“Literature Is Really Cultural Teaching” : : A Qualitative Study on How English Teachers View and Work with Literature in Relation to the Fundamental Values of the Swedish Curriculum.

(1)

“Literature Is Really Cultural Teaching”:

A Qualitative Study on How English Teachers View and

Work with Literature in Relation to the Fundamental Values

of the Swedish Curriculum.

Amra Kocanovic

COURSE:English for subject teachers 61-90 hp DEGREE PROJECT: 15 credits

SEMESTER:Spring 2020 SUPERVISOR: Jenny Siméus EXAMINER: Jenny Malmqvist

(2)

Abstract

Title: “Literature Is Really Cultural Teaching”: A Qualitative Study on How English Teach-ers View and Work with Literature in Relation to the Fundamental Values of the Swedish Curriculum.

Author: Amra Kocanovic. Pages: 20.

This study examines how English subject teaching at upper secondary school use literature as a possible pedagogical tool to impart the fundamental values of the Swedish curriculum. By asking how English teachers use literature as an instrument to invoke the fundamental values of the curriculum, and to what extent there is room to teach in said regard, the study aims to investigate how literature is applied to English subject teaching as a means to foster the ethics and basic principles of the Swedish curriculum. Therefore, to answer these questions, the study carries out qualitative interviews with English subject teachers, at Swedish upper sec-ondary schools, who have previous experiences working in said regards. The results of the study show how the interview subjects view and use literature as cultural teaching, and that there is great potential for literature teaching to be used as a tool to treat the fundamental val-ues of the Swedish curriculum. However, there are also several aspects that can obstruct said teaching, such as the curriculum’s formulations, students’ literacy and a lack of support. Keywords: Literature, English teaching, fundamental values, curriculum

(3)

1. Introduction

It is often assumed that the sole goal of education is the advancement of knowledge, for it is often specified, scheduled, and measured within the institution. However, the role of education can also encompass the maintenance and expansion of ethics and basic principles. Such is the case for the Swedish school system. The National Agency of Education (2017) refers to the content of the Swedish school system as comprised of dual objectives: the impartment of sub-ject knowledge and the fostering of fundamental values. Thus, the National Agency of Educa-tion posiEduca-tions the fostering of fundamental values on the same level of prominence as knowledge teaching (Skolverket, 2017, p. 1). The obligatory incorporation of the fundamental values, of the Swedish curriculum for upper secondary school, should come to affect teaching and learning. However, the School Inspectorate conducted a study (2012) to outline how Swe-dish schools work to convey the fundamental values and tasks presented in the curriculum. In brief, the study found that the teachers face several difficulties meeting the task, and that sup-plementary support needs to be provided (Skolinspektionen, 2012, pp. 18, 26).

In view of these challenges that teachers face, it is of interest to examine how teachers of Eng-lish implement the fundamental values of the Swedish curriculum in their teaching of literature. In fact, several theories and studies point to how using literature (meaning fictional texts) as a pedagogical tool can help to invoke civic features, similar to the ethics and basic principles presented by the curriculum. For instance, the role of literature, has been a subject of vast im-portance as a contributor of engagement and understanding of democratic life, empathy, com-passion, individuality, and knowledge (Keen, 2006; Wolf, 2008, p. 321; Tattamanti, 2005, p. 267). Therefore, by conducting interviews with English subject teachers, this study will com-pare how English teachers at upper-secondary school in Sweden work with literature, in relation to what is formulated in the curriculum. In doing so, the study can offer insight into the process of linking the values of the Swedish curriculum with the teaching of literature and how com-patible the relationship between the two parts is.

(5)

22

2. Background

In the background, various aspects surrounding the ethics and basic principles of the Swedish curriculum for upper-secondary school, and the use of literature as a means to foster said values are presented, based on the syllabi and previous research.

2.1 The Meaning of Promoting Fundamental Values

The National Agency of Education explains that working with the fundamental values of the curriculum primarily implies developing a certain approach to teaching. The approach should be based on basic democratic values and permeate everyday teaching and pedagogy, both for-mal and inforfor-mal. More specifically, the Swedish school system has a democratic mission: to uphold the rights of the students, to provide knowledge about democracy, and to permeate de-mocracy throughout every level of the institution. The task of promoting the fundamental values of the curriculum demands democratic competence of teachers, because teachers must be able to develop the civic abilities and virtues of students, in order to give them access to function in a democracy. Hence, the promotion of fundamental values is an ever-ongoing task that demands to be integrated and put into practice continuously (Skolverket, 2017, pp. 1-4; Skolverket, 1999, pp, 7-8).

2.2 The Writings of The Curriculum

Being regulations issued by the government, the curriculum and syllabus must be followed within the teaching vocation. Hence, a summary of the stipulations for the teaching profession, concerning the fundamental values of the curriculum, is in order. Some passages concerning literature teaching will also be included.

2.2.1 The Curriculum for Swedish Upper-Secondary School

The curriculum for Swedish upper-secondary school (2017), under the heading “Fundamental values and tasks of the school”, is divided into five parts: fundamental values, understanding and compassion for others, objectivity and open approaches, an equivalent education, and rights and obligations. The five sections come to describe the school system’s basic ideology, and can be summed up to promote a democratic mentality and human rights, equality for all people, gender equality between men and women, individual freedom and integrity, as well as the un-derstanding of others and the ability to empathize. The writings combine with the dismissal of

(6)

22 intolerance and all tendencies of discrimination or degrading treatment (Skolverket, 2017, pp. 1-4, Skollagen SOU2928).

2.2.2 The Syllabus for English 5, 6, and 7

Under ‘content of communication’, in the Swedish syllabus, the English subject should cover areas related to students’ education, and societal and working life, such as current issues, events and processes, as well as thoughts, opinions, ideas, experiences, feelings, relationships and eth-ical issues. Different contexts such as differing attitudes, traditions, and values, as well as social, historical, political, and cultural conditions, should also be brought to light. The content for English 6 asks of the subject areas to be ‘concrete’ and ‘abstract’. As for English 7, the content should include theoretical and complex subject areas (Skolverket, 2017, pp. 5-9).

In relation to literature teaching, the content of communication for English 5 should include different kinds of fiction. More specifically, the content of reception should feature texts of different kinds and for different purposes that instruct, relate, summarize, explain, discuss, re-port, and argue. In addition, literature and other fiction should be treated. Regarding English 6, the content of reception should include literature, as well as authors and literary periods, and the texts are to be of a more complex nature. Both contemporary and older literature should be dealt with as well. Moreover, the course of English 7 should incorporate literary periods of both modern and historical times, and the content of reception should include complex and formal texts, as well as other fiction (Skolverket, 2017, pp. 2-3).

