<p>Syftet med uppsatsen är att undersöka vilken betydelse upplevelsen har för minnet. Studien behandlar tre problemformuleringar: (1) Vad minns eleverna några månader efter sitt besök på Sörmlands museum? (2) Varför minns eleverna just de sakerna? Här studeras de två aspekterna: Av vilka anledningar anser eleverna själva att de har dessa minnen? Vad säger utomhuspedagogisk forskning om upplevelsernas betydelse för lärandet? (3) Hur väl stämmer elevernas minnen överens med de syften som Sörmlands museums har med sin verksamhet?</p><p>Studien baseras på en enkätundersökning där sammanlagt 205 elever i årskurs 4 och 5 har deltagit i ett studiebesök på Sörmlands museum under våren 2004. Efter fyra till åtta månader ombeds eleverna utveckla två frågeställningar / påståenden: (1) Detta minns jag… (2) Jag minns det för att…</p><p>Resultatet visar att eleverna har rika minnen från besöket samt att de allra flesta eleverna upplevde besöket som positivt. Studien av elevernas minnen efter deltagande i programmen på Sörmlands museum visade att 70 procent av eleverna mindes aktiviteter de fått göra själva. 51 procent hade auditiva minnen och 40 procent hade visuella minnen. 37 procent av eleverna hade minnen som var kopplade till en specifik plats på Nyköpingshus.</p><p>Den orsak de flesta eleverna själva angav till att de kom ihåg dagen var att de hade positiva minnen, 75 % skrev att det var roligt. Många elever upplevde även programmen som spännande, intressanta och unika. Karaktären hos deltagarnas minnen liksom deras egna teorier om varför de minns det de minns stärker den utomhuspedagogiska forskningens syn på inlärning. Egna upplevelser, i synnerhet sådana som involverar många sinnen, rörelse och en plats som förstärker lärandet, ger eleverna något att associera faktakunskaper till. Studien har visat att de studerade programmen utgör en arena för spännande möten mellan samtid och dåtid. Elevernas omfattande och positiva minnen visar att Sörmlands museum lyckas väl med sin föresats att fungera som ett komplement till skolan.</p>

Syftet med uppsatsen är att undersöka vilken betydelse upplevelsen har för minnet. Studien behandlar tre problemformuleringar: (1) Vad minns eleverna några månader efter sitt besök på Sörmlands museum? (2) Varför minns eleverna just de sakerna? Här studeras de två aspekterna: Av vilka anledningar anser eleverna själva att de har dessa minnen? Vad säger utomhuspedagogisk forskning om upplevelsernas betydelse för lärandet? (3) Hur väl stämmer elevernas minnen överens med de syften som Sörmlands museums har med sin verksamhet? Studien baseras på en enkätundersökning där sammanlagt 205 elever i årskurs 4 och 5 har deltagit i ett studiebesök på Sörmlands museum under våren 2004. Efter fyra till åtta månader ombeds eleverna utveckla två frågeställningar / påståenden: (1) Detta minns jag… (2) Jag minns det för att… Resultatet visar att eleverna har rika minnen från besöket samt att de allra flesta eleverna upplevde besöket som positivt. Studien av elevernas minnen efter deltagande i programmen på Sörmlands museum visade att 70 procent av eleverna mindes aktiviteter de fått göra själva. 51 procent hade auditiva minnen och 40 procent hade visuella minnen. 37 procent av eleverna hade minnen som var kopplade till en specifik plats på Nyköpingshus. Den orsak de flesta eleverna själva angav till att de kom ihåg dagen var att de hade positiva minnen, 75 % skrev att det var roligt. Många elever upplevde även programmen som spännande, intressanta och unika. Karaktären hos deltagarnas minnen liksom deras egna teorier om varför de minns det de minns stärker den utomhuspedagogiska forskningens syn på inlärning. Egna upplevelser, i synnerhet sådana som involverar många sinnen, rörelse och en plats som förstärker lärandet, ger eleverna något att associera faktakunskaper till. Studien har visat att de studerade programmen utgör en arena för spännande möten mellan samtid och dåtid. Elevernas omfattande och positiva minnen visar att Sörmlands museum lyckas väl med sin föresats att fungera som ett komplement till skolan.

