Föreläsningen på engelska av Anders Dunemyr återfinns nedan efter en inledande sammanfattning på svenska som har gjorts med stöd av AI.

Under SIESC-mötet i Sätila sommaren 2023 var temat ”Barns rätt till andlig utveckling”. En av föreläsarna var Anders Dunemyr.

Hans föreläsning behandlade barns rätt till andlig utveckling i en skolkontext och belyste hur denna rätt påverkas av två starka samhällstendenser: dels en individualistisk ”EGO-logik” som betonar självförverkligande och konsumtion, dels den ökade kontroll av skolan som sker till exempel genom anmälningar och fokus på mätbara resultat. Dessa perspektiv riskerar att tränga undan skolans bredare bildningsuppdrag och värdegrundsarbete.

Dunemyr betonade behovet av att åter fokusera på utbildningens syfte – inte bara kvalificeringen för arbetslivet, utan också att eleven utvecklas som en självständig och ansvarstagande person.

Andlighet är en grundläggande mänsklig dimension, som kan uttryckas både religiöst och sekulärt, och som handlar om medvetenhet om sig själv, andra, omvärlden och något som är större än individen. Samtidigt är området känsligt i skolan, då det kan uppstå konflikter kring religionsfrihet och värdegrund.

Enligt Dunemyr innebär barns rätt till andlig utveckling att man måste respektera barn som självständiga andliga subjekt, skydda dem från manipulation, stödja deras utveckling i gemenskap och främja andlig och kulturell bildning.

Avslutningsvis framhölls lärarens avgörande roll. Det krävs omdöme, lyhördhet och balans mellan att aktivt vägleda och att skapa utrymme för öppenhet och existentiella frågor. Barns rätt till andlig utveckling blir därmed en fråga både om skolans värdegrund och lärarens professionella omdöme i klassrummet.

Anders Dunemyr Conference excerpt SIESC 2023 

The theme of the conference is about children’s right to spiritual development and before I go  into this theme from an educational perspective (not theological) it is important to raise awareness  of how this right appears in competition with other influences that characterize the European  countries. 

During the conference, we will take part in Per Ewert’s thesis ’Moving reality closer to the ideal’  and how political agendas can change Sweden into one of the world’s most secularized and self realized countries. See Welzel’s Cultural Map 

Based on this, I want to highlight some other perspectives that can be interpreted as obstacles to  children’s right to spiritual development. 

’EGO-logic’  

Many social trends influence our thinking and our actions. One such influence is the EGO logic  that over time characterizes our way of thinking. An EGO logic that impulsively promotes man’s  need for self-satisfaction rather than a solidary desire to strengthen a common value base. Paul  Robert’s socially critical perspective ’The Impulse Society’ (2015) which considers how this  consumer logic is based on people following their immediate desires by visiting an online  marketplace in the fastest/easiest/cheapest way (Amazon and similar web services compete to be  able to have shortest delivery time). This logic is about satisfying my need and desire for something  new. This logic shows itself in an increased desire: to constantly get a new mobile phone even if I  don’t need it; vote for policies that cater to my own motives rather than society’s; depleting the  planet’s limited resources just to satisfy my (infinite) needs. In the school world, this is shown  through the student’s and parents’ superstition in schools that should ’fix’ everything for the family,  rather than parents’ and students’ self-critical acceptance of responsibility and dialogue as the  biggest influencing factor in the child’s development. The risk with this ’EGO’ logical view of  school gives consequences that deal with ’pick and choose’ learning based on what pleases the  student. The teaching role is measured based on students’ experience of satisfaction rather than  degree of upbringing. Here, the focus of value-based work can have a major task of opening up  the student’s understanding of a reality that does not place itself at the center. Where an increased  tolerance for other people who are different on a planet that does not have infinite resources and  where we understand how others see ourselves is put on the agenda. To be in the middle of the  world without placing oneself in the center. Based on this EGO logic, values that deal with a non self-centered worldview are in demand.