2.3 The Treatment of the Fundamental Values

A report, conducted by the National Agency for Education, contained a description of how the fundamental values of the curriculum were implemented at different schools. However, con-trary to the hopes of the National Agency of Education, the report presented several issues in the regulation, implementation and understanding of the curriculum. The study showed that the treatment of the fundamental values in teaching was carried out with great inconsistencies. As a result, the National Agency of Education concluded that teachers and school staff must be given various tools, especially at upper-secondary school (such as business planners, personal development planners, and meetings intended for reflection). In doing so, the ethics and basic principles of the school would possibly permeate the organization and be woven into teaching in an appropriate manner (Skolverket, 2009:419, pp. 2-5).

(7)

22 The reason for such inconsistencies stemmed from several factors. Primarily, teachers faced a challenge in interpreting and clarifying the curriculum, caused by the language and terminology being unclear and abstract. Subsequently, discrepancies in the teachers’ work with fundamental values occur, due to a lack of consensus (Skolverket, 2009:419, p. 2-5). In her study, Inga Wernersson explains how the lack of definitions and guidelines of the terms in the curriculum leads to individual interpretations of the writings, which in turn leads to inconsistencies in the implementation of the democratic task (2009, pp. 23-25). In her report Maria Hedlin, as well as Wernersson, criticizes the ‘trend’, in which the interpretation of the curriculum’s abstract terms are left to the teachers to decipher (Wernersson, 2009, pp. 63-76; Hedlin, 2006, pp. 94-96). Consequently, the lack of clarity and the weight of responsibility can lead to teachers turning away from the assignment (Svaleryd, 2002, pp. 45-46; Bauman, 2002, p. 34; Gustavsson, 2014, p. 9).

Similarly, in 2012, the School Inspectorate conducted a study, which examined whether the teaching at schools provided students with the conditions to acquire the democratic and civic skills that they need. The study showed that the promotion of fundamental values was separated from knowledge teaching, and that the task lacked clarity. The study also illuminated how the requirements, of the task to promote the values of the curriculum, demands great civic compe-tence and a self-reflective approach, which teachers need help to develop. As a result, the lack of guidance and clear directives led to a faulty implementation, consisting of great variation and a false consensus of the task – and the lack of a common and critical framework resulted in a lack of equity. In summation, the School inspectorate concluded that the support of teachers to stage the values of the curriculum in their teaching must improve (Skolinspektionen, 2012:9, pp. 18, 26, 38).

On the other hand, literature teaching could help support the integration of fundamental values in accordance with the curriculum. Essentially, the National Agency of Education believes that it is common for schools to bring to light issues and topics covered by the curriculum, however, the issues and topics are not dealt with in a matter that instigates significant effect, due to a lack of reflection, questioning and discussion. Hence, they specifically emphasized the use of liter-ature as a means for teachers to reach the goal of efficiently implementing the fundamental values of the curriculum (Skolverket, 2020, p. 4). Similarly, in a report, the School Inspectorate concluded that language courses are particularly well suited to handle the fundamental values of the curriculum because of how the values easily correlate to the content of the language

(8)

22 subjects. They found several good examples of proper implementation of the curriculum’s val-ues in literature teaching environments. For instance, the report highlighted how courses in Swedish and English often incorporate democratic and civic subject areas through literature and encourage discussions about and reflections on the literary works. Hence, the teaching of liter-ature was recommended as a tool to foster civic values (Skolinspektionen, 2012:9, p. 28).

2.4. The Power of Literature

Contemporary neuroscience can record the activation of so-called mirror neurons (the mind’s emotion sharing ability that enables moral judgement and empathy) in the brain of onlookers as they witness another’s emotional reactions and actions (Keysers, 2004, p. 501; Gallese, 2004, p. 396). Research has found that mirror neurons still operate when subjects simply hear or read narration about others. Therefore, neuroscientists have declared that mirror neuron activity can be altered through the exposure to, for instance, literature. (Tettemanti, 2005, p. 273; Gallese, 2002, p. 399). For example, empathy can be provoked by reading about another’s emotional state or conditions (Lodge, 2002, pp. 12-14). Hence, the activation of mirror neurons through novel reading can possibly lead to a change of mind (Slote, 2001, pp. 51-52).

The use of literary forms can therefore enact change in a person’s sense of justice, morals, attitudes, and caring. In fact, emotional contagion often transpires through the reactions to a narrative (van Peer & Pander Maat, 1996, pp. 95-97; van Peer, 2001, pp. 43-46). Storytellers then, have an opportunity to take advantage of the human tendency to share feelings, to tacti-cally train children and members of a wider societal group to give priority to certain cultural values. This type of education cannot create feelings, but it can make certain emotional states more rendered, legible and legitimate (Wolf, 2008, p. 321). However, aspects outside the fic-tional work itself can influence the enhancement or detraction of compassion, depending on, for instance, the attitudes, experiences, and knowledge of the readership. One’s personal history and cultural context can also affect how one interprets automatically shared feelings (Zwaan, 2004, pp. 917-920). Nonetheless, narratives in prose have the possibility to call upon the human built-in capacity to feel with others and ultimately sway thoughts and feelings (Wolf, 2008, p. 323; Damasio, 2010, p. 361).

However, not all types of literature can amount to the alteration of a person’s compassion and morals, to be in line with underlying democratic values. There are several elements of narration, that more readily evoke democratic responsiveness. For instance, there are three varieties of

(9)

22 techniques in narrative fiction, that an author can use to direct an emotional transaction:

bounded empathy, that offers a feeling of familiarity, ambassadorial empathy, which addresses

the ‘other’ in hopes of cultivating empathy, and broadcast empathy, which uses a ‘universal’ humanity to catch a reader’s empathy (Keen, 2008, p. 477). Furthermore, first person self-nar-ration, vivid, prolonged inside views, as well as ‘naturally interesting’ characters, are some techniques that can manipulate a reader’s response. Narrative monologue and psycho-narration can likewise cue the invitation to empathy and a strong sense of character identification. In addition, a political effort, an inspiring social context, or the promoting of change can be espe-cially efficacious (Bortlolussi & Dixon, 2002, p. 166).

3. Aim and Research Questions

The aim of this study is to examine how literature is used in the English subject classroom to promote the fundamental values in accordance with the curriculum. In addition, the purpose is to investigate to what extent there is space for English teachers to teach literature in order to impart said values.

• How do English teachers use literature as an instrument to invoke the fundamental val-ues of the curriculum?

• To what extent is there room to impart the fundamental values of the curriculum through the use of English literature teaching?

4. Method

This section will describe the method of the intended study.

4.1 Qualitative Study and Selection

This study is based on an interpretation-oriented knowledge-theoretical position in that the study, through qualitative interviews, seeks to understand a social reality based on how people within that reality interpret and experience it (Bryman, 2011, pp. 340–341). The scope of the essay requires, of the participants, some familiarity with working with the fundamental values of the Swedish curriculum through literature teaching. Therefore, a strategic selection was made, in which only participants who had previous experiences of consciously and actively working in said way were chosen as interview subjects. In total, six interview subjects, that met the requirements, partook in the study. All were English teachers at upper secondary school.

