Abstract
ABSTRACT The legal framing of national education systems has been subject to substantial change in the past decade, especially in Nordic countries. Earlier research has called for better understanding of the implications of these changes which, in turn, points to a need for conceptual development. With an emphasis on legal and education scholarly work, this article explores concepts for further research on juridification in relation to education. This is done through an abductive process of inquiry, in which interpretations of the concept of juridification developed in previous research are explored in relation to changes in Swedish education policy on the area of equal treatment. We distinguish conceptually between juridification of and in education and propose a conceptual framework based on six dimensions of juridification, contributing to a view of policy as both formally regulated and enacted by education actors at different levels. This conceptual framework opens up new directions for further research in different areas and contexts.
Highlights
Research has shown that changes in the field of education policy have challenged relations between different levels and actors in the education system
We provide an outline of the abductive process of inquiry; we explore the conceptual work on juridification and the empirical case
Our analytical exploration was supported by the following question: In what way and to what extent are Blichner and Molander’s five dimensions useful for understanding equal treatment in Swedish education? To answer this question, we explored the five dimensions and the empirical case, both separately and in relation to each other, each informing our examination of the other
Summary
Research has shown that changes in the field of education policy have challenged relations between different levels and actors in the education system. Scholars of education have reported on how national education systems have changed in relation to these transnational trends, finding an increased tendency towards instrumentalist solutions that aim to solve specific and identifiable problems, rather than to achieve structural or holistic change. These studies argue that policy must be recognized as a composite of regulations and imperatives, principles and other material and discursive conditions, in which problems are inter preted and translated by a variety of actors and set against existing commitments, values and forms of experience (Ball et al 2011).
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
