Abstract:

In this Ignite talk, I will present a paper in progress that examines pupils’ ability to participate in Norwegian schools through a case study developed in cooperation with a student teacher. Through an intervention, we attempted to search for alternative didactical methods by utilizing self-determination as a structural tool to encourage participation as a part of teaching democratically.  This study examines this intervention through the lens of autonomy based on some of the perspectives from critical theory:

1. What factors affect pupils’ participation in class activities when the teaching is structured on the principle of autonomy support?
2. How does an intervention based on self-determination impact the pupils’ experience of autonomy in school activities?

The study is a part of a larger project where we investigate three interdisciplinary themes currently implemented in Norwegian schools (USN, 2020). These are public health and life skills, sustainable development, and democracy and citizenship (Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training, 2017b). This project specifically focuses on how to teach democratically. The ambition for a democratic school is not only stated in the Norwegian curriculum but is agreed upon in UN Convention on the Rights of Children (Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training, 2017a; United Nations, 1990).

Each year a pupil survey is conducted from 5^th through Upper Secondary School in Norway. The survey investigates the pupil’s experience regarding their teaching environment and schooling. The survey’s intention is to improve Norwegian schools (Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training, 2022). Pupils’ co-determination and participation are repeated and recommended in every yearly report but do not seem to be improving in Norwegian schools. At the same time, motivation for schoolwork is declining. In the later reports, it is demonstrated that the pupils’ stress impacts their well-being. The observed shift of focus toward achievements over learning could be a plausible explanation for their experienced stress (Mellingsæter, 2018). The psychological theory of self-determination is highly critical to the educational systems’ use of external pressure. External motivations’ effects on cognitive growth, academic success, and the learner’s well-being are regarded as questionable (Ryan & Deci, 2017). Although most Norwegian pupils experience well-being at school, it is alarming that motivation for doing schoolwork is declining, and that their experienced ability to co-determine in and through their education does not seem to improve.

Therefore, we initiated an intervention where pupils in 7^th grade chose what and how to learn, combined with questionaries to the pupils on their general opportunities for participation and their experiences of this intervention. Seven months after the intervention, we asked the pupils to briefly comment on what they remembered. Results from observational notes, questionnaires, and unstructured comments have been analyzed and discussed through a combined framework of critical pedagogy and self-determination theory. Critical pedagogy points at some of the problematic structures of traditional schooling, while self-determination theory is a motivational theory, explaining how a “…more self-­ determined functioning is associated with greater creativity, superior learning, better performance, enhanced well-being, and higher quality relationships” (Ryan & Deci, 2017, p. 17). Previous research has demonstrated the benefits such as learning, well-being, creativity, and motivation in situations where teachers are supporting students in their autonomy (Engesbak et al., 2021; Koestner et al., 1984).

Educators such as Paulo Freire (Freire, 1996, 2021; Shor, 1993) and bell hooks  (1994, 2010) are critical to ‘authority-dependence’ as a consequence of learned passivity through traditional schooling. The critic is overlapping with the self-determination theory regarding external pressure, where top-down pressure is regarded as inadvisable. Instead, both theories promote students' and teachers' inclusion and active participation in co-developing educational content. 

Methods The project is a case-study intervention in one class, where we followed the students for two days. Participants The class consisted of 18 pupils between the age of 12 and 13, and the school was situated in a suburban area in Norway. The intervention was initiated after two in-depth interviews with a student teacher. This intervention was developed in cooperation with the student teacher. Data collection Data was collected using various methods of participatory observations, questionaries before and after the intervention, and unstructured comments from the pupils seven months after the intervention. The observation was semi-structured with a specific focus on active engagement and self-regulated learning. As it was our ideas being tested and evaluated by us, acknowledging the possibility of our bias regarding the more problematic aspects is essential. Triangulating using a questionnaire before and after the intervention, supplies the study with the pupils’ responses, as did the unstructured comments months after the intervention. The participatory approach allowed interaction with the pupils, hence opening an in-depth understanding of their experiences and actions. This semi-structured approach gave the flexibility to observe unintentional factors such as the pupil’s enjoyment and fun. The method was intrusive as the intervention was initiated by us as outsiders and not their regular teachers, but unintrusive as they were amongst peers and other teachers in a familiar setting. Analysis The observational notes were categorized into two categories: descriptions and interpretations. Descriptions are observations of specific actions or responses while interpretations are subjective readings of a situation, action, or response. The questionaries consisted of 12 checkbox questions in both the questionaries. The pupils could check several boxes when relevant. The first questionary had one question where the pupils were asked: How do you prefer to do schoolwork? The check box alternatives were therefore different methods such as project work and listening to the teacher. All the other questions had the check box alternatives of not at all, to a small extent, to some extent, to a large extent, and a very large extent. Self-determination theory consists of three main factors defining psychological needs for autonomy support: competency, relatedness, and autonomy (Ryan & Deci, 2017). The coded data and questionaries were organized into these three factors, examining SDT factors in the empirical material. Consistency in the empirical data has been investigated by comparing observational notes, questionaries, and unstructured comments.

