Response to interpellation 2023/24:798 on disciplinary measures in schools
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerned disciplinary measures in schools to create safety and study environments. L argues that the school is unsafe and rowdy, and that more disciplinary measures are needed to support teachers and principals 1 2. L emphasizes that detention is an important measure that should remain 1 and that the government is investing in earlier support measures for students with special needs 3 4. C agrees on the importance of order and early support measures 5 6, but questions detention as a method since there is a lack of evidence that it changes behavior 7. C argues that detention acts as a deterrent and can make students with special needs feel like failures 5 6.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Statsrådet Lotta Edholm (L)
Mr. Speaker! [The member] has asked me if I consider detention to be an effective method for achieving students' safety and study, and if, in that case, I intend to take any measures to ensure that the method is used in a way that takes into account special needs or situations. Anna Lasses has also asked me if I consider it reasonable that different schools choose to use disciplinary measures in such different ways as they are done today, and if not, if I intend to take any measures.
According to the provisions of the Education Act on safety and study environment, there are several disciplinary measures that may be used if a student disturbs the order or behaves inappropriately, such as expulsion from the classroom or detention for at most one hour. Such measures may only be taken if they are in reasonable proportion to their purpose and other circumstances. The purpose is that such a measure shall lead to the student changing their behavior and that the study environment in the school becomes better. It is also regulated that every school unit shall have developed rules of order. I do not, however, have the possibility to comment on how a head of school or school chooses to apply the provisions of the Education Act.
School is an important arena for influencing the moral compass of children and young people. Surveys from the Swedish Crime Prevention Council have shown that young people who attend a school where students follow the rules of conduct to a greater extent have a lower probability of committing violent crimes, even when taking the schools' student composition into account (short analysis 4/2023).
A school environment characterized by safety and study focus is also a prerequisite for students' learning. The insecurity in Swedish schools has increased over time, and in many classrooms, it is so chaotic that students cannot concentrate on the teaching. The Government has therefore appointed the Inquiry on strengthened safety and study focus in schools, which is to propose several measures for strengthened leadership and more effective work with safety and study focus in schools (dir. 2023:154).
It is important that the school's rules of order are clear and that both students and teachers as well as guardians are aware of the consequences that can follow from different forms of disruptions or inappropriate behavior. A school environment where, for example, rowdiness and brawls do not result in any consequences can lead to other students losing trust in a safe and fair school where the staff takes responsibility. The investigation shall therefore, among other things, submit proposals where it is more clearly stated than today that it is the principal who is responsible for the rules of order and that these should contain a ladder of consequences.
It is, however, important to consider different perspectives. If students do not receive the support they are entitled to, their studies can be negatively affected. Schools therefore need better conditions to implement early support measures. Today, most of the support is implemented first in grade 9, which for many is far too late. Therefore, the government is now investing heavily in, among other things, more special education teachers, smaller teaching groups, and more and earlier holiday school for more people.
In conclusion, it is important that teachers and other staff have clear conditions through legislation to handle all disruptions of order in a regulated manner, both serious and less serious but frequent ones. The legislation therefore needs to be reviewed with this in mind. I look forward to receiving the committee's report in due course.
Anna Lasses (C)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the answer, Minister for Education!
I can say that this question originally comes from my now 15-year-old student teacher. We wrote the interpellation together. It is an incredibly important and relevant question he has, because fundamentally it is about exactly what the Minister for Education spoke about, namely the trust between teachers and students. It is also about justice and about children with special needs.
First, I want to say that I completely agree on the importance of peace and quiet, especially for children who need support. I also welcome this investigation. It is truly needed. I look forward to seeing what it will lead to.
I also agree that we definitely should not micro-manage in the classroom. On the contrary, we should trust our educators and principals. We are in complete agreement there.
I am also not opposed to disciplinary measures. One must be able to intervene in different ways where it is needed in order to be able to maintain order and safety.
But retention - what function does it serve other than being a punishment, a punishment that often results in the student being confirmed that they are a failure and that the school perhaps is not really for them?
The Education Act and Skolverket's guidelines are crystal clear: The purpose of a disciplinary measure is to be able to maintain safety and order in the school and to change the behavior of those students who need to do so. The measure may not be used as punishment, and special consideration must be taken for the child's best interests and the needs the child has, depending on which student it concerns.
The more one reads, the clearer it becomes that there is actually a lack of evidence that detention has this effect, that is to say, changing behavior. Detention works primarily as a deterrent for those students for whom a reprimand normally suffices, and in those cases, a reprimand should also be used.
Given all this, I want to ask again: What does the Minister for Education actually think about retention as a method?
Statsrådet Lotta Edholm (L)
Mr. Speaker! We have major order problems in Swedish schools. Swedish students are more distracted by screens and mobile devices, feel greater insecurity in school, and arrive later more often than students in other countries. I am completely convinced that we need more opportunities for disciplinary measures than we have today. Above all, we must get a policy that stands behind the principals and teachers who want to maintain peace and quiet in their classrooms.
It also does something to young people when they see the adult world turn away when their classmates, for example, suffer from bullying, violence, and harassment. Unfortunately, many students live in that reality today.
Detention is a disciplinary measure, and it should be used in accordance with the existing legislation. It is not used particularly often in Swedish schools today, but I think it is very important that it remains.
