sou · H9B330 · 2021-04-27 00:00:00 — To indi- rectly assess the effects and survey the use of prioriterad and anpas- sad timplan, we have studied the prevalence of these measures in 3Sweden’s special schools are an alternative form of compulsory education for students with a hearing disability, a visual disability combined with additional disability, or a severe language disability. schools and how they are used in practice. The study also describes how the school staff evaluate the way the measures are designed in relation to their purpose and their view of the impact of these measures on the learning of newly arrived students. The Inquiry’s study shows that use of the measures is limited. The most common explanation for this is that no newly arrived stu- dent at the school in question has been judged to be in need of such interventions. Another reason cited by the schools is that other measures are judged to be more practical and a relatively high pro- portion of respondents also found these interventions difficult to organise. Uncertainty and a lack of knowledge about the measures also emerge as explanations for these interventions not being used. Some of ’s schools that have newly arrived students are en- tirely unaware of the measures prioriterad timplan or anpassad timplan. Based on the results of the evaluation study, there are also indications that schools decide which students are to be offered these measures at random. At the same time, the schools that have used the measures view them positively and think that they are well-designed for their pur- pose. The Inquiry proposes that the measures prioriterad and anpassad timplan be re-launched and subsequently monitored and evaluated Given the results of the evaluation study showing that awareness of the measures is low in some areas, the Inquiry proposes that the measures anpassad and prioriterad timplan be re-launched. For the same reason, the Inquiry proposes that the measures are not be ex- panded to other target groups. Following the re-launch, the impacts of these interventions should be evaluated and statistics gathered on their use at national level. This data can then form the basis for potential standpoints on how the measures can be used and developed. Studietid for all students instead of läxhjälp for some The Inquiry’s mandate includes submitting a proposal on a läxhjälp (homework help) guarantee for students at risk of failing to meet the admission criteria for upper secondary school. The Inquiry is to form an opinion on which forms of education and year groups should be covered by this guarantee, propose how students in these forms of education and school years at risk of failing to fulfil the criteria to progress to a national programme at upper secondary school are to be guaranteed help with homework, judge in which forms of education and year groups the need for a läxhjälp guarantee is greatest and submit alternative proposals. Furthermore, the In- quiry is to propose how it can be made clear in legislation that it is the schools that are to decide how homework is to be managed. The background to this remit is that students have varying op- portunities to receive help with their homework in the home itself. The educational background of parents means that there are major differences in their ability to support their children with their stud- ies. We also know that students who find it difficult to attain the minimum attainment requirements tend to have parents with a low level of education and more limited finances. Homework is a teaching tool Homework is one of several teaching tools that teachers have at their disposal, and something that legislators have hitherto refrained from regulating. There is currently no information at national level on the extent to which homework is used or how it is to be structured in schools. A common definition of homework is that it is tasks that the teacher sets for students to complete after the end of the school day. Different kinds of homework have different purposes but one common denominator is that homework contributes to students’ educational progress. The most common approach is for all students to be set the same homework irrespective of their level of attainment. How schools use läxhjälp Läxhjälp is often defined as help with homework or other school- work. In a discussion document on the topic, the for Education states that läxhjälp may have different pur- poses and take different forms but that there is no generally accepted definition of what it involves. However, the activities referred to tend to encompass more than simply help with homework. There are few evaluations of how schools and other provision work with läxhjälp in . It is even more difficult to find evaluations of the effects of läxhjälp on students’ progress. However, education au- thorities that have received government grants to arrange läxhjälp or other support with schoolwork outside ordinary teaching hours have found that läxhjälp has enabled students who lack support for their schoolwork or a good study environment at home to increase their self-confidence and their motivation for learning. Other effects reported by education authorities are improved study techniques and that the students become better prepared for future teaching. Some authorities have also noted the students displaying greater re- sponsibility and lower stress levels. The Inquiry has been in contact with representatives of the upper secondary schools’ introductory programmes to investigate the prevalence and the need for läxhjälp for students on these pro- grammes. Based on this information, it would appear that läxhjälp is not provided particularly often and that the need for it is limited. Läxhjälp to be broadened and redefined as studietid The underlying data gathered by the Inquiry indicates that with the aim of improving attainment, there is a need for a broader approach than merely providing help with homework