Juridification of school 

Another influence is the so-called juridification of the school. Legal concepts and legal  perspectives have gradually gained a stronger position in the educational policy management of the  school, similar to an ’over-regulation’ and ’juridification’ that becomes subject to implementation  processes that are influenced by different logics. The phenomenon that is often named  ’juridification of school’ wants to make visible how legal structures are incorporated that contribute  to emphasizing interpersonal values (Bergh & Arneback, 2016) see also authors (Enkvist &  Scheutz, 2021; Nordfeldt, 2012; Stigendal & Liedholm, 2018). Within this phenomenon there are  different perspectives such as; legal concepts and principles; governance processes; power shifts;  practical language use; teaching profession and relationships between school, students and  guardians (Bergh & Arneback, 2016, 2019; Carlbaum, 2016; Fransson, 2016; Hult & Lindgren,  2016; Møller & Ottesen, 2016; Runesdotter, 2019). This juridification, which is also called the era  of New Public Management (NPM) or as the philosophy professor Jonna Bornemark (2018) coined  the era of the ”förpappring”(=managed by paper), where what used to be about value-driven  interpersonal relationships is now about how schools and care live up to different measurable  requirements. Here it can easily be about quality, such as sending in documents and reports for the  authorities’ quality assurance to be fulfilled. Professor Lena Lindgren (2014) likens this situation to  satisfying the ’evaluation monster’ that has characterized Swedish society since the end of the 1990s,  where evaluation and closely related activities such as follow-up, quality measurement, supervision  and auditing have escalated more and more with each passing year.  

Andreas Bergh (2010), docent in pedagogy, demonstrates how this shift has successively taken  place within the world of schools. In his thesis, he highlights how concepts taken from industry  have become central concepts that should capture and define the school’s quality. This includes  industry concepts such as inspection, quality control, documentation, goal achievement/results,  market reputation, transparency, customer selection system, legal certainty and efficiency. These  concepts displace and challenge concepts such as education, formation, democratic upbringing,  knowledge, equality, influence and citizen, that is, concepts that have long existed in the world of  schools. The latter are often reduced to ’soft values’ and at some schools it will mostly be about  well-being. Bergh’s research shows how teaching quality in the 21st century is overshadowed by  result quality, market quality and system quality. What is valued simply becomes what can be  measured and he summarizes the movement of development as an instrumentalization and  juridification of the school. The shift away from teaching also creates templated systems where the  teacher becomes increasingly tied to the back and cannot independently shape his teaching in the  best way. It also means that questions of an instrumental and administrative nature are given more  and more space at the expense of pedagogical questions and questions about the goals and purpose  of the education. The core business itself is being pushed aside by growing control activities around  the core business.

A broader purpose of school

In the middle of this tension field of the individual’s self-realized EGO logic and the  juridification of society, voices are raised that demand a sensitivity for what is important in the  practical situation and that emerges from interpersonal everyday practice rather than something  that can be controlled from the outside with predetermined manuals that schools must live by up  to. Values derived from the old ideal of education are experiencing a renaissance that highlights  the importance of schools that offer a holistic view that is not one-dimensional but also includes  the soul and spiritual dimensions. Here it is about qualities and characteristics that, like the most  successful Anglo-Saxon universities, have a multidimensional view of education that encompasses  the ’whole person’ based on sports, health, music, art, aesthetics and existential aspects. This refers  to a versatility beyond subject knowledge that deals with upbringing and character building.  Properties and qualities with an uncomplicated connection between a scientific approach and the  spiritual part of life are housed here. An interaction between science and spirituality. This refers to  quality, which the economics professor Lars Strannegård describes in his book ’Kunskap som  känns’ (knowledge that one feels) both about measurable as well as immeasurable values. A broader  view of values that can be exemplified in how we view things and people. For example, the strength  of the bridge and its appearance based on the aesthetics of the recipient/viewer, and the bridge as  a symbol of how we create understanding for dissenters and empathy for the weak and vulnerable  in the name of tolerance.  

