How is education on gender equality implemented in schools?: a study of the attitudes, knowledge and interests of school leaders in pre-, primary and upper secondary schools.

Hér er greint frá niðurstöðum spurningakönnunar á viðhorfum, þekkingu og áhuga skólastjóra í leik-, grunn-, og framhaldsskólum á kynjajafnrétti og fræðslu á því sviði. Sambærileg rannsókn meðal skólastjóra hefur ekki verið gerð. Spurningalisti var sendur rafrænt til allra skólastjóra leikskóla (n=78) og grunnskóla (n=43) í Reykjavík og til allra skólameistara (n=14) á höfuðborgarsvæðinu í janúar 2016. Svarhlutfall var 68%, eða 92 af þeim 135 sem svöruðu, en allmargir slepptu mörgum spurningum, m.a. bakgrunnsspurningum. Fimmtíu og níu þátttakendur svöruðu til um kyn. Af þeim voru 14 karlar og 45 konur. Fram kom mikill áhugi eða ákall mikils meirihluta skólastjóranna sem svara (86%) um aukna kynjajafnréttisfræðslu inn í skólana, fyrir nemendur, kennara og stjórnendur. Rúmlega helmingur skólastjóranna aðhyllist almennt það sjónarmið að það sé munur á kynjunum sem námsmönnum. Flestir telja muninn menningarbundinn en minni hópur (12%) telur að um eðlismun sé að ræða. Niðurstöðurnar sýna að tekið er á jafnréttismálum á ýmsan hátt í skólunum, að mati skólastjóra, bæði meðal nemenda og kennara. Flestir skólastjóranna nefna að algengast sé að fjalla um jafnréttismál í lífsleiknikennslu og samfélagsgreinum en einnig í samverustundum og daglegu samtali við nemendur. Af svörum skólastjóranna verður þó lítið ráðið um það hvert umfang þessara aðgerða er eða hversu markvissar þær eru enda telja þeir sjálfir að margt megi bæta á þessu sviði. Höfundar telja að þótt þekking skólastjóra á kynjafræðilegum grunnhugtökum sé að sumu leyti góð, þá sé ástæða til að óttast að hún sé ekki nægjanleg til að hreyfa við staðalmyndum kynjanna. Hverjar sem ástæðurnar eru er ljóst að skólastjórar á öllum skólastigum eru mjög áhugasamir um að fá fræðslu um kynjajafnrétti inn í skólana, með áherslu á að breyta hefðbundnum staðalmyndum og vinna gegn kynferðislegri áreitni, m.a. á samfélagsmiðlum. Mikilvægt er að fylgja þeim áhuga eftir.This article reports on a research project by The Centre for Research on Equality, Gender and Education, at the University of Iceland, examining the attitudes, knowledge and interests of principals at three school levels concerning gender equality. Since 2008 equality issues have, by law, been a new subject of study in primary schools, and an optional subject in upper secondary schools. Moreover, since 2011 equality has been one of six pillars of education in the national curriculum guide for all school levels. This study is the third part of the Centre´s research investigating practices and resistances towards gender equality in teacher education and in schools. This study is among the first focusing on school leaders and gender equality issues in Iceland and possibly worldwide. The aim of this research was to investigate how gender issues are being dealt with in schools, as described by school leaders and to learn about their attitudes, knowledge and interest, regarding gender equality issues. An online questionnaire was sent to all leaders of pre-schools (N=78) and primary schools (N=43) in Reykjavik, Iceland and to all school leaders of upper secondary schools in the Reykjavik metropolitan area (N=14). The formal response rate was 68%, or 92 of 135 responded, but many questions were not answered including background questions which made detailed analysis difficult. The findings suggest that gender equality is being dealt with in various ways in schools according to the school leaders, both among teachers and pupils. Equality weeks, equality days or formal equality plans are mentioned as well as lectures and developmental projects. Equality issues are not a special subject yet in primary schools, but are integrated into other subjects. It is, however, not clear how effective these measures are. Research suggests that while little is done in this field, other issues related to neo-liberalism are prioritized. Findings on attitudes to gender differences in students’ interests and choices indicate that slightly more than half of the school leaders believe such gender differences exist, but only a small group of school leaders (12%) endorse essentialism. The remainder endorse social constructivism, which is in agreement with their hope and belief that change is possible. Fortunately the essentialists are a much smaller group than we found in earlier research among teacher education students (50%). Nevertheless, the gender issues these two groups see as most important are the same; that is, changing gender stereotypes, fighting gender violence, and gender related bullying or harassment on social media. Even if the principals believe they have sound knowledge of some gender related concepts like equality (100%) and masculinity (93%), there is reason to fear that their knowledge of other equality-related concepts is not good enough to change gender stereotypes. The concept gender is considered well known by 50% of those that answered, essentialism by 47%, and gender system by only 28%. The definitions given by the principals suggest that the proportion of those who know the concepts well is even lower. Moreover, among principals, findings show considerable interest in, or even insistence upon, increased education relating to gender issues in schools. In particular they are interested in changing gender stereotypes and responding to young people’s complaints about sexual harassment, especially in social media. Thee school leaders are interested in the use of a Nordic website on gender issues in education; 68% say they will use it monthly or more often and only 5% state that they are not interested. Despite avowed interest in increasing gender education in schools and changing traditional gender stereotypes, as well as demonstrating a formally acceptable response rate, school leaders received the questionnaire with reluctance, and did not show interest in focus group interviews. This gives rise to various questions: Are the school leaders possibly preoccupied with bureaucratic chores because of the impact of NPM (New Public Management) at the expense of the core activities of teaching and learning? Or is it conceivable that tasks, such as equality issues, are met with more resistance than others? We found no evidence that school leaders are ambivalent towards changing traditional gender roles, despite the inherent risks that students who oppose them might face harassment or mobbing by their peers. This is not surprising, giving the fact that the Icelandic society has been evaluated as number one on gender equality, for many recent years by the WEF. Whatever the reasons are for the reluctance to participate fully, it is obvious that school leaders at all school levels are very interested in receiving gender education with an emphasis on changing gender stereotypes and avoiding sexual harassment in their schools. It is important to follow up on the strong demand for more education on gender issues among school leaders at pre-, compulsory and upper secondary level. It is also important to explore the practices, resistance and attitudes of teachers concerning education on gender issues, in view of the findings of this study as well as the recent strong #metoo movement in Iceland as elsewhere.Peer Reviewe

