Individuell utvecklingsplan - produkt eller process?
En kvalitativ intervjustudie av hur fem lärare för de yngre åldrarna använder IUP
The process of learningSocio-cultural perspectiveIndividual development planLärandeprocessLärandeSociokulturellt perspektivIndividuell utvecklingsplanIUP
The intention of this study is to interview teachers in order to create a picture of how they look at their work with IUP (Plan of individual development). The main question formulated in my study is in what way IUP can become a contribution to the learner´s development. All teachers who participated in the interviews believe that the purpose of the document is to be proactive, developing and positive for the pupils. The teachers also believe that it is intended to serve as a clarification for pupils as well as teachers. It´s clear to see that the IUP generally is believed to be a supportive resource in education. The results of the interviews, however, show that the document does not in any significant way function as a support to the pupils and their learning during the term. Most of the attention is put into the meeting between teacher, parents and pupil (?utvecklingssamtal?) held once per term, in which the individual plan also is set up.A variety of reasons contribute to the fact that the majority of the responding teachers do not enable the pupils themselves to use the document on a regular basis in everyday work. Only one of the participating teachers stated that she actively encouraged pupils to use their IUP on a continual basis during their school day.In the other cases the IUP was filed and often kept locked up while the pupil and the parents kept a copy at home. However, the pupils are involved in the establishing of the IUP and are given a good opportunity to take part in formulating its goals, based on their capacities. The pupil´s own wording is important to make him or her feel that the IUP is fit for them.There were different statements about how much and how often the teachers participate in discussing the work of IUP with colleagues. One conclusion is that there was, in most of the cases, a will to create a common interpretation in order to get more out of the document.