Between Democratic Ideals and Local Conditions: Elementary School Teachers’ Narratives of Progressive Teaching in Sweden in the 1940s

ABSTRACT

Teachers’ implementation of and attitudes to school reforms and overriding pedagogical ideals have long been a topic of debate and research. In this article, we centre on teachers’ descriptions of how progressive teaching was conducted as well as on the teachers’ reasons for implementing such teaching in the 1940s. This study is based on written material consisting of 360 elementary school teachers’ accounts of their teaching collected in 1946. The material was collected by a government investigation of how progressive teaching was conducted in Sweden. The accounts offer detailed descriptions of how pupils were activated and how elementary teachers at the time could use the community as a teaching resource. The article is inspired by a prosopography approach, in which the basic assumption is that it is possible to extend knowledge of social processes and societal development by studying the group profile of members of various institutions such as political or professional organisations. The analysis is based on John Dewey’s and Larry Cuban’s perspectives on progressivism. We found that, according to teaching the theme of pupils participation was frequently reported in 59% of the accounts, while student interaction (35%) and extended classroom (16%) were less reported. The teachers motivated their teaching on the basis of general ideals, as democracy. Also important were practical circumstances such as available teaching resources as well as physiological aspects as student’s interest and development.

KEYWORDS:

• Curriculum reform
• elementary school
• teachers narratives on teaching
• progressivism

Introduction

Teachers’ implementation of and attitudes towards school reforms and overriding pedagogical ideals have long been a topic of debate and research. Even the issue of “how school is done” at the local level has been of interest in research, which has highlighted regional and local variations in many countries.¹ These studies do not approach education and teaching as the result of the planning and ideals of a national “elite”. Rather, teachers’ interests, practice, and given circumstances are the centre of studies. Reform research – international and Swedish alike – has, to a great extent, focused on professional organisations, authorities, politicians, researchers, and progressive pioneers. Teachers’ methods and attitudes towards new ways of teaching in connection with school reforms have attracted significantly less attention.² Lately, however, several international studies have focused on teachers’ experiences and perspectives in recognition of the rewards of clarifying the progressive “workshop”, which has broadened the understanding of central education history processes. Practice-related studies have added to our knowledge of how teachers actively construe and adapt pedagogical ideas and policies based on their daily professional practice.³ In the Swedish context, this perspective is still sparsely researched and a research gap this study tries to fill, even if there are some studies of teaching in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.⁴ This study is based on written material consisting of 360 elementary school teachers’ accounts of their teaching in the 1940s. The material was collected through a government investigation of how progressive teaching was conducted in Sweden. In other words, the aim was not to investigate how teaching was done in general.⁵ The accounts offer detailed descriptions of how pupils were activated and how elementary teachers at the time could use the community as a teaching resource. There are also thoughts on why teachers used different teaching methods and in what ways the design of the teaching was affected by limited resources.⁶

Since teachers’ collective experiences provide material for identifying how general pedagogical ideas and thoughts are transformed into teaching, this study focuses on Swedish elementary school teachers’ descriptions of their own practice in the 1940s immediately after World War II, which, in many ways, can be seen as a period of transition. As in other parts of the Western world, education was emphasised as important to democratisation, which is likely a direct effect of the World War and the wish to combat dictatorship.⁷ However, the role of education can also be seen as a result of ongoing democratic processes since the early twentieth century. Regarding Sweden, this was concretised in several school investigations advocating major reforms in which the societal role of education was made explicit. In the pedagogical debate, new findings also advocated, among other things, pupil-centred progressive methods.⁸ In the midst of this pressure for change, around 25,000 elementary school teachers had to manage both the conceptions of education as the key agent of modernisation and the daily professional demands for teaching, often under relatively scarce circumstances.⁹

In this article, we centre on teachers’ descriptions of how progressive teaching was conducted, as well as on their reasons for implementing such teaching. The teachers’ accounts thus provide a means to capture how progressive ideals were manifested in teaching and how the teachers’ daily experiences affected their teaching practice. In line with previous studies, this material reflects how teachers described how they transform, construe and adapt their teaching based on experiences, conditions, and knowledge.¹⁰ The aim of this article is to clarify elementary school teachers’ perspectives on and approaches to progressive teaching in the 1940s, based on the following research questions:

1. How were progressive teaching ideals reflected in teaching according to the teachers?

2. What reasons for and approaches to the progressive teaching ideal were manifested?

Background

Progressivism as a phenomenon and practice can be linked to a general societal change as well as to a particular school-related practice. Those who embraced a modern development in which progressive ideals were assumed to lead to a more equal and democratic society saw education as a key driver.¹¹ In relation to teaching, progressivism was an umbrella term for many overlapping pedagogical perspectives and principles, often rooted in John Dewey’s theories. Dewey, in Democracy and Education (1916), elaborated on the importance of democratic education, which not only “teach democracy” but also operated on democratic principles in practice, involving schools being meeting places for individuals of various backgrounds. Dewey also argued in detail for the importance of pupils’ activities and interests, as well as their interaction with the community, for the sake of knowledge and learning and making teaching interesting and thus relevant.¹²

Some central aspects are often singled out as characteristics of the educational philosophy that we call progressivism. Usually, this philosophy included the view that education changed in step with social change.¹³ There was also a basic view that schools should be imbued with a democratic culture and the idea that all citizens had the right to education, regardless of class and gender.¹⁴ The view of the child and the pupil as an independently acting subject was prominent, and pupils should learn to handle a changing future rather than pass down a cultural heritage.¹⁵ The reasons for more progressively inclined schools and teaching methods thus included general ideals as well as a teaching-related perspective.

Progressivism as a teaching practice has, for example, been analysed in a seminal study by Larry Cuban.¹⁶ When he discusses and studies the practice and ideals of progressivism, he especially mentions some practice-related indicators of relevance to our study. Identifying the impact of progressivism thus involves analysing aspects such as pupils’ classroom activities – individually or in groups – and teaching practices. Examples of activity are presentations, discussions, and essay writing, which are closely related to pupils’ opportunities to influence the teaching design and gain a say in the content and practice of teaching. Finally, a central feature to study is how the community is used as a resource in teaching. It should be noted that these aspects constitute ideal types and should be seen strictly as no more than indicators of progressive education. All indicators are not necessarily embedded in teaching at the same time.¹⁷ In this context, it is important to note that Cuban’s aim is not primarily to link pedagogical ideals to instructional practices but to study how teachers taught rather than what their explicit intentions with the teaching activities were. As shown in previous research, even before the emergence of progressivism, there were pedagogical ideas similar to progressive perspectives. For example, Enlightenment philosophers, such as Jean Jacques Rousseau, came to advocate the centrality of pupil-centred pedagogy.¹⁸ In addition, the practical challenges involved in teaching multiple classes in the same class or period could entail individual study.¹⁹ There were also elements in the older curricula that specifically stated the importance of community contacts.²⁰

In addition, it is noteworthy that progressive pedagogy is often contrasted with “traditional pedagogy”. Cuban, for instance, considers traditional teaching synonymous with teacher-centred teaching based on subjects and textbooks. The term traditional pedagogy can, however, be misleading, as it suggests that this is the way teaching has “always” been conducted, while we rather see it as a kind of ideal-typical method. It is also possible to speak of traditional content, which in the case of history education can be exemplified as teaching focusing on the affairs of nation states, kings, and adventures.²¹ In other school subjects, similar traditional content has been described. However, our assumption is that teachers seldom choose to apply a single method or content; rather, they adapt their instruction to a given situation and context.²² Instead, these methods and content can be understood as analytical ideal types used in research. In this article, we primarily aim to study examples of progressive teaching methods, and the analytical ideal types will be complemented with thick descriptions to give a nuanced picture of how progressive teaching was enacted in Swedish elementary schools in the 1940s.