Grunnskólastjórar á öndverðri 21. öld: Hlutverk og gildi

Publisher's version (útgefin grein)Nútímakenningar um skólastjórnun beina kastljósinu m.a. að sýn skólastjóra á hlutverk sitt, þeim gildum sem hafa áhrif á starfshætti þeirra (Begley, 2004; Branson, 2005) og hvernig þeir forgangsraða verkefnum sínum. Á síðasta aldarfjórðungi hafa höfundar þessarar greinar rannsakað viðhorf skólastjóra í grunnskólum með spurningalistakönnunum, þ.e. 1991, 2001 og 2006 (Börkur Hansen, Ólafur H. Jóhannsson og Steinunn Helga Lárusdóttir, 2008). Hér er greint frá rannsókn á störfum skólastjóra sem gerð var 2017. Sjónum er beint að þeim gildum sem þeir segjast leggja mesta áherslu á og hvernig þeir forgangsraða helstu verkefnum sínum. Gögnum var safnað með spurningalista sem sendur var til allra skólastjóra í grunnskólum landsins vorið 2017. Dregin er upp mynd af aðstæðum í skólunum, þ.e. skólagerð, skólastærð og kennslufyrirkomulagi, og afstaða skólastjóra til mikilvægra gilda sem tengjast skólastarfi er könnuð. Einnig var athugað hvernig þeir forgangsraða verkefnum, svo sem vinnu við námskrárgerð, samskiptum við starfsfólk, nemendur o.fl. sem tengist störfum þeirra. Niðurstöður benda til þess að nokkurs ósamræmis gæti milli yfirlýstra gilda skólastjóra og raunverulegra. Greininni lýkur með samanburði við fyrri rannsóknir höfunda á forgangsröðun viðfangsefna skólastjóra og umræðum um gildi niðurstaðnanna.Contemporary theories on school leadership focus on principals’ vision of their role, the values which impact their leadership behavior (Begley, 2004; Branson, 2005) and the way they prioritize their tasks. In the past quarter of a century the authors have studied the attitudes of compulsory school principals, using questionnaires; that is 1991, 2001 and 2006 (see for instance Börkur Hansen et al., 2008). This paper is a report on a study of compulsory school principals conducted in 2017. It focuses on principals’ values and their actual and desirable prioritization of important tasks. Data was gathered with an electronic questionnaire sent to all Icelandic compulsory school principals; that is, 162 individuals in the spring 2017. The number of respondents was 111, making the response rate 69%. The questionnaire was designed and administered by means of the Qualtrics software system and data analysis was conducted using the SPSS and EXCEL programs. The principals were asked to assess the importance of a number of values affiliated with education by assigning points from one to ten to each of them, depending on how much emphasis they placed on them in their practice. Six of the values presented in the findings were of an ethical nature and another six management-related. Moreover, the principals were asked to rank important task areas according to the actual and desirable time devoted to each of them. The findings show that the principals do not differentiate between ethical values on the basis of their impact on their practice. Almost all the principals, or 94%, say that they strongly emphasize the ethical values Care, Equality, Democracy, Autonomy, Tolerance and Justice (assign to them 8–10 points). This indicates that the principals may not have a clear picture of their own value base. It is, therefore, uncertain whether values guide them in their everyday practice as many scholars have advocated. The principals placed a more variable emphasis on management-related values. For instance, while competition is a high priority for only 9% of the principals (gave it 8–10 points), 44% of the principals put efficiency in the same category. Accountability and Achievement are, on the other hand, prioritized by more than 90% of the principals. The findings also show that in 2017 School Management was at the top of the ranking list of actual time allocated to a particular task area, or in the same seat as in earlier studies in 2006, 2001 and 1991. Program Development was, however, at the top of the list of desirable prioritization of tasks in 2017 as in all the earlier studies. The ranking of Personnel has changed somewhat during the time period under study; in 1991 it was in rank five of actual time devoted to this task area, in rank three in 2001 and in rank two in 2006 and 2017. The ranking of ideal time devoted to Personnel follows this pattern: in 1991 it was in rank six, in rank five in 2001, in rank two in 2006 and in rank three in 2017. Thus, the time devoted to the task area of Personnel has changed considerably during this period. The paper sheds light on the principals’ working environment, such as grades offered, number of students and teaching arrangements (regular classroom teaching, team teaching). These environmental factors were, however, not found to greatly impact principals’ working practice; that is, the ranking of actual and ideal time allotted to the explored task areas. The paper finishes with a comparison with the authors’ earlier research on the role of principals. It also reflects on the relevance of the findings for practice of principals as well as providing suggestions as to how principals can develop themselves professionally. The authors set out to explore principals’ values and their prioritizing of tasks. They conclude that a moderate difference between the actual and desirable prioritization of tasks is inevitable and may be an indicator of an ambitious future vision. Too much difference, however, indicates that some task areas may be preventing principals from prioritizing in accordance with their wishes. Nevertheless, the authors agree with those scholars who have recommended creating conditions which make it possible for principals to narrow the gap between the actual and the desirable. Besides, it would be of value to assist Icelandic principals in asking themselves critical questions about their vision and values and the disparity between their expressed and actual values. If successfully carried out, principals’ practice can be judged as value-based.Peer Reviewe

