E D U C AT I O N I N Q U I R Y. Volume 1, No. 4, December 2010
.UDE EDU.
.QNI INQ.
E D U C AT I O N
INQUIRY
Volume 1, No. 4, December 2010
CONTENT
Editorial
Educational Sciences – National and International Aspects
Jan Nieuwenhuis
Social justice in education revisited
Berit Lundgren & Liz Botha
Reading events from child to student
Eva Leffler, Gudrun Svedberg & Melodi Botha
A global entrepreneurship wind is supporting or obstructing democracy in schools:
A comparative study in the North and the South
Hyacinth Skervin
Cultural Sites of Meaning: Challenges and Pitfalls for Gender-Based Research
Saloshna Vandeyar
Educational and socio-cultural experiences of immigrant students in South African schools
Monika Vinterek
How to live democracy in the classroom
Constanta Olteanu & Lucian Olteanu
To change teaching practice and students’ learning of mathematics
Benjamin Zufiaurre, Lucia Pellejero Goni & Gaby Weiner
Gender equality and education in Spain: ideology and governance
Knut Steinar Engelsen & Kari Smith
Is “Excellent” good enough?
Umeå School of Education
Umeå University
Sweden
E d u c at i o n I nq u i ry
Ac k n ow l e d g e m e n t
Education Inquiry is an international on-line, peer-reviewed journal with free access in the field of
Educational Sciences and Teacher Education. It publishes original empirical and theoretical studies
from a wide variety of academic disciplines. As the name of the journal suggests, one of its aims is to
challenge established conventions and taken-for-granted perceptions within these fields.
Education Inquiry is looking for lucid and significant contributions to the understanding of contextual,
social, organizational and individual factors affecting teaching and learning, the links between these
aspects, the nature and processes of education and training as well as research in and on Teacher
Education and Teacher Education policy. This includes research ranging from pre-school education to
higher education, and research on formal and informal settings. Education Inquiry welcomes crossdisciplinary contributions and innovative perspectives. Of particularly interest are studies that take as
their starting point, education practice and subject teaching or didactics.
Education Inquiry welcomes research from a variety of methodological and theoretical approaches,
and invites studies that make the nature and use of educational research the subject of inquiry. Comparative and country-specific studies are also welcome.
Education Inquiry readers include educators, researchers, teachers and policy makers in various
cultural contexts.
Every issue of Education Inquiry publishes peer-reviewed articles in one, two or three different
sections. Open section: Articles sent in by authors as part of regular journal submissions and published
after a blind review process. Thematic section: Articles reflecting the theme of a conference or
workshop and published after a blind review process. Invited section: Articles by researchers invited
by Education Inquiry to shed light on a specific theme or for a specific purpose and published after
a review process. Education Inquiry is a continuation of the Journal of Research in Teacher Education, which is available in printed copies as well as electronic versions and free access at http://www.use.umu.se/forskning/
publikationer/lof/
The Editor and the board wish to gratefully acknowledge all those listed below who have
generously given of their time to referee the paper submitted to Education Inquiry during
2009 and 2010.
Editor
Professor Per-Olof Erixon, Umeå University, Sweden
Receiving Editor
Assistant Professor Linda Rönnberg, Umeå University, Sweden
The editorial board
Professor Marie Brennan, School of Education, UniSA, A
­ ustralia
Professor Bernard Cornu, Directeur de la Formation – CNED, Directeur de CNED-EIFAD, France
Professor David Hamilton, Umeå University, Sweden
Professor Brian Hudson, University of Dundee, UK
Professor Gloria Ladson-Billings, University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA
Professor Martin Lawn, University of Edinburgh, UK
Assistant Professor Eva Lindgren, Umeå University, Sweden
Assistant Professor Linda Rönnberg, Umeå University, Sweden
Professor Kirk Sullivan, Umeå University, Sweden
Professor Gaby Weiner, University of Edinburgh, UK
Professor Pavel Zgaga, University of Ljubliana, S
­ lovenia
Language Editor
Murray Bales, Ljubljana, Slovenia
Guidelines for Submitting Articles
See Education Inquiry’s homepage: http://www.use.umu.se/english/research/educationinquiry
Send Manuscripts to: [email protected]
©2010 The Authors. ISSN online 2000-4508
Anders Hanberger, Sweden Eva Skåréus, Sweden Ljubica Marjanovič Umek, Slovenia Anders Holmgren, Sweden
Ference Marton, Sweden Martin Lawn, Scotland
Anders Marner, Sweden Gaby Weiner, Scotland
Mats Danell, Sweden
Annette Patterson, Australia
Geif Afdal, Norway
Mona Holmqvist, Sweden
Barbara Comber, Australia
Greta Galloway, South Africa
Monika Vinterek, Sweden
Barbro Grevholm, Norway
Gun-Marie Frånberg, Sweden
Pakey Chik, Hong Kong
Bengt-Erik Andersson, Sweden
Helen Nixon, Australia
Perrti Kansaanen, Finland
Bengt-Göran Martinsson, Sweden Inger Erixon Arreman, Sweden Peter Sullivan, Australia
Bert Jonsson, Sweden
Irina Isaakyan, Scotland Robert Hattman, Australia
Brian Byrne, Australia
Jan Bengtsson, Sweden
Robert Kroflic, Slovenia
Brian Hudson, Scotland
Jan Mannberg, Sweden
Robyn Johansen, Australia
Carin Jonsson, Sweden
Jennifer Greene, USA
Ron Mahieu, Sweden
Daniel Andersson, Sweden
Joanna Giota, Sweden
Simone White, Australia
Daniel Kallós, Sweden
Jonas Christensen, Sweden
Susan Danby, Australia
David Cole, Australia
Kajsa Borg, Sweden
Sven Hartman, Sweden
David Hamilton, Scotland
Kirk Sullivan, Sweden
Tomas Englund, Sweden
Elisabet Öhrn, Sweden
Lesley, Farrell, Australia
Tomas Kroksmark, Sweden
Eva Forsberg, Sweden
Linda Rönnberg, Sweden
Torulf Palm, Sweden
Eva Silfver, Sweden
Liselotte Olsson, Sweden
Education Inquiry
Vol. 1, No. 4, December 2010, pp.367–380
EDU.
