1

Study Circles and Democracy in Sweden

Contribution to the symposium "Between labour and citizenship: The life-long education in France, Germany and Sweden" the 8th 9th June 2001 at the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique building in Paris1. A short version is published: Larsson, S. (2001) Seven aspects of democracy as related to study circles. International Journal of Lifelong Education. Vol. 20. No 3, pp 199 - 217. Also in French: Larsson, S. (2001) Les cercles detude et la democratie en Sude. Education Permanente. No 149/2001-4. Pp. 231 255 Farsi: Larsson, S. (2002) Study circles as a Democratic Utopia. Organon, A Quarterly Journal of Philosophy, Literature and the Humanities. No 20, Summer 2002. Russian: Larsson, S. (2007) Seven aspects of democracy as related to study circles. Aductar, No 1 (11) pp. 8 20.
Staffan Larsson, Linkpings universitet Sweden was referred to as a "study circle democracy" by the late Prime minister Palme (1969). As with most rhetorical phrases it does not capture the whole truth. What Palme probably wanted to capture with the expression "study circle democracy" is a notion of democracy that is situated in everyday life and a vigorous civil society. The phrase was used as a rhetorical device that pointed at a utopia, but on the same time it referred to a reality - the study circles. The Study circle tradition is a prominent feature of Swedish everyday life. It is estimated that between 1,2 - 1,6 million people in Sweden take part in a study circle during a year. In relation to
1

Other and shorter versions of this text is accepted for publication in the International Journal for Lifelong Education during 2001 and a collection: Bron (ed.) Civil Society, Citizenship and Learning (working title) Vol. 2. Bochum Studies in International Adult Education during 2001

contemporary discussions about learning and democracy in the high-, late- or post-modern society, the study circle seems to be exciting - in spite of its deep roots in the modern era (Johnston, 1999, Larsson, 1998). The main theme in this text is to give some answers to the question: In what ways are study circles contributing to democracy? Study circles can be described from many angles, for instance, as learning sites or educational institutions. Democracy is one of several possible descriptions, and in relation to contemporary concepts of democracy it seems to have a potential as a fruitful perspective. The basis for answering the main question is recent empirical research about Swedish study circles. The interpretational tool is seven different aspects of democracy. Since it is obvious that the theoretical discourse on the concept of democracy contains many meanings, I have tried to solve that problem by using several notions or perspectives that give access to different possibilities to talk about democracy in relation to contemporary Swedish study circles. In order to communicate the context for the discussion about democracy I will try to give a relatively elaborated presentation of the study circles and their history.

What is a study circle?

The identity of the popular adult education tradition (folkbildning in Swedish) is debated in contemporary Sweden, since changes in society and in the political agenda are challenging fundamentals of the tradition. Study circles are very complex and therefore it is necessary to present the study circle tradition in different ways and from different angels. We think that it is a rather unique educational institution in relation to civil society. The study circle tradition was developed outside of the state - by social movements, that in the start were in conflict with the dominant culture and power structures2. It was developed and governed by democratic organisations, that was in opposition to the elites. It is obvious that very few educational institutions are so closely linked to what could be a reasonable definition of a civil society. In a
2

Arvidsson, L. (1985)

global scale, it could be looked upon as a grand scale longitudinal experiment during almost 100 years in a small section of the world. There have even been suggestions that study circles may be considered more fit to the challenges of the emerging society - late modern or post-modern - than could be expected by a tradition that was developed and firmly footed in traditional popular movements from the early 19003. A normal way of defining phenomena is to do as they do in encyclopaedias - by an abstract sentence that is catching the meaning in a neutral way. In relation to the phenomena of study circles, this way of solving the task is problematic, to say the least. In fact, the meaning of a study circle has been the object of conflicts many times during its history. It has even been looked upon as an impossible or false problem. The first leader of the Workers Educational Association, Richard Sandler, wrote: If someone tells you: This is exactly the way a study circle should look and this is the way it should work - You must answer him right in the face: you are a humbug, sir, a genuine humbug, sir!4 However, I want to pursuit the project in spite of this strong advice. His context and purpose was different from mine. I have to define the phenomena in order to present it to an audience that have not a lot of experience of study circles, while Sandler was involved in a debate about decision-making for the future. The aim here is to present a description that is rich in meaning,5 grounded6 and thick.7 I will start indicating the meaning of study circles by pointing out some general traits on form, content and quantity. Then I present two "portraits" of the phenomenon, in order to give a glimpse of their "flesh and blood".
3 4

Larsson, 1998 Sandler (1937) Authors translation from Swedish: Om det kommer ngon och sger er: just s hr ska en cirkel se ut, och just s skall den arbeta - svara honom d mitt i ansiktet: you are a humbug, sir. En riktig kta humbug, herre! 5 In a phenomenologist tradition the description of concepts is the kernal and it must be done through considering the complete variation of possible instances of a phenomenon. 6 Glaser & Strauss (1967) uses the term grounded about theories that are formulated from the bases of everyday contexts. 7 The social antropologist Geertz (1993) writes about thick descriptions where he argues that understanding of a culture must be based on concrete pictures of everyday life.

Often people understand it as a form of pedagogy - with an ideal form8. However, it is also referred to as the activities that are organised through the study association. The latter definition is based on the fact that the study circles in the Swedish context are institutionalised, with administration, state funding as well as an institutional history. In this text, study circles are discussed with this latter institutional definition. Study circles will therefore be the activities that are organised through the 11 study associations, that exist and which main task is to organise study circles.

The study circle grammar

If we take an institutional perspective one can notice certain common traits - a common grammar, different from what is the norm in ordinary schools. Tyack & Tobin have described such general traits of ordinary schools as "grammar of schooling"9. If a "study circle grammar" should be expressed in the same manner the following "rules" would indicate dominating features10: 1. There are no examinations or merits to be gained. 2. Participation is "voluntary. 3. One operates with the expectation of a limited number of persons in a circle, normally somewhere between 5 - 10 persons. 4. Time is often treated in a different way from ordinary schools - often study circles will meet for 3 hours once a week with a break in the middle. A study circle will often contain 10 to 15 such meetings. 5. A circle will have a leader, who does not have to be an expert - it can be one of the participants. On the other hand, there are often experts acting as leaders. There are exceptions from this pattern, but it indicates a normality, that differs from the "grammar of schooling". Thus, even if there is no distinct pedagogy, there are certain characteristics, i.e., a study circle grammar that is different from the grammar of schooling.