The economic collapse and school practice in Reykjavik

Í þessari rannsókn voru könnuð áhrif efnahagshrunsins á Íslandi árið 2008 á skóla í Reykjavík. Gagnaöflun fór fram á árunum 2013 og 2014. Tekin voru viðtöl við einstaklinga og í rýnihópum. Rætt var við fulltrúa hjá Reykjavíkurborg og í menntaog menningarmálaráðuneyti, skólastjórnendur, kennara, foreldra og nemendur í völdum leik-, grunn- og framhaldsskólum. Niðurstöður benda til þess að tekist hafi að vernda kjarnann í skólastarfinu fyrir niðurskurði en þó í meira mæli í grunnskólum en í leik- og framhaldsskólum. Niðurskurðurinn olli því ekki skólakreppu í þeim skilningi að grunngildum skólanna væri ógnað. Öðru máli kann þó að gegna um leikskólana sem urðu fyrir þyngri áföllum en skólarnir á hinum skólastigunum. Þótt ekki kæmi til skólakreppu í framangreindum skilningi þá hafði niðurskurður margvísleg áhrif á skólastarfið. Stjórnunarstöðum fækkaði umtalsvert, einkum millistjórnendum, forfallakennsla var unnin af skólastjórnendum, annað starfsfólk var ráðið í hlutastörf og framlög til tómstundastarfs og náms- og starfsráðgjafar skert. Yfirvinna starfsfólks var ekki leyfð, minna fé var veitt til samstarfs, bekkir urðu fjölmennari og dregið úr fjárveitingum til kaupa á efniviði og námsgögnum og til viðhalds tækja og húsa. Loks voru skólar á leik- og grunnskólastigi sameinaðir. Fram kom að sú aðgerð hefði aukið mjög á þá erfiðleika sem af niðurskurðinum hlaust. Ekki voru nefnd dæmi um að fólk missti vinnuna þótt talsvert væri um uppsagnir, starfsmönnum var þá boðin vinna að nýju en stundum í skertu starfshlutfalli. Þótt viðmælendur teldu að ekki kæmi til frekari niðurskurðar sögðust þeir ekki vongóðir um bjartari tíma framundan. Að mörgu leyti voru áherslur hagsmunaaðila skóla í samræmi við ráðleggingar fræðimanna um fagleg viðbrögð við efnahags- þrenginum. Sú áhersla sem lögð var á að vernda nám og kennslu og standa vörð um velferð nemenda eru dæmi um slík viðbrögð. Á hinn bóginn komu upp mál þar sem bæði starfsmenn skóla og foreldrar kvörtuðu yfir þeim skorti á samráði sem yfirvöld hefðu viðhaft við ákvarðanir um mikilvæg málefni skólanna. Rannsóknin var unnin af fimm fræðimönnum Rannsóknarstofu í menntastjórnun, nýsköpun og matsfræði við Menntavísindasvið Háskóla Íslands.This paper explores the impact of the economic collapse in 2008 on schools in one Icelandic municipality, Reykjavík, the capital of Iceland. Earlier, a similar study was conducted by the same research team in two Icelandic municipalities, one in an agricultural area, and one in a fishing and service community. Information about staff and school costs was gathered for the years of 2013 and 2014. Interviews with individuals and in focus groups were carried out with represenatives at the ministry of culture and education, the Local Education Authorities in Reykjavík, school administrators, teachers, other staff, parents and pupils of six selected schools: two preschools, two primary and lowersecondary schools and two upper-secondary schools. Information about staff and school costs was also gathered. The research was qualitative in nature, primarily based on interviews and documentary data. Interviews were conducted with individuals and in focus groups with representatives of the municipalities and the state, school administrators, teachers, parents and pupils of selected pre-, primary-, and upper-secondary schools. The research sought answers to the following questions: How did educational authorities and school professionals respond to budget cut requirements? Did the reductions cause a school crisis and did they have different consequences depending on the school level? The findings suggest that the core functions of the schools, teaching and learning, were to a large extent protected as stipulated by school authorities. Reduction in expenditure, therefore, did not cause a school crisis in the sense, that the basic values of the schools were threatened. This, however, may not apply to the preschools and the schools at the upper secondary level, which were harder hit by the cut-backs than the other school levels. Even if the schools were able to protect the core school activities, finanicial cutbacks had serious implications for the schools. Various cutbacks were made at all school levels; administrative positions, especially at the middle levels, were cut considerably, principals served as substitute teachers, classes became bigger, no overtime was paid, extracurricular activities and specialist work, such as counseling, and maintenance of equipment and buildings were all cut. Finally, at the preschool level, and primary and lower-secondary school levels, schools were amalgamated. Interviewees in these schools agreed that the merges had been an additional challenge to deal with while trying to come to terms with reduced funding. Findings, moreover, indicate, that while all school members were affected by the bad economy, school principals at all school levels carried the heaviest burdens. While interviewees agreed that further cutbacks were unlikely, they did not envision better times ahead. In many ways school stakeholders, within and outside of the schools, responded to the cutbacks in a manner recommended by experts on school crisis, such as by protecting the core activities of teaching and learning. There were, however, instances when school personnell and parents complained, that school authorities had failed to consult them on relevant matters. The discussion highlights the impact of values on policy and decision making in general, but in times of austerity in particular. The research was carried out by five academics at the School of Education, University of Iceland and sponsored by the by the Center for Research on School Administration, Innovation and Evaluation at the School of Education, University of Iceland and carried out by five of its members.Rannsóknarstofa í menntastjórnun, nýsköpun og matsfræðiPublisher's Prin

