thus, the quality of communication systems and information flow is essential. In Table 4.1, the four capacities are operationalised and will serve as an analytical scheme for examining two different counties’ capacity for governing upper secondary education.

Method and Data Governing capacity is crucial when implementing measures that aim to decrease the number of adolescents leaving school without taking their final exams. This chapter relies on a comparative case design (Yin, 2009) of two Norwegian counties that are characterised by maximum variation along multiple dimensions, such as socio-­ demographic characteristics, geography as well as the percentage of students who leave upper secondary school without taking final exams, and the organisation of upper secondary education. Furthermore, the counties have different enrolment principles. By comparing these two regions in Norway – East and North – we point Table 4.1  Indicators of governing capacity at the county level Governing capacity County level Regulatory capacity Legislation and regulations Control and auditing of schools Information and statistics about students and schools Counselling and support to municipalities and schools Delivery capacity Resources: Teaching and support Professional knowledge School owners and school leaders’ influence on delivery Financing Coordination Facilitating collaboration between organisations, services and experts from capacity different sectors Communication Organisation Governance and management Analytical capacity Knowledge and information Managing and analysing information Providing advice and making judgements Evaluation and learning processes

4  Governing School Choice in Norway: Why Local Educational Government Capacity…

63

to possible consequences for governing capacity when implementing free school choice as a mandatory principle for all secondary schools. Below, some key conditions for governing capacity of upper secondary education in the two counties are presented (Table 4.2). The data have been collected through qualitative research methods, both semi-­ structured interviews and document analysis. The chapter relies on semi-structured interviews (Brinkmann, 2014) with key actors representing national education authorities, along with case studies in two counties. Data collection took place within two timeframes. First, interview data were collected from 2015 to 2016, within the frame of a research project that the Research Council of Norway (RCN) financed, in an effort to address measures to prevent school dropout in upper secondary education.2 Second, national education statistics on counties and documents concerning the national consultation on free school choice were collected from 2020 to 2021. The data from the RCN-financed project have been utilised to study governing capacity. The interviewees at the national and local levels have provided key information to describe local policy and the management of upper secondary enrolment. At the national level, we interviewed one bureaucrat at the Ministry of Education and two parliament politicians with responsibilities for upper secondary education policy. Within the two counties, we interviewed representatives from the political executive branch and education administrations dealing with education at both the county municipal and municipal levels. School executives at two upper secondary Table 4.2  Conditions for governing capacity of upper secondary education in East and North counties, including background variables and characteristics

Number of municipalities Political organisation Inhabitants (approx.) Upper secondary students Upper secondary schools, public Upper secondary schools, privatea Share of upper secondary students in academic programmes Share of upper secondary students in vocational programmes

East 2015 2020 1 Parliamentary 660,000 693,494 18,700 20,528 27 28 11 12 75% 82%

North 2015 2020 41 Parliamentary 242,000 241,235 9500 8115 17 17 1 3 52% 55%

25%

48%

18% (3683 students)

45% (3658 students)

Sources: Statistics Norway, Directorate for Education and Training a In 2019, 22.5% of upper secondary schools in Norway were labelled private schools (see Statistics Norway, 2021). Two categories of private schools exist: private schools entitled to public funding (‘free schools’) and accepted as equivalent to public schools and commercially funded schools. Most private schools are publicly funded  The project referred to is ‘Lost in Transition: Governance, Management and Organisation of Policy Programmes to Improve Completion of Upper Secondary Education (2014–2020)’. 2

64

A. Homme et al.

schools in each county also were interviewed, in addition to teachers and other professionals at the same schools. Altogether, 28 informants were interviewed. All informants provided written consent to participate and accepted that the county they represent is identifiable. Documents that include policy strategies, programme documents and annual reports have been incorporated into the analysis. Furthermore, to examine the conditions for governing capacity when introducing a mandatory enrolment model of free school choice, we analysed documents (Bratberg, 2021) from the public consultation related to the implementation of mandatory national upper secondary enrolment regulations. The main documents analysed contained the consultation responses from the two county cases.

 overning Capacity in Norway: Nationally and Regionally G in the East and North As suggested in the analytical framework, governing capacity is relevant at both national and regional levels. In our analysis, the point of interest is the balance between national and regional capacities in enrolment issues. Thus, we will start the presentation of findings by introducing the national governing capacity concerning school choice, as well as access and engagement in upper secondary education, and then discussing how local governing capacity unfolds in the two county municipalities.

Governing Capacity at the National Level In response to critique from the OECD (Michelsen, 2020), Norway has strived to enforce national governing capacity in primary and secondary education. Here we highlight some of the efforts at state level. Regarding regulatory capacity, the Education Act has been revised (Kunnskapsdepartementet, 2021). In addition, the Framework Plan for upper secondary education for both academic (Forskrift om rammeplan for lektorutdanning, 2016) and vocational (Forskrift om rammplan for yrkesfaglærerutdanning, 2016) upper secondary teacher education has been enforced. Also, a new National Curriculum for primary and secondary education was implemented from 2017 to 2021. Furthermore, the directorate for education and training, as well as the county governor, ensures the implementation of national regulations and policies. Regarding delivery capacity, a major measure has been to strengthen teacher education through the National Teacher Education 2025 strategy (Kunnskapsdepartementet, n.d.). Furthermore, increased national funding of teacher education and block funding of upper secondary education are important measures to ensure delivery capacity at the national level.

4  Governing School Choice in Norway: Why Local Educational Government Capacity…

65

At the national level, coordination capacity entails national exams for lower and upper secondary education in academic subjects. National networks for county municipalities are initiated at the national level, although local county educational administrators maintain them (Homme & Hope, 2017). As such, coordinating capacity at the national level is limited and targeted to specific measures informing national analytical capacity through a national framework for quality enhancement in primary and secondary education. Statistics and measures  – such as a ‘school contribution score’ (skolebidragsindikatorer), student surveys (Elevundersøkelsen, Lærlingeundersøkelsen), statistics for completion, results for exams and final grades and trade examinations3  – are published on the Directorate for Education and Training’s website.

Governing Capacity at the Regional Level Counties are responsible for providing educational services at the upper secondary level under the Education Act. The state representative, the county governor, is the inspection authority who ensures that the county fulfils its educational obligations under the law. However, the county municipality authority controls upper secondary schools. Thus, county municipalities determine application formats and rules of admittance for education programmes in their jurisdiction (Oslo kommune, 2020). In the following sections, governing capacity in East County and North County is presented, followed by a section on responses to the new enrolment principle.

Region East Local Regulatory Capacity The interviews demonstrated that education authorities have established a congruent control regime based on New Public Management (NPM) principles. As frequent monitoring of students provides education authorities with an overview of students’ education needs, it (potentially) also provides information on each school’s challenges. Local goals are set both for the county and for each school, with 90% of students graduating from upper secondary school. Thus, the graduation rate has been, and remains, a key performance indicator at the school level. Education authorities monitored school principals closely in the performance-based management system. The principals met with their superior, the education district director, six times a year to report on performance and discuss how to work towards  Final examinations are taken upon completion of an apprenticeship at a workplace or upper secondary school. Successful candidates are awarded a trade certificate (fagbrev) entitling them to practise their respective trades. 3

66

A. Homme et al.

achieving their goals. These meetings also were opportunities for principals to seek guidance and support, and the agency used the information from the meetings to decide whether action must be taken, and whether to offer guidance and support to schools to further their goals. Furthermore, East County systematically assessed teachers, with school leaders generally responsible for observation of teachers in classrooms, and in upper secondary schools, students evaluate their teachers (Nusche et al., 2013).4 Thus, the county implemented several regulatory systems to reach its objectives for upper secondary education. Admission to upper secondary school is organised based on both national state laws and regulations, and supplementary local regulations for East County. The county has a county-wide intake to upper secondary schools based on grade point averages from lower secondary schools. This often has been described as ‘free school choice’, i.e. the whole county is one big intake area. Students prioritise first among schools (up to six) and, second, among programmes (up to three). Students from neighbouring counties can get admission only into private schools in East County. Students who have the highest primary school grades take precedence over those with lower grades if the number of students who apply exceeds available spots in the schools. The County Education Agency has aimed for all applicants with a right to upper secondary education to have a school offer no later than the second admission round. This has been achieved every year since 2007. For almost all education programmes/programme areas, admission is based on grade point averages. However, some upper secondary programmes operate under separate rules. Delivery Capacity East County practises free school choice. The upper secondary schools and programmes differ in size, depending on the number of applicants and labour market needs. Almost three out of four students in East County choose academic programmes in upper secondary school training, a significantly higher rate than the rest of Norway. Some of the upper secondary schools are very popular, and only students with high grades are admitted. Other schools that are less popular enrol all student applicants, which is the most prominent in academic programmes, but also in some vocational programmes. Large differences exist between upper secondary schools in student performance and the extent to which students graduate. A report indicates a strong correlation between parents’ education level and students’ primary school grades, and between primary school grades and completion of upper secondary school (Oslo Kommune, 2020). The county municipality emphasises that well-qualified teachers and school leaders are vitally important, and being the capital city, the supply of professionals to upper secondary education has been steady. Furthermore, the county offers

 Nusche, D., Earl, L., Maxwell, W. & Shewbridge, C. (2013). OECDs gjennomgang av evaluering og valuering innen utdanning i Norge. OECD Publishing. 4

4  Governing School Choice in Norway: Why Local Educational Government Capacity…

67

teachers further training, e.g. in class management. Together with the BI Norwegian Business School, the Education Agency offers an MA programme in school management and encourage and funds school leaders’ attendance in the National School Principal Training Programme. Moreover, the agency continuously offers school leaders courses in law, economics and health. Students are monitored systematically throughout their first 11 years in school in the following subjects and related basic skills: literacy/Norwegian, English, mathematics/numeracy, science and digital skills.5 An important aim of frequent student monitoring has been to give the schools the possibility of practising early intervention to prevent students from falling short of their learning objectives. Furthermore, up until the present, teachers and school leaders were held accountable for students’ achievement. Finally, the allocation of financial resources has differed between primary/lower secondary education and upper secondary education. At the upper secondary level, there was, first, a voucher system, implying that a basic amount of funding was related to each student, but the rate depended on which educational programme the student attended. Second, some funding has been allocated based on individual criteria, such as the number of students with low grades, minority language students who needed extra tuition in Norwegian and English and students with special education needs. A third criterion has been related to school building expenses.6 Coordination and Communication at the Local Level As East County is both a county and a municipality, only one school owner entity covers primary and secondary education and training. Both kindergartens and primary and secondary schooling fall under one vice mayor. The Education Agency administers primary and secondary education, i.e. school years 1–13. Thus, the organisational structure favours accessible information exchange and collaboration between education levels. Still, the interviewees from the Education Agency reported that they faced challenges related to the transfer of information about individual students. Sensitive information is confidential and should not be transferred to the next school level without parents and students’ permission. However, the agency worked to establish a common set of codes to ensure that upper secondary schools know when to seek more information about students. The agency, local education districts and schools comprised a hierarchical education sector. Among the seven education districts in the county, one covered all upper secondary schools. As mentioned earlier, all school principals met with their superior administrative leader six times a year to discuss school objectives and results. These meetings were referred to as dialogue management. At the school level, the administration included the principal, as well as department heads. The number of departments at each  Oslo kommune Utdanningsetaten. Årsberetning 2015.  See ‘Økonomi i Osloskolen’. https://www.oslo.kommune.no/getfile.php/Innhold/Politikk%20 og%20administrasjon/Etater%20og%20foretak/Utdanningsetaten/%C3%98konomi%20i%20 Osloskolen.pdf (Retrieved July 1, 2021). 5 6

68

A. Homme et al.

upper secondary school depended on school size, number of programmes and services provided at the school level. To facilitate communication between schools, the agency established several school leader and teacher networks. Local Capacity in Managing and Analysing Information In East County, the Education Agency analyses information gathered from schools. The monitoring of students and schools provides the county with knowledge about students and schools, which form the basis for strong administrative hierarchical steering. The former director for education stated in 2012 that the agency is a ‘voracious reader of research’ and that the agency had gathered more knowledge about education in Norway than ever before.7 The agency used research to guide and support schools, and East County was participating in several research projects. National education statistics, as well as the national network for education directors, provided information that the county used for benchmarking; thus, analytical capacity appeared to be systematic, including the whole 13-year primary and secondary education pathway.

Region North Regulatory Capacity North County is divided into three enrolment areas, and students must name a school in the area where they live as their first choice. If their desired programme is not available in their primary intake area, they can apply to any school in the county that offers the preferred programme. They then may apply for lower prioritised choices in the whole county.8 Upper secondary education in North County is characterised by soft steering, except for national legislative mandates and inspections regarding fulfilment of legislation. As the owner of schools, the county steers schools through a schedule of visits as a form of control and guidance. The intention is to establish communication and a common culture for school-based assessment to strengthen teaching quality. The school visits entail formal meetings between the county’s education government and the schools, and then are followed by informal and regular contacts. However, the county gives schools room to manoeuvre and define what measures need to be taken to reduce dropout rates.

 https://www.utdanningsnytt.no/nyheter/2012/november/-har-nok-forskning-for-a-fa-kvalitet-iskolen/ 8  Forskrift om inntak til videregående opplæring og formidling av læreplass, Nordland fylkeskommune (Regulations on admission to upper secondary education and dissemination of apprenticeships, Nordland County Municipality). 7

4  Governing School Choice in Norway: Why Local Educational Government Capacity…

69

Delivery Capacity North County covers an area larger than Denmark and almost as big as Switzerland.9 Unlike East County, the enrolment of North County students in vocational and academic programmes is more balanced (45% and 55%, respectively; see Table 4.2). Nevertheless, it is a challenge to offer programmes for all students where they live. Furthermore, qualified teachers are needed in rural areas. The county strategy plan for 2014–2018, known as Better Learning (Bedre læring),10 focussed on further education for teachers in upper secondary schools to ensure that teachers are well-­ qualified, as the county had identified a gap between competence levels and needs among teachers, as well as career counsellors. Furthermore, the county was in the process of profiling its schools, both to strengthen their competence in particular programmes and ensure that schools offer programmes that can maintain sufficient quality levels. Furthermore, the county works to avoid scenarios in which schools are competing for the same students. Instead, the plan was for vocational students to be able to change schools when they chose vocational programmes in their second year. A considerable number of students live away from home, and the county put great effort into increasing the number of apprenticeships, as a lack of apprenticeships is viewed as the most important reason for dropouts in the county. The main measure has been to establish a formal agreement with social partners in the county, and the county municipality reported 100 apprenticeships more than the goal set for 2016.11 However, an apprenticeship shortage remained. In 2014, the national government changed how state funds were distributed among counties, leading to reduced budgets in North County. The change has led to a redistribution of priorities and resources in the county education sector, e.g. classes comprising only a few students would not be allowed. Coordination Capacity In addition to being spread out, North County’s geographical area covers many islands along the coastline. Travelling within the county is cumbersome, and with as many as 41 municipalities, North County presents several coordination challenges. Furthermore, the county municipality is responsible for 17 upper secondary schools scattered throughout the county.12 As mentioned above, the lack of apprenticeships in the county is viewed as the most important reason why students drop out. To establish more apprenticeships, the county has initiated and signed formal agreements with social partners, including the Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities (KS), Confederation of Norwegian Enterprise (NHO) and

 https://www.nrk.no/tromsogfinnmark/nytt-storfylke-kan-bli-storre-enn-39-land-1.12993369  Nordland fylkeskommune: Bedre læring – Strategiplan 2014–2018. 11  https://www.nfk.no/tjenester/utdanning/100-flere-har-fatt-lareplass.856628.aspx 12  The county municipality is only responsible for public upper secondary schools. 9

10

70

A. Homme et al.

Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (LO). According to county municipality interviewees in our study, this agreement has succeeded in continuously increasing apprenticeships. Analytical Capacity In North County, the interview survey revealed that research, experiences, analyses of student performances, administrative data, inspections and statistics formed the basis for strategic plans, as well as the dialogue-based steering of schools. This indicates that the county aimed to implement a research-based policy to reduce dropout rates and increase graduation rates. Access to information about students in upper secondary schools is limited compared with East County, as it is partly dependent on the quality of information that the municipalities provide.

Summing Up Governing Capacity in the Two Counties The analysis above, based on the ‘Lost in Transition’ research project, outlines the regional governing capacity in two distinct counties and demonstrates a considerable governing capacity at the regional level. However, the counties differ according to population density, geographical size, labour market, financial framework, teacher competence and student population. This implies that the counties meet different capacity challenges and that they strive to adjust upper secondary education to meet local needs. Therefore, introducing a mandatory principle of free school choice may threaten regional capacity to adjust the policy to local conditions. As the county municipalities govern upper secondary education with a high degree of discretion, a governmental proposal for new regulations and changes in the Education Act requires a national consultation. This also has been the case regarding free school choice. The consultation process was initiated in August 2019 and ended in December 2019. In the following section, we will address the main concerns that East and North Counties raised during the consultation process.

Responses to a New Mandatory Enrolment Policy Prior to the decision to institute a national mandatory policy of free school choice, the government initiated a national consultation on two possible ways to organise open enrolment. The first option called for county municipalities to introduce free school choice throughout the county, or within established geographical areas in the county. The second option called for county municipalities to introduce free school choice in the county, as well as establish that geographical enrolment areas only could be justified by large distances or traffic conditions (Utdanningsdirektoratet, 2019).

4  Governing School Choice in Norway: Why Local Educational Government Capacity…

71

All county municipalities replied to the consultation, and more than 90% rejected both suggested options. Both counties rejected them due to consequences for their regional governmental capacity. In their response, East County started out by underscoring that the concept of ‘free school choice’ is normative and should not be used in a legal or regulatory text. The response added: ‘“Free school choice” is free only for the academically strong students with good grades’. East County also asserted that both proposals implied a weakening of regional governmental autonomy and local democracy, forcing the county municipality to choose the enrolment model that the national government decided was best. Contrary to national government praise of free school choice, East County stated that the county at the time was reconsidering the free school choice model that it was practising. Imposing a national enrolment model would limit the regional scope of action to adjust upper secondary education to local conditions and challenges, such as diversity and social background.13 While East County expressed an overall concern for regional autonomy and democracy limiting their governing capacity for upper secondary education, the response from North County elaborated on specific consequences for regional governing capacity. First and foremost, North County addressed severe consequences for regional delivery capacity, as the suggested options implied that students would have actual freedom to choose between at least two alternatives providing similar programmes. The consequence would be that the county had to establish more education programmes and classes: ‘Based on the criteria set by the directorate for maintaining enrolment areas, this proposal will have major economic consequences for North County. Facilitating more educational programmes and classes will be required in several areas in the county, for which there is currently no basis, and will weaken professional competence’ (consultation response, North County). Thus, the county argued that both options would remove the county municipality’s latitude to adapt the school structure to regional needs. Moreover, the county stressed that the number of students in the region was declining and that enforcing this requirement to deliver free school choice within an upper secondary education was financially unsustainable.14

Discussion and Conclusion As demonstrated in the analysis above, the governing capacity of upper secondary education involves both national and regional levels. Until now, county municipalities have regulated student enrolment in upper secondary education with a high degree of regional discretion (Helgøy et al., 2019). However, the new mandatory free school choice policy reduces regulatory capacity at the county level.

13 14

 Consultation Response, East County, December 2019.  Consultation Response, North County, December 2019.

72

A. Homme et al.

Furthermore, our analysis indicates that strengthening national regulatory capacity also reduces other forms of regional governing capacity. Here, the consultation responses from East and North Counties illuminate differences in which forms of capacity the regulation influences. Still, a common consequence is that national enrolment regulations undermine analytical capacity at the county level. Our analysis revealed that both East and North Counties rely heavily on their regional analytical capacity when adjusting both the delivery and coordination of upper secondary education to satisfy local needs and preconditions. Thus, undermining regional analytical capacity consequently diminishes both delivery and coordination capacity at the regional level. During the national consultation, both counties raised this critical concern. In line with several Norwegian studies (Andersland, 2017; Haraldsvik, 2014; Lødding & Helland, 2007; Serediak & Helland, 2020), East County argued that grade-based enrolment or free choice of school leads to stronger segregation by grades, family background and ethnicity among schools, as well as more alignment of student performances within each school. Consequently, East County has investigated possible effects from different enrolment models to reduce segregation (Serediak & Helland, 2020). The new mandatory policy of free school choice hinders the county from making the changes it finds necessary to reduce the identified challenges of social and ethnic segregation. Thus, for East County, the main argument against a national mandatory enrolment model is that it reduces regional discretion and democracy, as well as regulatory capacity and the ability to make changes. North County points to the regional challenge of delivery, considering that the county municipality is scarcely populated and geographically spread out. As Falch et  al. (2013) found, travel time influences dropout rates in secondary school. Furthermore, being away from home negatively affects students (Wiborg & Rønning, 2005). Simultaneously, North County has been experiencing a decline in the number of upper secondary students; therefore, mandatory free school choice threatens regional delivery capacity in at least two ways. First, North County will need to establish several new programmes and classes to meet the new regulation’s requirements. Second, free school choice will challenge the recruitment of qualified teachers, as this is recognised as a continuous challenge within the county. Furthermore, regional coordination capacity will be under pressure to meet the required freedom of choice, as it implies establishing programmes and classes that, in the long run, will be redundant and vacant. Accordingly, building stable professional communities across services will be difficult. This chapter aimed to examine how county municipalities at the regional level enact governing capacity by governing school choice, as well as illuminating how regulatory changes at the national level influence regional governing capacity. Our analysis indicates that strengthening national regulatory capacity reduces regional governing capacity. First and foremost, it reduces and devalues counties’ analytical capacity. Furthermore, it affects other forms of capacity, though which forms of governing capacities are affected depend on regional conditions. The withdrawal of the decided national regulation on free school choice may have prevented such

4  Governing School Choice in Norway: Why Local Educational Government Capacity…

73

consequences. By examining different forms of governing capacity at both national and regional levels, important differences in conditions for equal access to secondary education have been revealed and should be investigated further to secure the establishment of a secondary education that is accessible for all.

References Alexiadou, N., Helgøy, I., & Homme, A. (2019). Lost in transition – Policies to reduce early school leaving and encourage further studying in Europe. Comparative Education, 55(3), 297–307. Allen, R. (2006). Allocating students to their nearest secondary school: The consequences for social and ability stratification. Urban Studies, 44(4), 751–770. Andersland, L. (2017). Peer effects from a school choice reform (Working papers in economics 9/17). University of Bergen, Department of Economics. Bache, I., & Flinders, M. V. (2004). Multi-level governance. Oxford University Press. Böhlmark, A., Holmlund, H., & Lindahl, M. (2015). School choice and segregation: Evidence from Sweden. In Working paper 2015: 8. IFAU Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Educational Policy. Bratberg, Ø. (2021). Tekstanalyse for samfunnsvitere (3rd ed.). Cappelen Damm Akademisk. Brinkmann, S. (2014). Unstructured and semi-structured interviewing. In P.  Leavy (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of qualitative research (pp. 277–299). Oxford University Press. https://doi. org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199811755.013.030 Christensen, T., Lægreid, P., & Rykkja, L.H. (2016). Organizing for Crisis Management: Building Governance Capacity and Legitimacy. Public Administration Review, 76: 887–897. https://doi. org/10.1111/puar.12558 Department of Education. (2019). Fritt skolevalg I hele landet. Press Release, August 22, 2019. https://www.regjeringen.no/no/aktuelt/fritt-­skolevalg-­i-­hele-­landet/id2666146/ Department of Education. (2020). Regjeringa ønskjer friare skuleval for elevar u vidaregåande skule. Press Release, November 22, 2020. https://www.regjeringen.no/no/aktuelt/ regjeringa-­onskjer-­friare-­skuleval-­for-­elevar-­i-­vidaregaande-­skule/id2786892/ Department of Education. (2021a). Regjerningen innfører regler for fritt skolevalg i hele landet. Press Release, June 21, 2021. https://www.regjeringen.no/no/aktuelt/ regjeringen-­innforer-­regler-­for-­fritt-­skolevalg-­i-­hele-­landet/id2862858/ Department of Education. (2021b). Rejeringen opphever det nasjonale pålegget om karakterbasert inntak. Press Release, November 5, 2021. https://www.regjeringen.no/no/aktuelt/ regjeringen-­opphever-­det-­nasjonale-­palegget-­om-­karakterbasert-­inntak/id2884395/ Department of Education. (n.d.). Skole og videregående opplæring (School and Upper Secondary Education and Training) https://www.regjeringen.no/no/tema/utdanning/ grunnopplaring/id1408/ Dovemark, M., & Holm, A.-S. (2017). Pedagogic identities for sale! Segregation and homogenisation in Swedish upper secondary School. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 38(4), 518–532. Falch, T., Lujala, P., & Strøm, B. (2013). Geographical constraints and educational attainment. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 43(1), 164–176. Feng, L., Figlio, D., & Sass, T. (2018). School accountability and teacher mobility. Journal of Urban Economics, 103, 1–17. Fiva, J. H., & Kirkebøen, L. J. (2013). Information shocks and the dynamics of the housing market. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 113(3), 525–552. Fjellman, A. M. (2019). School choice, private providers, and differentiated mobilities in Swedish metropolitan school markets: Exploiting through a counterfactual approach. International Journal of Educational Research, 98, 171–191.

74

A. Homme et al.

Fjellman, A. M., Yang-Hansen, K., & Beach, D. (2018). School choice and implications for equity: The new political geography of the Swedish upper secondary school market. Educational Review, 71, 518–539. Forskrift om inntak til videregående opplæring og formidling av læreplass, Nordland fylkeskommune (Regulations on admission to upper secondary education and dissemination of apprenticeships, Nordland County Municipality). https://lovdata.no/dokument/LF/forskrift/ 2020-­12-­17-­2929 Forskrift om rammeplan for lektorutdanning (Regulations on framework plan for teacher education for upper secondary education). (2016). https://lovdata.no/dokument/SF/ forskrift/2013-­03-­18-­288?q=rammeplan%20for%20lektorutdanning Forskrift om rammplan for yrkesfaglærerutdanning (Regulations on Framework Plan for Vocational Teacher Education). (2016). https://lovdata.no/dokument/SF/ forskrift/2013-­03-­18-­291?q=Forskrift%20om%20rammeplan%20for%20yrkesfagl%C3%A 6rerutdanning Galiani, S., Getler, P., & Schargrodsky, E. (2008). School decentralisation: Helping the good get better, but leaving the poor behind. Journal of Public Economics, 92(10–11), 2106–2120. Grøgaard, J.  B. (1999). Er det noen som løfter seg etter håret? In R.  Kvalsund, T.  Deichman-­ Sørensen, & P. O. Aamodt (Eds.), Videregående opplæring – ved en skilleveg? Forskning fra den nasjonale evalueringen av Reform 94. Tano Aschehoug. Grøgaard, J. B. (2000). Organisatoriske løsninger i videregående opplæring: fungerer integrering bedre enn segregering? (FAFO-notat; 2000:4). Forskningsstiftelsen FAFO. Grøgaard, J. B. (2002). Integrerte eller segregerte undervisningsopplegg i videregående opplæring: Hvilke gir best resultater? Tidsskrift for ungdomsforskning, 2(2), 83–108. Hanushek, E., Kain, J. F., Markman, J. M., & Rivkin, S. G. (2004). Does peer ability affect student achievement? Journal of Applied Econometrics, 18(5), 527–544. Haraldsvik, M. (2014). Does performance-based admission incentivise students? Arbeidsnotat, Institutt for samfunnsøkonomi, NTNU. Helgøy, I., Homme, A., Lundahl, L., & Rönnberg, L. (2019). Combating low completion rates in Scandinavian welfare States: Policy Design in Norway and Sweden. Comparative Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2019.1619328 Homme, A., & Hope, K. H. (2017). Innovative government initiatives to prevent upper secondary school dropout: Organisational learning and institutional change at the local level. International Journal of Innovation in Education, 4(1), 51–65. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJIIE.2017.10007512 Hoxby, C.  M. (2001). Peer effects in the classroom: Learning from gender and race variation. NBER Working Paper, No. 7867. Hoxby, C. M. (2002). The power of peers: How does the makeup of a classroom influence achievement? Education Next, 2.2(Summer 2002), 56–63. Kunnskapsdepartementet. (2021). Meld.St. 21 Fullføringsreformen – med opne dører til verden og fremtiden. https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/581b5c91e6cf418aa9dcc84010180697/ no/pdfs/stm202020210021000dddpdfs.pdf Kunnskapsdepartementet. (n.d.) Lærerutdanning 2025. Nasjonal strategi for kvalitet og samarbeid i lærerutdanningene. https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/d0c1da83bce94e2da21d5f631bbae817/kd_nasjonal-­strategi-­for-­larerutdanningene_nett.pdf Lødding, B., & Helland, H. (2007). Alle får, men hvem får hva? NIFU Step. Rapport 21/2007. Lodge, M., & Wegrich, K. (Eds.). (2014). The problem-solving capacity of the modern state: Governance challenges and administrative capacities. Oxford University Press. Machin, S., & Salvanes, K.  G. (2010). Valuing school quality via a school choice reform. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 118(1), 3–24. Marks, G. (1993). Structural policy and multilevel governance in the EC.  In A.  Cafruny & G. Rosenthal (Eds.), The state of the European community Vol 2: The Maastricht debates and beyond. Longman. Markussen, E. (Ed.). (2010). Frafall i utdanning for 16–20 åringer i Norden. København: TemaNord, 2010, 517.

4  Governing School Choice in Norway: Why Local Educational Government Capacity…

75

Michelsen, N. P. (2020). Education as a welfare matter? (Thesis for the degree of Philosophiae Doctor (PhD)). University of Bergen. Mogstad, M., & Rege, M. (2009). Tidlig læring og sosial mobilitet: Norske barns muligheter til å lykkes i utdanningsløpet og arbeidslivet. Samfunnsøkonomen, 5, 4–22. Nusche, D., Earl, L., Maxwell, W., & Shewbridge, C. (2013). OECDs gjennomgang av evaluering og valuering innen utdanning i Norge. OECD Publishing. OECD. (2011). Improving lower secondary schools in Norway. OECD. Oslo kommune. (2020). Inntaksutvalget. Rapport om alternative modeller for inntak til videregående skole i Oslo. https://www.oslo.kommune.no/getfile.php/13362993-­1583313062/ Tjenester%20og%20tilbud/Politikk%20og%20administrasjon/Politikk/Byr%C3%A5det/ For%20pressen/Pressemeldinger/Inntaksutvalget_Rapport%20om%20alternative%20modeller%20for%20inntak%20til%20videreg%C3%A5ende%20skole%20i%20Oslo.pdf Salinas, P., & Solé-Ollé, A. (2018). Partial fiscal decentralisation reforms and educational outcomes: A difference-in-differences analysis for Spain. Journal of Urban Economics, 107, 31–46. Sandsør, A.  M. J., & Kirkebøen, L.  J. (2015). Effektstudier av tiltak mot videregående frafall: Verdt et (systematisk) forsøk! In S. Lillejord, K. Halvorsrud, E. Ruud, K. Morgan, T. Freyr, P. Fischer-Griffiths, O. J. Eikeland, T. E. Hauge, A. D. Homme, & T. Manger (Eds.), Frafall i videregående opplæring, en systematisk kunnskapsoversikt (pp. 71–80). Serediak, O., & Helland, H. (2020). Inntak til Oslos videregående skoler. Analyse av simulerte inntaksmodeller (Skriftserien 2020, Nr. 1). Oslo Metropolitan University. Soderstrøm, M., & Uusitalo, R. (2005). Vad innebar innförandet av fritt skolval i Stockholm för segregeringen i skolan? (Rapport 2005:2). IFAU Institutet for arbeidsmarknadspolitisk utvärdering. Statistics Norway. (2021). Fakta om utdanning (Facts about education). Statistisk sentralbyrå. https:// www.ssb.no/utdanning/artikler-­og-­publikasjoner/_attachment/442056?_ts=176cc50e7d8 Utdanningsdirektoratet. (2019). Fritt skolevalg  – høring om forslag til endringer i forskrift til opplæringsloven kapittel 6. Høringsbrev. (Consultation letter on free school choice) Fritt skolevalg – høring om forslag til endringer i forskrift til opplæringsloven kapittel 6 (udir.no) Wiborg, A., & Rønning, W. (2005). Frafall, bortvalg, avbrudd eller skoleslutt? Frafall innen videregående skole i Nordland skoleåret 2004. NF-arbeidsnotat nr. 1013/05. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Sage. Anne Homme has a PhD in Political Science (2008). She is an associate professor in the Department of Education, University of Bergen, and a senior researcher at NORCE (Norwegian Research Centre). Her research interests concern public management and administration, particularly multi-level governance in education, comparative education policy, and administrative reform and institutional change in education. Her recent publications have focussed particularly on policies to prevent school dropouts in upper secondary education.  

Helene Marie Kjærgård Eide is an associate professor in the Department of Education at the University of Bergen. She has several years of experience in school leader education and upper secondary teacher education. She holds a PhD in Education and has expertise in the fields of educational leadership, school development and professionalism. Together with Associate Professor Anne Homme, she has investigated the implementation of educational reforms in early childhood education.  

Kristin Lofthus Hope is an associate professor in the Department of Business Administration at Western Norway University of Applied Sciences. She has a PhD in Science and Technology Studies. Her research experience and interests cover the study of organization and technology, knowledge production, cultural studies, reforms and institutional change in education. Together with Associate Professor Anne Homme, she has investigated how policy measures are governed, managed and organized regarding dropouts in upper secondary school.  

Chapter 5

Upper-Secondary School Choices in Reykjavík and Helsinki: The Selected Few in the Urban North Berglind Rós Magnúsdóttir and Sonja Kosunen

Abstract  In the Nordic countries as elsewhere, class reproduction for the middle classes has become riskier even in comprehensive educational systems based on mass education and meritocracy. This study focuses on general upper-secondary school students in their final year of study: (a) their choices of and experiences within the high-ranking upper-secondary schools in Reykjavík and Helsinki and (b) their future aspiration in terms of higher education. This is a comparative qualitative case study focusing on student interviews (n  =  20) in four schools and based on Bourdieu’s conceptual framework. In these two cities with relatively modest social class structure, the students did not experience much of a disjuncture between habitus and field. Educational choices were shaped and restricted by the inherited capital of their families, peers and/or friends, especially in Iceland, while in Finland that was mainly visible when confronted with HE choices. In both countries, these students were strongly directed towards status disciplines in universities. There is an obvious class (re)production mechanism driving their HE choices shaped by the institutional habitus of their upper-secondary schools. The actual admission to the ‘right’ universities and disciplines requires certain capitals and habitus formation that is further nuanced in the general upper-secondary schools of these selected few. Keywords  Upper-secondary education · Elite education · Academic track · Higher education · Educational choices · Bourdieu · Habitus · Social class

B. R. Magnúsdóttir (*) University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland e-mail: [email protected] S. Kosunen University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 A. Rasmussen, M. Dovemark (eds.), Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries, Educational Governance Research 18, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08049-4_5

77

78

B. R. Magnúsdóttir and S. Kosunen

Introduction In recent years, the social and cultural landscape in the Nordic cities has been changing into a multicultural, class divergent and market-oriented society. The policies in education have been shaped by neoliberal imaginaries emphasising individual and institutional responsibilities and competition, which in relation to the older ideology of promoting ‘one school for all’ (Antikainen, 2006; Magnúsdóttir, 2016) can be considered as a change. These policies are built on the ideal of meritocracy and later neoliberalism, in which the responsibility of educational opportunities and success is transferred entirely to the individuals (Dovemark et al., 2018). The keywords describing this process are, for example, competition, effectiveness, marketisation, individualisation and neo-managerialism (Dýrfjörð & Magnúsdóttir, 2016; Jóhannesson et al., 2002). These policies along with increasing economic and cultural inequality in cities, which have created more space for emerging competition between young people, narrowed the criteria for accessing certain general upper-­ secondary schools and thereby contributed to reproduction of educational privilege in new ways. In this chapter, we examine the experiences and aspirations of young people entering top-tier general upper-secondary schools in Reykjavík (Iceland) and Helsinki (Finland). These schools are attracting students with very high educational attainment and have traditionally had a reputation of an ‘elite’ school in both cities, which is not referring (at least only) to the social class composition of the school but rather the school performance of its students. This can be partly explained by the relatively flat socio-economic structure of these societies (Oddsson, 2021) and the reasonably low stratification of the field of education in Iceland and Finland (Dagsson et  al., 2020; Isopahkala-Bouret et  al., 2018). However, the educational tracks and choices of these young people are in the selective end of the spectrum in these Nordic educational systems and are typically driven by public provisions (see Dovemark et al., 2018). The relationship between parental higher education and a student’s higher scores in PISA in the comprehensive school stage is apparent for both countries (Gísladóttir, Haraldsson, and Björnsdóttir, 2019), and the connection between performance and family background has been increasing particularly in Finland over the recent years (Salmela-Aro & Chmielewski, 2019). Socio-spatial segregation in neighbourhoods and schools is reportedly growing (Bernelius & Vaattovaara, 2016; Magnúsdóttir et al., 2020), resulting in a widening achievement gap in Iceland by the end of compulsory schooling (Jónsson, 2019). In both countries, far more students from general upper-secondary schools in comparison to those in vocational education continue to higher education, even if it is formally possible from both tracks (Heiskala et al., 2020). All the general upper-secondary schools that can be selective (more applicants than study positions) assess their students based on academic grades in both contexts. The choices of general upper-secondary schools do not follow any geographical or institutional limits, and thereby it is possible to apply with

5  Upper-Secondary School Choices in Reykjavík and Helsinki: The Selected Few…

79

grade-point-average scores from any comprehensive school to any general upper-­ secondary school anywhere in the country in both cases. This chapter is based on Bourdieu’s conceptual framework on the interplay between habitus, field and the mobilisation of capital in the field of education, which we consider relational in bourdieusian terms (Kosunen & Hansen, 2018; Magnúsdóttir & Garðarsdóttir, 2018) and dependent on space-time in a certain political and societal context (Steiner-Khamsi, 2009). We explore what kind of role the choice and experience in a certain school play in this formation and how the young people in this study enter these elite institutions (by merit) and construct their aspirations and future choices in these contexts with other high-achieving students. Our focus is on exploring the functioning of habitus in the field of highly selective general upper-secondary education and the misrecognition of capital(s) in this respect. We explore (1) how the habitus that is like ‘fish in the water’ (Bourdieu & Wacquant, 1992) constructed and manifested in the choice of selective general upper-secondary education, and concerning the past and the future, (2) what are the mobilisable forms of capital in educational choices in the two contexts in the admission to and from general upper-secondary education? We particularly analyse the ways in which the young people of this study feel in belonging or not belonging to the institution, particularly how they perceive the expectations of the school staff and peers towards themselves in terms of educational choice.

Theoretical Underpinnings: Distinctive Choices in Education Pierre Bourdieu was one of the first theorists to deconstruct the myth of meritocracy, analysing data about the French educational system to show how historical and social factors shape students’ possibilities (Bourdieu, 1973, 1984, 1996; Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977). Agnès van Zanten (2015) explains how Bourdieu and Passeron (1977) have identified two crucial reasons why elite groups have managed to keep up their distinctive educational opportunities even if the competition with other groups in many contexts has increased: [T]he fact that evaluations of scholastic merit are related to particular understanding driven by the culture of dominant groups in society and the fact that parents from these dominant groups are able to further use their cultural assets and to transform their economic capital into cultural capital in order to help their children comply with school expectations and enjoy successful school careers. (van Zanten, 2015: 5)

The myth of meritocracy and especially the mechanisms through which it operates in secondary and higher education in Finland and Iceland are not thoroughly investigated phenomena. The selection of students is based on their earlier school achievement and considered meritocratic and thereby fair in the public discussions. What we know of the outcomes is that young people from urban, affluent backgrounds are an overrepresented group in Finnish universities (Nori et al., 2020) and that they end up in universities more often than young people from more

80

B. R. Magnúsdóttir and S. Kosunen

disadvantaged backgrounds with better earlier school attainment (Heiskala et al., 2020). In this regard, the role of experiences in upper-secondary education, and particularly in elite general upper-secondary schools, comes to the core of analysis. Are the schools in our analysis attracting students with the best school attainment, the most affluent background, or maybe both, and what is the social surrounding like for students coming from more disadvantaged backgrounds when entering these elite institutions based on their achievement? In many contexts, school choices are strongly and openly linked to possession and mobilisation of economic capital in the field of education. Buying private supplementary tutoring and accessing the private educational sphere are key actions the players (families) take in the field, both reportedly taking place in Finland (Kosunen et al. 2020) and Iceland (Auðardóttir & Kosunen, 2020; Dýrfjörð & Magnúsdóttir, 2016) and at different levels of education. In comparison to many other contexts, the invested economic capital operates in even more disguised ways in these two countries than in openly tuition fee-based educational systems, providing distinctive paths exclusively to the elite. Due to this, the ways in which the economic capital is transformed into cultural and social capital (see Bourdieu, 1984) are crucial in determining the distinctive paths the elites of the two countries operate within the educational systems. The theoretical aim of the chapter is to explore if these institutions are distinctive in plural ways and therefore become by definition elite institutions, as they possibly promote and discard certain types of habitus in their daily practices. This would be a way of exploring more conceptually how elitism is constructed in educational practices and contexts. The elites are the dominant agents in a certain social space, the field of power. Elite identity formation is shaped differently from one nation to another, but generally, the secondary and higher education system has an important role in its (re)production (Bourdieu, 1998; Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977). This has been the case especially when it comes to the cultural and intellectual elite. In recent years, even among the economic elite, higher education has gained much more importance in attaining access to high-ranking positions in the economic field (Flemmen, 2012). As Maxwell (2015) has pointed out, the social and academic curricula are either based on preparation for the national elite (as the French Grande École) or having more global orientations (as Ivy League and Oxbridge universities) when students express their future work life. Part of the changes among the making of the elite habitus is how much less the dispositions are shaped by high-­ brow culture than when Bourdieu was developing his concept of cultural capital (Bourdieu, 1984). In the last decade, the main key to reproduce elitist status in an ever-changing world is to have control of one’s mobility and time (Draelants, 2016; Skeggs, 2004) and then possibilities of gaining access to resources needed for endurance. The possible differences in this mobilisation across national contexts would be of interest in terms of comparison. Habitus is one of the main analytical concepts throughout this study. It can be understood as a social disposition that is formed early on through practice, personal experience and familial history  – a person’s habitus makes one feel, and appear, like a ‘fish in water’ in one’s regular setting (Bourdieu & Wacquant, 1992).

5  Upper-Secondary School Choices in Reykjavík and Helsinki: The Selected Few…

81

It demarcates a person’s horizon, that is, the actions, aspirations and possibilities which are considered either attainable or out of reach, and involves a person’s identity which is created through routine embodied practice and is shaped by the social fields in which the individual has participated. Thereby, it is relevant to explore the ways in which the students feel like fitting in or standing out in the selective school paths and how this influences their aspirations in higher education.

Methodology This is a comparative qualitative case study. We interviewed 20 students in four schools that recruit only students with high academic track record. These students were seniors, finishing their matriculation exam in the spring of 2017 or 2018. The semi-structured interviews lasted about an hour each. The students also answered a standardised electronic questionnaire that mapped generational class history, extracurricular activities and certain aspects of their cultural consumption. In Finland, this part was covered during the interview. Otherwise, the interview structure was the same in the two contexts. The analysis was qualitative content analysis. We applied theory-informed analytical categories on all discourse about prior school path, parents’ and siblings’ school paths and occupational careers, everyday life in school, social relationships in school, teachers’ expectations towards the students, homework, role of money in life, leisure activities, family time, political views and future aspirations. These categories were thematised into larger thematic entities of different forms of capital, their mobilisability and transformability, and fitting the habitus into the field of highly selective general upper-secondary education along the lines of the proposed research questions. This study applies a comparative approach (Steiner-Khamsi, 2009) in analysing the material, based on mutual theorisation, data gathering and analytical strategy. The interview structures were formulated together by the researchers in the two countries. The analysis was conducted with a shared analytical framework of content analysis, but for linguistic reasons coded only by the respective researchers in each country. The thematic categories were contrasted, and the comparative analytics deeply rooted in the local, political and societal situations, which in the Nordic sphere are relatively similar in Finland and Iceland. The interviewees were able to reflect on their positions and dispositions during their school years. The social context of the school is in constant interrelations with practice (Bourdieu, 2000; Perry et al., 2016; Thrupp & Lupton, 2006) shaping the learning environments, practices, ethos and status. In our analysis, we extend the concept of habitus to capture the set of predispositions, taken-for-granted expectations and schemes of perception based on that which schools are organised (Reay et al., 2005; Tarabini et al., 2017), what has been referred to as institutional habitus. This is done through the voices of students and background information derived from their administration.

