Hoppa till sidinnehåll

Resultatansvar för likvärdighet: En läroplansteoretisk studie av systematiskt kvalitetsarbete och rektorers sensemaking

Publicerad:25 mars
Uppdaterad:26 mars

Erik Åkesson har undersökt det systematiska kvalitetsarbetet som ett statligt styrt program.



Erik Åkesson


Professor Daniel Sundberg, Linnéuniversitetet Professor Andreas Nordin, Linnéuniversitetet


Docent Daniel Nordholm, Uppsala universitet

Disputerat vid




Abstract in English

The aim of this dissertation is to describe and critically analyze ideas about quality management with in different arenas of the Swedish education systemand how these relate to leadership and the enacted curriculum. The study conceptualizes systematic quality work as a governance tool and a national accountability program created with the aim of solving problems concerning lack of equity and lowered national test scores. Two tensions within the policy program are identified. The first is between external results-oriented forms of control and internal professional trust. The second is between national curriculum goals and local organizational goals.

The empirical study consists of a cross-case study of the most different designs of four quality systems enacted by the heads of the school organizations and the principals. The main sources of data are interviews with principals and school leaders and documents and policy artifacts. The data are analyzed from a combined perspective of loosely coupled system, discursive institutionalism and sensemaking.

The main conclusion of the study is that while systematic quality work represents an attempt by the state to create a more coherent and centralized accountability system, the results point to a decentralized and loosely coupled education system focused on local organizational goals. The contents of the enacted policy solutions show that the ideational content of quality work is highly malleable to localized uses and interpretations, which also raises questions about how equity is to be understood within the policy program.

The enacted solutions show great variance concerning how tensions relating to internal and external dimensions of accountability were handled. The reasons for these differences where related to different leadership strategies, varying pressures from the school market and distinct organizational needs. While the enacted accountability systems in all four cases have created results-oriented frameworks for teaching, their impact on the enacted curriculum was clearly mediated in three of the four cases.

Dela via: 

Relaterade artiklar

Relaterat innehåll

Senaste magasinen

Läs mer