With these perspectives, the social question regarding education and school and what knowledge  and values are necessary for future generations is brought up to date. What approaches and  perceptions of knowledge should schools form based on school legislation and curricula, how these  should shape teachers’ didactic considerations, what knowledge should be assessed and what  teacher skills and competences need to be developed in order to meet the knowledge and values  that should be conveyed in the common schooling (T. Englund m.fl., 2012; Wahlström, 2022). As  an example, I choose to highlight the Dutch pedagogy professor Gert Biesta’s discussion about the  fact that we live in a time when the measurement of educational results has displaced the question  of the purpose of education. Biesta asks the questions: ”-what should we have education for? -what  is its aim and purpose? – is it only about qualifying, i.e. undergoing training that leads to a job, and  thus taking one’s place in society, or is it about training that leads to a kind of education where the  student is included in a freedom that also requires their responsibility for this freedom?” (Biesta,  2018, p. 8). Biesta also highlights these perspectives based on his threefold view of education in  terms of qualification, socialization and subjectification (Biesta, 2015, p. 78, 2018, p. 23). With  socialization, Biesta does not only mean preparing children and young people in traditions and  behaviors, ways of being and doing, such as cultural, professional, political, religious traditions  etcetera. Socialization, he believes, also includes the interaction between students and teachers, for  example in ways that education reproduces existing social structures, divisions and differences  (2015, p. 77). The third domain, subjectification, assumes that education has a positive or negative impact on the student as a person. It has to do with the way in which children or young people  exist as subjects of initiative and responsibility rather than as objects of others’ actions. Biesta  believes that ”Subjectification processes make it possible for the educated to become more  autonomous and independent in thought and action” (2015, p. 77). Biesta’s threefold premises are  exemplified in the teacher’s didactic choices and priorities. This can be the choice of a more  student-centered teaching that promotes student influence, creativity and innovation as well as  more teacher-directed and knowledge-centered teaching that promotes the student’s  responsiveness to the teacher’s guidance and correction (2015, p. 80). By this, Biesta means that  there is no opposite relationship between what the teacher is required to convey and what the  student is expected to perform and at the same time the teacher’s choice to give room for, as he  says, ”a sense of openness and mystery” in areas where even the teacher does not have clear answers  on how to behave in, for example, moral, political or spiritual matters (2015, p. 80). 

Children’s right to spiritual development  

In national as well as international literature that deals with ’children’s right to spiritual  development’, the concept of ’spirituality’ refers to a wide range of expressions both from secular  and religious views that refer to religious/non-religious experiences in different contexts (Sagberg,  2017, p . 24; Westerlund, 2016). Spirituality appears in the literature as a fundamental human  dimension of modern man with different expressions in different forms in different times.  Examples of aspects related to; differences of approach in an individualized secular context;  experiences of spirituality in terms of tolerance and diversity; teachers’ promotion of individual and  existential conversations; teachers’ protective role for vulnerable children (Westerlund, 2016; Bone  & Fenton, 2015; Sagberg, 2017; Stockinger, 2019; Adams, 2009). Here, religion can be one of  several forms that respond to man’s need to express his spiritual dimensions (Haugen, 2018, p.  307). In general, there is a taken-for-granted view of children’s spirituality as an innate and universal  characteristic that often relates to the interaction with others and that connects to both their inner  self and at the same time to something outside themselves as an integrated aspect of human  development (Westerlund, 2016, p. 217). Central to the literature, Nye & Hay’s so-called ”relational  consciousness” often emerges for children’s spirituality within four elements: ”awareness of the  self; awareness of others; awareness of surroundings; and awareness of the transcendent other”  (for some people called God or a higher power) (Hay & Nye, 2006, p. 115; Westerlund, 2016, p.  217; Haugen, 2018, p. 307; Adams, 2009, p . 115). For non-religious people, the transcendent may  include different dimensions such as human conscience/wisdom, generosity/solidarity,  aesthetics/art or simply the belief that man is a spiritual being (Haugen, 2018, p. 307). Children’s  right to spiritual development and religious interpretations in a school context is not entirely  straightforward as it can be a sensitive area. It can be associated with fears of being ridiculed or  rejected for their inner spiritual thoughts and beliefs, which leads to the student’s voice being  silenced (Adams, 2009, p. 117; Berglund, 2017; Kittelmann Flensner et al., 2015, p . 117, 2015;  Mohme, 2017; Vikdahl, 2018). Such a conflict, based on this study, can be the child’s right to spiritual development in the dilemma of negative and positive religious freedom. Voices in society  that promote children’s rights in view of marginalized group affiliations or contexts where some  consider it to be contrary to the value base and others who claim that they constitute the very  foundation of the value base. 