82

B. R. Magnúsdóttir and S. Kosunen

The National Context of Finland and Iceland In both nations, the choice and accessibility of academic tracks is wide. In 2008 upper-secondary education in Iceland and 2020 in Finland became accessible and obligatory to all students until 18  years of age irrespective of their educational achievement, abilities or origin. Overall, there is a higher rate of Icelandic students choosing academic tracks than in other Nordic countries, and they finish the matriculation exam within a broader time limit (Blöndal et al., 2011). In Finland after a relatively uniform, yet somewhat socially stratified (see Kosunen, Bernelius, Seppänen and Porkka 2020) comprehensive schooling (9 years, starting the year the child turns 7), upper-secondary education divides into two separate school types, general upper-secondary and vocational schools. In Iceland, the vocational and academic tracks were integrated in the 1970s, and all vocational tracks are housed with academic tracks. The oldest schools still run a class-based teaching system (i. bekkjarkerfi) whereby the students stay with the same peers in almost all classrooms. A class-based teaching system does not exist in general upper-secondary education anymore in Finland. All general upper-secondary schools in Finland and the majority in Iceland are module systems, where students select their courses (150 credits required to finalise in Finland and 180 credits in Iceland) and study with those who have chosen the same courses in that period of teaching. In Iceland, each school is responsible for the student enrolment, based on criteria agreed to by the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture. Each school can thus determine the requirements for preparation and academic achievements for the individual educational programmes. Students select their chosen educational programme when applying. All the high-ranking schools require full admission for the students to stay in school (Ministry of Education, Science, and Culture (MoESC), 2014), and they base their admission criteria on student grades, most often with some emphasis on mathematics, science, Icelandic and English. In Finland, there is a point average grade in each school with which one can become enrolled. These grades are derived from the diplomas of comprehensive education and ranked in the order of preferences resulting in public, annual acceptance averages to each upper-­ secondary school and related school rankings. Unlike in Iceland, the general upper-secondary education in Finland has a nationwide standardised test called the matriculation examination, after (usually) 3 years of studying. The competition of study positions in higher education is based on the achievement in this test and is harsh, particularly in status disciplines, such as law and medicine. They admit only a few per cent of their overall applicants (e.g. medicine in the year 2019, only 4.2% of all applicants were admitted). Generally, the admission criteria in Icelandic universities are only subject-based and not also performance-­based as in Finland, except for high-status disciplines like medicine. The School of Medicine at the University of Iceland (UI) offers an admission test and admits the 60 highest achievers. For the year 2021, 18% of test-takers were accepted when the average at the UI for admission to studying for a bachelor’s

5  Upper-Secondary School Choices in Reykjavík and Helsinki: The Selected Few…

83

degree is 57%. Thus, the competition at the HE level is more intensive in Finland than in Iceland. In the next two sections, we share our findings in line with our research questions.

 he Fish in the Water? Harmony Between Students’ T and Institutional Habitus The schools in this study are high-performing as they all base their acceptance of students’ average grades higher than 9 (out of 10). There are more schools in both metropolitan areas that are attracting students with high performance, and in the Helsinki metropolitan context, there are also far more general upper-secondary schools than in the Reykjavik area. As the entrance thresholds in Finland are public, many students seem to adjust their preferences to their grades, and thereby in these two schools, the rejection rates are low even if their admission thresholds are very high. Thus, the Finnish students are using self-selection based on the previous public grade point averages of different schools, and therefore, these schools do not even receive unacceptable applications in the centralised system. In the Icelandic case, the story is different. Many students are applying who get rejected (Table 5.1). Student attainment is similar in these four schools although the Icelandic students seem to be a little more flexible in terms of changing schools (counts as a dropout) or staying longer in the school. Based on the interview data, we see a tendency of calling these schools ‘elite’ schools, which refers both to the high prior school performance of the students and, at least in some of the cases, the social class background of the students. The majority of them, 18 of our 20 interviewees, are coming from middle-class or upper-class white-collar backgrounds (see Appendices 5.1 and 5.2). Thus, 90% of them had at least one highly educated parent. The Icelandic students describe the student body as white, mono-ethnic and able with emphasis on being just ‘normal’: There was no one with different skin colour in my class or even my year, I think. … nobody who used a wheelchair or anything. (Guðbjörg, ICE-1) No, everybody, everybody is just white and normal…just normal people. (Breki, ICE-2)

Table 5.1  The characteristics of the schools of the interviewees in Iceland (ICE) and Finland (FIN) Rejection ratio ICE-­1 40% ICE-­2 55% FIN -1 15% FIN-­2 15%

The average grade for accepted studentsa 9.1≤ 9.3≤ 9.2 ≤ 9.2 ≤

Graduation rate (within ‘right’ time) 77% 84% 84% 85%

 Comprising several years due to reasons of anonymity

a

Dropout rate 17% 16% 0% 0%

Still in the school 6% 0% Not counted -----

84

B. R. Magnúsdóttir and S. Kosunen

The successful management of the admission to these schools was part of the driving force in students’ choices. Success in the enrolment to these schools was interpreted as a sign of success as such: …because it was always said that it took such high grades to get into ICE-2, then I just felt, you know, to take advantage of it. (Gunnar, ICE-2)

The high average grades were considered as a way of ‘weeding out’ students that were not good at school or motivated in studying during lessons. Leo describes that this also provides the possibility of actually studying in the classroom: …[the high average] weeds out those who are there for gags as you just need to be in school, or if you don‘t really know what are you going to do, so they just go to some upper-­ secondary school to spend time, or stuff. In that sense [we have] smart people, and then I’ve found [people] who have similar interests as I have. (Matias, FIN-2) I mainly [applied] to a high quality [upper-secondary school], as in those lower-level schools there is no way of concentrating. And as I myself have such good papers [grades], so why would I go to a bad [general upper-secondary school] in vain? (Leo, FIN-2)

For some, the grapevine about the ICE-1 strictness and impracticality of the study with ‘unnecessary amount of learning’ (Helga) was a component of the distinction if you survived within the school. Many of them had already gained academic distinction in lower-secondary schools for being the best students and that already formed their ‘destiny’ in the mind of their former teachers and peers for enrolling in ICE-1: Everybody expected it I think [that I would go to ICE-1]...I was chosen the brightest hope or something [in the lower-secondary school] (laughs).... (Helga, ICE-1)

She was considered the ideal type of student for ICE-1 in the eyes of teachers and peers in her compulsory school. Becoming a part of the social context of the schools also changed students’ self-esteem, both through their climbing up the social hierarchy inside the schools and by getting different responses from people outside these institutions than before. Ingólfur became socially much more active and popular after starting in ICE-2: After starting in ICE-2 I felt the heightening popularity, you know, just, right after the freshmen photographing I put that photo of me as a profile picture on the social media and I suddenly gained a bunch of likes […] I did not do anything, just started to attend ICE-2 and I developed much better self-esteem, especially after having made some friends in the school. (Ingólfur, ICE-s)

Becoming a part of ICE-2 changed his image outside of the school that was further produced and reproduced through social media. Einar took examples of changes in terms of summer jobs. After he became an ICE-1 student, he was accepted into jobs that he was rejected from before. Highly selective schools tend to produce what Bourdieu (1998: 102) described as ‘consecrated elite, that is, an elite that is not only distinct and separate, but also recognized by the other and by itself as worthy of being so […] by attaching the student to a place and a status that are socially distinguished from the commonplace […] that creates a magical boundary between insiders and outsiders’.

5  Upper-Secondary School Choices in Reykjavík and Helsinki: The Selected Few…

85

The student habitus of being studious and hard-working aligned in most cases with the institutional habitus referring to ‘similarly minded’ learners in the school and the expectations of the teachers: ‘In this school, I‘ve liked the fact that these people are very similar in spirit to me’ (Mia, FIN-1). The students strongly felt as they could compare their experiences between school levels/from lower secondary to upper secondary and expressed huge differences: We might not even have similar interests but we are somehow similar people, a lot more than what we had in lower secondary school [...]. (Rosa, FIN-1) [...] when I got in here, I noticed that everyone in here are people just like me, I mean good, and thereby it didn‘t feel anymore like I was the different one in the crowd. (Leena, FIN-1)

The girls described how all the students were academically similar to them, and the intensive use of the library was used as a marker for habitus fitting the perceived expectations of the school: During the matriculation examinations we first studied here for the day and then after school we all went to the [local] library to study, and when you went there, the whole school was there studying. (Mia, FIN-1)

Andrei was the only one clearly breaking the harmony between the individual habitus and institutional habitus. He was neither enjoying himself socially nor academically compared to his experience in the lower secondary school: Frankly speaking, not [doing] well at all. About 90% of these students and I come from different planets. I don‘t see them during leisure. Of course, there are some guys whom I see sometimes and whom I consider as good friends, but compared to lower secondary and primary school, where I knew about everyone or everyone knew each other, in upper-­ secondary school this is completely different. [...] those I was just talking about, they have formed kind of an elitist state of mind about themselves, I don‘t want to badmouth about them, they are normal people, but somehow live in their own worlds, a bit. (Andrei, FIN-2)

Andrei’s description reflects the image of a competitive, socially hierarchical structure of the school community and the school’s perceived social position in the field of general upper-secondary schools. He refers to his peers as elitist and living in their own world. He himself comes from a migrant and working-class background, and he was performing very well in school prior to upper-secondary education. Thereby, he felt that entering a high-performing school also led him to join a socially elitist community. His reasoning concerned only attainment, but it seemed evident in the frame of these schools that he had also entered an upper-middle class and upper-class social environment. Generally, there were more diverse learner identities among the boys that are in line with the fact that more boys than girls drop out of these schools. Ingólfur, who chose ICE-2 mainly because of its strong social life, said that ‘classroom rats’ (i. stofurotturnar), the peers that would stay in the classrooms studying during the breaks, were the group he disliked the most in the school. The academically oriented boys discussed the importance of respecting the teachers and the study they were confronted with. One of them, Breki, mentioned disruptions in classrooms due to bad behaviour (ICE-2), and another, Páll, mentioned a lack of attendance and

86

B. R. Magnúsdóttir and S. Kosunen

poor homework practices (ICE-1) in these high-ranking schools, without seeing any sort of negative consequences for students: [… ] then some kids put a lot of emphasis on their studies and other kids who put a lot of emphasis on social life and were just partying every weekend […] and did even skip classes and I was just; “what are you doing here? (laughs). (Páll, ICE-1)

Both the students and the teachers made comments like that ‘what are you doing here’ if the student was not considered to have the cultural capital or the right academic habits to fit into the academic culture of the school. Most students said they spent a long time on homework every day, and the expectations of achievement were high in both contexts. Olivia describes well that she feels it is relatively hard to be a student in such a high demanding school, even if she did arrive there with almost the highest possible grade average herself: Everybody here is so talented and then you get these pre-expectations that you only get tens [highest grade on courses] and write only laudatories [highest grade on matriculation examination] and then that kind of sets huge pressures. And then if you don‘t succeed, you automatically feel a huge inferiority complex, even if you know that on national level you are good. […] And then sometimes you hear vague comments of your study success from the teachers, if you don‘t succeed in some physics exam, then the teachers automatically [asks] what on earth are you doing in these classes. (Olivia, FIN-2)

The teachers remind the students throughout their study that they have no obligations to stay in this school except being able to excel. This positioning makes complaining about the huge burden of work practically impossible for these students because the choice of these schools is ‘their own’: they could go elsewhere, practically anywhere with such good grades, if they do not enjoy the ambitious atmosphere. Therefore, they remain like fish in water, as they excel well, fit the institutional habitus of studying hard and become dependent on the acceptance of the demanding teaching staff.

 ducational Choices in the Past and Future: Construction E of Distinction The Importance of Social Capital for ICE Students Social capital was a strong feature in the Icelandic students’ choices of general upper-secondary schools. All Icelandic interviewees (except Einar) had either family relationships (inherited and transmitted social capital) to the chosen school, or their best friends also chose the school (having insider knowledge) (see Appendix 5.1). This was experienced as a way to influence their habitus (and public image), like in Breki’s case. He decided after visiting ICE-1 that he did not want to be like the students there: It was only ICE-1 or ICE-2 that was a real option in my mind because of my family, that is an ICE-2 family, my mother‘s family. They have planted the idea in my head that these are the only reasonable schools and I always planned to go to ICE-1 […] and then I went there

5  Upper-Secondary School Choices in Reykjavík and Helsinki: The Selected Few…

87

and did not like the ethos and it is a small school […] and maybe because I had always been struggling with the nerdy stigma in school that I decided to change my image and then ICE-2 was, of course, the choice. (Breki, ICE-2)

The family’s perception of these elite schools being the only ‘reasonable’ choices for their offspring is an obvious point of social reproduction: it is also stating that their habitus would not fit other kinds of institutions, which Breki also explains by using terminology about nerdiness. Helga did not remember when she decided to go to ICE-1: ‘I feel like I always intended to go there…’: … My mom went to ICE-1 and she wanted me to go there … Dad was, you know, it was obvious that there was a lot of school pride around ICE-2, you know. …grandma was totally happy with me going to ICE-1. She has a lot of grandkids and most of them went to ICE-2. (Helga)

The few of our interviewees in Reykjavík who went to open day school events only went to see that school and one or two other schools having similar rankings. None had gained any sort of an overview of the curriculum and ethos in many schools. There was only one student (Einar) from a rural background, who made his choices without any social relations to the school. The family relations were not as apparent among the Finnish students in the upper-secondary choice process. If they existed, it was most often related to the choices of their siblings (see Appendix 5.1). The choices were rather based on perceived institutional links from comprehensive schools. Many of the Finnish students said they had gone to comprehensive education in a particular school, which seemed to ‘feed’ the population of a certain general upper-secondary school. The other relatively common process was attendance at several open day events. These students visited the most selective schools and often attended the events with their parents. Several of them mentioned the same schools, which they decided to avoid out of the pool of elite schools due to experiencing too much of a competitive or harsh atmosphere already in the open day events.

 tatus Discipline and Canonical Subjects S in the ‘Right’ Universities In general, these young people did have a bright future in mind; all had plans of finishing a university education. Almost all the young people were going to apply only for universities in the capital region of Helsinki and Reykjavík. They were aware of the social hierarchies and emphases of the different disciplines even across universities, the ways in which to conduct the actual application process and in the Finnish case, how to deal with the ongoing reform and the uncertainty caused by it: Well, I’m interested in information technology and as I live in Helsinki, I aim to consider Aalto University and Helsinki university as my options, so I do not need to go any further or think of housing or such. […] you nearly need five laudatories [highest grade in matriculation examination, admitted to 5% of candidates] if you wish to get in straight, that it is pretty difficult. But then you can compensate with an entrance examination. And now that

88

B. R. Magnúsdóttir and S. Kosunen there is this entrance examination reform, they still have those exams next spring and they have a value. I don’t know, actually, I haven‘t checked in a week or two if they have already published the new admission criteria for the spring. (Matias, FIN-2)

This excerpt from Matias’s interview shows how sophisticated the strategies of applying to these competitive and status disciplines in higher education are. Matias was completely aware of the changes in the admission reform and was following the process on weekly basis. Mia brings up an issue related to how the student counselling in her school (FIN-1) did shape her focus for further educational choices as they were expected to be applying for universities, not universities of applied sciences, in the Finnish dual system of higher education: [The student counselling] is pretty university-emphasized. Or you realise that it is university-­emphasised, maybe also as I never heard that somebody would talk about universities of applied sciences in our student counselling classes, which I think is kind of a pity, as even if we are in a school where there is a high point average in grades and people are pretty academic, but if we still had people who have noticed that or would want to do more practical jobs. That you don’t even offer the chance. Or information. And through that the possibility of applying there. (Mia, FIN-1)

Similarly, it was clear from the ICE-1 students that the University of Iceland was the only reasonable institution to choose when choosing engineering or computer science: I preferred UI (University of Iceland) rather than UR (University of Reykjavík). It is actually the same ideology of choice as between ICE-1 and ICE-2. I participated in a programming competition at the UR, and you know, it is a very cool (i. flottur) university but I was just, it was just, I don‘t know, and then there were so many, almost everybody around me choosing UI. (Páll, ICE-1)

If keeping up with the same identity as somebody who would choose ICE-1, then Páll felt UI was an inevitable follow-up. It is a clear ideological vision that the UI is thought to be more theoretical and the UR more practical (applied science). Sixteen students out of 20 were only aiming for canonical or high-status disciplines. Most of them had been preparing themselves and their studies (often with their families) for a long time in order to get into competitive tracks both in general upper-­ secondary and higher education. Whereas the upper-secondary choice of the Icelandic student was loaded with mobilisation of social capital, the choice of higher education as a continuum to elite upper-secondary schooling was that to the Finnish students. All Finnish interviewees aimed for status disciplines, except Nora, who applied to canonical studies in humanistic sciences, and Andrei who did not have a plan, except applying for a university. All interviewees in ICE-1 aimed for either high-status (engineering) or canonical disciplines (theoretical math, classical languages) at the UI, while two from ICE-2 did so (medicine, engineering). These students did not explore in the same details other less prestigious disciplines or universities of applied sciences. Thereby, the interconnection from selective general upper-secondary education to selective paths in higher education was evident in both countries.

5  Upper-Secondary School Choices in Reykjavík and Helsinki: The Selected Few…

89

The Social Reproduction Rosa’s parents had been involved in the process not only by showing example, as Rosa felt she is following their footsteps, but also financially by buying her private supplementary tutoring as in preparatory courses in the end of general upper-secondary school. Leena describes how she has become knowledgeable in history through some cultural everyday practices of her family, for example, by doing historical walks together in Helsinki city centre, which both helps her with the work in general upper-secondary school and indicates some future steps. Her school choices had been discussed and steered in her family: I think I had this discussion [with my dad] like three times if this [general upper-secondary school] is the right choice ((laughs)), but then I came up with reasonings and it felt good as I got a response from him. (Leena, FIN-1)

Leena had familial relationship to certain universities, and thereby prescribed study paths: And of course my [relative] is a researcher at Helsinki University and graduated from there and all [...] maybe these are self-fulfilling prophesies, when you‘ve discussed it enough many times since you were a child that this is your upper-secondary school and that is your university. That you don’t consider it as an impossible thing if you really want it yourself. It motivates, somehow. (Leena, FIN-1)

This kind of social reproduction was also present among Icelandic students. Sometimes it was also convenient to choose the same as a parent to get the help needed if necessary, as Guðbjörg was used to have throughout her study: ‘My dad is an electronic engineer, so I thought of the convenience to get assistance when needed’ (Guðbjörg, ICE-1). Gunnar and Páll mentioned both that they went into footsteps of some close relative in their choices: I always intended to choose law studies. The brother of my mother is a lawyer in the US and since I was small, through our visits to him, I built up excitement for that. So it has always been the aim. (Gunnar, ICE-2) My uncle was also in ICE-1 and I have always looked up to him. He was actually also studying software engineering. (Páll, ICE-1)

On the other hand, the two students coming from a working-class migrant background (Andrei and María) did not have this kind of connection. They had planned to go to university but were unsure of what they wanted to study. Andrei claimed he was unaware of what was expected of him when applying further: his family was not supporting his choices nor providing help in the admission process. A similar kind of insecurity and lack of social capital was found in María’s words. She felt unsure and had planned to spend a year off in the labour market to explore better the options: I would like to choose software engineering at the UI, but I say, honestly, I don‘t know well, you know, how to navigate the system, how it works, like the credit system and the courses, but I have been considering, as I am now working at a pharmacy, then all of a sudden I have become interested in pharmacology (laugh), thus I am very happy with the decision of not choosing anything yet, because I am so unsure…. (María, ICE-2, working class origin, foreign parents)

90

B. R. Magnúsdóttir and S. Kosunen

The examples of the white-collar students who attend the same school as Andrei and María bring up a very different story of intergenerational support and transmission capitals. Andrei describes how he feels disconnected from the peers in the school. The class-based differences are enacted in the everyday practices of educational choice and visible in the (lack of) belonging to the school community, when the habitus of the student and the institutional habitus of the school come together.

Conclusion and Discussion In the Nordic countries as elsewhere, class reproduction for the middle classes has become riskier through comprehensive educational systems based on mass education, meritocracy and high competitiveness in status disciplines in universities, followed by more anxiety among young people about future prosperity. The ‘right’ choice of general upper-secondary and higher education, i.e. to become one of the successful young people, seems to be the primary strategy for more security for many of the high-achieving upper-middle and upper classes. It is not anymore a matter of becoming educated as that is a common practice; it is a matter of where to be educated and with whom (Power et al., 2003), which in earlier studies have been concerned explicitly with descriptions of more stratified and segregated societies and educational systems than those of Iceland and Finland. The institution, locality and social context have become more relevant than what kind of curriculum and tracks are suitable or interesting. Matching one’s habitus with that of the school’s becomes highly relevant. School choice is an important means for shaping habitus through the enactment of institutional practices and adaptation to the ‘people like us’ in a school context as we have shown in this chapter. This leads students to position themselves both materially and symbolically in relation to one another. In other words, it might be said that school choice functions as a social class indicator and embodiment in the teenagers’ world, where distinction and the request for it are clear. The feeling of being the ‘right’ students for these highly selective schools is an enactment of their habitus fitting well in the field of highly selective education. The linkage between distinctive choice of upper-secondary schools and aspirations of studies in status disciplines in universities are evident in both contexts, but the instrumental value of the general upper-secondary school seems to be stronger in Finland than in Iceland. We started with a question concerning the harmony or the (mis)match between habitus and the field. The selected few did feel like home within these schools. This holds for the students of middle- or upper-class white-collar origin that counted for 90% of the interviewees, and they did not experience a disjuncture between habitus and field. Family and fellow students’ values were ingrained into the habitus, and the awareness of privilege and class position was limited, as the schools were filled with young people from higher social classes, like results shown by research in

5  Upper-Secondary School Choices in Reykjavík and Helsinki: The Selected Few…

91

other countries (Reay et al., 2005). There was a clear harmony between the selected few and the institutional habitus in these schools. The few that experienced being out of place were the ones coming from a more sociocultural distance in terms of social class, despite their good school attainment. When exploring the institutional habitus, it was grounded in the accumulation of educational, social and economic capital. Peers are experienced more worthy and talented than elsewhere through artistic, intellectual and physical activities (van Zanten, 2015). The students have had insider’s knowledge (from friends and/or parents/close relatives) from the early age of what is valuable in terms of education, schooling and aspirations (Draelants, 2016). In the first instance, it seems that the more privileged students (in terms of merit and social class) have unrestricted choices, but their habitus, taste and feelings for spaces that frame their educational choices have been shaped and restricted by the inherited capital (social, economic, cultural) of their families, upper-secondary peers and friends as most of them only consider status disciplines in universities for their future. There are several notable differences between the two contexts. Intergenerational familial social capital was more important in Iceland throughout, when choosing upper-secondary and HE, while in Finland that was only visible among these high-­ achieving students when confronted with HE choices. Bourdieu (1998) stated that the primary function of education is to sustain the culture and privilege of the dominant groups in society. The conservatism found in the strategies of sustaining national elitist ‘safe space’ within the upper-secondary school system is visible in both, the interviews in Reykjavík and Helsinki. This holds, however, especially true for ICE-1 as it does not offer social science tracks and is mainly emphasising canonical disciplines. Both the Icelandic schools are mono-ethnic in their intake, serving nationalistic values. This can be reflected in the students’ expressions of ‘everybody white and ordinary’. While staying in the school and being surrounded by similarly minded peers, students believe that the school is an investment of big economic and social return. The students described that they felt it gave them access to capital (relationships, institutions, persons), knowledge and perspective to make strategic plans for their future. They are mobile across cultural and geographical boundaries and social networking that makes them capable of reproducing the subject of value in a world of rapid changes (Skeggs, 2004). The schools in this study may not be the schools solely of the socio-economic elite, but the ways in which they feed the students further to higher education should be more thoroughly investigated. These mechanisms may explain how higher social classes reproduce their positions in HE, especially in times of uncertainty, as the actual admission to prestigious HE requires capital in the secondary education phase. It seems to be disconnected from the actual school performance, which appears to be very high among all students. Our analysis shows how the distinction based on the enactment of social class in its different forms of belonging and not-­ belonging may be because of meritocratic competition resulting in the reproduction of social positions.

92

B. R. Magnúsdóttir and S. Kosunen

Appendices Appendix 5.1  Background information of the Icelandic participants Fake School name Ice-1 Einar

Ice-1

Ice-1

Ice-1

Gender Mother’s ed/job Boy Vocational ed. and HE sport teacher certificate/ masseuse and flower arranger Berglind Girl University postgraduate degree/writer Guðbjörg Girl University degree/head of department in nursing Helga Girl University degree/nurse University degree/head of department in compulsory school Vocational ed./ store manager

Father’s ed/job University postgraduate degree/certified public accountant Compulsory schooling/ composer University postgraduate degree/electrical engineer University degree/business consultant University degree (engineering)/ executive director Vocational ed./ sport trainer

Ice-1

Páll

Boy

Ice-2

María

Girl

Ice-2

Ingólfur

Boy

University postgraduate degree/ marketing executive in a big company

University postgraduate degree/engineer at a state institution

Ice-2

Vala

Girl

Ice-2

Gunnar

Boy

University degree/ accountant University degree/teacher

University degree/ technologist Vocational ed./ blacksmith

Ice-2

Breki

Boy

University degree/ managing director

University degree/sport trainer

Family relations to the chosen Homework school per day No 2 h

Yes, mother and 2–3 h father in ICE-1 Yes, two of 2 h three older siblings went to ICE-1 Yes, mother in 4 h ICE-1 and father in ICE-2 Yes, grandfather 2 h and uncle in ICE-1

No, but three girls in her classroom chose ICE-2 No family relations. Best friend chose ICE-2 and many of the peers in his suburban school Yes, older sister chose ICE-2

30 min to 2 h

10 min

30–60 min

Yes, older sister 2 h and the best friend chose ICE-2. Mother in ICE-1 Yes, majority of 30 min to mother’s family 2 h went to ICE-2

5  Upper-Secondary School Choices in Reykjavík and Helsinki: The Selected Few…

93

Appendix 5.2  Background information of the Finnish participants

Fake School name Fin-2 Liisa

Fin-2

Fin-2

Mother’s ed./ gender job Female Voc secondary education/ artisan Andrei Male Acad secondary education/ unemployed Matias Male Higher education/nurse

Fin-2

Leo

Fin-2

Olivia

Fin-1

Leena

Fin-1

Rosa

Fin-1

Mia

Fin-1

Sara

Fin-1

Nora

Family relations to the chosen school Yes

How much time spent in homework per day? Every day

Father’s ed./ job University degree/ researcher Voc secondary No (used to go to Does not do education/ primary school in them, but in the same school) case he does, very quickly Higher No (used to go to Uses time, not education lower secondary much time for (MA)/director in the same other things school) Male PhD/researcher Higher No Uses time for education/ this Female Higher Higher No (used to go to Uses a lot of education education/ lower secondary time for it; (MA)/teacher engineer in the same 3–4 hours per school) day Female Higher ed./ Higher ed./ No A lot project worker historian Female Higher ed./ Higher ed./ No (used to go to Does them at economist lawyer lower secondary school in the same school) Female Higher ed./ Higher ed./ No Studies in the architect engineer library Female Secondary Secondary No Makes them education/cook education (?)/ works at a ministry Female PhD/lawyer Missing info No (used to go to Missing info primary and lower secondary school in the same school)

References Antikainen, A. (2006). In search of the Nordic model in education. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 50(3), 229–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313830600743258 Auðardóttir, A. M., & Kosunen, S. (2020). Choosing private compulsory schools: A means for class distinctions or responsible parenting? Research in Comparative and International Education, 15(2), 97–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745499920921098 Bernelius, V., & Vaattovaara, M. (2016). Choice and segregation in the ‘most egalitarian’ schools: Cumulative decline in urban schools and neighbourhoods of Helsinki, Finland. Urban Studies, 53(15), 3155–3171. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098015621441

94

B. R. Magnúsdóttir and S. Kosunen

Blöndal, K.  S., Jónasson, J.  T., & Tannhäuser, A.-C. (2011). Dropout in a small society: Is the Icelandic case somehow different? In S.  Lamb, E.  Markussen, R.  Teese, N.  Sandberg, & J. Polesel (Eds.), School dropout and completion: International comparative studies in theory and policy (pp. 233–252). Springer. Bourdieu, P. (1973). Cultural reproduction and social reproduction. In R. Brown (Ed.), Knowledge, education, and cultural change (pp. 56–69). Tavistock. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Harvard University Press. Bourdieu, P. (1996). Rules of art: Genesis and structure of the literary field. Stanford University Press. Bourdieu, P. (1998). The state nobility: Elite schools in the field of power (L. C. Clough, Trans.). Polity Press. Bourdieu, P. (2000). Pascalian meditation (R. Nice, Trans.). Stanford University Press. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J.-C. (1977). Reproduction in education, society and culture. Sage. Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. University of Chicago Press. Dagsson, E., Karlsson, Þ., & Zoega, G. (2020). The intergenerational transmission of education: A case study from Iceland. Icelandic Review of Politics & Administration, 16(2), 243–260. https://doi.org/10.13177/irpa.a.2020.16.2.8 Dovemark, M., Kosunen, S., Kauko, J., Magnúsdóttir, B., Hansen, P., & Rasmussen, P. (2018). Deregulation, privatisation and marketisation of Nordic comprehensive education: Social changes reflected in schooling. Education Inquiry, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508. 2018.1429768 Draelants, H. (2016). The insiders: Changing forms of reproduction in education. In A. Koh & J. Kenway (Eds.), Elite schools: Multiple geographies of privilege. Routledge. Dýrfjörð, K., & Magnúsdóttir, B.  R. (2016). Privatization of the early childhood education in Iceland. Research in Comparative and International Education, 11(1), 80–97. https://doi. org/10.1177/1745499916631062 Flemmen, M. (2012). The structure of the upper class: A social space approach. Sociology, 46(6), 1039–1058. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038512437899 Gísladóttir, B., Haraldsson, H., & Björnsdóttir, A. (2019). The relation between parents’ education level and students’ performance in the PISA study. Netla – Online Journal on Pedagogy and Education. https://doi.org/10.24270/serritnetla.2019.32 Heiskala, L., Erola, J., & Kilpi-Jakonen, E. (2020). Compensatory and multiplicative advantages: Social origin, school performance, and stratified higher education enrolment in Finland. European Sociological Review, 37(2), 171–185. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcaa046 Isopahkala-Bouret, U., Börjesson, M., Beach, D., Haltia, N., Jónasson, J. T., Jauhiainen, A., … Vabø, A. (2018). Access and stratification in Nordic higher education. A review of cross-­cutting research themes and issues*. Education Inquiry, 9(1), 142–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 20004508.2018.1429769 Jóhannesson, I. Á., Lindblad, S., & Simola, H. (2002). An inevitable progress? Educational restructuring in Finland, Iceland and Sweden at the turn of the millennium. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 46(3), 325–339. Jónsson, Þ. A. (2019). Er búsetumunur á námsárangri þegar ólík þjóðfélagsstaða er tekin með í reikninginn? Tímarit um uppeldi og menntun, 28(1), 63–87. https://doi.org/10.24270/ tuuom.2019.28.4 Kosunen, S., & Hansen, P. (2018). Discursive narratives of comprehensive education politics in Finland. European Educational Research Journal, 17(5), 714–732. https://doi. org/10.1177/1474904118764938 Kosunen, S., Bernelius, V., Seppänen, P., & Porkka, M. (2020). School choice to lower secondary schools and mechanisms of segregation in urban Finland. Urban Education, 55(10), 1461–1488. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085916666933

5  Upper-Secondary School Choices in Reykjavík and Helsinki: The Selected Few…

95

Magnúsdóttir, B. R. (2016). Skóli án aðgreiningar: Átakapólar, ráðandi straumar og stefnur innan rannsóknarsviðsins [Inclusive education: Conflicting and competing discourses and policies within the field]. In D. Bjarnason, Ó. P. Jónsson, & H. Gunnþórsdóttir (Eds.), Skóli margbreytileikans í kjölfar Salamanca [The development of the inclusive school after the Salamanca statement] (pp. 64–94). University of Iceland Press. Magnúsdóttir, B. R., & Garðarsdóttir, U. E. (2018). “Not my type of people!” students’ narratives of choosing the ‘right’ school for academic tracks in Iceland. Netla - Electronic Journal on Icelandic Education. https://doi.org/10.24270/serritnetla.2019.13 Magnúsdóttir, B. R., Auðardóttir, A. M., & Stefánsson, K. (2020). The distribution of economic and educational capital between school catchment areas in Reykjavík capital region 1997–2016. Icelandic Review of Politics & Administration, 16(2), 285–308. https://doi.org/10.13177/ irpa.a.2020.16.2.10 Maxwell, C. (2015). Elites: Some questions for a new research agenda. In A. van Zanten, S. Ball, & B. Darchy-Koechlin (Eds.), World yearbook of education 2015: Elites, privilege and excellence: The national and global redefinition of educational advantage (pp. 15–28). Routledge. Nori, H., Isopahkala-Bouret, U., & Haltia, N. (2020). Access to higher education (Finland). In Bloomsbury education and childhood studies (1st ed.). Bloomsbury. Oddsson, G. (2021). Class in Iceland. Current Sociology, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 00113921211012740 Perry, L. B., Lubienski, C., & Ladwig, J. (2016). How do learning environments vary by school sector and socioeconomic composition? Evidence from Australian students. Australian Journal of Education, 60(3), 175–190. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944116666519 Power, S., Edwards, T., Whitty, G., & Wigfall, V. (2003). Education and the middle class. Open University Press. Reay, D., David, M., & Ball, S. J. (2005). Degrees of choice: Class, race, gender and higher education. Trentham books. Salmela-Aro, K., & Chmielewski, A. K. (2019). Socioeconomic inequality and student outcomes in Finnish schools. In Socioeconomic inequality and students outcomes (pp. 153–168). Springer. Skeggs, B. (2004). Class, self, culture. Routledge. Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2009). Quo Vadis? In R.  Cowen & A.  M. Kazamias (Eds.), International handbook of comparative education (pp. 1143–1158). Springer. Tarabini, A., Curran, M., & Fontdevila, C. (2017). Institutional habitus in context: Implementation, development and impacts in two compulsory secondary schools in Barcelona. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 38(8), 1177–1189. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/01425692.2016.1251306 Thrupp, M., & Lupton, R. (2006). Taking school contexts more seriously: The social justice challenge. British Journal of Educational Studies, 54(3), 308–328. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1467-­8527.2006.00348.x van Zanten, A. (2015). Educating elites: The changing dynamics and meanings of privilege and power. In A. van Zanten, S. Ball, & B. Darchy-Koechlin (Eds.), World yearbook of education 2015: Elites, privilege and excellence: The national and global redefinition of educational advantage (pp. 3–12). Routledge. Berglind Rós Magnúsdóttir is a Professor in Educational Studies at the School of Education, University of Iceland. Her educational research concerns globalization, marketization and differentiation in the Icelandic education system and its impact on social justice, parental choices and practices, teachers’ professionalism, educational quality and in-/exclusion in education. Her newest publications include two chapters in the book Evidence and Expertise in Nordic Education Policy (2022), edited by Karseth, Sivesind and Steiner-Khamsi.  

Sonja Kosunen is an associate professor of Education at the University of Helsinki, Finland. Her research interests are in the fields of sociology and politics of education and urban studies. She leads the Social Studies in Urban Education (SURE) research unit.  

Part II

Segregation and Fairness

Chapter 6

The Janus Face of ‘Freedom of Choice’ in Upper Secondary School Markets Marianne Dovemark

and Mattias Nylund

Abstract  The Swedish educational system has, during the last decades, changed dramatically with respect to its organization, system of governance and curriculum. The market-oriented reforms implemented in the 1990s have had a great impact towards a deeper social and geographical segregation where schools are becoming more and more socio-economically and ethnically homogeneous. Since a school’s survival in this situation is highly dependent on its success in recruiting students, schools expend economic and personnel resources on marketing their facilities, ethos and programmes. By using the lens of Althusser’s concept of ideology, this chapter focuses on how the ‘academic-vocational divide’ is secured within a strong discursive context of democracy and freedom of choice. By analyzing the private company AcadeMedia’s upper secondary schools’ various marketing materials, this chapter aims to answer the following questions: What subject positions are prospective students given? How are these subject positions connected to the social division of labour? The findings show that schools market themselves as unique ‘brands’, hailing different segments of the ‘consumer market’ of students. Through this process of ideology, students from different social classes are hailed and prepared for different roles, both as future workers and as citizens, reinforcing a division between intellectual and manual labour. Keywords  Market-oriented reforms · Freedom of choice · Subject positions · Ideology · Reproduction

M. Dovemark (*) · M. Nylund Department of Education and Special Education, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 A. Rasmussen, M. Dovemark (eds.), Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries, Educational Governance Research 18, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08049-4_6

99

100

M. Dovemark and M. Nylund

Introduction Marketization and privatization of education is a global phenomenon (Ball, 2007; Ozga & Lingard, 2007) that has been largely based on the ideas of Milton Friedman (1962). Key elements are that parental influence is highly important and free school choice (provided by vouchers) leads to better school results, diversity and development. According to the associated educational discourse, this transfers key decision-­ making power from the state to individuals as consumers. In addition, giving consumers the opportunity to choose which service provider to entrust with the responsibility for their children’s education is expected to increase pressure on the system to improve through competition. These ideas have had a strong international impact since the early 1980s, when they were vigorously promoted by the American and British administrations of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, with backing from scholars such as Chubb and Moe (1990). In Sweden, the school system was transformed through far-reaching decentralization and marketing from the end of the 1980s onwards (Dovemark et al., 2018) after a long period of social democratically controlled education policy (Lundahl et al., 2013). A basic assumption underlying this change is that every citizen should be guaranteed the right to choose, rather than citizenship guaranteeing equal rights to health and education through public welfare commitments (Apple, 2001; Ball, 2007; Tooley, 2000). However, ‘freedom of choice’ is a many-layered concept, and the issue has become a major focus of discourses on democracy and equality. As we suggest in the title, it has (at least) two faces. One (often manifested in public discourse) is the empowerment of parents and students with opportunities to choose education; the other (much less visible) concerns inequality and social reproduction. In this chapter, we illustrate this Janus face of freedom of choice by exploring how a logic of profit plays a role in framing individuals’ educational choices for upper secondary school within the context of social reproduction through the information that schools provide for students on their websites. Empirically, it is based on a case study of the largest private provider of education in Sweden: AcadeMedia Ltd. Before explaining the study in more detail, some context is needed. No other country has gone as far as Sweden in the marketization of public schools (Beach, 2010; Dahlstedt & Fejes, 2019; Lundahl et al., 2013). A major distinguishing feature, in comparison with other countries, is a combination of school choice, tax-funded school vouchers, profit-driven companies and high freedom to establish schools, leading to large parts of the independent school sector being owned by foreign venture capital companies (Börjesson, 2016). It has also led to the closure of schools due to bankruptcy (Holm, 2017) and even economic crime (Vlachos, 2012). In Sweden, there is no examination of the owner’s motives when starting a school, and there are no restrictions regarding profit taking (Vlachos, 2012). In short, the Swedish free school system is a product of uniquely extensive deregulation (Dovemark et al., 2018), driven by a liberal attitude based on a strong belief that competition and freedom of choice will increase schools’ quality.

6  The Janus Face of ‘Freedom of Choice’ in Upper Secondary School Markets

101

However, to run a free school, the organizer must have permission from the Swedish Schools Inspectorate. The school must be open to all students, and schools are not allowed, by law, to charge fees. Instead, all schools are financed by a tax-­ funded voucher, which each pupil is given. There are no requirements for educational qualifications or experience by the education sector when seeking permission. During the 2019/2020 school year, 28.4 and 14.4% of the total numbers of upper secondary school and compulsory students, respectively, were attending free schools (Economy facts, 25 June 2021). The so-called free school reform has allowed private actors, from 1992 onwards, to start schools under the same conditions as those of municipal schools. Profit-­ driven companies are the most common form of providers of free schools.1 Today’s Swedish school system is based on the premise that public schools have the responsibility to ensure that every child in Sweden has an educational place, while private providers can design their activities without such responsibilities. It is often claimed that in a well-functioning market, with no conflicts between individual and societal interests, schools that compromise quality will be eliminated and only the forms of operation and ownership that are better in some way than competing forms will survive. In practice, however, significant obstacles and problems may be associated with the establishment and maintenance of such a market. Vlachos (2012, p. 17) points out that a fundamental problem with the market mechanism is that, when it works well, resources are transferred from students in poorly functioning schools to students in well-functioning schools. Another aspect of this market mechanism is discussed in this chapter, namely the so-called free school choice. One of the core ideas of freedom of choice is that each individual should have the opportunity to choose according to his or her own preferences. Choices in education supposedly play vital roles in both making individuals responsible for their social inclusion by making the ‘right’ choices (Beach & Dovemark, 2009, 2011) and promoting rationality as a choice that contributes to their success or failure (Dovemark, 2004; Puaca, 2013). Instrumental rationalities are often said to guide students’ educational choices (Beach & Puaca, 2014; Holm & Dovemark, 2020; Levine & Cureton, 1998). However, as various authors have noted, choices are influenced by sociocultural resources, and factors such as class, gender and ethnic background are highly important (Ball et al., 2002; Beach, 2018; Dovemark & Holm, 2017; Holm & Dovemark, 2020). Vlachos (2012, p.  16) argues that it is not possible to distinguish between a school’s governance and rule systems, and the importance of demanding that providers of education act responsibly, and checking their responsibility, rises with

 Private limited companies run almost 90 and ca. 50 percent of free schools at upper secondary and compulsory levels, respectively. Nearly half of the free school students attend schools run one by of the 10 largest school groups, whose market shares have been rapidly increasing, especially in the largest cities. In total, 76 percent of all free school students in primary and secondary schools attend schools run by limited companies. The limited company form is especially common among upper secondary free schools. The highest proportion is in Stockholm County, where one in five students attends a free school run by a limited company. 1

102

M. Dovemark and M. Nylund

an increase in the questionability of their motives for delivering high-quality education. As AcadeMedia Ltd., addressed in the case study presented here, is a venture capital company, it is no secret that its main task is to invest in companies to maximize the return on its investments. Thus, as a profit-motivated player, the company has a strong incentive to minimize costs and focus operations on student groups that offer large profit margins (Vlachos, 2012, p. 20). Clearly, there are risks of schools governed by this logic seeking to attract ‘the least resource-intensive students’, and even if they are not allowed to choose their own students, there are opportunities to influence which students try to enrol. This can be done by adjusting their focus, pedagogy, auxiliary facilities (such as accessibility for people with disabilities, canteens, sports halls, libraries, etc.) (Dovemark & Holm, 2017) and geographical locations (Fjellman, 2019). The student base simply plays a major role in a school’s opportunities to operate and, hence, opportunities for making profits.