to students at risk of failing to attain the grades required for admission to a national pro- gramme at upper secondary school. The Inquiry’s proposals have been inspired by the model of timetabled help with homework in- troduced in . The main difference is that since the academic year 2015/16, the Danish model has included help with homework as an integrated part of the ordinary timetable in the Danish equiva- lent of ’s compulsory schools. The Inquiry has sought to find a name for the proposed activity that does not link it to the concept of homework. One term that we have seen in schools that already arrange time for students to do their homework, etc. in this way is studietid (study time), a term whose content is broader than merely help with homework. The In- quiry proposes that two hours of studietid per student group per week be offered at all school units in compulsory schools that have students in years 4–9, during or immediately before or after the stu- dents’ school day. This would involve widening the target group such that all students in the school years affected have the oppor- tunity to attend studietid. The education authorities would decide on the content of activities and student attendance would be voluntary. For students in need of special support, participating in studietid can form part of their plan of measures. Considering that the Inquiry has broadened the content of the proposed activities, we judge that it is not necessary to clarify in ed- ucation legislation that it is the schools that are to decide how home- work is managed. It is important that studietid be organised such that it does not take resources away from ordinary education or replace special needs support that students would otherwise have received. Teacher-led but other staff can be involved To ensure that studietid is high-quality provision, it is vital that teachers lead it and are responsible for it. At the same time, the In- quiry is aware of the prevailing teacher shortage and that the teach- ing profession is feeling over-burdened with duties that take time away from teaching. However, we see studietid as a relatively small investment with great potential to supplement and strengthen the teaching carried out in lessons and improve student progress in the longer term. To relieve the burden on teachers, other staff can also be involved during studietid, provided that they have the training or experience to promote student development and student learning. We see this proposal as an important element in a shift towards general, early intervention in the education system. Expanding teaching during the academic year in the form of studietid that offers more help tailored to the individual is expected to benefit all stu- dents and contribute towards every student being able to progress as far as possible. The duty of education authorities to offer education in school holidays is to be extended, with an extra 25 hours of provision for students in year 9 The Inquiry’s mandate includes forming an opinion on whether the education provider’s obligation to offer lovskola should be expanded to other forms of education or year groups, assess which forms of education and year groups have the greatest need of lovskola and submit scalable alternative proposals. Lovskola is teaching arranged in school during school holidays, either in holidays during the school term or outside the academic year in the school summer break. Lovskola is thus organised outside the framework of the ordinary school days that make up the aca- demic year. Since 2017, education authorities have been obliged to offer at least 50 hours of lovskola in for students at the end of year 8 and year 9 who risk failing to attain or have not attained the grades necessary to go on to a national upper secondary school pro- gramme. Participation is voluntary for students, but attendance is compulsory for students who accept the offer. In addition to the lovskola that education authorities are obliged to arrange, the au- thority can also choose to voluntarily offer lovskola to these same students during the academic year. The authority can also receive Government funding for lovskola arranged in addition to this provi- sion, e.g. in year 6 or for students on an introductory programme at upper secondary school. There is a need for a national evaluation of lovskola provision A number of follow-up studies have been conducted examining pro- vision financed by Government funding over the years which show that following lovskola, students attain the grades they need to start upper secondary school to a varying extent. At the same time, the lovskola that the education authorities are legally obliged to offer has not been evaluated and thus we do not know how many students have attended or with what results. In the view of the Inquiry, there is a lack of data at national level to justify the need to expand lovskola to other year groups or forms of education. We propose that lovskola provision needs to be followed up and evaluated before such an expansion is considered. In the underlying data for the Inquiry, a clear picture emerges of students being offered lovskola in a limited number of subjects and priority being given to students with less extensive shortcomings. According to the rules, lovskola should be offered to all students at risk of failing to attain the necessary grades or who have failed to attain the necessary grades for upper secondary school irrespective of the number of subjects in which they are failing. This provision appears to be difficult to comply with or is not perceived as appro- priate by some education authorities and schools. A future evalua- tion ought to shed light on this question. Furthermore, the pro- posed evaluation should also investigate attainment of targets in up- per secondary who have attended lovskola com- pared with other students as the overarching purpose is not merely for lovskola to help