The Swedish context

To a considerable extent, Sweden was part of the Western world’s modernisation project, which emerged at the turn of the twentieth century. The time after the 1930s was marked by radical modernisation ideas, which were characterised by progressive proposals in the areas of housing and social politics. Often, the same people were advocates of both progressive social policy and progressive education policy.²³ In the interwar years, there was also a discussion in Sweden on reforming what many saw as an obsolete parallel school system of a 6–7-year elementary school for workers and farmers and a grammar school for the bourgeois. Somewhat simplified, we can say that right-wing parties generally favoured the parallel school system, while left-wing parties advocated its abolishment.²⁴

The importance of elementary schools is evidenced by the number of pupils and teachers. In the 1940s, there were around 25,000 elementary school teachers and around 500,000 pupils in Sweden. In comparison, there were 2,700 grammar school teachers at the beginning of the 1940s and around 4,000 school leavers received their student degree (matriculation) at that time.²⁵ Elementary school was, in other words, the predominant school form all over Sweden from major cities, towns, and not least rural areas. Grammar schools, on the other hand, were mostly found in major cities, often centrally located in stately stone buildings.²⁶

Grammar school teachers had a university degree, usually from one of the universities in Uppsala or Lund. A significant number of them also had postgraduate degrees, which is a considerable difference from elementary school teachers who were educated at teacher training colleges scattered around great parts of the country.²⁷ Depending on the student teachers’ (at the time: “teacher candidate”) educational background, the duration of their studies was two or four years.²⁸ During the interwar period, the number of student teachers with matriculation eligibility increased markedly.²⁹ The training had many practical and methodological components, but students also studied teaching subjects such as Swedish, history, civics, and biology. Mandatory courses in psychology and pedagogy were also offered, as well as the area “modern pedagogical movements”. Exactly what this entailed was not elaborated in the constitutional text, but the term “modern” most likely corresponds to what we define as progressive pedagogy in this article.³⁰ The theoretical parts of the training were not particularly extensive, but apparently, practical as well as scientific and scholarly knowledge was emphasised. Studies also show that access to research literature was good.³¹

After World War I, Swedish education was gradually influenced by a more pupil-centred perspective on education and teaching. Progressive ideals were transmitted through teacher training colleges and pedagogical journals.³² In addition, statutes and regulatory documents have been influenced by contemporary tendencies. The statutes regulating elementary education emphasise that teaching should be clear and graphic and ensure pupils’ own activity.³³ The 1919 national curriculum for elementary schools also underlines the importance of independent activity, which is clear in the instructions for the teaching of Christianity, elementary natural science, and “mother tongue” (i.e. Swedish). There are also suggestions of group-related activities in, for example, local history or geography, in which “field trips” are said to benefit pupils’ observations of “reality”, which in the statutes refers to the field, the forest, and the farm. It is also recommended that pupils report their experiences and observations.³⁴

In the Swedish elementary school, some principal ways of organising schooling affected the design of the teaching. The most common ways were the so-called A and B school systems, the first meaning that each class constituted an age-homogeneous teaching group under one teacher and the latter comprising several grades in one and the same teaching group. In practice, this meant that the quality of teaching would vary and that “individual study” was a necessary method because of practical circumstances.

The modernisation ideas discussed in education politics advocated a uniform school system, ensuring that all citizens received the same education in the same school, regardless of background. The purpose of the reform was that schools should be in step with time, and the parallel school system was considered to reinforce a class society that was not compatible with a modern and equal society. The report of the 1946 Schools Inquiry Commission was a result of this reform process. It was to this commission that the teachers in our study submitted their narratives. Previous research has established that the inquiry played a significant role in the development of modern uniform democratic elementary education. Analyses of the commission’s report emphasise that the experiences of Nazism and other totalitarian ideologies were driving forces in the democratisation of education,³⁵ while other researchers tone down the impact of the commission. Gunnar Richardson points out that the postwar school reforms were also, to a high degree, the result of “the pressures of realities”, referring to the increasing demand for higher education, organisational problems, and the lack of education opportunities in rural areas.³⁶ Previous research also often highlights the reinforcement of pedagogical and psychological perspectives on education and research in the wake of the commission.³⁷

Later, in the 1960s, the parallel system was abolished in Sweden through reform introducing compulsory schools. However, to make sure that schools would serve as an important part of modernisation and democratisation, many claimed that teaching, too, must be democratised by employing the ideas of progressivism in daily practice. Here, school investigators and left-wing politicians often had the same perspective.³⁸

Progressivism in practice: previous research

Research on elementary schools in Sweden is extensive, but the number of studies with a classroom-based approach centring on actual teaching is limited, particularly regarding how teachers relate to pedagogical ideals. Teaching in the late nineteenth century and approaches to certain pedagogical ideals, however, have been treated in some studies. Analyses of inspection reports, for instance, show that there were ambitions to innovate teaching practice towards a more varied and pupil-oriented ideal. Additionally, previous studies have indicated that the use of images and other illustration materials has played an increasingly important role.³⁹ It should be noted that these studies were based on the inspectors’ views of teaching and not on the teachers’ own accounts. In Sweden, there is also recent research on the emergence of elementary schools in relation to local and regional conditions. In particular, Johannes Westberg has drawn attention to the importance of understanding the development of this type of school in relation to the resources and traditions of the local community. Even if teaching is not the focus of Westberg’s study, it clearly shows the benefits of emphasising the more practice-related aspects of education instead of considering only national policy in studying school development.⁴⁰

Swedish research on progressivism is relatively extensive, but the focus has chiefly been on prominent advocates of progressive ideals and the impact of progressive policy.⁴¹ In addition, international research has studied how progressive ideals have influenced education at a more general level. Relatively recent studies in Germany and Italy, for example, have focused on structural and political power levels in terms of the dissemination of American educational ideas.⁴²

Stepping into the classroom to study what goes on there is to open what is sometimes called “The Black Box of Schooling”,⁴³ and there are studies that have primarily taken an interest in how progressivism influenced teaching and the impact of pupil-centred teaching in the United States and Japan.⁴⁴ Studies of progressivism in the United States, for example, show that it had a breakthrough in many states during the interwar period but that it never came to dominate teaching. It was also clear that teachers seldom practised a purely pupil-centred method but that their teaching approach was rather a mix of methods and approaches. The impact of progressive education was less evident in later school stages than in early stages and was most evident in English (L1) and in social studies subjects. There was also a substantial difference between small rural schools and urban schools. In rural areas, teaching was conducted with scarce resources and large age-integrated classes. A kind of non-theoretical pupil-centred teaching was found, with pupils working individually because of practical circumstances. The large age span in many rural schools made it difficult for teachers to maintain coherent teacher-led teaching.⁴⁵ Studies also show that schooling in rural areas was probably influenced by well-known progressivists such as Helen Parkhurst. She initiated the very influential “Dalton Plan”, which gave prominence to pupils’ interests and activities.⁴⁶ Parkhurst had personal experience with small rural schools where teacher-centred teaching was difficult, which coloured her view of pedagogy.⁴⁷ Swedish research regarding teaching in upper secondary schools in the first half of the twentieth century shows that progressively oriented teaching was practised. However, the nature of the teaching varied depending on the subject.⁴⁸

There are also studies of pedagogical ideals and teachers’ conceptions of teaching. A study of teacher accounts in Spain shows that teachers in the 1930s approached progressive ideals in many ways. One way was to learn about progressive teaching without actually practising it. Some teachers eventually embraced progressive ideas and then relatively uncritically transformed them into practice. A more considered approach involved teachers being basically positive about progressive pedagogy without fully applying progressive ideals in practice. Instead, adaptation to the conditions and circumstances of the schools and the pupils was made. This involved creating new ways of teaching rather than copying new ways, a process that placed great demands on teachers’ creativity and analytical abilities.⁴⁹

Theoretical and methodological starting points

Our article focuses on progressivism, elementary school teachers and specifically on how progressivism was “done” in the classroom. Teachers’ accounts provide an opportunity to identify general pedagogical ideas, as well as how pedagogical developments can be seen as a part of greater societal development. The article is, in this regard, inspired by a prosopography approach, in which the basic assumption is that it is possible to extend knowledge of social processes and societal development by studying the group profiles of members of various institutions, such as political or professional organisations.⁵⁰ The method is appropriate when it is possible to identify and demarcate a collective assumed to share common interests and experiences.⁵¹ The group to be studied here – elementary school teachers – was a relatively demarcated collective even if there were variations in the group. Overall, the teachers had similar teacher training and taught at an elementary school.⁵² Even if the approach was based on data generated from groups of individuals, there were common grounds with a biographical perspective, as this also involved the idea that societal processes can be accessed through the analysis of individuals’ experiences and actions in various contexts. In the history of education, many studies in practice combine analyses of individuals with those of groups.⁵³ Even if proponents of prosopography approaches see advantages, there are also challenges. Demarcating a specific group, such as elementary school teachers, is fairly easy, but attributing a shared pedagogical view to this group could be problematic.⁵⁴ We also need to point out that the teachers worked under different circumstances. The material studied includes teachers describing their practice in the prosperous area of Ålsten in Bromma, a Stockholm suburb in which leading progressive social democrats resided, including Prime Minister Per Albin Hansson and the Myrdal couple, whose son, Jan, attended the local school of Ålsten. On the other hand, the material includes several small B-system elementary schools in rural areas with unprivileged pupils and often one teacher responsible for all classes. Although our aim is to identify general patterns in the material, in the conclusion, we also discuss these patterns in relation to the different contexts in which the teachers worked.

