Abstract
The project set out to explore teachers’ perceived autonomy in four different countries. To meet this objective, we built on a mixed methods approach in order to gather as rich material as possible.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Delivering Equality of Opportunity in Schools (DEIS), the Action Plan for Educational Inclusion, was launched in May 2005 and remains the Department of Education and Skills’ policy instrument to address educational disadvantage.
- 2.
In Chapter 3, we have developed the matrix in an extended form.
References
Ballou, K. (1998). A concept analysis of autonomy. Journal of Professional Nursing, 14(2), 102–110.
Broadfoot, P., Osborn, M., Gilly, M., & Bucher, A. (1993). Perceptions of teaching. Primary school teachers in England and France. New York: Cassell.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Eliasson, A. (2010). Kantitativ metod från början [Quantitative methods from the beginning]. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 116–161). New York: AERA.
Esaiasson, P., Gilljam, M., Oscarsson, H., & Wängnerud, L. (2007). Metodpraktikan: konsten att studera samhälle, individ och marknad [Method studies. The art of studying society, individual and marketplace]. Stockholm: Norstedts juridik.
Gorard, S. (2001). Quantitative methods in educational research. The role of numbers made easy. London: Continuum.
Hofer, B. K. (2002). Epistemological world views of teachers: from beliefs to practice. Issues in Education, 8(2), 167–174.
Ingersoll, R. M. (2003). Who controls teachers’ work. Power and accountability in America’s schools. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
Maxwell, J. A., & Chmiel, M. (2014). Generalization in and from qualitative analysis. In U. Flick (Ed.), The SAGE Handbook of qualitative data analysis (pp. 540–553). Los Angeles: Sage.
Moss, P. A., & Haertel, E. H. (2016). Engaging methodological pluralism. In D. H. Gitomer & C. A. Bell (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching (5th ed., pp. 127–247). Washington, DC: AERA, American Educational Research Association.
Salokangas, M., & Wermke, W. (2020). Unpacking autonomy for empirical comparative investigation. Oxford Review of Education, 46(5), 563–581.
Wermke, W., & Paulsrud, D. (2019). Autonomie im Lehrerberuf in Deutschland, Finnland und Schweden: Entscheidungen, Kontrolle, Komplexität [Teacher autonomy in Germany, Finland and Sweden: Decision making, control and complexity]. Münster and New York: Waxmann.
Wermke, W., Olason Rick, S., & Salokangas, M. (2018). Decision-making and control: Perceived autonomy of teachers in Germany and Sweden. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 51(3), 306–325.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wermke, W., Salokangas, M. (2021). Examining Teacher Autonomy Comparatively. In: The Autonomy Paradox: Teachers’ Perceptions of Self-Governance Across Europe. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65602-7_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65602-7_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-65601-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-65602-7
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)