Education and the Division of Intellectual and Manual Labour The major aim of this chapter is to elucidate how a market or profit logic forms systems of meaning surrounding individuals’ educational choices, particularly how upper secondary schools operating under such logic market themselves on their websites by branding. As underlined by Bourdieu and Passeron (1970), it is impossible to distinguish the conception of meaning in education from its ideological functions. Ideology is performative in relation to how ideas and beliefs are formed and tends to sustain relations of domination. Using the lens of Althusser’s (1971/2008) concept of ‘ideology’, this chapter focuses on how the reproduction of the social relations of production, particularly the division between ‘intellectual’ and ‘manual’ labour, is secured within a strong discursive context of freedom of choice. The conception of this division (cf. Althusser, 1971/2008; Bernstein, 1981; Bourdieu & Passeron, 1970) stems from studies showing that educational systems are based on a (visible or invisible) division between a curriculum for the working class and a curriculum for the more privileged classes. In short, these curricula prepare students for very different roles in society: the (manual) curriculum for the working class builds on principles such as orderliness, punctuality and ‘good habits’, while the (intellectual) curriculum for the more privileged classes builds on principles that promote the acquisition of more theoretical and critical knowledge (Anyon, 1983; Apple, 2004; Beach, 2018; Nylund et al., 2017). One way of conceptualizing the division between intellectual and manual labour is to study the ‘academic-vocational divide’ (see, for example, Nylund et al., 2017). Upper secondary school in Sweden, and in many other countries, is divided between vocational and educational training (VET) and more academic/higher education preparatory (HEP) programmes, which differ in students’ social background and degrees of gender segregation. As shown in Table 6.1, the social class division is manifested in percentages of VET and HEP students who have highly educated parents, and gender segregation is much stronger among the VET programmes.

6  The Janus Face of ‘Freedom of Choice’ in Upper Secondary School Markets

103

Table 6.1  Class and gender divisions in upper secondary school in Sweden Programme VET programmes Handicrafts Health and social care Hotel and tourism Natural resource use Child and recreation Business and administration Restaurant management Vehicle and transport Industrial technology Building and construction Electricity and energy HVAC and property maintenance HEP programmes Humanities Arts Social science Natural science Business management Technology

Total student number (2020/2021)

% Girls

6284 10,084 2454 9703 11,000 10,040

Students with highly educated parents (%) Mean: 40.3% 40 38 40 50 39 37

4414 12,859 4580 13,685 15,601 3716

45 33 42 38 44 38

47 20 11 11 4 3

2073 20,727 61,560 45,944 50,282 31,119

Mean: 68.8% 69 67 63 77 65 72

79 63 65 55 51 19

94 77 74 68 63 52

This table is based on data from SIRIS (Gymnasieskolan – Elevstatistik (skolverket.se). ‘Highly educated parents’ means parents who have completed university studies, which earned them a joint credit of at least 30 ECTS, thus parents who completed at least one term of higher education

Thus, upper secondary school reflects unequal social relations in society and the labour market in general and plays an important role in the process of social reproduction by differentiating access to knowledge (Nylund & Rosvall, 2016), identities (Dovemark & Holm, 2017; Holm & Dovemark, 2020; Rehn & Eliasson, 2015) and thus life opportunities (cf. Beach & Puaca, 2014; Kap, 2014; Puaca, 2013) for students depending on their social background. A major focus of the analysis presented here is how these divisions are expressed on websites of schools run by the largest listed educational venture capital company in Sweden: AcadeMedia Ltd.

Education and Interpellation Any social system that is to survive over time needs to reproduce the core social relations for its functions in some way. For modern capitalism, Althusser (1971/2008) argues, the education system is the most important arena of this process of

104

M. Dovemark and M. Nylund

reproduction. Much like the church in previous times, the education system nowadays is a fundamental institution for the transmission of values and socialization into capitalist society (cf. Dovemark, 2004). No other institution in contemporary society has such possibilities of socializing people (particularly young people) concerning everything from getting up in the morning to going to bed at night: all aspects of expected behaviour, the society we live in, its history, and people’s positions in it (what is normal, who is ‘talented’, etc.). The main reason for turning to Althusser’s theory of ideology in this chapter is that it stresses two key points for our analysis: first, that ideology is a ‘practice’, not just a set of ideas. It is through practices like education that subject positions and subjects are created. Second, the theory highlights the importance of structural conditions in which a subject makes his/her choices because it is through different subject positions (e.g. through language, age, gender, class, ethnicity, parenthood, sexuality, etc.) that we become subjects who can act. We are being hailed to different subject positions even before we are born (e.g., the unborn child gets hailed as a boy/girl through a certain nationality, language, culture, expectations, etc.). Together, these two points enable the direction of analytical attention to two core aspects of the formation of subjects through education, which concern us in this chapter: who (what subject) is being hailed, and the positions constructed/to be occupied by this subject. In short, the theory sheds light on both the present (subject) and future (the subject’s direction). Acting, such as making choices (e.g. to attend a certain school), is always done from certain subject positions (being hailed) with a direction towards certain subject positions. As Althusser (1971/2008, p. 48) suggests: ‘…ideology “acts” or “functions” in such a way that it “recruits” subjects among the individuals /…/ or “transforms” the individuals into subjects by /…/ interpellation or hailing’. Ideology positions individuals as different subjects ‘free’ to obey or disobey the appeal. If the appeal interpellates the subject in such a way that the subject responds, a recognition is obtained. The subject perceives the place designated for him/her as ‘theirs in the world’ (Althusser, 1971/2008, p. 52) – as a graduate, a worker, a boss, etc. To summarize, in this chapter, we aim to illuminate who are being hailed and to what subject positions they are being hailed, in AcadeMedia’s marketing of upper secondary schools, and how these subject positions are related to the social division of labour.

Selected Case As a case, we focus in this chapter on Sweden’s largest free school provider, the publicly listed company AcadeMedia Ltd. According to their website (www.academedia.se), this is ‘Northern Europe’s largest education company’, providing preschool to adult education. During the 2020/2021 school year, more than 82,000 children and young people joined the company’s schools and preschools: almost 5% more than in the previous year (AcadeMedia Ltd., 2019/2020). In addition, 100,000

6  The Janus Face of ‘Freedom of Choice’ in Upper Secondary School Markets

105

adults participated in various adult education programmes provided by the company during the year. The company had 16,900 employees in 2020, and AcadeMedia Ltd. has been listed on the Nasdaq Stock Market in Stockholm since 15 June 2016. According to the company’s annual report, the net turnover (nettoomsättningen, AcadeMedia Ltd., 2019/2020) for the year 2019 was SEK 1557  M, 5.3% higher than in 2018 (SEK 1478 SEK); the adjusted operating profit increased sharply to SEK 131 M from SEK 32 M; and the margin rose from 2.2% to 8.4%. The main owner is the equity company EQT V Fund (www.academedia.se). Overall, the listed company AcadeMedia Ltd. has been increasing its turnover and thereby accumulating profits for its shareholders. Our focus in this chapter is on AcadeMedia Ltd.’s provision of upper secondary education, which catered to 36,400 students enrolled in 143 upper secondary schools with 4445 employees during the 2020/2021 school year (Rönnberg, 2019).

 cadeMedia’s Delivery of Different Kinds A of Education Programmes AcadeMedia’s provision of upper secondary education is summarized in Table 6.2. This is a snapshot of the company’s provision in December 2020, which is constantly changing as schools are bought and/or merged and renamed, as illustrated by the following data. There were 120 upper secondary schools in AcadeMedia’s ‘portfolio’ in 2018 and 143 in December 2020, according to the company’s website. The current Non-Traditional Instruction Program (NTI) upper secondary school is the result of a merger of two of Sweden’s leading players in upper secondary school education focused on technology, information technology (IT), design and media (IT and NTI upper secondary schools), and Hagströmska upper secondary in Linköping merged with Praktiska och Framtidsgymnasiet in the 2021/2022 academic year, according to AcadeMedia’s website (11 December 2020). All three of these schools only offered vocational programmes in the 2020/2021 school year. Table 6.2 shows AcadeMedia’s 13 brands and numbers of schools, their offerings of upper secondary national HEP and VET programmes, as well as locations, according to their websites as of December 2020. To obtain information about AcadeMedia’s various brands, we searched the company’s website (https://academedia.se) and linked the sites of the various brands and their schools to analyze who they hailed and to what subject positions. On each school brand’s main website, we identified the kinds of programmes (VET, HEP or both) it offers and categorized the schools as only or primarily aiming at higher educational preparation or vocational preparation or as hailing prospective students for both VET and HEP. Thus, in the following analysis of the websites, all brands in the table above are categorized as solely or primarily aiming at vocational education, solely or primarily aiming at preparation for higher education or both. We start

106

M. Dovemark and M. Nylund

Table 6.2  AcadeMedia’s brands, programmes and geographical locations Brands (and numbers of schools) Designgymnasiet (1) Didaktus (2) Drottning Blankas Gymnasieskola (11) Framtidsgymnasiet (6) Hagströmska (Athletic) Gymnasiet (3) Internationella Restaurangskolan (1) Klara Teoretiska Gymnasium (11) LBS Kreativa Gymnasiet (18) NTI Gymnasiet (29) Praktiska Gymnasiet (33) ProCivitas Private Gymnasium (7) Rytmus (6) Sjölins (4)

Number of HEP programmes 3 3 3

Number of VET programmes 1 2 3

Locations of schools MA MA MA, BC

– –

5 2

MA, BC BC

–

1

MA

5

1

MA, BC

2 5 – 3

– 1 5 –

MA, BC MA, BC, MC MA, BC, MC Ma, BC

1 3

– –

MA, BC MA

AcadeMedia’s brands, programmes and geographical locations according to their websites as of December 2020 Abbreviations: MA metropolitan areas = Stockholm, Göteborg, Malmö; BC big cities, more than 59,999 inhabitants in the urban area; MC medium-sized cities, 10,000–59,999 inhabitants in the urban area; RA rural areas, less than 10,000 inhabitants

with an analysis of who is being hailed and to what subject position for schools primarily aiming at vocational education.

 ho Is is Being Hailed and to What Subject Position W in Vocational Schools? The hailing on websites of schools that solely offered vocational programmes was dominated by a tone of ‘everyday speech’ or spoken language. We found expressions such as ‘We’ve got your back’ and ‘It’s not always easy [at school]’. The following quotation explaining why to apply to Framtidsgymnasiet (literally ‘Upper Secondary School of the Future’) illustrates this tone: We know you want to succeed in life, of course. But it is not always so easy to know where to start or how to stay focused on school and grades day after day. There is a lot more that draws [one’s attention], sometimes friends, family and leisure can feel both more important and more fun. (...) You also get a clear structure to follow in school, we know that everything will be easier [for you] then. (...) We know you want to succeed in life. But it is not always easy. You know that upper secondary school is important, but it can still be difficult

6  The Janus Face of ‘Freedom of Choice’ in Upper Secondary School Markets

107

to get it done, especially if you have not received the support you needed before. That is why Framtidsgymnasiet exists (Framtidsgymnasiet).

The quoted passages hail a student who ‘does not know where to begin’ or ‘how to keep focus on school’ and is assumed to be more interested in friends and family than in schoolwork. The hailed student is also someone who needs a clear structure and support (‘it gets easier then’). This tone and type of message, for example, dominate Framtidsgymnasiet’s marketing material and information addressing future students: ‘Do you not really know what you want to do after upper secondary school?’ A similar tone hailing presumptive students can be found on the Praktiska (Practical upper secondary school) website. The next quotation also illustrates a view of knowledge and learning that is representative of schools offering solely vocational education: We at Praktiska Gymnasiet believe in the idea of learning by alternating theory and practice. What you can learn in a workplace, you learn best there, while you get in-depth theory and training in school. Therefore, all our education is based on the most possible internships in a workplace. You get the most practice as an apprentice, as half of the studies are done as APL, workplace-based learning. Today we are one of the leading players in upper secondary apprenticeship training in Sweden. (...) We see the student’s talents (...) It is our students who will succeed at Praktiska Gymnasiet, it is they and their talents we want to develop and cultivate! We provide the conditions for the student to learn, practice and test their new skills at their own pace and in the contexts that best suit them (Practical upper secondary school).

The quotation clearly distinguishes between ‘theory’ and ‘practice’ and also expresses a view of learning that rests on the idea of students having innate ‘talents’. Thus, a particular subject is being hailed. The hailing also implies preparation for a particular future position. Generally, a clear pattern is that this future subject position is not associated with ‘larger’ or ‘abstract’ issues, such as society, democracy or influence. On the contrary, it is very much a position related to instrumental values, particularly getting a job and earning money, directly after finishing upper secondary school. This message is the dominant one on most websites of schools only offering VET: The future is waiting for you! Do you long for a really good job and to earn your own money? With support, structure, and internships at real companies, we help you into working life (....) Do you want a good job after high school? (...) You do not need to know everything about what you want to do in the future already, but together with us [at Upper secondary school of the future], after upper secondary school you will have every opportunity to get a good job, a good salary and a good life (Framtidsgymnasiet).

However, there are some nuances to this pattern. Despite following the basic pattern of hailing students with signals of low motivation and desires for a high chance of getting a job directly after upper secondary school, etc., Stockholm international restaurant school (IHR) has a more nuanced hailing. This also applies to students’ anticipated future positions, which are less clearly rooted solely in instrumental values, such as getting a job and money as soon as possible. For instance, IHR’s website states that the school offers students ‘Three years that make you develop’ a type of language that is rarely used by schools, such as Framtidsgymnasiet and

108

M. Dovemark and M. Nylund

Praktiska, mentioned above. One example is the following text about a student called Simon: Previously, Simon did not have much motivation to study, but now he longs for school where he will cook. He describes IHR as a school where he thrives. – Now I have a lot more motivation, it’s so much fun. I really found the right one [school for me], he says (Stockholm international restaurant school).

In another example, IHR seems to take it for granted that prospective students will be happy to seek opportunities abroad: Do you want the whole world at your feet? The restaurant and food – and hotel and tourism  – programmes are preparatory-vocational [programmes]. This means that you get a vocational qualification and can start working immediately after upper secondary school. Because the hotel and restaurant professions are quite similar [all over the world], regardless of the country, the world is at your feet. Or you can choose to study further at university, college or in higher vocational education (Stockholm international restaurant school).

However, in conclusion, a clear pattern emerges in the hailing, which can be summarized through keywords such as ‘support’, ‘structure’, ‘salary’, ‘apprenticeship’, ‘job’, etc. This is hailing rooted in a particular ideology of education and its purpose, which ties a particular subject to a particular future. In this ideology, ‘life’ and ‘working life’ become almost synonymous. There are low educational expectations on the subject being hailed and very few expectations that he/she will play any part in deciding which routes the future society will take. The hailing could be summarized as having little connection to what is traditionally regarded as education and knowledge. There is a more ‘therapeutic’ tone, with references to feelings, ‘getting by’, ‘getting a job’, ‘having a good life’, ‘making it even if it is hard’, etc. As shown in the following section, there is a stark contrast in the appellation from schools offering solely higher education preparatory programmes.

 ho Is is Being Hailed and to What Subject Position W in Higher Education Schools? The analysis of the websites of schools offering only or primarily higher education preparatory programmes revealed a different underlying ideology of education. The following quotations explaining why one should apply to different HEP schools illustrate how their subjects are hailed: Choosing upper secondary school is a starting point; a journey towards who you want to be and what you want to work with. We obviously want to give you three fun years at Klara Theoretical upper secondary school – but we also challenge you. We are the school for you with high ambitions, who want to develop and move forward in life. We make sure that you get the best conditions for further studies after upper secondary school (Klara Theoretical upper secondary school). All types of students attend ProCivitas – some with a conscious goal for their education, others attend because they want a good and broad education that gives them great opportunities to choose what they want to do in the future. (...) At ProCivitas, we place high

6  The Janus Face of ‘Freedom of Choice’ in Upper Secondary School Markets

109

demands on our students and our activities. Our teachers are experts in meeting and challenging motivated students so that they reach their full potential (ProCivitas). Sjölins’ upper secondary school has pedagogy with roots in Harvard [university] (Sjölins).

These quotations are from websites of HEP schools representing more traditional, or ‘disciplinary’, academic schools. Their hailing includes very little expression of instrumental values and is instead permeated by an ideology of education that highlights the importance of knowledge (as a process), development and an orientation towards an open future. There is a slightly different hailing and tone in the hailing of HEP schools that are oriented towards particular branches, such as IT, music or journalism. The same types of messages largely permeate the hailing, but the language is more ‘wordly’ and related to ‘products’, ‘business’ or even getting a job, as exemplified by these quotations from LBS Creative upper secondary and NTI Science upper secondary schools: Do you have high ambitions, a desire to learn more and the goal to study further at college or university? Then this is the school for you! In close collaboration with experienced and knowledgeable teachers, you get the opportunities, help and support you need for the future. Since the school recently started, you also have good opportunities to influence both teaching and the school environment (NTI, science upper secondary school). During your education, you get an insight into the creative process. Whether you want to become a journalist, architect or music producer, it is important to understand the entirety. In working life, you must be able to make quality assessments and know why a production was good or what made it less good. Knowledge, creativity and structure are ingredients that contribute to a good end product. Our educational programmes provide both study and vocational preparation. At LBS, all subjects are equally important, but the theoretical subjects give you the opportunity to study further. LBS is a school at the forefront, with close contact with the business community. Therefore, we can see what types of jobs will be sought in the future (LBS).

However, all the HEP schools hail a subject who is very different from the subject hailed by the VET schools, a subject with ambitions and who wants to be challenged, have influence, study and prepare for the future. These schools’ web pages also express a very different view of knowledge: as ‘a whole’, as a process and including a ‘why-question’ as part of the process of learning and understanding. This represents a more complex view of knowledge than the dualism of ‘theory’ and ‘practice’ that permeates the VET schools. It is, in short, a very different hail from that hailing a student who does not know what to do, wants to earn money fast and desires to be with friends and family instead of being in school. In fact, it hails a subject with almost the opposite attributes, as illustrated by the following quotation from the website of Rytmus upper secondary school, which focuses on music and media: At Rytmus, students are in the habit of staying after class time as we have great confidence in our students and therefore offer both generous opening hours and access to premises and equipment. In short:, with us, you as a student have the opportunity to realize your ideas when they come up. Just gather some friends, find a room and start creating! (Rytmus).

To summarize, the subject being hailed by HEP schools is active, creative and wants to – and is offered the opportunity to – influence their education, their future and

110

M. Dovemark and M. Nylund

beyond. He/she is an ambitious subject with high expectations who wants to stay after lessons to develop into an open future. Some ‘buzzwords’, such as ‘entrepreneurial learning’, appear in some of the schools’ web pages, but they still hail a very different subject, and to very different future positions, from those being hailed by the VET schools. Lastly, the subjects hailed by the schools offering more of a mixture of both HEP and VET programmes, and the positions they are being hailed to, are less clear than those of the schools offering either HEP or VET. In other words, there seem to be gradients in the hailing and subject positioning that correlate with a ‘HEP to VET gradient’. The more the subject is defined in relation to VET or HEP, the more the hailing and future positioning have the characteristics described above for the VET and HEP schools, respectively. The following quotation from Hagströmska upper secondary school’s website exemplifies how subjects are hailed at mixed schools: Our heart beats for the sport, that love runs like a common thread through everything. We are here to help you get a balance in life and to challenge yourself to reach further academically, personally and athletically. We know how important it is that school, training and leisure interact to make you feel good. That’s why Hagströmska is more than a school, that’s why we are more than teachers, classmates and coaches, we are a team and one big family (Hagströmska).

At mixed schools, the ‘straightforward’ hailing associated with VET schools and HEP schools described above is less univocal. An ambition to hail subjects who have interests in diverse aspects of education (e.g. academic, personal, vocational and/or athletic) can be identified. A similar hailing and positioning of the subject are expressed by the Design upper secondary school, another mixed school: Design runs like a common thread through all our education, regardless of whether you choose the aesthetics, technology or trade program. Choose between specializations such as architecture, graphic design, interior design, product design and exhibition design. With us, you will find a creative and stimulating atmosphere, knowledgeable teachers and an environment where we care about each other. We invite you to become one of us! (Designgymnasiet).

In conclusion, the ‘academic-vocational divide’ is less clearly an organizing principle in the hailing of these mixed schools. Instead, the ‘content’, or specialization, in terms of design, sports, architecture, etc. is a stronger determinant of the order of meaning in the hailing and positioning of the subject.

Freedom of Choice as an Ideology of Social Reproduction The above analysis shows how an academic-vocational divide is expressed very clearly through the websites of AcadeMedia’s brands. The hailing and positioning of prospective HEP and VET students often include expressions of opposites, such as high/low demands, challenge/support and open/closed futures (cf. Anyon, 1983; Apple, 2004; Beach, 2018; Nylund et al., 2017). A blunt summary of the results is that VET schools hail an unmotivated subject with an instrumental view of education aiming for a ‘locked’ future (‘getting a job to earn money’), while HEP schools

6  The Janus Face of ‘Freedom of Choice’ in Upper Secondary School Markets

111

hail ambitious subjects who view education and knowledge as having intrinsic value for growth and also aim for an open future shaped, in large part, by themselves. The stark differences in these ideologies may be at least partly due to the schools marketing themselves as unique ‘brands’ in one way or another, aiming to attract different groups of the ‘consumer market’ of students (cf. Ball, 2003, 2004; Dovemark & Holm, 2017). Through this market logic, the schools’ messages become very clear and simple. The curriculum (Lgy11) that schools must follow is complex, promoting many (and sometimes contradictory) values (Nylund et al., 2017). If the hailing of prospective customers is to be successful, such complexities are difficult to take into account. Instead, the voice of the web pages must be loud enough to ‘get through’ successfully to the specific group of customers who will accept the hailing. Even if this was the only differentiating logic operating, one might be critical of how unequally different knowledge, identities and life opportunities were distributed to young people. However, the inequality is exacerbated by upper secondary schools’ heavy differentiation by social class. Together, this double differentiation clearly contributes to, or even reinforces, the reproduction of a division between ‘intellectual’ and ‘manual’ labour. Through this ideological process, students from different social classes are prepared for different roles as both future workers and citizens. A crucial part of the legitimation of class society occurs through education. The education system is generally regarded as being based on the idea of meritocracy; i.e., anyone can become what they want if they try hard enough (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1970). Thus, it is assumed that differentiation is a reflexion of effort and ambition rather than social inheritance. However, systematic knowledge of social differentiation processes severely challenges the ideology of meritocracy’s validity. Research on the social differentiation of schools indicates that it is more accurate to describe education as playing a major role in upholding a division between ‘manual’ and ‘intellectual’ labour in a strongly class-based society. If the schools included in our study do what they promise on their web pages, working-class students will learn how to get a job and get by, while middle-class students will learn how to grow and acquire a new and much more refined understanding of themselves, the society they inhabit and their potential roles in it. The analysis in this chapter illustrates how ‘freedom of choice’ in the context of the choice of an upper secondary school is, in fact, a highly structured process. Rather than free, it is heavily framed by ideology, hailing students from different social groups with very different messages regarding who they are and who they are to become. Thus, ‘freedom of choice’, we argue, can be more correctly understood in this context as part of an ideological reproduction of the social division of labour, in which the concept itself is an expression of an ideology about what a human, society and education should be. One could even claim that rather than students being free to choose schools, we have a process where schools choose students via the construction of brands that differ in focus, pedagogy, auxiliary facilities, marketing and geographical location. Taken together, this constructs very different hailing in different schools, which is very likely to attract students and parents from different social backgrounds (e.g. a few middle-class parents would be attracted by the hailing of VET schools).

112

M. Dovemark and M. Nylund

In this chapter, for the sake of clarity and due to a lack of space, we have focused on the academic-vocational divide. However, two other important results from our study can be seen in Table 6.2, which warrants a discussion in this final part of the chapter. First, the ‘market logic’ itself seems to strengthen the organizational differentiation between VET and HEP as the examined brands mostly offer either only or primarily VET and HEP programmes, not both, which makes sense if the students are seen as customers. Second, the consumer logic also seems to fuel polarization in geographical terms as almost all programs that AcadeMedia offers are located in cities (primarily the largest three in Sweden) and not in rural areas (cf. Fjellman, 2019; Lundahl et al., 2013). We conclude from these findings, together with our main results regarding the ideological hailing on websites reproducing a division between intellectual and manual labour, that a market logic seems to strengthen multiple layers of reproductive processes of inequalities. Thus, they cast further doubt on the validity of the ‘freedom of choice’ concept. In summary, our analysis highlights the importance of recognizing the Janus-faced character of freedom of choice and stresses the importance of highlighting the much less visible face of the process, which has to do with inequality and social reproduction. With their strong focus on freedom of choice, the education reforms from the early 1990s have increased, rather than reduced, inequality and strengthened social reproduction rather than (as promised) improved school results, diversity and development.

References AcadeMedia Ltd.’s (2019/2020). Annual report 2019/2020. https://academedia.se/wp-­content/ uploads/2021/06/academedia-­annual-­report-­1920.pdf Althusser, L. (1971/2008). On ideology. Verso. Anyon, J. (1983). Social class and the hidden curriculum. In H. A. Giroux & D. E. Purpel (Eds.), The hidden curriculum and moral education: Deception or discovery? Berkeley. Apple, M.  W. (2001). Educating the “right” way: Markets, standards, god and inequality. Routledge. Apple, M. W. (2004). Creating difference: Neo-liberalism, neo-conservatism and the politics of educational reform. Educational Policy, 18, 12–44. Ball, S. J. (2003). Class strategies and the education market: The middle classes and the social advantage. Routledge. Ball, S. J. (2004, June 17). Education for Sale! The commodification of everything?, King’s Annual Education Lecture, University of London. http://sys.glotta.ntua.gr/Dialogos/Politics/CERU-­ 0410-­253-­OWI.pdf Ball, S.  J. (2007). Education plc: Understanding private sector participation in public sector. Routledge. Ball, S. J., Reay, D., & David, M. (2002). Ethnic choosing: Minority ethnic students, social class and higher education choice. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 5(4), 333–357. 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, 551–569. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392110367998 Beach, D. (2018). Structural injustices in Swedish education. Academic selection and educational inequalities. Palgrave Macmillan.

6  The Janus Face of ‘Freedom of Choice’ in Upper Secondary School Markets

113

Beach, D., & Dovemark, M. (2009). Making ‘right’ choices? An ethnographic account of creativity, performativity and personalised learning policy, concepts and practices. Oxford Review of Education, 1465–3915, 35(6), 689–704. First published 2009. 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), 313–327. Routledge. Beach, D., & Puaca, G. (2014). Changing higher education by converging policy-packages: Education choices and student identities. European Journal of Higher Education, 4(1), 67–79. Bernstein, B. (1981). Codes, modalities and the process of cultural reproduction: A model. Language in Society, 10(3), 327–363. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500008836 Börjesson, M. (2016). Från likvärdighet till marknad. En studie av offentligt och privat inflytande över skolans styrning i svensk utbildningspolitik 1969–1999 [From equivalence to market. A study of public and private influence on the school’s governance in Swedish education policy 1969–1999]. Örebro Studies in Education 52, Örebro University. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C. (1970). Reproduction in education, society and culture. Sage. Chubb, J., & Moe, T. (1990). Politics, market and America’s schools. Brookings Institution Press. Dahlstedt, M., & Fejes, A. (Eds.). (2019). Neoliberalism and market forces in education. Lessons from Sweden. Routledge. Dovemark, M. (2004). Ansvar, flexibilitet, valfrihet. En etnografisk studie om en skola I förändring [Responsibility, flexobility and freedom of chouce. An ethnographic study of a school in transision]. Göteborg Studies in Educational Sciences, nr. 223, Göteborg: ACTA Universitatis Gothoburgensis. Dovemark, M., & Holm, A.-S. (2017). Pedagogic identities for sale! Segregation and homogenization in Swedish upper secondary school. British Journal of Sociology of Education., 38(4), 518–532. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2015.1093405 Dovemark, M., Kosonen, S., Kauko, J., Hansen, P., Magnúsdóttir, B., & Rasmussen, P. (2018). Deregulation, privatisation, and marketisation of Nordic comprehensive education: Social changes reflected in schooling. Education Inquiry. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2018.1429 Economy facts (Ekonomifakta). https://www.ekonomifakta.se/Fakta/Valfarden-­i-­privat-­regi/ Skolan-­i-­privat-­regi/Antal-­friskolor-­i-­Sverige/. Available 2021, June 24. Fjellman, A.-M. (2019). School choice, space and the geography of marketization  – Analyses of educational restructuring in upper secondary education in Sweden. (Diss). University of Gothenburg. Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and freedom. University of Chicago Press. Holm, A.-S. (2017). En friskolan uppgång och fall [The rise and fall of a free school]. Education & Democracy, 26/1, 87–106. Holm, A.-S., & Dovemark, M. (2020). “I chose this school because the students were just like me” School choice, symbolic boundaries, homogenization and we-ness in Swedish upper secondary education. I S Lund (Red) Immigrant incorporation, education, and the boundaries of belonging (s. 17–39). Palgrave. Kap, H. (2014). Programme content orientation in vocational education and training and life chances – A comparative study. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 66, 348–364. Levine, A., & Cureton, J. S. (1998). When Hope and fear collide: A portrait of Today’s college student. Jossey-Bass. Lundahl, L., Erixon Arreman, I., Holm, A.-S., & Lundström, U. (2013). Marketization of education in Sweden: How far has it gone? Education Inquiry, 4(3), 497–514. Nylund, M., & Rosvall, P.-Å. (2016). A curriculum tailored for workers? Knowledge organization and possible transitions in Swedish VET. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 48(5), 692–710. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2016.1138325 Nylund, M., Rosvall, P.-Å., & Ledman, K. (2017). The vocational–academic divide in neoliberal upper secondary curricula: The Swedish case. Journal of Education Policy, 32, 788–808. Ozga, J., & Lingard, B. (2007). Globalisation, education policy and politics. In B.  Lingard & J.  Ozga (Eds.), The RoutledgeFalmer reader in education policy and politics (pp.  65–82). Routledge.

114

M. Dovemark and M. Nylund

Puaca, G. (2013) Educational choices of the future. A sociological inquiry into micro-politics in education. (Diss). University of Gothenburg. Rehn, H., & Eliasson, E. (2015). Caring disposition and subordination. Swedish health and social care teachers’ conceptions of important vocational knowledge. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 67, 558–577. Rönnberg, L. (2019). Swedish school companies going global. In M. Dahlstedt & A. Fejes (Eds.), Neoliberalism and Market Forces in Education (pp. 183–196), Research in Education Policy and Politics. Tooley, J. (2000). Reclaiming education. Bloomsbury. Vlachos, J. (2012). Är vinst och konkurrens en bra modell för skolan[Is profit and competition a good model for the school?]. Ekonomisk debatt [Economic debate]., 40(4), 16–30. Marianne Dovemark is a senior researcher and Professor Emerita of Education at the University of Gothenburg. Her main research interests are in the sociology of education concerning policy and politics related to the marketization of education and the personalization of learning. Theoretically, she belongs to a critical tradition, methodologically in critical ethnography. She is a member of the board of the international research journal Ethnography and Education. She has undertaken research and published extensively in the field of personalized learning and marketization of education. One of her latest contributions, co-authored with Professor Dennis Beach, is a chapter in the edited volume Neoliberalism and Market Forces in Education. Lessons from Sweden.  

Mattias Nylund is an associate professor of Pedagogy at Gothenburg University. His main research interest is in curriculum studies and sociology of education, with a particular focus on how education policy and practice reflect and affect power relations such as class and gender. Much of his research has had a focus on vocational education. He is currently working on a research project investigating how curricular documents are interpreted and used by teachers in Swedish adult education.  

Chapter 7

Revisiting Just Education for Students Last in Line – A Norwegian Perspective Anne Nevøy and Marieke Bruin

Abstract Notwithstanding the Nordic commitment to socially just  education, school systems produce and reproduce inequalities. Whereas mechanisms of inequality were previously related to institutional segregation, newer forms are induced by market orientation, competition, and values advantaging privileged groups. In this context, alternative programmes for students not meeting the required standards are introduced. The aim of this study is to explore how alternative programmes in upper secondary vocational education and training (VET) relate to issues of social justice. The study is based on a critical re-analysis of results from two previous studies, in which we explored alternative VET programmes. The analysis shows that the experiences from the alternative courses indicate issues of social injustice. Consequently, a series of principles involving social justice claims for redistribution and recognition, and curricular justice, become pertinent, which is discussed in three parts: (1) A right to education or just an educational impasse? (2) The construction of students, and (3) Education in what, and what for  – “What did you learn in school today?” The study concludes that alternative programmes do not solve a problem but rather call attention to institutionalised constructions of student diversity as deviance, not affording them equality of opportunity, hence sustaining patterns of inequality and social injustice. Keywords  Social justice in education · Upper secondary education · Vocational education and training (VET) · Inequality · Alternative programmes · Student diversity

A. Nevøy (*) · M. Bruin Department of Education and Sports Science, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 A. Rasmussen, M. Dovemark (eds.), Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries, Educational Governance Research 18, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08049-4_7

115

116

A. Nevøy and M. Bruin

Introduction As a means of shaping an inclusive society that sustains democracy, the Nordic countries display a strong commitment to socially just  education (Nevøy et  al., 2014). Within this scope, the Nordic commitment to the notion of a School for All has long-lasting origins. In Norway, comprehensive schooling has been central to the development of the Norwegian welfare state since World War II. The right to comprehensive schooling was extended to upper secondary education in the mid-­1990s when Reform 94 introduced a statutory right to a minimum of 3 years of upper secondary education and training, free of charge. This entailed a right to 13 years of schooling, reflecting an expanded goal of ensuring equal opportunities (Thuen & Volckmar, 2020). Following Mjelde (2008), the reform reinforced integration between the general academic track and the vocational track. Hence, the scholarly aspect of vocational education and training was strengthened. For students who would not adhere to higher academic standards, alternative pathways were provided, notably in association with the vocational track and based on a combination of school-based education and workplace training (Nevøy et al., 2014). Historically, the vision of a School for All has been at the core of the Norwegian comprehensive school, although it appears as a double-edged sword. On the one hand, the tradition of a School for All reminds us of important values connected to fellowship; on the other hand, it displays a historical continuation of practices that categorise and exclude, signalling that some students are not part of the “all” (Nevøy, 2019). This touches upon issues of inequality. With reference to inclusion, in an international context, ideas about inclusive education have been firmly anchored in an explicit social justice agenda (Artiles & Kozleski, 2016). Artiles and Kozleski state that the aim to transform education into a more inclusive system emanated from an increasing awareness of and criticism against educational inequalities. As such, the rationale was to disrupt beliefs, practices, and policies that privileged certain groups of students and disadvantaged others (Skrtic, 1995). Inclusive education is concerned with “the transformation of school cultures to 1) increase access (or presence) of all students (not only marginalised or vulnerable groups), 2) enhance school personnel’s and students’ acceptance of all students, 3) maximise student participation in various domains of activity, and 4) increase the achievement of all students” (Artiles et  al., 2006b, p.  67, original emphases). Artiles and Kozleski (2016) emphasise that inclusive education is anchored in a rights discourse that aims to expand access to valued resources. However, even though rights and access are crucial, it is imperative that inclusive education “broaden its justice agenda” to what happens after access is attained (Artiles & Kozleski, 2016, p. 15). Although the intersection of inclusion and social justice is thematised in research, it is to a lesser degree elaborated on (Artiles et al., 2006a), and research attention to equality and equity dilemmas has been limited (Artiles, 2012). Therefore, it is crucial to address the disparate meanings of inclusion and social justice and to refine the conceptualisation of these notions (Artiles et al., 2006a).

7  Revisiting Just Education for Students Last in Line – A Norwegian Perspective

117

Notwithstanding the commitment to socially just education, school systems produce and reproduce inequalities. Historically, the Norwegian educational system has been viewed as open, providing equal access for all, independent of background (Knudsen, 2021). However, from the late 1990s, collective interests have been replaced by individual interests through increased privatisation, free school choice, and increased opportunities for individual solutions within the comprehensive school, with an emphasis on learning outcomes as a quality indicator (Thuen & Volckmar, 2020). In these times, characterised by a dismantling welfare state, changes occur in education, health, and employment; with reference to Knudsen (2021), an increase in inequality in society emerges. Since 2015, after a yearly decrease of young people aged 15–29 who are not in education, employment, or training, the tendency is changing. Statistics indicate a clear increase of people under the age of 30 who were not in education, employment, or training within the last 3 years (Statistics Norway1). Knudsen (2021) states that when discussing the reproduction of social inequalities, we must acknowledge the correlation between social class and school performance. In Norwegian schools, the significance of family background for educational achievement persists, notwithstanding extensive political attention as well as pedagogical interventions. Moreover, the author indicates that patterns of geographical segregation, in combination with free school choice, cause worries for “ghetto-like” development in  local areas and increasing educational segregation. Following Knudsen (2021), the patterns of social reproduction appear therefore to be rather permanent, and there is reason to believe that the direct impact of social background on people’s social and economic position may increase. A factor less addressed than school systems reproducing inequalities, however, is that the mechanisms of inequality change over time (Connell, 2012). Whereas inequalities in previous times were related to institutional segregation, newer forms of educational inequalities are based on a global, neoliberal turn in education. The change is characterised by market-­oriented and competitive mechanisms, emphasising meritocratic norms and values and advantaging privileged groups (Connell, 2012; Smeyers, 2009). The neoliberal turn in education is a global education reform movement (Sahlberg, 2011), which is characterised by educational standardisation, teaching for predetermined results, and test-based accountability policies (Biesta, 2007, 2009, 2013; Sahlberg, 2011). These tendencies may produce authoritarian forces hindering teachers, students, and parents to participate actively in important decisions about schooling (Gewirtz, 2000), closing down arenas for debate and creating a monopoly for the market perspective, whilst issues of social justice diminish (Connell, 2013). Market reforms create inequality, persistently inducing concentrations of privilege and discourses of free choice whilst weakening redistributive mechanisms (Connell, 2013). Subsequently, “education becomes a zone of manufactured insecurity, with individual achievement through competition the only  https://www.ssb.no/arbeid-og-lonn/sysselsetting/statistikk/tilknytning-til-arbeid-utdanningog-velferdsordninger/artikler/trenden-er-brutt%2D%2Dflere-unge-utenfor-i-2020. Retrieved March 2022. 1

118

A. Nevøy and M. Bruin

recognised form of success” (Connell, 2019, p. 8). These tendencies coincide with questions concerning students leaving upper secondary school with no formal qualification, a problem that has been on political agendas throughout the Western world in the past few decades. In Norway, the welfare state’s priority to secure collective interests through equal rights in a common education system has gradually given way to a neoliberal focus on equity and educational outcomes, which has opened the gate for a plethora of compensatory solutions (Thuen & Volckmar, 2020). In an attempt to counteract instances of dropping out from upper secondary education, various alternative trajectories have been developed for students considered not to benefit from the regular programmes. Norwegian mainstream upper secondary education is organised into two, semi-integrated tracks, consisting of 12 programmes in total. Three tracks provide academic qualifications for higher education, and nine provide vocational qualifications. Whereas the general academic programmes are of 3-year duration, the vocational education and training programmes follow a 2-plus-2-year model: this means school-based education for the first 2 years, followed by a 2-year apprenticeship with a company or public institution. In comparison with other countries in Europe, Norway has a high level of youths aged 25–34 who have not received a qualification from upper secondary education. This lack of qualification applies primarily to former students in vocational education and training (Ministry of Education, 2019). The aim of this chapter is to explore how alternative programmes in upper secondary vocational education and training relate to issues of social justice. The chapter is based on a critical re-analysis of results from two previous Norwegian studies that explored alternative programmes in upper secondary vocational education. With Rawls’ (1971) Theory of Justice as a theoretical underpinning, the analytical lens used is based on Gewirtz (2006), Young (1990), Fraser (2000, 2008), and Connell (2012, 2013). Connell (2012) emphasises that social justice in education is concerned with multiple issues: not only does it concern equal access to an educational service, but social justice also concerns the nature of the service itself, as well as the consequences that follow over time, for society and the individual. The re-­ analysis aims to discuss justice in the intersection of an increasingly market-­oriented neoliberal educational system on the one hand and the vision of equal opportunities in socially just education on the other hand.

Analytical Framework Dewey’s legacy (1932) reminds us that social justice is multifaceted, based on moral principles that provide tools for analysing, clarifying, and illuminating special situations. On justice, Dewey remarks: “Taken as a principle, not as a rule, justice signifies the will to examine specific institutions and measures so as to find out how they

7  Revisiting Just Education for Students Last in Line – A Norwegian Perspective

119

operate with the view of introducing greater impartiality and equity into the consequences they produce” (Dewey, 1932, p. 338). Dewey points to the situated nature of justice, changing through time, encouraging each generation to overhaul its inherited stock of moral principles and reconsider them in relation to contemporary conditions and needs. Therefore, to each generation, “the obligation is to discover what principles are relevant to our own social estate” (p. 339). In developing a contextualised analysis of social justice, Gewirtz (2006) echoes Dewey’s notion. She argues that “social justice in education has to be understood in relation to particular contexts of enactment” (p. 69). When exploring justice in education, a contextualised approach is necessary that can function as an “analytical lens for helping us to read and evaluate claims about justice in education” (p. 79). Gewirtz emphasises that it is not her purpose to provide a definitive conceptualisation of what counts as justice in education, against which policies and practices can be judged; rather, she suggests a reflective discourse about justice. This is not about building a systematic theory but, according to Young (1990, p. 5), about “clarifying the meaning of concepts and issues, describing and explaining social relations, and articulating and defending ideals and principles”. Gewirtz (2006) states that what counts as socially just is a composite and multifaceted conundrum that is not possible to answer at a purely abstract level. She proposes a contextualised approach to understanding social justice involving four intertwined dimensions: looking at the multidimensional nature of justice, looking at the tensions between different dimensions of justice, being sensitive to the mediated nature of just practices, and being sensitive to differences in the contexts and levels within which justice is enacted (Gewirtz, 2006, p. 79). A similar notion is emphasised by Young (1990), who holds that issues of social justice need to be considered in light of experience because without experience, “normative reflection is abstract, empty, and unable to guide criticism with a practical interest in emancipation” (p. 5). Our re-analysis of experiences with alternative courses with extended workplace practice draws on this contextualised approach.

 xperiences Drawn from the Alternative Course E with Extended Workplace Practice In this critical reflection about how alternative educational trajectories relate to issues of social justice, we use the experiences with the Norwegian programme Alternative Course with Extended Workplace Practice as they come forward in two studies, in which we have taken part: (1) Nevøy et al. (2014) and (2) Bruin and Ohna (2013). The research was conducted between 2009 and 2012. Data consisted of interviews with school administrators, teachers, and students, as well as registered data and policy documents. The experiences with the alternative courses are presented from an institutional perspective, as well as a student perspective.

120

A. Nevøy and M. Bruin

 n Institutional Perspective on Alternative Courses A with Extended Workplace Practice Viewed from an institutional perspective, several findings in Nevøy et  al. (2014) emerge as relevant for our critical reflection on how alternative courses relate to issues of social justice. To unfold the institutional arrangements of the alternative VET courses, the following section is divided into three parts: (i) Local patterns of regulation of the alternative VET courses, (ii) Students attending, and (iii) Justification of the courses. (i) Local Patterns of Regulation of the Alternative VET Courses Alternative courses with extended workplace practice were first established in the mid-1990s when all students leaving compulsory education were given a statutory right to upper secondary education. Norwegian educational policy states that the alternative VET courses were initiated as a special educational response for students in need of support beyond what was considered possible in regular classes, with an emphasis on learning through practical work. The students in the alternative course thus have a formal right to upper secondary education and a right to special education, which aims at a fair distribution of educational opportunities. The courses did not follow the regular curriculum, and they were offered in groups with a reduced number of students: a maximum of eight. Local policy documents stated that a Certificate of competence would be granted upon completion of the course, documenting the skills acquired. The aspiration was that the course would qualify the student for participation in the regular labour market as a skilled or unskilled labourer or in sheltered workshops. The decisions about when, where, and in what VET programme to establish an alternative course were made by the regional school administration. The courses were generously funded by the county through a standard “classroom resource”, identical to how regular VET classes of 15 students were funded. In addition, each alternative class was resourced with 1.6 assistants. Students were assigned to the courses through a system of special admission. Contrary to the general system of admission to upper secondary education based on free school choice depending on grade average from lower secondary school, admission to the alternative course was based on special terms. Admission on special terms is regulated by the Educational-­ Psychological Counselling Service (EPCS) and concerns students who cannot compete for a school place in regular VET tracks on equal terms, for example due to grade exemption, as well as students entitled to special education. In the case of the alternative course with extended workplace practice, the basis for placement was the expert assessment provided by the EPCS rather than the students’ choice. In one of the interviews, a head of department asserted that students did not apply for the alternative VET courses, rather placement was recommended by the EPCS. It exemplifies how the alternative course existed in the shadow of the policy of free school choice.