INQ.
How to live democracy in the classroom
Monika Vinterek*
Abstract
The aim of the study presented in this article is to explore the teaching of pupils in relation to their
behaviour and attitudes in everyday work in the classroom. It is the educational objectives associated
with democracy linked to the teacher’s teaching and fostering actions that are of main interest. The
results are based on an analysis of data from 120 hours of classroom observations and contextualised
interviews with a primary teacher during a period of one and a half years. Using data from audio
recordings and notes taken from observations, I have analysed the pupils’ behaviour and attitudes
in relation to educational objectives and the teacher’s teaching and fostering actions. A democracy
stance and democracy signs are important concepts used in the study. My conclusion is that the way
democracy is thought and lived in this classroom seems to hold great potential for promoting knowledge in and about democracy.
Keywords: teaching, fostering, democracy stance, classroom
Introduction
The ambition to teach democracy and to foster democratic citizens played a central
role in the development of education in many European countries after the Second
World War. Democracy and democratic values have also had a prominent position in
Swedish curricula (Carlsson, 2006). But are such objectives possible and, if so, how
is this teaching and fostering carried out in schools?
The study presented in this article focuses on how democracy comes to life in the
classroom, on the way democratic principles are reflected in action and attitudes. I
want to elucidate the knowledge of democracy that can be observed in the pupils’
everyday work and in the teaching actions that promote democracy in that work.
The aim of the study
The aim of this study is to explore the teaching of pupils in relation to their behaviour
and attitudes in everyday work in the classroom. It is the educational objectives associated with democracy linked to the teacher’s teaching and fostering actions that
are of main interest. The study concentrates on two questions:
• Are any signs of democracy reflected in behaviour and attitudes that can be
observed during the lessons?
• What does the teacher do to support the way democracy comes to life in
everyday work in the classroom?
* Department of Applied Educational Science, Umeå University. E-mail: [email protected]
©Authors. ISSN 2000-4508, pp.367–380
367
Monika Vinterek
Background, previous research and theoretical framework
The fostering of active citizenship has been a significant feature of educational documents in all liberal states in the Western world (Lindblad, 2002, 94.). The steering
documents for the Swedish school system point out different kinds of methods and
democratic knowledge to achieve active democratic citizenship. The first lines in the
Swedish Curriculum for the compulsory school system, the pre-school class and the
leisure-time centre state, “Democracy forms the basis of the national school system”
(National Agency for Education, 2006, 3).
Democracy is often talked and written about in an unproblematised way, but it is
not easy to explain the meaning of the concept. Petterson (2009, 36-49) points out
two main problems in efforts to define democracy. One is finding something that
corresponds to a basic element of the meaning of democracy; the other is accepting
that democracy can take different forms when practiced. Democracy can be both a
form of government and values. John Dewey’s view on democracy was that, besides
being a political form, it is also a way of life.
Democracy is much broader than a special political form, a method of conducting government,
of making laws and carrying on governmental administration by means of popular suffrage
and elected officers. It is that, of course. But it is something broader and deeper than that.
The political and governmental phase of democracy is a means, the best means so far found,
for realizing ends that lie in the wide domain of human relationships and the development
of human personality. It is, as we often say, though perhaps without appreciating all that is
involved in the saying, a way of life, social and individual (Dewey, 1937, 457-467).
