Tilpasset opplæring i ulik skolearkitektur

Author(s)

Publication date

2013

Series/Report no

FORMakademisk;6(1)

Publisher

FORMakademisk

Document type

Abstract

I denne artikkelen har jeg undersøkt ulike læreres opplevelser av, forestillinger om og preferanser til to ulike former for skolearkitektur. Artikkelen er basert på observasjon av, og intervjuer med, syv lærere. Tre av disse jobber ved en baseskole, mens de resterende jobber ved en tradisjonell klasseromskole. Da lærerne satte ord på i hvilken grad de mente skolearkitekturen ved deres skole ga et godt utgangspunkt for å drive undervisning i samsvar med eget pedagogiske grunnsyn, pekte de samlet sett tre sentrale områder. Alle disse områdene kan sees i lys av begrepet tilpasset opplæring. Det første området handlet om hvilken form for differensiering som ble vektlagt på skolen, og hvordan de fysiske rammene samsvarte med den aktuelle differensierings- og organiseringsformen. Her var lærerne ved begge skolene godt fornøyde. Et andre fokusområde var reell arealtilgang som utgangspunkt for variert undervisning. Her var lærerne ved den tradisjonelle klasseromskolen godt fornøyde, mens lærerne ved baseskolen i langt større grad mente grupperommene var for små, og at disse til dels opplevdes som begrensende i forhold til lærerrollen og ønske om variert undervisning. Det siste fokusområdet lærerne pekte på var hvordan de fysiske rammene la til rette for en ønsket balanse mellom tette samarbeidsrelasjoner og autonomi i planleggings- og undervisningssituasjoner. Innenfor dette området var lærerne ved begge skoler stort sett godt fornøyd, men de hadde ulike preferanser for hvor tyngdepunktet i denne balansen skulle ligge
In this article I have made an inquiry into different teachers’ experiences with, perceptions about and preferences regarding two different types of school architecture. The article is based on observation and interviews with seven teachers. Three of these teachers worked in an open-plan school (baseskole), while the other four worked in a school with traditional classrooms. The teachers told stories about the connection between the school architecture and the possibilities they felt they had for teaching according to their own pedagogical views. They pointed out three central areas that were of importance for this connection. All of these areas can be seen in the light of the expression: adapted education. The first area was regarding the type of differentiation that was considered to be the starting point for adapted education at the school, and how the physical structures in the school correlated with the chosen type of differentiation and organizing that were put to use there. Regarding this area, the teachers from both schools were very satisfied. A second area of importance was the actual access to teaching space as a starting point for using different teaching strategies and methods. Regarding this area, the teachers from the traditional school were very satisfied, while the teachers from the open-plan school felt the rooms they had for teaching sat limitations upon different aspects of their teaching practices. The last area the teachers pointed their fingers at, was how the physical structures made possible a desired balance between close collaboration with colleagues and autonomy in situations regarding planning and teaching. The teachers from both schools were pretty satisfied regarding this area, but they had different preferences to how this balance should be

Keywords

Version

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Permanent URL (for citation purposes)

  • http://hdl.handle.net/10642/1650