students to qualify to attend upper secondary school but for them also to complete their upper secondary education. Lovskola should also be offered during holidays within the academic year The Inquiry’s data indicates positive experiences of using the oppor- tunity to divide lovskola across the academic year and provide stu- dents with teaching in school holidays other than the long summer break. Lovskola in such holidays is cited as a way of working proac- tively to give students an opportunity for a second chance and to catch up with schoolwork during the school term itself. Empirical data has also shown that it is easier to staff lovskola during the academic year and that the range of subjects studied is also larger when this extra teaching takes place in holidays during the course of the academic year. This also not only means that the students’ shortcomings can be tackled earlier but that more subjects can be covered. Lovskola in holidays during the school year can thus lead to more students being able to attain the grades needed before the end of the academic year. Students not only have their knowledge gaps filled during the academic year but also consolidate their skills and benefit from them during the remainder of their time at school. The Inquiry judges that this can benefit students’ future upper secondary studies more effectively than if they were only to attend lovskola offered after the end of year 9 (at the end of compul- sory education and before the start of upper secondary school). The Inquiry therefore proposes that the obligation of the educa- tion provider to offer lovskola be expanded for students in year 9 with the addition of an extra 25 hours during mid-year school holidays. We see this expansion of lovskola as a general measure for those students in year 9 who have not yet shown that they are capable of gaining the grades necessary to proceed to upper secondary school. A relatively small amount of extra time can create opportunities for students such that they do not fall further behind and succeed in their studies at compulsory school. Lovskola attendance to continue to be voluntary According to its terms of reference, the Inquiry is to propose how an obligation to attend lovskola is to be designed and also form an opinion on which students it is to apply to. Furthermore, the In- quiry’s remit includes submitting proposals that lead to more stu- dents feeling motivated to attend lovskola. The terms of reference also state that making lovskola compulsory for students has a signal value and can lend lovskola additional weight as part of school activ- ities. we set out how an obligation to attend lovskola in line with the terms of reference could be designed even though the In- quiry does not advocate such an option. Research that the Inquiry has seen shows that while an obligation to attend an intervention can increase attendance, it does not neces- sarily increase student performance. Like previous inquiries, the In- quiry has noted that making lovskola compulsory would have a num- ber of potential negative consequences, which can run counter to the very purpose of introducing this change. Such consequences include stigmatisation, teaching to the test, and the experience of further student failure. Making lovskola attendance mandatory may even damage student motivation and lead to students viewing lovskola as a punishment. On top of this, there is the risk that making lovskola compulsory would reduce the incentive of education authorities to introduce extra adaptations, support for newly arrived migrants and special needs support, early on. Legal challenges to making attendance mandatory for certain students Making lovskola mandatory or extending compulsory education for certain students is associated with a number of legal challenges. For example, making lovskola mandatory would mean an expanded right to education for one group of students while imposing an obligation on them to attend. In the view of the Inquiry, extending obligatory school attendance would limit the freedom of movement of students enshrined in the Constitution, whereby any regulation would need to meet high demands in terms of acceptability and proportionality. The Inquiry’s conclusion is that compulsory lovskola for students can be considered both acceptable and proportionate depending on how it is designed, and which students are covered by the regulation. However, such a regulation would affect strong individual rights of students, potentially posing a risk to their protection under the rule of law where the selection system involves a decision based on an assessment of the student’s level of attainment. Furthermore, there would be the necessity of introducing an opportunity to appeal against the decision, which would mean that the decision would need to be made early in the spring in order for the appeals process to be completed before lovskola commenced. Education authorities and schools must increase efforts to boost motivation for lovskola Research highlights the importance of engagement in learning com- ing from the student themselves, of the students being actively in- volved in designing their own goals and of a relationship being forged between the student and the teacher. If participation in lovskola is voluntary, we can assume that students who attend al- ready have targets that they wish to attain and thus lovskola will be a good tool. Supported by the empirical evidence, the Inquiry con- siders that lovskola will mainly be effective for students who are close to the borderline of qualifying for a national upper secondary school programme. Students with a reasonable chance of crossing the finishing line are also considered generally to be in the group of students who display great commitment to learning and have a clear goal in mind. The Inquiry’s data shows that as a rule these students are already keen to attend lovskola and thus it would be unnecessary to