The Swedish preschool, as part of the national educational system, is influenced by global discourses wherein education is defined as in need of constant improvement (Moss, 2013). These perceptions often stem from discussions of insufficient outcomes in international assessments, such as TIMMS and PISA. In response, governments, including the Swedish, regularly introduce new policies intended for implementation in local pedagogical practices (Adolfsson & Håkansson, 2019; Smith, 2016). Examples of such national initiatives include: “The Best School Possible” (CBS) (U2019/03786/S) in Sweden, “Every child matters: change for children in schools” (DfES/1089/2004) in Great Britain and “No child Left Behind” (20 USC 6301 note, 2002) in the United States.

This paper draws on an ongoing research project (2022–2024) investigating CBS policy (U2019/03786/S) in Swedish preschools. Decentralisation and recentralisation of educational systems, such as the Swedish, create unique settings for the realisation of policies like CBS (cf. Håkansson & Rönnström, 2021). While CBS can be understood as an example of the state’s increased control over preschools, it also includes intentions for local professional’s influence (U2019/03786/S).

CBS entails a three-year working process with a predetermined plan to identify and improve deficiencies in pedagogical practices (Skolverket, 2023). This initiative in local preschools, supported by university staff and led by head teachers and selected preschool teachers, aims to involve all preschool staff. Swedish preschool staff consist of various professions, mostly common preschool teachers with university degrees and professionals (referred to as assistants) with college degrees. Despite their different formal responsibilities, all are expected to provide high-quality pedagogical practice in line with the common national curriculum (Swedish National Agency of Education [SNAE], 2018).

Despite the rich array of international studies on national improvement initiatives (e.g., Cameron, 2010; Coborn & Spillane, 2016), research specifically on CBS, especially in the preschool context, remains sparse (Adolfsson & Håkansson, 2019).

In the current research project, we raise questions about how preschool professionals meet the demand for improvement in preschools with challenging conditions. Specifically, how is the CBS policy ‘made’ by professionals in local preschools? This paper aims to discuss how this policy is perceived and used in pedagogical practices by preschool professionals at the end of the three-year process. 

The following research question is addressed: 

-       How do preschool teachers and assistants understand and experience the way CBS is transformed and carried out in preschools’ pedagogical practice?  

This paper is grounded in Billig’s (1991) theoretical and methodological concept of ideological dilemmas. Billig argues that such dilemmas, which are overarching and recurring in society, may appear in different contexts, including scientific, political and everyday talk. These dilemmas encompass different logics regarding, for instance, regarding how education should be and can be controlled. Furthermore, they are seen as productive – if contrary rhetorical positions are articulated and discussed (cf. Billig 1991) – potentially deepening the understanding of a phenomenon such as CBS. In this paper, ideological dilemmas are useful for analysing both the opposing logics in professionals’ reasonings regarding CBS and the general dilemmas operating in the educational context (cf. Olsson et al., 2023).

So far, the research project has included 14 semi-structured interviews with 12 preschool teachers and two head teachers from four preschools. In spring 2024, further interviews are planned with both previously involved (and currently employed) preschool teachers (10) and assistants (10). These interviews (cf. Brinkmann & Kvale, 2015) aim to examine, in-depth, the participants’ understanding and experiences of CBS. Participants were selected from a Swedish municipality where work with CBS began at the beginning of 2022. Information about the research project was communicated to all current preschools, and those where all involved staff agreed to participate were selected. In accordance with the Swedish Research Council’s (2017) ethical principles, informed and written consent were obtained. Ethical guidelines were adhered to regarding participants’ voluntariness, confidentiality and data handling. The analysis is carried out in two steps. 1) An inductive analysis procedure is followed where patterns and themes are distinguished (Graneheim & Lundman, 2004) regarding how the preschool teachers and assistants understand and experience the transformation and implementation of the CBS initiative in their pedagogical practices; 2) Theoretical analysis tools are used to visualise tensions in the material and informants’ use of rhetorical resources.