When it comes to values, democracy must be understood as a conglomerate of many
different values. In this respect, some words are used more frequently than others,
such as freedom, equality and brotherhood. Other words often used when talking
about democracy are Abraham Lincoln’s words “that government of the people, by
the people for the people” (Petterson, 2009, 42). A democracy based on the values in
this statement and in the words from the French Revolution calls for tolerance and
respect of different opinions. But it also imposes the willingness of people to become
involved.
The character of democracy can also be described in different ways. It can be described as an object, something that can be separated from other things as a distinct
whole. As an object it is something we can learn about without becoming personally
involved. It can be knowledge about different kinds of democratic governments with,
for example, different voting and electoral systems.
Democracy can also have the character of the skills required when taking part in
democratic processes, for example how to vote or how to run a meeting. It can also
have the character of an approach. This can be understood when using the concept
stance from Rosenblatt’s linguistic theory. In Rosenblatt’s theory (1986, 1991, 2004),
stance is as a way of looking at the world. In Rosenblatt’s words the character of the
368
How to live democracy in the classroom
approach in this context can be described as “democracy stance”, as a form of moral/
ethical knowledge forming different attitudes or ways of looking at the world. In
this respect, democracy is something more than just knowledge about it. Different
stances also call for different actions. In practice, different stances will be revealed
in different actions. In my study, I have paid special attention to what I hereby call
a democracy stance.
By dividing democracy knowledge into these three different characters, it can be
described as a democratic object, democratic skills and a democracy stance. I argue
that the first type of knowledge is about democracy, whereas the other two types are
knowledge in democracy. The first aspect does not include a person’s attitudes or actions; it just says that someone knows about democracy as a concept. To have skills in
democracy is to have the ability to carry out democratic ways of acting in public and
family life. How to participate in elections and different democratic institutions can
be examples of such abilities. To give voice to and to consider different opinions can
also be seen as democratic skills when it helps a person to participate in democratic
processes. The stance aspect of democracy is neither a skill, ability nor pure knowledge about the concept. It encompasses a person’s attitudes and ways of considering
things based on democratic values and as such moral/ethical knowledge. It can be
compared with what Nagda, Gurin and Lopez (2003) refer to as democratic sentiments shown in practice by abilities like being open-minded, take another person’s
perspective and decision-making with others.
In the Swedish steering documents for schools both knowing about and having
knowledge in democracy can be identified. The first chapter of the Swedish curriculum for compulsory school (National Agency for Education, 2006, 3) is about
“Fundamental values and the tasks of the school” saying that “Democracy forms the
basis of the national school system”. The first section starts with a reference to the
second paragraph of the Education Act (Utbildningsdepartementet, 2010a, kap.1). It
stipulates that “School activities shall be structured in accordance with fundamental
democratic values”. The intrinsic value of every human being and equality between the
genders are values explicitly mentioned. It is also clearly stated that everyone working
at school has a responsibility to “actively counteract all types of insulting treatment
such as bullying or racist behaviour” (Utbildningsdepartementet, 2010a, 1kap, §2).
In Sweden it is stipulated that every class or similar in upper secondary school
shall have a pupils’ council and every class or group in compulsory school shall have
the opportunity to deal with questions of common interest together with the teacher
(Utbildningsdepartementet, 2010b, 2010c).
The about kind of democratic knowledge is more clearly outlined in the Swedish
syllabi than the in kind. In the subjects of civics and history, it is stated what is to be
learnt to achieve object knowledge of democracy (Skolverket, 2008, 78-81, 87-91).
But the curriculum says that school also has the “[…] task of imparting, instilling
and forming in pupils [...] fundamental [democratic] values” (National Agency for
369
Monika Vinterek
Education, 2006, 3). This is to say that the duty includes more than simply teaching
pupils about democracy. Being able to influence, take responsibility and be involved
are called democratic principles, which also set the standard for what is to be thought
(National Agency for Education. 2006, 13). According to Greene (1993), Hooks (1994)
and Nieto, (1995), is it possible to form a classroom environment that can be a base
for the experience of democratic ideals such as equality, freedom and justice and
for actions of responsibility. But such an environment is only created in an ongoing
process (Gay, 1995).
Democracy stance, skills and actions
Research has shown that the pedagogical methods used in schools have an impact
on pupils’ knowledge about democracy (Almgren, 2006; Ekman, 2007; Hahn,
1998; Ochoa-Becker 2007; Torney-Purta et al., 2001). Participation in democratic
processes such as voting and participating in different representing groups can
work as an alternative way of learning about democracy, alongside formal education about democracy (Almgren, 2006, 141-151). But the positive effects of, for
example, pupils’ participation in pupils’ councils do not have any effect on the
non-participating pupils. These kinds of school democracy have an effect only at
the individual level. But the pedagogical methods used to influence the classroom
climate, for example deliberative dialogues, have a positive effect on all pupils’
learning about democracy.
