General description on research questions, objectives and theoretical framework:

The aims of the research are following:

(I) To provide deeper understanding of pupils’ – especially boys’ – security and welfare

(II) To design pedagogical practices and modify the school environment in a way that it provides feelings of safety and well-being

(III) To create new kind of educational and curriculum thinking: to link education to the concept of human security, positive philosophy of hope and holistic view of humanity.

Considering the two crisis situations in Finland, the school shootings in Jokela Nov 2007 and in Kauhajoki Sept 2008), it is crucial to gain better understanding about the school environment from a security perspective. Mainstream understanding of security has been emphasizing stricter control, more effective surveillance and corrective measures. In school environment security has been linked to fire safety and rescue readiness, or prevention of vandalism, bullying and physical violence. Our research instead approaches security from a more human centric and holistic perspective. Our research promotes school curricula, pedagogies and school programs aiming at positive and ethical identity development, finding one’s own talents and strengths, and strengthening pupils’ feelings of hope and prospects of personal future.  This approach is similar to theory of restorative justice that fosters dialogue between victim and offender. At schools this means that children are themselves educated, not to avoid, but solve conflicts in peaceful manner (Kiilakoski 2010). This change of agency to pupils themselves means a break to traditional structures of power and authority at schools.

In the school environment and culture many boys live at risk. Boys face more physical violence at schools (Peura et al. 2009). Boys learn at schools to see other males as potential threat – they learn violent masculinity (Jokinen 2000). This on the other hand makes boys’ conflicts more visible and labels boys as troublemakers and more prone to corrective measures and control.  Boy pupils are also in danger to drop out; from all pupils who break off their school in Finland 63% are boys. Boys learn more slowly and like less the school life compared to girls. According to statistics and studies 70% of all pupils provided special education are boys. In our research we pay special attention to boy pupils, their experiences of safety and well-being.

The research questions are: (1) How pupils – especially boys – understand the concepts of security and welfare in everyday school life? (2) What kind of experiences pupils – especially boy pupils – have of security and welfare in everyday school life? (3) How could school (pedagogy and curriculum) as a formal educational institution strengthen pupils’ – especially boys – feelings of security and welfare?

References: Bruner, J. 1986. Actual minds, possible words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Bruner, J. 1987. Life as narrative. Social Research 54 (1). Clough, P. 2002. Narratives and fictions in educational research. Buckingham: Open University Press. Hatch, J. & Wisniewski R. (Eds.) 1995. Life history and narrative. London: Falmer. Jokinen, A. 2000. Panssaroitu maskuliinisuus. Mies, väkivalta ja kulttuuri. [Armored Masculinity. Man, Violence and Culture] Tampere: Tampere University Press. Kiilakoski, T. 2009. Viiltoja. Analyysi kouluväkivallasta Jokelassa. [Cuts. Analysis of School Violence in Jokela] Verkkojulkaisuja 28. Helsinki: Nuorisotutkimusverkosto. Peura, J., Peltonen, M. & Kirves, L. 2009. Miksi kertoisin, kun se ei auta? Raportti nuorten kiusaamiskyselystä. [Why Would I Tell, If It Does Not Help? Report of the Questionnaire of Bullying among Youth]. Helsinki: Mannerheimin lastensuojeluliitto. Syrjäläinen, E. 1990. Teachers’ and pupils’ role behavior in the classroom. An ethnographic case study of fourth graders in comprehensive and Steiner school. University of Helsinki. Department of Teacher Education.