make it compulsory as far as these students are concerned. For students with large knowledge gaps, the Inquiry judges that lovskola after the end of year 9 would be far too late to have an effect and also might exacerbate students’ sense of having failed. The Inquiry has seen different examples of education authorities and schools working to motivation for students to attend and complete lovskola. Such efforts need to be adapted to local needs and conditions. At the same time, authorities may be aided by shared tools and methods to motivate students to attend lovskola and to engage them in learning. To facilitate and improve the efficiency of the work of education authorities, the Inquiry considers that the for Education should produce supporting material on how schools can work with initiatives to boost student motivation to attend lovskola. Such supporting material would equity and improve the quality of schools’ motivational efforts. The material should also contain tools for how schools can work appropriately to reach students who have only spent a brief period in the Swedish education system and students who, for other reasons, may benefit from participation, but are not currently willing to attend. It should also be clear that it is very important that students’ parents or carers are included in such efforts. One possible design of compulsory lovskola for students As has already been stated, the remit to propose how compulsory lovskola for students is to be designed raises several difficulties and for this reason the Inquiry does not advocate such a solution. To fulfil its remit under its terms of reference, the Inquiry has nev- ertheless produced an alternative proposal for a possible way in which compulsory lovskola might be designed. Lovskola could be made compulsory for students still covered by the obligation to attend compulsory education who have completed year 9 without attaining the grades for a national programme in upper secondary school and who are close to attaining these grades and are judged to be capable of attaining them with 50 hours of teaching. The obligation to attend would cover lovskola run in the month of . If lovskola were made compulsory for students who are close to attaining the necessary grades, this would also extend the period in which education is compulsory If lovskola were to be made compulsory for students, the provisions on compulsory education in the Swedish Education Act would need to be expanded. Students’ obligation to attend education ceases at the end of compulsory education if the student attains their targets before this date or if the student reaches the age of 18 during lovskola. As stated above, lovskola is described as being most effective for students who are on the verge of attaining the necessary grades, i.e. the students who have a reasonable and real chance of attaining the knowledge targets in the limited time provided by lovskola held during the summer break. Thus, it is the Inquiry’s verdict that this group of students should be the group that could be covered by an obligation to attend lovskola. Based on the argument above, the Inquiry proposes that it is the students who need pass grades in a maximum of two subjects to meet the admission criteria for upper secondary school and who are judged to be capable of attaining the required grades during lovskola who would be obliged to attend lovskola if lovskola were to be made compulsory. Targeting students who are not capable of reaching the necessary level of attainment to enter upper secondary school would be far too interventionist a measure that cannot be considered to be proportionate. Making attendance compulsory would mean that a decision to extend these students’ obligation to remain in education must be able to be appealed against to for Education. Such a process would require the decision to be made in good time before lovskola begins, which in turn would not be entirely appro- priate as students’ attainment might improve considerably before lovskola is actually organised. There are no grounds to propose extending compulsory education for all newly arrived migrants According to its terms of reference, the Inquiry is to analyse and propose how compulsory education can be extended for newly ar- rived migrant students who have not attained the grades necessary to commence a national programme at upper secondary school. Fur- thermore, the Inquiry is to reach a view on whether an extended ob- ligation to attend compulsory education could be met in an intro- ductory programme at upper secondary school. Not all newly arrived migrants are obliged to attend compulsory education Under the Education Act, a newly arrived migrant is a student who has previously been resident abroad and who has started attending a Swedish school after the age of seven. The status of newly arrived migrant then applies for four years. In other words, a student is con- sidered to be a newly arrived migrant under the Education Act only once they start their schooling in and for a maximum of four years thereafter. However, not all newly arrived migrants in compulsory schools and equivalent are obliged to attend education. Some newly arrived migrant students, such as asylum seekers, are exempt. The Inquiry finds that it is not possible to investigate extending the obligation to attend education for the whole group of newly ar- rived migrants in a uniform way, as the fundamental legal criteria differ in all essentials. This would mean that to be covered by an ob- ligation to attend education, different groups of newly arrived mi- grant students would require different special solutions. Monitoring which students have an obligation to attend education and which do not would mean extensive administrative work for education au- thorities because the student’s status as a newly arrived migrant, their age and the location where they are entered in the population register are all changeable factors.