Stage 1: Information from kindergartens
Communicating with local kindergartens and parents is the first step in making a 2-8 decision.
When children reach school age, many primary schools become interested in finding out as much as possible about the children who will attend their school.
In Oslo, there is a “standard” regarding how schools and kindergartens shall transmit knowledge about school beginners. Oslo Education Agency published in 2011, updated in 2013.This standard contains an “annual wheel” of actions that schools and kindergartens are to follow, regarding cooperation between themselves and parents.
In my interviews, I found some variations in how schools acquired knowledge about their pupils. Some arranged meetings with kindergartens in the area, some visited kindergartens and observed children, and some only received written information about children. Some schools did not have pupil information before the school year began because children had never attended kindergarten, or because families had recently moved to the area.
The kind of information school were interested in also varied. School staff often try to find out whether it is likely that children will need some extra help of any kind, for instance special needs, language help of physical assistance.
Some informants explained how they closely followed the annual wheel. Other informants gave me an impression of conducting those pullet points suggested by the standard in cooperation with local kindergartens. Although the transmission of information always
depended on parents’ approval of correspondence between kindergartens and primary schools, parents seldom resisted this, according to all of my informants, except for one informant. The informant at school four, however, explained that if they did receive any information from kindergartens regarding language development, there was:
Way too little, way too little about language. Kindergartens are clever on reporting if there’s something regarding behavior, serious learning disabilities, but way too little concerning language. We have been mapping the kindergartens this year, and we do see that there are great differences, many children haven’t attended kindergarten, and often children who haven’t attended kindergarten are weak in language. But we do see that many children who have attended kindergarten are weak in language. There are
57 different trends from the kindergartens. This is reported back to the kindergartens, and they are obliged to send us a form about the child. But we sometimes wonder “why on earth hasn’t the kindergarten reported this?” And the kindergarten then answers that thy will only report what parents approve of, because parents need to approve of transmitted information. Simply, we receive little helpful information from kindergartens regarding language.
Informants who did not collect much information from kindergartens gave me the impression of perceiving the responsibility to get to know children as theirs. Therefore, they did not necessarily see the value in kindergartens’ evaluations. All said, that they would always conducting their own examinations of children’s skills rather than rely on kindergartens’
judgments.
I did not expect to find that not all schools followed the knowledge transmit standard
published for this purpose. The different ways that primary schools follow the “annual wheel”
of measures is clearly not in line with Oslo authorities’ intentions. Oslo officials wrote that that all schools and kindergartens must follow the standard wheel bullet point by bullet point.
But the reality for some schools is different than the reality visualized by authorities.
When schools have to carefully examine all candidates for 2-8 decisions, they may think like
“why do the extra work in collecting much information on children before they are in the hands of the school?” The way that school and kindergarten employees understand the
knowledge transmit standard is crucial for how it is implemented. In addition, they depend on a similar perception of the importance of the standard and pedagogic considerations with individuals they are to cooperate with from kindergartens. Or vice versa, for a mutual understanding in cooperation between institutions.
When talking to informants about their cooperation with kindergartens, many were happy with the way this cooperation worked out. In contrast, several schools expressed worries about the lack of pedagogic skills or staff with relevant experience. Several of my informants also told me that they found important differences between kindergartens in the same area.
Informant (no.5) expressed that in some kindergartens, personnel are more into their cups of coffee than the children. The informant had been to several kindergartens in her area and had various impressions on the insights kindergarten staff had on children’s development. This
58
lack of pedagogic insights results in the fact that schools can be given different levels of useful information from kindergartens.
As seen in earlier white papers, the Norwegian government wants staff in the education system, including kindergartens, to possess knowledge about multicultural diversity among children. But, according to some of my informants, this does not often occur, and it affects schools when working with personnel who lack multicultural qualifications. Children may be affected because schools do not get adequate information from kindergartens during this transmission stage. If schools do not know that a child needs certain language examinations , it may take more time before teachers discover the need. This informant also expressed her concerns over the fact that some kindergarten staff speak poor Norwegian. Moreover, these staff may be some children’s only model for how to speak Norwegian.
It might be understandable that some informants struggle to cooperate with kindergartens where staff are neither pedagogically skilled, nor speak fluent Norwegian. How can someone who does not speak fluent Norwegian teach children in Norwegian, or identify challenges that children face in learning Norwegian? Do these same staff communicate with parents about children’s linguistic challenges, and then inform schools about them, in a language in which they are not fluent? On the other hand, some informants stated that they worked well with kindergartens.
It seems that because Oslo authorities consider the cooperation between primary schools and kindergartens to be important, they publish a standard for schools and kindergartens to follow.
I found, however, that there are variations in how closely schools follow this standard. In addition, the issue of language development is normally handled during this communication.
As shown, school staff cannot rely solely on reports from kindergartens regarding language.
59 Stage 2: Information at enrollment and determine mother tongue:
The next step towards making 2-8 decisions is the process of enrollment. As the Education Act (1998) states, children with a mother tongue other than Norwegian may qualify for a 2-8 decision. The law determines that children’s mother tongues are criterion for 2-8 decisions.
Informants explained that in December, approximately eight months before first grades begin, children are enrolled in primary schools. Schools invite children and their parents to register.
During this time, children develop an impression of the school and an idea of what to expect in the coming year. Similarly, schools try to get a picture of the children. For example, schools want to know if a child is an asylum seeker, if a child has, or had, psychological issues, or if a child needed any kind of special attention before the age of school. Informants told me they notify parents at enrollment and on the first day of school about the 2-8 solutions and rights. At enrollment, parents are also asked to fill out what citizenship the child has and what mother tongue the child speaks.
Parents fill out a form during enrollment that identifies children’s mother tongues. At some schools, school staff goes through the form with parents to make sure that everything is correctly understood and answered. This assistance may be necessary as parents may not be steady in Norwegian themselves.
Schools appear to handle the information received during enrollment in very different ways.
They all insert information into the school’s system and divide children into classes. But, schools do not prepare more during summer. Some teachers may prepare for how to teach certain pupils, but school administrations do not seem to prepare before the start of the school year. As far as I know, no test, mapping or examinations are conducted through the summer to investigate if some children need extra assistance.
The process of determining a child’s mother tongue may not always be as easy as ticking of a box. For instance, some children have parents from different countries; one or neither of them may be native Norwegians. A child may speak two or more languages at home, and it can be difficult to point out which one is her mother tongue. And does considering you self as
Norwegian automatically lead to you speaking Norwegian well enough to teach your child the language fluently? Some parents may be second generation immigrants and define their Norwegian language as their first language, but yet not be fluent speakers. Defining mother
60
tongue may even be a sensible topic for parents and not as straight forward as one may think.
During interviews, I was also told about parents who talk to their children in a non-Norwegian language, and the child will response in Norwegian. So, what this child’s mother tongue?
At secondary schools, I acquired the impression that schools had access to children’s information through local intranets. Here, they could find information about whether their new pupils are had another mother tongue than Norwegian registered. Local intranets also show if pupils are having an individual decision for to adapted language education.
During enrollment, staff want to identify which children the school is going to examine for a 2-8 decision, by determining if Norwegian is the mother tongue or not. This is a fundamental criterion for determining which children the school needs to examine for 2-8 decisions. But, determining children’s mother tongues may not always be a simple job, for parents or the school. As the Education Act (1998) demands, however, it is necessary to determine
children’s mother tongues in order to assess whether children are candidates for 2-8 decisions.