(10)

22 Aside from the strategic selection, the study applied a convenience sample, in which teachers (no matter location, age, or gender), were selected simply due to them wanting to partake in the project. The most common criticism about such sampling is the lack of representativeness among the population (Bryman, 2011, p. 194). However, the interview subjects were, by chance, evenly split regarding gender, age, locality, work experience and school type. The teachers' personal information is confidential throughout the study (such as their names, resi-dence and workplace), except for information that is necessary and relevant for the study, but too general for the participants to be identified (Kvale & Brinkman, 2014, p. 109).

4.2 Interviews and Data Analysis

The interviews are semi-structural and based on a pre-determined interview guide, which is divided into relevant topics (see appendix 1), and the questions are adapted to how each indi-vidual conversation develops (Bryman, 2011, p. 415). How the questions are formulated is in-spired by John Sawatsky's interview methodology. Sawatsky believes that certain types of ques-tions prevent the interview subjects from sharing their experiences (such as yes-or-no quesques-tions, or leading questions) (Hellmark, 1997).

The interviewees were contacted via e-mail and informed of the interview topic and participa-tion requirements, which requested the English subject teachers to have previous experiences using literature to impart the values of the Swedish curriculum. Moreover, they were conducted through the interview subject’s preferred communication service (such as, Zoom, Microsoft Teams and FaceTime), recorded, and then transcribed. The interviews were transcribed using the intelligent verbatim transcription method, in which irrelevant fillers, broken sentences, and grammar mistakes are removed (Bryman, 2011, p. 310). Since the teachers were comfortable speaking English, the interviews were conducted in English.

The study is inspired by grounded theory: an approach where collected data is reviewed, in which apparent and repeated ideas, concepts or elements are grouped into categories. These categories then become the basis of the research (Bryman, 2011, pp. 513–515; Hartman, 2018). When processing the material, the present study specifically used selective coding (the catego-rization of emerging concepts from data) (Bryman, 2011, p. 514). The categories are presented in the results section, in the form of relevant topics and representative citations, in relation to the project’s research questions. They are divided into topics relating to the writings of the curriculum, the use of literature in teaching, and the combination of the two aspects.

(11)

22

5. Results

In this section the results generated by the analysis of the interviews will be presented. In addi-tion, the answers will be presented through themes (based on the interviews’ emerging con-cepts). The themes consist of the interpretation and application of the steering documents, lit-erature teaching and views on litlit-erature, as well as the implementation of the fundamental val-ues using literature. In order to keep the anonymity of the interviewed teachers they will be called: Anna, Sofi, Jennifer, Simon, Carl and Rick. Moreover, Anna, Sofi, Jennifer, and Simon currently work at university preparatory programs, Carl and Rick work at vocational programs, and Sofi and Carl have worked at both. Additionally, Anna, Jennifer, Carl, and Rick have worked for over 10 years as teachers, whilst Sofi, and Simon have worked for less than 5 years as teachers. When only some teachers are quoted, it is because repetition is being avoided.

5.1 "It’s Something You View as Given"

In relation to the fundamental values of the curriculum the teachers explained how they interpret said writings and how they use the curriculum in their working life. More specifically the teach-ers described how they apply the curriculum, what they focus on in relation to the steering documents, how they interpret the documents, and what difficulties they face in implementing them. Two respondents said the following:

Anna: I don’t specifically read the curriculum. I mostly focus on the core content and knowledge requirements. I think that the fundamental values are the foundation of the school. The values are a natural part of – a base for our work. It permeates everything we do, but we don’t read it.

Rick: I can’t say that, in my specific courses, I look at the goals of the curriculum. That’s something you dedicate a training day for. I think that the curriculum states very obvious things, and I keep them in mind throughout my work. I mean, it’s the foundation for eve-rything, but it’s something you view as given.

In summation, all the teachers pointed out how they rarely read the fundamental values of the curriculum. All the teachers also explained how they prioritize the syllabus (especially the core content and knowledge requirements) over the curriculum in their daily work, and how the curriculum is highlighted at training days or theme days. However, all the teachers pointed out

(12)

22 how the fundamental values are carried with them throughout their work, despite them not ac-tively referencing to the curriculum. Carl described how, even though teachers "never use" the curriculum, "I know it, but I don't know it" and that he always has it in the back of his mind. In turn, the interviewed teachers gave the impression of instinctively implementing the writings, since the values were described as “given”, "obvious" and “natural”, as described by Carl, Rick and Sofi. The reason for not explicitly using the curriculum was described in the following way:

Sofi: I feel like the formulations are very complicated. I wish we all had the same under-standing of it. […] The language can be so unclear. The terms are so big. I mean, ‘funda-mental values’, ‘justice’. Like, it’s not black and white, the language is very colored, and it can be difficult to interpret it right.

Carl: There are several difficulties – it’s a complex subject. […] sometimes it’s too open for interpretation and not so clear. There are so many documents and texts, and thousands of teachers that have to relate to all that. So, of course there will be inconsistencies in use.

Overall, each subject teacher expressed several difficulties with dealing with the fundamental values of the curriculum, and the document in general. One prominent and shared experience among the teachers was how the need for interpretation in relation to the curriculum’s writings could be complicated and demanding. All the teachers explained how said difficulty stemmed from the language and terms of the curriculum being unclear and abstract. One common rami-fication of such unclarity, that each interview subject mentioned, was how the differing inter-pretations lead to inconsistencies and a lack of consensus regarding the implementation of the fundamental values. Jennifer specifically urged for support and change, saying that teachers might need a "parallel curriculum with a simpler language" in order to "make it more accessi-ble!". The teachers discussed further issues in relation to the fundamental values and teaching:

Sofi: I feel like I have an advantage teaching fundamental values, because I am interested in the topics and read about it on my own. But if you’re not, you can spread the wrong information. It can be too difficult and go wrong. Like, we are obligated to talk about it, but so many lack that ability.

Simon: Every time we talk about the fundamental values, the math teachers sit in a corner and look sad. It’s very difficult for them. ‘Let’s talk about algebra, and oh right, equality!’,

(13)

22 I mean, that’s not possible. […] I’m a teacher in social studies as well, so I have the

ad-vantage of handling those topics.

Anna: Once I used a book in my teaching that was later criticized in media. I was scared that I had hurt my students. […] We have to talk about these topics, but sometimes it can be a dilemma, because you’re not cut out for it. I teach English, not sociology, or history.

Every interviewee explained how teachers are obliged to implement the fundamental values of the curriculum. Nonetheless, every interview subject expressed how being an English subject teacher can pose issues when handling the fundamental values of the Swedish curriculum, since their education is not designed to deal with topics surrounding said values. Anna and Sofi also emphasized the complications that can arise from having to promote values, without being con-versant in said regard. In order to be able to use the fundamental values correctly in their teach-ing, all the teachers believed that they have to put the responsibility of familiarizing themselves with civic issues on their own shoulders, and that their personal interests are pivotal to their comfortability in teaching the values of the curriculum.