The content in study circles

Study circles have no national curriculum and no other state regulations about the choice of content. Content is also very diverse.
8

Larsson, 1995, on the language game of folkbildning, here translated to the expression free and volutary popular education and sometimes popular adult education 9 Tyack & Tobin, 1994. 10 Larsson, 1995

An illustration to this diversity can be the names of some of the study circles, that participants in an interview study took part in (Andersson et al. 1996). The circles had names such as: English language, Music, Interpreting the Bible, Building a musical instrument, Weaving, Fishing, On the way to the future, Computers, Circle for relatives to persons with dementia, Writing, Babyswimming, Summer in the fields, Japanese sewing, My farm in European Union, Minerals in Sweden, "Sing, Swedish people1", Gardening, Cooking, "Bergsmansgrdens Lina" - a literature circle, Medieval songs and dances, Your dog, Healthier sports, English for beginners, Referee - circle (soccer), Singing in a choir, Ceramics, Circle for dementia people at a service-home, Weaving ribbons, German language, The community and the environment, By your own strength, Matters of influence for the retired, Water colours, Rock-music and, finally, Conversations about life. Judging from these assorted names, it is obvious that content is very diverse. It even creates an anarchistic impression, which is not completely wrong. There are statistics that classify content into six content areas (unfortunately very crude). From that we can learn that some areas are more dominant than others. In 1998, 49% were classified as aesthetic, 19 % social science/information, 8 % languages, 8 % human/behavioural science and 6 % as maths/natural science (Folkbildningsrdet, 1999c).

Study circles as a mass-phenomenon in Sweden.

The first study association, created in 1912, was the ABF, linked to the workers movement. 57 study circles were registered the first year (Arvidsson, 1996:41). Over the years new associations have been created, all linked to popular movements or other organisations in the civil society. Thus, study associations were started to serve the temperance movement, free-church movement, and movements linked to farmers as well as white-collar workers. Also liberal and conservative forces formed study associations, and there is a study association linked to the university extension movement. The last association that was created is related to sports. One can note that these 11 study associations cover a broad range of sectors in the civil society. Another side of the study circle's position in the society is participation. Between 1992 and 1998 the number of study circles has fluctuated between 316 000 to 336 000 and with between 2,7 and 2,9 million participants (Folkbildningsrdet, 1999b). The total number of study hours has increased steadily in the 1990's, in spite of decreasing public financial support. In 1998 there were, on average, about 37 study hours in each study circle.

Since many people participate in several circles during a year, some are counted twice or several times. Several estimates have therefore been made concerning the number of people who have been involved, i. e. has participated one or more times during a year. The estimated numbers have varied between 1,2 to 1,6 million, out of a population of close to 9 million, which is a considerable share (Johnsson & Ghler, 1995: 13, Svensson, 1996: 95). These figures are almost ten times as high as the figures in the middle of this century, when there were less than 31 000 study circles with some 315 000 participants (Johansson, 1954: 239). Another figure from a relatively recent survey (Johnsson & Ghler, 1995) is that 75 % of the adult population has participated at least once in a study circle. For 10% of the population it is a regular part of their life and it is reported that for half of them study circle participation is a life style. The international picture indicates more or less a disappearance of adult education related to the civil society (Korsgaard, 1997). Adult education has in stead, during the last decades, been subordinated to local needs to compete for the attraction from the global capital by skilled labour for a cheap prise, i. e. the market (Jackson, 1997, Wellton, 1997, Walters, 1999). In contrast it seems that study circle participation is a mass phenomenon in contemporary Sweden, especially for women who constitute 2/3 of the participants. However, also in Sweden there is a constant struggle about the meaning of education, not least in relation to the dominance of economistic views of education during the last decade (OftedalThelhaug, 1990, Larsson, 1997b). Financial support to study circles from the state and the municipalities are contested - conservatives are critical and are cutting such support in municipalities were they are in power.

Portrait of a study circle: Bjrkvik

In order to create some link to the lived experience of the reader, concrete pictures and narratives will contribute to the understanding. It will give a basis for the readers conception of the really existing study circles. The chosen case is picked from a text by Hartman. His description is based on participant observation11:
11

Hartman (1996) pp 30 - 31. Translation by Staffan Larsson

The study circle was organised by the local history association in a rural community. Hartman finds the participants in the local library: In the circle this evening there are 8 participants, including the leader. They have all lived in Bjrkvik for a long time and are from the middle- to the old-aged. The members have been the same the last years. There is an open and informal structure where participants own initiatives and propositions plays an important role. Since 1988 they have written a diary and this time they start with reading aloud the text from last meeting. From this one could understand that they have focussed on the dairy in Bjrkvik the last years. One of the female participants started with showing a new newspaper article about a project for unemployed. This project was related to a railway that was created to transport timber from Bjrkvik to the coast, in the beginning of this century. The aim was to save timber from the attacks of a butterfly. Today there is only part of the old bank from the railway left. In the informal conversation, that was typical for the way the circle was operating, they discussed the possibility to use the remaining part of the bank for tourists. A sketch for a trail for bikes starting or ending in Bjrkvik was made as a way of leading the stream of tourists to Bjrkvik. Another spontaneous input was a finding from one of the participants farm. It was a page from the local telephone directory from the 30 ies. A number of images from the inter-war period was presented. One of the participants told that he had a directory from the time of the last war at home. He promised to fetch it in the break he had to transport his son from his sport activities. Eventually the circle returned to the theme of the local dairies. With the help of lexicons from the library they found out about the origin of the concept dairy and its way into the Swedish language. There was a break for drinking the coffee that was brought by the participants. Finally the local play about the old times interrogations by the church was discussed. This play was going to be a part of the arrangements this summer on the yearly returnees day, when old inhabitants meet in their old community. The participants knowledge of each other was a prominent part of work in the circle. This means that participants were aware of each other's special interest and special knowledge. The "specialist" often answered questions - the other just turned towards her or him. The leader

of the circle kept a low profile and did not speak a lot. The informality in the operation of the circle was obvious. At 9.30 it is time for breaking up. This quotation shows just one circle, with its idiosyncrasies, but it gives us some idea about what it could be. It becomes clear that in this case it is different from many classroom activities.

The Bjrkvik case and the civil society.

It is obvious that the participants form the curriculum of the circle. In that sense they are autonomous and not subordinated to any hierarchies. It is a direct and participatory democracy. There is one indication of a possible strategic action in a Habermasian sense - the idea that they could lead the stream of tourists to Bjrkvik with the help of the railway bank. However, there are no clear indication about what kind of consequences this would lead to - if it is strategic in relation to the economic system or if it is part of their commitment to the local community. Another side is that this possible influence of the economic system is not central for the events as a whole. Generally, the conversation is focussed on the participant's interest in history and knowing more about the specific local history. The content of the conversation is very contextual in the sense that their own lives, local events and plans are interwoven. There is little evidence that the minds of the participants are in the control of a limited discourse that is set by media. However, the content is very traditional, the purpose is not to change society in any clear way - it is a harmless activity in civil society. This is far away from the aspirations of the social movements. On the other hand, one can argue that the circle constitutes an agora - a meeting-place where deliberations about how to form the society are a potentiality12. We can see how they touches on other activities that have been formed by local initiatives - often as a struggle against the slow decline that many rural areas have experienced.

