This research examines children´s human rights education in compulsory schools for pupils with intellectual disabilities. The writings about children's human rights in the Swedish school´s governing documents (for pupils without and with intellectual disabilities) are consistent with the UN documents, which define human rights education as education about, through,and for human rights (Strouthers, 2015). Through human rights education, children must be allowed to develop and grow as rights holders. A rights holder is a person who has knowledge of their rights and their ability to exercise their own, as well as respect the rights of others. Growing as a rights holder is something children do when they learn about human rights as well as they acquire rights-conscious attitudes, values, and behaviors through being a participant in human interaction.

Sweden has a long tradition of educating pupils with intellectual disability in segregated schools. In Sweden, the education of this group of pupils has a separate national curriculum and course syllabus, and teachers have a rather large room for interpreting values, goals, and regulations (Göransson & Klang, 2021).

Internationally, much research has examined educational institutions as arenas for children´s rights, and human rights education research in formal education is an emerging field of study (Quennerstedt & Moody, 2020). However, the adapted school is an institution where research about Human Rights Education is lacking. Therefore, knowledge about Human Rights Education for pupils with intellectual disability is almost non-existent, both in Sweden and internationally.

Something that has been noticed in research on the teacher's role is that teachers feel uncertain about how to teach human rights (Struthers, 2016; Quennerstedt, 2019; Quennerstedt et al., 2020), and that teachers' knowledge of human rights tends to be too weak and without subject matter depth (Cassidy, Brunner & Webster, 2014). There is a lack of knowledge about how teachers who work with pupils with intellectual disability interpret and implement the curriculum.

A Didaktik approach and terminology create the theoretical framework. Didaktik is the theory and practice of teaching and learning (Gundem, 2011). Collected data are analyzed with qualitative content analysis using Didaktik theory and Dewey's theory of collateral or embedded learning (Dewey, 1938). Dewey´s collateral learning is the lesson learners take from the accidental experience with the lesson rather than from the instructor´s intent.

This study explores the role of teachers educating children with intellectual disability in adapted primary schools about, through, and for human rights.

The purpose of planned teaching about children's human rights is examined, as well as the content and implementation of the teaching. Also, embedded human rights education is examined. The investigation of unplanned/embedded education is directed at two rights themes: equal value and freedom of expression. The following questions guided the research:

-          How can planned human rights education take place in an adapted primary school, and how do teachers view planned education as part of human rights education?

-          How can embedded human rights education take place in an adapted primary school, and how do teachers view embedded education as part of human rights education?

Two schools participated in the study that have adapted primary schools for pupils with intellectual disabilities. The pupils in the study are 7 to 12 years old. Observations of teachers and pupils, and interviews of the teachers in one class per school were carried out. The fieldwork lasted about 4-5 weeks in each school, with about 100 hours of observation per school spread over this time and 2-4 interviews with each teacher. The classes in adapted elementary school include several stacked grades, as there are usually few students in each grade and one to three teachers per school. The teachers were asked by the researcher to undertake planned work with the class on children's human rights. The teacher selected the content, methods, and scope of this work without involvement of the researcher. Other teaching and classroom activities were also observed to identify embedded human rights education. Semi-structured interviews took place before and after the implementation of the planned teaching. In a pre-interview, the teachers were asked what purpose they had with the teaching, the content and how they intended to work. In a post-interview, the teachers reflected on the completed teaching, and if they would have done something differently if they were to do the lesson again. All interviews were recorded and transcribed. The observations of the planned teaching situations were documented with film recordings. The embedded human rights education was investigated through observations of other teaching situations and the rest of everyday school life. Field notes documented these observations. The teachers were also interviewed about embedded teaching and were then asked to reflect on teaching and learning in everyday life and unplanned situations. The stimulated recall technique was used during these interviews, i.e., situations the researcher had observed were used as a basis for reflection. Collected data is then analyzed based on previously developed analytical tools, such as qualitative content analysis using didactic theory and Dewey´s theory of embedded learning. Qualitative content analysis is a process designed to condense raw data into categories or themes based on valid inference and interpretation. Qualitative content analysis is “any qualitative data reduction and sense-making effort that takes a volume of qualitative material and attempts to identify core consistencies and meanings” (Patton, 2015, p.453). This progress uses inductive reasoning. From inductive reasoning, themes and categories emerge from the data through the researcher's careful investigation and constant comparison. Through didactic theory, aim, content, and working methods are separated in the analysis.

The study is expected to make an essential contribution to the very limited knowledge about pedagogical children´s rights work in adapted schools where pupils with intellectual disability are educated, and particularly about human rights education in adapted schools. Initial findings show that: Planned (by the teacher) human rights education training - Time and repetition were highlighted by the teachers as a prerequisite for pupils with intellectual disabilities to learn about rights. - Communicative aids fulfilled an important purpose in planned teaching through rights where pupils could assert the right to their voice and freedom of expression. However, it also showed the risk of limiting the pupil's actions to what the adults around them thought they should communicate about. An adult perspective on communication means that various tools for communication (image support, materials, room design) are based on the teacher's perspective, where communication is about what they want the students to communicate. Rarely did the communication emanate from the student's perspective and their interaction with peers in play situations and everyday communication. Embedded human rights education training (unplanned) - Pupils with a severe disability require a relationship with an adult who recognizes the pupil's body language and signals and can interpret and pay attention to the child's needs, opinions, and wishes. This seems to be particularly important in unplanned teaching where others (pupils and other school staff) outside the “relational sphere” encounter pupils with severe intellectual disabilities. The adult often needed to step in, talk, and stand up for the student's rights. Planned and embedded human rights education training. - Many teachers in the classroom, which makes one-to-one-teaching possible risk minimizing teaching situations (planned and unplanned) where the pupils, together with other pupils and/or adults, get to practice experiencing through rights.

Cassidy, C., Brunner, R., Webster, E. (2014). Teaching human rights? ‘All hell will break loose!’ Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 9(1), 19–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/1746197913475768 Dewey, J. (1938/1997). Experience & Education. New York: Touchstone. Gundem, B. (2011). Europeisk didaktikk. Tenkning og viten. [European didactics. Thinking and knowing.] Oslo: Universitetsforlaget Göransson, K. Klang, N. (2021). Lärares uppfattningar om skola och undervisning för elever som läser enligt grund- och gymnasiesärskolans läroplaner. I M. Tideman (Red.), Utbildning och undervisning i särskolan-forskningsinsikter möter lärar-och eleverfarenheter (s. 32 – 58).Natur & Kultur. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Quennerstedt, A. (2019). Teaching children’s human rights in early childhood education and school (Reports in Education No 21). Örebro: Örebro University. Quennerstedt, A. Moody, Z. (2020). Educational children’s rights research 1989–2019: Achievements, gaps and future prospects. The International Journal of Children’s Rights, 28(1), 183–208. doi:10.1163/15718182-02801003 Quennerstedt, A. Thelander,N. Hägglund.S. (2020). Barns och ungas rättigheter i utbildning Gleerups Utbildning AB Struthers, A. (2015) Human rights education: educating about, through and for human rights. The International Journal of Human Rights 19 (1), 53-73 Struthers, A. (2016); Breaking Down Boundaries: Voice and participation in English primary education. The International Journal of Children's Rights 24 (2), 434-468