7  Revisiting Just Education for Students Last in Line – A Norwegian Perspective

121

The alternative courses were designed locally by the schools. The courses were organised within a continuum, ranging from school-segregated to more integrated models. The initial courses, established in the 1990s, were organised as segregated units. The more recently established courses were situated at school premises yet segregated; whilst integrated with regular programmes in terms of sharing school facilities and teaching staff, they were organised as separate courses. The schools valued their freedom to design the courses; there was widespread agreement that local autonomy and flexibility were necessary conditions for responding to the students’ situation, as well as to the needs of the regional labour market. In designing the courses – including purpose, content, and pedagogy, as well as learning sites – the schools stressed the necessity to consider the students’ situation, their educational needs, and their interests. The purpose of the courses was unanimously expressed as ensuring that students obtain a steady job, earn a living, gain stability, and find their place in society. To make this happen, schools strived for flexible and adapted education. To enable a comprehensive picture of the schools’ accounts of the courses, we draw on the analytical lens of the “The earning schema” (Kraus, 2008, p.  56) designed to analyse the relation between work and education in VET. The earning schema (2008) is based on an “earning oriented pedagogy” (p. 56), which is oriented towards qualifying students to make a living. The model comprises three dimensions central to VET: technical expertise, general competence, and earning orientation. In our case, we apply the model to differentiate between school-based and work-based learning sites. In doing so, the model visualises the curricular differences in a school-based and workplace-based setting. According to Kraus (2008), technical expertise involves knowledge and skills necessary to do a specific task, including relevant literacy and numeracy, and the area of technical expertise is realised in the process of work itself. General competence refers to “behaviour in the working context that results from the social organization of work” (p. 58). The earning orientation is understood as “a person’s relation to […] own manpower, both in a concrete working context as well as in a more encompassing context of the individual’s biography and daily life” (p. 58). In the following table, the schools’ description of the content of the courses is presented as it relates to “The earning schema” and to school-based and work-based learning sites:

122

Technical expertise

General competence

Earning orientation

A. Nevøy and M. Bruin School based General academic school subjects, 3–4 lessons per week Emphasis on health, safety, and environment and practical lessons such as drivers’ education and how to use a computer Work experience in school-based workshops and school-based enterprises Focus on preparation for work

Developing students’ social behaviour and skills Developing teacher-student relationships built on trust and honesty Courses in home economics, sex education and relations, and drugs and violence Working on students’ attitudes, language, and conduct Working on technical skills, social skills, independence, reliability, and responsibility Working on self-regulation Before workplace placement, issues such as attendance, social stability, and motivation are addressed Helping students find out where their interests lay Focus on employees’ duties and rights and employers’ expectations and demands Offer courses on work ethics and employee conduct

Workplace based The first year: Placement in a workplace is only short term (workweek); field trips and visits to local companies Workplace placement when teachers deem the student ready, not earlier Construction work on sites alongside teachers to get acquainted with the machinery A few students were granted training agreements with companies or sheltered workshops, gradually expanding from one day per week to full-time in the second and third years Learning work ethics

As the earning schema shows, the alternative courses had a strong emphasis on school-based activities and learning. It shows that the vocational part of the training was limited and mainly located at the schools, in school workshops, and in school-­ based enterprises, whilst the workplace-based learning site was less enhanced, especially within the general competence and earning orientation categories. The schema shows some workplace-based learning in the category of technical expertise. However, the workplace-based placements were incidental at best. Experience at the workplace was acknowledged as essential for learning, yet the schools focused more on preparing the students for workplace training. Several schools emphasised that it was difficult to find adequate workplaces: “Companies are not interested”, and “Employers are reluctant to take on any responsibility for the students’ learning

7  Revisiting Just Education for Students Last in Line – A Norwegian Perspective

123

needs” (Nevøy et al., 2014, p. 200). Some implied that companies only accepted students because they represented free labour. As noted earlier, upon completion, students were supposed to receive a Certificate of competence. National regulation underlined that this certificate would document the student’s total competence by the end of the course. To the schools, designing the certificate represented a challenge; often, the record was based on the teachers’ experiences and therefore rather informal. Moreover, the schools differed in their understanding of the certificate’s content and form. Some provided a summary of what the student had done; others would document the offered course activities or what the student had to offer. According to the schools, there was no standard assessment, and schools offered various forms of documentation  – of various competencies. (ii) Students Attending This section focuses on how the schools described the students, their backgrounds, and previous school experiences. In the data, the students were described by the county authority and school representatives and through the schools’ report on how students were presented in the EPCS’ expert assessments. An online description of the programme provided by the county authority stated that “The target group will have various problems related to learning and social functioning” (county website, vilbli.no/2011). In A handbook for counsellors (2009), the county administration presented the alternative VET courses, and the specific target group, as follows: Some students will have motivational and relational problems to such an extent that this means they will not be able to adjust to the framework of differentiated teaching within the regular curriculum. The main goal is to provide a course involving increased workplace practice with extended supervision and adult support. (County Policy Document, 2009 – Section 9.4.6 – Alternative courses with extended workplace practice).

The schools reported that before admission to the course, the students were identified by conventional special educational needs categories, likewise in the expert assessment from the EPCS: The students’ special needs and how they disqualify for regular programmes are reflected in an extensive use of special needs labels, such as “complex learning difficulties”, “social and emotional problems” and “specific subject difficulties” (Nevøy et al., 2014, p. 200).

Notwithstanding some variations, most students came from disadvantaged backgrounds, and more than 80% received special needs education upon leaving lower secondary school. About half of these students received individual tutoring or special needs education in segregated settings in lower secondary school. However, records on the students’ grade average from the tenth grade are uncertain. No grades have been registered for one third of the students, and for the remaining two thirds, the grade average was equivalent to that of the student intake in regular programmes.2  Based on regional register data.

2

124

A. Nevøy and M. Bruin

The heads of department underlined the importance of a particular  teacher-­ competence -, emphasising personal qualities for building relationships with students rather than professional or vocational competence. The schools’ descriptions of the necessary teacher competence reflected how the students were constructed; it mirrored the students as different and focussed on why they were disqualified for regular VET programmes. Hence, a teacher’s personal qualities would be considered more important than formal VET teacher competence. As such, the vocational expertise of teachers was devaluated, corresponding to the downgrading of technical expertise in the course design. (iii) Justification of the Courses The county authorities, as well as the schools, strongly articulated the value of the alternative VET courses. Predominating arguments referred to preventing dropping out, the students’ need for adapted education and coherent schooldays, keeping students out of prison, and developing skills to cope with difficult life situations. The justification most prevalent involved keeping students from becoming dropouts; this argument trumped the goal of vocational qualification. As a head of department explained, “We do whatever it takes to keep the students in school […] and out of prison” (Nevøy et al., 2014, p. 200). Therefore, to ensure that students stayed in the course, the head of department explained that the school was tolerant towards the students. The schools reported that only less than 5% of the students had left the alternative courses during a school year. Due to the students’ former school experiences and the demands put on them in regular VET classes, the school principals emphasised that more students might leave school if the alternative courses did not exist. The schools argued that the strength of the alternative courses lay in how students’ needs were taken into consideration and how the daily activities and routines were adapted to the students’ situation. As such, the Norwegian principle of adapted education provided a legitimate basis on which to argue for the value of the courses. Other justifications involved qualifying students for regular work and sheltered workshops. However, there seemed to be fewer opportunities for work experiences than stated in the official course description, and as such, there was a discrepancy between what was promised by the course and what was provided in reality. Another justification for the course was that the students stayed in the programme. However, the progression statistics of students who started in 2009 showed that 3 years after joining, one third of the students had left the programme. One third had transferred to regular programmes, and the remaining third was still in the programme. Within the group of students who made the transition into regular programmes, one third left within the subsequent year. Similar to Dovemark and Beach (2016), the situation that a high number of students did not finish school in spite of alternative programmes was not acknowledged by county officials or the schools (Nevøy et al., 2014). However, some heads of departments referred to students as being reluctant to be associated with the alternative course, which made them question the value of the courses. Moreover, they argued whether it might be too easy to push students – considered unable to function in regular classes – into alternative

7  Revisiting Just Education for Students Last in Line – A Norwegian Perspective

125

courses and as such  removing them  because teachers  in regular classes could not cope. Furthermore, since the courses did not provide any formal qualifications, some of the interview participants expressed their worry that students would finish and enter into “nothing”.

The Student Perspective In Bruin and Ohna (2013), eight students – four boys and four girls aged 16–19 – talked about their experiences in the alternative course and in compulsory school, as well as their thoughts for the future. Almost unanimously, the students talked about not being able to keep up with the pace in lower secondary school, about problems with coping academically and socially, and about being ‘unable to fit in’. The students talked about a non-supportive school system and being on the outside of the peer group. The students expressed that their experience in primary and lower secondary school felt like it left no room for their personal or educational needs. This was prevalent in the story that David shared, about making an effort, which he consequently did not consider worthwhile: When I did try… then I had to sit for hours when working on some tasks, because […] I can’t do anything very well… […] So, when you then present it and haven’t got it right, […] then they weren’t exactly happy, and when you hadn’t done it, they were definitely not happy, so… I told them I hadn’t had time, or hadn’t understood, well… that didn’t help, they only got mad at me and reprimanded me, and… it really sucked (Bruin & Ohna, 2013, p. 1095).

Students talked about feeling so overwhelmed that they gave up altogether. Moreover, they expressed feelings of being given up on, as in Phillip’s case: They gave up on me […] at home, […] at primary school, […] at lower-secondary school […] Then you feel extremely abandoned […] I felt stuck, couldn’t go anywhere (Bruin & Ohna, 2013, p. 1096).

John talked about feeling betrayed by his teachers in lower secondary school. According to him, the teachers failed to see how he could learn more effectively, forcing methods upon him that he did not understand. “They said, No, you have learned this the wrong way, forget it, you have to do it differently! They never taught me shit … I didn’t learn anything” (Bruin & Ohna, 2013, p. 1096). Almost all students reported being a victim of extensive bullying in compulsory school, and they talked about feeling depressed, being passive, and isolating themselves from others. At the same time, they did not feel acknowledged by their teachers but rather felt marked as ‘trouble-makers’: Teachers were so prejudiced, like he’s a pain, he doesn’t know how to behave himself in class. They never considered why that was the case, whether there could be a reason for this… So, you are marked (Bruin & Ohna, 2013, p. 1096).

Contrary to their experiences in compulsory school, the students expressed that the alternative course brought about a turning point in their lives, transforming

126

A. Nevøy and M. Bruin

hopelessness into experiences of learning and participation, which created encouragement and hope for future possibilities. Even though some students expressed they did not entirely understand why they were in the course, most of them expressed experiencing a more positive outlook on life. Phillip reported that he had entered a “really good stage in life” where I can start to develop myself as a person […] and that is extremely important right now… being in a supportive environment, feeling secure, and feeling able, managing a job… because it’s now or never, right? It is important to build good things around me, not standing up to my knees in the negative shit like I always have, but gaining security and so on… The course has taught me that (Bruin & Ohna, 2013, p. 1097).

The students said they had no wish to be in a regular course, which was associated with difficult experiences; they would rather have a job. The enhanced quality of life the students talked about stemmed from learning meaningful things. For instance, the students talked about learning new words to make it easier to express oneself and about learning crafts one had not considered before. Contrary to their experiences from regular education, the alternative course accommodated the need for more time to learn, which made it possible for students to master things they never thought themselves capable of, expressed by John as “one hell of a good feeling” (Bruin & Ohna, 2013, p. 1097). The students talked about learning other things than subject-related issues in the alternative course. They talked about being genuinely proud of doing a good job and how good it felt to master a task. The course gave Phillip the security that he needed to “build himself up”. It also provided a secure environment in which he could thrive and develop his great passion  – music: “I can write a text and confess to myself, and […] I know that […] I have told my story […] and have reflected a little upon what I have been going through earlier […] So, the music is a huge help, to be able to stand up tall” (Bruin & Ohna, 2013, p. 1098). Like Phillip, there were other students who reported that, due to the alternative course, they experienced personal growth. About half of the students talked about gaining a formal apprentice agreement and vocational qualification. As such, the fact that the alternative course did not provide any such formal qualification was unknown to them. At the time of the interview, Marc was in his first semester. He was convinced that he would gain an apprentice agreement and vocational qualification upon finishing the course: “That is my goal” (Bruin & Ohna, 2013, p.  1098). Christine wanted to be a chef, and although she knew she would not gain a formal qualification, she was confident that the alternative course would help her reach her goal. David also wanted to become a chef, but not in a nursing home, where he was placed at the time of the interview. His dream was to gain a formal apprenticeship agreement in a hotel. However, for this to happen, he would have to learn additional skills first; these skills could not be developed within the context of his current workplace, and this worried him. Phillip emphasised the value of self-development, so that I will be able to stand firmly, and not slide back into old habits which is easily done […] So, the alternative course is my safety net right now […] It makes it possible for me to be the person that I want to be (Bruin & Ohna, 2013, p. 1099).

7  Revisiting Just Education for Students Last in Line – A Norwegian Perspective

127

Like Phillip, other students considered themselves saved by the course. As David commented on the question of where he would have been otherwise, “I don’t know, out on the streets, out of work, dead, I wouldn’t know. It would have been sheer hell, that’s for sure” (Bruin & Ohna, 2013, p. 1099). The course provided a community where students felt accepted for who they were, with peers and other people with similar experiences. Phillip was convinced he would have become an “outcast” without the course. “I don’t think that story would have ended very well” (Bruin & Ohna, 2013, p. 1099). In summary, the students’ experiences reflect a non-supportive school system in regular, primary, and lower secondary education. The alternative course represented a turn in the students’ lives in the sense that, to the students, education became meaningful. The question, however, is whether the course qualifies as therapy rather than education.

Discussion The analysis shows that the alternative course had a substantial impact on the students’ lives. The experiences reflect patterns of unfulfilled promises and hopes, indicating issues of social injustice, involving the basic social structures underlying the alternative course, as well as the course’s curricular and pedagogical design, its content, and its purpose. Consequently, a series of principles involving social justice claims for redistribution and recognition, and curricular justice, become pertinent. The following discussion is divided into three parts: (1) A right to education or an educational impasse? (2) The construction of students, and (3) Education in what, and what for – “What did you learn in school today?”

A Right to Education or an Educational Impasse? The right to education adapted to individuals’ needs is a fundamental principle within the Norwegian school system, in both regular and special education. As stated by the Education Act section 5(1), students who do not benefit sufficiently from the regular educational programme are entitled to special needs education. The alternative course with extended workplace practice was established under this provision; the content of the programme was to be adapted to the individual student and thus not obliged to follow the national curricula of regular VET programmes. As such, the students in the alternative course had a formal right to both upper secondary education and special needs education. As such, the alternative course rests on principles of fair distribution and equality of opportunity. The provision echoes Rawls, reflecting how “social groups who are most disadvantaged are given decisive weight in the distribution of economic benefits” (Føllesdal, 2014), in line with the welfare state’s focus on equal opportunities (Thuen & Volckmar, 2020).

128

A. Nevøy and M. Bruin

The formal rights to education seem to be in place. Yet, as noted by Connell (2019), justice is not restricted to material equality and equal distribution; it involves recognition, respect, and the overcoming of oppression. On the one hand, the experiences drawn from the alternative courses show that the programmes were well funded, with ample economic and pedagogical resources. On the other hand, the alternative programme was segregated from the regular programmes. Teachers and heads of department raised questions regarding the curriculum, and the courses showed a low connection to working life in local companies. This gives cause to question the opportunities the course provided for vocational education and training. Furthermore, the course did not provide formal qualifications. Therefore, in line with Dovemark and Beach (2016, p. 175), the alternative course rather resembled a process of abandonment of a genuinely educational contract with these young people. Instead of being educated so they may develop mentally, morally, or aesthetically, they become educationally neglected, hidden, overlooked, dismissed, pitied, and quite literally de-valued.

As indicated by Dovemark et al. (2018, p. 135), “The knowledge economy narrative is replacing the welfare narrative”, referred to by Connell and Dados (2014, p. 117) as “the squeezing of welfare”. The welfare state’s focus on equality is replaced by the neoliberal paradigm’s equity focus on students’ learning outcomes, pushing the alternative provision into a virtual no man’s land, which is connected neither to the welfare state’s equality policy nor to the neoliberal pursuit for equity. Referring to Gewirtz (2000, p. 363), within the current paradigm, “issues of equality and social justice are downplayed in comparison to (overall) commercial success”. As such, the students in the alternative course – not expected to become economically productive – become disconnected from current policy discourses. Subsequently, it is fair to ask whether these alternative programmes can be considered an education worth having as they “might exacerbate social and economic exclusion instead of contributing to its reduction” (Arreman & Dovemark, 2018, p. 581).

Constructing the Students The analysis shows that the students are characterised by special needs education labels, identifying students in terms of lacks and diagnoses and emphasising their defects. Students are referred to not in empowering ways but rather in terms of what needs to be “fixed”, indicating low expectations. In the way in which students are constructed, they become marginalised and excluded. The analysis further indicates the students’ expressions of struggle for self-respect in experiencing personal growth, being able to learn and cope. At the same time, half of the students do not know that the course does not provide any formal qualification, leaving students with an education of no value to the labour marked. Some students know that they will not learn the skills necessary for admission to further education, or for a job that  they wish for. Moreover, teachers explain that students are apprehensive of

7  Revisiting Just Education for Students Last in Line – A Norwegian Perspective

129

being identified as a student in the alternative programme, indicating an ambivalence. The students expressed satisfaction with the course; however, they are aware of the low value of the course. The analysis shows traces of what Young (1990, p. 58) calls “cultural imperialism” in the ways students experience how the meanings of society render their personal perspectives invisible, whilst they are stereotyped and marked as different. The established special needs categorisation of the students in the alternative programme can be interpreted as misrecognition, addressed by Fraser (2000) as “a problem of reification” (p. 120). What is needed, according to Fraser, is “a way of rethinking the politics of recognition”, meaning conceptualising struggles for recognition so that they merge with struggles for redistribution rather than undermining them. In that regard, Fraser (2008, p.  405) introduces “The status model”, focusing on deconstruction of categorisation with the aim of enabling participation on an equal basis – participative parity – in every arena of social life. Thus, a central issue concerns the quest for structural conditions that support participative parity: the ability to interact with peers on an equal footing. Young (1990, p.  5) underlines that “Rational reflection on justice begins in a hearing, hearing a call, rather than in asserting and mastering a state of affairs”. In the students’ experiences from the alternative course, we can hear them claim for participative parity, in particular when they talk about experiences of not being acknowledged in compulsory education, being given up on, being categorised as a “trouble-maker”, and being neglected by institutional practices that did not respond to their ways of being different. According to Young (1990), evaluating social justice according to whether persons have opportunities must involve “the social structures that enable or constrain the individuals in relevant situations” (p. 26). A telling example coming forward in this study is that the alternative programme represents a structure that constrains the students’ opportunities. Yet the alternative course as an institutional practice seems to be taken for granted as a socially just practice. As Young implies, we “consider this structure to be the way things are” (p. 95), and therefore, neither policy nor practice needs to change. However, as the analysis shows, the alternative course brings along inequalities as well as processes of marginalisation and exclusion.

 ducation in What and What for – “What Did You Learn E in School Today?” The central characteristics of the alternative course are that the programme is locked within the 2-plus-2 model of the regular VET programmes, simultaneously showing weak connections to working life and workplace training in local companies. Within the 2-plus-2 structure of the VET programmes, companies are not under obligation to take in students. This results in a competition for available workplace apprenticeships or training agreements for students not fulfilling the requirements for formal

130

A. Nevøy and M. Bruin

apprenticeships. This means that students in the alternative course compete with their peers in regular VET for workplace learning opportunities. The moment the students in the alternative course are placed within a freedom of choice logic, where they must compete to gain a workplace training position, the alternative programme is selling the students short. The schools are left with offering school-based preparation for working life. As such, the emphasis on workplace learning is weak, displaying low expectations concerning the students’ vocational skills. The focus of the course is on the students’ personal growth, implying a more therapeutic than an educational aim, resulting in an educational programme with little market value – in Hegarty’s term (2014, p.  932) “a substandard education”. Students are rendered educationally disadvantaged, with blocked opportunities left at the margin (Avis, 2016). Lingard (2007, p.  246) talks about “pedagogies of indifference”, referring to educational provisions characterised by low intellectual demand and connectedness, provisions that do not prepare students for the contemporary globalised world, and provisions that do not work in socially just ways. These provisions may be “deeply therapeutic in their strength of care for students, but indifferent in terms of working with differences and making a difference in academic and opportunity senses” (Lingard, 2007, p. 246). The term does not indicate teachers’ indifference, whose commitment and care could be commended. Rather, the term addresses the institutional provision characterised by indifferent effects of the pedagogies in relation to opportunities and difference (Lingard, 2007). The students in the alternative course had a right to upper secondary education adapted to their individual needs, and, echoing Rawls, their rights were given weight in the distribution of economic benefits. However, the alternative course is an educational provision that seems to be promising more than it delivers. With reference to Rawls, Young (1990, p.  39) argues that justice should refer not to distribution alone but to “the institutional conditions necessary for the development and exercise of individual capacities and collective communication and cooperation”. She explains that “rights are not fruitfully conceived as possessions” (p. 25); they are not something people have; rights are relationships, “institutionally defined rules specifying what people can do in relation to one another. Rights refer to doing more than having, to social relationships that enable or constrain action” (Young, 1990, p. 25). Young argues that instead of focussing on distribution, a concept of justice should start with looking at structures of domination and oppression. Following Connell (2012), just education would respond to the deep diversity in school populations, meaning two things: (1) curricular justice and (2) emphasis on social encounters that make up an educational system – those involving responsibility, collaboration, and trust. Curricular justice concerns a decentralisation of the decision-making process on curriculum development, in which schools, counties, and policies should be held responsible. The second requirement points to the social encounters that make up an educational system as a means of building culture. In the VET context, this involves strengthening the responsibility of schools and local

7  Revisiting Just Education for Students Last in Line – A Norwegian Perspective

131

workplaces, in combination with providing quality vocational education and training, in which relations with students are built on collaboration and trust. So far, in the alternative course, curricular justice and the value of enabling social encounters are found wanting. One of the replies in Pete Seeger’s song from 1964, “What Did You Learn in School Today?”, is “I learned that justice never ends”. The experiences drawn from the alternative course show that at least the quest for justice never ends, presenting its own unrealised possibilities, experienced as lacks and desires (Young, 1990).

What’s Next? A Quest for Educational Justice Currently in Norway, a reform in upper secondary education is launched, named “The Completion Reform”,3 which aims at 90% completion within the student population by the year 2030. In the new policy bill, we cannot observe a reorientation towards curricular justice and enabling encounters concerning VET. The aim of the reform is to enable flexible solutions for students who need more time. However, the reform may put students in peril of becoming caught in a lifelong “right to education”, which begs the question of whether alternative programmes will continue to be a dead end. In the new reform, we do not see a turn that would indicate reflections on curricular justice or on the building of a VET culture involving all stakeholders – in the school and workplace contexts. In line with Rizvi (2015), the responsibility for providing quality VET for all students “demands collective action, through institutions such as education, health and welfare”, whereas the neoliberal state seeks to shift these responsibilities to the market, leaving vulnerable students even more vulnerable (p. viii). Developing alternative trajectories in upper secondary education does not solve a problem but rather calls attention to institutionalised constructions of student diversity as deviance, not affording them “equality of opportunity and respect” (Young, 2006, p. 97), hence sustaining patterns of inequality and social injustice. In the spirit of Dewey, it seems time for our generation to overhaul our inherited stock of moral principles and reconsider them in relation to the conditions for normalising practices in education and the ongoing conditions that produce and reproduce inequalities. As Young (2006, p. 97) states, “This is a tall order, to be sure, but we should not trim our ideals of justice just because we find the task of measuring up to them too large”.

 Fullføringsreformen, retrieved 31 March 2022 from https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/ meld.-st.-21-20202021/id2840771/ 3

132

A. Nevøy and M. Bruin

References Arreman, I. E., & Dovemark, M. (2018). Social justice in Swedish Post-16 education? New preparatory Programmes. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 62(4), 570–585. https:// doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2016.1258672 Artiles, A. J. (2012). After inclusion: Notes on the future of a (tranformative?) idea. Presentation made at the School of Education, University of Birmingham. Artiles, A. J., & Kozleski, E. B. (2016). Inclusive Education’s promises and trajectories: Critical notes about future research on a venerable idea. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 24(43). https://doi.org/10.5212/PraxEduc.v.14n3.001 Artiles, A. J., Harris-Murri, N., & Rostenberg, D. (2006a). Inclusion as social justice: Critical notes on discourses, assumptions, and the road ahead. Theory Into Practice, 45(3), 260–268. https:// doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4503_8 Artiles, A. J., Kozleski, E. B., Dorn, S., & Christensen, C. (2006b). Learning in inclusive education research: Re-mediating theory and methods with a transformative agenda. Review of Research in Education, 30, 65–108. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X030001065 Avis, J. (2016). Social justice, Tranformation and knowledge. Routledge. Biesta, G. (2007). Why “what works” won’t work: Evidence-based practice and the democratic deficit in educational research. Educational Theory, 57(1), 1–22. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1741-­5446.2006.00241.x Biesta, G. (2009). Good education in an age of measurement: On the need to reconnect with the question of purpose in education. Educ Asse Ecal Acc, 21, 33–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11092-­008-­9064-­9 Biesta, G. (2013). The beautiful risk of education. Paradigm Publishers. Bruin, M., & Ohna, S.  E. (2013). Alternative courses in upper secondary vocational education and training: Students’ narratives on hopes and failures. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 17(10), 1089–1105. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2012.735259 Connell, R. (2012). Just education. Journal of Education Policy, 27(5), 681–683. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/02680939.2012.710022 Connell, R. (2013). Why do market ‘reforms’ persistently increase inequality? Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 34(2), 279–285. https://doi.org/10.1080/0159630 6.2013.770253 Connell, R. (2019). Equal schools, global power and hungry markets: Sociology in the long struggle for social justice in education. In M.  Abraham (Ed.), Sociology and social justice (pp. 130–150). Sage Publications Ltd.. Connell, R., & Dados, N. (2014). Where in the world does neoliberalism come from? Theory and Society, 43(2), 117–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-­014-­9212-­9 County Policy Document. (2009). Rådgiverhåndbok [Handbook for School Counsellers]. Norway. Dewey, J. (1932). Moral judgment and knowledge. In L. A. Hickman & T. M. Alexander (Eds.), The essential Dewey volume 2. Ethics, logic, psychology (pp. 328–340). Indiana University Press. Dovemark, M., & Beach, D. (2016). From learning to labour to learning for precarity. Ethnography and Education, 11(2), 174–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457823.2015.1114422 Dovemark, M., Kosunen, S., Kauko, J., Magnúsdóttir, B., Hansen, P., & Rasmussen, P. (2018). Deregulation, privatisation and marketisation of Nordic comprehensive education: Social changes reflected in schooling. Education Inquiry, 9(1), 122–141. https://doi.org/10.108 0/20004508.2018.1429768 Føllesdal, A. (2014). John Rawls’s theory of justice as fairness. In G. Fløistad (Ed.), Philosphy of justice, contemporary philosophy (pp. 311–328). Springer. Fraser, N. (2000). Rethinking recognition. New Left Review, 3(May/June), 107–120. Fraser, N. (2008). Abnormal justice. Critical Inquiry, 34(3), 393–422. https://doi. org/10.1086/589478 Gewirtz, S. (2000). Bringing the politics Back in: A critical analysis of quality discourses in education. British Journal of Educational Studies, 48(4), 352–370. https://doi. org/10.1111/1467-­8527.00152

7  Revisiting Just Education for Students Last in Line – A Norwegian Perspective

133

Gewirtz, S. (2006). Towards a contextualized analysis of social justice in education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 38(1), 69–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-­5812.2006.00175.X Hegarty, S. (2014). Special education and its contribution to the broader discourse of education. In L. Florian (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of special education (2nd ed., pp. 931–944). SAGE. Knudsen, K. (2021). Utdanning og ulikhet [Education and difference]. In S. Grønmo, A. Nilsen, & K. Christensen (Eds.), Ulikhet. Sosiologiske perspektiv og analyser [Difference. Sociological perspectives and analyses] (pp. 129–150). Fagbokforlaget. Kraus, K. (2008). Does employability put the German ‘Vocational Order’ at risk? An analysis from the perspective of earning oriented pedagogy. In P. Gonon, K. Kraus, J. Oelkers, & S. Stolz (Eds.), Work, education and employability (pp. 55–81). Peter Lang. Lingard, B. (2007). Pedagogies of indifference. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 11(3), 245–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110701237498 Ministry of Education. (2019). NOU 2019:2 Fremtidige kompetansebehov II  – Utfordringer for kompetansepolitikken. Retrieved from https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/ nou-­2019-­2/id2627309/?ch=9 Mjelde, L. (2008). Will the twain meet? The academic-vocational divide in vocational education in Norway. In V. Aarkrog & C. H. Jørgensen (Eds.), Divergence and convergence in education and work. Peter Lang. Nevøy, A. (2019). En Skole for alle – og en pedagogikk for inkludering [A School for all – And a pedagogy for inclusion]. In A. Nevøy & L. Helle (Eds.), Profesjonsrettet pedagogikk. Innspill til læreres arbeid for inkludering (pp. 20–42). Gyldendal. Nevøy, A., Rasmussen, A., Ohna, S.  E., & Barow, T. (2014). Nordic upper secondary school: Regular and irregular Programmes  – Or just one irregular School for all? In U.  Blossing, G. Imsen, & L. Moos (Eds.), The Nordic education model. ‘A School for all’ encounters neo-­ Liberal policy (pp. 191–210). Springer. Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Rizvi, F. (2015). Foreword. In K. Te Riele & R. Gorur (Eds.), Interrogating conceptions of “vulnerable youth” in theory, policy and practice (pp. i–viii). Sense Publishers. Sahlberg, P. (2011). The fourth way of Finland. Journal of Educational Change, 12(2), 173–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-­011-­9157-­y Skrtic, T. M. (1995). Power/knowledge and pragmatism: A postmodern view of the professions. In T. M. Skrtic (Ed.), Disability and democracy: Reconstructing (special) education for postmodernity (pp. 25–62). Teachers College Press. Smeyers, P. (2009). Afterword. In P. Smyers & M. Depaepe (Eds.), Educational Research: The Educationalization of Social Problems (pp. 227–238). Springer. Thuen, H., & Volckmar, N. (2020). Postwar school reforms in Norway. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. Retrieved 2021, November 7, from https://oxfordre-­ com.ezproxy.uis.no/education/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.001.0001/ acrefore-­9780190264093-­e-­1456 Young, I. M. (1990). Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton University Press. Young, I.  M. (2006). Education in the context of structural injustice: A symposium response. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 38(1), 93–103. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1469-­5812.2006.00177 Anne Nevøy is an associate professor at the Department of Education and Sports Science, University of Stavanger, in Norway. Her research interests centre around the field of educational sciences, with an emphasis on the nexus of regular and special education, inclusive education and social justice.  

Marieke Bruin is an associate professor at the Department of Education and Sports Science, University of Stavanger, in Norway. Her work encompasses an interest in inclusive education, vocational education and training in upper secondary education, and parents’ roles in education, with a particular emphasis on perspectives on diversity, participation and social justice.  

Chapter 8

Choice and Competition in the Governance of the Danish Gymnasium School Elisabeth Lauridsen Lolle and Annette Rasmussen

Abstract  After a major structural reform in 2007 changed the activities of educational funding, regulation, and provision, the gymnasium schools in Denmark became self-governed. This underlined the students’ ‘free choice’ of gymnasium school. However, the distribution of students among the gymnasium schools has entailed some problems. Some schools attract far too many students, while others struggle for economic survival due to fewer students applying. Self-governance has exposed the schools to an increased competition to attract the most students. Based on a case study on selected schools, we conclude that the freedom of choice involves a market logic that is contradictory to central aspects of democracy. This illustrates that subtle mechanisms of social and cultural selection take place and that the value-added grant system tends to have the same effect as that of financial selection: to increase public spending on the privileged students and institutions. Furthermore, the policy is contradictory to the workings of democracy since the ‘free choice’ is not open to all students but depends on location and resources. It is seen to lead to an increased polarisation, which poses a threat to universal provision and equality in the access to upper secondary education. Keywords  Upper secondary schools · Value-added grant system · Education policy · Polarisation · Inequality

E. L. Lolle (*) · A. Rasmussen Department of Culture and Learning, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 A. Rasmussen, M. Dovemark (eds.), Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries, Educational Governance Research 18, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08049-4_8

135

136

E. L. Lolle and A. Rasmussen

Introduction Education policies in a world of global economic competitiveness increasingly focus on establishing educational structures that cater to the same logics as those of national economies facing the challenges of globalisation (Ball, 2008; Pedersen, 2013). Analyses of such policies have provided national examples that show more concern with education policy with decreases in the international rankings than with increases in social inequalities in student outcomes and educational provision (Andersen, 2020; Hjort & Raae, 2011; Rasmussen & Moos, 2014; Sandholdt, 2020). In general, the Nordic countries share strong roots in an equality-oriented tradition of education. As opposed to upper secondary schools in the other Nordic countries, however, in Denmark, the general upper secondary education framed by the gymnasium school is still to some extent considered an elitist institution (Hjort & Raae, 2011). This is due to the sharp division in Danish upper secondary education between the vocational and general tracks. However, the fact that gymnasiums have grown over the past 70 years from the inside and today contain more than 50% of the youth has led to an increasing intake of students and to some inclusion challenges (Ulriksen et al., 2009). Due to the move to self-governance that occurred with the municipal reform in 2007, which underlined the students’ ‘free choice’ of a gymnasium school, the allocation of students among the gymnasium schools has entailed a number of problems. Some gymnasiums are disproportionately applied and attract far too many students to have sufficient capacity for them all, while others on the contrary struggle to survive economically because of too few students. Thus, the structural changes of the move to self-governance have exposed the gymnasiums to market competition from within, which entails a competition to attract the most students. Theoretically, the problems in relation to the premises of rational choice in education include that this does not consider and capture the messiness, compromise, and doubt that are pervasive in the process of choosing a school. There is a highly complex and differentiated system of schools, in which space, distance, and transport make some schools more attractive than others, just like history and reputation make some schools more desirable to those choosing. Thus, preferences, opportunities, and capacities contribute to generating patterns of school choice (Ball, 2003; Forsey et al., 2008; van Zanten, 2007). Other problems with the premise of rationality are those of democracy and equality in educational access (Fraser, 1990; Piketty, 2017, p. 618). As argued by Fraser (1990, p. 77), rationality in public choice rather than market relations is a matter of discursive relations, which means that inequality taints deliberation and that people are differentially empowered to exert choice. In this chapter, based on case study research of selected gymnasium schools positioned differently in the institutional landscape, we investigate these issues through the following main question: What are the democratic consequences of governance by competition and choice – regarding the provision of and access to general upper secondary education in Denmark?

8  Choice and Competition in the Governance of the Danish Gymnasium School

137

To address this broad and general question, we focus on the different levels of policies that govern the Danish gymnasium as an educational institution. This includes providing a legal framework for the gymnasiums at the national level, interpreting and adapting to the legal framework (the outline of different models for distribution) at the regional level, and translating and operating within the regime of competition and choice at the school level. Accordingly, the research questions translate into processes of interpretation (at the national and regional levels) and translation (at the school level), which we address empirically via the following sub-questions: (1) What are the actual legal structures that govern the student streams for general upper secondary schools? (2) How does the educational governance structure translate within different institutional positions?

Methodology and Structure The research strategy has been driven by an ambition to integrate perspectives of a two-level analysis (Ball et al., 2012). On the first level, we focus on policy documents, their interpretations, actions, and subsequent translations by relevant actors. On the second level, we consider how inequalities in the distribution of resources situate the general upper secondary schools and their actors differently in the competition for students. This involves sociological analyses of policy texts and interviews with selected actors and the triangulation of different methods. Thus, we understand policies as global processes emanating from national or supranational agencies that involve negotiation, interpretation, and translation, expressed in different local ways involving numerous actors at different levels of the education system (Ball et al., 2012; Ozga & Lingard, 2007). We address the processes of interpretation and translation by using different types of data and by focusing first on the national and, to some degree, regional levels of policy and then the school level. As empirical data for analysing the process of interpretation at the national level, our main sources are selected excerpts from Danish journals, ministerial and legal texts, and interviews with two chairpersons of regional coordination committees. We analyse this by maintaining a critical focus on the governance activities of funding, regulation, and provision (Dale, 1997). These concepts provide both the structure and a roadmap for an internal connection between them. The process of translation at the school level is based on interviews with the heads of the studied case schools. This ‘multiple case study’ involves different cases that may have similar or dissimilar characteristics (Stake, 1995). Our case study includes six schools, which were selected due to their distinctions along the dimensions of geography and historical origin. From each school, we have collected information, including board meeting summaries from the last 3  years, as well as conducted an interview with the heads of the schools. Based on the case study, we have identified three distinct types of gymnasium schools based partly on a geographic dimension and partly on a historical

138

E. L. Lolle and A. Rasmussen

dimension. Geographically, the distinction is based on the degree of urbanisation and centralisation that characterises the schools’ surroundings. The historical dimension roughly follows the types identified in a historical analysis of the building structure and its link to the dominating pedagogies of the time of the building. Chronologically, this includes the grammar school, the subject-oriented school, and the student-­oriented school (Jellingsø, 2001). With the inclusion of both the historical and geographical location and the schools’ ranges of educational programmes in our analysis, we have named them the cathedral, the modern urban, and the regional gymnasiums. This threefold distinction also, to some extent, parallels the political historical periods of the expansion of the upper secondary school sector in Denmark and, in other analyses, has been termed the conservative elitist, the social-democratic, and the neoliberal market-­oriented gymnasiums (Raae, 2012). In our typology, the types are based not on specific schools but on clusters of schools sharing similar basic characteristics. Even though the data derive from specific upper secondary schools, we have blurred the identity of the specific schools by constructing each gymnasium type on data derived from several schools.

Changes to Upper Secondary School Governance in Denmark According to Dale (1997), we need to closely examine the activities of the governance to understand the complexities of the relationship between the state’s activities. Therefore, we start by looking at the funding, based on Buse and Smith (1999) and their historical review of the Danish budget model, which according to them constitutes an incentive for behavioural change at the central administrative and institutional levels.

Funding Education was the first part of the public sector in Denmark to be governed by the value-added grant system of funding. This was introduced at the beginning of the 1990s and, in short, is based on subventions provided by a public authority per unit of activity to one or more public or private institutions. The value-added grant system is based on the absolute correlation between a public subvention and the activity (numbers of students), which means a strong focus on goals and results in an extensive freedom for the institutions to dispose of the subvention. The value-added grant system contrasts with the traditional framework funding, which presumed no direct correlation between the size of the subvention and the institutions’ activity. In the framework funding, subventions for the individual institution result from negotiations between the institution and the Ministry of Education.

8  Choice and Competition in the Governance of the Danish Gymnasium School

139

Due to the element of higher state control, the motivation for the institutions to increase activity is supposed to be lower. The introduction of the value-added grant system was connected to more general reforms of central governance from the mid-1980s and the national budget reform from the late 1980s, which was supposed to entail a tightening of the national expenses. However, there was a political incentive to introduce a new form of funding system to have greater control over the governance of expenses, particularly of the vocational schools, which were referred to as ‘financially uncontrollable’ (Buse & Smith, 1999). As such, the vocational schools were among the first to be governed by the value-added grant system (in 1991), and over the next 5 years, they were followed by other educational institutions. The value-added grant system was supposed to be a homogenous system that would ensure standardised governance for all institutions at once and automatically allocate resources from education areas and institutions with a decreasing demand to those areas with an increasing demand. It presumes that the behaviour of the individual institutions can be governed by economic incentives. It is assumed that the standard and provisions can be regulated by adjusting the ‘value’ and that this close connection between subvention and activity would increase the incentive to maximise the output. In short, the educational institutions now receive money per student completing a programme. Accordingly, this is supposed to motivate the institutions to work on the quality of their study programmes and do what they can to prevent student dropouts. Parallel to the introduction of the value-added grant system was a decentralisation of competence and to the institution. This form of decentralisation was supposed to give the management of the institutions more power and possibilities to act independently and adapt to the development of the activities (Ministry of Education, Finance and Labour, 1998). A committee analysing the effects of the value-added grant system 8 years later identified the system as a quasi-market system, where several providers compete on equal terms to attract potential clients, citizens, or students and prevent dropouts. The term ‘quasi’ is used since the service/school users in Denmark do not pay for public services. It might also be important for the state to intervene and limit the market orientation to ensure a geographical spreading of provision or concentration in sustainable professional environments. This way of economic governing also required the decentralisation of responsibility and a form of institutional independence (Ministry of Education, Finance and Labour, 1998).

Regulation Until 1986, some gymnasiums were state governed, typically the cathedral gymnasium types, while the modern gymnasiums were governed by the counties. Since 1986, most state schools have also been governed by the counties. In addition to regulating the provision of study programmes and the elective courses offered by

140

E. L. Lolle and A. Rasmussen

their gymnasiums – to ensure the provision of a broad range of subjects – the counties regulated the capacity, establishment, and closing of institutions. Each county council determined the capacity of the individual institution, that is, the maximum number of classes admitted and the minimum number of applicants that the institution is obligated to admit. The council was obligated to ensure the admittance of all qualified applicants on their prioritised education within a reasonable geographical distance. The students were admitted to the institution of their choice in relation to the capacity of the institution. If the capacity of an institution was exceeded, a distribution committee established by the county determined which applicants would be referred to another institution (Ministry of Education, 2005). Over time, the municipalities and counties were not considered large enough to assume the increasing responsibilities, and the distribution of tasks in several parts of the public sector was not efficient. The structural reform of 2007 thus reduced the number of municipalities from 275 to 98 and the 14 counties to five regions and redistributed the governing tasks among the state, the regions, and the municipalities (Ministry of the Interior and Health, 2005). With regard to the upper secondary schools, all of them (except one) were transferred to the state and became self-­ governed under the state (Ministry of the Interior and Health, 2005). Self-governance includes (1) a board of separate and independent management, (2) a regulation that states the purpose and framework of the institution, and (3) separate funding from the Ministry of Education. It is built on the principles of freedom to manage the task of the institution and at the same time the responsibility to fulfil the objectives of the educational and institutional policy (i.e. the national curricula of the study programmes, their organisation, and the value-added grant system, as described above; Ministry of Education, 2006). In 2010, the gymnasiums were offered ownership of their buildings as part of their self-governance. This means that the schools have become responsible for the indoor and outdoor maintenance, renovations, additions, etc. (Gymnasieskolernes Lærerforening, 2010).