12

Compare Waldn (1994), Andersson et al. (1996)

The global economy does not interfere with the circle, but the content as such is very much touched by it - the dairies and the railway that disappeared. The circle is not changing this, but rather they are reflecting on it. They did not have any aim to change these processes. On the personal side, it seems as if the participants had a rather equal relation. There are signs of participants that are introducing new themes - there are no real clear signs of a hierarchic control. Neither do they seek to legitimate their decisions - they seem to act as a self-governed group. The general impression is that the circle seems to have a complex relation to what can be called the civil society. It is also obvious that the civil society can be a trivial thing and something that is not very challenging to the state and corporate interests or the economic and political system. In our case it seem to be a side-activity. It has signs of a deliberative democracy, but without a clear cause or a real problem that is pressing to be solved.

Portrait of a participant
A portrait of a participant can give another insight. In this case it is based on an interview and was presented in a governmental report "The Study Circle Society".13 In this case it is a handicraft-circle - they are making canteles, an instrument that is linked to a Finnish culture. The participant that is portrayed here is a Finnish immigrant - we can call him Juhani14. He came, as so many of his countrymen, to Sweden in the beginning of the 70ies. The family moved directly to Gothenburg and got a flat in Hammarkullen, one of the newly built suburbs in the northern part of the city. The area was not even completed when they moved in. The standard was high in the flats and the area was friendly for the children with nice nature surrounding.

13 14

Andersson et al, 1996, pp 47 - 50. Translation by Staffan Larsson The description is based on Andersson, Laginder, Larsson & Sundgren (1996) pp 47 - 50

10

It was a new suburb and there were lots of available flats, and in the 70ies there were plenty of jobs also, so it was natural that I choose an environment close to nature. At that time I had four small kids and it meant a lot that it was close to nature and easy to reach the school. They did not have to cross motorways and such. Everything was in the area, if you say so. Last year Juhani and his family moved to Grdsten - another area rather close to Hammarkullen. It had been too noisy - Juhani here refers to immigrants moving in. Juhani is now an unemployed carpenter in his 50ies. He spends his free time with the Finnish cultural club Finngoths. His interest in clubs he brought from Finland: There he was engaged as a couch in a soccer club. The Finngoths was started in 1971. Juhani was a participant from the start and the first thing they did was to build a sauna. We had a lot of members when we told them we had a sauna Juhani tells. Almost every night the club occupies him, either with the activities as such or with different responsible post he has had in the club through the years. It is primarily in the motor and in the music sections he is active. Except the sauna but that is not an interest it is natural, a way of life. In the motor section Juhani is working with car racing and the sons are also interested and have licences for racing. At some occasions he has been study circle leader for training functionaries. Right now one is working with organising a racecourse and to organise an elite-race this autumn. But the interest in music is as important as in cars, Juhani tells. He has participated in several study-circles in music, on one hand about classical music and on the other hand in learning to play the mandolin. He is also singing in the choir and has together with it sung at several musical festivals around the country. The choir is also organised as a study circle. Now Juhani participates in a handicraft circle where they made a cantele, which is a traditional instrument from Carelia. The circle is arranged by Finngoths in co-operation with ABF (WEA). There are 10 participants, as well women as men, who meet once a week. Juhani has several different instruments at home and this is not the first time he builds a cantele in a circle. Earlier he built an instrument with 5 strings. Now he

11

builds a 10-stringed cantele. I wanted to show the Finns that ordinary carpenters can do this kind of very delicate carpenting. And I did that in fact, I did one such small instrument during two evenings and that is very fast he says. It is the fine carpenting the soft wood and the unusual ways to put the pieces together that is the challenge, he explains. I am a carpenter constructing housing. There is a bit of a difference in fact. You seldom use that soft and nice material. And all the material comes from Finland. One learns to work with those soft materials as for instance spruce. It is so soft that you cannot put the nail on your fingers at it - it will go through at once. So you have to be very careful. And also, if I will glue something at my work I will put a screw or a nail into it after having glued. But here you must glue as careful as it will hold. (...) It is exiting; it is always when one starts to build. One is not clear about if it is possible to play on or not, until it is complete. If there will be only a small mistake, a small hole somewhere or some air somewhere, you have to throw it away. But it is not only for the sake of the challenge and the excitement that Juhani participates in study circles. What he more than anything else will remember is the comradeship in the club. The friendship in the club, that will be in my memory he says. Yes, that is important, at least in the Finnish club, that we stick together. It is a way to be together. The Finngoths are a large club. It is different persons in different study circles, but Juhani does not mind that the persons vary. In fact he does not mind working by himself. I am a loner, I prefer to work alone. A couple of years ago the construction company where Juhani worked suddenly went bankrupt, and Juhani become unemployed after having worked all his life. I started as 10 years old and earned enough to buy my first bike he says. Unemployment was a terrible experience. A lot of time was spent before the Tele. It was almost the whole life, when I was unemployed. I only looked at the Tele The risk to fall outside of society is big when you dont have a job, he thinks. Especially for Finns, he thinks, it is their culture, as it were. The Finns have a rather bad habit. If we are unemployed or get a lot of free time, then you get...One can see when you walk in the square how it ends.

12

If you are unemployed it is life-important that you can fill the days with meaningful activities, says Juhani. You must have something to do or the psychiatric hospital will be filled. After a while, Juhani had the possibility to work full-time at the Finngoths as a job paid by the Labour Market Agency. Now it is among his duties to repair the clubhouse, the furniture and fix everything. This was, what can one say, a salvation for me, that I could begin working again. he says. The study-circle and the rest of the activities have got a different meaning for him since he was unemployed. In the circle he can relax from the problems in everyday-life and at the same time he will meet the others in the same situation and that is sharing his interests. There are several unemployed in the circle. Juhani do not think that the activity would have been differently organised if they had been organised by the club. But he thinks that it feels more important to be there every time when you are in a study circle. Maybe it that it is more necessary to come then, or you would not get your marks in the protocol of attendance. No, I do not know, have never thought about it On the other hand he do think there is a difference between the organisation through the club and activities run by the municipality. Exactly where, he has problems to point out. I feel it and that is an important feeling he says. I do not know, but I do not think you get the same. It is seldom you find a person like Raimo as a teacher. You cannot get that through the municipality. You feel that you are coming home when you come here. And you know that you will have a cup of coffee and you are a part of the group and if you need help, he will come and help. The club Finngoths study circles are nowadays all organised through ABF (WEA). Before, also Studiefrmjandet were behind some of the circles. Juhani thinks that it does not matter which study association that is organising the circles. The main thing is that they have the proper material you need he argues. That there is a study association behind the circles is also important from an economical angel. Even if the contribution for each circle is not very much, they mean a lot in all. Some of the tools Juhani thinks have been bought for the money they get from ABF and thy

13

are also helped with space. The participants pay their own material to their instruments. They pay 600 crowns for participation in the circle. Then they get as well the drawing as material. Juhani thinks it is value for the money. Yes it is all right. If you do something very nice it can also cost some. One obvious conclusion is that there is no single motive for participating. Juhanis study circle participation could rather be conceived of as a piece in his life-context, with complex connection to different aspects of his life history and life-situation. This was also the conclusion in the report about the main pattern - study circles had a multitude of significances or meanings, even in the individual case15.

