Professional working conditions in Icelandic upper-secondary schools during the last twenty years: Narratives of policy and socio-cultural changes in neoliberal times

Abstract

Upper-secondary schools in Iceland are obligated to offer education to everyone under the age of 18, who has finished compulsory school. The greater part of these students then continue and complete their matriculation examinations (i. Stúdentspróf). During the past few decades, there have been both socio-economic and policy changes in Iceland, leading to an increase in the number of students attending uppersecondary school. The increase has also been fuelled by neoliberal and transnational policy forces which have influenced the educational system. The aim of this research is to study working conditions of teachers and supervisors, focusing on; a) whether, and then how, their conditions have changed during the past twenty years, b) whether, and then how, the ideas of those who were interviewed were influenced by the school’s social context and market value and c) whether there was a noticeable difference between teachers and supervisors in how they experienced this change at their schools.

In 1999 a new main curriculum policy for upper-secondary schools was implemented. Among changes made was the reduction of academic tracks down to three. In 2008 laws were passed that required upper-secondary schools to revise every stage and study-track and made it compulsory for the upper-secondary education system to accept everyone under the age of 18 who had finished primary school. Additionally, these laws allowed for a reduction of units required to finish upper-secondary school. Recently, the minister of education changed the studying time required for matriculation exam, from four years to three. Apart from formal policy changes there have been transformative social and educational changes regarding technical innovations, smart phones and interconnection programmes of all kinds which have encouraged individualisation in learning.

Neoliberalism has shaped educational policy and practice in Iceland in step with the Nordic countries, emphasizing marketization, neo-managerialism, choices and individual risks and responsibilities. It is clear that those changes have affected the upper-secondary schools and the working conditions within them.

This research was built on individual interviews with eight experienced teachers and school supervisors within four different Icelandic upper-secondary schools. All of the persons interviewed had been involved with their school for more than twenty years. Eight interviews were conducted with four secondary school teachers and four managers (field-supervisors/vice-principals). The schools chosen for participation provided a good spectrum of upper secondary-schools in Iceland. Two of them have one of the lowest rejection rates in the country, as they rarely reject a student that applies for the school, while the other two schools are amongst those that have the highest rejection rate. The lower-ranking schools have a much wider age distribution of students than the elite schools.

This study revealed a considerable difference in how school staff in schools with a high rejection rate and schools with a low rejection rate experienced changes in the education system. While some changes within the education system seemed to affect all the schools in a similar way, for example increased pressure due to change of age of majority (from 16 to 18) and parent cooperation, other changes such as government policy regarding the reduction in teaching hours, lesson units and allocated study time, showed a drastic difference in experience.

The study indicated no noticeable difference in the views and attitudes of teachers and supervisors. While revealing an obvious difference in how the various schools experienced these changes, the study recorded hardly any difference within the same school, since both teachers and supervisors seem to be experiencing the same situation within their own school.

Working conditions of teachers and supervisors have certainly changed during the past twenty years although the changes seem to have been more strongly felt in the schools which have a low rejection rate than in those with a higher rejection rate. Even though all the interviewees experienced a change under the new regulations, for example regarding the diversity of the student group, this difference was considerably greater in schools with a low market value.