5.2 "Literature is Really Cultural Teaching"

The interviewed English teachers further illustrated how they work with, and their views on literature teaching, in relation to the fundamental values of the Swedish curriculum. More spe-cifically, the teachers accounted for what types of methods, literature, purpose, and goals they apply in their work with literature, in order to invoke fundamental values. As for the reason for using literature in teaching, two teachers said the following:

Anna: Literature teaching, for me, means that I should give the students the chance to see things from a bigger perspective and to get them to reflect about issues they have never thought about before – issues like those in the curriculum.

Sofi: Well, the main purpose of teaching literature for me [is] to push my students to grow as people, and not only their language. After all, to read is to take part of a culture. Like, literature is really cultural teaching.

Without asking the teachers to relate literature teaching to the curriculum, every interviewee established that literature in teaching can present civic topics that can help students take part in Swedish society and develop into democratic citizens. When the teachers were asked about

(14)

22 their views on literature teaching, each of the interview subjects regarded literature teaching as consisting of dual goals: one being the development of language skills, while the other con-cerned the expansion of civic competences, perspectives, thoughts, personal qualities and cul-tural understandings. Moreover, how the teachers applied literature teaching in the classroom, to implement the fundamental values of the Swedish curriculum, was done in the following way:

Sofi: I like working with themes that correlate to the curriculum. Like, when its Black History month, I cover it by using literature. I get the students to read about someone else’s situation. Plus, I also use diaries […]. I want them to think and ponder. Oh, and also discuss!

Jennifer: I use themes. For instance, ‘choices’, in which the students choose a novel that is about, well, choices. Then we discuss it, what types of choices we have. So, I try to work with themes, that connect to the fundamental values. […] I have also worked with ‘fighting spirits’, another theme about, usually minorities, that fight for equal rights. […] Then the students write in a reading journal, to process the text. It’s all about reflecting on the content.

Carl: I usually use textbooks, where I find shorter extracts from novels. I mean, I very often need to work with so called ‘easy-readers’ (shorter and easier versions of a novel). Then I also work with book circles, and the students discuss, reflect, argue, etcetera. I also use a reading journal.

A common approach to teaching literature in relation to the fundamental values of the Swedish curriculum, among the participant, was using themes, related to social issues, in which light was shed on minorities, and discriminated or victimized societal groups. All the teachers men-tioned the importance of developing the student’ ability to empathize, understand, and have compassion for the perspectives and situations of others, through the use of literature in relation to the curriculum. All the interviewees pressed the importance of processing literature by means of reflections and discussions, through book circles, whole class or group discussions, jour-naling, writing assignments and seminars. However, the way they taught literature noticeably differed in one regard: it depended on the language levels of their students. For instance, the interviewees teaching vocational programs (Carl and Rick), often used simpler and shorter pieces of literature, whilst Anna, Jennifer and Sofi, who teach university preparatory programs,

(15)

22 had the option to work with more advanced works of literature. Likewise, when asked about the choice of literature, in relation to the curriculum, the pattern repeated itself:

Carl: Where I work students don’t read books. It is really hard on them. I mean, they have to look up even the simplest words, and they can barely understand the content of easy-readers. The level is so low. Honestly, I can never work with what the syllabus wants me to, like older literature and entire novels – it’s just not possible.

Anna: Teaching literature is a great way to talk about values. ‘The Book Thief’, ‘The Help’, ‘The Hunger Games’, ‘1984’ – there are so many that I like to use and discuss with the students. I especially like working with dystopian novels – then you can have a lot of important conversations about what type of society one prefers to live in. It ties in very well with the curriculum.

Based on the presented practices of the interviewed teachers, a clear pattern could be identi-fied. Teachers with work experiences at vocational programs or with students who have defi-cient language skills, had troubles meeting the requirements of the syllabus, since reading could be difficult for their students. Instead, the teachers focused on heavily adapting the liter-ature to the students' needs, often by using easy-readers, short texts, and by reading texts out loud to the students. Rick and Carl explicitly admitted to avoiding literature, due to the com-plications they faced teaching it. Carl, Rick, Simon, and Sofi, described a culture among stu-dents at vocational programs as characterized by reading comprehension difficulties and an unwillingness to read, while describing students at university preparatory programs as moti-vated, high-achieving students, who have an interest in and experiences of reading. Con-trastingly to the experiences of vocational program teachers, Anna and Jennifer often used an array of literature to invoke civic values in line with the curriculum; literature that often deals with topics on social issues, like racism, feminism, and human rights, that greatly challenges the students. The mentioned books are also set in political contexts that incite revolution.

5.3 "Literature Teaching and Fundamental Values Go Hand in Hand"

On the topic of the combination of literature teaching and the fundamental values of the Swe-dish curriculum, the interviewed English teachers were asked about the correlation between the two parts. The connection between the fundamental values and English literature teaching was described as follows:

(16)

22 Anna: You can so easily approach those questions through literature, without it being so stilted, instead it’s very natural. Also, the fundamental values are so wide and big, so you can easily find something from it to bring into your teaching.

Rick: Simple, it’s super simple. If you look at the core content it’s like the same thing as the values in the curriculum. There are so many things to connect. Literature and funda-mental values go hand in hand. You can work almost anything into the English subject, as long as it’s in English.

Amongst all the interviewees, they saw a clear correlation between the writings of the docu-ment and the teaching of literature. The two areas were seen to contain similar contents, and as being comprehensive documents that invite to widespread content avenues. At one point or another, every interviewed subject teacher expressed how the nature of literature, how it shares others' experiences and civic issues, has the power to influence students' knowledge and thinking. Literature as a method was also described, by Carl, Sofi, Anna and Jennifer, to substitute a natural and seamless transition between the documents, in which topics required by the syllabi and curriculum could be presented to students in a relaxed way. By simply choosing literature, which contains themes, issues and topics that are mentioned by the syllabi and curriculum, the democratic task could be met, the interviewees argued. However, how ef-fective literature teaching could be was further discussed by the teachers, who said the follow-ing:

Jennifer: Personally, I believe that literature is one of the strongest ways to influence stu-dents […]. You get these strong emotional reactions, and they become so engaged. […] Literature is exciting, and provocative. I mean, why do you think book burnings were a thing?

Carl: I have to admit that I would rather not work with literature at all. So, no, literature does not trump any other method. It’s almost the opposite. I feel that it’s easier to work with something else, because students don’t read.

Rick: I think that talking is a good instrument to connect to the values. Maybe even more effective than literature, because literature can be hard. Sadly, I think that you really have

(17)

22 to fight for literature today. Getting them to read anything at all is an accomplishment in and of itself.

The interviewed teachers differed greatly in their opinions of literature, due to the language levels of their students. While every teacher admitted that literature has the possibility to invoke civic values in their students, some expressed skepticism to the method due to their work expe-riences with it. The teachers who work at vocational programs (Rick and Carl), saw little use in working with literature to teach civic values, while the rest saw a vast potential in literature teaching in that regard. Instead, they described the students as being activated by literature, due to how literature has the power to affect people emotionally and personally, in the way it deals with people and topical issues. Contrastingly, Rick and Carl did not experience the same en-gagement or results when using literature with students that struggle reading-wise ̶ in their cases, using literature could instead have an inhibitory effect. Instead, they preferred working orally. The interviewees continued discussing disadvantages of working with literature to im-plement fundamental values. This is what they had to say:

Sofi: The biggest factor is their reading habits. Some have never read a book, and some don't like to read. But we also have those who love it. The problem with working with the values and literature is when the students can’t take it in, because of the language barrier. That becomes a question of inequality actually.