The study circles, the civil society and the state

The history of the study circles provides an interesting case of the complicated relations between the civil society and especially the state. Study circles and the emerging democracy Study circles are considered to belong to what was, and to some extent still is, called the "free and voluntary" popular education. It is obvious that the quality "free and voluntary" indicated activities that were part of the civil society. Here I operate with a definition of the civil society that differentiates between state, market and the civil society (Cohen & Arato, 1995). Through the concept "civil society" we have a link to democracy. The "free and voluntary" popular education was only partially developed within the context of popular movements. Popular libraries were created, especially in the temperance movement and the workers' movement. The early study circles were often focused on the reading of books from the library that were discussed in the meetings (Arvidsson, 1996:31). Outside of the popular movements, folk high schools and lecture associations aimed at enlightening the broad public. Folk high schools were only gradually linked to popular movements and not in any significant degree until after the First World War. Today those institutions still exist, although they have changed; the popular libraries have been taken over by the
15

Larsson et al, 1997

14

municipalities, and the study associations that organise study circles are less linked to popular movements. There are also more folk high schools than ever before - 147 in 1999 (Folkbildningsrdet, 1999: 3). They are, to a greater extent than ever, linked to organisations, movements and churches. Their objectives have changed, not least because of their role as an alternative to the ordinary school system (Berntsson, 1999). This role often mirrors the tension between wanting to be different and, in effect, being similar to the ordinary schools. It is obvious that the establishment of a formal democracy was a cornerstone that had great implications for the rule of the country. In Sweden a full and equal vote was gained in 1918 (Ehnmark, 1994). However, another side of the establishment of a democratic society was the emergence of a democratic civil society. This civil society developed before the breakthrough of formal democracy. If the existence of associations and free and voluntary movements, as well as some possibility to debate and form opinions, are pivotal aspects of a civil society, it is obvious that the end of the 19th century experienced the foundation of a civil society in Sweden. It was the time for creating a great number of associations, with all kinds of objectives. It was also the time for the establishment of popular movements. Linked to this was a more and more open debate in newspapers and through public meetings. Not least was a democratic culture - a "culture of meetings" established through new structures as popular movements and other associations that were growing rapidly at the turn of the century. The movements became arenas for learning of democratic decision-making (learning conceived as participating in collective action is stressed by some contemporary theories on learning - (Lave & Wenger, 1991, Larsson 1997a, Kilgore, 1999). The study circles were part and parcel of this development. In the movements at the turn of the century, activities were aimed at changing the society fundamentally, in conflict with the established power and cultural elite (Arvidsson, 1989). The movements as well as other democratically ruled associations constituted a democratic civil society before structures like the state and local governments were put under a formal democratic rule through the equal vote. Studies organised by the movements supported mobilisation and preparation for the political power of the masses in a fully developed democracy. Oscar Olsson considered as the father of the study circles launched the concept "self-education". The essence of the concept was that the participants as a collective commanded their own education (Arvidsson, 1996:10). Since the activities in the study associations basically were controlled by the movements - decisions

15

about the form and content of the studies were made democratically within the movements - it was possible to study what was relevant for political work as well as other interests within the movements. Dewey expressed the intellectual significance of this: Until the democratic criterion of the intrinsic significance of every growing experience is recognised, we shall be intellectually confused by the demand for adaptation to external aims (Dewey, 1966:109). There is reason to believe that participation in popular movements and study circles was a better preparation for the execution of power in a democratic state than was the educational institution that the elite went through, i.e., the authoritarian grammar school. Even though there was a strong tendency to celebrate scientific knowledge, study circles gave in fact space for diverse worldviews. In that sense pluralism in worldviews was in fact supported by the organisational structure of independent study associations with different ideological connections. Diversity was also expressed by the fact that membership during at least the first part of the 20th century often was in the form of a membership in one of a number of movements that each offered a context for many human needs. Since they covered such a broad spectrum of needs one can talk about life forms, which also expressed pronounced identities. To be part of the workers movement often meant some kind of involvement in a conglomerate of organisations and their activities: political participation, union activities, study circles, youth clubs, consumers co-operatives as well as entertainment such as theatre and ball-room dancing (Ambjrnsson, 1988). The material bases for the activities were often People's Houses and People's Parks, and a number of journals were part of the memberships in different organisations. The same pattern existed within the farmers movement - with youth clubs, banks, producers co-operatives, study circles and party activities as well as all kinds of entertainment in special houses. With some differences in the kind of activities that took place, free churches and the temperance movements also offered their distinctive life forms and identities. Within each there were common interests, values and convictions. Thus, participation in study circles during the first half of the century was often part of a relatively strong, sometimes class based, relation to a specific movement. An influential civil society In the first part of the 20th century the popular movements and the popular education that was linked to them seem to have been in the centre of a civil society. The institutions that form the

16

basis of a civil society are families, associations and free and voluntary movements, as well as different structures for public discourse (Cohen & Arato, 1995). The movement activities involved families in a fundamental way as members; movements were conglomerates of associations and they had strong voices in the public discourse through the press and public speeches. They were in sharp relief to the state and the market. As Arvidsson (1985) has pointed out, there was in the early period a fundamental conflict between the movements and the values in the state and the market. However, eventually they had a very strong influence on the state and the market. Not least when democracy put the state in the hands of those who were the elite of the movements and the popular education. The market was not only influenced through political bodies but also through the effects of strong unions as well as consumers and producers co-operatives. The movements and popular education aimed at changing the society in line with Utopia, which had normative foundations. They strove for equality, the betterment of their own living conditions or for a better life through a sober society, or they acted because of their faith. In that way, the study circle activities and the resulting knowledge became pivotal in the civil society as well as in relation to the power of that society. The civil society was therefore not isolated, but a potent force with an impact on the state and the market in forming the society. During the latter part of the 20th century the movements have weakened, the involvement of the members has become less deep. In fact, already in the 1950s there was talk about a crisis in the popular movements. Johansson (1954) draws the conclusion that one has to foresee a decreasing number of active members in the movements. He considers this to be a democratic problem; there is a risk that the movements become instruments for a small minority of citizens. Frazer (1999) points out that this talk about a crisis has been part of the discourse in the UK during the last half century, which also seems to be the case in Sweden. Another change has been the gradual dissolution of the strong relation between movements and study circles, not formally, but in the minds of the participants, not least because of the breakdown of the movement cultures as life forms and as identities. We can see the results today; the participants in ABF (the workers' study association) do not differ from those in other study associations, and 28 % of the participants do not know which study association organised the circle they last participated in (Johnsson & Ghler, 1995). The ideology of the study association organising the studies is of little importance to many. Another side of the coin is that the study circles have not experienced the same activity crises as the