The Role of Education in Developing Ethical Leadership

Článek se ve světle dopadů ekonomického kolapsu Islandu v říjnu 2008 zabývá potřebou formální revize islandského vzdělávacího systému. V článku zdůrazňujeme především fakt, že většina islandských lídrů, kteří se na islandském ekonomickém kolapsu podíleli, byli absolventy islandského vzdělávacího systému. Ukázalo se, že sami sebe považují za jedince, kteří se nezodpovídají ani svým spoluobčanům, ani občanům jiných zemí. Je zřejmé, že vzdělávání těchto lídrů kladlo přílišný důraz na kognitivní aspekty výchovy a vzdělávání na úkor rozvoje morálního úsudku. Proto navrhujeme takovou nápravu tohoto nedostatku islandského vzdělávacího systému, díky níž by budoucí lídři Islandu nebyli připraveni o možnost rozvíjet nejen své kognitivní, ale také morální znalosti a dovednosti. Dále máme za to, že na vzestup a pád islandské ekonomiky lze pohlížet coby na případovou studii, z níž se mohou poučit jak Islanďané, tak také občané dalších zemí. Tato hořká zkušenost by se tak mohla změnit v lekci, již je možné aplikovat i za hranicemi ostrova Islandu. Za tímto účelem se v článku pokoušíme nalézt odpovědi na otázku, jakou hrají školy roli v ovlivňování žáků nejen v oblasti profesní přípravy, ale také v oblasti rozvoje morálního rozhodování.This article calls for a formal review of the educational system in Iceland in light of the impact of the economic collapse upon the nation in October 2008. In particular, this article highlights the fact that most of the Icelandic leaders who contributed to the economic collapse in Iceland were products of the Icelandic educational system. Apparently they saw themselves as individuals without responsibility towards either their countrymen or those of neighbouring countries. Arguably, the schooling of these leaders had placed too much emphasis on the cognitive aspects of their education at the expense of their ethical development. Hence, the author proposes that this shortcoming of the educational provision in Iceland needs to be redressed so that future leaders of the nation are not deprived of the opportunity to develop both their cognitive and ethical knowledge and skills. The author moreover suggests that the rise and fall of the Icelandic economy may be seen as a case study from which not only Icelanders but other nations as well could learn. This bitter experience could thus become a learning experience with applicability reaching far beyond the geographical boundaries of the island. To this end, this article seeks to answer questions about what role and responsibility schools have in graduating students who have not only acquired vocational knowledge and skills but have also developed a commitment to being influenced by sound moral judgment

