Search

Since 1995 all Swedish compulsory schools have been required to establish Individual Educational Plans (IEPs) for pupils with special educational needs. According to the Swedish Education Act such a plan should be drawn up if pupils do not achieve the goals in the curriculum or the syllabus. The process of IEPs covers a prior investigation to identify and assess what kind of problems or difficulties a pupil has. These investigations should be the basis for decision to ensure that the pupils get adequate support for their needs. In the current study we examine the use of IEPs for pupils with reading difficulties. Data in the study comprised 150 IEPs. One important part of the analysis of the IEPs included quality aspects of investigations and interventions. The results show a large variation of the quality for both. In many cases there is a lack of prior investigation in the IEPs and in other cases a limited connection between the assessments of the investigations and the interventions. Furthermore, the results indicate interventions based on assessments of the investigations, generally show a higher quality level. Therefore, the key conclusion is that investigations are crucial in designing interventions and establishing IEPs.

The documentation of pupils in Swedish schools is extensive and a documentation culture has come to characterize the schools in recent years. In the context of decentralization and changing governance, focus has increasingly been directed towards assessment, follow-up and evaluation of pupils' learning and social development. This article examines the Individual Educational Plans (hereafter IEP) used for pupils with special educational needs in Swedish compulsory schools from the perspective of text analyses based on discourse theory. The aim of this study is to shed light on how pupils are constructed in the school's documentation. The study examines how these IEPs are used as a pedagogical technique for new ways of governing in order to impose self-regulation, individual responsibility and social control. The documents, which comprise the empirical material in this article, are gathered from 14 different schools and consist of documents for a total of 136 pupils with special educational needs.

The aim of this article is to offer some reflections on the relationship between meanings of equity at the national level and those working with these questions in local schools. We argue that meanings of equity at the national level are in strong contrast to the range complexity identified in local schools. The article draws from case study research, and the empirical data were gathered in seven schools, ranging from preschools to upper secondary schools. Our focus is on how issues of equity are interpreted and what challenges the schools face in relation to this. Our intention is to gain insights into processes where values of equity are negotiated, renegotiated and reshaped in daily contexts in schools. Our results convey a complex picture with a wide variation in how school staff interpret and work with fundamental values. This variation appears both within and between schools. An analysis of the variations resulted in three overarching themes: values as taken for granted, values as formalized and values as a pedagogical flow. These three themes are not exclusive or limited; instead, they should be seen as intertwined.

Since 1995, all Swedish compulsory schools have had a legal obligation to establish individual educational plans (IEPs) for pupils with special educational needs. However, previous research shows that there are a number of issues associated with how these plans are used in schools' overall work and identifies a discrepancy between educational policy and practice. In this article, we review previous research on authentic IEPs in Sweden to clarify issues and obstacles associated with each step of the process of working with these plans. We then problematise and critically discuss the role that IEPs have come to play in the current Swedish education system and Swedish education policy, following recent reforms. Informed by our review of previous research and the transformation of the Swedish education system during recent years, we conclude that the following issues regarding the use of IEPs require particular consideration on both policy and local school levels. Firstly, partly (at least) because guidelines for implementing IEPs are inadequate, schools appear to "enact" rather than "implement" these policy demands, without critically considering "what" an IEP is and "how" it should be used in practice. Secondly, in contrast to initial intentions, IEPs largely seem to be used primarily as administrative tools rather than to help meet the educational and developmental needs of the pupils concerned. Hence, there is a risk of IEPs being used merely for "fabricating" a sanitised version of the schools' procedures to demonstrate accountability in national quality audits and give a favourable representation of the schools. Finally, parents and pupils' participation and involvement in developing IEPs need further exploration in schools. These issues should ideally be critically examined in future studies regarding the use of IEPs both nationally and internationally.

New forms of activities now shape and govern the Swedish education system, based on governance through comparison. The focus on comparison can be regarded as soft governance and different types of (self-) evaluations and valuations are, at present, deeply embedded keystones in the decentralised education system. Recently this has, together with the transformation of the Swedish education system, led to an increase in the number of documents being written in school for quality assurance and in order to assess, follow-up and evaluate students' learning and development. To address these challenges, different commercial actors have become part of school practices and market, e.g. digital tools for assessment. The government's acceptance of this industry has allowed the rise of neo-liberal ideas that are required in so-called 'knowledge economies'. The aim of this article is to report the findings from three empirical studies of how digital tools for documentation are viewed by teachers and used in practice. Our findings show that the digital tools shape both students', as well as the professionals', identities through their role of governing activities and processes. The usage of the tools could jeopardise teachers' profession and there is a risk of de-professionalism.