Methods and material

The material is a product of a call issued by a government inquiry in the 1940s, namely the 1946 Schools Inquiry Commission.⁵⁵ Around 250 grammar school teachers and 600 elementary school teachers responded to the call. The investigation formed the basis of the political decisions that led to the new compulsory school for every child. Early on, the commission recognised the need to collect different kinds of information about schools and teaching practices, which could be done through an analysis of previous research and the practical experience of teachers.⁵⁶ The inventory of teachers’ practice should ascertain “to what degree reform pedagogical activities were currently taking place in Swedish schools”, and teachers were encouraged to submit their accounts via teacher training colleges, inspectors, and teacher unions.⁵⁷ The call was also announced in education journals, inviting teachers to submit accounts of ongoing pedagogical experiments of various kinds. The approach was broad, and the commission welcomed extensive as well as less extensive “innovative examples”. However, there was neither an explicit request for detailed descriptions of a specific method, such as individualised teaching or group work, nor information on the reasons for choosing teaching methods.⁵⁸ A total of 850 accounts were submitted, and the material is available at the National Archives of Sweden (Riksarkivet).

Selection of material and analysis

Around 600 accounts in the archive were submitted by elementary school teachers, of which 360 were selected for further analysis. These represent teaching practices in the “theoretical subjects” (Swedish L1, Christianity, mathematics, natural science, history, local history, and geography). The reason for this selection was that we wanted to study how progressive teaching ideals manifested in regular compulsory education. Consequently, descriptions of thematic teaching and teaching untypical of regular activities were excluded from the study. Examples of such accounts were thematic teaching of traffic rules and the detrimental effects of alcohol, in which concrete suggestions on changes in schedules or allocation of hours dominated rather than descriptions of teaching conducted.

To identify aspects of progressivism, we used thematic analysis according to an iterative process between deductive and inductive analysis.⁵⁹ The text analyses and the ensuing coding were based on the semantic expressions in the accounts in terms of their explicit content.⁶⁰ The analysis was theoretically driven in the sense that we used the theoretical frame for progressive teaching as the analytical frame for coding. The general starting point for the analysis of Research Question 1 was Cuban’s categorisation of progressive teaching (see the Background section).⁶¹ To address Research Question 2, we initially used Dewey’s and Popkewitz’s perspectives on progressivism.⁶² The teachers’ accounts and reasons stated, however, did not correspond with the definition frames of the theoretical concepts, and the analysis process developed into an iterative process in which continuous adjustments were made in an interpretative process to adapt codes to the material and the Swedish context. In the practical handling, one of the authors made an initial analysis by categorising the accounts that contained teaching ideals and reasons, which were then discussed with the co-authors in several steps before different themes relating to the respective research question were identified. In this method of alternating between deductive and inductive approaches in the coding and categorisation of the material into different themes, we mainly followed Braun and Clarke’s description of thematic analysis.⁶³ In the analysis of Research Question 1, the deductive themes emerged more clearly in the material, while the inductive themes emerged in the analysis of Research Question 2. After coding into themes, the number of accounts under each theme was quantified, which resulted in an overall picture of the instances of the respective themes in the material, which is interesting in view of the large number of collected accounts. By presenting extracts from the accounts in the Results section, the material was then made transparent. Our selection of examples from the accounts was based on the twofold ambition to present the typical and common ideas categorised in the main themes while illustrating variations within a theme.

Analysis of research question 1

The analysis of accounts in terms of the progressive teaching ideals in the material was based on three overriding themes: pupil participation, pupil interaction and the role of the local community in teaching (i.e. the extended classroom).

• Pupil participation

This theme includes group work, individual work, discussions, and oral presentations.

• Pupil interaction

This theme includes aspects of pupils’ influence on teaching, for instance, when they suggested content/themes, presentation, and teaching methods.

• Extended classroom

This theme includes examples of when the teaching took place outdoors with a view to taking advantage of the local community through visits to museums, municipal administrations, workplaces and social institutions, etc.

In the thematic analysis, no subthemes emerged iteratively in the material. Instead, the variation within each theme was significant and is illustrated in the Results section through individual examples. The examples also provide an idea of what meanings the teachers themselves attributed to, for example, group work. In line with our ambition to understand teaching in relation to the teachers’ experiences and contextual conditions, we also give examples of and consider how three progressive elements relate to “traditional” ways of teaching.

Analysis of research question 2

In the analysis of teachers’ reasons for favouring progressive teaching, we initially drew on the progressive perspectives that, above all, Dewey and Popkewitz developed regarding democratic schools and the student perspective in the deductive themes. These two themes reflect progressive ideals in terms of more general perspectives regarding progressivism, in which the issue of the role of education in democratisation and social relevance was a central aspect, as well as the emphasis on the child/pupil’s interest and agency.⁶⁴ Subsequently, a praxis-related theme linked to practical circumstances emerged inductively. Here is a description of the themes involved:

• Ideals

This theme includes the reasons for the idea that teaching should prepare pupils for citizenship in a democratic world and educate them for life.

• Pupil perspective

This theme includes reasons relating to the idea that teaching should provide work satisfaction, self-esteem and good results.

The third theme is based on reasons relating to the teachers’ work situations.

• Practical aspects

This theme includes teachers’ reasons relating to class size and opportunities to teach smaller groups and to allocate time for support to individual pupils.

Evaluating the material

Some source-critical aspects must be commented on here. Progressive ideals had been given a certain weight in statutes regulating teacher training and teaching in elementary schools. The teachers who responded to the call from the commission were also invited to give an account of how experimental teaching could be conducted in elementary schools. In addition, our knowledge of teachers who did not respond is limited. We cannot say whether the teachers who submitted their accounts represented a progressive portion of the teaching profession. Our material also strictly represents a teacher’s perspective, excluding pupils and other persons, such as inspectors. It is, in addition, important to note that the teachers were not invited to give an account of their ordinary teaching but of their progressive teaching. It was only to be expected, then, that there would be a considerable degree of progressive practice. In line with our partly deductive approach, we looked for examples of a certain type of teaching and, in connection with the examples given, tried to balance the teachers’ accounts with examples of how progressive teaching in many cases was rooted in a more teacher-centred and traditional approach. Another challenge is the possible variation between what the teachers say and what they actually do. Studies of teachers’ voices have also indicated that discrepancies between what is said and what is done may occur. Educational history studies have also indicated that written reports from teachers can be subjective.⁶⁵

Objections can thus be made to our material, but we would also like to emphasise some strengths. The teachers described the teaching they conducted or had recently conducted at the time of the call, and the accounts were therefore not a form of retrospective life stories at the end of their careers. The material is extensive, and, as far as we know, it is an unparalleled collection of accounts of actual teaching practices at the time. As mentioned, it is noteworthy that the call was relatively open, giving the teachers a great deal of freedom regarding how to report on their teaching. Another aspect that can be highlighted is the importance of taking the stories of separate individuals seriously. It is about seeing teachers as experts and authorities in our case.⁶⁶ Reservations can be made regarding the material, but compared with analysing teaching by studying curricula, teaching materials, educational journals, and inspectors’ reports, we argue that this material probably provides a better picture of what teaching at the time could be like. However, above all, different kinds of material should probably be combined to give a more complete picture of teaching in 1940s schools.

Progressive teaching ideals in practice according to the teachers

To provide an idea of the aspects of progressive teaching that were most frequent in the accounts, we start by presenting the number and frequency of the various progressive themes reported in the teacher accounts. We then present the quantitative distribution of the three thematic reasons to deepen the understanding of how the teachers said they applied progressive teaching and, finally, extracts from the accounts describing the teachers’ reasons for the teaching practice. By reading the teachers’ stories, it will also be possible to get a closer view of their understanding of different methods. In the concluding discussion, we relate the results to the article’s aim and previous research on how the wide attraction of progressivism can be understood. In the presentation, we strive to include the voices of teachers from the whole of Sweden. We have also, as far as possible, included teachers with experience in both A and B school systems. However, it was not possible to break down answers in relation to these systems in the quantified analysis, as this information was generally not included in the accounts.

Teaching practice

Based on the nature of the material (see above), it is not surprising that there were many instances of progressive education in the material (see Table 1).

Table 1. Elementary school teachers: compilation of different ways of teaching progressively.

	Pupil participation	Pupil interaction	Extended classroom
No. of teachers (total 360*)	212	127	58
% of no. of teachers	59%	35%	16%

Source: FI V7, V8, V9, V10, V11, V12 (SKRA).

* The accounts can be represented in several boxes, which means that the total number of accounts may exceed the total number of teachers.

Table 1 shows that of the more progressive teaching strategies, the aspects involving student participation dominate, followed by student interaction and the extended classroom as a teaching resource. However, it is interesting to see how the strategies were implemented in teaching.