Collaboration with middle leaders and teachers leadership emphasis of compulsory school principals in Iceland

Í nútímakenningum um skólastjórnun er kastljósinu jafnan beint að sýn skólastjóra á hlutverk sitt og tengsl við samstarfsfólk. Þá er átt við að skólastjórar og kennarar starfi saman að því að þróa skólastarf og kennsluhætti. Markmiðið með slíkum starfsháttum er að stuðla að auknum gæðum í skólastarfi. Í þessari grein er athyglinni beint að þeim afbrigðum samstarfsforystu sem fengið hafa mikið rými í fræðilegri umræðu á 21. öldinni, þ.e. dreifðri forystu (e. distributed leadership) og kennaraforystu (e. teacher leadership). Gögnum var safnað með spurningakönnun sem send var til allra skólastjóra vorið 2017 og var svarhlutfallið 69%. Í niðurstöðum er dregin upp mynd af aðstæðum í skólunum og greint frá hversu miklum tíma skólastjórar telja sig verja til samstarfs við millistjórnendur, kennara og annað starfsfólk, hversu mikla áherslu þeir leggja á þátttöku millistjórnenda og kennara í ákvörðunum og virkja þá til forystu um þróun kennsluhátta. Í umræðunum um niðurstöðurnar er bent á mikilvægi þess að skólastjórar horfi gagnrýnið á hvert markmiðið með virkjun millistjórnenda og kennara er, þ.e. hvort það sé einkum til að létta vinnuálagi af skólastjórum eða til að dreifa forystu um þróun náms og kennslu. Þá þarf að greina hvort launamál, vinnuálag eða aðrir starfstengdir þættir valdi því að meirihluta skólastjóra veitist erfitt að virkja kennara til kennslufræðilegrar forystu í þágu skólastarfsins alls.Current theories on school leadership focus on principals’ vision of their role and their relations with school personnel. More specifically, school leadership is now viewed as a collaborative effort between principals and teachers in providing leadership in the area of teaching and learning (Harris, 2008; Kaplan & Owings, 2015; Louis, Leithwood, Wahlstrom & Anderson, 2010; Robinson, 2011; Sergiovanni, 2009). The main objective of this emphasis on collaboration is to contribute to improved educational quality in schools (Hoy & Miskel, 2008; Sergiovanni, 2009; Woolfolk-Hoy & Hoy, 2009). This paper reports on a study of the leadership emphasis compulsory school principals in Iceland place on collaboration with middle leaders and teachers. The focus is on two forms of collaborative leadership, prominent in the 21st century, distributed leadership and teacher leadership. The study was conducted in 2017. Data was gathered with an electronic questionnaire sent to all Icelandic compulsory school principals, 162 individuals, in the spring of 2017. The number of respondents was 111, making the response rate 69%. The questionnaire was designed and administered by means of the Qualtrics software system and data analysis was conducted using the SPSS and EXCEL programs. The principals were asked to estimate, on a five point Likert scale, the time they devote to working with middle leaders, teachers, and other school staff. They were also asked to estimate their emphasis on involving middle leaders in decision-making on significant issues in their schools. Furthermore, they were asked to estimate their emphasis on middle leaders and teachers providing leadership concerning the development of teaching and learning. The following background information was used for analysing the data: background variables concerning the principals’ age, gender, education, experience as principal, experience as assistant principal; background variables concerning circumstances within the schools, such as their size (number of students), location (urban, rural), dominant teaching arrangements (classroom teaching, team teaching, combination of classroom and team teaching), number of students with severe learning difficulties, number of support staff. The analysis was based on the assumption that these variables would signify a difference in the working environment of the principals. The findings show that principals claim to devote considerable time to collaborating with teachers (79%), middle leaders (59%) and other staff (48%). Moreover, the findings show that the principals claim they strongly emphasise the involvement of teachers (96%) and middle leaders (74%) in decision-making concerning significant issues in their schools. However, 25% of the principals considered this question concerning involvement of middle leaders in decision-making irrelevant because no formal middle leader position existed in their schools. The findings also show that the principals emphasise involvement of teachers (94%) and middle leaders (66%) in providing leadership in the area of teaching and learning. Again, a quarter (26%) of the principals considered the question concerning the leadership of middle leaders irrelevant because no formal leaders existed in their schools. Lastly, about two thirds (64%) of the principals claim it requires much effort to involve teachers in taking responsibilities in school activities outside their classrooms. The analysis of the data showed no significant differences relating to any of the questions concerning time for collaboration, involvement in decision-making, providing leadership or effort concerning involvement, based on the background variables listed above. While the principals want middle leaders to lead the development of teaching and learning, it seems as if their tasks are more in the area of operational components to the detriment of pedagogical and instructional issues. Principals, therefore, need to ask themselves critical questions as to what is the objective of the role of middle leaders; that is, whether it is to decrease their own work load or to facilitate the development of teaching and learning. It is also important to analyse whether it is workload, salaries or other work-related issues that discourage teachers from contributing to the overall leadership of the schools.Peer Reviewe