Definition 

Children’s rights in the spiritual area undoubtedly open up sensitive and important viewpoints  and therefore it may be important to find a relevant and guiding definition. I have chosen Sturla  Sagberg’s definition as follows: 

Taking children’s rights perspective on children’s spirituality could mean ‘exploring sources of  children’s rights in one’s own faith and culture as well as entering into dialogue with people of  other faiths’.  

This is a great, but urgent task in a world of religious and cultural diversity. It requires ethical  awareness and reasoning as well as a serious discussion of educational policy and practice. (2017,  p. 33) 

Sagberg believes that children’s right to spiritual development entails responsibility at several  levels in society as well as moral obligations to: 

1. respect children as autonomous religious and spiritual subjects with the right to be heard, 2. protect children from all kinds of abuse or manipulation in the name of religion, 3. provide support for the child to develop as a full, contributing member of a fellowship, 4. and contribute to children’s spiritual literacy in cultural and language learning, including  their getting to know rituals and practices of religious faith. (2017, p. 33)

Values strengthening efforts

Based on Sagberg’s definition, we understand that efforts to strengthen schools’ values need to  be developed. Schools’ work to concretize normative as well as descriptive value issues is actualized,  which raises awareness of the school’s promotion as well as counteracting values-based practice  (Davidsson, 2018; Hartman, 2014; J. Lindgren et al., 2003; Orlenius, 2010, 2014). It is often  highlighted which aspects of values foundation/values foundation work have been used in the  school such as school governance, attitudes, democracy, equal treatment/ plan against offensive  behaviour, gender equality etc. Values foundation work often goes together with the Christian  profile’s set of themes which can be values or character words. In the school debate over time, it  is often a matter of more corrective and normative practice where efforts to a greater extent are  about countering what violates the school’s value base rather than strengthening what promotes  the value base. At the same time, there are studies that show that more promotional work in  combination with student influence is an important success factor. Regarding democracy and  citizenship education, there is a synergy of both promotion and counteraction – in terms of  increased understanding of tolerance, solidarity, equality and human dignity and at the same time  counteraction in terms of xenophobia, Nazism, racism and segregation. Normative – what schools  ”should” or Descriptive – ”how” schools promote / discourage. Normative value pedagogy research – considers the normative mission of the school to convey the values expressed in  curricula and policy decisions. Descriptive value-pedagogical research, on the other hand, is  interested in how and in what way value perspectives are expressed in preschool/school or in  governing documents. Furthermore, values-based aspects related to ’culture’ are presented, such as  expected school culture in terms of ’teaching values’ and actual school culture in terms of ’perceived  values’ which can relate to value-based strengthening interventions that are either integrated and/or  program-based (Colnerud et al., 2003 ; A.-L. Englund & Englund, 2012; Forsberg & Lundgren,  2003; Halstead & Taylor, 1996; Howard-Hamilton, 1995; J. Lindgren et al., 2003; Merson, 2018).  There is research that relates to program-based as well as integrated interventions (integrated in all  subjects), where the latter refers to teachers’ constant influence of the daily interaction that takes  place between teachers and students as a kind of indirect, often for those involved unconscious,  intuitive influence that often within the core value area is named as ”hidden upbringing” alt. ”the  hidden curriculum” corresponding to the English ”implicit curriculum” or the hidden curriculum  (Halstead & Taylor, 1996, p. 12; Jackson, 1992, p. 10; Wahlström, 2016, p. 132). 