Pupil participation

A frequent method described in the accounts was pupils working in groups, preferably with a cross-thematic approach. In the midsized town of Halmstad, for instance, Margit Tunås described how she organised this in 1936 to 1940. In a group design, she combined natural science, history, and geography with writing, and the pupils worked on this for 14 days. She explained: “The pupils worked in groups and organised the groups mainly on their own initiative” and further stated that “the members of the group had discretionary opportunity and permission to help each other”. If there was a problem, Tunås described how she stepped in to ensure learning. The results could also be presented in a group, but written tests in class also occurred. Tunås wrote: “Each group was examined individually, but after the conclusion of each period, there was also an oral exam in the classroom or a written test.” Even if Tunås described how she, since the 1930s, has taught in a way that could be considered modern and pupil-centred, other aspects of teaching and learning were also emphasised. For example, she stressed the importance of teaching content, and that it should “stick in the mind”, and a way to achieve this was to embrace children’s sentiments and imagination.⁶⁷

A different strategy to promote pupil activity mentioned by the teachers is individual work. Stefan Ivansson, in the minor industrial community of Västanfors, for example, combined history and natural science when the nineteenth century was studied. The development of electricity and the railway was a theme on which the pupils could work individually for a longer stretch, as in Tunås’ class. In Ivansson’s case, the task was pinned to the noticeboard and then the pupils could get started. The pupils cooperated during the individual work period. “The children worked by themselves”, Ivansson stated and continued, “but the good ones have sometimes – on their own initiative and sometimes on my encouragement – helped the slower pupils”. The pupils reported what they had learnt via presentations and written tests.⁶⁸

Additionally, Astrid Fredberg, teaching at a B-form school in the rural community of Tavelsjö, used individualised teaching with many elements of independent work. She reported having to let the pupils work individually, as there were several parallel groups at the same time.⁶⁹ In relation to components involving reading, she described this as follows:

The quiet reading time in elementary school comprises, apart from reading, a written report on the reading passage in the form of answers to the teacher’s questions and sometimes in the form of independent summaries. The teacher has seldom time to check the reading in other ways.

In the variously organised B system, independent work was common, even if it was adapted to age and subject. In Elvira Larsson’s Björkulla school, situated in a rural district, slightly older pupils worked individually in history and natural science, while younger pupils had a greater need for what she called “direct teaching”.⁷⁰

Fredberg and Larsson provided good examples of how the conditions for teaching greatly affected the organisation of teaching in parallel classes. Forsberg claimed that “the teacher is easily seduced into facing the class being taught at present and forgets to observe the children occupied with silent exercises, particularly if the classroom is short and broad”. To vary the teaching, Fredberg described how she used to “start every other lesson in these subjects [silent reading and direct teaching] with grade 4 and every other lesson with grade 6 as it is difficult to give the class, I start with only half a lesson”.⁷¹

In summary, two kinds of learner activity in teaching emerged – group work or individual work – which could also be combined with other similar approaches. Note that several ways of working might occur in parallel. The Larsson and Forsberg accounts are also clear examples of how teachers were expected to manage a complex day at work and that the pedagogy used varied depending on the situation.

Pupil interaction

Teacher accounts also contained many examples of how the progressive ideal of pupil influence could be manifested in teaching. In the pupil-active methods above, there were elements of pupil influence, as in Margit Tunås’ classes. For example, in group work, pupils can decide how to organise and design the work.⁷² However, pupil influence could also involve teaching content, as in Hanna Knutsson’s school and Kyrkbyn’s school in the small community of Gruvbyn. She had tested group work with a set subject-based topic and design and was disappointed. Then, she let the pupils choose an area based on their interests. She described an example in which Jeanne d’Arc (usually not part of the course) was chosen, as this had been requested, especially by a group of girls and a group of boys because she “had told them about Jeanne d’Arc at the morning assembly”. Although there were often several set topics to work with, the pupils could also opt out of some. Knutsson put it as follows: “When each group had chosen a topic (nobody wanted Huguenots and Catholics), we got started.” In history, pupils could choose between themes, such as France and the Thirty-Years’ War or Cardinal Richelieu. In natural science, they could, for example, choose between “Flowers on the Riviera, the Silk Butterfly and Oyster farming”. Group work was also applied in other contexts. Knutsson further mentioned that

the groups could choose who should be responsible for the various presentations, which turned out be short, simple lectures with illustrations in the form of maps and drawings, all pinned to the wall as well as placed in exercise books.

Knutsson’s account demonstrates that pupils were allowed to suggest proposals, for example, by learning more about Gustav Vasa. In the examples above, we can note how the teachers combined the more progressively oriented methods with traditional perspectives on teaching and learning, as well as with traditional subject content, such as Swedish Kings (i.e. Gustav Vasa).

Just as content could relate to a previous teaching tradition, so could elements of teaching practice not associated with progressive pedagogy be used. Knutsson, for instance, also used the standard method of checking homework orally.⁷³

Along with influence on content and organisation in Knutsson’s classes, there were also a “class board” and ”class meetings” – a kind of pupil council for discussing general school issues. This type of pupil-active approach was also described by Stina Skantze, in Sweden’s second largest city, Gothenburg, who conducted pupil-centred teaching, letting pupils discuss and develop rules of conduct at the school. Skantze explained: “As early as the third grade, the class and I play ‘village council’ . . . The class council legislates on our working together.” Skantze exemplified: “When we are about to go on a school outing, I make some proposals some days in advance and the children discuss them and then the decision is made by casting a vote.” In the civics lessons, her pupils discussed the nightlife of young people through a kind of role-play in which the children played the part of adults.⁷⁴

There were no examples in the material of teachers letting pupils freely choose the type of instruction. Usually, there were restricting frames or a firm foundation for what could be called traditional teaching. Beyond this, some of the teachers almost completely allowed the pupils to choose teaching approaches. A.W. Åkerud observed that

now all the children were allowed to freely take initiatives, plan, and act for the first time in the course of their schooling. If I had harboured any distrust about the children’s ability to manage on their own, this conception was soon corrected.

⁷⁵ Restricting frames also applied to content – pupils’ choice of content was usually limited, as the teachers proposed content as well as types of instruction and activities. In other words, the progressive elements were restrictively practised and kept in line with traditional school content.

In the accounts, pupils’ influence emerged in the form of an opportunity to influence teaching content and participate in setting up rules for classroom interaction.

Extended classroom

A typical progressive idea was the recognition that the local community could be a resource in hands-on teaching, which was also emphasised in the statutes regulating education. This theme refers to statements in which the local community was included as a teaching resource in the teachers’ accounts. Like all the other progressive elements presented, the ways in which the classrooms were extended beyond the classrooms varied.

At the small-sized town of Smedsbyn’s elementary B system school, John Carlsson taught the parallel grades 5, 6, and 7. When embarking on his career at the beginning of the 1930s, he applied the principle of “preparation and oral homework checks” and that the pupils should “drill in the course”. Gradually, Carlsson experienced that he became an “automation” and the pupils “machines”. He then introduced the “school as workplace” method, emphasising the pupils’ own work, described as follows: “Eventually, I introduced the school-as-workplace method, moving down from the pulpit to the children. I was their foreman, allocating tasks and providing supervision.”

According to Carlsson, this method “had increased the pupils’ as well as my interest”. The method of seeing school as workplace also included increased pupil participation through incorporating different kinds of resources from the community. Carlsson used school broadcasting, the post office savings bank, and other institutions, which annually arranged competitions of various kinds:

In the competitions mentioned here, the pupils have participated with great interest. Competing has been more than a competition. It has involved collecting material, planning, discussing, writing, drawing, discarding and starting again.

The pupils also had the opportunity to perform tasks in their home environment, such as describing their homes or reporting on old estates in the neighbourhood. The tasks required measuring and reproducing buildings. In addition, descriptions of architectural styles and interior details might be part of the tasks and give an account of the means of communication. Carlsson also arranged field trips in connection with natural science. Pupils made observations of “the diary of nature”, such as the weather, migratory birds’ arrival, and the surrounding flora.⁷⁶

Like Carlsson’s pupils, their peers in rural Svartsö Skälvik used nature and their surroundings as teaching resources. Their teacher, Josef Thunqvist, reported on field trips relating to local history:

In connection with local history, we have visited cowsheds and barns, and taken the opportunity to interview the owner about the domestic animals. We have also taken a trip on the frozen lake to study a unique local fishing method involving trawling on the ice.