We know that there has been a decline in representative participating in politics in many Western countries in the last few decades and we can ask what role
schools can play in encouraging young people to take an active part in politics (Ekman, 2007, 28-29). In her doctoral study, Ekman (2007) showed the importance
of what she calls political self-esteem for young people’s willingness to take up
active citizenship. Her conclusion is that active citizenship presupposes a trust in
the ability of oneself. When Ochoa-Becker (2007, 211) makes her analyses about
how to form democratic education in the USA, she comes to the conclusion that it
is not enough to pay attention to the overt curriculum. In developing a tool for the
Quality Assurance of Education for Democratic Citizenship in Schools supported
by UNESCO and the Council of Europe (Abs, Ed., 2009), Bîrzea et al. (2005) seem
to come to the same conclusion and point out many aspects of democracy in school.
But Ochoa-Becker et al. (2007) also stress that “The climate in both the school and
in the classroom needs to reflect democratic principles in action” (211). It is this
in action that has been the object of my study. But democracy will not come about
without certain attitudes. In this article, these attitudes or ways of looking at the
world are labelled a democracy stance. When I have looked into school practice, I
have been most interested in how it is possible to teach pupils a democracy stance
and how such a stance is lived in the classroom by different actions giving evidence
of different signs of democracy.
370
How to live democracy in the classroom
Signs of Democracy
From previous theoretical reasoning and earlier research, some elements can be
said to be important when teaching and fostering democracy and essential to about
knowledge as well as knowledge in democracy. Democracy in its broader meaning is
seen as working in the frame of a structure where two fundamental aspects must be
present. These aspects are connected with the culture of the communication. Without
somebody expressing their thoughts in an environment where there are people willing
to listen in an honest and respectful way, democracy will not come to life. Talking is as
important as listening. To be able to form one’s own opinion and make choices, one
has to have knowledge of different standpoints or alternatives. When people share
different views, this becomes possible. Education has to be conducted in an atmosphere of tolerance and respect, encouraging people’s self-esteem in order to promote willingness and the ability to express
one’s thoughts as well as a willingness to listen to others. Here, these elements will be
called signs of democracy since they can give signals of democratic life in the classroom. The signs are viewed as ways to create democracy as well as part of democracy
itself. All together, this can form a culture of democracy.
Culture
Since there are many ways to understand and look at culture I will outline the way
the concept is used here. One can look at culture in a broad meaning including ideas
(knowledge, understanding and values) activity (actions) and artifacts. Bates and
Plog (1990) offer this definition:
[…] the system of shared beliefs, values, customs, behaviours, and artefacts that the members
of society use to cope with their world and with one another, and that are transmitted from
generation to generation through learning (Bates and Plog, 1990, 7).
There are ideational, social and material dimensions of this way of looking at culture.
In the theory of structuration Giddens (1984, 1995) argues that people make society
but that they at the same time are dependent on society. This makes the relationship reciprocal as the structures act upon individuals and vice verse. A culture can
be looked upon as a structure and to be in a culture then means to be in a “give
and receive situation”. Individuals act upon the culture and the culture acts upon
individuals. In this perspective, culture is maintained and changed through actions
but culture also set limits on what actions can take place. With support of Giddens’
structuration theory, culture and actions must be analysed as a whole due to this
reciprocal relationship.
Roger Keesing (1974) argues that:
Culture, conceived of as a system of competence shared in its broad design and
deeper principles, and varying between individuals in its specificities, is then not all
371
Monika Vinterek
of what an individual knows and thinks and feels about his world. It is his theory of
what his fellows know, believe, and mean, his theory of the code being followed,
the game being played, in the society into which he was born (Keesing, 1974, 89).
This implies that what creates a culture and becomes part of the culture at the same
time is not only made up by individuals’ perceptions of society itself but also includes
all individuals’ thoughts about everyone else’s perceptions.
In this study culture is seen to be constituted by ideas and activity as well as artifacts and symbols. It is not looked upon as initially there, it is seen as something that
arises in a social process and as a result of social experiences, yet culture is also seen
as a structure that imposes something upon those who are in that culture.
Methodology
Since May 2008, I have been regularly observing a Swedish teacher in her work with
pupils. I have also made tape recordings during my visits. The observations and recordings have mostly been for a whole week or for several days at a time following
the teacher through the whole school day. This teacher is teaching the same group
of pupils for three years in almost all their subjects. I first observed the teacher in a
grade three class and then followed her work in a class from grade one. This group of
children is now in its second year and I am still attending the class for observations.
During my observations I have been sitting at the back of the classroom, without
talking to anyone or taking part in the lesson in any way. The pupils and the teacher
have accepted my role as a non-participating researcher and I have had the feeling
that most of the time the pupils and the teacher forget about my presence.