I den här rapporten redovisas processen och resultatet av mitt examensarbete i möbeltapetsering på Carl Malmsten Furniture Studies. Med mitt gesällprov som utgångspunkt har jag undersökt hur det dolda hantverket som döljer sig under ytan på en traditionellt stoppad möbel kan synliggöras. Undersökningen har resulterat i en processbeskrivande text–från trären stomme till stoppad och klädd möbel, där mitt fokus legat på att besvara frågorna om vad och varför, snarare än hur. Jag har sökt formuleringar, ord, representativa bilder och illustrationer för att på ett pedagogiskt och trovärdigt sätt förmedla det immateriella värdet och den handlingsburna kunskapen som finns inbakad i en möbel. Svaren på varför-frågorna påvisar nyttan i en handling men även innebörden och vikten av den handlingsburna kunskapen,  vilken även en lekman kan förstå vidden och betydelsen av.  Med en kunskapsteoretisk bakgrund har jag undersökt begreppet kunskap och kunskapsförmedling som ligger till grund för det här arbetet. Jag har bland annat tittat på hur olika typer av kunskap definierats och värderats olika och vad det har haft för betydelse för hantverkets utveckling. Jag har också sökt teoretiskt stöd som understryker syftet med att dokumentera och kommunicera handlingsburen kunskap. I varje äldre möbel som en tapetserare åtar sig finns en kulturhistoria inbäddad och det är genom den som vi lär vårt hantverk. Det arbete som en tapetserare utför handlar därför inte bara om omstoppning och omklädsel av en enskild möbel, utan bidrar i längden även till att stärka det immateriella kulturarvet och fortlevnaden av ett traditionellt hantverk. Av den anledningen har jag med en historisk bakgrund som beskriver hur stoppningshantverket har utvecklats över tid och varför det ser ut som det gör. Liksom vid beskrivningen av arbetet med mitt gesällprov har jag även här särskilt fokuserat på att söka efter svaren på varför-frågorna, d.v.s. den bakomliggande anledningen till att ett material eller en teknik kom i bruk. / This report presents the process and results of my bachelor thesis at Carl Malmsten Furniture Studies. With my journeyman's test  as a starting point, I examined how the hidden craft underneath the surface of a traditional upholstered furniture can be made visible. The investigation has resulted in a describing text - from wooden body to upholstered furniture. My focus has been to answer the questions of what and especially why, rather than how you do something. I have searched formulations, words, representative illustrations and pictures to convey the intangible value and the tacit knowledge that is embedded in a traditional handmade furniture. The answer to question why gives us answers for the benefits of an act, and conveys the meaning and importance of tacit knowledge, which is knowledge that even a person without insight of the craftsmanship can comprehend.   With a epistemological (the theory of knowledge) background, I have examined the concept of knowledge and the dissemination of knowledge, which is the basis for this work. I have studied how different types of knowledge through history has been defined and measured differently, and what consequences it has had for the development of handicraft. I have also searched theoretical support that emphasizes the meaning of documenting and communicating tacit knowledge.  In each piece of furniture that an upholsterer restore, there is a cultural history to find, and it is through that history we learn our craftsmanship. Therefore, the work of a upholsterer is not just about craft itself, it also helps to strengthen the intangible cultural heritage and the survival of a traditional craft. For that reason I have written a historical background that describes the development of Swedish upholstery traditions and how it has evolved over time. As with the description of the work of my journeyman's test, I have particularly focused on searching for answers to the questions of why - the underlying reason whya material or technology came into use.

<p>This is a licentiate dissertation consisting of a summarizing section and two free-standing but coherent articles, one of which has previously been published in ascientific journal while the other is accepted for publication. The unifying link is the theme of attempting to establish the kernel of outdoor education, as it isunderstood by teachers active in the field. The study depicts with the help of semi-structured interviews the respondents’ conceptions of teaching and outdooreducation. The first article is a <em>survey </em>(accomplished in A - School and B - School) of teachers’ perceptions of learning and teaching outdoors in preschool – (to) thefirst year of the compulsory school. The second article is a study of teachers’ perceptions of the possible special nature of outdoor education after having experiencedan <em>educational intervention</em> in the subject (preschool to first year). Both articles treat the special nature of outdoor education coupled with learning and outdoorteaching in light of the overall research question, what perceptions do teachers have of learning and teaching outdoors? The summarizing section which discusses thetwo articles is divided into five different parts.</p><p>Chapter I comprises a social and environmental analysis and indicates the need for research in the field of outdoor education. Chapter II deals with the aim, issuesand theoretical perspectives of learning which are tied to knowledge through action, ecological readability and bodily learning. A number of restricted examples areselected among theoreticians and representatives of these three perspectives within the reform pedagogy movement, American pragmatism, the environmental studymovement and theories of the phenomenology of the body, the learning body in movement.</p><p>The methodological basis for the analysis of the two articles is phenomenographic and is described in Chapter III. In Chapter IV the possible special nature ofoutdoor education is analysed, noting what stands out as especially prominent in the respondents’ answers and in what way, proceeding from questions such as what isoutdoor education for you, <em>what is the difference between learning outdoors and indoors, and why teach outdoors?