The very purpose of the investigation we have now commissioned is to strengthen the principal's responsibility for safety and study environment and to ensure that it is the teachers who decide what shall apply in the classroom, but also to ensure that there are disciplinary measures to resort to when students do not live up to the rules of order that shall also exist. We also see in the research that students in the schools where rules of order are used and followed get a safer and better environment than students in other schools.
Anna Lasses (C)
Mr. Speaker! I thank you again for the answer. I am inclined to agree with most of what the Minister for Education says. It is truly a major problem we see in the schools, and order needs to be maintained. I also think it is good that one is reviewing what other types of disciplinary measures can be used.
But it is also important that these measures reach their goal and purpose. What has been seen, specifically regarding detention, is that it has a deterrent effect on those students for whom a reprimand is usually sufficient. In those cases, a reprimand should also be used; it is very clear and distinct. One talks, even the Minister for Education, about a consequence ladder. If a student listens to a reprimand, one should not need to resort to the next measure, which could for example be detention.
As the Minister for Education says, staying behind is not used often, but when it is used, it is often about students who may have special needs. This can, for example, be NPF students, students who are aggressive, or children with problems at home. These are students in need of support, and just as the Minister for Education says, this support is something that all too often is missing or is implemented far too late. I know that the government is working to rectify this, but de facto, that is how it is.
What these students need least of all is to feel singled out as failures, as if the school is not for them. It is precisely this that staying behind has as an effect. One is singled out. It is also an incredibly inconsistent measure. It leads nowhere.
The law states that measures shall be adapted based on the student's needs and situation. Nevertheless, it is these students who receive retention. Their behavior does not change because of it.
Again: It is very good to have more opportunities and different types of disciplinary measures, but is it really the students with special needs who should receive exactly detention?
Statsrådet Lotta Edholm (L)
Mr. Speaker! It is a major concern in Swedish schools that special support is provided far too late. Most of the special support in Swedish schools is provided in grade 9. It is a major problem. We are far behind other comparable countries, for example Finland, which provides the support much earlier. This is due, among other things, to an ideology that has stated that all children, regardless of need, should be included in the same classroom. Many times, this has occurred in very large classes.
What the government is doing now is to expand the state support in order to be able to build up more small, special teaching groups for the children who really need the support the most. When I travel around municipalities now, I see a strong expansion of such teaching groups. I believe that it is important and good. These students need support, and they need support early.
That is not to say that students in need of support can behave however they want in the classrooms. That is also not possible. Order and tidiness, safety, and study time are not just about the students who cause trouble, but also about their classmates' right to a safe environment where the time in the classroom is used to study and learn things, where one is not disturbed by mobile phones and where one is not disturbed by students constantly arriving late. We must do something about this.
Suspension is part of the arsenal of measures that a school can take, but we need more. Above all, teachers and principals must feel that they have the policy behind them when they take disciplinary measures against students who behave in such a way that they harm both themselves and their classmates, and not least for teachers and other staff. We see that the reports to the Work Environment Authority during a ten-year period have more than doubled in Swedish schools.
This is naturally also a reason why many young people choose not to become teachers: There is an image that it is rowdy in Swedish schools.
We need more different opportunities, not fewer - that is what I would say.
Anna Lasses (C)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the answer, Minister!
I truly agree with the Minister that support should come in early. It is good that the government is working towards that. Then, of course, I would have liked to see that the resources being allocated were somewhat larger.
With that said, I agree that order is extremely important. No student should behave badly, regardless of what needs one has or who one is. But specifically for students with a need for support, the consequences must be relevant. There, I strongly question whether detention is truly the right method.
Disciplinary measures are, as said, important and necessary to maintain a safe environment. There can gladly be more of them, but they must be relevant. One can also remove those that are bad and appoint more that actually work.
We must never forget the purpose of the measure. It is not about punishment, but about ensuring that students have the opportunity to complete school. This applies to both those who follow the rules of order and those who do not. That retention is sometimes dressed up in beautiful words, such as time for reflection, no student falls for it. A punishment is a punishment.
I feel that the Minister for Education and I have the same goals for the Swedish school, and we both think that children's education is incredibly important for their entire lives.
I hope that the investigation, when it finally lands on the Minister's desk, will result in a government bill with a lot of good proposals where retention has been referred to history, in favor of support for all children in need of support and in favor of effective measures that can maintain safety and study environment in school.
Statsrådet Lotta Edholm (L)
Mr. Speaker! I believe that we need more opportunities for disciplinary measures in Swedish schools, not fewer. The investigation that is currently underway works primarily from the premise of strengthening both the responsibility and the powers of principals and teachers in these matters. We know, after all, that Swedish schools have become increasingly insecure and have greater problems with disruption.
I would, however, also like to highlight the parental responsibility in this matter. In Sweden, we have been far too afraid to talk about parental responsibility. Parents are responsible for raising their children. The school has a responsibility to help raise the children, but the responsibility for upbringing lies with the parents. Therefore, it is important that there is an opportunity to have, for example, expectation documents regarding what is expected of the parents in their upbringing of the children.
We need to have significantly more measures in Swedish schools today than we actually have, to ensure that the classrooms become calm and safe and are a place for learning and nothing else.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.