The observation focus has been on the teacher’s teaching and fostering actions. But
at the same time I have observed the pupils’ behaviour and how the pupils respond
to her actions. The centre of attention has been on understanding the learning environment, not the individual pupils. Since everything has been tape recorded I have
concentrated on taking notes on things happening in the classroom that could not
be heard such as body language, gestures and facial expressions. At the same time, I
have written down what has been going on in the classroom and changes in the room,
movements of desks and pupils. Emerson, Frez & Shaw (1995) stress the importance
of taking field notes during observations to be used as a source to describe social and
interactive processes in a broad, rich and coherent way.
After lessons during breaks and after the pupils have left school, the teacher has
told me about her plans for the lessons and reflections she made in connection to her
teaching and the interaction with the pupils. I have also been able to ask questions
about things that were unclear to me during my observations, which can be seen as
contextualised interviews (Hultman, 2001). These talks and contextualised interviews
have given me a chance to achieve a deeper understanding of the situations observed
(Wolcott, 2005). The talks were mostly tape recorded. During the observations and
372
How to live democracy in the classroom
the contextualised interviews I also wrote my own reflections down concerning things
that could be interpreted as signs of democracy, as part of the phase of analysis.
The way I used these notes in the study might be seen as the “step on a ladder”
Agar (1996, 113) talks about as a way to reach an understanding of how democratic
principles are reflected in action and attitudes in the everyday classroom life. All together, I had data from 120 hours of observation and the contextualised interviews
to be analysed for this study.
The analyses are built on a theoretical foundation of the meaning of being democratic as outlined in the theoretical framework section of this article. I draw parallels
with Dewey’s understanding of the concept of democracy as a way of life. From this
starting point, I have observed the classroom for signs of how democracy is lived by
the pupils and by the teacher in their everyday work.
The analysis of the material involved two main steps. First, I searched the collected data for attitudes and behaviour that can be connected to what I call “signs
of democracy” which were used as an analytic tool. Second, I looked at the notes
and listened to the recordings for passages with situations where the actions of
the teacher in some way seemed to be concentrated on promoting a democracy
stance. Looking at these situations, I tried to find out what the teacher does to
support the way democracy comes to life in everyday work in the classroom. I
have looked at the different ways the teacher has promoted a democracy stance.
In this article, I give some examples of such ways, illustrated by episodes from
life in the classroom.
The lived democracy in the classroom
Tolerance and respect among the pupils seem to have become very strong and I observed changes in their willingness to listen and to speak up and give a voice to their
own thoughts. During my time in the classroom, I heard more and more often the
pupils spontaneously tell others what they were thinking and I could also more often
hear them respond to each other in a supportive way. The pupils’ democracy stance
seemed to grow and I analysed the data to find out what the teacher might have done
to promote a democracy stance.
Ways of promoting a democracy stance
I found that the teacher had many ways of promoting a democracy stance among the
pupils. In the following section I give some examples of the teacher’s actions connected to the different signs of democracy that I have observed, even if each example
includes more than one sign.
Willingness to express one’s thoughts
The teacher often talks to the pupils about the importance of answering and being
clear in saying yes or no, to speak out their opinion. There is a boy called Peter in
373
Monika Vinterek
the class, a year younger than the rest of the pupils in this group, but he can already
read better than many of the others and he seems to pick up new things quite easily.
But this boy is very quiet and the teacher wants him to practice expressing what he
thinks.
During one of my observations, I watched Peter and the teacher involved in a conversation in which Peter was not giving the teacher a straightforward answer (Notes
and audio recordings, Folder D [p. 21]). The teacher was standing beside Peter’s
desk, very close to him, and I could see the teacher when she said “And what are you
answering me then?” at the same time as the teacher touched Peter’s shoulder very
gently, laughing just a little, but one could hear the humour in the teacher’s voice.
Peter responded “Yes” loud enough for me to hear, even though I was at the back of
the classroom and he was at the front. I could also see him turn to the teacher with
a smile on his face.
I interpret this situation as an act by the teacher that puts some pressure on a
pupil with something very specific in mind. The teacher wanted Peter to be able to
declare his opinion and be able to stand up for what he thinks and believes. The way
the teacher did this is crucial. It was done in a gentle way but still with an obvious
direction. What the teacher expected the pupil to do is abundantly clear at the moment it was happening, but the teacher also made the purpose of these expectations
clear to all pupils. The teacher’s friendly way of encouraging, which in English can
also be expressed as giving confidence, is exactly what she seemed to do. In the
situation described above, Peter spoke up and appeared to be satisfied with what
he was doing.
If a person has such an experience as Peter, of doing something in a new way
and at the same time realising it works and feels good, it is going to make a change.
And if this experience is repeated over and over again, this new way of acting and
feeling will sooner or later become the norm. All our experiences add to the self,
not only as something we can say we learnt about the world around us but also to
the way we feel and think about ourselves. In this teacher’s classroom, the pupils
are offered many experiences of this kind. And after one and a half years of regular
observations in this group of pupils, I can notice changes in their willingness to
speak up and give a voice to their own thoughts. More and more often I can hear
pupils spontaneously tell others what they are thinking and also more often hear
them respond to others.