Provision Even though the gymnasiums have become self-governed under the state, the five new regions continue to play a coordinating role (Ministry of the Interior and Health, 2005). According to the regulation, the regional council coordinates upper secondary education in the region to ensure coherence in the provision of gymnasiums, including the geographical location of the provision and the capacity to ensure sufficient and varied educational provision in the region (LBK, 2015). This means that the regions are obliged to ensure the provision of gymnasiums even if the local population is not sufficient to support a gymnasium. The coordination is carried out in cooperation with all the self-governed institutions in the region. The regions form distribution committees to coordinate the capacity of the gymnasiums. Some regions have one committee, while others have

8  Choice and Competition in the Governance of the Danish Gymnasium School

141

two or more depending on the number of gymnasiums in their area. Each committee includes the heads of the gymnasiums in that area, appointed representatives from the regional council, and sometimes also a representative from the student body. The committee selects a chairperson for 4 years following the period of the election of the regional council (Fordelingsudvalgets Arbejdsgruppe, 2020). Some committees form a smaller working group, which typically takes care of all practicalities concerning the applications. When they apply, the students can freely choose between upper secondary schools. However, they are not guaranteed to get their first choice. Once a year, all upper secondary school boards report their capacity to the region upon which a maximum capacity for each school is agreed. All schools will accept eligible candidates, also those from other regions. As for the vocational schools, the capacity report is rather a declaration of intent. When they get more applicants than expected, they raise their capacity by starting a new class, whereas for the general upper secondary schools, the gymnasiums, the reported capacity is binding. They cannot raise their capacity, and the distribution committee therefore prepares a proposal for the distribution of applicants for the schools with more applicants than their capacity (Fordelingsudvalgets Arbejdsgruppe, 2020). This proposal takes into consideration the distance from the applicant’s home to the school. According to the interviewed chairpersons, this can pose a particular problem for some gymnasiums. This applies to the gymnasiums located close to the border of two regions or the gymnasiums to which specific types of students apply. The proposal is discussed and should be agreed upon unanimously in the distribution committee, that is, among the heads of the schools. If they cannot reach an agreement, the regional council or even the minister of education is included in the discussion. As also expressed by one of the chairpersons, reaching a consensus can be difficult: It is important to have a decentralised structure, that’s why the urban schools can’t get too big … and not surprisingly the other point of view that you should follow the students’ priorities, which will make the urban schools bigger and in the longer run will threaten the existence of the regional school (Chairperson of the regional coordination committee).

Next to such problems of polarisation tendencies, the fact that the regional council is part of the distribution committee is seen as threatening the balance of power. This is under the consideration of the chairpersons since regional politicians may intervene and overrule the consensus agreed upon in the committee, as happened in one region in 2020. In the following, we zoom in on the policy arena of the gymnasiums and the way they – through their positions and available resources – translate the challenges of free choice and competition for students.

142

E. L. Lolle and A. Rasmussen

The Cathedral Gymnasium The cathedral gymnasium is located in a listed building in the city (i.e. the Latin quarter of the city) and therefore has a central location for the whole regional area. With about 900 students, it is one of the largest gymnasiums and definitely the oldest one in the region. The history of the cathedral gymnasium dates back more than several hundred years, while its exact date of foundation is difficult to establish. Its establishment was closely linked with that of the city’s cathedral as a Latin school, of which the first buildings were completed in around 1200. Over the centuries, multiple school buildings have been added or changed. The most recent cathedral gymnasiums were built in the 1920s, and, pedagogically, the architecture of these grammar-school-like gymnasiums supported an elite-oriented pedagogy focused on the teacher and his desk (Jellingsø, 2001). In accordance with its historical past as an elite-oriented school, the gymnasium has established its profile as a highbrow gymnasium, whose students perform above average. The high-grade point average makes it attractive and ensures a high number of applicants. In relation to other gymnasiums in the area, it has also established its profile: Well, it’s music. As one of our students once wrote, one gymnasium has the swots, one has the sports-minded, one has the gangsters, and this one has the freaks. This is what it’s like – it’s probably that we have a lot of music, and then we’re well known for having an open-­ minded, very tolerant environment where you can… where there’s not a particular label of clothes etc. (Interview with the head of the cathedral gymnasium).

The gymnasium’s image of a particular music profile means that it has applicants from all over the region and some from far away, even from outside the region. This occurs even though it may involve a lot of transportation time for some students. As further stated in the catchment area: We’re special in the sense that we don’t have our own catchment area. That’s why we’re dependent on somebody not bothering about transportation time or about passing by another gymnasium to get to us, because otherwise we might as well close down (Interview with the head of the cathedral gymnasium).

Despite the fact that the gymnasium depends on applicants from outside of its area, the head of the school claims that it does not really face competition with the other institutions of general upper secondary education. In his opinion, other factors are more important when it comes to the students’ choices, for instance how they perceive a specific gymnasium and who they consider its target group is – whether it is the ‘swots’, the ‘sports-minded’, the ‘gangsters’, or the ‘freaks’. The students seem to be looking for fellow students with the same dispositions as theirs. The competition is seen as being more against other types of educational institutions, such as, partly, vocational schools and their vocational gymnasium programmes and, partly, general adult educational institutions (VUC) that also offer the same general education as that of many general upper secondary schools. Instead of competing, the schools cooperate in marketing and transition programmes for elementary schools

8  Choice and Competition in the Governance of the Danish Gymnasium School

143

and market themselves as one type of upper secondary education with several possibilities. Even so, the head of the school is in favour of competition and choice: There’s a dynamic in having a free choice …. Having chosen where to go will ensure a higher loyalty to the place, maybe also contribute to a higher completion rate, and certainly to more motivation. When we have an open doors event, the students are very proud of their school and proudly present it. That’s because they chose it, which I’m sure means a lot …, and I’m sure it means a lot to say that we shouldn’t move more students than necessary to help the smaller gymnasiums (Interview with the head of the cathedral gymnasium).

As the above quote shows, the head of the school supports the students’ free choice of school. Higher completion rates, motivation, loyalty, and pride in the school are, in his opinion, the positive results of the free choice policy. In general, the cathedral gymnasium does not aim to get bigger, the head of the school claims. However, he still finds it frustrating to have a ‘reduction of capacity’ (maximum number of students allowed) set by the regional council or the Ministry of Education: We didn’t reduce our capacity voluntarily, but had it reduced. Of course, it’s a board decision not to do so, considering how painful it is to have to lay off people and to make such adjustments, because you’ve had a reduction of capacity (Interview with the head of the cathedral gymnasium).

The head of the cathedral gymnasium points out that the reduction of capacity imposes an undesirable and painful situation on the gymnasium. They do not have a local catchment area, he continues, and he worries that the new regulations will blur their profile as one specialising in music. This worry is based on an expectation that students from outside the area who specifically want to go to that gymnasium will no longer be admitted, which will affect its profile. Thus, he considers the importance of free choice to the influx of students but admits that it cannot stand alone and that an unimpeded growth of the most popular gymnasiums could be at the expense of the smaller, regional gymnasiums. Therefore, he finds it necessary to have some kind of regulation governing the competition among them.

The Modern Urban Gymnasium The modern urban gymnasium is in an urban area and was built in the 1960s. It houses around 600 students, has two main programmes (the general upper secondary programme and the higher preparatory), and is situated in one of the main provincial towns in Denmark. Historically, the founding of the modern urban gymnasium coincided with an elementary school reform that extended schooling from 7 to 9 years and, from 1958 to 1968, tripled the influx to the gymnasium schools. Based on the so-called Red Report from 1958 – the first reform of the gymnasium since 1903 – there was a change in the teaching and pedagogic philosophy. The increase in the number of students also meant an increase in the number of gymnasiums, especially in the

144

E. L. Lolle and A. Rasmussen

suburban and smaller town areas. The changes in pedagogic thinking led to another type of architecture different from that of the cathedral gymnasium’s classicist style. New pedagogies focused on the teaching of school subjects, which were now dedicated a room of their own. In this new, school-subject-oriented era, the students did not have a classroom of their own but moved around to be in the rooms dedicated to the particular disciplines and subjects (Jellingsø, 2001). For the modern urban gymnasium, the way of attracting students is by emphasising such values as collaboration, openness, health, and talent (according to the gymnasium’s website). When ‘choosing’ an upper secondary school, the student flows may, however, follow quite other parameters and mechanisms: It’s not a choice of education, it’s a choice of place. … There’s a polarisation tendency …. What makes the students choose what they do is to be where they find somebody like themselves. And that’s what the polarisation is about. You may have a school where you’re lucky that there’s a big crowd of lookalikes that throw their love on that school, that decide that’s where they want to be. Or you may have a school which is more specialised or have a subculture that they find attractive (Interview with the head of the modern urban gymnasium).

From the position of the modern urban gymnasium, the ‘choice’ of the students seems largely incidental and results in polarisation processes. Such cultural dynamics among the youth appear to be self-increasing, depending on where the ‘crowds’ go, and therefore hard to influence, as the head of the school continues: It’s something that the schools can’t control. If we could only compete on something we could control, then it would be fair enough, but we compete on something we can’t control. This appears to be the case here. … The idea that the students would choose according to quality and that the competition would create an improvement of quality for the entire sector; this premise turned out not to hold (Interview with the head of the modern urban gymnasium).

The quote expresses a sense of being subject to structural restraints; the students do not seem to go for institutions that are the best at providing quality – whatever that may be. The link between competition and an increase in quality is unrecognisable to the head of the school. As further pointed out in the interview, the polarisation tendencies also have other side effects: It’s about arriving at a certain 20–30 per cent of students with an immigrant background. When that happens, you will be deselected by ethnic Danes. Then the next step will be that there’s also a deselection on behalf of the clever immigrant students, who would rather go somewhere else. … We are not allowed to deselect on ethnicity, but we can see that a lot of the ones with immigrant backgrounds come from exposed housing areas and have agreed that from next year we will not accept students from these areas. It means that I’ll be passing on a lot of my first-priority students to a school, where they have no such student types (Interview with the head of the modern urban gymnasium).

Students with an immigrant background appear to be a special issue in the freedom of choice policy. When a school has too many students with immigrant backgrounds, it leads to the phenomenon of ‘deselection’ by other students. Ethnicity is brought in as a parameter of choice when students of similar backgrounds – and too many of them  – choose the same gymnasium. This group of students is considered

8  Choice and Competition in the Governance of the Danish Gymnasium School

145

problematic because they come from the so-called marginalised housing areas, which seems to imply an unattractive ‘student type’, which keeps other potentially attractive students from choosing this gymnasium as their first priority. As to the issue of capacity, the position of the head of this gymnasium is as follows: I need to have this tight adjustment of capacity to have enough students for this gymnasium. And the interesting thing is that they live in the local area. That is to say, we don’t have to go far away to get them, but due to the interplay of other forces, like the polarisation, we ended up where we are, which has been totally unpredictable (Interview with the head of the modern urban gymnasium).

Being challenged by a descending curve of student applicants, this gymnasium is very much in favour of setting limits for each gymnasium’s student capacity. The demographic situation with the generally declining number of students is another challenge for the modern urban gymnasium. This is accentuated by the above-­ mentioned polarisation and immigrant issues and by the value-added grant system, which creates a competition between the different types of gymnasiums and upper secondary schools. For some of the modern-type gymnasiums located in smaller towns, their main issue of competition, however, is not the technical or commercial schools but the attractiveness of the bigger city – particularly if the public transport infrastructure makes it easier to get there than to the local gymnasium. This issue is especially pronounced for the next type of gymnasium we will deal with.

The Regional Gymnasium The regional gymnasium is located in a small town of about 7000 inhabitants. It is a relatively small school with about 350 students and forms part of a larger campus including  other educational programmes, like  vocational programmes  and boarding facilites. This gymnasium type emerged in 1980 and thus during the period from the mid-­1970s to the mid-1980s, which saw the appearance of a new type of school architecture, the ‘home gymnasium’ (Jellingsø, 2001). This aspect was reflected in the school buildings giving priority to large communal areas, this brought the students to the fore, whose well-being and confidence in schooling became core issues. It was also an unofficial policy of the time that there be no more than 25 kilometres between gymnasium schools in normally populated areas in Denmark. The head of the school describes the regional gymnasium’s profile as follows: To counter the demographic decline, we try to attract students from the rest of the country. That is why we have created a strong image of us as a gymnasium with many extra-­ curricular activities. We put a lot of energy into an annual musical, into sports activities, we have a strong e-sport activity with some of the elite performers (Interview with the head of the regional gymnasium).

146

E. L. Lolle and A. Rasmussen

The ‘demographic decline’ refers to the declining number of youth in the area. During the past years, this has meant remarkably fewer students  – sometimes a whole class, which is about 20 students – attending the regional gymnasium. It is very regional in the sense that it depends on and attracts a large proportion of students from the local or ‘regional’ catchment area, but qua the boarding facilities a small number of students come from elsewhere in Denmark. The boarding facilities thus contributes to its survival by adding more students and likewise adds to its image, which is seen from the way it emphasises being a place with many extracurricular activities. Regional policies that aim to redistribute some students to small gymnasiums use the method ‘reduction of capacity’. With regard to such policy measures, the head of the school comments: They don’t matter a lot to us, the reductions of capacity. That some of the big urban gymnasiums have had their capacity reduced and some students have been redistributed do not provide us with extra students because they are close to us. We only had one extra student in this way (Interview with the head of the regional gymnasium).

The quote points out that the reduced capacity of bigger urban gymnasiums does not mean much for this regional gymnasium. It is situated too far away from the city for a lot of students to be redistributed in their direction; the head of the school implies that the ‘reduction of capacity’ method will instead redistribute students in and around the city area. And one extra student does not count enough to considerably improve the situation for the regional gymnasium. The head of the school describes the vision of an ideal scenario of educational provision and distribution of students from his position: We consider it very important that there is an educational provision in the regional fringe areas like ours. Even if until 2030 we face a declining number of students …, we would appreciate a funding system that is less sensitive to fluctuations. It could be funding built on classes or groups, or that you considerably raise the basic amount per institution. The current way of funding, where it’s a value-added grant per student is an advantage to the large schools, whereas to the small schools it’s problematic. Thus, small fluctuations in the number of students may imply enormous fluctuations in funding. Adding to this we often have to set up many small classes which are disproportionately expensive, because it costs the same to teach classes whether they contain 10 or 28 students. We’ve got the fringe area allowance, which allows us to establish an extra class per year grade … and to have a more versatile provision of study profiles (Interview with the head of the regional gymnasium).

As indicated in the quote, the position of the gymnasium is considered as covering the ‘fringe areas’. The head of the school considers that even in a situation of student scarcity, it is important that all areas of the country have a provision for general upper secondary education. To ensure this, he points to the need for a different funding system that can guarantee the institutions basic funding and make them less vulnerable to fluctuations in student numbers. Thus, in the current situation, the regional gymnasium depends a lot on having a ‘fringe area allowance’. Without this, it would not be possible for the gymnasium to provide the number of study profiles needed for a sufficiently versatile provision.

8  Choice and Competition in the Governance of the Danish Gymnasium School

147

In the discussion of the future scenarios, the gymnasium has also been challenged by the offer of a merger: We have a short while ago, less than a year ago, had a special offer from a larger educational institution of merging us into their organisation. However, the school board did not want that. They clearly wish to continue to run this gymnasium as an independent institution, which I strongly agree with. If we are to maintain our special image, it’s important to focus and prioritise resources. Only then can we provide the best offers and develop our activities here (Interview with the head of the regional gymnasium).

The educational landscape in Denmark has seen a lot of mergers in recent years. This has occurred in both rural and city areas and links to the discourses of providing more choices for students and ensuring better quality education. In the case of independent institutions, as seen from their perspective, it would clearly hamper their independence and their opportunity of establishing and maintaining their special profiles. Thus, the question of mergers between institutions makes the paradoxes of choice and quality visible – how it is practiced and conceived and whether it depends on size or uniqueness.

Enactment of ‘Free Choice’ Governance at the School Level With the structural reform in 2007, the new ownership structure also entailed the introduction of school boards to run the institutions. This decentralised the governing of the gymnasium schools from the county level to the institutional level, providing each institution with an extended responsibility for decision-making. In the following, we return to the governance activities of funding, regulation, and provision (Dale, 1997) and analyse them at the school level. For this part of the analysis, we draw on policy texts issued by the main interest organisations related to the Danish gymnasium schools and, e.g., board materials via a selection of summaries of school board meetings from the six schools in the case study. The main interest organisations that we refer to include the Danish regions, the Danish National Union of Upper Secondary School Teachers, and the Union of Danish Upper Secondary School Students. The funding of the Danish gymnasium schools is primarily linked to the number of students enrolled in each institution  – the above-mentioned value-added grant system. This accounts for more than 90% of the total state grants. In contrast, more than 50% of the teaching costs are related to each class or group of students (Danske Regioner, 2021). However, since the number of students is a decisive factor for school funding, it is important for each school to ensure that its full capacity is used. Considering the work and issues dealt with in the school boards, this leads them to take an interest in such issues related to student capacity and state funding. In the board meeting summaries of the cathedral gymnasium, it shows that the boards appear to be preoccupied with the ‘limitation of capacity’ that regional cooperation imposes upon them. During the last 3 years, a recurrent theme at their board meetings has been how they can maintain their capacity. They consider it very

148

E. L. Lolle and A. Rasmussen

problematic that a ‘reduction of capacity’ means reduced funding. In the years prior to 2017 (cf. the summary of March 2017), they lost whole classes due to reductions in capacity, which meant losing substantial amounts of state funding. At the modern urban gymnasium, they view the question of capacity somewhat differently. The board meeting summaries bear witness to a gymnasium that is under pressure from the decreasing number of students applying as well as the special type of students applying. Here, the words that occur most frequently are ‘distribution’ and ‘combination’ of students. They have not been subject to reductions in capacity but rather depend on having extra students or the redistribution of students to obtain a different mixture of students. Therefore, the theme discussed most often in their board meetings (e.g. summaries of March 2018 and 2019) is the ‘distribution of students’ with regard to obtaining more students in general and less students from socially vulnerable areas in particular. The board meeting summaries at the regional gymnasium deal especially with the themes of ‘local community’ and ‘fringe area’. They depend financially on the fringe area subsidy (Gymnasieskolernes Lærerforening, 2021; PWC, 2011), which is given to schools that, due to geographical circumstances, have difficulties in attracting enough students (typically less than 400 students) to ensure a sufficiently diversified provision of subjects and subject combinations. At the board meetings, a recurrent theme is how to attract more students, to which one solution appears to be the building of new boarding facilities (cf. the summary of March 2019). Even if applying the ‘distance criteria’, which relocate students to a gymnasium that is closer, they are unlikely to receive many students on that account (January 2017). Other summaries reveal that they lose students to urban gymnasiums (May 2019) and that they experience funding challenges in general (April 2020). Regulation combines with funding in different ways to create the context for educational policy and practice (Dale, 1997, p. 277). Regulation thus follows the decentralisation tendency, which leaves it very much up to the gymnasiums to find solutions to the problems of setting student capacity and distribution. As the gymnasiums experience these issues in very different ways, they adopt different positions to the issues of free market choice versus public regulation of them. At the cathedral gymnasium, they favour free choice in the sense that as many students as possible should have their first priority fulfilled. This option is an obvious interest of the gymnasium, which rather than experiencing a decline of applicants experience an imposition of rules and forced capacity reduction. They fear that such regulations imply that fewer ‘first-priority students’ – both to school and to subject priorities – will challenge the well-being of the students (cf. summary of November 2017) and may hamper the special music profile of the school. They view the setting of capacity as a regulation imposed upon them. The modern urban gymnasium takes a rather proactive position to ensuring a ‘better distribution of students’. This can be seen  in the head of school being an active voice in the regional debate on this, while also taking action to contact the Ministry of Education and thus promote the interests of the school (cf. summary of June 2019). The school’s board is in favour of a joint action to have a more diversified distribution of students in the urban area. The board seems generally pleased

8  Choice and Competition in the Governance of the Danish Gymnasium School

149

with the agreed-upon setting of capacity, which has provided the gymnasium with more students (cf. summaries of March 2019 and April 2020). At the regional gymnasiums, they also consider state intervention necessary. They favour a type of intervention that can ensure them financial stability, one that is less dependent on the annual fluctuations of students (value-added grant) and offers more basic funding like a fixed fringe area subsidy. This is very much in line with the proposals made by the Union of Danish Upper Secondary School Students, which suggests increasing the basic funding and replacing the value-added grant and its emphasis on the number of students with some form of ‘social grants’ (Danske Gymnasieelevers Sammenslutning, 2021). Provision is primarily an issue dealt with at the regional gymnasium, whereas the urban gymnasiums do not view this as problematic to the same degree. The challenge of the urban gymnasiums is less of declining numbers of students in total than one of segmented student populations that may create a problem of declining numbers and eventually threaten the gymnasium’s survival as institution. The cathedral gymnasium considers the provision of specific subjects and their music profile as threatened by the regulation of capacity. However, this is more a market issue since it is unlikely to threaten the institution’s survival as such.

Conclusion In the analysis, we have identified multiple layers of governance in the policy area of the Danish general upper secondary school, the gymnasium. There are challenges that appear to be common and that seem to face all gymnasium schools, and there are challenges that connect to the positions and situated conditions of the gymnasium type and that becomes clear from the quoted heads of the gymnasiums. The general feature of the gymnasium is that curricula and exams are regulated centrally by the state. The self-governance refers to the fact that the gymnasium schools have funding autonomy with regard to strategic decisions about buildings, subject provisions, and staff. One of the arguments raised for introducing self-governance by means of the value-added grant system was to create a homogenous funding system and thereby control, in an economic sense, the ‘uncontrollable educational institutions’ (Buse & Smith, 1999). Another argument is found in the occurrence of a market logic connecting educational quality with the number of students that apply (i.e. with demand). This reflects the general economic orientation of global education policy, which ‘speaks back in the vernacular’ when mediated by national policies and local histories (Ozga & Lingard, 2007, p. 72). The vernacular expression of this policy in the Danish gymnasium is causing provisional challenges because some gymnasiums are over-applied and others are under-applied. The under-applied gymnasiums face restricted opportunities for providing the general, wide variety of educational sub-programmes and subjects. In some cases, they may face a threat to their very existence since they are not able to offer

150

E. L. Lolle and A. Rasmussen

sufficient classes to establish the necessary basis for their programmes. Thus, the student polarisation constitutes a particular version of the ‘governing by numbers’ strategy dominating global education policy (Ozga & Lingard, 2007). In light of the increased competition for students, the gymnasiums, depending on their positions, have developed different policy responses. The over-applied gymnasiums, illustrated in the case of the cathedral gymnasium, favour the freedom of choice policy and that as many students as possible should have their first priority fulfilled. The head of the school here has an obvious interest in the continuous reception of as many students as possible since the positive flow of students increases the added grants revenue for the gymnasium. From this position, the link between educational quality and the number of students applying to and frequenting the gymnasium appears obvious. In the case of the modern city gymnasium, which for a while was over-applied by ethnic minority students and then under-applied by ethnic Danes, the head of the school does not acknowledge such a connection between quality and choice. Rather, from this position, ‘choice’ appears to be very much decided by other mechanisms – partly due to the school’s geographical location and partly due to other structural conditions, such as sub-cultures and youth trends, which the educational institutions cannot control. Some under-applied gymnasiums, which are found especially in the peripheral regions of the country, attempt to integrate various activities (e.g. by establishing a mix of different programmes). Other strategies, which are illustrated in the case of the regional gymnasium, include providing boarding facilities as an attempt to broaden the intake of students in a geographical sense. Despite the problems of polarisation, the interviewed heads of the schools and chairpersons of the distribution committees, who are also heading schools, consider the self-governance of being in charge of the personnel and buildings as a necessity to take into consideration the local situations of the schools. This follows the logic that has recently been put forward by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2017). In most cases, they also favour the students’ free choice of school, as long as it works in their favour, and they can act on it by, for instance, extending the catchment area of the gymnasium. Thus, the experience of agency is decisive for which position the heads of the schools take and impacts their preferences in particular ways. This is also the case for the head of the school position, since this is the person in charge and to whom the sheer size of the gymnasium is an indication of status. The regional councils are in charge of coordinating the distribution of students in the so-called distribution committees. They handle the distribution, which involves two processes. First, they agree on the capacity of each school, and second, they distribute the students based on their applications. In most cases, the committees reach a consensus on the schools’ capacity. However, when it comes to the part of distributing the students, their system of consensus has proven problematic. When disagreements occur, the regional council and sometimes even the minister of education are involved and must solve the problem politically. Generally, however, there is little interference by the committee at this stage.

8  Choice and Competition in the Governance of the Danish Gymnasium School

151

The chairpersons of the distribution committees call for a clear distribution structure that applies to all educational institutions, including the vocational ones, which up until now have not been included in the general agreements on capacity. This can prove even more important since vocational schools in some cases merge with general upper secondary gymnasiums and thus contribute to furthering an imbalance in the general provision of upper secondary education programmes. As pointed out in this analysis, the freedom of choice governance of upper secondary education involves a market logic that is contradictory to central aspects of democracy. It illustrates that there are more subtle mechanisms of social and cultural selection, which by means of the value-added grant system tend to have the same effect as financial selection – that is, increase public spending on the privileged students and institutions (Piketty, 2017). Thus, the so-called freedom of choice involves an inherent contradiction to democracy since the ‘free choice’ is not open to all students but depends on location and resources (Fraser, 1990; van Zanten, 2007). This is likely to increase polarisation and thereby can pose a threat to universal provision and, eventually, diminish general access to upper secondary education.

References Andersen, M. (2020, February 24). Segregering truer den demokratiske dannelse [Segregation is a threat to democratic education]. Altinget. https://www.altinget.dk/uddannelse/artikel/ rektor-­segregering-­truer-­den-­demokratiske-­dannelse Ball, S. J. (2003). Class strategies and the education market. RoutledgeFalmer. Ball, S. J. (2008). The education debate. Policy Press. Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., & Braun, A. (2012). How schools do policy. Policy enactments in secondary schools. Routledge. Buse, T., & Smith, M. S. S. (1999). Taxameterstyring som budgetmodel – incitamenter og fristelser [The value-added grants system as a budgetary model]. Politica, 31(3), 272–285. Dale, R. (1997). The state and the governance of education: An analysis of the restructuring of the state-education relationship. In A. H. Halsey, H. Lauder, P. Brown, & A. S. Wells (Eds.), Education. Culture, economy, and society (pp. 263–272). Oxford University Press. Danske Gymnasieelevers Sammenslutning (2021). Gymnasieelevernes bud på et bedre bevillingssystem. [Upper secondary students’ suggestions for a better funding system]. https://www. gymnasieelever.dk/finansiering-­af-­gymnasier Fordelingsudvalgets arbejdsgruppe. (2020). Forretningsorden for Fordelingsudvalget i Region Nordjylland [Procedures for the distribution committee in Region Northern Jutland] Not published. Forsey, M., Davies, S., & Walford, J. (2008). The globalisation of school choice? An introduction to key issues and concerns. In I. M. Forsey, S. Davies, & J. Walford (Eds.), The globalisation of school choice? (pp. 9–25). Symposium Books. Fraser, N. (1990). Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. Social Text, 25(26), 56–80. https://doi.org/10.2307/466240 Gymnasieskolernes Lærerforening. (2010). Bygningsselveje [Self-governance of buildings]. https://www.gl.org/uddannelse/institutioner/Sider/Bygningsselveje.aspx

152

E. L. Lolle and A. Rasmussen

Gymnasieskolernes Lærerforening. (2021). Finansiering af de gymnasiale uddannelser. [Funding of the general upper secondary programmes]. https://www.gl.org/detmenergl/Documents/ GLs%20taxameterpolitik.pdf Hjort, K., & Raae, P.  H. (2011). Strategic self-management. Danish gymnasium management between playing solo and showing solidarity. Journal of Public Administration and Governance, 1(2), 186–202. Jellingsø, O. (2001). Den historiske dimension. Gymnasiebyggeri i 100 år. [The historical dimension. 100 years of building gymnasiums]. Gymnasiepædagogik, 23, 5–17. LBK. (2015). LBK nr. 777 af 10/06/2015, §10. Bekendtgørelse af lov om institutioner for almengymnasiale uddannelser og almen voksenuddannelse [Act of Institutions for general upper secondary and general adult education]. https://www.retsinformation.dk/eli/lta/2015/777 Ministry of Education. (2005). Styringsanalysen – Analyse af uddannelsesområdets styringssystem [Regulation analysis – Analysis of the regulation-system in the education sector]. http:// static.uvm.dk/publikationer/2005/styringsanalyse/ Ministry of Education. (2006). Overgang til selveje. Håndbog til de midlertidige bestyrelser på gymnasier og HF kurser [Transfer to self-governance. Handbook for the temporary boards on general upper secondary schools and Higher Preparatory Examination Course]. http://static. uvm.dk/publikationer/2006/gymhfselveje/hel.html Ministry of Education, Finance and Labour. (1998). Rapport om taxameterstyring [Report on value-added grant system]. http://static.uvm.dk/Publikationer/1998/taxameter/ Ministry of the Interior and Health. (2005). Kommunalreformen  – kort fortalt [The municipal reform in brief]. http://www.oim.dk/media/17070/kommunalreformen-­kort-­fortalt.pdf Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2017). School choice and school vouchers: An OECD perspective. www.oecd.org. Ozga, J., & Lingard, B. (2007). Globalisation, education policy and politics. In B.  Lingard & J.  Ozga (Eds.), The RoutledgeFalmer reader in education policy and politics (pp.  65–82). Routledge. Pedersen, O.  K. (2013). Political globalisation and the competition state. In B.  Brincker (Ed.), Introduction to political sociology (pp. 281–298). Hans Reitzels Forlag. Piketty, T. (2017). Capital in the twenty-first century. Harvard University Press. PWC. (2011). Gymnasiernes økonomiske vilkår. En analyse af udvalgte økonomiske udfordringer 2011–2015. (The financial situation of the gymnasiums. An analysis of selected financial challenges 2011–2015). https://www.regioner.dk/regional-­udvikling/uddannelse/ gymnasier-­og-­erhvervsuddannelser Raae, P. H. (2012). Den nordiske uddannelsesmodel og det danske gymnasium. Nordic Studies in Education, 32, 311–320. Rasmussen, A., & Moos, L. (2014). A school for less than all in Denmark. In U. Blossing, G. Imsen, & L. Moos (Eds.), The Nordic education model. ‘A school for all’ encounters neo-liberal policy (pp. 57–75). Springer. Danske Regioner. (2021). Gymnasier og erhvervsuddannelser. [Gymnasiums and vocational schools]. https://www.regioner.dk/regional-­udvikling/uddannelse/gymnasier-­og-­erhvervsuddannelser Sandholdt, L. (2020, March 9). Gymnasier er mere optagede af søgetal og omdømme end løfteevne [The upper secondary schools are more preoccupied with the number of applications than with social mobility]. Altinget. https://www.altinget.dk/uddannelse/artikel/ rektor-­gymnasier-­er-­mere-­optaget-­af-­soegetal-­og-­omdoemme-­end-­loefteevne Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. SAGE. Ulriksen, L., Murning, S., & Ebbensgaard, A. B. (2009). Når gymnasiet er en fremmed Verden. Eleverfaringer  – Social baggrund  – Fagligt udbytte [When the upper secondary school is an unknown world. Student experiences, social background, and academic benefit]. Samfundslitteratur. Van Zanten, A. (2007). Bourdieu as education policy analyst and expert: A rich but ambitions legacy. In B. Lingard & J. Ozga (Eds.), The RoutledgeFalmer reader in education policy and politics (pp. 254–267). Routledge.

8  Choice and Competition in the Governance of the Danish Gymnasium School

153

Elisabeth Lauridsen Lolle has a PhD in Educational Studies from Aalborg University (AAU) in 2017 and is currently employed as an associate teaching professor at the Department of Culture and Learning, also at AAU. Her research interests cover education politics and policy(all levels), (in)equity in education, regional development geographical mobility and social capital. In 2021 she finished education descriptions of the Danish municipalities in the topographical work of Trap Danmark.  

Annette Rasmussen is an associate professor in the Department of Culture and Learning, Aalborg University. Her main research interests are in ethnographic approaches to education policies and practices, which she has studied in several school and learning contexts. She is a member of the board of the international research journal Ethnography and Education. In her recent research, focus is on policy issues of employability, performativity and talent, especially in relation to social background and inequality. One of her latest publications on this is Cultivating Excellence in Education. A Critical Policy Study on Talent, which is co-authored with Professor Christian Ydesen and published in the Educational Governance Research Series.  

Chapter 9

“It Is Not All About Studying”. General Upper Secondary Schools’ Institutional Habitus Shaping Students’ Educational Choice Making Linda Maria Laaksonen and Anna-Maija Niemi

Abstract  In this chapter, our aim is to construct an understanding of what the role of educational institutions is in shaping students’ educational hopes, choices and admission seeking strategies to gain access to higher education. We use the concept of institutional habitus to examine what happens in the everyday life of general upper secondary schools in relation to students’ admission seeking strategies. We propose the following research questions: (1) what kind of institutional habitus is formed in the everyday life of general upper secondary schools? and (2) how are the admission seeking strategies for higher education being constructed and shaped within these various types of institutional habitus? The chapter is based on two ethnographic studies conducted in three Finnish general upper secondary schools in the Helsinki metropolitan area during the academic years of 2016–2017 and of 2019–2020. We argue, that the field of general upper secondary education in the Helsinki metropolitan area seems to be differentiated and the differences between the institutional habitus of the schools also emphasise varying educational opportunities for the students and shapes their educational experiences. Keywords  Institutional habitus · Educational choice-making · Social class · General upper secondary education · Access to higher education · Ethnography

L. M. Laaksonen (*) Department of Education, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland e-mail: [email protected] A.-M. Niemi Department of Education, University of Turku, Turku, Finland e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 A. Rasmussen, M. Dovemark (eds.), Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries, Educational Governance Research 18, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08049-4_9

155

156

L. M. Laaksonen and A.-M. Niemi

Introduction Finnish education is guided by egalitarian principles according to which all students should be given equal opportunities in education, irrespective of their socio-­ economic background. Nonetheless educational reproduction and distinctions based on social class seem to occur and be reflected on the distinct educational paths and choices for young people (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977; Kosunen & Seppänen, 2015; Peltola, 2020). Signs of educational choices as a practice creating social distinctions are already emerging during basic education when upper-middle-class families are selective in their preferred schools, favouring middle-class peer groups and even schools in residential areas for their children (e.g. Bernelius & Vilkama, 2019; Kosunen et al., 2020; Peltola, 2020). As for upper secondary education, studies have repeatedly shown how educational choices divide the students in Finland according to their backgrounds: young people from working-class backgrounds tend to end up in vocational education, whereas young people from middle-class backgrounds typically end up in general upper secondary (GUS) education (Härkönen & Sirniö, 2020; Nylund et al., 2018) and furthermore in higher educational institutions, producing socio-economically biased student compositions  (Kohvakka et  al., 2019; Nori, 2011). Besides social selection, access to higher education in Finland is also highly competitive and uncertain as only one-third of applicants get accepted every year (OECD, 2019). However, social inequalities do not only lie in the processes of (non-)access to higher education, but also in the admission seeking strategies that are available for young people when making educational choices. In this chapter, our analysis focuses on educational choice making as a distinctive process, one in which different students have diverging options available to them. The recent policy reform1 on student admission to higher educational institutions (Ministry of Education in Finland, 2021) included the general upper secondary (GUS) matriculation examination as a basis for access to all disciplines,2 and approximately 50% of new students are now selected based on it. Therefore, it is important to examine what is happening in the field of GUS education as it has gained more relevance in the process of seeking access to higher education (cf. Heiskala et al., 2021). In this chapter, our aim is to construct an understanding of what happens in the everyday life of GUS schools in relation to students’ admission seeking strategies to gain access to higher education, and why and how these institutions make a difference in students’ educational experiences and choices. We use the concept of institutional habitus to examine the role of educational institutions in shaping educational hopes, choices and admission-seeking strategies (Bourdieu, 1984; McDonough, 1997; Reay et  al., 2001; Reay, 2005; Tarabini et al., 2017).

 The reform progressed during 2017–2020 and was fully implemented in 2020.  Excluding admissions to art institutions that are still solely based on entrance examinations.

1 2

9  “It Is Not All About Studying”. General Upper Secondary Schools’ Institutional…

157

The chapter is based on two ethnographic studies conducted in three Finnish general upper secondary schools in the Helsinki metropolitan area during the academic years 2016–2017 and 2019–2020.3 Our analysis focuses on the interviews we conducted with the students during the fieldwork. Through a qualitative ethnographic analysis of these interviews, together with an ethnographic analysis of our field notes, we propose the following research questions: (1) what kind of institutional habitus is formed in the everyday life of general upper secondary schools, and (2) how are the admission-seeking strategies for higher education being constructed and shaped within these various types of institutional habitus?

I nstitutional Habitus and the Choice of a General Upper Secondary School It can be argued that in the Nordic countries, where a certain level of educational accessibility has been achieved within an educational system, distinctions begin to occur both vertically (access to education at various levels of education) and horizontally (choice of school) as affluent middle-class families aim for the best quality education to secure their children’s positions in the education system (see, e.g. Bourdieu, 1984; Forsberg, 2018; Kosunen & Seppänen, 2015; Reay et al., 2001, van Zanten et al., 2015). Therefore, it is interesting to examine not only who chooses general upper secondary education and who gets admitted to higher education but also the everyday life of general upper secondary schools and the role of these institutions in shaping students’ strategies for seeking admission to higher education. During the past few decades, the idea of a Finnish comprehensive school for all has also been influenced by neoliberalism, emphasising the freedom of educational choices and assigning responsibility for these choices to the individual (see, e.g. Rasmussen & Ydesen, 2019; Arnesen et al., 2014; Ball et al., 2002). We analyse educational choices in relation to and as shaped by societal and educational structures and schools’ institutional habitus and by what the students consider as being suitable choices for themselves based on their social positions. One aspect framing educational choice making is the educational status of schools: the lowest grade point averages (GPAs) of student intake in GUS schools in Finland and the results of schools’ matriculation examination, which is the final GUS exam, are published annually. The choice of the GUS school and the school’s ranking does not affect students’ access to higher education. Especially in larger cities, there is a variation and hierarchisation in the grade point averages of GUS schools, and those with the highest scores are known as “elite GUS schools”. Among the basic GUS programmes in larger cities, there are also GUS schools that offer emphasised classes in subjects like art, sport, sciences and languages.

 The study is part of the research projects ‘Privatization and access to higher education’ and ‘Employability, education and diversities’. 3

158

L. M. Laaksonen and A.-M. Niemi

As Pierre Bourdieu (1984) has stated, education is a field in which students enter with a range of capital (economic, cultural and social) available to them, meaning that education can be understood not as a neutral field but as a field that consists of several options for different people (Skeggs, 2013). In this chapter, we analyse our field schools’ different institutional habitus. Institutional habitus is an analytical concept introduced by Diane Reay (et al., 2001; see also McDonough, 1997, for organisational habitus), which enables us to analyse the differences that are formed in various levels of an institution’s everyday life and how students are positioned in a certain school. The institutional habitus of the schools is something that already exists in the history of the institutions and is furthermore reinvented and maintained by the students and the staff at the school (Reay et al., 2001). The idea draws on Bourdieu’s (1984) concept of habitus and the theorisations on capitals and field that are inseparably linked to it. As with Bourdieu’s original concept of habitus, institutional habitus is not meant to be examined as a stable, predetermined context: institutional habitus is also capable of adapting and changing. However, due to the collective nature of institutional habitus, the processes of change are slower than they are for individual habitus, and the nature of institutional habitus is therefore rather reproductive than transformative (Reay et al., 2001; Reay, 1998; Bourdieu, 1990). It is important to note that there are differences in how individual students are positioned in relation to their schools’ institutional habitus (Reay et  al., 2001; Ingram, 2009; Burke et al., 2013; Tarabini et al., 2017). Some students fit in with the institutional habitus like “fish in water”, whereas some might find it more difficult to position themselves within it (Bourdieu & Wacquant, 1992, p. 127; Reay et al., 2001; Burke et al., 2013; Huilla, 2022). As Tarabini et al. (2017, p. 3) write, institutional habitus should be understood not to homogenise the whole institution (cf. Atkinson, 2011) but to highlight “the shared elements that define school culture”. Reay et al. (2001) and Tarabini et al. (2017) have categorised the components of institutional habitus into educational status, organisational practices and expressive order. The component of educational status includes the characteristics of the school’s intake, educational profile, and level of demand. The component of organisational practices  then refer to the school’s customary practices, such as formal pedagogical practices and guidance counselling, and its organisational structure. The component of expressive order, in turn, stands for a collective understanding about what kind of institution that particular school is (expectations, character related to it and manners produced by it) (Reay et al., 2001; Tarabini et al., 2017). These components interact with each other forming a multi-layered concept situated into the field of education and linked to the power relations and mechanisms of reproduction within the field (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977).

9  “It Is Not All About Studying”. General Upper Secondary Schools’ Institutional…

159

Research Data and Methodology The analysis in this chapter is based on the reading of ethnographic research data, which was produced at three general upper secondary schools in the Helsinki metropolitan area between 2016 and 2020. Three field schools, pseudonymised as Lakeland, Cloudpark and Highwoods, were selected from the Helsinki metropolitan area: they are located geographically in different areas and their educational status differed. Lakeland is an academically elite GUS school. To be admitted, a student needs to have high grades from comprehensive education. The elite status of the school attracts students from a wide geographical range. Cloudpark offers emphasised classes in art among regular GUS programmes. Admissions to emphasised classes are selected via aptitude testing. The emphasis on art attracts students from a wide geographical range, even though Cloudpark is not as academically oriented as Lakeland and the admission rate is lower. However, Cloudpark also has a high educational status due to its emphasis on art education. At both Lakeland and Cloudpark, the students are primarily white and belong to the middle class or upper-middle class, and the role of Finnish as second language and special education is minor, almost non-existent. At our third field school Highwoods the GPA needed to access falls within the lowest quartile  of general upper secondary schools in the Helsinki metropolitan area. In comparison with the other schools, the students in Cloudpark have more diverse backgrounds. Among white middle-class students, there are also students who have migrant backgrounds, belong to racialised minorities and speak a language other than Finnish as their mother tongue. The school offers Finnish as second language teaching and special education. However, it is important to note that compared to vocational education, GUS schools as educational institutions can still be considered middle-class institutions. The aim of the curricula of GUS education is to prepare students for further academic studying, whereas vocational education prepares students for the workforce. This is an important notion as despite the lower educational status and diverse backgrounds of the students at Cloudpark, there are also students who come from middle-class families. In this chapter, we concentrate on ethnographic interviews that discussed students’ educational history and prospects as well as their experiences and thoughts on GUS schooling and, more particularly, on guidance counselling, admission-­ seeking strategies and their leisure time and family. In the educators’ interviews, themes considering everyday life at the schools, guidance counselling and other organisational practices of the GUS schools were discussed. During the fieldwork, we participated in, observed, and wrote field notes during lessons, staff meetings, individual study guidance meetings and other events at the schools (cf. Gordon et al., 2001). As we analysed the ethnographic data produced in two research projects and three separate schools, our approach to the field in this study was inspired by multi-­ sited ethnography (Niemi & Laaksonen, 2020; Lahelma et al., 2014). By multi-sited

160

L. M. Laaksonen and A.-M. Niemi

we mean that we understand the ethnographic field as layered, that it stretches from a certain time and institution towards the wider societal context of the research (Marcus, 1995). The data used in this chapter were produced from separate research projects but were analysed jointly. We conducted qualitative ethnographic analysis (e.g. Coffey & Atkinson, 1996), and in the first pre-analysis round, Laaksonen used Atlas.ti and coded the data thematically. After that, she analysed the data in a dialogue with the theoretical concept of institutional habitus: first, the data were coded with Atlas.ti by mapping out interview narrations involving narratives on educational choices, educational status of the schools, organisational practices and expressive order. This was followed by both authors writing analytical sections based on the coded data (Koski, 2011).

 n Schools’ Educational Status and Educational O Choice Making Our analysis illustrated how the students’ educational paths already start to differ during the comprehensive education years and how the educational status of a certain school in question is being described in the students’ interview talk, taking into account their earlier educational experiences and choices, which serve as the basis for their future education. The students described their educational choices as individual choices but also framed them based on what they thought seemed to be a suitable choice for “students like them”. One teacher at Lakeland expressed this as follows: “When choosing schools, the students start to wonder where they could find people who are like-minded, and they do talk about it a lot.”