17

popular movements did. They are still involving large numbers of the population. How should that be interpreted? One argument, often put forward, is that the collective orientation of the earlier period is not prevalent in the same way today. People do not study for the sake of struggling for a sober society or for emancipation of their class; they do not take pride in being an informed citizen in spite of being a worker or a farmer without formal schooling. It seems as if the expansion in numbers has happened in areas linked to individual interests not related to societal change or any other activity that could be seen as a contribution to the civil society. Thus, there is evidence of a trend towards more individualistic motives for joining a study circle. On the other hand, this does not necessarily mean that studies related to activities in associations or unions necessarily have decreased in absolute numbers. One survey study in 1992 indicates that 5% had such purposes for their participation (Svensson, 1996: 62). Translated into absolute numbers 5% in 1992 is equivalent to 55% in 1950/51. People who were active in associations were over-represented among the participants in general, in 1992. The conclusion will be that there is still a link, on the level of participants, between associations and unions and the study circles. The collective orientation has not disappeared, but the number with explicit motives indicating that kind of a collectivistic purpose is small in relation to the total number of participants. The conclusion will be that the relation to movements, associations and unions is still there, but other motives and activities have overshadowed it. It is not the study associations or the study circles that are in a state of crisis, but rather the popular movements, especially those that were most vigorous in the early period. In a recent report written by political scientists the crises among parties and popular movements are highlighted. The number of active members is decreasing. The same pattern has been reported in many countries (Frazer, 1999: 6). However, we should be open to the possibilities that study circles contribute to democracy in other ways than the traditional. New patterns of influence and new views on democracy put the spotlight on the possibility that other aspects of study circle participation seem to be potentials for a discourse on democracy. This will be shown later in this text. Study circles and the state. The description of the sharp division between the free and voluntary popular education and the state was valid in the beginning of the 20th century. In spite of this the state was very early part of the development as a financial supporter. As a matter

18

of fact, I think this case is very interesting, since it challenges some notions about the relation between the state and the civil society. One can even pose the question: Has the state support been vital for the survival of the study circles and the development into a grand scale phenomenon? In 1912 the first study association was created. The acute reason for this was the prospect of getting financial support from the state. Throughout the history of the study circles it is reasonable to suppose that the continuing state support has been fundamental to the size of participation as well as the development of a study circle institution with a strong administration. As can be expected, it has also constituted the basis for state interference in the free and voluntary popular education. A number of regulations for the use of the state subsidy have been introduced during the course of the century - each influencing the activities in some way. However, the general impression is that this interference has not in a substantial way changed the heart of the matter - that the study circles are voluntary and subordinated to the interests of participants and organisations within the civil society. The study associations have always been and are still independent from the state and the study associations and folk high schools, in fact, elect the body that distributes the state subsidy among them. The influence of the state is more indirect, i.e., through the possibilities that are offered in relation to the subsidy and the rules for achieving it. The most remarkable aspect of the independence of the study associations is their independence from the state when it comes to the content in the study circles. There have always been very wide frames for what is possible to study or do in a study circle; nowadays there are almost no restrictions, as could be understood by the names of the circles that were presented earlier. It seems reasonable to assume that very few educational institutions are producing such a wide variety of contents. That it is happening in an institution heavily supported by the state may be unexpected. In our case, the effect seems to be the opposite. One can assume that the broad variation of content is promoted through the state subsidy, since lack of support would reduce the whole sector. Without state support study associations would probably have to rely on customers with money, like employers or different educational projects from the state - they would thus be more subordinated under other institutions and organisations. That would probably reduce the possibility for content that is not linked to the educational policies of the state or considered as an investment for future gains within working life. Studies related to the life-world of the participants would probably be reduced,

19

especially those less affluent. However, it is possible to use a market metaphor. As an effect of the relative autonomy in relation to the popular movements and other organisations, there is a tendency to do what there is a demand for, without much normative evaluation (Assarsson & Larsson, 1996). However, this market metaphor has a limited use in several ways. First, the market is basically not a market of money, but of participants. One cannot exchange many participants who pay little for a few who pay a lot. Secondly, there is a restriction as regards commercial activities, i. e., to offer education on the market, where the buyers are companies and so on, is prohibited. There are signs that this state interference has put a check on some of the study associations' interest in working with a commercial incentive. In that sense the "anti-commercial" regulations have had some effect. The other side is that organisations in the civil society still have access to and use their study associations as a way of training and educating their members and functionaries. It is obvious that the study associations serve organisations that have a normative base, but there are also signs that many functionaries operate on a normative basis, as they try to form the content or promote content that contributes to a civil society (Lindgren 1996). Thus, a complicated pattern emerges. The result is anyway, that study circles provide the civil society with great opportunities. The sharp line between state and civil society seems here to be somewhat softened. The lack of regulations on content, which seems to be the overall situation, also means a flexibility to create circles with new content in a very uncomplicated way. This gives the civil society an opportunity to culture studies in line with the issues that are at stake at a particular time. Nuclear power, European union, water pollution, workers health, inequalities, civil disobedience - all are possible to study, if there are enough participants to make it worthwhile for a study association to initiate a circle. Study circles can be initiated from different sources. The study association often does it, nationally or locally. Often different organisations - NGOs which are linked to the study associations, take the initiative and, finally, it may be a group of would-be participants who suggest a circle to a study association. I hope that this relatively long introduction has contributed to creating some notions about the history, contexts and contents of the study circles. The next step will be to focus on democracy in relation to the actually existing study circles in our time.

Seven aspects of democracy in study circles

20

The significance of the study circles for democracy must be related to the broader context of the state of the civil society as a whole - i.e., in what condition democracy is. It is to be expected that there is no unequivocal meaning in a concept that has such a central position on the political arena as democracy has. There are many meanings of the concept, and the theoretical discourse is complex. In this text different conceptions of democracy are used as interpretational tools to make sense of the study circles as they are presented in empirical studies. It seems as if different theories highlight different aspects of democracy. One can note that those aspects are not necessarily excluding each other, but rather complementary in throwing light on different sides of the study circles. My aim is to create a multifaceted picture of the question we are trying to address. The investigation is organised in subtitles where each is related to different notions of democracy. Finally, there is a discussion on the question whether study circles contribute to the authority of the citizens. It is our conviction that democracy in the end must be about the power of ordinary citizens, i.e., the people. Even if many theoretical constructions are used, the elitist view, that democracy is about competition for the votes between elites, is not used in this text as an aspect (Cohen & Arato, 1995). Equality When the idea of popular education grew strong during the 19th century, it was a challenge to the view that education was a privilege for the elite. In fact, it was considered as a contradiction in the meaning of the term - one talked about the educated class. How could this be accommodated with a view where the lower classes should be educated? The same contrast can be linked to democracy it is the opposite of an elite rule: The idea of democracy is that all citizens shall have the same importance when it comes to decisions about the common future (Peterson et al, 1998). Equality is in the heart of the matter of democracy. In contrast to other kinds of rules theocracy, aristocracy, oligarchy, monarchy, or plutocracy democracy is based on a conception of a rule that was not in the hands of an elite. In both popular education and democracy equality is fundamental. Fundamental to democratic rule is, of course, general and equal vote, as well as freedom of speech, organisational freedom, and competition about the power of government in free elections. Many countries do not meet these requirements in our time, and the people become powerless against the ruling elite. What is sometimes called a formal democracy is very important as a controlling instance. However, more could be expected from