Field trips to barns and observation of spring flowers and insects are examples of how the surroundings were a natural part of schooling in Svartsö Skälvik.⁷⁷ The civics subject also took advantage of the community as a resource. Gunnar Hasten, in the rural community of Harplinge, let his pupils read public and local announcements to gain knowledge about social activities in the community: “Citizenship issues, which otherwise can be so drab for 13–14-year-olds, assume a different character if public announcements and local notifications assist in bringing life to social activities.”⁷⁸ Nature field trips with plant examination and learning the difference between the woods of fir and leaf trees were components of Brita Lohmander’s teaching in the small town of Sölvesborg, if time permitted.⁷⁹

Summing up, we can note that a large part of teacher practice at this time was based on traditional resources in the sense of traditional content, which was adapted to or transformed into progressive practice. Beyond these resources, the local community and its surroundings were used as resources. Barns, fields and the democratic institutions of the municipal community were typically used as resources. Cuban observes that a characteristic of rural schools was the “use of content drawn from the community, and tolerance of student movement”.⁸⁰ The teachers in this material can thus be said to represent a general international trend.

It is also clear that the teaching practices described in the teachers’ accounts often involved parallel methods, usually as a result of a school organisation requiring the same teacher to teach different age groups in the same period.

Reasons for progressive teaching

In around 100 of the accounts submitted, there was elaborate reasoning, which makes it possible to identify reasons for choosing to conduct teaching in a specific way. As shown in Table 2, some of the reasons can be related to progressive education ideals, while others are linked to the everyday realities and practical aspects that the teachers had to face and deal with.

Table 2. Elementary teachers’ reasons for using progressive teaching methods.

Reasons for using a progressive Method	No. of teachers stating reason	Percent of total no. of teachers (no. 360)
Ideal: democracy, education and learning for life and the future.	42	12%
Pupil perspective: bolstering the pupil, creating satisfaction and interest, increasing fellowship and individual self-esteem, and achieving better knowledge and good results	91	25%
Practical circumstances: facilitating teaching in big classes and providing more space for teachers to help weak pupils alternatively increased workload, but positive results compensate for this	27	7%
Total no. of teachers stating reasons	101	28%

Source: FI V7, V8, V9, V10, V11, V12 (SKRA).

Ideal

Basically, the conception of progressive education is that schools should contribute to the development of society while promoting democratic values and principles. Reasons linked to democratic ideals recurred in many of the reasons given in the accounts. Wald Jansson from Sweden’s second largest city, Gothenburg, for instance, described his ambition to organise teaching in a way that would be aligned with the demands of new times on the future citizens of the emerging social system. He described his vision as follows:

Eventually, I realised that what I wanted was a community system that was natural for children: which in itself contained the joy of playing, the incentive of sports to work hard and perform, and the character moulding power of independence: a system providing social contact between teachers and pupils with the open nature of true friendship, thus creating the immediate affinity enabling individual and education.

According to Jansson, such a society needed qualities like power of initiative, open-mindedness and the ability to act independently.⁸¹ Similar reasons were expressed by K.G. Ljunghill from the midsized town of Lund: “In the teaching of citizenship and contemporary history, children shall acquire a clear understanding of the meaning and system of democracy.” Ljunghill further stated that he applied independence so that the pupils should “acquire the skills and experience required to be an active citizen in a democratic society”. The pupils also visited democratic institutions, such as the city council, and established their own library boards. Through his teaching, Ljunghill wanted the children to experience democracy in school and thus to provide opportunities for them to develop into good citizens in future society.⁸²

Similarly, in the north of Sweden, Sigbritt Therner at Tossa School, situated in the midsized town of Haparanda, argued for activity-based pedagogy, writing that this method contributed to “moulding the children into persons with good character and into truly democratic citizens who are responsible and can cooperate”.⁸³

The reasons inspired by more general ideals and conceptions of society and education are in line with progressive ideals of schools characterised by democratic ideals and practices.

Pupil perspective

The reasons described above can be said to link the progressive method to overarching ideals and conceptions of the role of education in contemporary society. However, there were also reasons more directly linked to progressive ideals about enhancing pupils’ competences and abilities. Several teachers made the connection to this progressive ideal clear by letting pupils work on their own in different subjects using encyclopaedias and books based on their interests and competences. Teaching also involved collaboration and commenting on each other’s work. Arthur Stehr in Stockholm, the capital of Sweden, observed that this meant that pupils could acquire “a certain parliamentary experience and the formal training needed for the subject of citizenship as a side effect”.⁸⁴

In the same way, Greta Tjellström, from Ålsten’s elementary school in Stockholm, argued for group work in which pupils in groups of 4–5 could visit museums on their own, form their own groups in the classroom and move freely about because pupils performed better, no children could be lazy and the resulting classroom spirit was character moulding. In the following extract, Tjellström clarified the issue of “lazy children”:

So-called lazy children did not exist at all, since each task was allocated and adapted in degree of difficulty to match each pupil’s ability to perform the task on its own or with a little help from the teacher or group members.

Even though the teacher had to design the questions, which involved an overwhelming workload, Tjellström judged the method to give good results.⁸⁵

By letting the pupils develop at their own pace, Ruth Chancerelle at Högalid’s elementary school in Stockholm wished that the children should be active and “as healthily vivified in school as in the playground”. Instruction should ensure that pupils learn to take the initiative to help and be able to express themselves without inhibition. The method of letting pupils work by themselves and at their own pace was justified with reference to the need to learn to take responsibility and be independent.⁸⁶ Maja Norrgran from Källås School in Vallda parish reacted at the start of her career (1922) to the prevailing military discipline. She hoped for more joy and satisfaction for the pupils and that they should be more independent and get used to taking responsibility. Norrgran also claimed that freely chosen tasks increased pupils’ motivation and their zeal to work and that being helpful and considerate of others was instilled in them.⁸⁷ Karl Lindahl, in the midsized town of Norrköping, had similar experiences. In addition, his account highlighted that individual study “is very useful when it comes to review” as well as “to provide opportunity for the more talented to widen their knowledge”. In addition, Lindahl emphasised that the method worked differently for different pupils and that “weaker pupils” did not advance at all on their own.⁸⁸

Arguments that more or less directly referred to pupils’ abilities and competences constituted the dominant reasons for their practice, which may reflect their views on what was most important in education. However, in the teachers’ reasoning on their choice of organising teaching according to more progressive principles, there were also reasons unconnected to conceptions of democratic ideals and individual development.

Practical aspects

Along with pedagogical ideals pertaining to social development at large and arguments linked to pupils’ development, there were also reasons related to practical realities in schools. While the former reasons were expected, the latter pertaining to practical aspects were less obvious to us. In many cases, the practical aspects referred to the context of B system schools, where the teachers taught several grades at the same time in the same classroom. These schools were mostly small units in rural areas.

Astrid Forsberg, as mentioned earlier, represented teachers working in a B school in Tavelsjö. She taught several grades at the same time, which affected her teaching, as it was not easy to organise. Teaching geography for grades 4 and 6 in the same classroom was, for example, a challenge. Since the level of knowledge was different, it meant that the six graders sat and were “lazy”, while the four graders were busy. Forsberg then tried using more pupil-centred methods and instruction inspired by the so-called workplace school method, in which pupils worked independently on different tasks. One problem, however, was that she “did not have enough time to supervise the children and answer their questions”.⁸⁹ Despite the lack of time for supervision, individual study became the organisational solution for teaching.

In a B system school near the small town of Simrishamn, pupils also worked independently. Dagny Larsson applied silent exercises, which involved the challenge of “getting the children to be efficiently occupied”. Larsson taught five different classes at the same time. One way to handle these differences was to use individual piecework. To organise the work, Larsson used charts, showing when each child’s piecework should be completed and “placed on the wall in the classroom”. Piecework alternated with whole-class teaching, but “for piecework, the children could work through the task at their own pace”.⁹⁰

Structuring teaching with the help of piecework and charts seemed to be the solution to a complex situation. Teachers in schools with several grades in one classroom needed a whole range of teaching approaches to make it “efficient”, a term used by Ruth Söderberg and Linnea Larsson, multi-grade teachers. They noted that the multi-grade school organisation required a specific approach to teaching. They organised “groups to work on their own in another room – in the corridor or in the temporarily empty primary school – with reading aloud, spelling, homework quizzes, etc”.⁹¹ They adapted their teaching to the apparently scarce resources to solve daily professional problems, in their case, the lack of resources, such as group rooms and classrooms.

