The school has a democratic fostering mission, as it is tasked with conveying and anchoring respect for fundamental democratic values. The purpose of this study is to investigate how subject teachers relate to the democratic fostering mission. This study contributes to the research area by examining how social studies subject teachers manage the complexity of fostering for democracy and how teachers interpret and implement the democratic fostering mission. The study also enhances understanding of the relationship between fostering for democracy and respecting democratic principles. The main conclusions of this study are that the way teachers approach the fostering mission can vary depending on how the curriculum is interpreted and how they align with the purpose of the mission. This, in turn, will affect how the fostering mission is realized in teaching, primarily through dialogue and participation. The results also indicate that boundary-setting in teaching becomes crucial in understanding how teachers foster for democracy. It is through boundary-setting in teaching that teacher’s objective position is challenged, aiming to uphold the democratic values outlined in the educational document. Consequently, the democratic upbringing mission may sometimes appear to be incompatible with the fundamental democratic principles of society.

The aim of this study is to acquire knowledge regarding democratic education in upper secondary school programmes with different gender and social class profiles. It covers the teaching in and about democracy, pupils’ power-positions and their attempts to affect routine school activities. A particular focus of attention was processes of influence, through which the pupils themselves pursue issues in school. The analysis is based on theories and previous research focused on gender and class perspectives of fostering democracy. Basil Bernstein’s theories regarding power, control and pedagogic codes, in combination with feminist theories (principally those of Arnot, Reay, Skeggs, Gordon and Walkerdine), form the basis of the theoretical framework. Ethnographic methods have been applied, including participatory observations, conversations, interviews, and analysis of relevant documents over one academic year. Two Swedish upper secondary school classes were followed: one from the vocational Child and Recreation Programme and one from the academic Natural Science Programme. Teaching students about democracy and invitations for them to exert influence appeared generally to be unplanned and were marginalised in school. The few invitations that occurred had an individual stamp and focused on pupils’ choices, responsibilities and duties, rather than on their rights in school. Democracy was presented in the form of facts about formal democracy and formal participation in democracy in the future, while a more critical   attitude and possible influence strategies for youths were marginalised. Pupils in both classes wished and attempted to influence teaching, primarily through informal means. There were, however, significant differences between the classes in what they were able to influence. Analysis of pupils’ voices in relation to the pedagogic context revealed that the power relationships in these influence processes depend partly on the focal academic subject. More   importantly, they also differ between the upper secondary school programs, which differ in strength of classification (sensu Bernstein), demands, pace and difficulty levels. These   differences are related, in turn, to whether the programmes are intended to prepare the pupils for higher education and/or a vocation after school. Generally, the Child and Recreation pupils exerted influence more successfully when they wished to reduce the pace and difficulty of lessons than when they wished to get more out of their education, while the opposite applied to the Natural Science class. Who had influence over what was principally   related to the programmes’ gender and class profiles and the pupils’ expected positions in society. / Ett aktivt medborgarskap? Om demokratifostran i gymnasieskolan