21

democracy - a more ambitious democracy could be depicted. Lindgren (1996) writes about a deeper democracy, where there is also a focus on equal conditions for influence in the society. The notion of a participatory democracy operates with the same view (Pateman, 1970) This view has a stronghold among those formulating the "selfunderstanding" within the free and voluntary popular education as well as in texts from the government. In the last governmental bill on popular adult education it is expressed very distinctly: The state subsidy to popular adult education shall: ...make it possible for people to influence their life situation and form a commitment to take part in the developments of the society by for instance political, cultural and union work (Prop. 1997/98: 115). It is followed by a passage stating that priorities should be in line with an equality principle; i. e., there is a compensatory logic behind, where those with a weak position should be given priority. In this perspective popular adult education, of which the study circles are a part, is given a central role for contributing to conditions, where people can get increased influence over the society, which, in turn, leads to a more equal distribution of power. If many actors in the "arena of formulation", where policy creation is the task, have expressed such an equality perspective, one may ask about the realities: Who are the participants? Is participation in line with an equality perspective? One may pose the question even more strongly, as follows: A recent study about effective political participation in Sweden indicated depressing results in relation to equality (Pettersson et al., 1998). Large and increasing differences between immigrants and natives were noted and there were large differences between the unemployed and those with a job. They also found large class differences and that higher officials dominated the public discourse as well as the public decision-making. On the positive side, gender differences and regional differences were small. This reality will constitute the background for the question: Are study circles working as a counter-force to the inequalities in political power? It is possible to give a relatively clear answer to the questions, since participation patterns have been described in several investigations. It becomes obvious that study circles are not equal in terms of participation. The same kind of pattern that was described in relation to political power is generally found in study circle participation. Higher social classes have a higher degree of activity, and there are more people who have participated at least once, than in the lower social classes (Johnsson & Ghler, 1995). Workers are underrepresented among the highly active as well as among those that have participated at least once.

22

An aberration from the general pattern is that farmers have the highest level of highly active participants and that businessmen are the ones with the lowest level. The unemployeds have the lowest level among the highly active. Jonsson & Ghler (1995: 57) point at the differences between immigrants from countries outside of the Nordic countries and natives as being especially large - the participation of those immigrants are only 40% of that of the native Swedes. The conclusion will be that study circle participation is unequal. On the other hand, it is more equal than other forms of adult education. Differences in participation between persons with different educational backgrounds are small (Johnsson & Ghler, 1995: 23); in other words, inequalities seem to be more related to class than to educational background. Another conclusion is that study circles do not constitute a counter-force against the tendencies of marginalisation or exclusion of unemployed and immigrants in the Swedish society. The counter-force hypothesis seems to be false and the correlation hypothesis seems to be supported. Study circles do not belong to the people as opposed to the elite, but rather seems to contain the same kind of inequalities that are found in society in general - they have been part of the normality in that sense. However, the most prominent difference from this kind of normality is the fact that almost two thirds of the participants are women (Svensson, 1996:58), as an oppressed group - with less pay and with very little part in the power elite, especially when it comes to the corporate sector. In that sense, study circles seem to have the potential as a counter-force. However, according to the investigation of political activities they do not have less power than men do. It seems as if that conclusion presupposes a limitation of the scope of political influence on the formal political structures and an exclusion of other power structures, where it is obvious that there is a gender difference. Another theme, less acknowledged, is the generation or age aspect. Study circles have participants from all age groups. There is, in fact, a slight over-representation of the age group 55 - 74 years, in relation to their share of the population, but on the whole participation mirrors the demography of the population. This is in sharp contrast to other educational institutions, other forms of adult education included. One can even draw the conclusion that study circles are the most important, and sometimes the only educational institution which is realistically available to half of the population of adults, i. e., those who are more than 50 years old. It is difficult to judge if this group is less powerful - they are more active in political parties and in elections, but they take less initiatives, have less contacts with other people and less self-confidence (Pettersson,

23

1998:83). It seems as if the younger generation is better equipped to influence in individualistic ways, while older persons are more active in formal and collective types of influence. So, the final conclusion will be that study circles probably will have a counter-force potential in relation to gendered power and also in relation to strengthening the older half of the adult population. In relation to class, and especially when it comes to marginalisation of unemployed and non-Nordic immigrants they do not operate as a counter-force. It is obvious, too, that the latter groups are underprivileged in education, housing and health, as well as in income, i.e., other aspects than those of political power. Relations We now leave the question of participation per se and look into the consequences of taking part - the process. Is it possible that interaction itself within the circle can make any impact on democracy? Several contributions to democratic theory have underlined the importance for democracy of the interaction and the creation of relations between citizens. The philosopher Dewey presented in 1916 such a view in his main work, "Democracy and Education". He argues that overcoming the isolation of individuals and the lack of interest in what is common, is the heart of the matter in democracy. He contends, first, that this has to do with constructing common interests and that citizens, to an increasing degree, count on common interests as central for the social order (Dewey, 1966:86,87). Secondly, he states, that democracy is a matter of habits that result in the mutual adaptation of social groups to each other when they meet in different situations: a democracy is more than a form of government; it is primarily a mode of associated living, of conjoint communicated experience. The extension in space of the number of individuals who participate in an interest, so that each has to refer his own action to that of others, and consider the action of others to give point and direction to his own, is equivalent to the breaking down of those barriers of class, race and national territory which kept men from perceiving the full import of their activity. These more numerous and more varied points of contact denote a greater diversity of stimuli to which an individual has to respond; they consequently put a premium on variation in his action. They secure a liberation of powers which remain suppressed as long as the incitations to action are partial, as they must be in a group which in its exclusiveness shuts out many interests." (Dewey, 1966: 87).