A vivid picture of the daily life of an elementary school teacher was also given by Edith Thellert in the small community of Ekesta, Västerensta. Her account clearly shows that the way in which a school was organised also affected teaching. Edith Thellert gave an account of how the B school system required using several methods at the same time and, among other things, independent work. This is how a typical morning was described:

The children start at 8:20, but already at 8:00 I have “reception” at school. [—] The weekly caretaking group attends to the heating, ventilation and sharpening the pencils and so on. Then the exercise books in mathematics are handed in. I have time to check them and find that a boy might not have done a sum correctly. He is asked to return, and we go through the sum again. Here is a girl who did not know a hymn verse yesterday and recites it again. Then it is time to ring the bell. Here come children of all ages from 7 to 14. At the morning assembly we sing the morning hymn. [—] The first lesson is devoted to the youngest children, when I have put the others to work – it could be exercises in geography or history – so they manage on their own. The children move silently about in the classroom, use scissors, or hold copies of a picture against a windowpane, and so on. [—] Now I sit down among the youngest children. It is time for Christianity and then I want stillness. We are talking about the miracle of Easter. The children hear about how Jesus appeared before his disciples. [—] The second half of the lesson is spent on reading. Before we begin, I must help some of the older children. A girl who has completed her task and is ‘unemployed’ gets instructions to a new task. Another child receives help in finding a ‘bigger’ book for the presentation she is giving in the third lesson. [—] Then there is a break. [–] Only the caretakers have work to do inside for a bit longer. They open windows, clean the blackboards, hand out drawings, and sharpen the pencils again.⁹²

As is clear, the teacher’s workday was multifaceted and demanded ingenuity, and the pupils’ day also varied. Within the course of some hours, they were caretakers, assistant teachers and independently working pupils. As is evident in the previous survey of research, this was hardly a unique Swedish phenomenon. Larry Cuban has shown similar patterns in studies of rural education, that is, a progressivism marked by circumstances and not primarily the idea-driven pedagogy that was typical of many schools in the United States.⁹³

Discussion and conclusions

It is well known that progressivism was a transnational pedagogical movement in the first half of the twentieth century and was variously applied, depending on the national context.⁹⁴

However, judging by the teachers’ own accounts, there are some clear findings worth highlighting. One of the main contributions of this study is that it explicitly shows that this variation is due to local circumstances that have transformed teaching practice in a progressive direction. Hence, the practice of progressive teaching methods was enacted not only due to progressive ideals of the 1940s but also as an effect of practical experiences and needs by the elementary teachers.

A second main contribution in relation to previous Swedish studies is that the present study adds an explicit and distinct teacher perspective to our understanding of how progressive teaching was practised and expands and complements previous studies on curricula, teaching materials, educational journals, and inspectors’ reports. We have previously pointed out some weaknesses in the material; we do not, for example, get knowledge from this material about how the teaching was conducted in general. However, this study provides the authoritative voices of teachers who describe their own recent teaching.⁹⁵ This voice indicates that the most frequent progressive practice in Swedish elementary schools in the 1940s consisted of various types of pupil participation, with over half of the teachers (59%) giving accounts of teaching involving pupil activities, followed by pupil interaction and the local community as a resource. This result relates to the first research question and is in line with the findings of recent studies on teacher practice in grammar schools in Sweden.⁹⁶ Regarding the reasons for progressive practice, going back to the second research question, as stated by the teachers, most instances involve pupil development of different knowledge and skills.

A third contribution of this study is that it researches important historical material that has not previously been systematically studied. The government report, for which the material was collected, summarises an analysis of the teacher accounts on less than one page, without any analysis of the material. It is simply noted that several methods are used, such as exercise books and individual word and group work, that the school system affects instruction and finally, that the present education system obstructs the development of pupil-centred teaching.⁹⁷

The teachers who described their teaching in this material were, in many ways, professionally active during a time of democratisation and modernisation. It is likely that several of the female teachers started their professional careers before having the right to vote, which was not introduced in Sweden until 1921. The school year of 1945/46 started in August in connection with the end of World War II, when Japan capitulated in August. Major school reforms, which would mean a radical democratisation of education, were approaching, but no formal decisions had been made. Against this backdrop, it is not surprising that teachers should link their practices to democratic and progressive ideals. We might rather wonder why these ideals and principles did not have a greater impact since they are virtually invisible in the material. In previous research on the breakthrough of progressivism, the importance of democratic ideals is emphasised, not least regarding the analysis of the reforms in the wake of the 1946 School Inquiry Commission.⁹⁸ However, there are clear differences between the societal level and the teachers’ daily considerations. This can be understood in relation to education historian Gunnar Richardson’s observation that leading education reformers often had an ideal conception of what was possible to change in schools, which had no relation to reality.⁹⁹ Our study also shows that much of teachers’ reform of teaching is due to local reality and not only ideals. Consequently, one should be cautious about extrapolating teaching practices to existing teaching ideals if they are not informed by the teachers’ incentives for doing so.

If we combine the arguments referring to pupil development and everyday challenges, the reasons that are closely and directly linked to teaching emerge most clearly, not least is the wide impact of progressivism on teaching in the rural B school system interesting. As noted in international research, rural schools were often run according to a non-theoretical view of schools and education. The material conditions with the considerable lack of premises demanded a flexible, innovative, and adaptable teacher, as shown in this study.¹⁰⁰ The teachers’ daily work required, not least, organising teaching that could accommodate pupils from several grades at the same time. It could also involve a classroom in which teaching was conducted in several subjects in the same lesson. It is also clear from the teachers’ accounts that a lack of resources meant that they had to rely on local resources.¹⁰¹ However, this instruction could not take any form. Apparently, the teachers based their teaching on traditional content, as formulated in teaching materials and curricula since hymns, morning assembly, writing skills, and national history were recurring themes in their practice. This can be understood in relation to conceptions of “the Grammar of Schooling”, which entailed that there were expectations on teachers and schools to ensure that instruction had a content and an organisation that could be described as traditional.¹⁰² As mentioned initially, the impact of various national understandings of progressivism has been stressed in previous research.¹⁰³ As we argue, there are also considerable variations within Sweden, even within one and the same classroom. The local resources affected how teachers transformed progressive ideals into teaching.

Studying elementary school teachers as a collective with shared features offers the opportunity to trace the impact of ideas and conceptions of society, education and teaching.¹⁰⁴ The group we studied can be seen as relatively homogeneous in several respects. These teachers had more or less the same training, they were probably members of the same union, they taught children in the same school system, and they had similar terms of employment. However, there were considerable differences in the circumstances under which they worked. An elementary school teacher in prosperous Ålsten in Bromma, Stockholm, often taught children of the social elite in the A school system, while many other teachers worked with integrated social class groups and more resources. The teacher collective also included individual teachers who were, to a great extent, positioned in the epicentre of pedagogical renewal. Among the teachers who submitted accounts was Ester Hermansson from Gothenburg. Hermansson wrote books on progressive teaching, made study trips to the United States, and participated in the 1946 Schools Inquiry Commission.¹⁰⁵ Hermansson was not representative of the broad group of teachers at the time, even if there were others who also actively took part in the pedagogical debate and development of ideas. However, Hermansson stands out as a teacher who has left an imprint on posterity through investigations and pedagogical travel. Teaching in the 1940s was a multifaceted and broad pedagogical workshop in which policy and practice walked hand-in-hand in the reform process of Swedish education.

The collection of teacher accounts is probably the largest inventory of teaching practices from the perspective of teachers in Sweden. How, then, were the results used in the 1946 Schools Inquiry Commission’s reform efforts in Sweden? The short and simple answer is: hardly at all. Admittedly, the commission affirmed the importance of the material but did not draw any conclusions from it or use it in any other context.¹⁰⁶ Nevertheless, the collection probably played an indirect role in the continued reform process and in the extensive systematic pilot schemes launched in the 1950s. The proposition, on which the principle of nine-year compulsory education was based, reflects the essence of the collected material, as it points out that many important spontaneous reforms are taking place in schools. Although conceding that individual teachers trying out new methods is important for continued reform efforts, the proposition also points out that more systematic methods are required.¹⁰⁷ Research studies of Swedish reforms, as well as more synoptic works, highlight the latter reform strategy, neglecting any consideration of individual teachers’ importance as agents of reform.¹⁰⁸

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Swedish Research Council [dnr 2017-03646]; Vetenskapsrådet [dnr 2017-03646].

Notes

¹ Larry Cuban, How Teachers Taught: Constancy and Change in American Classrooms, 1890–1980 (New York: Longman, 1993); Johannes Westberg, Att bygga ett skolväsende [Building a School System] (Lund: Nordic Academic Press, 2014); and David A. Gamson, The Importance of Being Urban (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2019), 2–3.

² cf. Thomas Popkewitz, ed., Inventing the Modern Self and John Dewey: Modernities and the Travelling of Pragmatism in Education (New York: Palgrave, 2005); Herbard Kliebard, The Struggle for the American Curriculum, 1893–1958 (New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 2004); and Ingrid Carlgren and Ference Marton, Lärare av i morgon [Teachers of Tomorrow] (Stockholm: Lärarförbundets förlag, 2008).

³ Carlos Menguiano-Rodríguez and María del Mar del Pozo-Andrés, “Appropriating the New: Progressive Education and its (Re) constructions by Spanish Schoolteachers,” Paedagogica Historica (Published online: May 5, 2021); Laura Tisdall, A Progressive Education? How Childhood Changed in Mid Twentieth Century English and Welsh Schools (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2020); Cuban, How Teachers Taught; Arthur Zilversmit, Changing Schools: Progressive Education Theory and Practice, 1930–1960 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993); and Dorothy Kass, Educational Reform and Environmental Concern (London: Routledge, 2018).