Willingness to listen
The teacher often gathers the pupils in a circle on the floor, while she sits on a low
stool. Seated like this, all the children can see each other and easily see things the
teacher demonstrates. Frequently pieces of work done by the pupils are read and
discussed in the circle. The teacher often reads stories or reflections written by the
pupils out loud. This is done with deep involvement and an emphasis on what is
374
How to live democracy in the classroom
good in what they have created, but there is also room for suggestions on things
that can be improved. The teacher always encourages the pupils to see the merits
of a piece of work and to come up with ideas on improvements and to help each
other in this process. When the teacher gathers the pupils to read fiction to them,
first she always talks about the text and stimulates them to associate and talk about
things in connection with what is going to be read. An example of this was one occasion when the teacher was about to read a story (Notes and audio recordings,
20091104 Folder A [p. 2]). A girl called Esira from the Middle East put her hand
up and told the class, with excitement in her voice, that she had seen wool being
cut from a sheep as mentioned in the talk about the text. At this point, the teacher
asked complementary questions to make Esira talk more about her experiences,
to make her own story richer, to make her use more words. Esira then continued
telling things like how it was to feel the wool in her hands and more about the way
the sheep were kept where she used to live. But the purpose of the teacher’s wish to
make Esira talk is also a way of making her classmates interested in what Esira has
to share from her life. Thus, a listening culture is created, built with the help of the
components of willingness and interest.
Every day during the period of Advent, the expectant waiting and preparation
for the celebration of Christmas, one pupil a day was allowed to open a window in
a Christmas advent calendar. The calendar hung on the wall and took the form of
a rectangular card with many windows with hidden pictures behind them, the first
to be opened on 1 December. The teacher had gathered the pupils at the front of
the classroom (Notes and audio recordings, 20081217 Folder D [p. 92]). She asked
them to help her to count the unopened windows in the calendar. They counted eight
windows and the teacher made them realise that there were nine pupils who had not
opened any window yet. They understood that they faced a dilemma. How could this
be solved, was the teacher’s question to the class. After some discussion a suggestion
was made that two of the pupils could open a window jointly. The teacher then asked
if someone could volunteer to open a window together with someone else. Right away,
a couple of pupils raised their hands and agreed to open the window together.
Observing this situation, I noticed that the pupils listened carefully to what the
teacher had to say and everyone seemed deeply engaged in finding a solution to the
problem. The pupils who willingly volunteered to open one window as a pair did this
with a smile on their face. I interpret the outcome of this situation as the result of
a listening teacher who also makes her pupils “listen” because she is talking about
matters that engage them with a trusting approach. The teacher trusted them to be
wise and trusted their ability to listen and give a voice to their thoughts in a respectful
way. She also let them know she was happy about their way of dealing with problems
like this. She signalled that they had good reason to be happy about their ability to
handle things in a democratic and ethical way. Such a ground for happiness might
have lain behind the smile on the pupils’ lips.
375
Monika Vinterek
Respect and Tolerance
The teacher treats the pupils with respect even in situations when she must set limits
that can be in conflict with an individual pupil’s momentary desires because that pupil’s desires could be opposed to the needs of others. But the teacher manages to solve
such dilemmas while showing respect to all pupils and in that she is also modelling
a way to act. This modelling is also something from which the pupils can learn and
must be regarded as a form of teaching when it is done intentionally.
These dilemma situations happen all the time. One morning Mary came to school
and was standing in the corridor waiting to be let in along with her class mates (Notes
and audio recordings, 20081215 Folder D [p. 1]). She declared in a strong proud voice
that she had painted a princess for the teacher. The teacher responded immediately,
clearly and concisely. “Not now!” The teacher opened the classroom up for the pupils
and they started walking in. When Mary passed the teacher, she gave the teacher the
folded painting. I could hear the teacher say she was not going to open it and look at it
before the upcoming break. I looked at Mary and expected to find disappointment in
her face. But there was none. How did this little girl handle this situation? Was she sad
inside and hid it or did this not affect her? When it was time for the break and all the
pupils were on their way out, I observed Mary and some other pupils gather around
the teacher and I saw how the teacher opened the picture and commented on her gift
with an expression of joy in her face and with gratefulness. Mary seemed happy and
the atmosphere around the whole group was friendly. I assume that it is here we find
the explanation of the lack of disappointment in Mary’s face. She trusted the teacher
and knew from earlier experiences in this class that the teacher would give her the kind
of response she longed for. In the situation described above, the teacher also signalled
the importance of schoolwork and the teacher must be trusted, even by Mary, to ensure
that everyone will be guaranteed time to study without disturbing interruptions.
