Vad, hur och varför i slöjdämnet textillärares uppfattningar om innehåll och undervisning i relation till kursplanen

Detta är en avhandling från Umeå : Umeå universitet

Sammanfattning: The thesis deals with questions of how the purpose and content in the Swedish school subject Sloyd can be understood in the present, some years after a new curriculum came into effect in 2011. Through sloyd teachers’ stories of their knowledge and the historical traces that have left a mark on their teaching, such as older syllabuses and mediated experiences, the intention is to examine the pedagogical thinking that forms the classroom’s activities. The overall purpose is to develop knowledge of what shapes the design of sloyd, based on how the subject is expressed in the syllabus and in teachers' understandings of teaching and the subject. Based on previous knowledge and interviews, a hermeneutic research process has been designed and developed over time. Seventeen semi-structured interviews with textiles teachers where conducted, recorded and transcribed for the study. The hermeneutic interpretation process involved repeatedly reading and listening, and the material was coded using the digital analysis tool ATLAS.ti. Through repeated reading of the codes, three overarching themes were found: Textiles teachers' perceptions of Sloyd’s purpose and content, Textiles teachers’ teaching, and Manual and intellectual work in unity. The perspective of curriculum theory using a frame factor model is intended to highlight how Sloyd manifests itself at different levels of interpretation, which may impact how sloyd takes shape in the classroom. For a functional perspective on the study's data, didactic theory is used with a focus on subject didactics. The transformation phase is central to the shaping of Sloyd, where teachers’ beliefs and perceptions about the subject will influence their interpretation of the syllabus. Shulman's model of pedagogical thinking and action linked to pedagogical content knowledge, PCK, form the basis for the analysis together with theoretical perspectives on teachers’ pedagogical thinking as Kansanen and Hansén describes it. In summary, two levels of pedagogical thinking are distinguished by analysis. Firstly, based on those teachers who transform and implement teaching in sloyd based on an interpretation that follows the syllabus closely, and secondly, based on those who proceed from an interpretation that is closer to sloyd’s field of knowledge, based on handicraft. This results in two subject conceptions relating to sloyd. Teachers can ascribe to one of these, or move between them in the different phases of pedagogical planning and reflection. The conclusions also include an understanding of why the knowledge requirements in the syllabus largely relate to the students expressing themselves in words regarding their learning and their choices during the process. The curriculum is results-oriented and the knowledge that is evaluated must therefore be measurable and comparable, and be made possible to learn through the subject content. It can also be interpreted as an approximation of a practical knowledge culture to a theoretical knowledge culture, and therefore a legitimation of a practical subject in the school context that elementary school constitutes.