Anna: Sometimes when you use literature, the book can go right over their heads, and well, you have failed your mission. It’s the same with the values. If some are really good at reading between the lines, they will get the values, but the others, who are less good, will not understand it. So, even if you want to work with the values, you can end up working against it, because everyone doesn’t have the same chance.

When working to implement the fundamental values of the Swedish curriculum, through the use of literature teaching, each interviewed teacher mentioned how a students’ language profi-ciency could come to affect the planning of literature teaching, or the outcome of it. Reading comprehension was highly emphasized by each teacher as the main, and as a vital, factor that could come to determine the outcome of the teaching. Each teacher explained how students' reading abilities differ, and how finding one literary work that fits every student is an immense challenge, and how failing to do so could lead to a lack of equality.

(18)

22

6. Discussion

In this final part, the results of the study are processed based on the thesis’s research questions and the information that is included in the thesis’s background. To further explain, the purpose of the first section (6.1) is to answer the study’s research question regarding how English teach-ers use literature as an instrument to invoke the fundamental values of the curriculum. Likewise, the purpose of the second section (6.2) is to answer to what extent there is room to impart the fundamental values of the curriculum through the use of English literature teaching.

6.1 The Use of the Fundamental Values

The fundamental values presented by the Swedish curriculum is a matter that educators are obliged to address (Skolverket, 2017, p. 5). The process of imparting said values through the use of English literature teaching, has been made visible and will be addressed in this section.

6.1.1 The Curriculum and the Fundamental Values

In order to explain in what ways the interviewed subject teachers use literature as a tool to promote the fundamental values of the curriculum, it is relevant to also address in what ways the teachers use the curriculum by itself. Based on the analysis of the interviews of this study, the interviewees do not regularly read or explicitly reference to the curriculum in their daily work. Instead, the teachers mostly focus on the writings of the syllabus (especially the core content and knowledge requirements), and the curriculum is mostly highlighted at training days and theme days. Reports presented by the School Inspectorate, and the National Agency of Education, show that teachers do not always actively or consciously permeate the values of the curriculum into their subject teaching, and that the values are mostly treated at formal occasions (Skolverket, 2009:419, pp. 2-5; Skolinspektionen, 2012:9, p.18, 26). Hence, the presented in-terviews in this study and previously presented studies, differ in some regards. A shared com-monality between the sources seems to be how the curriculum is explicitly prioritized at formal occasions, like training days. However, the interviewees of this study do see themselves as of fundamental value influencers.

Even though the interview subjects do not actively address the curriculum as a document, they view their work as being permeated by the value system that the curriculum promotes. Even though the precise writings of the curriculum are rarely explored, the teachers explain that they always carry the values with them intuitively (since they were described as natural, obvious,

(19)

22 and given). Similarly, Wernersson and the National Agency of Education, show that the funda-mental values of the Swedish curriculum are often treated as obvious, customary, and natural, by teachers (Wernersson, 2009, pp. 23-25; Skolverket, 2009:419, pp. 2-5) Wernersson explains that due to the lack of clear definitions for the terms used in the curriculum, teachers must base the meanings of the terms on their own individual values and interpretations (Wernersson, 2009, p 50). Wernersson, the National Agency of Education, and the School Inspectorate have re-ported on how such circumstances often lead to inconsistencies among teachers in their use of the fundamental values (Wernersson, 2009, pp. 23-25; Skolverket, 2011, pp. 2-5; Skolin-spektionen, 2012:9, p.18, 26 ). Similarly, the interviewed teachers also addressed how the cur-riculum's need for interpretation has led them to interpret the writings, and to use the funda-mental values in teaching, differently. In summation, the interviewed subject teachers do see themselves as integrators of fundamental values, however, their employment of the values is based on their own interpretations and can therefore vary.

6.1.2. Literature Teaching and Fundamental Values

When the fundamental values of the curriculum are employed in English literature teaching, a pattern in relation to the choice of literature can be identified. Based on the mentioned novels that the teachers chose, the chosen literature correlates to narrative techniques that readily evoke democratic responsiveness. For instance, the literature mostly consists of political and revolu-tionary contexts, that inspire social change (like equal rights) (Bortlolussi & Dixon, 2002, p. 166). In addition, the main character is usually very different and special, hence interesting, and the narration either consists of psycho-narration or first-person narration. Furthermore, ambas-sador empathy and broadcast empathy is often evoked by the chosen novels through their rep-resentation of one group (like the poor or African Americans) to a broader audience, and the connection with universal aspects of the human condition (like love, or fear) (Keen, 2008, p. 477).

The purpose of using such literature, that presents others’ situations and perspectives, is ulti-mately, say the teachers, to develop their student’s empathy and compassion. Hence, the teach-ers purposefully take advantage of emotional contagion to legitimize certain cultural values, not unlike how Wolf (2008, p.321) explains it. Their work can also be correlated to the curric-ulum, which emphasizes the importance of teaching empathy and compassion (Bortlolussi & Dixon, 2002, p. 166; Skolverket, 2017, p. 1). Therefore, by using literature that includes narra-tive techniques that can prompt moral change to be in line with democratic values, it has the

(20)

22 potential to be used as a pedagogical tool to impart the fundamental values of the Swedish curriculum.

However, the National Agency of Education and the School Inspectorate have reported on the importance of not only bringing the values of the curriculum to light, but to also properly deal with the issues, through reflection, questioning, and discussion (Skolverket, 2020, p. 4; Skolin-spektionen, 2012:9, p. 28). Likewise, the English subject teachers, taking part of this study, strongly believe that reading by itself is not enough, because the content must be processed. Therefore, they frequently work with reading journals and book circles, whole class or group discussions, written assignments and seminars, as a means to encourage their students to reflect, ponder, discuss and argue about the content. Hence, based on the factors of importance, stated by the School Inspectorate and the National Agency of Education, English literature teaching could be an effective tool in properly implementing the values of the Swedish curriculum, which falls in line with the School Inspectorate’s report (Skolinspektionen, 2012:9, p. 28).

6.2 The Room to Teach Fundamental Values

Since educators are obligated to address the fundamental values of Swedish curriculum (Skolverket, 2017), the present study has investigated to what extent there is room to impart said values, through the use of English literature teaching, which will be addressed in this sec-tion.