Lakeland: Emphasising Educational Status At Lakeland, a so-called elite GUS school, most of the students described how they had already made several educational choices before choosing their preferred upper secondary school. Despite the Finnish local school principle,4 an opportunity to make active educational choices was something the students were aware of and what they described as an ordinary practice. In the interview, Sofia, a student at Lakeland, describes her educational choices before upper secondary education: I did not want to go to my local school’s lower secondary, because it had a bad reputation. So, I thought that choosing a class with special emphasis on mathematics would be nice and that way I could have smarter people around me. I was also interested in mathematics of course ... I was also considering another school which would have been closer to my home,

 Municipalities place every child in a comprehensive school based on the school catchment area they live in. This school is the local school assigned to the child. 4

9  “It Is Not All About Studying”. General Upper Secondary Schools’ Institutional…

161

but it would have been more difficult to get admitted in there and the emphasis on mathematics was stronger in the school I chose, so eventually it was a clear decision for me.

What Sofia describes was a common story at Lakeland. She pictures herself as an active chooser and makes distinctions between herself and the presumed “other students” in the schools she did not want to choose (see Bourdieu, 1990). Choosing something other than the local school was presumed to result in choosing a socially selective, “smarter” peer group (e.g. Kosunen, 2016). In the students’ interview talk, the responsibility for making a choice was given to individuals, and questions related to social differences, such as family background, were not mentioned in relation to educational choices, although the parents’ educational backgrounds and labour market positions indicated that the students belonged to the upper-middle class, and therefore the social selection was clearly visible (Kosunen & Seppänen, 2015). The choice of upper secondary education was described by the Lakeland students as an easy process with clear options. Since admission is meritocratically based on students’ earlier school success (GPA), those students who apply and are admitted to the elite GUS schools with the highest entrance limits can basically choose from all the GUS schools in Finland. However, the preferable institutional habitus, and particularly the preferable educational status, of the school limited the pool of GUS schools, and the choice was often made between a couple of similar schools (cf. Reay et al., 2001), whereas some lower GPA schools and vocational education were often clearly excluded for being a “not suitable for me” option (Bourdieu, 1990; Ball et al., 2002; Reay, 1998). When choosing a GUS school, the quality of teaching, reputation, admission rate and curricula were mentioned as the most valued reasons for applying. Individual attributes, such as motivated students and staff, were also often linked to “desirable schools”. One of the students, Lucas, described how he “wanted to apply for a GUS school that would have a high entrance limit so that the students would be motivated to study”. Especially motivation was taken for granted in Lakeland and it was seen as a part of an institutional habitus the students wanted, and felt they would fit in (Bourdieu & Wacquant, 1992; Reay, 2005). Lakeland’s educational status as an elite school attracted students also from nearby municipalities, and none of the students mentioned locality when talking about their GUS choice (cf. Reay et al., 2001). In previous research, locality has often been found to be more important for students who come from lower social classes, whereas commuting to school was more typical and encouraged by families from the more affluent middle class (e.g. Bernelius & Vilkama, 2019). At Lakeland, the students acknowledged that many of the students at their school had an affluent background, and being middle class appeared to be a part of the institutional habitus, particularly the expressive order of the school, constructing a shared class consciousness that reinforced students belonging to an affluent middle class. In the interview extract below, Sebastian and Julia discuss this: Sebastian: many of the students have a similar background to Julia: her parents have actively chosen for her to go to an emphasised class and to a better school. That is some-

162

L. M. Laaksonen and A.-M. Niemi

thing you can notice from the people here. […] And people are successful in their studying, but that is kind of obvious here. Julia: yes, I think you can figure it out from the grades needed to be admitted here. Things need to be pretty good in your life in order to end up here, you know…

Belonging to the affluent middle class was something most of the students at Lakeland represented. The students reflected this with the education status of the school and the school was called elite, but the students at the school called themselves (affluent) middle class rather than elite. This narrative of an elite school with middle-class students was something the educators also produced in their interviews. Competition between students was often mentioned in the interviews when the students were asked to describe how it was like studying at Lakeland. Competition was part of the school’s institutional habitus, and in the expressive order of the school, it was often highlighted when the students were discussing their grades and comparing them with other students, which was common in the everyday life of the school. However, in the expressive order, competition was often downplayed by notions like “our school is not as competitive as other elite schools”. The students saw inconvenient aspects in competitiveness, as Joanna explained: I think it [competition] makes you to challenge yourself. I am a competitive person, so sometimes it is also hard to accept that I am not being able to achieve the best grade in everything. There have been some dull comments that I have got from other students and those just makes you think like “Ok, I am nothing more than competition to you”.

It was part of the school’s institutional habitus to expect students to have their goals set on achieving the highest grade. Like many other students, Joanna described how only the highest grade was generally considered to be “good enough”. Besides the students, the teachers also described a competitive vibe among the teachers: they worked hard and invested a lot of time and energy in their teaching and sometimes felt pressure to do extra well. This also highlighted competition as part of the school’s expressive order, which sometimes seemed to wear out both students and teachers (Reay et al., 2001; Tarabini et al., 2017).

Cloudpark: Getting into an Art School Cloudpark offered extra curricula on art, which made it different from the “regular GUS schools” and gave it an art school status. Some of the students at Cloudpark had studied in classes with special emphases during their comprehensive education years, but unlike Lakeland, the emphasis was usually on art or sport rather than on sciences and languages. In the interviews, Mia and Amanda described how their hobbies affected their educational choices during comprehensive education: Mia: I remember that our art teacher suggested that maybe I should apply for a class with special emphasis on music for secondary school. […] I was not too excited about it back then. But when I started to study there, I actually liked it Amanda: the emphasis on music was nice Mia: Yea, I did not even know that the school existed before my teacher told me about it

9  “It Is Not All About Studying”. General Upper Secondary Schools’ Institutional…

163

Amanda: I think my parents did not know the school either. My father been a student there, but back then they did not have any emphasised classes. But my parents encouraged me, they thought that applying there would be nice for me

In Mia and Amanda’s case, the social capital in the form of knowledge of educational opportunities came from their teacher (Ball & Vincent, 1998). The girls explained their choice mainly through wanting to study music, and there was no mention of a certain institutional habitus or peer group that would have been desired. However, the choices they made and the hobbies they had are linked to a certain middle-class lifestyle, and social selectiveness related to those is probably acknowledged (Peltola, 2020; Kosunen, 2016). Also, the choice of a class with special emphasis is not available to everyone since admission is based on an aptitude test, which in Mia and Amanda’s case required being able to play a musical instrument, which functioned as an asset for them within the field of education (cf. Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977; Bathmaker et al., 2013). Having a good atmosphere, constructed on the idea of everybody being accepted as themselves, was emphasised in the school’s expressive order and something that all the students mentioned and also acted upon. The aim of the organisational practices was to support a good atmosphere by organising extracurricular activities that focused on the students’ well-being and for the students to get to know each other. These kinds of events were an important part of maintaining and reproducing the school’s institutional habitus. Some of the students also mentioned academic orientation and the educational status of the school, but as Oliver described, other things were more important: I went to visit one elite general upper secondary school. Then I came here, and I just instantly liked it. This was the place for me: it is not all about studying, it is also about having a nice atmosphere to spend time in.

Oliver was not the only student who had been considering elite GUS schools, but he had felt that the atmosphere at Cloudpark was more suitable for him. Unlike at Lakeland, the orientation of the students was not as much towards studying and succeeding, as Oliver mentioned in his interview: In some subjects I have been able to be as good as I want to be without anyone telling me that I am a nerd. But then there are also subjects in which I can be like “this is not my thing” and let it go. […] That is something I love about this school: we have people with high grades but then we also have people with average grades – so you kind of never feel you are marginal here.

The institutional habitus of the school allowed students to move between strategies, as Oliver describes. This was something the teachers had also noticed and what they encouraged the students to do. Many of the students were also working hard on their hobbies, and sometimes they prioritised their hobbies over studying, which the teachers sometimes reacted to and due to which they called them a “bit too laid back” and “too little study oriented”. Because of the institution’s art school status, a certain laid-back and bohemian attitude was allowed as part of its institutional habitus  – it was part of all three components  of the institutional habitus and became visible both in the educational status and in the organisational practices, such as the

164

L. M. Laaksonen and A.-M. Niemi

pedagogical practices of the school. However, as student intake in Cloudpark was rather selective due to aptitude testing and it had a high educational status since it was an art GUS institution, a sense of entitlement was also emphasised in the institutional habitus, which sometimes created ambivalent expectations and ideas of academic success for the students. The students in Cloudpark did not explicitly mention social class, but many referred to middle-class lifestyles, including hobbies and living in prestigious neighbourhoods. However, being middle class was not an essential part of the institutional habitus of the school, and some of the students also explained that they were struggling financially or needed employment at the same time as they were studying. Still, a certain feeling of entitlement and elitism was part of the institutional habitus of the school, and the students described how being admitted to an art school like Cloudpark was not a foregone conclusion (Bourdieu, 1990).

 ighwoods: Negotiating Academic Choices and Dealing H with Uncertainty Unlike the students at Lakeland and Cloudpark, most of the students at Highwoods described how choosing a GUS school was the first time they had actively chosen a specific school. They came into Highwoods with lower grades, and the educational status of the school was not as academically oriented, nor did the school have a cultural or academically elite status. Most of the students had been studying in their neighbourhood’s local schools and did not bring up any reflections about choosing emphasised classes during comprehensive school when asked about their educational history before upper secondary education. In the interview with Zidan, he described his studying during lower secondary school: During lower secondary school I did not focus much on my studying … now I have started to focus, but there are just some things that I have not learnt [at lower secondary school] […] The atmosphere in our class [at lower secondary school] was bad, everybody was just talking and shouting at each other during the lessons. So, it was a bit difficult to focus there.

Zidan describes an unfocused class as a negative thing, but unlike the students at Lakeland, he also described himself as a part of this unfocused group and makes no distinctions between himself and the institutional habitus and peer group of his previous class in comprehensive school. Despite not having made active educational choices during comprehensive education, the students at Highwoods had diverse educational paths to GUS education. Unlike in Lakeland and Cloudpark, there were also students studying at Highwoods with migrant backgrounds and whose mother tongue was other than Finnish. The conversations related to educational choice making were slightly different at Highwoods in comparison with the other two schools. Firstly, some students had sought access to more prestigious schools as their primary choice, but when they did not reach the required GPA, they ended up at Highwoods as their second, third or

9  “It Is Not All About Studying”. General Upper Secondary Schools’ Institutional…

165

even fifth choice. Secondly, some of the students had also made a choice between GUS and vocational education. To be able to gain access to GUS education, some of the students at Highwoods had to work hard during their last year of comprehensive education. Whereas the students at Lakeland described their educational choices as being clear and even easy choices, at Highwoods there was a lot more uncertainty involved in the choice-making process. Due to the uncertainties related to access to upper secondary education, the students could not choose a certain institutional habitus and educational status, unlike the students at the other two schools. Some of the students in Highwoods had talked with student counsellors in comprehensive school, who had advised them to choose vocational education instead of GUS education, contrary to the students’ own aspirations to have a more academically oriented path (e.g. Kurki, 2019; Laaksonen et  al., 2021). In the interview quoted below, Hasna and Jamilah discuss guidance counselling: Hasna: I went to meet the student counsellor and they said that “you must go to vocational school” and I was like, why would I go there, and s/he just kept saying that “general upper secondary school will be very difficult for you because of your Finnish language” and I was like, I am born here in Finland. I have good grades, why would I want to go into vocational education? The counsellor was like “all students with migrant backgrounds should go to vocational education”. I think that is a bit too stereotypical… Jamilah: I have not encountered anything like that personally, but many girls with migrant backgrounds have. My friend has told me that usually they [the student counsellors] recommend practical nurse education for girls with migrant backgrounds saying that they should choose vocational education, practical nursing especially.

Similar narratives that Hasna and Jamilah spoke of were mentioned by other students and by some teachers too. The phenomenon of guiding girls with migrant backgrounds towards vocational education was recognised and discussed at Highwoods. The girls said that they have had to negotiate their positions within the education system against being racialised and categorised as a girl with a migrant background, which in some cases resulted in guidance that was by no means sensitive to the student’s own plans (Kurki, 2019; Laaksonen et  al., 2021; Mäkelä & Kalalahti, 2020). Language proficiency was often discussed at Highwoods as many of the students had a mother tongue other than Finnish. It was also common to speak many languages fluently. In the school’s expressive order, diversity was valued, and the organisational practices were also aimed at supporting diverse students to succeed in their studying by offering special educational support and courses covering general study skills. However, because the academic language at the school was Finnish and knowledge of other languages was not recognised as a valuable capital by the official education system, in this sense, the organisational practices also failed to recognise the importance of having language skills in other languages. A special education teacher expressed this as follows: The curricula of the general upper secondary schools do not consider that we have students [who do not speak Finnish properly]. […] Their language proficiency is not always enough,

166

L. M. Laaksonen and A.-M. Niemi

but our teachers have a good attitude: they want everyone to be able to graduate. But we don’t have resources to really help these students…

The special education teacher describes how they cannot support all students lacking language proficiency due to shortage in resources. They also felt it was left to the school’s own organisational practices to support its students since the official education system failed to recognise that not all students studying in Finnish GUS education speak Finnish fluently (Laaksonen et al., 2021). The educators described the school as diverse: some of the students were highly motivated and did well at school, whereas some were struggling to pass courses and to find the motivation to study. The teachers also described how students needed support more generally in addition to academic support, especially if the students came from families in which they could not get enough support. For some of the students, it was the case that they were employed to support their studying financially or even their families (Tarabini et  al., 2017). The expressive order of the school was strongly based on the idea of good spirit, as Sam summed up in his interview: Here you can find people who study, then some people are a bit more relaxed about school. In here people don’t just stress about school, you can take it a bit easier here as well, because you don’t need to be stressed all the time and think about school, school, school…

Sam characterised Highwoods as having a good atmosphere. The teachers also emphasised the good atmosphere of the school as a basis for the school’s institutional habitus. Whereas the students at Lakeland said they had chosen the school because they wanted to focus on what they were studying, the students at Highwoods emphasised other things, such as its atmosphere, its location near to home and having friends who also chose the same school (e.g. Reay, 1998; Rönnlund et al., 2018). Many of the students said that they had friends who were also studying at Highwoods and that they had been going to the same local schools since they were children and had been sharing the same peer group throughout their educational path so far (cf. Reay et al., 2001).

Admission-Seeking Strategies Towards Higher Education  akeland: Seeking Admission to Status-Disciplines L in Higher Education As described in the intro, the recent reform of student selection to higher education strenghtened the position of matriculation examination diploma, when seeking admission to higher education (MINEDU, 2021). As access to higher education is highly competed, especially to the status disciplines, to be admitted the applicants need to have rather high grades from their matriculation examinations. In the interview, Sofia explained her thoughts on seeking access to medical sciences:

9  “It Is Not All About Studying”. General Upper Secondary Schools’ Institutional…

167

Preparing for the entrance examinations is something I hope I don’t have to do. […] I think it is good that you can get accepted via the matriculation examination. It feels insane that first I should study for the matriculation examinations, and then I should start studying all over again. […] But it is good that they have the entrance examination also for those who have not invested in their studies [during GUS education].

As Sofia described, securing access to higher education by investing in the matriculation examination was a common access-seeking strategy at Lakeland. Despite the competitive and uncertain nature of higher education admission in Finland, many of the students described their admission seeking with confidence and even with peace of mind (Reay, 1998; van Zanten et al., 2015). Individuals’ own responsibility was highlighted in the narratives, like Sofia’s, in which she described how not investing in studying during GUS education could result in having to prepare for the entrance examination (Kosunen & Haltia, 2018). The students who did well overall in studying also had more options to choose the subjects they would include in their matriculation examination. Sebastian was a third-year student who was pondering between law and social sciences: I based my tactics on how the admissions via matriculation would be graded: for example, physics gives you 10 more points than social studies, so I thought that maybe I should study physics then. […] I will also do the matriculation examination on the Swedish basic syllabus, though I have studied the advanced syllabus. This is also tactics. I would like to take the examination on the advanced syllabus, but the best grade is too hard to reach.

Since physics was the subject that graded the most points in the admissions via matriculation, Sebastian had chosen to study it. Another common strategy that Sebastian and many other students used was trying to secure best grades in the matriculation examination: even though Sebastian had studied the advanced syllabus in the Swedish language, he ended up taking the test on basic syllabus so that he could easily get the highest grade. Tactics like these were possible only for the students who had made distinctive language choices during elementary school and who had been continuing to study the advanced syllabus in GUS. Recent research has highlighted a growing private education market in the Nordic countries (Dovemark et al., 2018). In addition to good grades, the students also had economic capital that they could use to invest in extra tutoring or private preparatory courses if they wanted to. Previous research has shown that private tutoring is most commonly used by students who come from more affluent backgrounds to enhance their opportunities to get into higher education institutions (Kosunen et al., 2020). However, preparatory courses were not excessively common among the students at Lakeland. In our analysis, we found two reasons for this: first, the students who had already secured a study place via the matriculation examination found the courses not to be helpful to them. The second reason was that some of the students thought that teaching in their GUS education was of better quality and going into a preparatory course would just “mess their thoughts up” and be an extra burden, taking time away from their own studying. Participating in such courses did not seem to fit with the school’s institutional habitus, which emphasised the school having a higher educational status than the preparatory courses because they were open to everyone. The students described how the courses were for “those who are not able to stay on

168

L. M. Laaksonen and A.-M. Niemi

track with their studying” or who “had not been investing in studying during their first few years in GUS”. Part of the school’s organisational practices was that the study counsellors had a critical attitude about the private preparatory course market, and they encouraged the students to reflect on it critically. During lessons, the study counsellors also made distinctions between public and private education and expressed critical notions about market-driven education. According to our analysis, the students in Lakeland were encouraged to pursue their educational goals, and in terms of access to higher education, the teachers argued: “for students like them, everything is possible”. The school also had a network of alumni, who often participated in the school’s career events. In telling their success stories about seeking admission to higher education and, in some cases, into the labour market, the alumni validated the school’s mantra about endless options. Some of the students were also thinking about seeking admission to institutions abroad, and mobility seemed to be a privilege they could use if they wished to (Skeggs, 2013). However, all the students were planning to seek admission to a Finnish university too as a “backup study place”.

 loudpark: Preparatory Courses as a Part C of Admission-Seeking Strategy At Cloudpark, the students had diverse hopes for the future, from creative and performing arts to natural sciences, but medicine and other status disciplines were not as popular as they were at Lakeland. Amanda was one of the students who wanted to seek admission to university, but she felt her matriculation examination was not enough to get her accepted, so she had decided to choose a strategy whereby she would focus on preparing for the entrance examinations: I have always thought that I would undertake a private preparatory course and study there before taking the entrance examination. You know … I have not been thinking that I will get the best scores in the matriculation examination. Of course, I would like to get in via the matriculation examination, but I am focusing on the entrance examinations as well.

Amanda said her parents had promised to pay for her preparatory course, which was actually her parents’ idea. The high prices of the courses were often mentioned in the student interviews, and most of the students noted the economic inequalities related to that. However, unlike in Lakeland, the students at Cloudpark seemed to invest private economic capital in private preparatory courses to enhance their chances of gaining admission into a higher education programme (Kosunen et al., 2020). Differing from Lakeland’s organisational practices, the guidance counsellors did not offer critical notions related to private preparatory courses, and allowed the course providers to participate in the school’s guidance counselling lessons. The institutional habitus of the school was not as academic or competitive as that of Lakeland. However, there were students who seemed to be like “fish in the water” (Bourdieu & Wacquant, 1992, p.  127) when talking about higher education.

9  “It Is Not All About Studying”. General Upper Secondary Schools’ Institutional…

169

Benjamin was one of these students: after his interview, he accidentally told me that he is “also from the University of Helsinki”. He then soon realises what he had said and laughs about it, saying that he already feels like he is a student there since he has been waiting to start university all the time he has been at the GUS school. However, in contrast to Benjamin’s narrative, in the interviews, there were also a few others like Mia’s. Mia had given up on her original aspirations during GUS education due to her limited opportunities to be admitted: Mia: My dream is to become a veterinarian, but I don’t think I will be able to get into the medicine school, especially now since I quit studying chemistry and can’t be accepted via the matriculation examination. So maybe I should come up with a new goal. I have a feeling that maybe studying to become a vet is not for me. I know the entrance examinations for medicine are very hard, so I feel like I don’t have any chances. So, I have started to think about other options. Interviewer: Do you think that you won’t be applying at all or are you maybe still going to apply and look how it goes? Mia: I don’t want to end up spending many gap years, so I don’t know … Maybe it is just that I don’t want to face disappointment. I don’t want to apply so that I won’t get disappointed on being such a poor student. Yea, I don’t know…

In her interview, Mia is comparing herself to possible other applicants and states that maybe becoming a vet is “not for her anymore” (cf. Ball et al., 2002). Students at Cloudpark were often able to use flexible admission-seeking strategies, but some of the students, like Mia, had fewer strategies available. The expressive order of the school also did not encourage all students to pursue whatever career they dreamed of: Teacher: so, if you want to go to medical school, but maybe this is not the best place for you. The students seem confused, everybody sits quietly and just stares at the teacher, who continues: how many of you are planning to seek admission to medicine? Nobody raises a hand. Teacher: how many of you would like to study art? Few students raise their hand. Teacher: there you go… The students begin to laugh and at least some of the tension caused by the teacher’s statement seems resolved.

The students seemed to be a bit taken aback by the teacher’s comment as they often did express entitlement as part of their school’s institutional habitus. Many of the students also felt they had competence to pursue their dreams within the field of education. Still, compared to Lakeland, admission to higher education was less certain for them due to lower matriculation examination grades or due to seeking admission to very prestigious art schools, which admit only a few students each year.

Highwoods: On Not Being Sure The students’ plans at Highwoods were less structured than those of the students at Lakeland and Cloudpark. Some of the students had only vague plans, and they were not sure how they could achieve them. Some had little knowledge or even held false

170

L. M. Laaksonen and A.-M. Niemi

beliefs about admission seeking. This was the case especially with the students whose family members did not have first-hand experiences or connections to people with experience of GUS education or higher education in Finland (Laaksonen et al., 2021). In the interview extract below, Vanessa describes how she is the first of her family to undertake GUS education and to study within the Finnish education system: I understand you need to be more independent here, but what if you have no knowledge at all … I don’t even know what I should be asking, since I know so little. But I have done okay here. It is just that everybody expects you know these things [about matriculation examinations], but I don’t, and I don’t have anyone who could tell me.

Vanessa seems to have less social capital to mobilise in relation to the students in her peer group, whose parents have undertaken Finnish GUS education (Laaksonen et  al., 2021). She also explains how knowledge on these matters was taken for granted in the school. Though diversity was visible in the school’s expressive order, the organisational practices sometimes failed to recognise the heterogeneity of the students’ backgrounds. What Vanessa describes above is one example. Compared to the students’ descriptions at the other field schools, the students at Highwoods had fewer admission-seeking strategies. The study counsellors also talked about how “sometimes the students have expectations that go quite far from the reality. It is possible that the students won’t be able to get admitted to higher education”, and the study counsellors encouraged the students to also consider less prestigious higher education options. Compared to Lakeland and Cloudpark, there was more uncertainty in Highwoods related to admission seeking and planning for future education, especially if the students were struggling with their current studies. Going to study abroad was also an option for some students at Highwoods. Interestingly, unlike the Lakeland situation, the students considered applying abroad because seeking admission to higher education in Finland seemed challenging due to Finnish language proficiency or because of competitive entry requirements (Kosunen et al., 2020). Some students had older siblings who were already studying abroad, so the option seemed realistic in that way. The students did not mention how they were going to cover tuition fees abroad. Investing money in private preparatory courses was not mentioned either, and using preparatory courses did not seem to be an admission strategy the students used at Highwoods. However, like at Cloudpark, preparatory courses were also advertised at the school.

Conclusion: Choosing Elite or Egalitarian? Based on the ethnographic data analysis, our main argument in this chapter is that there are clear distinctions between the students' educational path towards upper secondary education and furthermore towards higher education in Finnish GUS education, and the concept of institutional habitus has been helpful in analysing these. The field of GUS education in the Helsinki metropolitan area seems to be differentiated: the schools have different kinds of institutional habitus, and they also

9  “It Is Not All About Studying”. General Upper Secondary Schools’ Institutional…

171

seemed to have socially stratified student bodies, which also reflects wider societal segregation. Differences between the institutional habitus of the schools also emphasise varying educational opportunities for the students and shape their educational experiences (e.g. McDonough, 1997; Reay, 1998; Reay et al., 2001; Tarabini et al., 2017). At Lakeland, the highly academically oriented institutional habitus encouraged the students to succeed when seeking access to higher education, and the students also had many admission-seeking strategies available to them due to educational success and extensive amounts of economic, social and cultural capital to mobilise. Cloudpark then is an example of how reproduction of social positions and distinctions can be embedded in the institutional habitus and be constructed in schools; the students acquired a lot of cultural capital, but it was only mobilisable within the field of education in some cases, such as when seeking access to classes that have an emphasis on the arts. However, acquiring a lot of cultural capital was strongly linked to having a certain middle-class lifestyle, and the students often described a sense of entitlement (see Bourdieu, 1984; Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977). In contrast especially to Lakeland, in Highwoods, a good atmosphere and valuing diversity were highlighted, yet the organisational practices sometimes still failed to recognise the heterogeneity of the students’ backgrounds, and when it came to cultural capital, the Finnish language was usually the only language recognised as a valuable capital, despite the students having diverse language skills (Bourdieu, 1984; Laaksonen et al., 2021). Mechanisms of educational reproduction seemed to emerge when the students who had more economic, social and cultural capital available to mobilise within the field of education had already made socially selective educational choices during their comprehensive education (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977). Consequently, for these students, choosing a school with a preferable institutional habitus often meant choosing a school characterised by high educational status and where most of the students came from affluent backgrounds (see, e.g., Kosunen & Seppänen, 2015; Reay et al., 2001). Yet we propose that even for students with the highest amounts of capital, the pool of options is somehow limited as educational choices are always related to what the students think were “suitable for the ones like me” and where they felt they could fit in (Ball et al., 2002; Bourdieu, 1990; Reay et al., 2001). We do not suggest that these distinctions between the schools are intentionally maintained, nor do we claim that they are a direct result of socially selective educational choices, but they are important to consider in relation to questions of equality in education policies. As the relevance of upper secondary education as part of admission to higher education increases, it is important to consider the distinctions occurring within GUS education and the socially selective nature of educational choice making. Distinctions occur not only between schools but also within the schools and in how the students position themselves in relation to the institutional habitus of their school (Bourdieu, 1990; Reay, 1998; Reay et  al., 2001; Tarabini et  al., 2017). The schools had differing institutional habitus. Institutional habitus functions only as one aspect related to mechanisms of educational reproduction and there are many other aspects to also consider. However as the institutional habitus

172

L. M. Laaksonen and A.-M. Niemi

contributes to students' educational experiences and further on to their educational hopes and choice-making illustrating the role of different institutions is highly relevant.

References Arnesen, A. L., Lahelma, E., Lundahl, L., & Öhrn, E. (2014). Unfolding the context and the contents: Critical perspectives on contemporary Nordic schooling. Fair and Competitive, 1–19. Atkinson, W. (2011). From sociological fictions to social fictions: Some Bourdieusian reflections on the concepts of ‘institutional habitus’ and ‘family habitus’. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 32(3), 331–347. Ball, S. J., & Vincent, C. (1998). ’I heard it on the grapevine’: ‘Hot’ knowledge and school choice. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 19(3), 377–400. Ball, S. J., Reay, D., & David, M. (2002). ‘Ethnic Choosing’: Minority ethnic students, social class and higher education choice. Race Ethnicity and Education, 5(4), 333–357. Bathmaker, A.  M., Ingram, N., & Waller, R. (2013). Higher education, social class and the mobilisation of capitals: Recognising and playing the game. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 34(5-6), 723–743. Bernelius, V., & Vilkama, K. (2019). Pupils on the move: School catchment area segregation and residential mobility of urban families. Urban Studies, 56(15), 3095–3116. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Harvard University Press. Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice. Stanford University Press. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J.-C. (1977). Reproduction in education, society and culture. Sage. Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L.  J. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. University of Chicago Press. Burke, C. T., Emmerich, N., & Ingram, N. (2013). Well-founded social fictions: A defence of the concepts of institutional and familial habitus. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 34(2), 165–182. Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making sense of qualitative data: Complementary research strategies. Sage. Dovemark, M., Kosunen, S., Kauko, J., Magnúsdóttir, B., Hansen, P., & Rasmussen, P. (2018). Deregulation, privatisation and marketisation of Nordic comprehensive education: Social changes reflected in schooling. Education Inquiry, 9(1), 122–141. Forsberg, H. (2018). School competition and social stratification in the deregulated upper secondary school market in Stockholm. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 39(6), 891–907. Gordon, T., Holland, J., & Lahelma, E. (2001). Ethnographic research in educational settings. In P. Atkinson, A. Coffey, S. Delamont, L. Lofland, & J. Lofland (Eds.), Handbook of ethnography. Sage. Härkönen, J., & Sirniö, O. (2020). Educational transitions and educational inequality: A multiple pathways sequential logit model analysis of Finnish birth cohorts 1960–1985. European Sociological Review, 36(5), 700–719. Heiskala, L., Erola, J., & Kilpi-Jakonen, E. (2021). Compensatory and multiplicative advantages: Social origin, school performance, and stratified higher education enrolment in Finland. European Sociological Review, 37(2), 171–185. Huilla, H. (2022). Kaupunkikoulut ja huono-osaisuus [Urban schools and disadvantage]. University of Helsinki. Ingram, N. (2009). Working-class boys, educational success and the misrecognition of working-­ class culture. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 30(4), 421–434.

9  “It Is Not All About Studying”. General Upper Secondary Schools’ Institutional…

173

Kohvakka, M., Nevala, A., & Nori, H. (2019). The changing meanings of ‘responsible university’. From a Nordic-Keynesian welfare state to a Schumpeterian competition state. In The Responsible University (pp. 33–60). Palgrave Macmillan. Koski, L. (2011). Teksteistä teemoiksi – dialoginen tematisointi. In A. Puusa & P. Juuti (Eds.), Menetelmäviidakon Raivaajat. Perusteita Laadullisen Tutkimustavan Valintaan [From texts to themes – Dialogical thematization] (pp. 126–149). Hansaprint Oy. Kosunen, S. (2016). Families and the social space of school choice in urban Finland. Kosunen, S., & Haltia, N. (2018). Valmennuskurssit ja koulutuskuluttajuus: tutkimus kurssijärjestäjien puhetavoista [Private preparatory courses and consumerism]. Sosiologia, 55(2). Kosunen, S., & Seppänen, P. (2015). The transmission of capital and a feel for the game: Upper-­ class school choice in Finland. Acta Sociologica, 58(4), 329–342. Kosunen, S., Haltia, N., Saari, J., Jokila, S., & Halmkrona, E. (2020). Private supplementary tutoring and socio-economic differences in access to higher education. Higher Education Policy, 1–20. Kurki, T. (2019). Immigrant-ness as (mis)fortune?: Immigrantisation through integration policies and practices in education. University of Helsinki. Laaksonen, L. M., Niemi, A.-M., & Jahnukainen, M. (2021). Study counselling experiences and educational choice-making of girls with immigrant backgrounds in the context of general upper secondary education. In L.  Arnell & M.  A. Vogell (Eds.), Living like a girl: Agency, social vulnerability and welfare measures in a European context. Berghahn Books. Lahelma, E., Lappalainen, S., Mietola, R., & Palmu, T. (2014). Discussions that ‘tickle our brains’: Constructing interpretations through multiple ethnographic data-sets. Ethnography and Education, 9(1), 51–65. Mäkelä, M. L., & Kalalahti, M. (2020). Facing uncertainty yet feeling confident: Teenage migrant girls’ agencies in upper secondary school transitions. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 64(1), 118–134. Marcus, G. E. (1995). Ethnography in/of the world system: The emergence of multi-sited ethnography. Annual review of anthropology, 95–117. McDonough, P. M. (1997). Choosing colleges: How social class and schools structure opportunity. Suny Press. MINEDU. (2021). Ministry of Education: FAQs about the student admission reform in higher education institutions. Accessed 26.10.2021: https://okm.fi/en/faqs-­about-­student-­admissions Niemi, A. M., & Laaksonen, L. M. (2020). Discourses on educational support in the context of general upper secondary education. Disability & Society, 35(3), 460–478. Nori, H. (2011). Keille yliopiston portit avautuvat  – Tutkimus suomalaisiin yliopistoihin ja eri tieteenaloille valikoitumisesta 2000-luvun alussa [For whom will the university gates open? A study of the selection for admission to Finnish universities and fields of study in the beginning of the 21st century]. University of Turku. 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. OECD. (2019). Investing in youth: Finland. In Investing in Youth. OECD. Peltola, M. (2020). Everyday consequences of selectiveness. Borderwork in the informal sphere of a lower secondary school in the metropolitan area of Helsinki, Finland. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 42(1), 97–112. Rasmussen, A., & Ydesen, C. (2019). Cultivating excellence in education. A critical policy study on talent. Springer. Reay, D. (1998). Rethinking social class: Qualitative perspectives on gender and social class. Sociology, 32(2), 259–275. Reay, D. (2005). Beyond consciousness? The psychic landscape of social class. Sociology, 39(5), 911–928. Reay, D., David, M., & Ball, S. (2001). Making a difference?: Institutional habituses and higher education choice. Sociological Research Online, 5(4), 14–25.

174

L. M. Laaksonen and A.-M. Niemi

Rönnlund, M., Rosvall, P.-Å., & Johansson, M. (2018). Vocational or academic track? Study and career plans among Swedish students living in rural areas. Journal of Youth Studies, 21(3), 360–375. Skeggs, B. (2013). Class, self, culture. Routledge. Tarabini, A., Curran, M., & Fontdevila, C. (2017). Institutional habitus in context: Implementation, development and impacts in two compulsory secondary schools in Barcelona. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 38(8), 1177–1189. Van Zanten, A., Ball, S. J., & Darchy-Koechlin, B. (2015). Elites, privilege and excellence: The national and global redefinition of educational advantage. Routledge. Linda Maria Laaksonen is a PhD Researcher in Department of Education at the University of Helsinki. Her research interests include ethnographic research, sociology of education, social justice, educational choices and privatisation of education.   

Anna-Maija Niemi works as a University Research Fellow at the Department of Education, University of Turku. She conducts a life-historical research project concerning young adults’ educational and labour market paths. Anna-Maija has studied educational inclusion as a question of education policy and school’s everyday practices. In the centre of her life-historical and ethnographic research work, is to highlight young people’s viewpoints from intersectional approach.  

Chapter 10

Selection for Whom? Upper Secondary School Choice in the Light of Social Justice Elsa Eiríksdóttir , Kristjana Stella Blöndal and Guðrún Ragnarsdóttir

,

Abstract  The education policy in Iceland emphasises inclusive and comprehensive education for all, and upper secondary schooling is open to all students throughout their lifetime. However, schools set their own admission policies, and some are selective. High-status schools are traditionally those that offer only academic programmes that prepare students for university, while comprehensive schools that include vocational programmes are considered less prestigious. The aim of the chapter is to explore how the institutional governing structure of school and programme selection perpetuates and reflects social inequalities. Systematic patterns in students’ school and programme choices based on their social and economic background, academic achievement, and educational expectations were analysed. In a longitudinal cohort study, questionnaires were administered to all students at the end of compulsory education in the Reykjavik metropolitan area in 2014, and then data on their standardised grades and progress at upper secondary schools were collected. The results show a pattern of school composition where some schools can select high-achieving students who tend to have a stronger social background and access to more resources. Comprehensive schools offering vocational education are not among them. This school hierarchy reflects a social stratification reinforced by a selection system that in practice contradicts the inclusion policy. Keywords  Upper secondary education · School choice · Social stratification · Academic education · Vocational education · Admission governance

E. Eiríksdóttir (*) · G. Ragnarsdóttir School of Education, University of Iceland, Reykjavík, Iceland e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] K. S. Blöndal School of Social Sciences, University of Iceland, Reykjavík, Iceland e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 A. Rasmussen, M. Dovemark (eds.), Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries, Educational Governance Research 18, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08049-4_10

175

176

E. Eiríksdóttir et al.

Introduction The education policy in Iceland emphasises inclusive and comprehensive education for all, and since 1988, students who have completed compulsory education or have reached the age of 16 have the right to attend upper secondary school, irrespective of their academic results at the end of compulsory school (Blöndal, 2014; Ministry of Education, Science and Culture [MoESC], 2012; Jónasson & Óskarsdóttir, 2016). However, upper secondary schools set their own admission policies and select students for entry based on academic performance and, in the case of the most selective schools, extracurricular activities (Eiríksdóttir et al., 2018). This means that high-­ status schools are exclusive. For the last two decades, several reforms have been passed that have in part aimed at changing the institutional structures governing the distribution of students. None of those reforms seem to have managed to change the institutional governing system of distributing students within the system; in fact, they can be seen to have further cemented the basis for selection. Increasingly marketised systems and societal pressure are suggested to be the deciding factors (Bergsdóttir & Magnúsdóttir, 2018; Magnúsdóttir & Garðarsdóttir, 2018; Ragnarsdóttir, 2018). Of particular interest is the disparity of esteem between the general academic and vocational education pathways on one hand and grammar and comprehensive schools on the other. Vocational programmes generally have lower status than academic programmes that prepare students for university education and are often seen as a landing place for students with lower academic achievement (see Eiríksdóttir et al., 2018; Nylund et al., 2018). Traditionally, comprehensive schools that include vocational programmes have lower status than schools that only offer academic programmes. To provide an overview of the system and school choice, these two dimensions are integrated into the current study, and a distinction is made between two school types: schools that offer only academic programmes and (2) schools that offer both vocational and academic programmes. The first category includes all the grammar schools as well as a few comprehensive schools, while the second category includes only comprehensive schools. The aim of the chapter is to explore how the institutional governing structure of upper secondary school selection perpetuates and reflects social inequalities in the Icelandic, Reykjavik metropolitan area. We will analyse systematic patterns in students’ school choices based on their social and economic background, parents’ education, students’ academic achievement, and educational expectations, as relates to school type.

Upper Secondary Education in Iceland and School Hierarchy Upper secondary education in Iceland is provided by the state, and its role is to educate and prepare students for higher education, the labour market, and democratic citizenship (Upper Secondary Education Act (USEA) No. 92/2008). The

10  Selection for Whom? Upper Secondary School Choice in the Light of Social Justice

177

system of upper secondary schools is open to all students of all ages throughout their lifetime (Jónasson & Óskarsdóttir, 2016). But in general, the school level is meant to educate students from 16 to 19 years old (MoESC, 2014). In 2015, when the data for the study was collected, 23,947 students (Statistics Iceland, 2021a) were enrolled in upper secondary education, of which 4,080 new students enrolled after graduating from compulsory education (Statistics Iceland, 2021b). Today, there are 30 traditional upper secondary schools in Iceland, 13 of which are in the Reykjavík metropolitan area (Directorate of Education, n.d.). Due to the population sparsity and the distribution of upper secondary schools outside the Reykjavik metropolitan area, it has been argued that for students living outside Reykjavik, there is in fact very limited choice in upper secondary schools (Þorkelsson, 2011). The focus of this chapter, though, is on upper secondary school choice in the Reykjavik metropolitan area. Upper secondary schools in Iceland are either grammar or comprehensive schools (MoESC, 2014). Grammar schools mainly base their educational settings on traditional academic programmes, and their structure is, in most cases, year based, where students belong to the same class (follow the same student group) throughout the school year, and sometimes throughout their entire time of study. If they do not pass the school year, they need to repeat the whole year. Comprehensive schools offer either exclusively academic programmes or a mixture of academic, art, and vocational programmes and are organised around the unit-credit system. Flexibility characterises the system, and students can choose when to take courses depending on the courses on offer, select the order in which to take them, and decide on the number of credits they take each term. In the unit-credit system, students do not follow the same student group, and if they fail courses, they do not need to repeat the whole school year, only the course(s) that they did not pass. Traditionally, the grammar schools that formed the homogeneous backbone of the secondary system enjoy higher status than comprehensive schools offering both academic and vocational programmes (Bergsdóttir & Magnúsdóttir, 2018; Blöndal et al., 2011; Þorkelsson, 2011). Ranking the status of upper secondary schools is not formally recognised in Iceland, even if there have been attempts to do so (Bartoszek, 2011). However, public discussions make it clear that there is an informal school hierarchy – with certain upper secondary schools being referred to as “elite schools” (see, i.e., Bartoszek, 2010; Guðmundsson, 2018; Schram, 2009; Vilhjálmsson, 2017). These high-status schools do not include comprehensive schools offering both academic and vocational programmes.

Academic or Vocational Pathways: Programme Hierarchy All academic programmes end with matriculation examinations, which function as entrance tests into universities (University Act No. 62/2006). Academic programmes are therefore seen as preparation for higher education. Vocational programmes provide training for specific trades or occupations, some of which are regulated or

178

E. Eiríksdóttir et al.

licensed (MoESC, 2012). The majority of vocational programmes have a professional orientation, and traditional academic subjects are taught across programmes. Students enrolled in vocational programmes can also complete additional courses and matriculate. Upper secondary schools in Iceland offered about 110 different programmes in 2015, when the study was conducted, the majority of which were vocational (MoESC, 2013, 2014). Despite this, most of the students attend academic programmes, with about a third of enrolled students attending vocational programmes, and this proportion has remained stable for the past two decades (Directorate of Education, 2018; MoESC, 2016; Statistics Iceland, 2018, 2021a). The attendance proportion is also reflected in graduation rates, and most students graduate from academic programmes. The gap in graduation rates between these two study paths increased rapidly from 1970, when the number of students graduating from these two tracks was nearly equal (Eiríksdóttir et al., 2018; Jónasson and Óskarsdóttir, 2016), indicating a substantial increase in the number of students pursuing upper secondary education in general and academic education in particular. The disparity of esteem between general academic and vocational programmes is well documented (see, for example, Billett, 2014; Cedefop, 2014; Lasonen & Young, 1998; Parkes, 1993). The same applies to Iceland and the other Nordic countries (Aarkrog, 2020; Dovemark & Holm, 2017; Eiríksdóttir et  al., 2018; Hiim, 2020; Jónasson & Óskarsdóttir, 2016). The disparity of esteem between these two educational pathways reveals itself in differences in enrolment numbers, social standing, content taught, and the academic  abilities of students entering the programmes (Eiríksdóttir et al., 2018). This in turn has consequences for social justice and future prospects for students (Isopahkal-Bouret et  al., 2018; Nylund et  al., 2018). It has been argued that school marketisation and free school choice play a role in exacerbating the division between academic and vocational pathways, especially as both teachers and students consider the separation between these pathways the natural state of affairs (Dovemark & Holm, 2017; Eiríksdóttir et al., 2018). In Iceland, a recent series of educational reforms and policy directives have been aimed at reducing the distinction between vocational and academic education pathways at the upper secondary level (MoESC, 2012, 2014; USEA No. 92/2008). Despite these and various other initiatives, a disparity in esteem between vocational and general academic pathways seems ingrained (Eiríksdóttir, et al., 2018; Icelandic National Audit Office, 2017). An undoubtedly perpetuating factor is the admission structure for upper secondary education, whereby the status of schools and the hierarchy of programmes, as well as variable admission criteria, direct the flow of students.

