Folkrätt för barn som pedagogiskt åtagande: Statligt ansvar – regionalt lärande?
Jag hör ofta lärare uttrycka att de redan arbetar i enlighet med FN:s konvention om barnets rättigheter, säger forskaren Elizabeth Englundh. Men när det kommer till kritan så är det ganska få som vet vad ”barnets bästa” innebär – eller hur det tar sig uttryck i verksamheten.
Elizabeth Englundh
professor Birgitta Qvarsell, Stockholms universitet
Professor Inge Johansson, Stockholms universitet
SU – Stockholms universitet
2008-02-29
Folkrätt för barn som pedagogiskt åtagande: Statligt ansvar – regionalt lärande?
International Law on Children as an Educational Commitment: National obligation – regional learning?]
Pedagogiska institutionen
International Law on Children as an Educational Commitment: National obligation – regional learning?]
This thesis focuses on the problem of learning processes in an organization that has decided to implement the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). It is based on an assumption that there is interdependency between learning about the CRC and its implementation. The aim is to understand the conditions for individual learning and group learning in the organization. The empirical material consists of 52 interviews, notes and written material from the UN, the Swedish government, and regional levels. The research design is qualitative and the method used is abduction and retroduction. Sensitizing concepts have also been used. The regional context is a county council which has decided to implement the CRC by educating a ”pilot-group”, and whose task will be to integrate the CRC in the organization.
The theoretical frame is mainly constructivistic; learning is an ”inside-out” process. It is the individual who does the learning, but these individuals meet in the pilot-group and create knowledge based on their own experiences. The most significant results point out that learning about the CRC is a prerequisite for implementation. Once the individuals have learned about the CRC and how to understand and interpret its implicantions, they also know what has to be done in the administration in order to speed upp and secure implementation. Other important results show how the individuals act depending on to their position in the organization. The administration directors show passive resistence by not including the question on the agenda. The operations managers show active resistence by not taking the CRC into consideration in their contracts ”because then you have to show what you have accomplished”.