Preliminary results In our intervention, we observed some factors that affected the pupil’s participation. The pupils expressed engagement through the work they were doing explaining that it was fun that they were allowed to have their preferences to direct the learning. At one point a pupil shouted across the classroom: “This has been the best day at school, ever”, resonating with the responses from the questionaries and unstructured comments. Most of the pupils were ambitious, planning to not only read and learn about a subject, but to make films, posters, and digital books. While this enthusiasm resulted in working during breaks, a few of the pupils became inactive in this process. The intervention seemed to have impacted the experience of autonomy because the pupils acted self-regulatory, organizing themselves, and planning for activities. Some of the pupils took a leading role, distributing tasks and regulating the others. Such self-organizing can cause a situation where the pupils argue, or do not allow for all to participate. Our questionnaires showed that the pupils enjoyed the ability to decide what and how to learn. A large majority report that they were engaged by the ability to decide themselves and that they liked how we had worked during these two days. In addition, most of the pupils reported that they wanted to have the ability to co-decide to a larger extent than today. The conclusions and analysis are still in progress, but the study’s results seem to be indicating that there is a need to experiment with self-determination in schools. The pupil survey in Norway repeatedly shows deficiencies in pupils’ participation and co-determination. We need more knowledge and practical experiences on how to stimulate pupils partaking competencies, both for their well-being and motivation, but also because we need citizens familiar with participating.

References Engesbak, O. S., Uthus, M., Kirkvold, L., & Pande-Rolfsen, M. S. (2021). “Maybe the kids need to decide a little?”: Trust and Relatedness through Increased Self-Determination - A qualitative study regarding third grade pupils' self-determination in light of social roles and relations. In: NTNU. Freire, P. (1996). Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. B. Ramos, Trans.; 20th anniversary ed. ed.). Penguin books. Freire, P. (2021). Education for Critical Consciousness (1 ed.). Bloomsbury Academic. http://www.bloomsburycollections.com/book/education-for-critical-consciousness/introduction-by-carlos-alberto-torres-2021/ hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress. Education as the practice of freedom. Routledge. hooks, b. (2010). Teaching Critical Thinking: Practical Wisdom. Florence: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203869192 Koestner, R., Ryan, R. M., Bernieri, F., & Holt, K. (1984). Setting limits on children's behavior: The differential effects of controlling vs. informational styles on intrinsic motivation and creativity. Journal of personality, 52(3), 233-248. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1984.tb00879.x Mellingsæter, H. (2018, 28.03.2018). Elevene har svart: Slik synker motivasjon, trivsel og støtte fra lærerne. Aftenposten. https://www.aftenposten.no/norge/i/yvbv8r/elevene-har-svart-slik-synker-motivasjon-trivsel-og-stoette-fra-laererne Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2017a). Core curriculum Democracy and citizenship. Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training,. Retrieved 03.01.2022 from https://www.udir.no/lk20/overordnet-del/prinsipper-for-laring-utvikling-og-danning/tverrfaglige-temaer/demokrati-og-medborgerskap/?lang=eng Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2017b). Core curriculum, Interdisciplinary topics. Retrieved from https://www.udir.no/lk20/overordnet-del/prinsipper-for-laring-utvikling-og-danning/tverrfaglige-temaer/?lang=eng Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2022). Elevundersøkelsen. Utdanningsdirektoratet. https://www.udir.no/tall-og-forskning/brukerundersokelser/elevundersokelsen/ Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory : basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. The Guilford Press. Shor, I. (1993). EDUCATION IS POLITICS. Paulo Freire's critical pedagogy,. In P. McLaren & P. Leonard (Eds.), Paulo Freire: a critical encounter. Routledge. Convention on the Rights of the Child, 15 1 (1990). https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/crc.pdf USN. (2020). Forskningsprosjektet BRIDGES. https://www.usn.no/forskning/hva-forsker-vi-pa/barnehage-skole-og-hoyere-utdanning/samfunnsfagdidaktikk/bridges/