IDPs at Work

Abstract

The present study concerns Swedish teachers' practices with regard to individual development plans (IDPs), which are mandatory for all students in compulsory school. The conceptual points of departure are taken from Wartofsky's distinctions between primary, secondary, and tertiary artifacts and the concepts of inscription and translation. A total of 15 interviews were carried out with teachers at various stages of Swedish compulsory school grade levels. A typology of three qualitatively different ways of perceiving and working with IDP emerged. The ways in which teachers implement the use of IDPs—that is, their IDP practices—vary depending on perceived purpose and local contextual conditions. In the discussion section, it is argued that the creation of a typology as a way of categorizing practices should be viewed as a way of conceptually generalizing the empirical material. Finally, the results are problematized in terms of the possible implications different practices may have for students.

Keywords:

• individual development plans (IDP)
• IDP practices
• primary/secondary/tertiary artifact
• inscription/translation

Notes

¹Teachers’ administrative workload is currently under investigation, and in a department memorandum (Ds 2013:23) it has been suggested that IDPs should be drawn up once instead of twice a year in grades 1–5, and that IDPs should no longer be required in grades 6–9 of elementary school. The government has also assigned the National Agency for Education to design templates for IDP documentation. The use of these will be optional for schools (http://www.regeringen.se/sb/d/16839/a/220240).