„Þotulið“ og „setulið“ : kynjajafnrétti og kennaramenntun

Ný ákvæði um jafnréttisfræðslu í grunnskólalögum og aðalnámskrám hafa tekið gildi. Í 25. grein grunnskólalaga kemur fram að setja skuli ákvæði um inntak og skipulag náms í námsgreinum grunnskólans og þar eru jafnréttismál meðtalin. Í aðalnámskrá grunnskóla er jafnréttisfræðsla talin til samfélagsgreina ásamt átta öðrum námsgreinum. Í aðalnámskrám allra skólastiga frá 2011 eru sex grunnþættir hafðir að leiðarljósi, þar af er einn um jafnrétti. Af þessu tilefni, og einnig vegna lengingar á kennaramenntuninni frá 2011, var ákveðið að skoða hvernig tekið er á jafnréttisfræðslu í menntun kennara og annarra fagstétta á Menntavísindasviði Háskóla Íslands. Rannsóknin var gerð á vegum rannsóknarstofunnar RannKyn. Gagna var aflað með viðtölum við átta rýnihópa kennara við Menntavísindasvið, auk viðtals við stjórnanda. Spurningalisti til kennara nýttist ekki vegna lágs svarhlutfalls. Niðurstöður benda til að kennarar skilji hugtakið jafnrétti víðum skilningi og tilhneiging virðist vera til þess að leiða hjá sér eða sýna andstöðu við kynjajafnrétti. Kennarar hafa eigi að síður áhyggjur af því að fordómar, staðalmyndir um kynin og ótti við samkynhneigð séu til staðar í skólum og í kennaramenntun. Sumir kennarar eru áhugasamir og kalla eftir skýrri stefnumörkun, gagnvirkri umræðu og upplýsingum á vefsetrum Menntavísindasviðs og RannKyn. Það er mat höfunda að átak þurfi til að brúa bilið á milli kennaramenntunar, lagaákvæða og kynjafræðilegra rannsókna og skapa rými fyrir jafnréttisfræðslu í kennaranámi. Í greininni er bent á leiðir í þeim tilgangi.New requirements for equality education in compulsory schools in Iceland were mandated by law in 2008 when equality became a new subject in compulsory schools. In the National Curriculum for Compulsory Schools equality education is listed as part of social studies, along with eight other subjects. Moreover, in the National Curriculum Guide for all school levels, equality is listed as one of six values or pillars of education. With reference to the above, and also because of the lengthening of teacher education from three to five years in 2011, it was decided on behalf of RannKyn, Centre for Research on Equality, Gender and Education, to examine how education on gender and equality is being executed in the education of teachers and other professionals at the School of Education, University of Iceland. Data were gathered through eight focus group interviews and interviews with administrators. A questionnaire to teachers proved useless due to the low response rate. The findings indicate that the teachers understand the concept of equality in a broad sense, and see themselves as equality oriented. However, they tend to either ignore or show resistance to gender equality, or focus on gender as a binary essentialist concept. Some teachers are concerned that prejudice, homophopia and stereotypes about gender are a problem in schools as well as in teacher education. Some of them are worried and call for a clear policy, interactive discussions and information on the websites of the School of Education and RannKyn. The authors emphasize that an effort should be made to bridge the gap between the present practices in teacher education and gender research and make space for gender studies in teacher education. In this article, ways are suggested to that end

Hvaða þættir ráða mestu um hvernig gengur að innleiða aðferðir við sjálfsmat í grunnskólum? : niðurstöður athugana í sex skólum

Samkvæmt athugunum menntamálaráðuneytisins er mjög misjafnt hvernig skólar uppfylla ákvæði um sjálfsmat sem leitt var í lög árið 1995. Í þessari rannsókn var leitast við að varpa ljósi á þá þætti sem hafa einkum áhrif á það hvernig skólum gengur að koma sjálfsmati í framkvæmd. Tekin voru viðtöl við skólastjórnendur og kennara í sex skólum af mismunandi stærð til að afla gagna um sjálfsmatið. Talsverður munur kom fram milli skólanna. Í sumum hafði lítið sjálfsmat farið fram en í öðrum mikið. Það sem helst skýrir muninn milli skólanna er forysta skólastjórnenda, þekking á sjálfsmati og sjálfsmatsaðferðum og viðhorf stjórnenda og kennara til gildis sjálfsmats sem aðferðar við breytingar og þróun skólastarfs

