Syftet med studien var att belysa en lässtrategis relevans för läsförståelsen i ett främmande språk för en grupp elever i kursen Moderna språk 3 på gymnasiet, genom tre läsförståelsetester. Vid testen fick eleverna samma text att läsa, och fick besvara samma innehållsfrågor. Halva gruppen arbetade enskilt men i övrigt på valfritt sätt, medan andra halvan fick arbeta med en förutbestämd strategi innehållande en gemensam aspekt. Studien grundar sig i en sociokulturell teori, där tanken är att det gemensamma arbetet i grupp B ska stärka elevernas enskilda resultat. I slutändan har kunnat konstateras att grupp B presterade bättre på två av tre test, och att grupp A konsekvent gör fler misstolkningar av textinnehållet. Alla elever har fått reflektera över sin strategianvändning vad gäller läsförståelse och eleverna i grupp B har även fått ta ställning kring vad de tyckte om den utvalda strategin, där en övervägande del var positivt inställd. Sammanfattningsvis kan resultaten användas för att som lärare kunna erbjuda eleverna olika strategier för läsförståelse som de kan använda sig av, för att finna de strategier som passar dem bäst.

This study aims to investigate students’ strategy use in performing problem-solving tasks about the measurement of a circle's area, and whether the students' individual strategy thinking develops during discussions about strategic choices in heterogeneous groups. The theories that are linked to this study are Strategy use, Heterogeneity, and Classroom norms. The theories about strategy use are about the student’s choice of strategies and about the students' understanding of the strategy they choose to use. The theory about Classroom norms indicates that teachers and other students influence students' mathematical reasoning and calculation. Finally, the theory about Heterogeneity, tells us how students' different knowledge levels, backgrounds and experiences influence the development of mathematics. The study was implemented in two classes from year six in primary school, where a total of four heterogeneous groups from these classes were created. The students had to individually perform three problem-solving tasks which involved calculating the area of ​​the circle. The students were taught different strategies for making these calculations and they could use any strategy. Students then discussed their solution strategies in groups before they had to solve the next task.  The results of the research show that the only relevant strategy used in the four groups was the multiplication strategy. The reason why the students used the multiplication strategy was directly connected to the classroom norms the teacher had presented. Therefore, students learned the multiplication strategy and they implemented it immediately without understanding why they calculated it in that way. Because the students only used one relevant strategy to calculate the area of ​​the circle in all groups, there was no exchange of strategies. There was, however, an exchange of experience. Since the students who used irrelevant strategies understood how other students solved the problem-solving tasks about the area of ​​the circle with the multiplication strategy. As a result of the discussions in heterogeneous groups, the students who used irrelevant strategies started using the multiplications strategy eventually.

The syllabi for the subject English in both Swedish compulsory and upper secondary school state in the core content for English that it should provide the opportunity to learn how to use linguistic strategies in speech, i.e. oral communication strategies. However, we as teachers are not informed by these documents what oral communication strategies are and which ones are to be preferred. For this reason, we as future teachers of English, posed the following research questions: What are oral communication strategies according to the literature, and how are these assessed in terms of being positive and negative strategies? According to research what factors correlate with strategy use, and what are the potential pedagogical implications for the Swedish school context? To answer these questions, we have read and analyzed fourteen different empirical studies regarding communication strategies. The first question was answered by analyzing the empirical studies and relevant theory. We found various definitions in our studies, stemming from different theoretical perspectives. However, they all define oral communication strategies as serving the purpose of furthering interaction. Furthermore, by comparing the definitions in the Swedish syllabi for English and the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages to our literature, we were able to answer the second part of the first question. The literature shows that there is a preference for achievement strategies over avoidance or reduction strategies. To answer the first part of the second question, some studies indicated a positive correlation between strategy use and the level of proficiency. Regarding pedagogical implications, some studies indicate that explicit strategy training has a positive effect on oral performance. Drawing on the results of these studies and the theoretical framework provided, we conclude that achievement strategies are to be preferred and that they should be taught explicitly.