Displacement of Leisure Time Centers content

– between the Nordic model and the logic of the “competition state”

Abstract

Leisure Time Centres (LTC) originated in the Nordic model of education and were considered a prerequisite for establishing justice, equality, social inclusion, and democratic participation. The Nordic education model was initially governed by rules but was later subject to a goals-orientated management system during the 2000s, resulting in ‘governance through competition’ and a focus on ‘measurable knowledge’. In this context, we conducted a close reading of official steering documents to investigate the operations of LTC’s in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. The Nordic education model was developed during the construction of an integrated welfare system. When it was introduced, primary education was understood as a civil right and a prerequisite for establishing justice, equality, social inclusion, democratic participation, and increased social mobility (Aasen, 2003). Parallel to this development, we identify several long-term economic arguments where it was believed that a citizen’s higher educational level would contribute to the nation’s economic growth. We note that the welfare state’s social ambitions were based on the ideas of solidarity and social cohesion among pupils regardless of their social background. The primary school system was thus expected to contribute to a spirit of cooperation rather than competition. The introduction of LTC’s was based on the same broad social values. Previous research has identified a tradition where the content of these LTC’s has been in agreement with the social values associated with the Nordic model (Öksnes et al., 2014). Gradually, the primary school system and its social ambitions was subject to criticism for being overly occupied with ‘care’, ‘relationships’, and ‘play’ (Karlsen, 2011). In the late 1980s, the Nordic educational model went into decline due to global, international, and neoliberal political trends (Wahlström, 2011). A new governance model was implemented in the public sector to strengthen the economy and increase efficiency through competition (Karlsen, 2011). The original Nordic educational model was partially abandoned during the 2000s with the introduction of the concept of ‘government by competition’. Education increasingly became focused on utility-oriented knowledge, measurable results, and individual responsibility. Concurrently, a modified understanding of democracy was introduced in terms of ‘freedom of choice’. Citizens were viewed as users of public services in accordance with New Public Management (NPM) (Karlsen, 2011). We thus identify a shift from educational content to learning results, and move from the development of competence to the pupil’s responsibility for learning (Korsgaard, Kristensen, & Jensen, 2017). A close reading of the relevant countries’ steering documents reveals two interpretations. First, the meaning of the texts is understood in terms of their historical and political context. This interpretation is supported by core elements of the Nordic educational model and as the logic of governing through competition and measurable knowledge. We claim that the interpretation of these documents is influenced by both factors. Second, the steering documents are interpreted according to a different set of premises. This involved a shift in perspective in agreement with Säfström (1999). We argue the central elements of the Nordic model have been colonized by the logic of ‘government through competition’. By understanding these steering documents as the result of negotiation and compromise allows us to interpret and critically discuss these documents. We find that the LTCs have a double assignment which is characterised by contradicting tasks. On the one hand, the assignment involves recreation and play. On the other, LTCs are expected to work with learning and support the educational goals of the school system. We conclude that the steering documents are preoccupied with the latter task, hence our claim that the traditional elements of the Nordic educational model have been colonized and have become merely rhetorical in the legitimization of the logic of ‘government through competition’ (Holmberg, 2018). Recontextualization allows us to discuss the content in relation to educational policy changes and conflicting demands. From a historical perspective, we observe changes in the steering documents that are based on the shift in education policy from the 1990s onwards. For LTCs, this shift has entailed that the content has changed in the direction of a learning-supporting function that is characterized by the logic of ‘governance through competition’. Consequently, the school day has been extended in duration; a circumstance where LTCs are increasingly expected to contribute to the delivery of the school’s knowledge and goals (Stecher et al., 2013). When we consider the logic of ‘governance through competition’, we note that play is expected to contribute to specific learning outcomes with political implications (Kane, 2015). Assuming that LTCs constitute a complement to the home learning environment, we understand that LTCs are a place where children can just be—existing on their own terms, without planned activities. We believe that the LTC’s goals, including democracy education and social inclusion, can be understood in the light of several processes. These processes (and associated learning) support the individuals existence, for example, by fostering a democratic citizen. In summary, the broad upbringing and socialization perspective that is present in the Nordic educational model has been reduced to mere rhetoric. These principles risk being marginalized in existing steering documents (Olesen, 2007). Given this interpretation, we find that children at the LTCs are expected to be prepared for school learning. Consequently, there is an effective colonization of children outside the school situation as well.

Educators are assigned to promote childrens play in an appropriate learning direction, i.e., towards the school system’s pre-determined learning objectives (Holm, 2016). Our critical observation is that play at LTCs has become a tool for learning and thus play has survived, with learning as a legitimizing argument. We argue there is a need for an educational and social policy discussion regarding the central values ​​of the socialization and education of children. We maintain that the ideas of ​​‘community’ and ‘fellowship’ that are supported by the Nordic educational model need to be actualized, and thus function as a counterweight to the prevailing individual knowledge perspective that is based on the logic of ‘educational governance through competition’.