Efnahagshrunið og skólastarf í Reykjavík

Í þessari rannsókn voru könnuð áhrif efnahagshrunsins á Íslandi árið 2008 á skóla í Reykjavík. Gagnaöflun fór fram á árunum 2013 og 2014. Tekin voru viðtöl við einstaklinga og í rýnihópum. Rætt var við fulltrúa hjá Reykjavíkurborg og í mennta- og menningarmálaráðuneyti, skólastjórnendur, kennara, foreldra og nemendur í völdum leik-, grunn- og framhaldsskólum. Niðurstöður benda til þess að tekist hafi að vernda kjarnann í skólastarfinu fyrir niðurskurði en þó í meira mæli í grunnskólum en í leik- og framhaldsskólum. Niðurskurðurinn olli því ekki skólakreppu í þeim skilningi að grunngildum skólanna væri ógnað. Öðru máli kann þó að gegna um leikskólana sem urðu fyrir þyngri áföllum en skólarnir á hinum skólastigunum. Þótt ekki kæmi til skólakreppu í framangreindum skilningi þá hafði niðurskurður margvísleg áhrif á skólastarfið. Stjórnunarstöðum fækkaði umtalsvert, einkum millistjórnendum, forfallakennsla var unnin af skólastjórnendum, annað starfsfólk var ráðið í hlutastörf og framlög til tómstundastarfs og náms- og starfsráðgjafar skert. Yfirvinna starfsfólks var ekki leyfð, minna fé var veitt til samstarfs, bekkir urðu fjölmennari og dregið úr fjárveitingum til kaupa á efniviði og námsgögnum og til viðhalds tækja og húsa. Loks voru skólar á leik- og grunnskólastigi sameinaðir. Fram kom að sú aðgerð hefði aukið mjög á þá erfiðleika sem af niðurskurðinum hlaust. Ekki voru nefnd dæmi um að fólk missti vinnuna þótt talsvert væri um uppsagnir, starfsmönnum var þá boðin vinna að nýju en stundum í skertu starfshlutfalli. Þótt viðmælendur teldu að ekki kæmi til frekari niðurskurðar sögðust þeir ekki vongóðir um bjartari tíma framundan. Að mörgu leyti voru áherslur hagsmunaaðila skóla í samræmi við ráðleggingar fræðimanna um fagleg viðbrögð við efnahagsþrenginum. Sú áhersla sem lögð var á að vernda nám og kennslu og standa vörð um velferð nemenda eru dæmi um slík viðbrögð. Á hinn bóginn komu upp mál þar sem bæði starfsmenn skóla og foreldrar kvörtuðu yfir þeim skorti á samráði sem yfirvöld hefðu viðhaft við ákvarðanir um mikilvæg málefni skólanna. Rannsóknin var unnin af fimm fræðimönnum Rannsóknarstofu í menntastjórnun, nýsköpun og matsfræði við Menntavísindasvið Háskóla Íslands.This paper explores the impact of the economic collapse in 2008 on schools in one Icelandic municipality, Reykjavík, the capital of Iceland. Earlier, a similar study was conducted by the same research team in two Icelandic municipalities, one in an agricultural area, and one in a fishing and service community. Information about staff and school costs was gathered for the years of 2013 and 2014. Interviews with individuals and in focus groups were carried out with represenatives at the ministry of culture and education, the Local Education Authorities in Reykjavík, school administrators, teachers, other staff, parents and pupils of six selected schools: two preschools, two primary and lowersecondary schools and two upper-secondary schools. Information about staff and school costs was also gathered. The research was qualitative in nature, primarily based on interviews and documentary data. Interviews were conducted with individuals and in focus groups with representatives of the municipalities and the state, school administrators, teachers, parents and pupils of selected pre-, primary-, and upper-secondary schools. The research sought answers to the following questions: How did educational authorities and school professionals respond to budget cut requirements? Did the reductions cause a school crisis and did they have different consequences depending on the school level? The findings suggest that the core functions of the schools, teaching and learning, were to a large extent protected as stipulated by school authorities. Reduction in expenditure, therefore, did not cause a school crisis in the sense, that the basic values of the schools were threatened. This, however, may not apply to the preschools and the schools at the upper secondary level, which were harder hit by the cut-backs than the other school levels. Even if the schools were able to protect the core school activities, finanicial cutbacks had serious implications for the schools. Various cutbacks were made at all school levels; administrative positions, especially at the middle levels, were cut considerably, principals served as substitute teachers, classes became bigger, no overtime was paid, extracurricular activities and specialist work, such as counseling, and maintenance of equipment and buildings were all cut. Finally, at the preschool level, and primary and lower-secondary school levels, schools were amalgamated. Interviewees in these schools agreed that the merges had been an additional challenge to deal with while trying to come to terms with reduced funding. Findings, moreover, indicate, that while all school members were affected by the bad economy, school principals at all school levels carried the heaviest burdens. While interviewees agreed that further cutbacks were unlikely, they did not envision better times ahead. In many ways school stakeholders, within and outside of the schools, responded to the cutbacks in a manner recommended by experts on school crisis, such as by protecting the core activities of teaching and learning. There were, however, instances when school personnell and parents complained, that school authorities had failed to consult them on relevant matters. The discussion highlights the impact of values on policy and decision making in general, but in times of austerity in particular. The research was carried out by five academics at the School of Education, University of Iceland and sponsored by the by the Center for Research on School Administration, Innovation and Evaluation at the School of Education, University of Iceland and carried out by five of its members

Efnahagshrunið og skólastarf í tveimur íslenskum sveitarfélögum : skólakreppa?