6.2.1 The Curriculum

The School Inspectorate concluded, in a report (2012:9, p. 28) that the content of language subjects easily correlates to the basis and ethical principles of the curriculum, a result that the present study’s participants attest to. The interviewed English subject teachers can easily intro-duce topics of value beliefs, due to the writings of the syllabus for the English courses for Swedish upper-secondary school. For instance, the syllabus states how the content of English should cover subject areas related to attitudes, traditions, and values, as well as social, historical, political, and cultural conditions (Skolverket, 2017). The writings offer the interviewed teachers the potential to speak on issues such as feminism, racism, human rights and democracy. Hence, the required content correlates to the fundamental values of the curriculum, which, for instance, entails the promotion of a democratic mentality, human rights, and the understanding of others (Skolverket, 2017). The teachers mention how the content of the documents is extensive and how it therefore can be easily brought to light in their teaching. They also believe that the nature

(21)

22 of literature is to deal with topics that relate to fundamental values. Hence, English literature teaching has an upper hand in handling the values of the curriculum.

However, the language of the Swedish curriculum imposes problems on the interviewed teach-ers’ work practices. According to the interview subjects, the writings of the curriculum are too open for interpretation, unclear, abstract, and inaccessible. The National Agency of Education, and Wernersson, have reported similar issues, in which teachers’ concerns related to the curric-ulum stem from the challenge of interpreting and clarifying the writings of the curriccurric-ulum (Skolverket, 2011, pp. 2-5; Wernersson, 2009, pp. 23-25). Hedlin, and Wernersson, problema-tize the curriculum’s use of abstract terms (such as equality, or democracy), without the docu-ment simultaneously offering definitions and guidelines for such terms (Hedlin, 2006, pp. 94-96; Wernersson, 2009, pp. 63-73). In turn, the interpretation of the curriculum’s terminology is left to the teachers to decipher (which can lead to inconsistencies in and an avoidance of the task) (Svaleryd, 2002, pp. 45-46; Bauman, 2002, p. 34; Gustavsson, 2014, p. 9). Similarly, the interviewees believed that the responsibility of interpreting and applying the writings of the document was theirs alone, and how the curriculum needed to be clearer. Hence, the lack of clarity and the weight of responsibility that the participant describe can act as a hindrance to their use of literature teaching in relation to the curriculum.

Moreover, the National Agency of Education has stated the importance, as teachers, to have civic competence (Skolverket, 2017; Skolverket, 1999). However, as stated by the teachers, not all English teachers are equipped to handle such topics, since their education is not designated to deal with topics surrounding said values. Working with the fundamental values of the Swe-dish curriculum could be a challenge, since the issues that it raises are sensitive and require extended knowledge, the teachers explain. Additionally, the interviewees feet like the respon-sibility to familiarize themselves with such knowledge is left on their shoulders, and that the reason as to why they feel comfortable working with the values stem from their own enthusi-asm. Likewise, Wernersson and Hedlin observed how the democratic task of the curriculum is viewed as a task for teachers, instead of an assignment that belongs to the entire work force of the school (Wernersson, 2009, pp. 63-76; Hedlin, 2006, pp. 94-96). As a result of similar find-ings, the School Inspectorate points out the importance of providing teachers with tools and assistance in their work with the values of the curriculum (Skolinspektionen, 2012:9, p. 38). In

(22)

22 summation, the interviewees explained how English subject teachers can face practical obsta-cles when working with issues raised by the curriculum, due to their concentrated subject-knowledge and the lack of support.

6.2.3 The Students’ Literacy

Even though the National Agency of Education (2020), and the School Inspectorate (2012:9, p. 28) recommend literature teaching as a tool to treat the values of the Swedish curriculum, there is a crucial aspect that can determine the success of such teaching: such as the attitudes and knowledge of the readership (Zwaan, 2004, pp. 917-920). This study’s interviewees likewise agree. For instance, the teachers with work experiences at vocational programs or with students who have deficient language skills, are less inclined to work with literature, because the students are reluctant to read and had difficulties understanding the content. On the other hand, the in-terviewed teachers at university preparatory programs, working with ‘motivated’ students, are met with engagement and a more advanced understanding of the content. Hence, literacy in relation to literature teaching is an important factor that can possibly obstruct the value teaching (Zwaan, 2004, pp. 917-920).

When reflecting on the implications of working with literature as a means to foreground the fundamental values of the curriculum, the interviewees find that it is vastly difficult to find literature that suits each students’ reading proficiency level ̶ hence, the teaching could possibly lack equity. This presents a paradox, in which the interviewed subject teachers want to forward the fundamental values of the curriculum, but because of the language deficiencies that some of their students face, the students are excluded from the value teachings, hence, making the teaching in of itself unequal. Therefore, the School Inspectorate notes how the support of teach-ers to stage the values of the curriculum in their teaching must improve, to avoid a lack of equity (Skolinspektionen, 2012:9, pp. 18, 26, 38). Ultimately, reading comprehension is highlighted by the study’s participants as an important factor to literature teaching, and how literature, as a structure, has the capability of being inequitable in relation to said factor.

6.3 Conclusion

In summary, based on the answers of the interviewed English subject teachers, literature teach-ing can be used as a tool to forward the fundamental values of the Swedish curriculum, owteach-ing to the comparability and span of the curriculum and the syllabi for English, the compatibility

(23)

22 of the curriculum and common themes used in literature, the narrative techniques used in liter-ature, and the encouragement of processing value topics in literature through discussion and reflection. However, the teaching is dependent on several parameters concerning the formula-tions of the curriculum, the regulaformula-tions surrounding the curriculum, the knowledge and interests of English subject teachers, student literacy, choice of literature, and the possibility to receive support. All things considered, this encourages interesting avenues for further research, regard-ing ways in which to support English subject teachers, in the EFL classroom, to use literature teaching as cultural teaching.

(24)

22

7. Works Cited

Bortolussi, M., & Dixon, (2002). Psychonarratology. Alberta: Alberta University Press. Bryman, A. (2011). Samhällsvetenskapliga metoder (2:a uppl.). Stockholm: Liber AB.

Damasio, A. (2010). Self Comes to Mind: Constructing the Conscious Brain. Pantheon books. Gallese, V. (2004). A Unifying View of the Basis of Social Cognition. Trends in Cognitive

Sciences, 8(9), 396-403.

Hartman, J. (2018). Grundad teori. Retrieved from Nationalencyklopedin: https://www-ne-se.proxy.library.ju.se/uppslagsverk/encyklopedi/l%C3%A5ng/grundad-teori.

Hedlin, M. (2006). Jämställdhet, en del av skolans värdegrund. Stockholm: Liber.

Hellmark, M. (1997). ”Ställ RÄTT fråga och du kan få ett strålande svar”. Retrieved from Journalisten: https://www.journalisten.se/nyheter/stall-ratt-fraga-och-du-kan-fa-ett-stralande-svar

Keen, S. (2006). A Theory on Narrative Empathy. Ohio: Ohio University Press.

Keen, S. (2008). Strategic Empathizing: Techniques of Bounded, Ambassadorial, and Broad-cast Narrative Empathy. Dtsch Vierteljahrsschr Literaturwiss Geistesgesch, 82, 477–493. Keysers, C., & Perrett, D.I. (2004). Demystifying Social Cognition: A Hebbian Perspective.

Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(11), 501-507.

Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2014). Den kvalitativa forskningsintervjun (3:e uppl.). Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Lodge, D. (2002). Consciousness and the Novel: Connected Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Palmer, A. (2004). Fictional Minds. Nebraska: Nebraska Press.

Skolinspektionen (2012). Skolornas arbete med demokrati och värdegrund,

kvalitetsgransk-ning, rapport 2012:9.

Skolverket (1999). Ständigt. Alltid! Dnr 1999:1345.

Skolverket. (2011). Skolverkets beskrivning och analys av två principiellt olika strategier för

arbete med värdegrundsfrågorna Dnr 2009:419. Stockholm.

Skolverket (2017). Läroplan, examensmål och gymnasiegemensamma ämnen för

gymnasie-skola 2011. Retrieved from Skolverket:

https:www.skolverket.se/po-lopoly_fs/1.266015!/Laroplan_gymnasieskolan.pdf

Skolverket (2020). Värdegrundsarbetet viktigt för studiero. Retrieved from Skolverket: https://www.skolverket.se/skolutveckling/inspiration-och-stod-i-arbetet/stod-i-arbetet/koll-pa-studiero/vardegrundsarbete-viktigt-for-studiero

Slote, M. (2001). Morals from Motives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Tattamanti, M. (2005). Listening to Action-related Aentences Activates Fronto-Parietal Motor circuits. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17(2), 273-81.

(25)

22 Van Peer, W. (2001). Justice in Perspective: New Perspectives on Narrative Perspectives. New York: SUNY Press.

Van Peer, W & Pander Maat, H. (1996). Perspectivation and Sympathy: Effects of Narrative Point of View. Empirical Approaches to Literature and Aesthetics, 143-54.

Wernersson, I. (2014). Genusordning och utbildning – förr och nu. In U. P. Lundgren, R. Säljö, & C. Liberg (Red.), Lärande, skola, bildning: grundbok för lärare (pp. 449–470). Stockholm: Natur och Kultur.

Wolf, M. (2008). Proust and the Squid: The Story and Science of the Reading Brain. Harper Perennial.

Zwaan, R, A. (2004). Effect on Genre Expectations on Text Comprehension. Journal of

(26)

22

Appendix

Appendix 1 – Interview Guide

STEERING DOCUMENTS

1. How do you use the steering documents in your daily work? Explain.

2. Where do you feel that you focus your attention? (ex: knowledge requirements) 3. What are your thoughts on the language used in the curriculum?

4. What difficulties do you experience in your use of the steering documents? 5. Are some parts of the steering documents clearer than others? If so, which ones? 6. Are some parts of the steering documents easier to work with? If so, which ones? 7. Do you want to add something?

FUNDAMENTAL VALUES

1. How much room is given to the curriculum in your daily work? 2. What do the fundamental values of the curriculum mean to you? 3. What made you interpret the term like so?

4. How do you interpret that you should work in order to address the fundamental values of the curriculum?

5. What difficulties do you face when you try to implement the fundamental values of the curriculum?

6. How can you, as a teacher in English, work to increase the value foundation work? What needs to be improved?

7. Do you want to add something? LITERATURE TEACHING

1. How much room is given to literature teaching in your daily work? 2. What does literature teaching mean to you?

3. What makes you interpret the concept like so?

4. What purpose or goals do you try to achieve when working with literature? 5. How do you use literature in your teaching?

6. Are some types of literature easier to work with than other types? If so, which ones and why?

7. What difficulties do you encounter when teaching literature? 8. What benefits are there to literature teaching?

9. Do you want to add something?

FUNDAMENTAL VALUES AND LITERATURE TEACHING

1. Do you see a connection between literature teaching and the fundamental values of the curriculum? Explain

2. How can you work with literature in order to promote the fundamental values of the curriculum? Give examples

3. What type of literature do you think can promote the values? (ex: genre, narration?) 4. Do you have any specific literature in mind that you find works especially well, or that

you often turn to when promoting fundamental values?

5. What difficulties can one face from working with fundamental values through litera-ture?

6. What are the benefits of working with literature to promote the fundamental values? 7. Do you prefer other materials and methods than literature teaching as a tool to promote

fundamental values? Or do you prefer literature teaching? 8. Do you want to add something?

(27)

22 Appendix 2 – Anna’s interview

Interviewer: Amra Kocanovic

Interviewee: Anna (English subject teacher for Swedish upper-secondary school) Interview setting: Google Hangouts

(Start of interview)

Interviewer: How do you use the curriculum in your daily work?

Interviewee: I don’t specifically read the curriculum. I mostly focus on the core content and knowledge requirements. So, it’s not something that you really look at. I think that the funda-mental values are the foundation of the school. The values are a natural part of – a base for our work. It permeates everything we do, but we don’t read it. Yeah, like I said, it’s the foun-dation, but I can’t quote it.

Interviewee: I feel like it's still there though, not just in my teaching or my course, but in the entire school as well. There are study days that contain themes that illuminates value ques-tions, or yes, it's always there in a way. I feel like the school and the students' education is built on it. But it is important to bring it to attention some more, like in teaching. Because, right now, we have theme days that touch on those questions, or study visits, or something like that.

Interviewer: What do the fundamental values of the curriculum mean to you?

Interviewee: To me, it's all about bringing attention to questions about human worth, and to talk about vulnerable people, and discuss that. It is important to do that in class. Mm, yes, like democratic questions.

Interviewer: What made you interpret the term like so?

Interviewee: I don't know. In a way, I think that people talk a lot about this. Like, equal rights and human rights. I don't know. Also, at school, for example, we have discussions about gen-der and identity, and then I think that it's like this very current topic in a way. It is important to care about how the students feel, that they feel safe and free to be who they are. So, I think

(28)

22 that it's a natural part of how I think. These topics and thoughts come from something that you just have inside of you. But I have to be honest here, it is really difficult to interpret it. It re-ally is a challenge in a way. I mean, its not like they give us clear definitions, so, its rere-ally just my interpretation, just so you know.

Interviewer: How do you interpret that you should work in order to address the funda-mental values of the curriculum?

Interviewee: Well, its kind off what I mentioned before, that you need to illuminate and dis-cuss these topics, about gender equality and things like that. You disdis-cuss human rights in rela-tion to texts, novels, and you choose books that deal with these issues. But you also have to think about what you say and how you act in class. Like, you have to think about that you yourself have to show respect to the students and be open to differences and the like. So, it is not only about the subject, it is also about how you approach the students.

Interviewer: What difficulties do you face when you try to implement the fundamental values of the curriculum?

Interviewee: Sometimes the values, those types of topics, can be very sensitive. You have to think and be careful. Once I used a book in my teaching that was later criticized in media. That made my stomach hurt. I was scared that I had hurt my students. I used the book 'Thir-teen reasons why'. It's about suicide. I thought that it was an important topic to bring up, since these young people can struggle with thoughts like that. But then, when the show came out, it was heavily critiqued for romanticizing suicide. And when I saw that, I really felt like I maybe shouldn't have talked about this topic. We have to talk about these topics, but some-times it can be a dilemma, because you’re not cut out for it. I teach English, not sociology, or history or whatever else.

