Search

Discourses on Inclusion in Media. This article explores discourses on inclusion in articles about education in Sweden’s four largest newspapers, and how these discourses position children, students, teachers, and schools. The findings indicate that the journalistic practices of agendization, accountabilization, factualization, emphasizing, and sensationalization have impacted arguments and increased the newsworthiness of the subject. Inclusion is often discussed in a sporadic and inconsistent way and students and teachers are often positioned out of a deficit perspective. Discourses were demarcated on three interrelated levels: an individual level, an organisational level, and a societal level., Inkluderingsbegreppets makt och mening

Discourses on Inclusion in Media. This article explores discourses on inclusion in articles about education in Sweden’s four largest newspapers, and how these discourses position children, students, teachers, and schools. The findings indicate that the journalistic practices of agendization, accountabilization, factualization, emphasizing, and sensationalization have impacted arguments and increased the newsworthiness of the subject. Inclusion is often discussed in a sporadic and inconsistent way and students and teachers are often positioned out of a deficit perspective. Discourses were demarcated on three interrelated levels: an individual level, an organisational level, and a societal level., Inkluderingsbegreppets makt och mening

Discourses on Inclusion in Media. This article explores discourses on inclusion in articles about education in Sweden’s four largest newspapers, and how these discourses position children, students, teachers, and schools. The findings indicate that the journalistic practices of agendization, accountabilization, factualization, emphasizing, and sensationalization have impacted arguments and increased the newsworthiness of the subject. Inclusion is often discussed in a sporadic and inconsistent way and students and teachers are often positioned out of a deficit perspective. Discourses were demarcated on three interrelated levels: an individual level, an organisational level, and a societal level., Inkluderingsbegreppets makt och mening

Discourses on Inclusion in Media. This article explores discourses on inclusion in articles about education in Sweden’s four largest newspapers, and how these discourses position children, students, teachers, and schools. The findings indicate that the journalistic practices of agendization, accountabilization, factualization, emphasizing, and sensationalization have impacted arguments and increased the newsworthiness of the subject. Inclusion is often discussed in a sporadic and inconsistent way and students and teachers are often positioned out of a deficit perspective. Discourses were demarcated on three interrelated levels: an individual level, an organisational level, and a societal level., Inkluderingsbegreppets makt och mening

Discourses on Inclusion in Media. This article explores discourses on inclusion in articles about education in Sweden’s four largest newspapers, and how these discourses position children, students, teachers, and schools. The findings indicate that the journalistic practices of agendization, accountabilization, factualization, emphasizing, and sensationalization have impacted arguments and increased the newsworthiness of the subject. Inclusion is often discussed in a sporadic and inconsistent way and students and teachers are often positioned out of a deficit perspective. Discourses were demarcated on three interrelated levels: an individual level, an organisational level, and a societal level., Inkluderingsbegreppets makt och mening

Discourses on Inclusion in Media. This article explores discourses on inclusion in articles about education in Sweden’s four largest newspapers, and how these discourses position children, students, teachers, and schools. The findings indicate that the journalistic practices of agendization, accountabilization, factualization, emphasizing, and sensationalization have impacted arguments and increased the newsworthiness of the subject. Inclusion is often discussed in a sporadic and inconsistent way and students and teachers are often positioned out of a deficit perspective. Discourses were demarcated on three interrelated levels: an individual level, an organisational level, and a societal level., Inkluderingsbegreppets makt och mening

Discourses on Inclusion in Media. This article explores discourses on inclusion in articles about education in Sweden’s four largest newspapers, and how these discourses position children, students, teachers, and schools. The findings indicate that the journalistic practices of agendization, accountabilization, factualization, emphasizing, and sensationalization have impacted arguments and increased the newsworthiness of the subject. Inclusion is often discussed in a sporadic and inconsistent way and students and teachers are often positioned out of a deficit perspective. Discourses were demarcated on three interrelated levels: an individual level, an organisational level, and a societal level., Inkluderingsbegreppets makt och mening

Discourses on Inclusion in Media. This article explores discourses on inclusion in articles about education in Sweden’s four largest newspapers, and how these discourses position children, students, teachers, and schools. The findings indicate that the journalistic practices of agendization, accountabilization, factualization, emphasizing, and sensationalization have impacted arguments and increased the newsworthiness of the subject. Inclusion is often discussed in a sporadic and inconsistent way and students and teachers are often positioned out of a deficit perspective. Discourses were demarcated on three interrelated levels: an individual level, an organisational level, and a societal level., Inkluderingsbegreppets makt och mening

Discourses on Inclusion in Media. This article explores discourses on inclusion in articles about education in Sweden’s four largest newspapers, and how these discourses position children, students, teachers, and schools. The findings indicate that the journalistic practices of agendization, accountabilization, factualization, emphasizing, and sensationalization have impacted arguments and increased the newsworthiness of the subject. Inclusion is often discussed in a sporadic and inconsistent way and students and teachers are often positioned out of a deficit perspective. Discourses were demarcated on three interrelated levels: an individual level, an organisational level, and a societal level., Inkluderingsbegreppets makt och mening

Discourses on Inclusion in Media. This article explores discourses on inclusion in articles about education in Sweden’s four largest newspapers, and how these discourses position children, students, teachers, and schools. The findings indicate that the journalistic practices of agendization, accountabilization, factualization, emphasizing, and sensationalization have impacted arguments and increased the newsworthiness of the subject. Inclusion is often discussed in a sporadic and inconsistent way and students and teachers are often positioned out of a deficit perspective. Discourses were demarcated on three interrelated levels: an individual level, an organisational level, and a societal level., Inkluderingsbegreppets makt och mening

Den här rapporten handlar om barns medieanvändning, de strategier som föräldrar tillämpar för att kontrollera sitt barns medieanvändning och de familjekonflikter som barns mediebruk kan ge upphov till. Studien undersöker dels vilka konflikter som uppstår kring barns medieanvändning, och dels hur barn och föräldrar uppfattar och hanterar konfliktsituationer. Studien baseras på en kombination av kvantitativ och kvalitativ metod, i vilken statistisk analys av enkätdata kompletteras med analyser av kvalitativa intervjuer med barn och föräldrar. Rapporten bidrar med ny kunskap om barns medieanvändning och barn–föräldrarelationer i vardagslivet.