Teachers awareness and ability  

With the aforementioned value perspective and children’s right to spirituality, it is ultimately not  only about the local school’s broadened view of education, but also the individual teacher’s value pedagogical considerations in the meeting with the individual student as well as the group. On a  more educational philosophical perspective, corresponding to the teacher’s value-pedagogical  choices between the individual’s upbringing and education based on the teacher as given authority  (Kant, 2008) and the teacher’s responsiveness and interaction based on the student’s agency and  experience (Dewey, 2015). Furthermore, teachers’ choices between the teacher’s care for each  individual student (Noddings, 2013) and the development of the student’s understanding and  tolerance for others (Kumashiro, 2002). This requires an awareness, creativity and discernment on  the part of the teacher to relate to both ”ethical values of care, democratic values, disciplinary values  and knowledge values” (Colnerud, 2004; Davidsson, 2018). 

Carsten Hjorth Pedersen (2020), describes in his book ’influence with respect’ the importance  of teachers’ developed sensitivity in the meeting with children’s spirituality, which is about two  ways of influencing with respect, which is about both coming forward and sometimes withdrawing.  Here, Hjort Pedersen highlights two different pitfalls that teachers can fall into. One extreme with  the adult’s influence so that it becomes so intrusive that it intimates the student and the other  extreme where the adult has the opposite effect by withdrawing so much that the adults abdicate  their mission. 

Overall, children’s right to spiritual development highlights the individual teacher’s need for  judgment prudence or Aristotle’s Phronesis. A judgmental ability that is tied to an action that is  right then and there. This action, as we have seen, is not arbitrary but grounded in a complex ability  to take the situation into the classroom, be part of the situation and drive the situation in a certain  direction. A good assessment that assumes an interaction between both activity and passivity on the part of the teacher. To both actively act while the teacher stops and passively listens and takes  in the situation with the students. As a father, I have experienced my wife’s births of our children.  The labors of a woman who is about to give birth cannot be controlled by her, they come and go  as they wish. But that does not make the woman passive. She uses the power found in labor to  become active. At the same time, she cannot be active without passively receiving. Bornemark  (2020) has invented the word ‘pactive’ (=passive+active). An expression of judgment that works  both active and passive. This translated into Biesta’s view of a broader purpose of education where  the teacher both actively conveys what the student is expected to perform and passively chooses  to give room for, as he says, ”a sense of openness and mystery” in areas where even the teacher  does not have clear answers to how to behave in, for example, moral, political or spiritual matters  (2015, p. 80).

Preferences 

Adams, K. (2009). The rise of the child’s voice; the silencing of the spiritual voice. Journal of Beliefs  & Values, 30(2), 113–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/13617670903174991 

Bergh, A. (2010). Vad gör kvalitet med utbildning? Om kvalitetsbegreppets skilda innebörder och dess  konsekvenser för utbildning. Örebro universitet, Akademin för humaniora, utbildning och  samhällsvetenskap. 

Bergh, A., & Arneback, E. (2016). Hur villkorar juridifieringen lärarprofessionens arbete med  skolans kunskaper och värden? Utbildning & Demokrati, 25, 11–31.  

https://doi.org/10.48059/uod.v25i1.1048 

Bergh, A., & Arneback, E. (2019). Juridification of Swedish Education – Changing Conditions for Teachers’  Professional Work (s. 53–70). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-18605-0_4 Berglund, J. (2017). Secular normativity and the religification of Muslims in Swedish public  schooling. Oxford Review of Education, 43(5), 524–535.  

https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2017.1352349 

Biesta, G. (2015). What is Education For? On Good Education, Teacher Judgement, and  Educational Professionalism. European Journal of Education, 50(1), 75–87.  

https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12109 

Biesta, G. (2018). God utbildning i mätningens tidevarv. Liber. 