Interviewer: How can you, as a teacher in English, work to increase the value founda-tion work? What needs to be improved?

Interviewee: We have theme days about questions like that, and we have evaluations about how the students at the school feel. Then you bring up questions of that nature, like, if you have ever felt harassed and so on. Then you get a picture of the situation and how the school

(29)

22 really is. Based on that we discuss it further. Like, if the students feel bad about something, what is the cause of that? Is there something we can do about that? I think that by doing that, we gain some important information about value questions. But we could do more, but I don’t have an answer for exactly what.

Interviewer: How much room is given to literature teaching in your daily work?

Interviewee: Oh, it's a very big part of my teaching. Literature is so giving. The goal for me is to get them to read at least two novels per year, preferably more if there is room for it. Some-times, they don't get to choose, instead, I choose for them, or sometimes they can choose from a selection that I have chosen. But sometimes, they can choose freely in relation to a certain theme. So, it can look very different, but I definitely work with texts all the time, preferably whole novels.

Interviewer: What does literature teaching mean to you?

Interviewee: Literature teaching, for me, means that I should give the students the chance to see things from a bigger perspective and to get them to reflect about issues they have never thought about before – issues like those in the curriculum. I also see that as obvious. Litera-ture always deals with questions like those, so it is almost impossible to not use literaLitera-ture in that way.

Interviewer: Are some types of literature easier to work with than other types? If so, which ones and why?

Interviewee: Well, in my experience I have a lot of titles that have worked very well for me in my teaching. In English 5 I focus more on teenage books, but in English 6 we start to look into the classics. Right now, we are reading 'The Great Gatsby'. Then, In English 7 we can read very complicated novels, with very deep questions, that really asks a lot of the students.

Interviewer: What difficulties do you encounter when teaching literature?

Interviewee: The thing about being able to read between the lines, interpret, analyze, see sym-bolism. But at the same time, these questions can be quite clear in some novels. So it may

(30)

22 look different. If you want, you can understand it, but in general, the better the reader you are, the better you understand the text. Often, the more reading you do, you usually get even more from the text. If you are good at reading, then reading between the lines, and interpreting sym-bolism is easier. You notice that when they look for themes, some find very simple ones. For example, love. But those who are more used to reading may find more, more exciting and deep themes, that are more specific. They can understand what the work wants to say and ex-plain in what way that is.

Interviewer: Do you see a connection between literature teaching and the fundamental values of the curriculum?

Interviewee: I think that literature is a fantastic way to work with those questions. You can easily approach those questions through literature, without it being so stilted, instead its very natural. Literature is very giving in that sense. I could imagine myself only working with liter-ature. Also, the fundamental values are so wide and big, so you can easily find something from it to bring into your teaching.

Interviewer: How can you work with literature in order to promote the fundamental values of the curriculum?

Interviewee: I often try to work thematically. There is much to be learned about being able to identify themes in novels, which I feel students are quite good at, identifying themes that are linked to fundamental issues. Sometimes there is more focus on literary classics and then you can also get into those questions, even if the purpose is more about something else. So even when you aim to shed light on a literary period in history, the value questioned can be brought up as well. For example, with Jane Austin, who belongs to a certain period, but who also ex-tensively illuminates the women's position during that period, which is strongly linked to equality and feminism. And then the students also write reading logs where they can reflect and discuss themes, and they can have the opportunity to respond to different quotes - and then questions about those issues naturally come up. They also often get to sit in groups and discuss and then they, very quickly, bring up such questions.

(31)

22 Interviewer: What type of literature do you think can promote the values, and do you have any specific literature in mind that you find works especially well, or that you often turn to when promoting fundamental values?

Interviewee: Yeah, teaching literature is a great way to talk about values. ‘The Book Thief’, ‘The Help’, ‘The Hunger Games’, ‘1984’ – there are so many that I like to use and discuss with the students. I especially like working with dystopian novels – then you can have a lot of important conversations about what type of society one prefers to live in. It ties in very well with the curriculum

Interviewer: What difficulties can one face from working with fundamental values through literature?

Interviewee: There are many different types of readers. Some are very strong, while others have more difficulties. Some need a lot of support. So, it's a challenge to make sure that all the students understand what they are reading. Sometimes when you use literature, the book can go right over their heads, and well, you have failed your mission. It’s the same with the values. If some are really good at reading between the lines, they will get the values, but the others, who are less good, will not understand it. So, even if you want to work with the values, you can end up working against it, because everyone doesn’t have the same chance

Interviewer: What are the benefits of working with literature to promote the fundamen-tal values?

Interviewee: I am a strong advocate for literature. I think that's a key. Literature becomes a different way than, for example, taking an article, or a factual text. Or, you can connect sev-eral different things together, and you usually do that. But yes, I definitely think that literature is one of the strongest ways to influence. Because it becomes more alive, there are other types of examples. Maybe you have books that are based on true events. It goes into depth in differ-ent ways. It brings the contdiffer-ent to life more than, say, factual texts or an article. I think you put yourself into it more and you can identify with the character, feel what it feels, or yes, you might get more emotional, or you feel a more emotional response.

(32)

22 Appendix 3 – Sofi’s interview

Interviewer: Amra Kocanovic

Interviewee: Sofi (English subject teacher for Swedish upper-secondary school) Interview setting: Phone call

Interviewer: How much room is given to the curriculum in your daily work?

Interviewee: In my experience it's like the foundation. It's something you carry with you, but I do not read it really. In a way, it's the base, and the other documents build on that - it continu-ous it. I think that the school should permeate the fundamental values of the curriculum in a way. It should be a part of everything you do, but I do not specifically read it very often. But I do like to discuss - and I am very interested in those types of topics, so for me, I often talk about it with my colleagues. But maybe the school should talk about it more? We teachers tend to only care about the core content and the knowledge requirements. I think we only re-ally talk about the curriculum when we have a ' week of democracy' at school. Yes, it is not often that we talk about it.

Interviewer: What difficulties do you face when you try to implement the fundamental values of the curriculum?

Interviewee: I think that many problems can come up. I have almost - I don't know about other teachers, but I think many agree - I get really unsure about what exactly the task is. Like, what do they really want us to do? I feel like the formulations are very complicated. I have noticed that it’s a question of interpretation. Depending on who I talk about it with, I will be given different answers. I wish we all had the same understanding of it. Because, when I was really new, I asked many of my colleagues ' what does this mean', and 'what does that mean', and I always got different answers. That is so frustrating! I really really care about, like equality and these things, but I am not entirely sure how to exactly do what they want me to do. The language can be so unclear. The terms are so big. I mean, ‘fundamental values’, ‘jus-tice’, and all that. They are difficult. Like, it's not black and white, the language is very col-ored, and it can be difficult to interpret it right

“Literature Is Really Cultural Teaching” : : A Qualitative Study on How English Teachers View and Work with Literature in Relation to the Fundamental Values of the Swedish Curriculum.