Rannsókn þessi var unnin á vegum Rannsóknarstofu í menntastjórnun, nýsköpun og matsfræði, til að kanna áhrif efnahagshrunsins 2008 á skólastarf í tveimur sveitarfélögum, annað er landbúnaðarhérað, hitt fiskveiða- og þjónustusamfélag. Upplýsinga um starfsmannahald og kostnað við skólastarfið var aflað fyrir árin 2005 og 2007–2010/11. Viðtöl og rýnihópar voru notuð til að afla gagna frá fræðslustjórnum, skólastjórnendum, kennurum, öðru starfsfólki og foreldrum í völdum leik-, grunn- og framhaldsskólum í þessum sveitarfélögum. Rætt var við nemendur í grunn- og framhaldsskólum. Forystumenn annars sveitarfélagsins höfðu brugðist við fjárhagsþrengingum árið 2006. Það var því betur undirbúið fyrir efnahagshrunið en hitt þar sem viðbrögð vegna fyrirsjáanlegs samdráttar hófust síðar. Grunnstarfsemi skólanna hefur þó verið haldið í horfinu í báðum sveitarfélögunum, í meira mæli í grunnskólum en í leik- og framhaldsskólum. Almenn yfirvinna starfsfólks er ekki lengur í boði, bekkir eru fjölmennari, skólastjórnendur annast forfallakennslu, stjórnendastöðum og öðrum stöðugildum hefur fækkað, sums staðar verulega. Minna fjármagni er veitt til sérkennslu og faglegs samstarfs, annað starfsfólk en kennarar er ráðið í hlutastarf, tómstundastarf og sértæk störf, svo sem náms- og starfsráðgjöf, hafa verið skorin niður. Dregið hefur verið úr fjárveitingum til kaupa á búnaði og námsgögnum og til viðhalds tækja og húsa. Helstu tækifærin sem viðmælendur telja að hafi skapast við þessar aðstæður felast m.a. í samvinnu milli leikskóla og heimila, endurskipulagningu sértækrar kennslu í grunnskólanum og samvinnu milli nærliggjandi framhaldsskóla. Skólakreppur má skilgreina sem atburð eða atburði sem ógna grunnforsendum skólastarfsins og stjórnendanna. Hér var kreppan af ytri orsökum og samdrátt mátti sjá fyrir, þannig að stjórnendur skóla og sveitarfélaga gátu minnkað áhrifin á starfsemi skólanna og forðast skólakreppu.This study was sponsored by the Center for Research on School Administration, Innovation and Evaluation at the School of Education, University of Iceland. Effects of the economic meltdown in 2008 on schools in two municipalities were studied, one in an agricultural area and one in a fishing and service community. Information about staff and school costs was gathered for the years of 2005 and 2007–2010/11. Interviews and focus groups were conducted with super-intend-ants, school administrators, teachers, other staff, parents and pupils of selected preschools, primary schools and upper-secondary schools. In one of the communities retrenchment began in 2006, softening the hit. Core school activities were protected by law, to a greater extent for the compulsory schools than pre-schools and upper-secondary schools. However, no overtime work was done; classes became bigger; administrators became substitute teachers; administrative positions were cut; support staff was hired on a part-time basis; extracurricular activities and specialist work, such as counseling, and maintenance of equipment and buildings were all cut. The main opportunities for improvement following the crisis lie for example in more cooperation between preschools and homes, reorganization of special education in the compulsory schools and co-operation between upper-secondary schools. A school crisis can be defined as an event or events that threaten the basic values of the school and its administration. In this case the economic crisis was external and foreseen, making it possible for the school and municipal leaders to reduce its impact on the schools and avoiding a school crisis

Kynjamyndir í skólastarfi

2. útgáfa. Ritstýrur: Arna H. Jónsdóttir, Steinunn Helga Lárusdóttir, Þórdís Þórðardóttir. Bókarhöfundar eru átta og starfa annars vegar við Kennaraháskóla Íslands og hins vegar við Háskóla Íslands. Það eru þær Arna H. Jónsdóttir, Berglind Rós Magnúsdóttir, Guðbjörg Vilhjálmsdóttir, Sif Einarsdóttir, Sólveig Karvelsdóttir, Steinunn Helga Lárusdóttir, Þorgerður Einarsdóttir og Þórdís Þórðardóttir.Bókin Kynjamyndir í skólastarfi er ætluð nemendum og kennurum á ýmsum skólastigum en ætti að nýtast öllum þeim sem áhuga hafa á efninu. Bókin er safn ellefu kafla þar sem m.a. er fjallað um femíniskar kenningar, konur og kennslu, kyn og vísindi, karlmennsku og kvenleika, mótun kyngervis, náms-og starfsráðgjöf, kyn og stjórnun og fagþróun leikskólakennarara.Heildartexti er samhljóða texta 1. útgáfu