There are many situations like this when the teacher sets limits for individual pupils, not allowing them to take time off from the lesson and the rest of the group for
something that mostly concerns themselves. This is also done on several occasions
when pupils report conflicts between themselves and another classmate. The teacher
never ignores such happenings but if it is nothing serious and can be talked about
later, the teacher says it must wait until the next break. The pupils are often asked if
that solution is okay with them, leaving room for negotiation, but I have never heard
anyone disagree. The talk then takes place during the break, but only among the pupils
directly involved and the teacher.
There is mutual respect in those situations, respect for the interests of the whole
group to create as much teaching time as possible and respect towards the pupils
needing help to solve conflicts as well as needs for any other kind of response. It is
respect of different interests but the way the teacher handles this is also done in a
respectful way which I call “agreed ways”. A democracy stance is operating at the
same time as it is being taught.
376
How to live democracy in the classroom
Promoting self-esteem. Trust in the ability of oneself
Anna, don’t hurry when you write! You must be satisfied with them (the letters) too!
(Notes and audio recordings, 20081215 Folder D [p. 15])
When the teacher says things like this, which happens all the time, she is giving signals about the importance of the pupils’ efforts. This is a job and it ought to be well
done! But at the same time there is an emphasis on you. Stressing you is also saying
to Anna that she is important. It is also central that she can be happy about what she
creates. The teacher’s comments to Tom give another illustration of the same thing.
A similar situation:
Tom, there are ten minutes left of this lesson. Now remember, you must complete this before the end of the lesson. If you do that, I think it will make you feel satisfied with yourself!
(Notes and audio recordings, 20081217 Folder D [p. 93])
This teacher is making the pupils do good work by clear instructions, by giving supporting comments, constantly reminding them and making the pupils aware of their
progress and all their good achievements. One morning she made them aware of the
kind of work book in maths they had been working with lately. Many pupils commented that it was easy. Then she asked about the new books in maths and obtained
the response that it was quite difficult. The teacher asked questions about how it
could be that they thought one of the work books was difficult and the other was not.
They expressed their different experiences and thoughts about how they were making
progress and learning and came to the conclusion that, after learning more and after
working for a time with the new harder tasks, these would also become easy (Notes
and audio recordings, 20091210 Folder A [p. 59]). Another example was when the
teacher came back to class after being absent the day before. She told the pupils that
she had found a note from the substitute teacher and held it up in front of the class.
She read the positive words about the class she had received out loud (Notes and
audio recordings, 20090112 Folder D [p. 2]). If the pupils can be satisfied with their
work and behaviour it must be easier for them to feel trust in their own ability, is her
reasoning, which in turn can have a positive impact on their self-esteem.
Conclusion – A classroom of many voices and ears
I have noticed more and more signs of democracy in the studied classroom during
the time I have been observing the interaction in the room. It seems to be the educational work of this teacher that makes this change happen. Here, the teacher’s stance
is important and is reflected in the way she acts in the everyday life of the classroom.
The way this teacher is teaching and fostering promotes a democracy stance among
the pupils too and establishes a culture with strong democracy signs. The willingness
to listen and also to give voice to their thoughts in a respectful way is noticeably in-
377
Monika Vinterek
creased among these pupils in year two. The willingness is also a willingness to become
involved. The teacher’s actions promote a way of living democracy in the classroom,
it is becoming a democratic culture from which in turn everyone in the classroom
seems to learn. This impression corresponds well with Giddens’ (1984, 1995) theory
of structuration. One of the key components in what has been observed as part of
this culture is the teacher’s efforts to promote the pupils’ trust in their own ability.
This teacher also makes it very clear who decides what is to be done at school and
why, which might help the students to understand the limits of what can be decided at
the school level, by the teacher and by themselves. If this is not clear, it can promote
feelings of antagonism between the teacher and the pupils (Forsberg, 2000, 104105). This teacher avoids this, which probably provides an important platform for a
successful understanding of democracy. The pupils are never uncertain about what
they can influence at the same time as they are given many opportunities to express
their opinions to a teacher who is flexible and responsive to their needs and desires.
The ongoing process that has been pointed out as necessary to create a democratic
environment (Gay, 1995) is established in this classroom. The study supports the ideas
put forward by researchers such Greene (1993), Hooks (1994) and Nieto (1995) about
the possibilities to create teaching and learning environments in favour of democracy.
The study has also shown the importance a democracy stance can play in everyday
life in a classroom and how the interaction that comes out of such a stance seems to
have a great role to play in teaching about democracy and fostering democratic values.
Monika Vinterek is an Associate Professor of Educational Work at Umeå University, Sweden. Her
research focuses on general didactics and history didactics. Some areas of special interest include
individualization in an educational context, the acts of teachers to be successful in their teaching,
and fostering, teaching and learning in multi-age and multi-grade settings, textbooks and others
texts and teaching resources from a user perspective.
378
How to live democracy in the classroom
References
Agar, M. H. (1996) The professional strange. London: Academic Press Ltd.