</em> Four categories of response can be distinguished: aplace for learning, a way of learning, an object of learning and bodily learning. At the end of Chapter IV the results of both articles are summarised. Finally, Chapter Vcomprises a discussion proceeding from a metacategorisation of all descriptive categories from both articles. The discussion has led to the identification of threethematised perspectives, namely the <em>place perspective, the environment</em> perspective and <em>the body perspective</em>. These perspectives, place, environment and body, arelinked back to the technical frame of reference in Chapter II.</p><p>The result of the two part studies, the survey study in article 1 and the educational intervention in article 2, indicates a multiplicity of varied perceptions of thespecial nature of outdoor education and can thus be said to characterise this as richly diversified. As regards teachers’ notions of the principal reasons for learning andteaching outdoors, the following four aspects are foregrounded:</p><ul><li>the place for learning</li><li>the object of learning</li><li>the way of learning</li><li>bodily learning</li></ul><p>Two main categories were identified in article 2 which are treated in education in the subject after a five-day course (10 half study days), teachers who perceive aspecial nature in outdoor education and teachers who do not. Both main categories crystallised out after the educational intervention was implemented in Byskolan andStadsskolan (the Village School and the Town School), the latter being the reference school. One year after the completion of the educational intervention mostteachers in the Village School associated the special nature of outdoor education with a more <em>authentic, body and sensory experience related, movement intensive</em> and <em>health promoting learning</em> than traditional learning in the classroom.</p><p>Proceeding from a metacategorisation the three above-mentioned thematised perspectives are described in Chapter V. These reflect the identified responsecategories in articles 1 and 2.</p><p>The analysis of the empirical material of the investigation reveals that the special nature of outdoor education from the respondents´ perspective is related to place,to the environment and to the body.</p>

This is a licentiate dissertation consisting of a summarizing section and two free-standing but coherent articles, one of which has previously been published in ascientific journal while the other is accepted for publication. The unifying link is the theme of attempting to establish the kernel of outdoor education, as it isunderstood by teachers active in the field. The study depicts with the help of semi-structured interviews the respondents’ conceptions of teaching and outdooreducation. The first article is a survey (accomplished in A - School and B - School) of teachers’ perceptions of learning and teaching outdoors in preschool – (to) thefirst year of the compulsory school. The second article is a study of teachers’ perceptions of the possible special nature of outdoor education after having experiencedan educational intervention in the subject (preschool to first year). Both articles treat the special nature of outdoor education coupled with learning and outdoorteaching in light of the overall research question, what perceptions do teachers have of learning and teaching outdoors? The summarizing section which discusses thetwo articles is divided into five different parts. Chapter I comprises a social and environmental analysis and indicates the need for research in the field of outdoor education. Chapter II deals with the aim, issuesand theoretical perspectives of learning which are tied to knowledge through action, ecological readability and bodily learning. A number of restricted examples areselected among theoreticians and representatives of these three perspectives within the reform pedagogy movement, American pragmatism, the environmental studymovement and theories of the phenomenology of the body, the learning body in movement. The methodological basis for the analysis of the two articles is phenomenographic and is described in Chapter III. In Chapter IV the possible special nature ofoutdoor education is analysed, noting what stands out as especially prominent in the respondents’ answers and in what way, proceeding from questions such as what isoutdoor education for you, what is the difference between learning outdoors and indoors, and why teach outdoors? Four categories of response can be distinguished: aplace for learning, a way of learning, an object of learning and bodily learning. At the end of Chapter IV the results of both articles are summarised. Finally, Chapter Vcomprises a discussion proceeding from a metacategorisation of all descriptive categories from both articles. The discussion has led to the identification of threethematised perspectives, namely the place perspective, the environment perspective and the body perspective. These perspectives, place, environment and body, arelinked back to the technical frame of reference in Chapter II. The result of the two part studies, the survey study in article 1 and the educational intervention in article 2, indicates a multiplicity of varied perceptions of thespecial nature of outdoor education and can thus be said to characterise this as richly diversified. As regards teachers’ notions of the principal reasons for learning andteaching outdoors, the following four aspects are foregrounded: the place for learning the object of learning the way of learning bodily learning Two main categories were identified in article 2 which are treated in education in the subject after a five-day course (10 half study days), teachers who perceive aspecial nature in outdoor education and teachers who do not. Both main categories crystallised out after the educational intervention was implemented in Byskolan andStadsskolan (the Village School and the Town School), the latter being the reference school. One year after the completion of the educational intervention mostteachers in the Village School associated the special nature of outdoor education with a more authentic, body and sensory experience related, movement intensive and health promoting learning than traditional learning in the classroom. Proceeding from a metacategorisation the three above-mentioned thematised perspectives are described in Chapter V. These reflect the identified responsecategories in articles 1 and 2. The analysis of the empirical material of the investigation reveals that the special nature of outdoor education from the respondents´ perspective is related to place,to the environment and to the body. / <p>Serienumret är felaktigt i avhandlingen och skall vara 251.</p>