In this paper, questions are raised about how preschool professionals in a local context understand and handle the CBS policy, whose intentions have been formulated at a national level. In an earlier paper about the initiation of this policy (Olsson & Fredriksson, submitted), the risks of an overly narrow view of the pedagogical practice in which local conditions are neglected were pointed out. The expected findings of this paper may align with the former. If local conditions are neglected, professionals may overlook how current educational contexts, such as preschool environments, affect or create perceived shortcomings. However, through collaboration with university staff over time, preschool teachers might have discussed how local conditions are related to and can be handled within the pedagogical practice. Nevertheless, assistants have not been involved to a great extent in these discussions, despite their assigned responsibility for the current practice. Instead, preschool teachers have been given the responsibility of discussing with assistants how the policy can be implemented in pedagogical practice. It is probable that professionals position themselves in different ways in relation to CBS, and tensions might arise between different professionals’ understanding and experiences regarding how and for what purpose CBS should and can be transformed into local practice. This paper not only contributes to early childhood education research but also enhances understanding of how national policies might be understood, transformed and implemented by practitioners in local pedagogical practices. Thus, this paper could lead to further discussions about why, for what and for whom an educational practice needs to be improved.

20 USC 6301 note. (2002). No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 Education. Inter-governmental relations. United States of America in Congress assembled (USC). Adolfsson, C.-H., & Håkansson, J. (2019). Evaluating teacher and school development by learning capital: A conceptual contribution to a fundamental problem. Improving Schools, 22(2), 130–143. Billig, M. (1991). Ideology and opinions: Studies in rhetorical psychology. Sage Publications Inc. Brinkmann, S., & Kvale, S. (2015). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (3 ed.). Sage Publications. Cameron, K., & Boyles, D. (2022). Learning and teaching in a neoliberal era: The tensions of engaging in Froebelian-Informed pedagogy while encountering quality standards. Global Education Review, 9(2), 99–117. Cameron, D. H. (2010). Implementing a large-scale reform in secondary schools: The role of the consultant within England’s Secondary National Strategy. Journal of Education Policy, 25(5), 605–624. DfES. 2004. Every child matters: Change for children in schools. London: DfES. No. DfES/1089/2004. Graneheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today, 24(2), 105–12. Håkansson, J., & Rönnström, N. (2021). Samverkan för bästa skola – skolförbättring som politiskt styrd nationell angelägenhet genom samverkan och forskarmedverkan. Pedagogisk Forskning i Sverige, 26(1), /–14. Moss, G. (2013). Research, policy and knowledge flows in education: What counts in knowledge mobilisation? Contemporary Social Science, 8(3), 237–248. Olsson, M., Ericson, J., von Ahlefeld Nisser, D., & Randell, E. (2023). Between an educational task and an idea for treatment: multiprofessional collaboration for supporting children “at risk” – a coordinator role in pedagogical practice. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, prepublication online. Rönnström, N. (2015). Educating competitive teachers for a competitive nation? Policy Futures in Education, 13(6), 732–750. Skolverket (2023). Samverkan för bästa skola. https://www.skolverket.se/skolutveckling/leda-och-organisera-skolan/samverkan-for-basta-skola#h-Meromprocessen Smith, W. C. (2016). An introduction to the global testing culture. In W.C., Smith (Ed.), The global testing culture: Shaping education policy, perceptions, and practice, (pp.7–23). Oxford Studies in Comparative Education, Symposium. Swedish National Agency of Education, SNAE (2018). Curriculum for the preschool, Lpfö 18. https://www.skolverket.se/publikationsserier/styrdokument/2019/curriculum-for-the-preschool-lpfo-18 Swedish Research Council (2017). Good Research Practice. https://www.vr.se/english/analysis/reports/our-reports/2017-08-31-good-research-practice.html U2019/03786/S. Uppdrag till Statens skolverk om samverkan för bästa skola. Regeringsbeslut. https://www.regeringen.se/contentassets/0fc920eda8b546f18b05693c890218f7/uppdrag-till-statens-skolverk-om-samverkan-for-basta-skola-u201903786s/