Den osynliga kampen om fritidspedagogikens syfte : en studie av diskurser om fritidspedagogik

Sammanfattning: The invisible struggle for the purpose of leisure time pedagogy  - a study of discourses about leisure time pedagogy The aim of the study is to examine and highlight the discursive struggle about the main purpose of leisure time pedagogy in school in a democratic society. Thereby my aim is to deepen the discussion about what leisure time pedagogy is and should be. The examination of different purposes is based on Gert J.J. Biestas different educational concepts qualification, socialization and subjectification. The study is based on a webb survey answered by 71 leisure time pedagogues, and interviews answered by 6 leisure time pedagogues. Findings from the webb survey suggests that most of the respondents believe their administration think the most important duty of leisure time pedagogy is different from their own. Most of the respondents indicated socialisation or subjectification of students as their most important duty, while most of them think their administration designate the students qualification as most important. The interviews where recorded, transcribed, and later analysed in line with Ernesto Laclau ́s and Chantal Mouffe ́s discourse theory. From the interviews I was able to map out 3 different discourses about the main purpose of leisure time pedagogy according to leisure time pedagogues: the socially oriented discourse, the knowledge oriented discourse and the identity oriented discourse. I was also able to map out one discourse based on leisure time pedagogues views on how they think their administrations anticipation on leisure time pedagogy differ from their own beliefs. In conclusion most leisure time pedagogues believes their main purpose is to help students develop social skills and personal identity, while they believe their endeavor to do so, is interfered either by their administrations designated purpose with leisure time pedagogy or their anticipation on leisure time pedagogues to help teachers and to support pupils development of subject knowledge, rather than to plan and elaborate with leisure time pedagogy. The study suggests that the different discourses, while not properly articulated, may lead to misunderstandings and a false feeling of agreement when there is none. This is why there seems to be a need to really discuss and clarify different comprehensions of the meaning of the main concepts of leisure time pedagogy in order to articulate the discursive struggle.