Bone, J., & Fenton, A. (2015). Spirituality and child protection in early childhood education: A  strengths approach. International Journal of Children’s Spirituality, 20(2), 86–99.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1364436X.2015.1030594 

Bornemark, J. (2018). Det omätbaras renässans: En uppgörelse med pedanternas världsherravälde. Volante.  https://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-36729 

Bornemark, J. (2020). Horisonten finns alltid kvar: Om det bortglömda omdömet. Volante.  https://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-42488 

Carlbaum, S. (2016). Juridifiering och utbildningsval—Konsekvenser av elevers och studenters  rättigheter. Utbildning & Demokrati – tidskrift för didaktik och utbildningspolitk, 25(1), 53–72.  https://doi.org/10.48059/uod.v25i1.1050 

Colnerud, G. (2004). Värdegrund som pedagogisk praktik och forskningsdiskurs. Pedagogisk  forskning i Sverige, 9(2). 

Colnerud, G., Thornberg, R., Sverige, & Skolverket. (2003). Värdepedagogik i internationell belysning.  Statens skolverk : Fritze [distributör. 

Davidsson, M. (2018). Värdeladdade utvärderingar: En diskursanalys av förskolors systematiska  kvalitetsarbete. Linnaeus University Press. 

Dewey, J. (2015). Experience and education (First free press edition 2015). Free Press. Englund, A.-L., & Englund, T. (2012). Hur realisera värdegrunden?: Historia, olika uttolkningar: Vad är  värdegrundsstärkande? Örebro universitet.

Englund, T., Forsberg, E., & Sundberg, D. (Red.). (2012). Vad räknas som kunskap?:  Läroplansteoretiska utsikter och inblickar i lärarutbildning och skola. Liber. 

Enkvist, V., & Scheutz, S. (2021). Barnkonventionen och skolan. 

Forsberg, E., & Lundgren, U. P. (2003). Skolan och tusenårsskiftet: En vänbok till Ulf P. Lundgren.  STEP, Department of teacher education, Uppsala University. 

Fransson, S. (2016). Juridifieringens konsekvenser på skolans område—En översikt av begrepp  och principer. Utbildning & Demokrati – tidskrift för didaktik och utbildningspolitk, 25(1), 33– 51. https://doi.org/10.48059/uod.v25i1.1049 

Halstead, J. M., & Taylor, M. J. (1996). Values in Education and Education in Values. Psychology  Press. 

Hartman, S. (2014). Värden i föränderliga barndomsvärldar. I Värdepedagogik: Etik och demokrati i  förskola och skola. Liber. 

Haugen, H. M. (2018). It is time for a general comment on children’s spiritual development.  International Journal of Children’s Spirituality, 23(3), 306–322.  

https://doi.org/10.1080/1364436X.2018.1487833 

Hay, D., & Nye, R. (2006). The Spirit of the Child. Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Howard-Hamilton, M. F. (1995). a just and democratic community approach to moral education:  Developing voices of reason and responsibility. Elementary School Guidance & Counseling,  30(2), 118–130. 

Hult, A., & Lindgren, J. (2016). Med lagen som rättesnöre—Kunskapsformer i lärares arbete mot  kränkande behandling. Utbildning & Demokrati – tidskrift för didaktik och utbildningspolitk,  25(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.48059/uod.v25i1.1051 

Jackson, P. W. (1992). Conceptions of curriculum and curriculum specialists. I Handbook of research  on curriculum: A project of the American Educational Research Association. (s. 2–40). Macmillan  Pub. 

Kant, I. (2008). Om pedagogik (J. Jakobsson, Övers.). Daidalos. 

