Hierarkia ja demokratia opiskelutilanteiden jäsentäjinä. Tapaustutkimus luokanopettajaopiskelijoiden kokemuksia ja toimintaa ohjaavista kehyksistä.

Abstract

The aim of the present qualitative case study was to understand how students frame their experiences in various study situations in a university context. The theoretical starting point of this study was frame analysis, developed by sociologist Erving Goffman (1986). According to Goffman (1986), individuals do not define a social situation themselves, because the definition already exists as a kind of frame. Students’ experiences and actions in the higher education context are organised through the ready-made frames into which they have been socialized through their earlier experiences. This case study was intended to reveal these unconscious study frames, which are ubiquitous but also latent and thus difficult to capture. The data for this qualitative case study research project were collected from one group of student teachers (n=13) while they were completing their first two academic years in primary school teacher education. The data included field observations, student interviews, qualitative email enquiries and some audio recordings of study situations. The study examined what kind of frames organised students’ experiences in various study situations, how the frames of study situations changed during the two academic years studied and how the frames of study situations were constructed. Because people are typically incapable of describing frames and are even unaware of their existence, it was also necessary to look beyond the semantic level of the data to find latent themes and hidden meanings with the help of qualitative inductive thematic analysis. The results revealed two kinds of study frames: hierarchical and democratic. In a hierarchical frame, the students assumed the position of subordinates, which led them to be obedient and attempt to please supervisors. As a consequence of this asymmetrical situation, the students did not assume responsibility for and ownership of their own learning. A hierarchical frame was applied in study situations in which educators were present, whereas a democratic frame was linked to peer group situations. When the stu-dents interpreted their positions as being equal with one another, this made it difficult for any one person to obtain leader status in a peer group. In a democratic frame, the students emphasized liberty because equal peers do not have the right to interfere with the freedom of other group members. In addition, there was an assumption that peers should be on the same side, striving for the common good, with everyone united and cohesive, which made the students avoid disagreements. Attempting to change these study frames is difficult and perhaps even unnecessary because hierarchy and democracy are integral parts of social life. It is more important to recognise them and understand their logic because obstacles may hinder, for example, collaboration, responsibility and self-direction, preventing students from making the most of their university studies.