Admission Governance For the last two decades, several reforms have been passed that have in part been aimed at changing the institutional structures governing the distribution of students. At the end of the twentieth century, Iceland was divided into upper secondary school

10  Selection for Whom? Upper Secondary School Choice in the Light of Social Justice

179

districts, and schools primarily admitted students from their district (Regulation on upper secondary schools, No. 105/1990). This arrangement was discarded at the turn of the century, and Iceland was defined as one school district (Regulation on the enrolment of students in upper secondary schools, No. 98/2000). This meant that entry into popular schools became considerably more competitive than before. Following these changes, the schools also started to market themselves for the purpose of attracting students who aspired to enroll into the school based on its aims and profile. This development is similar to developments in recent decades around the world, where there is increased marketisation of school choice (see Ball & Youdell, 2008; Dovemark et al., 2018; Lundahl et al., 2013). The ideology of free school choices is based on the idea that students and their parents select both school and study programmes. This emphasis ignores the fact that not everyone has equal access in such selection processes, i.e. when it comes to social and economic status (Connell, 2013; Dovemark et al., 2018). At the same time, when Iceland was defined as one school district and marketisation began to make its mark, the admission criteria for upper secondary education were centralised. The criteria were based on the average grade at the end of compulsory education and performance on standardised national examinations in three subjects: Icelandic, English, and mathematics. Additionally, students needed to reach the criterion for additional subjects based on the focus of the programme applied for. The admission criteria for art and vocational programmes were weaker and not as clearly specified as for the academic programmes (Regulation No. 98/2000). In spring 2008, legislation for the upper secondary school level was changed (USEA No. 92/2008), and the national curriculum guides followed in 2011 (MoESC, 2012). The aim of the reform was decentralisation, and upper secondary schools were given the freedom to create their own school curricula based on their history, location, and specialisation. This drastically changed the landscape of programmes within upper secondary education, and the number of study programmes increased substantially. Simultaneously, the admission governance structure of the upper secondary level underwent changes as new decentralised admission criteria were needed. The new regulation stated that all individuals who had completed education at the compulsory school level or reached the age of 16 were entitled to enrol in upper secondary school. The schools got the freedom to set their own admission rules based on their specialities and existing programmes. Yet the admission criteria for different programmes were expected to be based on subjects generally taught at the compulsory level and other factors, such as competence assessment and validation (Regulation on the enrolment of students in upper secondary schools No. 1150/2008). After this change, in 2009, many students with good academic standing did not get accepted to the school they selected. A subsequent regulation change targeted this issue and specified that the schools had to take at least 40–45% of students from the school district (Bergsdóttir & Magnúsdóttir, 2018). This regulation was criticised by the highly selective schools (Vísir, 2010) and was changed two years later (Regulation No. 204/2012, amending Regulation No. 1150/2008).

180

E. Eiríksdóttir et al.

In the regulation from 2012, the requirement for accepting students from the school district was removed, and prioritising students from the vicinity of the school was made optional. However, an attempt was made to give certain groups priority for enrolment, i.e. students moving between semesters (including students under the age of 18 with unsatisfactory performance but who had complied with school rules in other respects), students with intellectual disabilities, and students completing compulsory education (Regulation No. 204/2012 amending the Regulation No. 1150/2008). A few years later, in 2016, a further amendment accommodated the highly selective schools and explicitly gave them the power to set their own admission requirements: In cases where a selection takes place from a large group of applicants, the upper secondary school may also consider additional documents that the student chooses to send in with the application, such as confirmed information on participation and results in social participation, extra studies, competitions of various kinds, such as sports, artwork, languages and sciences and the results on standardised national examinations (Regulation No. 1199/2016 amending the Regulation No. 1150/2008).

These series of amendments can be seen as attempts to balance the tension between protecting the rights of students and giving the schools the freedom to choose students, but at the end of the day, the highly selective schools have the power to select the students that best fit their mission, thus contradicting the idea of free school choice for all. The result is that the upper secondary schools set their own admission policies and select students for entry based on academic performance, mostly in Icelandic, English, and mathematics, and, in the case of the most selective schools, extracurricular activities (Fig. 10.1). The admission system, in combination with marketisation, reinforces the academic elite when schools compete for students with high academic performance and social capacity. Generally, the grammar schools and academic comprehensive schools in the metropolitan area receive more applicants than they can accommodate and select their students by grades. Therefore, students’ freedom of school choice in upper secondary education in Iceland only applies to those who have a strong standing academically (Eiríksdóttir et al., 2018; Þorkelsson, 2011).

Systemic and Social Factors Influencing School Choice The definition of school choice is a policy where schools select students on the one hand and students select schools or programmes on the other (Ball & Youdell, 2008; Dovemark et  al., 2018). Research has shown that family background is strongly related to school choice (Ball & Vincent 2007) and in the Nordic countries, school choice policies have been linked to between-school differences and school segregation (Dovemark et al., 2018; Fjellman et al., 2018). These findings contradict a common claim on school choice – that everyone has an equal choice and that families are equally able to select the upper secondary education best fitting the aspirations

10  Selection for Whom? Upper Secondary School Choice in the Light of Social Justice

181

Fig. 10.1  Admission criteria for the 13 upper secondary schools in the Reykjavik metropolitan area. Schools with only academic programmes are indicated in italics, and schools with both academic and vocational programmes are indicated in bold

of the young people in question. In fact, increased school segregation seems to be driven by the middle and upper classes, which are more likely to be willing and able to take advantage of school choice policies (Dovemark et al., 2018; Magnúsdóttir & Garðarsdóttir, 2018; Reay, 2004). Research on school choice has shown that a reciprocal relationship exists between schools and students in building the reputation of schools. The schools create admission policies that increase the likelihood of admitting students who are seen as likely to maintain or enhance the reputation or ranking of the school (Ball & Vincent, 2007; Dovemark & Holm, 2017). As Dovemark and Holm (2017) emphasised, “the more a school targets specific students, the more homogeneous student groups they will recruit, and subtler underlying factors linked to class, race and gender are involved” (p. 529). They found clear homogenisation and segregating trends in Swedish upper secondary education, in stark contrast with the democratic values and stipulations in the national legal framework. Given the current admission governance structure in Iceland and the evident school and programme hierarchies, the same patterns are likely to apply. Indeed, research has shown that in Iceland, there is a lack of awareness of the role that aggregated privilege plays and the fact that choice is not equally distributed (Magnúsdóttir & Garðarsdóttir, 2018). Different societal groups have unequal access to resources and information, and the richness of the social network is important to know how to work the system to one’s benefit (Horvat et al., 2003). Research has also shown that students and their parents seem to be aware of the criteria for

182

E. Eiríksdóttir et al.

admissions to different schools, and students seem to be “realistic” in their choices. That is, they tend to select schools that they are likely to be admitted to, considering their grades from compulsory school (Þorkelsson, 2011). Þorkelsson (2011) found that the four most selective schools in Reykjavik (MR, Kv, MH, and VÍ, all schools with only academic programmes) admitted students based on prior academic achievement, while most other schools accepted all who applied. The implications were that those who really had a choice of upper secondary education were students living in Reykjavik who had high grades from compulsory education. Upper secondary schools that can reject a high proportion of applicants tend to have high-­ achieving students who graduate on time, whereas schools that generally accept all applicants have a much higher proportion of dropouts and fewer students who graduate on time (Magnúsdóttir & Garðarsdóttir, 2018). Evidence suggests that at the end of compulsory school, students tend to choose between schools rather than programmes and that young people leaving compulsory education see academic programmes as the default choice (Blöndal et  al., 2016; Gunnarsdóttir, 2019). Only about 15% of young people graduating from compulsory education choose to enter vocational programmes in Iceland (Directorate of Education, 2018; Statistics Iceland, 2018, 2021b). The influence of peers and parents seems undeniable. Research shows that young people who choose academic programmes are more likely to report having followed their peers’ school choices instead of actively selecting their programme of study (Blöndal & Ægisdóttir, 2013; Blöndal et al., 2016). Furthermore, a large proportion of upper secondary students report that their parents emphasised completing an academic matriculation programme, even more so than the students themselves in some cases (Blöndal et al., 2016). Parents seem to put more trust in academic programmes to prepare their children for the future.

Focus of the Study Overall, it can be said that in Iceland, there is a rift between national educational goals of equality in and through education and the reality that promotes and maintains inequality through admission policy and selection criteria. The goal here is to provide an overview of the consequences of admission structures in the system, and the focus will be placed on the schools and not individual programmes within schools. Schools that offer only academic programmes in Iceland are either grammar or comprehensive schools, but only comprehensive schools offer both vocational and academic programmes. Inherent in the classification of schools with or without vocational programmes is the separation of grammar schools and comprehensive schools, to a certain degree. This is important as grammar schools are generally considered more elite – reinforcing the disparity of esteem between academic and vocational education. The two main categories of schools that will be compared in this study are (1) schools offering only academic programmes, including the typically more prestigious grammar schools, and (2) comprehensive schools that offer

10  Selection for Whom? Upper Secondary School Choice in the Light of Social Justice

183

both vocational and academic programmes. The aim of the chapter is to understand how admission policies contribute to the hierarchy of schools and programmes and what that means in terms of access to upper secondary education for different groups of students and their future prospects. The research question addressed is the following: What are the student background, prior academic achievement, and educational expectations of students attending the different upper secondary schools and school types in the Reykjavik metropolitan area?

Method In this study, we will use data from a cohort of young people born 1999  in the Reykjavik metropolitan area and analyse the socio-economic status of students admitted to different upper secondary schools, as well as their prior academic achievement and educational expectations at the end of compulsory education. By looking at students who have already been admitted to certain upper secondary schools, it becomes possible to analyse the end result of the reciprocal interaction of students selecting a school or programme and the admission criteria and policies of the same schools and programmes. This research is part of an ongoing longitudinal study: ‘The International Study of City Youth’ (ISCY, see Blöndal et al., 2019). In this study, we focus on a cohort of students in tenth grade (last year of compulsory education) and their upper secondary school choice the following year. We build on both a student survey in tenth grade and registered data.

Participants/Population At baseline, the population of the study was the cohort born in 1999 who attended the last year of public compulsory schools (age 15, tenth grade) in the Reykjavík metropolitan area in autumn of 2014, where two thirds of the Icelandic population live. Independent compulsory schools were excluded from the study. Independent in Iceland means that in addition to the government fee for each student, parents pay an additional fee. In the autumn of 2014, when the student study was conducted, only 1% of students in tenth grade attended the five independent schools in the Reykjavik metropolitan area (Blöndal, 2014). Altogether, 1956 students in 44 schools participated in the student survey, in tenth grade or 82.1% of the cohort (N = 2408, students born in 1999); 52.5% were females, and 5% had a foreign background (both parents born outside Iceland). The number of cases lost was the result of students’ absenteeism and the lack of active consent from parents, either because they could not be reached or because they refused to consent.

184

E. Eiríksdóttir et al.

The educational trajectories of the cohort have been followed since 2014 using registered data from Statistics Iceland. The population in this study are the 2341 students of the baseline cohort (N = 2408) who attended one of the 13 upper secondary schools in the Reykjavik metropolitan area the year following compulsory education (in autumn 2015), 80% of whom participated in the survey at baseline in tenth grade (1869 students). The number of participants by upper secondary school is shown in Table 10.1.

Procedure Permission for the study was granted by the Icelandic Data Protection Commission (Notification number S7011) and the educational authorities in the six participating municipalities in the Reykjavík metropolitan area. All the principals, except one, of the 45 compulsory schools that offer schooling in tenth grade agreed to participate. Letters describing the study were sent to the schools’ administration and to the adolescents and their parents. Parents’ active consent for their children’s participation was granted. A self-report questionnaire was administered online during school hours with the help of trained data collectors. The adolescents were informed that they could refuse or discontinue participation at any time and were assured that their answers were strictly confidential. Table 10.1  Participants by upper secondary school and % of population School name BHS FÁ FB FG Flb Fmos Kv MH MK MR MS TS VÍ Total

Number of students 121 52 105 142 137 62 168 197 167 177 189 121 231 1869

% of population 66 59 72 80 80 78 88 85 78 93 81 68 90 80

10  Selection for Whom? Upper Secondary School Choice in the Light of Social Justice

185

Measures In this study, we explore students’ background, prior academic achievement, and educational expectations in the different upper secondary schools and school types in the metropolitan Reykjavik area. The 13 upper secondary schools in the Reykjavík metropolitan area were categorised into (1) schools offering only academic programmes, including the typically more prestigious grammar schools (eight schools: MR, MH, VÍ, Kv, MS, FG, Flb, and Fmos, marked with italics), and (2) comprehensive schools that offer both vocational and academic programmes (five schools: FB, TS, BHS, FÁ, and MK, marked with bold). School selection for the first year at upper secondary school is based on registered data from Statistics Iceland, and data on academic achievement were provided by the Directorate of Education. Other measures were based on the survey conducted at the end of compulsory school when the students were at the age of 15 (tenth grade). Academic achievement is based on the average achievement on standardised national tests in Icelandic, mathematics, and English at the end of compulsory school at the age of 15 (M = 32, SD = 8.6, range = 1–57). The correlations between the achievement in the three subjects were moderate to high (Icelandic and mathematics, r = 0.69; Icelandic and English, r = 0.68; mathematics and English, r = 0.56). Social-economic status (SES) was based on parental occupation using the ISEI index (Ganzeboom, 2010). If both parents worked, the higher-ranked occupation was used as the SES of the family (M = 65.2, SD = 17.5, range = 14.2–74.8). Additionally, students were asked about the highest level of schooling completed by their mother and father. If the mother’s and father’s levels were not similar, we used the higher of the two. Students were asked at age 15 what they expected to do after leaving upper secondary school. The options were “Go to university” and “Get a job”. The variable was recoded into a dichotomous variable: expecting to pursue higher education (1) and not expecting to (0). Of the participants, 56% were expecting to pursue higher education.

Analysis The data analysis is based on descriptive statistics. Boxplots of schools’ academic and socio-economic composition based on Z distribution with a mean equal to 0 and a standard deviation equal to one are displayed to facilitate comparisons between schools. The boxplots give information on the distribution within each school, the box showing the quartiles of the data (the median, the first and third quartiles), the mean represented by an X, and the minimum and maximum. For ordinal variables, percentages are presented. Confidence intervals are using finite-population

186

E. Eiríksdóttir et al.

correction factor (Thompson, 2012). The evaluation of effect size and students’ socio-­economic status and prior academic achievement is based on the Nagelkerke R2 statistic.

 esults: Student Background, Prior Academic Achievement, R and Future Expectations In this chapter, we present the findings for the school composition of the 13 upper secondary schools in the Reykjavík capital area. Eight of the schools offer only academic programmes (MR, MH, VÍ, Kv, MS, FG, Flb, FMos), while five schools offer both vocational and academic programmes (FB, TS, BHS, FÁ, MK). Seven of the schools serve mainly students living in the neighbourhood (FG, Flb, FMos, FB, BHS, FÁ, and MK), while six of them can be categorised as consolidated schools (Kv, MH, MS, MR, VÍ, and TS).

Students’ Background Two indicators were used for students’ background, i.e. socio-economic status and parents’ highest level of schooling. Findings for students’ socio-economic compositions showed a substantial difference between upper secondary schools, as can be seen in Fig. 10.2. The findings are presented in boxplots showing the SES distribution in the 13 upper secondary schools. Each box shows the first and third quartiles of the school data, the median, the mean represented by an X, and the minimum and the maximum. The scale is standardised, which means that the average SES score is 0 and the standard deviation (SD) is 1. For example, the boxplot for MR shows that the quartile of the students with the highest SES was at least one standard deviation above the mean, meaning that they were among the top 84% of the cohort and that most of the students were above the average of the cohort. The schools are arranged based on their average, from the lowest to the left to the highest to the right. The figure also shows the type of school, i.e. only academic vs. academic and vocational. Figure 10.2 reveals substantial school differences in SES composition, both regarding average SES and the variance within each school. In the three schools with the strongest SES composition  – MR, MH, and VÍ  – the average SES was greater than the cohorts’ average, and about 80% of the students in MR and MH were above the average student. FB was the school with the lowest SES composition by far and the greatest variability. The average student was at the bottom 26% (SD: −0.72) of the cohort. Moreover, all the top schools were academic, while the five academic-vocational schools were among the six schools with the lowest SES composition. Socio-economic status explained 9% of the variation in school selection (Nagelkerke R2 = 0.09). Confidence intervals showed that MR had the students

10  Selection for Whom? Upper Secondary School Choice in the Light of Social Justice

187

Fig. 10.2  Socio-economic composition by school and school type

Fig. 10.3  Parents’ education – composition by school and school type

with the highest SES average, MH came second, and VÍ came third, and FB had the students with the lowest SES average (see Table A in the Appendix). Students’ parental educational backgrounds differed significantly by school. Over 80% of students in MR (88%), MH (86%), and VÍ (82%) had parent/s with higher education compared to only 42% in FB, the school with the lowest proportion, as can be seen in Fig. 10.3. Significantly, the three schools with the highest

188

E. Eiríksdóttir et al.

proportion were academic schools. Of the six schools with the lowest proportion of parent/s with higher education, five were academic and vocational.

Academic achievement and educational expectations Figure 10.4 shows the academic achievement composition of students by upper secondary school based on their average scores in core subjects (Icelandic, mathematics, and English) on a standardised test at the end of compulsory education (age 15). The findings are presented in boxplots showing the academic achievement distribution of each student group for the 13 upper secondary schools. The scale is standardised with average achievement at 0, and the standard deviation (SD) is 1. The schools are arranged by their average from the lowest to the left to the highest to the right. The figure also shows the type of school, i.e. academic vs. academic and vocational. There is a clear difference in the academic ability composition between schools. In the four schools with the academically highest achieving students – MR, VÍ, MH, and Kv, all academic schools only – the average achievement was greater than the cohort’s average, while the opposite was true for the other nine schools. In the one school with the highest achieving students, MR, the average achievement was one standard deviation above the mean, which shows that the average student in that school was in the top 84% of the cohort. It can also be seen that in the three highest schools, around 80–90% of the students showed greater academic achievement at the end of compulsory school than average students in the cohort. Moreover, all the

Fig. 10.4  Academic achievement composition by school and school type

10  Selection for Whom? Upper Secondary School Choice in the Light of Social Justice

189

top schools were academic, while the five vocational-academic schools were among the six lowest schools. Confidence intervals showed that MR had students with the highest average academic achievement, VÍ came second, MH came third, Kv was fourth, and FG and MS had the fifth highest achievement composition (see Table A in the Appendix). Academic ability at the end of compulsory school explained 39% of the variation in school selection (Nagelkerke R2 = 0.39). Social inequality in students’ educational expectations, a strong predictor of educational attainment, differed substantially between schools (Fig. 10.5). In the school with the highest (MR) and second highest (VÍ) grade averages, 81% and 75% of students, respectively, expected to pursue higher education, compared to only 32% in the lowest schools, BHS and TS. All the five schools at the bottom were both academic and vocational. However, in the eight academic schools, the variation was considerable, with a range of 53–81% expecting to pursue higher education.

Overview of School Hierarchy Table 10.2 shows an overview of the ranking of the 13 Reykjavik metropolitan area upper secondary schools based on the findings already presented. The overview shows a clear pattern in the school composition based on student background, academic achievement, and educational expectations. First, the academic and vocational schools were at the bottom on each of the four indicators. Second, the same academic schools were at the top.

Fig. 10.5  Educational expectations – composition by school

190

E. Eiríksdóttir et al.

Table 10.2  Ranking of the upper secondary schools. Schools with only academic programmes are presented in italics and schools with academic and vocational programmes in bold Variable Social-­ economic status % of parent/s with higher education Academic achievement % of students who expect to pursue higher education

Ranking from lowest to highest FB TÍ BHS FMos FÁ FB

FÁ

FÁ

FMos FB

BHS TÍ

TÍ

FB

MK

Flb Kv FG MS VÍ

MH MR

MK

FMos BHS Flb FG Kv MS VÍ

MH MR

TÍ

MK

BHS Flb MS FG Kv

FÁ

MK

FMos MS FG Flb MH Kv

MH VÍ VÍ

MR MR

 iscussion: Consequences of School Choice Governance D in Iceland The aim of the chapter was to explore how the institutional governing structure of upper secondary school selection perpetuates and reflects social stratification and how it unfolds in practice through school choice. That is, to understand how admission policies contribute to the hierarchy of schools in the Reykjavik metropolitan area and what that means in terms of access to upper secondary education for different groups of students and their future prospects. The question we wanted to answer was: What are the student background, prior academic achievement, and educational expectations of the students attending the different upper secondary schools as well as the school types in the metropolitan Reykjavik area? The results reveal a school hierarchy that clearly reflects a social stratification, with some schools selecting high-achieving students who tend to have a stronger social background and access to more resources. Our study uncovers the different socio-economic profiles of the student population within the 13 upper secondary schools in the Reykjavik metropolitan area. In the highly selective academic schools, a higher proportion of students have parents with university education and higher socio-economic status compared to the student population of less selective schools, especially those offering both academic and vocational programmes. Students with lower academic achievement do not have as educated parents as the others and are more likely to attend comprehensive schools. These students also have lower economic status compared to their peers attending highly selective schools. The findings contradict the ideology of inclusiveness and highlight the different selection opportunities that are associated with socio-­ economic backgrounds (Blöndal, 2014; Eiríksdóttir et  al., 2018; Magnúsdóttir & Garðarsdóttir, 2018). Thus, it is possible to state that the socio-economic background of students within highly selective schools upholds and reinforces the existing stratification within the system. These results are in concordance with prior

10  Selection for Whom? Upper Secondary School Choice in the Light of Social Justice

191

research elsewhere, showing the importance of background in school choice (see Ball & Youdell, 2008; Ball & Vincent, 2007, Dovemark et al., 2018). The importance of school choice – and whether an academic or vocational pathway is selected – has consequences for the future prospects of students (Isopahkal-­ Bouret et al., 2018; Nylund et al., 2018). Academic traditions are dominant in the Icelandic education system, leading to barriers to entry between compulsory and upper secondary schools and also upper secondary schools and university education. Higher education admissions are based on the same set of traditional subjects and focus on matriculation exams (see Ragnarsdóttir & Jónasson, 2020; University Act No. 62/2006). Therefore, the choice of upper secondary school can determine the educational and career options moving forward. Low-achieving students with lower socio-economic status and less educated parents are not as likely to be able to enter specialist professions requiring university education in selective fields. The same barriers apply to students who choose vocational programmes. The results that students in the highly selective schools are more likely to say that they intend to pursue higher education reflect this. The stratification evident in the results can be seen as a direct consequence of the upper secondary school admission governance structure and criteria. The policy on upper secondary education in Iceland emphasises inclusiveness, decentralisation, and democratic values (Blöndal, 2014; MoESC, 2012; Jónasson & Óskarsdóttir, 2016; USEA No. 92/2008), but the results show how the admission structures contradict these aims in practice. Firstly, the admission policies set by the government are relatively normative, with an emphasis on a few high-status academic subjects (Icelandic, English, and mathematics) and little focus on other subjects such as the field of art, technology, and vocational education. Secondly, the schools have considerable power in creating their own admission criteria but nonetheless rely almost exclusively on the same three high-status academic subjects. This is problematic as only a small subset of homogenous competences is valued, ignoring the diversity of talent and abilities. Given this basis of classification of students by academic achievement in only a few subjects, the disparity of esteem between academic and vocational programmes is not surprising. The results show clearly that academic achievement defined in this way is the basis for the selection of students into upper secondary schools in Iceland – especially where admissions are competitive. The high-status academic schools select students with the highest academic achievement through more intense admission criteria compared to the admission criteria set by the comprehensive schools. This directly contradicts the inclusion policy Iceland claims to have. Different emphasis on grades in the school’s admission criteria is problematic and reinforces the stratification within the system: only some schools get to select students, and only some students actually have a choice. This means that students with lower academic achievement need to accept the restricted choices available to them, and our data indicate that these tend to be the students with lower economic status and less educated parents. The lack of choices means that students may need to choose programmes of study based on what is on offer in the schools they are accepted into rather than their own interests or future

192

E. Eiríksdóttir et al.

aspirations. This could also mean travelling long distances to attend schools in different parts of the metropolitan area. Even though this is challenging within the metropolitan area, it is even more so for students living in rural areas (Bjarnadóttir & Ragnarsdóttir, 2021). In light of these findings, it is important to consider the school selection processes. Students completing compulsory education apply for upper secondary schools and programmes at the beginning of the year but confirm their selection at the end of May after receiving their final assessment outcomes. During this time, certain filtering takes place. Students are often influenced by parents and education practitioners, guiding the students based on their academic achievement (Ragnarsdóttir, 2018; Þorkelsson, 2011). It is therefore not surprising that students are “realistic” in their choices and that the government can boast that the majority of students are admitted to their first choice. These numbers do not tell the whole story and most likely mask a feature of the school selection process where students are prodded into making the right choice based on their academic achievement and a common cultural understanding of the school hierarchy. The exclusive nature of the upper secondary school admission structure in Iceland is problematic. Some of the reforms on student admission policies have in part been aimed at changing the institutional structures governing the distribution of students without success, and increased marketisation and the competitive nature of the system play a role here. The system strives for equality through the idea of inclusion without succeeding. The tension between the actual admission structures and the educational policy can be traced to two contradictory ideas: on the one hand, the idea of inclusive education and, on the other, the ideology of decentralisation and free school choice. The schools, particularly the highly selective academic schools, do not promote equity as part of their selection processes. Only a few students with high socio-economic backgrounds and educated parents can in fact select. The highly selective schools tend to protect their power by creating admission criteria in favour of students with high academic achievement, thereby reinforcing an unjust system. Therefore, the idea of a free school choice is a reality only for a small part of the cohort, and others lacking the resources and background have to temper their expectations, select “realistically”, and hope for the best. Overall, the results show the different status of academic and comprehensive schools in the Icelandic upper secondary school system. Our analysis indicates that the admission system, in combination with marketisation and free choice ideology, reinforces the academic elite when schools compete for students with high academic performance and social capacity. The findings give rise to complex questions on social justice, the need to discuss the aim of education, and how a controlling conservative attitude impacts the educational system even though the policy is preaching the opposite. Moreover, the findings suggest that an overhaul is needed of institutional structures governing student distribution within the Icelandic education system, in particular the entrance criteria and selection mechanism in upper secondary schools.

10  Selection for Whom? Upper Secondary School Choice in the Light of Social Justice

193

Acknowledgments  The ongoing research project reported in this study was supported by grant no. 184730 from the Icelandic Research Fund. The young people, parents, teachers, and principals who kindly consented to participate in this project are gratefully thanked.

Appendix  Table A  Descriptive statistics and confidence intervals for academic achievement and socio-­ economic status by school Standardized academic achievement 95% CI School M SD Lower MR 0.98 0.75 0.91 VÍ 0.80 0.67 0.75 MH 0.64 0.81 0.58 Kv 0.26 0.71 0.19 FG −0.24 0.80 −0.30 MS −0.27 0.65 −0.32 Flb −0.42 0.80 −0.47 BHS −0.56 0.96 −0.65 MK −0.65 0.85 −0.69 TS −0.67 0.93 −0.74 FB −0.67 0.85 −0.75 FMos −0.67 0.85 −0.81 FÁ −0.72 0.76 −0.80

Socio-economic status Upper 1.05 0.85 0.69 0.34 −0.17 −0.22 −0.37 −0.47 −0.60 −0.60 −0.59 −0.54 −0.64

School MR MH VÍ MS FG Kv Flb MK FÁ FMos BHS TS FB

M 0.47 0.35 0.23 0.04 0.03 −0.03 −0.16 −0.20 −0.20 −0.23 −0.25 −0.40 −0.72

SD 0.72 0.86 0.81 0.92 0.99 0.98 0.94 0.98 0.95 1.07 1.13 1.07 1.31

95% CI Lower 0.44 0.30 0.20 −0.02 −0.04 −0.09 −0.24 −0.28 −0.40 −0.38 −0.39 −0.52 −0.88

Upper 0.50 0.40 0.27 0.11 0.11 0.03 −0.09 −0.11 −0.01 −0.09 −0.12 −0.27 −0.57

Note. CI confidence interval Table B  Descriptive statistics and confidence intervals for parents’ education and educational expectations by school Parent/s with higher education 95% CI School % Lower MR 88.0 87.6 MH 85.9 85.2 VÍ 81.5 80.9 MS 72.5 71.5 Kv 71.5 70.6 FG 71.2 70.1 Flb 69.2 68.1 BHS 63.1 61.6 FMos 60.0 58.7 MK 58.6 57.3 TS 55.9 54.4 FÁ 54.2 52.6 FB 41.9 40.5 Note. CI confidence interval

Upper 88.4 86.6 82.1 73.5 72.4 72.3 70.3 64.6 61.3 59.9 57.4 55.8 43.3

Expect to pursue higher education 95% CI School % Lower MR 81.03 80.5 VÍ 74.89 74.2 Kv 66.67 65.9 MH 60.00 59.1 Flb 55.64 54.6 FG 53.90 52.9 MS 53.51 52.5 FMos 53.23 52.1 MK 49.38 48.3 FÁ 41.18 39.7 FB 35.58 34.4 TS 32.48 31.2 BHS 32.48 31.2

Upper 81.6 75.6 67.5 60.9 56.7 54.9 54.5 54.3 50.5 42.6 36.7 33.7 33.8

194

E. Eiríksdóttir et al.

References Aarkrog, V. (2020). The standing and status of vocational education and training in Denmark. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 72(2), 170–188. https://doi.org/10.108 0/13636820.2020.1717586 Ball, S., & Vincent, C. (2007). Education, class fractions and the local rules of spatial relations. Urban Studies, 44, 1175–1189. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980701302312 Ball, S., & Youdell, D. (2008). Hidden privatisation in higher education. Education International. Bartoszek, P. (2010, March). Enginn jafnari en aðrir [No one is more equal than others]. Deiglan, 19.03.2010. www.deiglan.is/13073/ Bartoszek, P. (2011). Í fyrsta sinn á Íslandi: Úttekt á framhaldsskólunum [For the first time in Iceland: Ranking the upper secondary schools]. Frjáls Verslun, 3, 34–47. Bergsdóttir, Á., & Magnúsdóttir, B. R. (2018). Ólíkur félagslegur og menntapólitískur veruleiki íslenskra framhaldsskóla: Nám til stúdentsprófs í 20 ár af sjónarhóli framhaldsskólakennara og -stjórnenda [Professional working conditions in Icelandic upper-secondary schools during the last twenty years: Narratives of policy and socio-cultural changes in neoliberal times]. Netla – Online Journal on Pedagogy and Education. https://netla.hi.is/serrit/2018/framhaldskolinn_brennidepli/12.pdf Billett, S. (2014). The standing of vocational education: Sources of its societal esteem and implications for its enactment. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 66(1), 1–21. https://doi. org/10.1080/13636820.2013.867525 Bjarnadóttir, V.  S., & Ragnarsdóttir, G. (2021). Áskoranir og gildi fámennra framhaldsskóla í dreifðum byggðum [Challenges and local value of two rural uppper secondary schools]. Manuscript submitted for publication. Blöndal, K. S. (2014). Student disengagement and school dropout: Parenting practices as context (Doctoral dissertation). University of Iceland, Reykjavik. Available at http://skemman.is/item/ view/1946/19426 Blöndal, K. S., & Ægisdottir, B. S. (2013). Óákveðni nemenda við námsval í framhaldsskóla og skuldbinding þeirra gagnvart námi og skóla [Career indecision and student engagement in upper secondary school]. Netla  – Online Journal on Pedagogy and Education. http://netla. hi.is/serrit/2013/rannsoknir_og_skolastarf/005.pdf Blöndal, K.  S., Jónasson, J.  T., & Tannhäuser, A.-C. (2011). Dropout in a small society: Is the Icelandic case somehow different? In S.  Lamb, E.  Markussen, R.  Teese, N.  Sandberg, & J. Polesel (Eds.), School dropout and completion. International comparative studies in theory and policy (pp. 233–251). Springer. Blöndal, K.  S., Jónasson, J.  T., & Sigvaldadóttir, S. (2016). Sérkenni námsferils starfsnámsnemenda í framhaldsskóla. Afstaða og skuldbinding til náms, líðan og stuðningur foreldra og skóla. Institute of Education, University of Iceland. http://hdl.handle.net/1946/26433 Blöndal, K.  S., Jónasson, J.  T., & Hafthorsson, A. (2019). Student disengagement in inclusive Icelandic education: A question of school effect in Reykjavík. In J. Demanet & M. Van Houtte (Eds.), Resisting education: A cross-national study on systems and school effects (pp. 117–133). Springer. Cedefop. (2014). Attractiveness of initial vocational education and training: Identifying what matters. Publications Office of the European Union. Connell, R. (2013). The neoliberal cascade and education: an essay on the market agenda and its consequences. Critical Studies in Education, 54(2), 99–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750848 7.2013.776990 Directorate of Education. (2018). Tölfræði starfsnáms á Íslandi. https://mms.is/sites/mms.is/files/ mms_starfsnam_2.pdf Directorate of Education. (n.d.). Listi yfir skóla [School list]. Retrieved from https://mms.is/ listi-­yfir-­skola

10  Selection for Whom? Upper Secondary School Choice in the Light of Social Justice

195

Dovemark, M., & Holm, A.-S. (2017). Pedagogic identities for sale! Segregation and homogenization in Swedish upper secondary School. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 38(4), 518–532. Dovemark, M., Kosunen, S., Kauko, J., Magnúsdóttir, B. R., Hansen, P., & Rasmussen, P. (2018). Deregulation, privatisation and marketisation of Nordic comprehensive education: Social changes reflected in schooling. Education Inquiry, 9(1), 122–141. https://doi.org/10.108 0/20004508.2018.1429768 Eiríksdóttir, E., Ragnarsdóttir, G., & Jónasson, J. T. (2018). Þversagnir og kerfisvillur? Kortlagning á ólíkri stöðu bóknáms- og starfsnámsbrauta á framhaldsskólastigi [On parity of esteem between vocational and general academic programs in upper secondary education in Iceland]. Netla – Online Journal on Pedagogy and Education. http://netla.hi.is/serrit/2018/framhaldskolinn_brennidepli/07.pdf. Fjellman, A.-M., Yang-Hansen, K., & Beach, D. (2018). School choice and implications for equity: The new political geography of the Swedish upper secondary school market. Educational Review, 71, 518–539. Ganzeboom, H. B. G. (2010). Occupational status measures for the new international standard classification of occupations ISCO-08; with a discussion of the new classification. http://www. harryganzeboom.nl/isol/isol2010c2-­ganzeboom.pdf Guðmundsson, B. (2018, October). Einkunnabólga og þunglyndi háskólanema [Grade inflation and depressed university students]. Fréttablaðið, 19.10.2018. https://www.pressreader.com/ iceland/fr%C3%A9ttabla%C3%B0i%C3%B0/20181019/281956018759663 Gunnarsdóttir, Á. (2019). “Það hjálpaði mér alveg svakalega að fá að prófa”. Tækniskólaval fyrir grunnskólanemendur (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Iceland. http://hdl.handle. net/1946/32763 Hiim, H. (2020). The quality and standing of school-based Norwegian VET. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 72(2), 228–249. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/1363682 0.2020.1734062 Horvat, E. M., Weininger, E. B., & Lareau, A. (2003). From social ties to social capital: Class differences in the relations between schools and parent networks. American Educational Research Journal, 40(2), 319–351. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.3102/00028312040002319 Icelandic National Audit Office. (2017). Starfsmenntun á framhaldsskólastigi: Skipulag og stjórnsýsla [Vocational education at upper secondary schools: Organization and administration]. https://www.rikisend.is/reskjol/files/Skyrslur/2017-­Starfsmenntun-­a-­framhaldsskolastigi.pdf Isopahkala-Bouret, U., Börjesson, M., Beach, D., Haltia, N., Jónasson, J.  T., Jauhiainen, A., Kosunen, S., Nori, H., & Vabø, A. (2018). Access and stratification in Nordic higher education. A review of cross-cutting research themes and issues. Education Inquiry, 9(1), 142–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2018.1429769 Jónasson, J.  T., & Óskarsdóttir, G. (2016). Iceland: Educational structure and development. In T. Sprague (Ed.), Education in Non-EU countries in Western and Southern Europe (pp. 11–36). Bloomsbury. Lasonen, J., & Og Young, M. (Eds.). (1998). Strategies for achieving parity of esteem in European upper secondary education. Institute for Educational Research/University of Jyväskylä. Lundahl, L., Arreman, I. E., Holm, A. S., & Lundström, U. (2013). Educational marketization the Swedish way. Education Inquiry, 4(3), 497–517. Magnúsdóttir, B. R., & Garðarsdóttir, E. (2018). “Bara ekki mínar týpur!” Sjálfsmyndasköpun, félagsleg aðgreining og framhaldsskólaval [“Not my type of people!” Students’ narratives of choosing the ‘right’ school for academic tracks in Iceland]. Netla – Online Journal on Pedagogy and Education. https://opinvisindi.is/bitstream/handle/20.500.11815/1596/3075-­4858-­1-­PB. pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Ministry of Education, Science and Culture. (2012). The Icelandic national curriculum guide for upper secondary schools. General section. Author. Ministry of Education, Science and Culture. (2013). OECD review: Skills beyond school. National background report for Iceland. Author. https://www.stjornarradid.is/media/ menntamalaraduneyti-­media/media/mrn-­pdf/oecd-­skyrsla-­tilbuin-­nov-­2013.pdf

196

E. Eiríksdóttir et al.

Ministry of Education, Science and Culture. (2014). Framhaldsskólastig [The upper secondary school level]. http://www.menntamalaraduneyti.is/menntamal/framhaldsskolar/ Ministry of Education, Science and Culture. (2016). Nemendum fækkar á framhalds- og háskólastigi [Fewer students in upper secondary schools and universities]. https://www.stjornarradid. is/efst-­a-­baugi/frettir/stok-­frett/2016/06/28/Nemendum-­faekkar-­a-­framhalds-­og-­haskolastigi/ 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. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/20004508.2018.1424490 Parkes, D. (1993). Parity of esteem for vocational education? European Journal of Education, 28(2), 131–134. Ragnarsdóttir, G. (2018). School leaders’ perceptions of contemporary change at the upper secondary school level in Iceland. Interaction of actors and social structures facilitating or constraining change (PhD), University of Iceland, Reykjavík. Ragnarsdóttir, G., & Jónasson, J.  T. (2020). The impact of the university on upper secondary education through academic subjects according to school leaders’ perceptions. In L.  Moos, E. Nihlfors, & M. Paulsen (Eds.), Re-centering the critical potential of Nordic school leadership research: Fundamental but often forgotten perspectives. Educational Governance Research (pp. 191–207). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-­3-­030-­55027-­1_11 Reay, D. (2004). Exclusivity, exclusion, and social class in urban education Markets in the United Kingdom. Urban Education, 39(5), 537–560. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085904266925 Regulation No. 1199/2016 amending the Regulation on the enrolment of students in upper secondary schools, No. 1150/2008. Reykjavík: Alþingi. Retrieved from https://www.reglugerd.is/ reglugerdir/allar/nr/1199-­2016. Regulation No. 204/2012 amending the Regulation on the enrolment of students in upper secondary schools No. 1150/2008. Reykjavík: Alþingi. Retrieved from https://www.reglugerd.is/ reglugerdir/eftir-­raduneytum/menntamalaraduneyti/nr/17772. Regulation on the enrolment of students in upper secondary schools No. 1150/2008. Reykjavík: Alþingi. Retrieved from https://www.reglugerd.is/reglugerdir/eftir-­raduneytum/ menntamalaraduneyti/nr/10529. Regulation on the enrolment of students in upper secondary schools No. 98/2000. Reykjavík: Alþingi. Retrieved from https://www.reglugerd.is/reglugerdir/eftir-­raduneytum/ menntamalaraduneyti/nr/3317. Regulation on upper secondary schools, No. 105/1990. Reykjavík: Alþingi. Retrieved from https:// www.reglugerd.is/reglugerdir/allar/nr/105-­1990. Schram, B. (2009, June). Hvers konar skólakerfi? [What kind of school system?]. Morgunblaðið, 29.06.2009. https://www.mbl.is/greinasafn/grein/1289602/ Statistics Iceland. (2018, 9. April). Nýnemum fækkar í starfsnámi á framhaldsskólastigi. https:// hagstofa.is/utgafur/frettasafn/menntun/nynemar-­a-­framhaldsskolastigi-­1997-­2016/ Statistics Iceland. (2021a). Students by school level, type of study, general field, and gender 1997–2019. https://px.hagstofa.is/pxis/pxweb/is/Samfelag/Samfelag__skolamal__3_framhaldsskolastig__0_fsNemendur/SKO03104.px/table/tableViewLayout1/?rxid=33160794-­6611-­4 c60-­9c07-­6e6099f7e803 Statistics Iceland. (2021b). Freshmen at the upper secondary school level by gender, age, type of study, background, and form of teaching 1997–2017. https://px.hagstofa.is/pxis/pxweb/is/ Samfelag/Samfelag__skolamal__3_framhaldsskolastig__0_fsNemendur/SKO03109.px/table/ tableViewLayout1/?rxid=12bbb1c2-­1ae4-­4095-­a0e6-­dcda0c6a6464 Thompson, S. K. (2012). Sampling. Wiley. Þorkelsson, M. (2011). Hverjir eru valkostir nýnema í framhaldsskólum? [What choices do freshmen in upper secondary schools have?] Netla – Online Journal on Pedagogy and Education. https://skemman.is/bitstream/1946/12428/1/magnusth.pdf University Act No. 62/2006. Reykjavík: Alþingi. https://www.althingi.is/lagas/nuna/2006063.html. Upper Secondary Education Act No. 92/2008. Reykjavík: Alþingi. www.althingi.is/lagas/ nuna/2008092.html.

10  Selection for Whom? Upper Secondary School Choice in the Light of Social Justice

197

Vilhjálmsson, P. (2017, May 26). MS sem elítuskóli og kerfið [MS as an elite school and the system]. Blog.is. https://pallvil.blog.is/blog/pall_vilhjalmsson/entry/2196576/ Vísir. (2010, February 19). Óánægja með endurkomu hverfisskóla [Dissatisfaction with the return of district schools]. https://www.visir.is/g/2010203207168 Elsa Eiríksdóttir ([email protected]) is an associate professor at the University of Iceland, School of Education. She completed a BA degree in Psychology from the University of Iceland in 1999 and a master’s and a PhD in Engineering Psychology from Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta in 2007 and 2011, respectively. Her research interests include learning, transfer of training, skill acquisition, upper secondary education, and vocational education and training.  

Kristjana Stella Blöndal ([email protected]) is an associate professor in the MA programme in Career Counselling and Guidance at the Faculty of Sociology, Anthropology and Folkloristics at the University of Iceland. Her research is mainly in upper secondary education, focusing on student progress, school dropout, and school effectiveness. Kristjana is an active participant in international research in the field of upper secondary education.  

Guðrún Ragnarsdóttir ([email protected]) is an associate professor in the Faculty of Education and Pedagogy, School of Education, at the University of Iceland. Guðrún holds a BSc degree in Biomedical Science and two diplomas, one in education and another in public administration. She has also completed a master’s degree in Public Health and a PhD in Education from the University of Iceland, School of Education. Guðrún has worked as a compulsory school teacher, upper secondary teacher, and school leader and has been employed as a teacher trainer for the Council of Europe. Her research interests include pedagogy, school development, professional development, and school leadership.  