⁴ Jakob Evertsson, “Classroom Wall Charts and Biblical History: A Study of Educational Technology in Elementary Schools in Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Century Sweden,” Paedagogica Historica 50, no. 5 (2014): 668–84; Ulla Johansson, Normalitet, kön och klass: liv och lärande i svenska läroverk 1927–1960 [Normality, Gender and Class: Life and Learning in Swedish Secondary Schools 1927–1960] (Umeå: Umeå universitet, 2000); Christina Florin and Ulla Johansson, “Där de härliga lagrarna gro”: kultur, klass och kön i svenska läroverk 1850–1914 [“Where the Laurels Grow”: Culture, Class and Gender in Swedish Secondary Schools 1850–1914] (Stockholm: Tiden, 1993); and Kent Hägglund, Ester Boman, Tyringe helpension och teatern: drama på en reformpedagogisk flickskola 1909–1936 [Ester Boman, Tyringe Full board and Theatre: Drama at a Reform Pedagogical School for Girls 1909–1936] (Stockholm: HLS, 2001). The last three Swedish studies only peripherally feature teaching.

⁵ SOU 1948:27, 1946 års skolkommissions betänkande [SOU 1948:27, Report of the 1946 Schools Inquiry Commission] (Stockholm: Ivar Häggströms Boktryckeri, 1948), 83–4.

⁶ The material is further presented in the methods section.

⁷ Tisdall, A Progressive Education, 38–9; Arthur Zilversmit, Changing Schools, 90–102; and Yoko Yamasaki and Hiroyoki Kuno, eds., Educational Progressivism: Cultural Encounters and Reform in Japan (London: Routledge, 2018), 1–9.

⁸ Gunnar Richardson, Svensk skolpolitik 1940–1945: Idéer och realiteter i pedagogisk debatt och politiskt handlande [Swedish School Policy 1940–1945: Ideas and Realities in Pedagogical Debate and Political Action] (Stockholm: Liber, 1978), 98–111.

⁹ Statistisk årsbok för Sverige 1950 [Statistics Yearbook of Sweden 1950] (Stockholm: Norstedt & Söner, 1950), Table 257.

¹⁰ See Lawrence Stone, “Prosopography,” Daedalus 100, no. 1 (1971): 46–79; Stephen Ball and Ivor Goodson, Teachers’ Lives and Careers (London: Falmer Press, 1985); Peter Cunningham, “Innovators, Networks and Structures: Towards a Prosopography of Progressivism,” History of Education 30, no. 5 (2001): 433–51; and Jane Martin “Interpreting Biography in the History of Education: Past and Present,” History of Education 41, no. 1 (2012): 87–102. For information of current history of education studies, see e.g. Yamasaki and Kuno, Educational Progressivism.

¹¹ Thomas Etzemüller, Alva and Gunnar Myrdal: Social Engineering in the Modern World (London: Lexington, 2014); Yvonne Hirdman, Att lägga livet till rätta [Putting Life Straight] (Stockholm: Carlssons 2010); and Popkewitz, Inventing the Modern Self.

¹² John Dewey, Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education (Miami: Hardpress, 1916).

¹³ Popkewitz, Inventing the Modern Self; Cuban, How Teachers Taught.

¹⁴ Tisdall, A Progressive Education, 38, 39; Zilversmit, Changing Schools, 90–2; and Richardson, Svensk skolpolitik, 98–111.

¹⁵ See e.g. Popkewitz, introduction to Inventing the Modern Self, 1–39.

¹⁶ Cuban, How Teachers Taught.

¹⁷ Ibid., 14–17.

¹⁸ William Reese, “The Origins of Progressive Education,” History of Education Quarterly 41, no. 1 (2001): 1–24.

¹⁹ Cuban, How Teachers Taught, 136–9.

²⁰ Normalplan för undervisning i folkskolor och småskolor [Government, Standard Syllabus for Elementary School Teaching] (Stockholm: Nordstedt, 1900). See specifications for geography teaching.

²¹ Sven Sødring Jensen, Historieundervisningsteori [Theory of Teaching History] (Köpenhamn: Christian Ejlers’ Forlag, 1978), 11–78.

²² cf. Tisdall, A Progressive Education, 219–21.

²³ Etzemüller, Alva and Gunnar Myrdal; Hirdman, Att lägga livet till rätta.

²⁴ Lisbeth Lundahl, I moralens, produktionens och det sunda förnuftets namn [In the Name of Morals, Production and Common Sense] (Lund: Pedagogiska institutionen, 1989), 88–93; 167–70; and Richardson, Svensk skolpolitik, 28–39.

²⁵ Statistisk årsbok för Sverige 1950, Tables 257, 265 and 266.

²⁶ See Richardson, Svensk skolpolitik, 11–25; Florin and Johansson, “Där de härliga lagrarna gro”, 25–8.

²⁷ Florin and Johansson, “Där de härliga lagrarna gro”, 168–70.

²⁸ Svensk författningssamling SFS [Swedish Code of Statutes], 1937:535, sections 1 and 5.

²⁹ Agneta Linné, Moralen, barnet eller vetenskapen? [Morals, the Child or Science?] (Stockholm: HLS Förlag, 1996), 210–12.

³⁰ SFS, 1937:659.

³¹ Linné, Moralen, barnet eller vetenskapen? 193–5, 226–30.

³² Sven Hartman, Ulf P. Lundgren and Rita M. Hartman, “Inledning,” [Introduction] in John Dewey, Individ, skola och Samhälle: Utbildningsfilosofiska texter [John Dewey, Individual, School and Society: Philosophical Texts on Education], ed. Sven Hartman, Ulf P. Lundgren, and Rita M. Hartman (Stockholm: Natur och kultur, 2005).

³³ SFS, 1921:604, section 29.

³⁴ Undervisningsplan för rikets folkskolor den 31 oktober 1919 [Government, Swedish National Curriculum for Elementary Schools, October 31, 1919] (Växjö: Smålandspostens Boktryckeri, 1923): cf. Henrik Åström Elmersjö, En av staten godkänd historia [A State Approved History] (Lund: Nordic Academic Press, 2017), 55–6.

³⁵ Johan Östling, Sweden after Nazism: Politics and Culture in the Wake of the Second World War (New York: Berghahn Books, 2016), 184–98; and Tomas Englund, Samhällsorientering och medborgarfostran i svensk skola under 1900-talet [Orientation about the Wider Society and Civic Education in Swedish Schools during the Twentiethth Century] (Uppsala: Uppsala universitet, 1986), 347–51.

³⁶ Gunnar Richardson, Drömmen om en ny skola [Dreaming of a New School] (Stockholm: Liber, 1983), 33–8, 367–406.

³⁷ Christian Lundahl, Viljan att veta vad andra vet [Wanting to Know What Others Know] (Stockholm: Arbetslivsinstitutet, 2006), 179–87; and Richardson, Drömmen om en ny skola, 411–13.

³⁸ Richardson, Drömmen om en ny skola, 76–90. See also SOU 1961:31: 1957 års skolberedning 6 Grundskolan: betänkande [SOU 1961:31, The 1957 Commission 6 Report on Compulsory Schools] (Stockholm: Ivar Häggströms Boktryckeri, 1961), 202–7.

³⁹ Evertsson, “Classroom Wall Charts;” Jakob Evertsson, “Folkskoleinspektionen och moderniseringen av folkskolan i Sverige 1860–1910 [Elementary School Inspection and the Modernisation of Elementary School in Sweden 1860–1910],” Historisk tidskrift 132, no. 4 (2012): 624–51.

⁴⁰ Johannes Westberg, Funding the Rise of Mass Schooling: The Social, Economic and Cultural History of School Finance in Sweden, 1840–1900 (Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017).

⁴¹ See Emma Vikström, Skapandet av den nya människan: Eugenik och pedagogik i Ellen Keys författarskap [The creation of the New Human Being: Eugenics and Pedagogy in the Authorship of Ellen Key], (Örebro: Örebro University, 2021); and Englund, Samhällsorientering och medborgarfostran.

⁴² Marjorie Lamberti, The Politics of Education: Teachers and School Reform in Weimar Germany (New York: Berghahn Books, 2002); and Steven F. White, Progressive Renaissance (London: Routledge, 2018 [1991]).

⁴³ See Cuban, How Teachers Taught; Marc Depaepe, Order in Progress: Everyday Education in Primary Schools – Belgium 1880–1970 (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2000); and Alessandra Arce Hai and others, eds., Reimagining Teaching in Early 20th Century Experimental Schools (Cham: Palgrave, 2020).