Kittelmann Flensner, K., Göteborgs universitet, Institutionen för litteratur, idéhistoria och  religion, & Centrum för utbildningsvetenskap och lärarforskning. (2015). Religious education  in contemporary pluralistic Sweden. Department of Literature, History of Ideas, and Religion,  University of Gothenburg. http://hdl.handle.net/2077/41110 

Kumashiro, K. K. (2002). Troubling education: Queer activism and antioppressive pedagogy.  RoutledgeFalmer. 

Lindgren, J., Umeå universitet, & Värdegrundscentrum. (2003). Värdegrund i skola och forskning  2001. Värdegrundscentrum, Umeå univ. 

Lindgren, L. (2014). Nya utvärderingsmonstret: Om kvalitetsmätning i den offentliga sektorn.  Studentlitteratur.

Merson, B. (2018). Harmonies and Dissonances: The Relationship between Values Taught and Values  Experienced in Three Values-oriented High Schools [Ph.D., Lesley University].  

http://www.proquest.com/docview/2299502944/abstract/F065C6CB63094C8APQ/1 Mohme, G. (2017). Somali Swedes’ Reasons for Choosing a Muslim-Profiled School— Recognition and Educational Ambitions as Important Influencing Factors. Journal of School  Choice, 11(2), 239–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/15582159.2017.1302256 

Møller, J., & Ottesen, E. (2016). Rettslig regulering og profesjonelle normer i skolen. Utbildning &  Demokrati – tidskrift för didaktik och utbildningspolitk, 25(1), Article 1.  

https://doi.org/10.48059/uod.v25i1.1053 

Noddings, N. (2013). Caring: A Relational Approach to Ethics and Moral Education. Univ of California  Press. 

Nordfeldt, M. (2012). Förväntningar och spridning: En sammanfattande studie av den nationella  Överenskommelsens tre första år: Del tre i uppföljningen av överenskommelsen mellan regeringen,  idéburna organisationer inom det sociala området och Sveriges kommuner och landsting.  Överenskommelsen. 

Orlenius, K. (2010). Värdegrunden—Finns den? Liber. 

Orlenius, K. (2014). Individens frihet och solidaritet: En värdekonflikt i skolans uppdrag? I  Värdepedagogik: Etik och demokrati i förskola och skola. Liber. 

Pedersen, C. H. (2020). Influence with Respect. Wipf and Stock Publishers. 

Roberts, P. (2015). The impulse society: What’s wrong with getting what we want? (paperback edition).  Bloomsbury Paperbacks. 

Runesdotter, C. (2019). Juridifiering i skolan – möjligheter och risker | FÖRENINGEN SVENSK  UNDERVISNINGSHISTORIA // TIDSKRIFTEN VÄGVAL i SKOLANS  HISTORIA. https://undervisningshistoria.se/juridifiering-i-skolan-mojligheter-och risker/ 

Sagberg, S. (2017). Taking a children’s rights perspective on children’s spirituality. International  Journal of Children’s Spirituality, 22(1), 24–35.  

https://doi.org/10.1080/1364436X.2016.1276050 

Stigendal, L., & Liedholm, S. (2018). Vad är problemet? Om effektiv styrning av offentlig sektor. Stockinger, H. (2019). Developing spirituality – an equal right of every child? International Journal of  Children’s Spirituality, 24(3), 307–319. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364436X.2019.1646218 Vikdahl, L. (2018). Det kommer inte på tal: En studie om religiös och kulturell mångfald i grundskolan.  Artos & Norma bokförlag. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-37192 Wahlström, N. (2016). Läroplansteori och didaktik. Gleerup Utbildning AB. 

Wahlström, N. (2022). Läroplansteori och didaktik, 3 uppl (3 uppl). Gleerups Utbildning AB. Westerlund, K. (2016). Spirituality and mental health among children and youth – a Swedish  point of view. International Journal of Children’s Spirituality, 21(3–4), 216–229.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1364436X.2016.1258392