24

This view, with roots in pragmatism, gives democracy a meaning that is far from the formal democracy linked to the peoples control of political power. Rather, he seems to focus on the small scale, everyday opinions and decision-making, and the fostering of a collectivist attitude. The political scientist Putnam (1993) argues along the same lines based on an investigation of political efficiency in different regions of Italy. According to him, citizens must develop horizontal relations to build social capital (Field, 1998). Horizontal relations are based on equality rather than hierarchy. Co-operation through hierarchies is denoted as vertical relations. Horizontal relations create foundations for a commitment from the citizens, which has an impact on the efficiency of governance. The base for this spirit among the citizens is argued to be the mutual thrust which is formed when people co-operate - in choirs, soccer teams and other associations - and that there is a habit of mutual aid within and outside of the family. How can the study circles be connected to the landscape that Dewey and Putnam have painted? It is obvious that the study circles are meeting-places, where people do things together. Therein lies a potential. If the study circles are non-authoritarian, which is always claimed, they should furthermore constitute a potential for building horizontal relations. What is the empirical evidence? In several studies it has been highlighted that togetherness is a very strong theme in the minds of the participants. In the interviews in a qualitative investigation of the meaning of participating, The Study Circle Society, togetherness was one of six main categories and one that was expressed by all those who were interviewed (Andersson et al, 1996). In Svenssons (1996) survey 33% indicate that their motive for participating was to meet others, togetherness - here respondents were forced to choose only one answer. This should mean that one third seem to see relations as the main reason to participate. That is obviously in line with Deweys view stressing that the individuals isolation should be overcome. Women choose the "togetherness" motive to a greater extent than men do (Svensson, 1996:62). Considering that the overwhelming majority of participants are women, there should be some support for the conclusion that the study circle plays a special role for them as a place to interact and thus create relations, that we can assume are horizontal. For the 10% of the population, who are regular participants, this becomes even more obvious. More than half of the participants who are handicapped see togetherness as their primary motive (Svensson, 1996:63). It is easy to draw the conclusion that the preference of the togetherness theme in some instances is related to isolation and to overcoming it. However, as is shown by the fact

25

that study circle participants are more active in associations than the average citizen, they have access to other arenas, with opportunities to engage in co-operation through horizontal relations. Based on their experiences of study circles the authors of The Study Circle Society analyse and discuss the kind of relation that could be expected. It is characterised as task-oriented and with a controlled intimacy (Andersson et al. 1996:185 - 191). Being part of a study circle normally does not involve any expectations of relations outside of the circle - it is a delimited relation. Another trait is that one meets new people in study circles - people who sometimes represent other backgrounds and values than do those one normally interacts with. One is reminded of the Deweyan view that meetings between social groups will result in new habits based on mutual adaptation. A fundamental condition for the relations in study circles is that there is no coercion - participation is voluntary. Furthermore, no tests or other evaluations or exams, that may create a vertical relation between the judge and the judged, are normally part of the studies. This constitutes the basis for assuming that relations on the whole are horizontal. However, the pedagogy is varying to a great extent and there are obviously a lot of study circles where the leader dominates. The conclusion will therefore be only a partial support for the assumption that relations are horizontal. However, if we reverse this proposition we will also draw the conclusion that study circles are very bad places for developing vertical relations of domination as patrons - clients. There is no power base that can be the foundation for someone to create a hierarchy, except communicative power, and that is not often appreciated, unless it is task-oriented. If there is something to the citizen-spirit, that Putnam is operating with, one can assume that study circles, as well as associations and other informal arenas for horizontal relations, contribute by fostering such citizen virtues that support the effectiveness of a democratic rule. Compared to other educational arrangements there is reason to believe that study circles create very good conditions for building equal and co-operative relations. As we are talking about a mass phenomenon, this should be a significant contribution, even though not all relations are horizontal. However, since participation is not equal this effect is reduced and limited to mainly those who are not in the deepest shadow of the society. Deliberations In contemporary thinking on democracy there has been an emphasis on the communication between citizens. Several terms

26

indicate this - deliberative, discourse- or discussion-democracy (Habermas, 1991 Peterson, 1998). Even communicative democracy has been used (Andersson et al., 1996:226). The term "deliberations" seems to refer to what is aimed at, i. e., that citizens engage in communication, where they are able to explore arguments and evaluate them. In this way they should be better prepared to take a standpoint on different issues. This kind of thinking is not new. Alf Ahlberg, principal of one of the workers' movement folk high schools and the incarnation of a popular education intellectual, expressed the same thought in one of his books in the 1930s: "A real discussion should be a co-operation", where one can hope for an investigation and an illumination of a question, that should make one better equipped to take a position on a warranted basis. (Ahlberg, 1935:174, this author's translation). In a governmental investigation of Swedish popular adult education, initiated in 1944, there was a similar view of democracy, namely, that it presupposed a permanent debate about issues of public concern and that the citizen has an opportunity to form an opinion independently (Lindgren, 1996:33). One can understand those old formulations in the light of a new democracy that is challenged by totalitarian views, where debate and conclusions based on warranted arguments were not asked for, but rather despised. In our time, arguments for deliberations could also be viewed from the background of a media industry, where opinions are created by powers that certainly are not democratically elected, but rather based on trans-national capital that is invested in the media. Together with the lobbyism it is obvious that standpoints become commodities that can be bought by those who can afford it. The aim is not the common good, but rather the exploitation of the common resources. It has also been pointed out that certain worldviews become hegemonic and overshadow other views - a recent example is the economism that has dominated the last decade, when it seems as if economic arguments are the only valid ones in the political debate. The discourse gives a limited space for the deliberations (Foucault, 1993). Some have pointed out that this is based on a struggle about who has the power to set the agenda for the debate (Petersson et al, 1998: 96). Habermas (1991) describes how the civil society is colonised by the thinking that is adapted to the forces of systems like the economy, where strategic thinking and action becomes the norm. In that way, people lose their sense of thinking and acting for the sake of the common good. Action is no longer governed by what is fair and decent, and such ethical standpoints, but instead by what is profitable, even if it means oppression or that everyone will lose in

27

the end. Notions like solidarity lose their meaning. Against this people could defend themselves by participating in communication, where they can reflect upon what is the right thing to think or do. The study circle seems to be the perfect form for learning where deliberations are in focus: a deliberative democracy could also be called a study circle democracy. The problem is that the pattern of interaction in study circles is not unequivocal. Andersson (1998) has done an investigation, where study circle leaders have been interviewed and where a survey was done on a large sample and subsequently analysed by an exploratory factor analysis. The preliminary analysis, based on both qualitative interpretations and factor analysis, gave important information about the form of work that the leaders reported. Three kinds of circles could be distinguished: teaching circles, discussion circles and handicraft circles. Varying degrees of possibilities for deliberations could be assumed within these different forms of interaction. If we do not consider what is happening during breaks, it seems as if the teaching circle gives least possibilities for deliberations. According to Andersson, in the teaching circles the subject or content is the focus together with prepared teaching material. The leader has a role that is close to a traditional teacher, as a conductor and someone that will give answers. In the discussion circle, on the other hand, we can see something that comes close to a deliberation, free of coercion. The discussion is the heart of the matter and the leader is basically a chairperson who is organising the discussion. The responsibility for the content seems to be in the hands of the participants, even though they in most cases rely on study material. This must be the kind of study circle that would represent the study circle democracy. The third type, the handicraft circle, seems to focus on something other than talk - in this case practical activities. This means that the tempo is individualised, and the leader, often an expert, takes the role of a resource-person rather than a conductor. In the handicraft circle there is no focus on communication and deliberations are thus peripheral to the main activity. If we base our conclusions on data about the main activities the conclusion will be that deliberative democracy could be a useful concept to relate to those circles that are discussion circles, but not to other variants. Now, there is in fact evidence that this conclusion is premature. In a project with several studies of so-called textile circles there was evidence that those handicraft circles functioned as communicative arenas for the participants, in this case women (Waldn, 1994). Based on participant observation, the findings point

