Report on flexibility in distance learning in adult education
The Swedish curriculum for municipal adult education emphasizes that there should be flexibility in education and adaptations to meet the different needs of adults. However, it seems unclear what the concept of flexibility means in practice, especially in the context of distance learning for adults. This study examines how the distance teacher role is constructed, how flexibility is acted upon and its consequences for didactic practice. Using focus groups with 46 teachers and principals and a survey of seven municipal adult education operations, the results reveal a paradox of conditional flexibility: while teachers are expected to be highly adaptable, organizational and financial constraints, standardized structures and policy-driven efficiency goals limit actual flexibility. Teachers navigate tensions between pedagogical ideals, administrative demands and students’ expectations of autonomy, often at the expense of didactic quality. Assessment requirements further limit flexibility and reinforce rigid methods in a system that markets itself as flexible. The study argues for strategic organizational support and a redefinition of flexibility that prioritizes pedagogical and didactic dimensions.
Anna Åkerfeldt Stockholm University, Department of teaching and learninghttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-5101-7369
Enni Paul Stockholm University, Department of educationhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-4474-3925
Stefan Hrastinski Division of Digital Learning, KTH Royal Institute of Technologyhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-9984-6561
https://publicera.kb.se/educare/article/view/60035
