Session Information
Paper Session
Contribution
Research indicates that the school wellbeing of the average Finnish pupil improved between 1994 and 2006 (Kämppi et al. 2008). However, the number of pupils who became demotivated at school increased during the same period (Konu & Rimpelä 2002). In order to support these demotivated lower secondary level pupils, the Finnish Ministry of Education launched the Flexible Basic Education (JOPO, ‘joustava perusopetus’) project in 2006. The purpose of the project was to develop modes of study that enhance participation among adolescents and prevent comprehensive school dropouts. In all of the schools involved in the project, the participating pupils (also referred to as JOPO pupils) have been supported by inter-professional cooperation within the school environment. According to a national follow-up and evaluation study (Manninen & Luukannel 2008), approximately 90% of the pupils have benefited from the activities: among other things, pupils’ school motivation has improved. This has had a positive impact on pupils’ grades and enabled them to achieve school-leaving certificates. However, limited attention has been paid to the possibility of involving the other teachers in supporting these pupils and to integrate the new practices into the schools. The project has also ignored the results of earlier studies (Solomon & Rogers 2001) that indicate pupils with low school motivation often having low self-esteem and poor interaction skills. Therefore, in supporting the pupils, it is essential that their self-respect is improved. In the JOPO project, the pupils have been supported by a inter-professional team representing different professionals and students within the field of education (JOPO adults). A good “school atmosphere” can be created only if all of the professional groups working with lower-secondary-level pupils adopt a shared approach to work. In the interaction between teachers, other JOPO adults, and the pupils, one of the key factors raising the pupils’ self-respect is dialogical encountering: listening to, hearing, appreciating, and respecting the pupils. In this kind of interaction, the participants must be able to create a shared object for learning and investigation, in which each pupil’s life-world can be viewed from various perspectives (Ash & Wells 2006; Baxter, L. A. 2004). The aim of this study is to develop and test, through inter-professional collaboration, methods that promote pupils’ self-respect, opportunities, and responsibility of their own life and future (see Anning et al. 2008; Huotari 2008). The project participants include pupils, their teachers, and other adults from four lower secondary schools in different parts of Finland. The research task is to provide answers to the following questions: 1. What are the interactive methods that generate and develop the interactive relationship between poorly motivated lower-secondary-level pupils and the adults supporting them in different school environments? 2. What kinds of methods should be used to make an adolescent with a low school motivation want to reflect on his/her positive qualities and successes, as well as to make plans for the future? 3. What kinds of practices should be used to commit the whole school community to supporting pupils facing the threat of social exclusion?
Method
Expected Outcomes
References
Ash, D. & Wells, G. 2006. Dialogic inquiry in classroom and museum: actions, tools, and talk. Teoksessa Z. Bekerman, N. C. Burbules & D. Silberman-Keller (toim.) Learning in places. The informal education reader. New York: Peter Lang, 35-54. Anning, A., Cottrell, D., Frost, N., Green, J. & Robinson, M. 2008. Developing Multiprofessional Teamwork for Integrated Children’s Services. Research, Policy and Practice. Open University Press. Baxter, L. A. 2004. Dialogues of relating. In R. Anderson, L. A. Baxter & K. N. Cissna (eds.) Dialogue. Theorizing Difference in Communication Studies. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 107-124. Edwards, A., Daniels, H., Gallagher, T., Leadbetter, J. & Warmington, P. 2009. Improving Inter-professional Collaborations. Multi-agency working for children’s wellbeing. London: Routledge. Engeström, Y. & Kerosuo, H. 2007. From workplace learning to inter-organizational learning and back: the contribution of activity theory. Journal of Workplace Learning 19 (6), 336-342. Huotari, R. 2008. Development of collaboration in multiproblem cases: some possibilities and challenges. Journal of Social Work 8 (1), 83-98. Kämppi, K., Välimaa, R., Tynjälä, J., Haapasalo, I., Villberg, J. & Kannas, L. 2008. Peruskoulun 5., 7. ja 9. luokan oppilaiden koulukokemukset ja koettu terveys. WHO-Koululaistutkimuksen trendejä vuosina 1994-2006. (The school experiences and experienced health among pupils in the 5th, 7th and 9th grades of comprehensive school. Trends in the HBSC Study 1994-2006) Helsinki: Finnish National Board of Education. Manninen, J. & Luukannel, S. 2008. Flexible basic education. Impact analysis (JOPO-toiminnan vaikuttavuuden arviointi). Helsinki: Ministry of Education. Publications of the Ministry of Education 36. Konu, A. & Rimpelä, M. 2002. Well-being in schools: a conceptual model. Health Promotion International 17 (1), 79-87. Solomon, Y. & Rogers, C. 2001. Motivational Patterns in Disaffected School Students: insights from pupil referral unit clients. British Educational Research Journal 27 (3), 331-345.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.