Almgren. E. (2006) Att fostra demokrater: om skolan i demokratin och demokratin i skolan.
Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.
Bates, D. G. and Plog, F. (1990) Cultural Anthropology (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
Bîrzea, C. Cecchini, M. Harrison, C. Krek J. and Spajić-Vrkaš, V. (2005) The Tool for Quality Assurance of Education for Democratic Citizenship in Schools. UNESCO, Council of Europe, CEPS.
http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/education/edc/Source/Pdf/Documents/2006_4_Tool4QA_EDC.
pdf (accessed 25 January 2010)
Carlsson, L. (2006) Medborgarskap som demokratins praktiska uttryck i skolan: diskursiva
konstruktioner av gymnasieskolans elever som medborgare. Växjö: Växjö universitet.
Dewey, J. (1937) Democracy and Educational Administration, School and Society 45, 457 – 467.
Ekman, T. (2007) Demokratisk kompetens: om gymnasiet som demokratiskola. Göteborg: Statsvetenskapliga institutionen, Göteborgs universitet.
Emerson R. M., Frez R. I. & Shaw, L. L. (1995) Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Forsberg, E (2000) Elevinflytandets många ansikten.(Uppsala Studies in Education 93). Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.
Gay, G. (1997) The relationship between multicultural and democratic education. Social Studies
88, 5–11.
Giddens, A. (1984) The Constitution of Society. Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Cambridge: Polity.
Giddens, Anthony (1995) Politics, Sociology and Social Theory: Encounters with Classical and
Contemporary Social Thought. Cambridge: Polity.
Greene, M. (1993) The passions of pluralism: multiculturalism and the expanding community.
Educational Researcher 22(1), 13–18.
Hahn, C. L. (1998) Becoming political: comparative perspectives on citizenship education. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Herman, J. A (ed.) (2009) Learning and living democracy: introducing quality assurance of
education for democratic citizenship in schools - Comparative study of 10 countries. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Hooks, B. (1994) Teaching to Transgress: education as the practice of freedom. New York:
Routledge.
Hultman, G. (2001) Intelligenta improvisationer. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Keesing, R. (1974) Theories of Culture. Annual Review of Anthropology 3.
Lindblad S. (2002) Ett pedagogiskt perspektiv. I red. BE Andersson Ungdomarna, skolan och
livet. Stockholm: HLS förlag.
Nagda, B. A, Gurin, P and Lopez, G.E. (2003) Transformative Pedagogy for Democracy and Social
Justice. Race Ethnicity and Education 6 (2), 165–191.
National Agency for Education. (2006) Curriculum for the compulsory school system, the preschool class and the leisure-time centre. Stockholm: Fritzes.
Nieto, S. (1995) From brown heroes and holidays to assimilationist agendas: reconsidering the
critiques of multicultural education. In C. E. Sleeter & P. L. Mclaren (eds.) Multicultural Education, Critical Pedagogy, and the Politics of Difference. Albany, NY: Suny Press, 191–220.
Ochoa-Becker, A. S., (2007) Democratic Education for Social Studies: an issue-centered decision
making curriculum. Greenwich, Conn.: Information age publishing. 379
Monika Vinterek
Petterson, O. (2009) Vår demokrati. Stockholm: SNS.
Rosenblatt, L. M. (1986) The aesthetic transaction. Journal of Aesthetic Education 20, 122–128.
Rosenblatt, L. M. (1991) Literary Theory. In J. Flood, J. Jensen, D. Lapp, & J. Squire (eds.), Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts. New York: Macmillan, 57–62.
Rosenblatt, L. M. (2004) The transactional theory of reading and writing. In R.B. Ruddell and N.J.
Unrau (eds.) Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed.). Newark, DE: International Reading Association, 1363–1398.
Skolverket (2008) Grundskolans kursplaner och betygskriterier. Stockholm: Fritzes.
Torney-Purta, J. Lehmann, R. Oswald H. and Schulz W. (2001) Citizenship and education in
twenty-eight countries: civic knowledge and engagement at age fourteen. Amsterdam: IEA
(International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement).
Utbildningsdepartementet [Ministry of Education and Research] (2010a). Education Act
(1985:1100). http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/574/a/21538 (accessed 25 January 2010).
Utbildningsdepartementet [Ministry of Education and Research] (2010b) Gymnasieförordning
(1992:394), 4 kap, 3 § http://www.riksdagen.se/webbnav/index.aspx?nid=3911&bet=1992:394
(accessed 11 April 2010).
Utbildningsdepartementet [Ministry of Education and Research] (2010c) Grundskoleförordningen (1994:1194) [Compulsory School Ordinance (1994:1194)], 3 kap. 6§ http://www.notisum.
se/rnp/SLS/LAG/19941194.HTM (accessed 11 April 2010).
Wolcott, H. F. (2005) The Art of Fieldwork. Oxford: AltaMira Press.
380