One out of every four upper secondary school students in Sweden interrupts their education, although the intention behind the new Curriculum for Upper Secondary School (GY 11) was to increase throughput of students with complete grades. Lack of study motivation is the most important explanation for students dropping out. This article analyzes study motivation from students and teachers' perspectives. It is based on interviews in three upper secondary school programs that were analyzed with a qualitative approach and hybrid content analysis. Study motivation is set in relation to motivational strategies, achievement, and learning environment. The result showed similarities and differences in perceptions. Both teachers and students pointed to the importance of teachers, practical pedagogy, social relations, and the significance of grades for study motivation. An important difference between informants was that teachers put more emphasis on life skills and adapted study groups, whereas students pointed to the physical learning environment and teachers' personalities as important. Conclusions in the study point to complex interplay between internal and external motivational factors and between situation, person, and learning processes. This leads to validity of interactive and transactional motivational perspectives. A broader and more in-depth study is needed primarily to understand students' perspectives.

Every fourth student in Sweden cancels their upper secondary school education, although the intention behind the new school reform 2011 (GY-11) was to increase the throughput. One important reason for this is a lack of study motivation, which, in turn, has different causes. The authors of this study have chosen to focus on students' perceptions of what is happening in the classroom (i.e., learning and teaching in four different study programs). The purpose of the article is to describe and analyze students' perceptions of what motivates or demotivates them. The research questions are: a) what is important to study motivation?, and b) are there any differences regarding study motivation between programs? The study is based on a web survey of 126 students and four group interviews of 12 students. The interviews were analyzed using thematic content analysis. This is a cross-sectional study that also was analyzed using descriptive statistics and chi-squared tests with correction. The results show the importance of learning and teaching strategies, teachers, and learning enviroments. Some similarities were found between the four upper secondary programs, such as a preference for more practically-oriented pedagogy, short-term goals and quick feedback, varied teaching methods, and good textbooks. However, there are also statistically significant differences between the programs regarding the need for structure, learning methods, and preferred perceptual preferences. The results have implications for teacher education, practicing teachers, and the students themselves. Conducting studies at the group-and program-level to better understand students is a way to develop the didactics for specific study programs and find ways to strengthen students' study motivation.

No abstract

The aim of this article is to describe and analyse how policy changes in the three latest Swedish compulsory school, preschool class, and school-age educare curricula affect the political goal of pupil influence. This is done with an interest in implications for utterances of power relations and for didactical considerations for living and learning democracy in school. This article analyses pupil influence by using theories of democracy, power, and didactics. The method used is content analysis. The empirical results show that pupil influence in the curricula is linked to seven concepts: democracy, value, norm, rights, responsibility, influence, participation. Our conclusion is that only small differences exist in terms of the central concepts mentioned in the curricula linked to pupil influence. Secondly, we found a policy shift with respect to the pupils, i.e., viewing pupils as subjects or objects. Thirdly, we found a shift in how learning is viewed in the curricula and the type of didactical questions that are in focus, which illuminates a change in utterances of power relations that challenges possibilities for living and learning democracy in Swedish school education.

No abstract