⁴⁴ Cuban, How Teachers Taught; Zilversmit, Changing Schools; and Yamasaki and Kuno, Educational Progressivism.

⁴⁵ Cuban, How Teachers Taught; David Labaree, “Progressivism, Schools and Schools of Education: An American Romance,” Paedagogica Historica 41, nos 1/2 (2005): 277–88; and Zilversmit, Changing Schools, 28–30.

⁴⁶ Helen Parkhurst, Education on the Dalton Plan (New York: E.P. Dutton, 1922).

⁴⁷ Piet van der Ploeg, “The Dalton Plan: Recycling in the Guise of Innovation,” Paedagogica Historica 49, no. 3 (2013): 314–29.

⁴⁸ Johan Samuelsson, Niklas Gericke, Christina Olin-Scheller and Åsa Melin, “Practice before policy? Unpacking the black box of progressive teaching in Swedish secondary schools,” Journal of Curriculum Studies 53, no. 4 (2021): 482–99.

⁴⁹ Menguiano-Rodríguez and del Pozo-Andrés, “Appropriating the New.”

⁵⁰ Stone, “Prosopography,” 46–79.

⁵¹ Ludmilla Jordanova, History in Practice (London: Arnold, 2000): 178–9; See also Tobias Dalberg, Mot lärdomens topp: svenska humanisters och samhällsvetares ursprung, utbildning och yrkesbana under 1900-talets första hälft [Towards the Zenith: The Origin, Education and Career Paths of Swedish Humanists and Social Scientists in the First Half of the 20th Century] (Uppsala: Uppsala University, 2018).

⁵² Section 8 provides a deepened description of the teachers.

⁵³ Martin, “Interpreting Biography;” Jordanova, History in Practice, 41–2.

⁵⁴ Cunningham, “Innovators, Networks and Structures.”

⁵⁵ SOU 1948:27, 83–4.

⁵⁶ See Attachment to minutes no. 14 and the special documentation, “PM regarding Mrs de Laval ‘s request for an investigation of whether pedagogical experiments have been or are taking place in Sweden” (undated and unsigned) and “The need of further investigation of certain school issues” February 27, 1946. Alva Myrdal. V2 AIab (Skolkommissionen 1946–1952, Riksarkivet, SKRA); “P.M. with comments on the pedagogical inventories alongside the Elmgren investigations” March 2, 1946. Alva Myrdal. V2 BII (SKRA).

⁵⁷ Minutes no. 14, February 27, V2 A1ab (SKRA).

⁵⁸ SOU 1948:27, 83–5; Folkskollärarnas tidning 1946:11, “Inventering av pedagogisk försöksverksamhet”, 4.

⁵⁹ Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke, “Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology,” Qualitative Research in Psychology 3, no. 2 (2006): 77–101.

⁶⁰ Richard E. Boyatzis, Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development (London: Sage, 1998).

⁶¹ Cuban, How Teachers Taught.

⁶² Dewey, Democracy and Education; Popkewitz, Inventing the Modern Self, 16–25.

⁶³ Braun and Clarke, “Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology,” 86–93.

⁶⁴ Dewey, Democracy and Education; Popkewitz, Inventing the Modern Self, 16–25.

⁶⁵ Marjo Nieminen, “Teachers’ Written School Memories and the Change to the Comprehensive School System in Finland in the 1970s,” Paedagogica Historica 55, no. 2 (2018): 253–76; and Mikko Puustinen and Amna Khawaja, “Envisaging the Alternatives: From Knowledge of the Powerful to Powerful Knowledge in History Classrooms,” Journal of Curriculum Studies 53, no. 1 (2021): 16–31.

⁶⁶ Malin Thor Tureby and Jesper Johansson, Migration och kulturarv [Migration and Heritage] (Lund: Nordic Academic Press, 2020), 25–7.

⁶⁷ Account by Margit Tunås, Halmstad. FI V7 (SKRA). Note that information about which schools the teachers worked in is sometimes missing.

⁶⁸ Account by Sten Ivansson (probably), Västanfors. FI V7 (SKRA).

⁶⁹ Account by Astrid Forsberg, Tavelsjö. FI V8 (SKRA).

⁷⁰ Account by Elvira Larsson, Björkulla skola. FI V8 (SKRA).

⁷¹ See note 69 above.

⁷² Account by Margit Tunås, Halmstad. FI V7 (SKRA).

⁷³ Account by Harriet Karlsson Kyrkbyns skola, Gruvbyn Los skoldistrikt. FI V8 (SKRA).

⁷⁴ Account by Stina Skantze, Göteborg. FI V10 (SKRA).

⁷⁵ Account by A.W Åkerud, Västra Karup. FI V9 (SKRA).

⁷⁶ Account by John Carlsson, Smedsbyns folkskola. FI V7 (SKRA).

⁷⁷ Account by Josef Thunqvist, Svartsö Skälvik. FI V8 (SKRA).

⁷⁸ Account by Gunnar Hasten, Harplinge. FI V8 (SKRA).

⁷⁹ Account by Brita Lohmander, Sölversborg. FI V9 (SKRA).

⁸⁰ Cuban, How Teachers Taught, 44.

⁸¹ Account by Wald Jansson, Göteborg. FI V10 (SKRA).

⁸² Account by K.G. Ljunghill, Lund. FI V10 (SKRA).

⁸³ Account by Sigbritt Therner, Karhuvaara, Haparanda. FI V10 (SKRA).

⁸⁴ Account by Arthur Stehr, Ålsten’s elementary school, Stockholm. FI V7 (SKRA).

⁸⁵ Account by Greta Tjellström, Ålsten’s elementary school, Stockholm. FI V7 (SKRA).

⁸⁶ Account by Ruth Chancerelle, Högalid’s elementary school, Stockholm. FI V12 (SKRA).

⁸⁷ Account by Maja Norrgran, Källås skola i Vallda socken. FI V9 (SKRA).

⁸⁸ Account by Karl Lindahl, Norrköping. FI V11 (SKRA).

⁸⁹ Account by Astrid Forsberg, Simrishamn (exact location unclear). FI V11 (SKRA).

⁹⁰ Account by Dagny Larsson, Jönstorp. FI V8 (SKRA).

⁹¹ Account by Linnea Larsson and Ruth Söderberg, Skellefteå. FI V8 (SKRA).

⁹² Account by Edith Thellert, Ekesta, Västerenstad. FI V8 (SKRA).

⁹³ Cuban, How Teachers Taught.

⁹⁴ Popkewitz, Inventing the Modern Self, 16–25; Yamasaki and Kuno, Educational Progressivism.

⁹⁵ See Thor Tureby and Johansson, Migration och kulturarv, 25–7.

⁹⁶ Samuelsson, Gericke, Olin-Scheller and Melin, Practice before policy?, 482–99.

⁹⁷ SOU 1948: 27, 83–4.

⁹⁸ See Englund, Samhällsorientering och medborgarfostran, 309–36; Johan Östling, Nazismens sensmoral [The Lessons of Nazism] (Stockholm: Atlantis, 2008), 169–203; Tomas Wedin, “In Praise of the Present: The Pupil at the Centre in Swedish Educational Politics in the Post-war Period,” History of Education 46, no. 6 (2017): 768–87. See also Henrik Åström Elmersjö, “An Individualistic Turn: Citizenship in Swedish History and Social Studies Syllabi, 1970–2017,” History of Education 50, no. 2 (2021): 220–39.

⁹⁹ Richardson, Drömmen om en ny skola, 385–9.

¹⁰⁰ See also Menguiano-Rodríguez and del Pozo-Andrés, “Appropriating the New,” and their discussions on pedagogical creativity.

¹⁰¹ Cuban, How Teachers Taught, 33–44; van der Ploeg “The Dalton Plan: Recycling.”

¹⁰² David Tyack and William Tobin, “The ‘Grammar’ of Schooling: Why Has It Been So Hard to Change?” American Educational Research Journal 31, no. 3 (1994): 453–79.

¹⁰³ See Popkewitz, Inventing the Modern Self, 16–25.

¹⁰⁴ cf. Stone, “Prosopography;” Cunningham, “Innovators, Networks and Structures;” Martin, “Interpreting Biography.”

¹⁰⁵ Ester Hermansson, I amerikanska skolor [In American Schools] (Stockholm: Svensk läraretidning, 1940).

¹⁰⁶ Statement based on reviews of all the Commission’s minutes of meetings in 1946 to 1952 in AIaa V1 (SKRA).

¹⁰⁷ Government Proposition 1950:70, 573–7.

¹⁰⁸ See e.g. standard works such as Richardson, Drömmen om en ny skola, 411–3; Ulf P. Lundgren, Att organisera omvärlden: En introduktion till läroplansteori [Organising the World at Large: Introduction to Curriculum theory] (Stockholm: Utbildningsförlaget, 1989), 111–12.