Chapter 11

Comparing Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary School in the Nordic Countries Annette Rasmussen

and Marianne Dovemark

Abstract  In this concluding chapter, we compare and sum up the findings from the respective country studies and contributions to the edited volume. Across the countries, differences are particularly pronounced in the way the systems of upper secondary education are structured, varying from Sweden’s undivided upper secondary system in one comprehensive school, which was to include everybody, to Denmark maintaining a strong division between vocational and general academic tracks. Other differences include the degrees to which privatisation has taken place and undermines the role of free public schooling and whether access to upper secondary education is a statutory right and how – in one way or another – the market changes cause significant between-school and within-school differences and promote options for social distinction. Summed up, the contributions show that access to knowledge and qualifications is unfairly distributed. The entrance tickets to inclusion and participation are more accessible to some than to others. Access and opportunities still depend on the resources students bring into the education system and the opportunity structures that surround them where they live. Keywords  Education governance · Choice · Access · Inclusion · Inequality

A. Rasmussen (*) Department of Culture and Learning, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark e-mail: [email protected] M. Dovemark Department of Education and Special Education, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 A. Rasmussen, M. Dovemark (eds.), Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary Education in the Nordic Countries, Educational Governance Research 18, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08049-4_11

199

200

A. Rasmussen and M. Dovemark

Introduction In the introduction to this book, we outlined how global education policies emphasising individualism and freedom of choice have come to dominate education policies in Nordic countries. With reference to the Nordic countries by way of their commonalities as archetypal representatives of social democratic welfare states (Arnesen et al., 2014), we argued that they constitute relevant cases for a critical study of market-oriented education political reforms. Based on the assumption that their common anchoring in a universal type of welfare state could be a premise for more radical approaches to neoliberal reforms and could cause new amalgams between welfare and competition state policies, we find that they are ideal critical cases for this study. The Nordic region is known worldwide for its social democratic vision of reducing social inequality in education through comprehensive schooling. By the 1990s, all the Nordic countries had introduced an undivided compulsory school to provide general education for all children (Wiborg, 2009). It is also a general feature for the Nordic countries that a large majority of a cohort of 16–19/20-year-old youngsters continue to upper secondary education and that there are general efforts to encourage as many as possible complete upper secondary education, preparing them for higher education, vocational competence, or both. Here, the attempts to create joint and comprehensive systems turned out very differently, with Sweden and Denmark constituting the two extremes (Jørgensen, 2018). While Sweden went for an undivided upper secondary system that was to include everybody, Denmark maintained a strong division between vocational and general academic tracks. There are other important differences – degrees of privatisation and comprehensiveness (Dovemark et al., 2018) that add to the 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 add to an argument for and an aspect of comparison, which necessitates that we compare along more dimensions. The differences add to the uneven consequences that apparently similar reforms have when enacted in different contexts (Ball et al., 2012; Rizvi & Lingard, 2010). In Sweden, for example, privatisation and freedom of choice have caused a clear increase in inequality in relation to class, ethnicity, and geographical origin (Fjellman et al., 2018) in a sometimes tough competition among upper secondary schools to attract students. Although the underlying education policies are similar in Denmark, where the ‘school voucher’ is named a ‘value-added grant system’, the situation is different. In Denmark, the challenges for upper secondary schools are partly related to the increased competition for students due to decreasing youth cohorts. This means that the school vouchers that follow the students put institutions under economic pressure. In Norway, as well as in the other four countries, there is political pressure, on the one hand, to get as many students as possible through upper secondary education and, on the other hand, to ensure an appropriate

11  Comparing Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary School in the Nordic…

201

distribution between the vocational and general educational tracks (Nevøy et  al., 2014). In Finland, students applying to research-intensive universities first need to pass an entrance exam, where less than 10% of the applicants are admitted due to the limited number of study places (Isopahkala-Bouret, 2018), which creates a social bias in recruitment. Furthermore, private preparatory courses that aim to increase university education contribute to increasing social inequality since there is a clear link between social background and those who participate in the preparatory courses on the one hand and the extent to which parents pay for participation on the other (Kosunen et al., 2021). Across the countries, there is economic pressure for institutional survival to attract as many students as possible. The development of the comprehensive upper secondary schools in the early 1970s was an attempt to bridge the gap between the academic grammar schools and the vocational schools, as well as allowed students to easily change routes (Jónasson & Óskarsdóttir, 2016). In part, this development is related to an economic rationale for helping rural areas. In the introduction, we raised four questions, which framed the chapter analyses for the book and of which the conceptual key points were access, governance, choice, and segregation. In this concluding chapter, we will summarise the findings emanating from the questions: 1. How has student access for upper secondary schools developed in relation to welfare state policies? 2. What reforms have influenced the institutional structure and governance of upper secondary education? 3. What does school choice mean to the institutional structure and new needs for regulation? 4. How does the governing of upper secondary education play out in relation to segregation – geographically and socially? Attaching importance to regional distinctions in the Nordic countries, we stipulated our key concern as the investigation of how the complex relationship between welfare policies with an emphasis on broad provision and access, and market-oriented policies focused on freedom of choice, play out in the different Nordic systems of upper secondary education. As mentioned in the Introduction, Green (2004, p. 42) poses the questions, why should we be interested in a comparative perspective, and how can we adopt it? We do remind the reader that it is rare that the same types of sources exist in each case that is going to be compared. This is also the case for this volume. What we want to examine in this volume are some of the similarities or differences that emerge in research in relation to governance and choice in the five Nordic countries. The comparative approach reveals the contradictory processes of unification and diversification, but at the same time it is through a broader comparative approach that commonality can be found. For this purpose, we will carry out a juxtapositional comparison (Green, 2004) of the different chapters, addressing the main themes of the book  – governance, access, school choice, and segregation – from the perspective of each country’s own

202

A. Rasmussen and M. Dovemark

fields of upper secondary school. In line with Green (2004, p. 42), we define ‘compare’ as examining the nature or properties of a phenomenon to discover both similarities and differences, having been melded together in the concept of comparing. Inspired by Bartlett and Vavrus (2017), we further draw on the comparative case study approach, having in mind its heuristic features of an iterative and contingent process. In this process of tracing relevant actors to ‘explore the historical and contemporary processes that have produced a sense of shared place, purpose, or identity with regard to the central phenomenon’ (Bartlett & Vavrus, 2017, p. 10), we have defined the phenomenon to be processes of governance and choice. The levels of analysis will thus be aimed at perceiving sameness and focusing on particularities by emphasising both common themes and variations. In the following, we start by outlining common and distinctive traits in relation to access, governance, choice, and segregation of upper secondary education across the universal welfare states of the Nordic countries. Then we turn to the consequences that the freedom of choice policies have for the Nordic systems relative to what other studies of school choice have shown about freedom of choice policies elsewhere in the world and in earlier studies (Forsey et al., 2008; Ball et al., 1997). They illustrate tensions and differences, locally and countrywide, as to what the object of choice is (what to choose), where choice is evident (differences between populated areas), who has a choice, and in whose interest choice takes place.

 omparing the Upper Secondary Schools C of the Nordic Countries Education systems in the Nordic countries share common values related to the dominant welfare thinking. Historically, the Nordic commitment to a comprehensive public school that includes everyone regardless of social origin, ethnicity, and place has been central to the democratic visions of the welfare state. Despite the division into academic and vocational tracks, the system has generally attached great value to providing equal access to knowledge, identities, and life chances. However, there are strong indications that the educational equality approach in contemporary policy and curricular trends has become secondary to the goals of competition and employability (Nylund et al., 2018). The systems of upper secondary education in the Nordic countries are unified in pointing out that all young people, or as high a percentage of them as possible, should be kept in the system and should pass a matriculation examination. Thus, education policies and numerous initiatives are aimed at avoiding students dropping out or reducing dropout rates. The importance of this issue appears from studies and reports focusing on dropout rates over the last 20 years (Bäckman et  al., 2015; Nevøy et al., 2014). Thus, focusing on educational retention, policies of ‘education for all’ and ‘lifelong learning’ also indicate the importance of the knowledge society or rather ‘knowledge economy’. A ‘knowledge economy’ also supports the view

11  Comparing Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary School in the Nordic…

203

that education is an optional commodity that produces flexible employable individuals, adds positively to the economy, and must not be wasted. Thus, raising the educational level of everyone is an important part of Nordic education policies, which is, for instance, also expressed in the Finnish policy intentions from the 1990s. In Finland, nine out of ten school leavers aim at a graduation from a gymnasium or a vocational school, which share is persistent. Less than 10% of the examinations constituted a combination of the two school types (Ahonen, 2014). With the development of comprehensive schools and the credit system, academic and vocational programmes could exist within one and the same upper secondary school. The idea was that students could more easily change routes or change programmes (Jónasson & Óskarsdóttir, 2016). Matriculation exams were needed to access higher education, but vocational education and training (VET) students could add a few courses and access higher education as a result. Even though access to upper secondary education is open to all young people in the different Nordic countries, their policies on school choice range from systems where students are assigned to a school, mainly based on their residence (Finland, Norway, Iceland, and, to some extent, Denmark), 1 to the Swedish system, where there is general freedom to choose a school (European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2020, p. 10). Each chapter in this edited collection has analysed structural changes and challenges connected to these within the national context in which they operate. In the following, inspired by Bartlett and Vavrus’ (2017) comparative case study approach, we compare and contrast the findings of the historical and contemporary processes from the different chapters in relation to access conditions, governance changes, complexities of choice, and social segregation.

Access Conditions In Iceland, all young people who have reached the age of 16 have a statutory right to get access to upper secondary education, regardless of their results in the nationally coordinated examination or the results of their compulsory schooling. But despite this statutory right, upper secondary schools set their own admission policies and select students based on academic performance. And in the case of the most selective school, access also depends on extracurricular activities (Eiríksdóttir et al., Chap. 10, in this volume). The same goes for Norway, where all young people who have completed primary and lower secondary education, or the equivalent, also have a statutory right to upper secondary education. One problem in relation to the so-called statutory right  In Denmark, free choice is the main principle of assignment as long as the general upper secondary school has the capacity to accept more students. Once the school has not enough capacity, the principle of residence will apply, and students having chosen school which is situated at too long distance from their home will be assigned to another school. However, young people are free to choose vocational schools independently of the location of their home. 1

204

A. Rasmussen and M. Dovemark

is that clear responsibility is still lacking for those programmes that do not lead to formal qualifications, concerning content as well as the responsibility of workplaces to offer student placements. Instead, students may become caught in a lifelong ‘right to education’, which begs the question of whether alternative programmes may still involve a dead end for the students (Nevøy & Bruin, Chap. 7, in this volume). Finland has recently expanded its compulsory education. The minimum school leaving age is being increased from 16 to 18 years because of a piece of legislation that came into force in August 2021. In addition to free upper secondary education and school meals, the legislation also means that textbooks, short school trips, supplies, or other materials for lessons and final tests (matriculation examination) will be free of charge, which they have not been before. In Denmark, there is 10 years of compulsory education, not schooling (Rasmussen & Moos, 2014), after which most young people continue to general, academic upper secondary education and a smaller share to vocational education. In 2021, the percentage pursuing an academic upper secondary exam was 72%, while the percentage who chose to pursue vocational education was approximately 20% (Ministry of Education in Denmark, 2021). To enter both general upper secondary and vocational education, there is a grade restriction, which is higher for the general track. In Sweden, there are restrictions on admission to upper secondary national programmes; they demand a minimum grade level, depending on the programme applied to. For those students who are not eligible for any national programme, there are four different introductory programmes, all of which aim to make students eligible for a national academic or vocational programme (Dovemark & Beach, 2016; Dovemark & Erixon Arreman, 2017). What is also obvious with regard to access to upper secondary education is that through the strong marketing of different schools, students are hailed or interpellated (Althusser, 1971/2008, p.  47) to some schools but not to others based on how the students recognise themselves in the marketing text (Dovemark, 2017; Dovemark & Holm, 2017; Holm & Dovemark, 2020; Dovemark & Nylund, Chap. 6, in this volume). The phenomenon that school choice is instead based on factors such as recognition and status also appears in the other Nordic countries (e.g. see Laaksonen & Niemi, Chap. 9; Magnúsdóttir & Kosunen, Chap. 5, in this volume) but becomes clearer in the Swedish context through the schools’ often extreme marketing because unique brands clearly stand out. Even though Sweden today stands out as an extreme example of a highly competitive school market, attempts were made some decades ago to give everyone who attended some form of upper secondary education the opportunity to study general subjects. Sweden introduced reforms in the 1990s regarding general core subjects that emphasised the value of general core subjects to equip all students with general knowledge. This was to prepare them for both higher education and citizenship. The aim was, according to Lund (Chap. 2, in this volume), to emphasise an equal distribution of knowledge to reduce the boundaries between different groups in society. The introduction of general subjects for all students was also regarded as an important part of the educational policy effort to realise and implement the idea that all

11  Comparing Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary School in the Nordic…

205

upper secondary school programmes, general as well as vocational, should open up for future study opportunities and ensure there would not be any dead ends. However, in a government bill (Prop. 2008/2009:199), it was proposed that the scope of some of these general subjects be reduced to provide more space for more professional, specialised education. This is in line with the main conclusions that Nylund et al. (2018) made concerning curriculum developments in Sweden, Iceland, and Finland, where the curricula become more dominated by the importance of employability. Further details on this development in Sweden appear in the analysis by Lund (Chap. 2, in this volume). Lund argues that their combination with a social justice perspective is an often-forgotten aspect of school choice reforms. He reminds the reader that reforms of marketisation and students’ freedom of choice were combined with a universal admission for university studies in Sweden. Students, regardless of upper secondary school programmes, were obliged to take certain general subject courses (Swedish, mathematics, English, physical education, social science, natural science, religious instruction, and art/music/drama). It was argued that such a broad education for all students would prepare them for a rapidly changing labour market and lifelong learning in a pluralistic and individualised society. Lund argues, though, that the 2011 upper secondary school reform is attempting to strengthen the neoliberal policy agenda through stronger regulation and control and at the same time liquidates the social liberalistic notion of broad inclusion and equal access to knowledge. In Finland, choosing upper secondary education is generally the first official educational choice that students make. As in the other Nordic countries, students can choose between a range of options within either general or vocational upper secondary programmes. But the choice is based on previous education through compulsory schooling, and, as Laaksonen and Niemi (Chap. 9, in this volume) point out, these choices consequently start to mould the students’ educational paths during compulsory education. By focusing on the field of general upper secondary education, Laaksonen and Niemi state that, despite the so-called free choice, the educational choices of the students are constructed in relation to the schools’ different institutional habitus rather than the students’ own choices. Other significant parameters in deciding access conditions are geography and locality. In all the Nordic countries, we find sparsely populated areas with similarly scarce infrastructure but urban areas with highly developed infrastructure and opportunities. In this way, geographical scope constitutes both affordances and challenges to access. The Norwegian case by Homme et al. (Chap. 4, in this volume) demonstrates that locality in terms of the governing unit as well as a peripheral placement pose geographical restrictions to access. As it appears, it is only in the Oslo region that the young have the possibility of choice. Regarding these parameters of access, it applies to all five countries that only their capital regions provide the students with many options to choose from. Even in a small country like Denmark, geographical locality is an important parameter for sustaining access to an educational institution. The institutions that are situated in-between cities or in relatively peripheral areas suffer from a lack of applicants, so much that some of them are at risk of not surviving in the long term

206

A. Rasmussen and M. Dovemark

(Lolle & Rasmussen, Chap. 8, in this volume). Thus, the Danish system also offers very different conditions depending on where in the country you are. Addressing the question of access therefore also becomes one of social democracy, in which the educational provision for all may face serious restrictions due to the increase in market competition. Likewise, geography and locality seem to have an impact on the opportunities for young Icelandic and Finnish people to find suitable education. The notable difference between the two contexts depends upon urban geography, according to Magnúsdóttir and Kosunen (Chap. 5, in this volume). The long distances in Helsinki seem to somewhat influence the choices of upper secondary schools for young people from the eastern and western parts of the city. In Reykjavik, however, such a difference could not be seen. The privatisation of education is found, in one way or another, in all five Nordic countries, but there are considerable differences as to what degree this is practised (Dovemark et al., 2018). It seems that both Finland and Norway, despite years of resistance, are beginning to adopt the idea of free choice as a fundamental principle. The future will show if there are lessons to be learned from the Swedish model or if other countries will copy the same.

Governance Changes Neoliberal reforms have been enacted in the different countries to different degrees and with different strengths. Despite different reform approaches, all countries share a common understanding that all students who have completed primary and lower secondary education or the equivalent are entitled to choose an upper secondary education programme. In all five countries, upper secondary education is usually free of charge. The countries also have some private education, which is government dependent, publicly funded, and under public supervision and must fulfil legislative requirements in order to receive a licence. Iceland, Norway, Denmark, and Finland have relatively small private upper secondary education sectors compared to Sweden. In contrast to Sweden, none of the other Nordic countries allow providers to make a profit on private compulsory and upper secondary schools (Lundahl, 2016). In Finland, private schools are mostly within vocational education, with the percentage of private general upper secondary education being 9% in 2018, whereas in vocational education the percentage was 54% (cf. Eurodice). Thus, Sweden constitutes an extreme example when it comes to having developed a large, privatised sector of ‘free’ schools and having allowed publicly listed companies to invest in and run schools with the aim of making a profit. As such, the country represents a radical version of market-oriented upper secondary education (Lundahl et al., 2013). However, Sweden was also a pioneering country in the welfare model, introduced in the 1970s, of keeping upper secondary students together in large public institutional units, ‘gymnasieskolan’, which includes both academic/ general and vocational tracks. Nevertheless, since private free schools entered the

11  Comparing Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary School in the Nordic…

207

educational ‘market’ at the beginning of the 2000s, there has been an increasing specialisation and selection from within the system (Dovemark, 2017; Dovemark & Holm, 2017; Dovemark & Nylund, Chap. 6, in this volume). Denmark has a long tradition for two distinct sectors, a general and a vocational, with the latter being subject to corporatist governance. This contrasts with Sweden, where the state-led and school-based VET system was gradually integrated into the comprehensive upper secondary school. Unlike Danish apprenticeships, Swedish VET programmes postpone the training of specific occupational skills until after graduation from upper secondary school. This contributes to making the transition from VET to the labour market more difficult and protracted in Sweden than in Denmark. Comparing the two systems, Jørgensen (Chap. 3, in this volume) concludes that marketisation and decentralisation in Sweden have led to larger between-­ school differences in relation to students’ socio-economic backgrounds and educational attainments and have created a structure for many schools. In contrast, liberalisation in Denmark has resulted in successive mergers of vocational schools and the closing of smaller local schools. This has led to fewer and larger institutions, which has limited young people’s access to VET in peripheral municipalities. Even so, for students in VET, the critical question primarily concerns not the choice of school but the task of finding a company where they can get an apprenticeship contract (Jørgensen, Chap. 3, in this volume). In Iceland, as in Denmark, in upper secondary education, there is an institutional distinction between academic/general and vocational tracks (Eiríksdóttir et  al., Chap. 10, in this volume). There is also a sharp division between general and vocational upper secondary education in Finland (Laaksonen & Niemi, Chap. 9, in this volume), like those in Denmark and Iceland. In Iceland, recent educational reforms and policy directives have been aimed at reducing the distinction between vocational and academic education pathways at the upper secondary level. Despite these efforts, a disparity in esteem between vocational and general academic pathways seems ingrained according to Eiríksdóttir et  al. (Chap. 10, in this volume). Eiríksdóttir et  al. go on to stress that an undoubtedly perpetuating factor is the admission structure for upper secondary education, whereby the status of schools and the hierarchy of programmes, as well as variable admission criteria, direct the flow of students. But even though the organisation is different in Iceland, Finland, and Sweden, there is a stronger demarcation between vocational programmes and disciplinary knowledge discourses, while the demarcation between vocational programmes and ‘the workplace’ is weakening (Nylund et al., 2018). However, Nylund et al. further state that this trend is less clear in Iceland, where the responsibility for curriculum development was transferred from industry stakeholders to the schools with the reform of 2008. Norway represents a slightly different system of governance of upper secondary schools, which, just as in the other Nordic countries, consists of two main orientations: academic and vocational programmes. Among different initiatives for change and improvement, the Norwegian government has, since 2022, decided to implement free school choice as mandatory for upper secondary education nationally,

208

A. Rasmussen and M. Dovemark

restricting the regional autonomy to a choice between different enrolment policies. The government’s aim for the amendment to the Education Act is to ensure that all students have a greater opportunity to choose which school to attend. Homme et al. (Chap. 4, in this volume) address the question of how the national governance of upper secondary education challenges the geographical regulation of provision and access. The analysis, which compares the consequences of decentralisation for governing capacity in two Norwegian counties, concludes that the different models of enrolment both respond to and influence regional educational challenges. Thus, the local conditions for upper secondary education challenge the realisation of free school choice as an equal principle across the country.

Complexities of Choice Increased choice of school has originally been justified in terms of the effect that it is said to have on efficiency and effectiveness and, ultimately, students’ educational attainment (Walford, 2008, p. 96). The idea of free choice of school becomes intertwined with competition between schools and the number of students that could be attracted by the school since a school’s survival is highly dependent on its success in recruiting students. Increased flexibility was claimed to occur, where the individual should have greater power to decide over their own situation. Freedom of choice became a way of materialising the focus on the individual. However, the individualisation of choice differs depending on the positions of individuals and an already highly complex and differentiated system of schools. Some are more and less well placed in spatial terms for exerting a choice and for being chosen (Ball et al., 1997). In line with the global tendencies, the education political agenda within the Nordic countries demands greater school choice opportunities and competition between schools. This is based on a claim that there are social benefits of school choice (cf. Varjo & Kalalahti, 2018). Proponents claim that the possibilities of choosing a school will reduce educational bureaucracy, strengthen democracy (the right to choose instead of being assigned), improve efficiency (higher achievement at lower cost), and increase accountability. One of the loudest arguments for freedom of choice is that it should promote equal opportunities for students in high-­ poverty and low-achieving schools, since they by activating their choice could attend high-status and high-achieving schools in metropolitan areas. However, across the cases in this volume, there is plenty of evidence suggesting that choice rather contributes to exacerbating inequalities. The types of educational choices that students face include the track (general/ academic or vocational), the school as an institutional setting, the programme, the subjects, the content of the subjects, extracurricular activities, etc. These types of educational choices can be seen as ordered and depending on each other so that the

11  Comparing Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary School in the Nordic…

209

first one conditions the next one and so forth (i.e. the first concerns whether to choose an academic or vocational track). This applies to the distinct academic and vocational sectors of Denmark, Finland, and Iceland, though they provide opportunities for combined matriculation examinations that allow students to enter higher education. In contrast, Sweden and Norway have organised these sectors as fairly joint systems. However, in the Swedish case, the choice of an academic versus a vocational track has become more complicated since choosing a programme often also nowadays means choosing a school, at least if the student chooses a free school, in which case the student is strongly hailed for a special track (Dovemark & Nylund, Chap. 6, in this volume). Choice is highly dependent on context conditions. This involves social; educational, including the student’s prior experience with and performance in education; and geographical conditions. In connection with this, it is relevant to ask what options are available. As supported in contributions of this volume (e.g. Homme et al., Chap. 4; Lolle & Rasmussen, Chap. 8; Laaksonen & Niemi, Chap. 9), and due in all of the Nordic countries, choice of school is primarily an option for those students who live in urban or densely populated areas, where there are several schools to choose from. For those living in the far away north, between towns, or in other ways peripheral areas – of which the Nordic countries have a vast array – the nearest school is the obvious and usually only choice (cf. Fjellman, 2019). Thus, in line with Ball et  al. (1997), we can conclude that space, distance, and transport play parts in making some students and schools more accessible than others. Prior educational experiences and school results decide whether the student has a choice between different options or simply has a choice of continued education or not – such as with the ‘alternative programmes’ in Norway (Nevøy & Bruin, Chap. 7, in this volume). In some cases, the student is faced with dead ends, that is, with no possibilities of transitioning, whether this is into higher education (Laaksonen & Niemi, Chap. 9, in this volume) or work (Jørgensen, Chap. 3, in this volume). The complexity of choice includes the fact that some students in effect do not have a choice since their social background leads to an unfavourable disposition towards having a choice and making the right choices. The latter involves making choices with no dead ends but choices that always leave a door open for another or the next choice. Numerous studies, including some in this volume (Laaksonen & Niemi, Chap. 9; Eiríksdóttir et al., Chap. 10), confirm that the choice of higher and academic education is highly linked with social class. Middle-class students dominate percentagewise, whereas working-class students still constitute a relatively low percentage of those attending higher education. That the so-called free choice is something, which is primarily of benefit to the middle classes is an old truth that research has shown for decades (c.f. Ball, 1993, 2003; Reay et al., 2005; Sharp & Green, 1975).

210

A. Rasmussen and M. Dovemark

Feeding Social Segregation Despite the aims and promises of meritocracy and social mobility, several research findings show that social reproduction continues to be strengthened (Ball, 2003; Beach & Dovemark, 2009, 2011) and that social segregation is increasing. Certain parents and students have privileges; they have and exert advantages ‘in and through choices’ (Ball et al., 1997, p. 419). Parents and students are oriented culturally and materially differently towards the education market, in which the middle class typically benefits the most (Reay et  al., 2005; Varjo & Kalalahti, 2018 Bunar, 2010; Bunar & Ambrose, 2018, etc.). The middle class is particularly good at taking advantage of the opportunities to choose to keep/re-establish their historic economic advantages or their achieved status position (Ball, 2003). The market is a new opportunity for the middle class, or, as pointed out by Bourdieu and Boltanski (1979) more than 40 years ago, the educational system functions as an instrument of reproduction by allowing the utilisation of specific powers. Within the market, the schools’ space, distance, and transport possibilities and their reputation and history make them desirable to some choosers and not to others. As Ball et al. (1997, p. 419) put it, ‘Patterns of choice are generated both by choice preferences and opportunities and capacities’. Within the education marketplace, there are simply hidden mechanisms; there are, partly, assumptions about the neutrality of patterns of achievement in education and, partly, assumptions about neutrality of the market itself. Ball et al. go on to stress that there are two ‘distinct discourses of choice in evidence. A working-class discourse dominated by the practical and the immediate and a middle-class discourse dominated by the ideal and advantageous’ (Ball et al., 1997, p. 420). What is also obvious in the examples from the different Nordic countries in this volume is the fact that for the students whose social and cultural capital did not match that of the school, choice was constructed more based on what their friends choose and what was reachable in terms of their previous school success and grades. The students valued locality, diversity in the student body, and a good atmosphere at the school (Laaksonen & Niemi, Chap. 9, in this volume). Or as Magnúsdóttir and Kosunen express it in this volume, the students in their studies chose a school on the basis that they could identify and know what kind of person they could become in society by choosing that particular school. Likewise, the marketing material in Dovemark’s and Nylund’s study in this volume was strongly focused on and dominated by either a working-class discourse of the practical and immediate or a middle-class discourse dominated by the ideal and advantageous. These are messages that in themselves have a segregating effect and by that contribute to the increasing segregation in society. Students’ free choice of general upper secondary school (gymnasium) in Denmark is also seen to further social segregation. In the analysis, this freedom of choice appears to create polarisation processes in two ways: both polarisation by means of students of similar characteristics and social group applying to the same school and polarisation towards city or urban schools rather than others (Lolle &

11  Comparing Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary School in the Nordic…

211

Rasmussen, Chap. 8, in this volume). In both ways, the polarisation tendencies may involve school closures because the under-applied schools may not have enough students. In the long-term perspective, this will limit choices in some areas of the country and for some groups of students or in general.

Main Conflicts Within and Across the Nordic Countries From the analyses in this volume, despite all the Nordic countries’ policies concerning the importance of access to and the completion of upper secondary education, it appears that there are clear patterns of different options for choice. As pointed out by Lund in this volume, education has come to play an increasingly important role in the societal incorporation of young people. Thus, gaining an upper secondary diploma is described in policy documents and research across all five countries as a necessity for entry into the labour market of groups of young people who have no choice but to choose an education of some kind. When market forces and competition find expression within the education sector, space is created for the academic elite. Schools compete for those students with high social and cultural capital and high academic performance. The students become ‘the producers of the exchange value of the institution’ (Ball, 2004, p. 24). In Sweden, for example, we now see a clear increase in inequality in relation to class, ethnicity, and geographical origin (Fjellman et al., 2018). The same goes for Iceland, where Eiríksdóttir et al. (Chap. 10, in this volume) show how the registration system in combination with marketisation reinforces the academic elite when schools compete for students with high academic performance and social capacity. They point out that the tension between the actual admission structures and the educational policy can be traced to two contradictory ideas: the idea of inclusive education and the idea of decentralisation and free school choice. The schools studied did not promote equity as part of their selection processes. Only a few students with high socio-economic background and educated parents could in fact choose. The highly selective schools tended to protect their power by creating admission criteria in favour of students with high academic achievement. In this way, the schools reinforced an unjust system. Eiríksdóttir et al. point out that the idea of a free school choice is only a reality for a small part of the cohort and that others lacking the resources and background must temper their expectations, select ‘realistically’, and hope for the best. The challenges for upper secondary schools are also partly about the competition for students due to decreasing youth cohorts. This means that the school vouchers that follow the students put institutions under financial pressure. This is the case in Denmark with the ‘value added grant system’. There is political pressure on the one hand to get as many students as possible through upper secondary education and on the other hand to ensure an appropriate distribution between the vocational and the general educational tracks (Nevøy et  al., 2014). There is economic pressure for institutional survival to attract as many students as possible. This can be exemplified

212

A. Rasmussen and M. Dovemark

by the Swedish model with for-profit free schools, which are almost exclusively owned and run by private actors but are tax financed by school vouchers. The tuition fee system means that each student brings a certain amount of (tax-financed) money to the school that the student chooses; in other words, the existence of a school stands or falls on the number of students that choose that school. Lund (Chap. 2, in this volume) argues that a changing educational policy in relation to general subjects will show how policy initiatives become an active part in the structuring of young people’s acquisition of knowledge. The ways in which the upper secondary education curriculum is organised predefine who will gain admittance to such knowledge and who will not. In line with Nylund et al. (2018), we can see that contemporary policy and curriculum trends in all the Nordic countries are dominated by a neoliberal discourse stressing principles such as freedom of choice, competition, and employability. None of the Nordic countries have resisted the neoliberal ideology, although they have embraced it differently. The chapters in this volume show that neoliberal reforms can be understood through the prism of the local, which challenges any grand generalisation of the significant changes in education policy development (cf. Forsey et al., 2008). School choice reforms assume a wide variety of enactments from country to country, even when there are cultural similarities in understanding education for all as an important social  – welfare state – good. The growth in the privatisation of education seems to undermine the role of free public schooling in the welfare state model that the Nordic countries have generally followed, in other words general access to schools. In the Nordic countries, school choice has been found to cause significant between-school and within-school differences and promote options for social distinction (see Dovemark et al., 2018). The phenomena of urban segregation and school segregation have been strongly linked through policies of school choice. Östh et al. (2013) conclude in their study that school choice in Sweden is the driving force behind increasing school segregation. Schools as social environments become socially differentiated due to school choice, regardless of the levels of urban segregation. Yang Hansen and Gustafsson (2016, p. 40) show that the major trend in school segregation in Sweden during the years 1998–2011 was an increase over time in between-school differences in achievement – a trend that is most distinct in the big cities, where there are several schools to choose from within a close geographical distance (Fjellman, 2019). The radical changes that have taken place in Sweden in particular (Dovemark et al., 2018) lay the foundation for a new welfare model, a ‘hidden’ two-part welfare system (Lapidus, 2018) where the boundaries between the public and private sectors become blurred. It positions welfare ‘as a commodity that can be selected for consumption, with a price that can be set for profitability’ (Beach & Dovemark, 2007, p. 37; cf. Beach, 2010, 2014; Dovemark, 2004). Both government start-up capital and venture capital play a major role in the emergence and further development of the welfare industry. The new welfare mixes of public and private elements that have developed as a result challenge standard conceptions regarding what constitutes ‘public’ or ‘universal’ social programmes and make it hard to assess their implications for values such as social equity. Since experiences and meetings on

11  Comparing Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary School in the Nordic…

213

equal terms between different groups in the society constitute important social criteria for a common welfare system, we can draw the conclusion from the volume’s various chapters that at least the possibility of meeting each other during school as being part of the welfare system is falling apart or is at great risk of falling apart. The knowledge that we belong to different social classes but can still meet in the same waiting room at the health centre or put our children in the same school with one and the same curriculum for all students is an important part of keeping society together. All Nordic countries, however, seem to have left the ambition of having a strong focus on citizenship in the curriculum and of trying to create conditions for a community where we meet in the same arenas regardless of ethnicity and class. A question for the future is if it would be possible to sustain the still relatively high overall level of universalism (compared to many other countries) in the Nordic countries’ welfare systems. The public popularity of the universalist principles is well documented. Populations in welfare states with a high level of universality in, for instance, inclusion and financing, support their welfare systems more strongly than populations in more selective or stratifying welfare states (Brady & Broski, 2015). Maybe it is a sign that questions about the welfare state’s survival are now being raised and could open up new interpretations, of which there are early signs within various Swedish political parties. They ask whether it is reasonable to make profits on the welfare state or whether venture capital companies are suitable as school providers. After 30 years of reforms in that direction, it is about time that such issues are questioned, including whether it is fair that some people have a choice while others do not. Even though all Nordic countries in their policies strive for increased educational equality, with the stated purposes of raising the level of education and competencies and reducing the learning gap between different groups, we can conclude that, like many studies before this, the so-called freedom of choice does not change the pattern of social inequalities. The pattern of social reproduction continues to be as strong as ever. Finally, returning to our initial point of departure, where we referred to increasing inequalities globally, similar tendencies are seen in the Nordic countries. The inequalities in the distribution of privilege position people so differently that choice to some becomes an irrelevant term. Considering that there may be no options to choose from and no resources to support one’s ‘choice’, the question is if it is plausible and fair to talk about choices at all. Regarding fairness, the intersection between policies of inclusion and equality with those of competitiveness and choice is rather a clash that poses a threat to this. A recent report by the European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice (2020, p. 7) also points out that ‘academic segregation goes together with lower levels of inclusion and fairness’. Thus, the educational market does not function as an equaliser that provides freedom of choice for all but rather constitutes a problem to fairness. Education and its relationship to the community are twofold. Firstly, a common foundation of values and norms is supposed to be transferred through the system. Secondly, the education system supposedly equips individuals with the capacity for social participation and grants access to the labour market. In other words, the

214

A. Rasmussen and M. Dovemark

education system can be seen as an agent for social inclusion and a cornerstone for creating and maintaining a sense of community. The question is: What happens when market considerations crowd out considerations of community and fairness in the distribution of resources? Comparing governance and choice in the contributions in this volume, it becomes evident that across this period of neoliberal policy hegemony, social inequality has grown in all Nordic countries. The contributions show that access to knowledge and qualifications is not fairly distributed. The entrance tickets to inclusion and participation are more accessible to some than to others. Access and opportunities still depend on the resources students bring into the education system and the opportunity structures that surround them where they live. This is an old sociological truth (e.g. see Lundberg et al., 1976). Despite 50 years of policy intentions for greater equality and justice, the injustices remain as strong as ever.

References Ahonen, 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. Althusser, L. (1971/2008). On ideology. Verso. 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. Bäckman, O., Jakobsen, V., Lorentzen, T., Österbacka, E., & Dahl, E. (2015). Early school leaving in Scandinavia: Extent and labour market effects. Journal of European Social Policy, 25(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928715588702 Ball, S. J. (1993). Education markets, choice and social class as a class strategy in the UK and USA. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 14(1), 3–9. Ball, S. J. (2003). Class strategies and the education market: The middle classes and social advantage. Routledge. Ball, S. J. (2004, June 17). Education for sale! The commodification of everything? King’s Annual Education Lecture, University of London. Ball, S.  J., Bowe, R., & Gewirtz, S. (1997). Circuits of schooling: A sociological exploration of parental choice of school in social-class contexts. In A. H. Halsey, H. Lauder, P. Brown, & A.  S. Wells (Eds.), Education: Culture, economy, and society (pp.  409–421). Oxford University Press. Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., & Braun, A. (2012). How schools do policy. Policy enactments in secondary schools. Routledge. Bartlett, L., & Vavrus, F. (2017). Comparative case studies; an innovative approach. Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education, 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. (2014). The public costs of the re-structuring of adult education: A case in point from Sweden. The Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, 2(1), 159–188. Beach, D., & Dovemark, M. (2007). Education and the commodity problem: Ethnographic investigations of creativity and performativity in Swedish Schools. Tufnell Press.

11  Comparing Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary School in the Nordic…

215

Beach, D., & Dovemark, M. (2009). Making right choices: An ethnographic investigation of creativity and performativity in Swedish schools. Oxford Review of Education, 35(6), 689–704. Beach, D., & Dovemark, M. (2011). Twelve years of upper-secondary education in Sweden: The beginnings of a neo-liberal policy hegemony? Educational Review, 64(4), 313–327. Bourdieu, P., & Boltanski, L. (1979). Changes in social structure and changes in the demand for education. Information sur les Sciences Sociales, 12(5 Octobre), 61–113. Brady, D., & Broski, A. (2015). Paradoxes of social policy: Welfare transfers, relative poverty, and redistribution preferences. American Sociological Review, 80(2), 268–298. Bunar, N. (2010). Choosing for quality or inequality: Current perspectives on the implementation of school choice policy in Sweden. Journal of Education Policy, 25(1), 1–18. Bunar, N., & Ambrose, A. (2018). Urban polarisering och marknadens förlorare [Urban polarisation and loosers of the market]. In A. Fejes & M. Dahlstedt (Eds.), Skolan, marknaden och framtiden (pp. 169–186). Studentlitteratur. Dovemark, M. (2004). Responsibility, flexibility and freedom of choice. An Ethnographic study of a school in transmission (Dissertation). Gothenburg University. Dovemark, M. (2017). Utbildning till salu – konkurrens, differentiering och varumärken [Education for sale – competition, differentiation and brands]. Utbildning & Demokrati, 26(1), 67–86. Dovemark, M., & Beach, D. (2016). From learning to labour to learning for precarity. Ethnography and Education, 11(2), 174–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457823.2015.1101383 Dovemark, M., & Erixon Arreman, I. (2017). The implications of school marketisation for students enrolled on introductory programmes in Swedish upper secondary education. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1746197916683466 Dovemark, M., & Holm, A.-S. (2017). Pedagogic identities for sale! Segregation and homogenization in Swedish upper secondary School. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 38(4), 518–532. Dovemark, M., Kosunen, S., Kauko, J., Magnúsdóttir, B., Hansen, P., & Rasmussen, P. (2018). Deregulation, privatisation and marketisation of Nordic comprehensive education: Social changes reflected in schooling. Education Inquiry, 9(1), 122–141. European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice. (2020). Equity in school education in Europe: Structures, policies and student performance. Eurydice Report. Publications Office of the European Union. Fjellman, A.-M. (2019). School choice, private providers and differentiated mobilities in Swedish metropolitan school markets: Exploring through a counterfactual approach. International Journal of Educational Research, 98, 171–191. Fjellman, A.-M., Yang-Hansen, K., & Beach, D. (2018). School choice and implications for equity: The new political geography of the Swedish upper secondary school market. Educational Review, 71, 518–539. Forsey, M., Davies, S., & Walford, J. (2008). The globalisation of school choice? An introduction to key issues and concerns. In M. Forsey, S. Davies, & J. Walford (Eds.), The globalisation of school choice? (pp. 9–25). Symposium Books. Green, N. L. (2004). Forms of comparison. In D. Cohen & M. O’Connor (Eds.), Comparison and history. Europe in cross-national perspective (pp. 41–56). Routledge. Holm, A.-S., & Dovemark, M. (2020). “I chose this school because the students were just like me” School choice, symbolic boundaries, homogenization and we-ness in Swedish upper secondary education. In I. S. Lund (Ed.), Immigrant incorporation, education, and the boundaries of belonging (pp. 17–39). Palgrave. Isopahkala-Bouret, U. (2018). Stratification through a binary degree structure in Finnish higher education. In R. Bloch, A. Mitterle, C. Paradeise, & T. Peter (Eds.), Universities and the production of elites (s) (pp. 83–101). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-­3-­319-­53970-­6_4 Jónasson, J.  T., & Óscarsdóttir, G. (2016). Iceland: Educational structure and development. In T. Sprague (Ed.), Education in non-EU countries in Western and Southern Europe (pp. 11–36). Bloomsbury.

216

A. Rasmussen and M. Dovemark

Jørgensen, C.  H. (2018). Ungdomsuddannelsernes og enhedsskolens bidrag til social u/lighed. Dansk Pædagogisk Tidsskrift, 2(2018), 26–36. Kosunen, S., Haltia, N., Saari, J., Jokila, S., & Halmkrona, E. (2021). Private supplementary tutoring and socio-economic differences in access to higher education. Higher Education Policy, 34(2), 949–968. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-­020-­00177-­y Lapidus, J. (2018). Vård-stölden. Hur den private välfärden tar från det gemensamma [The care-­ theft. How private welfare takes from the public]. Leopard förlag. Lundahl, L. (2016). Equality, inclusion and marketization of Nordic education: Introductory notes. Research in Comparative & International Education, 11(1), 3–12. Lundahl, L., Erixon Arreman, I., Holm, A.-S., & Lundström, U. (2013). Educational marketization the Swedish way. Education Inquiry, 4(3), 497–517. Lundberg, S., Selander, S., & Öhlund, U. (eds.). 1976). Jämlikhetsmyt och klassherravälde i avancerade kapitalistiska samhällen [Equality myth and class domination in advanced capitalist societies]. Bo Cavefors bokförlag Ministry of Education in Denmark. (2021). Hvad vælger eleverne, når de forlader grundskolen efter 9. og 10. klasse i 2021? [What do the students choose when they leave school after grade 9 and 10 in 2021?]. Børne- og Undervisningsministeriet i Danmark, Styrelsen for It og læring. Nevøy, A., Rasmussen, A., Ohna, S.  E., & Barow, T. (2014). Nordic upper secondary school: Regular and irregular programmes  - or just one irregular school for all? In U.  Blossing, G. Imsen, & L. Moos (Eds.), The Nordic education model. ‘A school for all’ encounters neo-­ liberal policy (pp. 191–210). Springer. 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. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/20004508.2018.1424490 Östh, J., Andersson, E., & Malmberg, B. (2013). School choice and increasing performance differences: A counterfactual approach. Urban Studies, 50, 407–425. https://doi. org/10.1177/0042098012452322 Rasmussen, A., & Moos, L. (2014). A school for less than all in Denmark. In U. Blossing, G. Imsen, & L. Moos (Eds.), The Nordic education model. ‘A school for all’ encounters neo-liberal policy (pp. 57–75). Springer. Reay, D., David, M. E., & Ball, S. J. (2005). Degrees of choice. Social class, race and gender in higher education. Trenthams Books. Rizwi, F., & Lingard, B. (2010). Globalizing education policy. Routledge. Sharp, R., & Green, A. (1975). Education and social control. A study in progressive primary education. The Open University. Varjo, J., & Kalalahti, M. (2018). The art of governing local education markets – Municipalities and school choice in Finland. Education Inquiry, 10(2), 151–165. https://doi.org/10.108 0/20004508.2018.1514907 Walford, G. (2008). School choice in England: Globalization, policy borrowing or policy corruption? In M.  Forsey, S.  Davies, & J.  Walford (Eds.), The globalisation of school choice? (pp. 95–109). Symposium Books. Wiborg, S. (2009). Education and social integration: Comprehensive schooling in Europe. Palgrave Macmillan. Yang Hansen, K., & Gustafsson, J.-E. (2016). Causes of educational segregation in Sweden  – School choice or residential segregation. Educational Research and Evaluation, 22, 23–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2016.1178589 Annette Rasmussen is an associate professor in the Department of Culture and Learning, Aalborg University. Her main research interests are in ethnographic approaches to education policies and practices, which she has studied in several school and learning contexts. She is a member of the board of the international research journal Ethnography and Education. In her recent research,  

11  Comparing Governance and Choice of Upper Secondary School in the Nordic…

217

focus is on policy issues of employability, performativity, and talent, especially in relation to social background and inequality. One of her latest publications on this is Cultivating Excellence in Education. A Critical Policy Study on Talent, which is co-authored with Professor Christian Ydesen and published in the Educational Governance Research Series. Marianne Dovemark is a senior researcher and professor emerita of Education at the university of Gothenburg. Her main research interests are in sociology of education concerning policy and politics related to marketization of education and personalization of learning. Theoretically she belongs to a critical tradition, methodologically in critical ethnography. She is a member of the board of the international research journal Ethnography and Education. She has undertaken research and published extensively in the field of personalized learning and marketization of education. One of her latest contributions, co-authored with Professor Dennis Beach, is a chapter in the edited volume Neoliberalism and Market Forces in Education. Lessons from Sweden.