28

at communication being a parallel activity to the handicraft. It was reported that the handicraft took first priority, after that family and home activities, and in the third place, comments about society. The talk was not political in a narrow sense. However, it was rooted in experiences of everyday contexts - the participants' own life history, the unemployment allowance, the cost of housing, the quality of the health-care system, or the mismanagement of the municipality. They seem to have talked about almost all important issues in the political discourse, but with a focus on matters directly related to local problems or their own experiences. One is reminded of Habermas' notion of a rationality that is grounded in the life-world (Waldn, 1994:111). However, there were clearly also constructions, which came from the mass media. The importance of these findings is obvious, because they undermine hasty conclusions. They are not least interesting, since they make us aware of the multitude of expressions that deliberations with a political potential can have. If one should be critical there is an open question, whether the communication is deliberation, i. e., an investigation and an illumination of a question, that should make him better equipped to take a position on a warranted basis, if we use Ahlbergs formulation. That will also mean that it is not clear whether they search for standpoints that are aimed at the common good. There is no clear evidence that could answer those questions and that would give a direct link to the theories of deliberative democracy. In other types of circles one can assume from the content that the communication should have such a link, as circles that are run in the context of associations, or, at least, have a clear link in content to political issues. Those that are classified as social science circles should have such a potential, for instance. The problem with this kind of assumptions is the poor quality of data; they are based on titles or other such very crude criteria. However, more substance can be found in the book The Study Circle Society, where a number of participants are portrayed (Andersson et al, 1996). Here we find examples of how standpoints have been created. Mia, who has followed a circle through the union, underlines the importance of an open discussion with representatives from parts of the society, other than her own. Nevertheless, in the interviews that were conducted, there are not many indications of something that can be linked to a deliberative democracy. Democracy seems to be a silent theme in the participants' expressed thoughts about the implications of taking part in a study circle. Hartman (in "Studies in association", 1996) reports an investigation of four study circles, that are part of the activities in associations. This report offers us a closer look at cases where we

29

would expect deliberations. Apart from one case, however, there are no indications of a clear link to deliberations that are focused on forming standpoints or action. The exceptional case, a local history association, was a discussion circle where focus was on selfeducation, but it also made decisions about action. The interest was completely focused on the local environment. The conclusion will be that deliberations are probably common, but more conclusive evidence of discourse that could tell us about the way standpoints are created is generally lacking (Ahlberg's criteria). A related problem is the lack of evidence that the lifeworld of the participants is the ground on which they form their standpoints; neither do the seem to discuss along the lines of instrumental rationality (Habermas' criteria). The same lack of evidence makes it difficult to say if standpoints are formed independently and not only picked up from media (The argument of an agenda control - Foucault). One obvious problem in the interview studies is that the interviewees do not see democracy as an aim, they do not attend a study circle to do democracy. Rather, it becomes the background of the content or activity that is in focus. Another problem is that participants have very little knowledge of the discourse around democracy, which means that they have difficulties in identifying aspects of their study circle activities that could be of importance to our questions. The final problem is that it is difficult for everyone to sort out cause and effect as regards the relation between study circle activities, the discussion there, the standpoints formed and, eventually, the political activity and the influence that were the outcome. In everyday life things tend to be blurred or too complex to sort out (Larsson, 1996). Knowledge Knowledge is power is an expression that can be traced to Francis Bacon at the end of the 16th century (Holm, 1976). It points at a relation between democracy and knowledge. To be able to influence the society, knowledge is a crucial factor, but it also seems to support the legitimacy of democracy: "Education attainment is correlated with, inter alia, the endorsement of the legitimacy of democratically elected governments; the endorsement of values such as toleration (as opposed to racism) and freedom and equality (as opposed to authoritarianism and hierarchy); and political participation (voting, campaigning, party membership as well as participation in civil associations)" (Frazer, 1999: 9). Another aspect is that, in order to use their positions to benefit the citizens; those who have some position through a democratic election need knowledge. How different kinds of knowledge are related to

30

democracy is, however, a complicated matter. Democracy has often been related to the enlightenment movement, as we have already pointed out: by the help of rationality and scientific knowledge, myths and superstition, used so effectively by, for instance, the Nazis, could be fought (Ahlberg, 1935). More than 200 years ago Kant (1989: 27) formulated a political vision of the enlightenment, that it is about using one's own knowledge to form opinons; sapere aude. It is obvious that Kant is referring to a very specific kind of knowledge, one that is useful in forming opinions, to take a standpoint in the questions of life, and especially about society. Democracy is about refusing to accept subordination. Here is a vision of autonomy - a knowledge that is independent and makes one independent from structures of power that are based on authority and hierarchies. On the formal level popular adult education has the independence that creates conditions for free and voluntary participation. The state does not decide on matters of content, i. e. what kind of knowledge that is considered important will be decided without consulting the state. Popular adult education is not allowed to work commercially, which means that it is not lead by employers. No one can force anyone to participate. It is free and voluntary. The concept of self-education is very interesting in this context. It stresses the autonomy of movements and study groups and, thus, seems to be a view of education that belongs to the civil society. Arvidsson writes: In the heart of this concept is that it tells from where the initiative comes and who has control over the content and forms of the education. The prefix self is steering the meaning of the concept (Arvidsson, 1996:10). Oscar Olsson invented another expression with a connotation that was pretty much the same: education for and through the people. The relation to democracy is clear. Olsson was inspired by Abraham Lincolns expression: A democracy, that is, a government of all the people, by all the people, for all the people" (Holm, 1976). It seems reasonable to conclude that self-education and civil society is linked. Self-education could, in fact, be thought of as the educational parallel to democracy and civil society among the existing views of education. Here, control is supposed to be in the hands of the participants and not an elite. In the philosophy behind the study circles there is an interesting possibility for participants to create their own knowledge and thus be knowledgeable in areas that they themselves consider important. If we look at empirical evidence concerning the level of knowledge among the adult Swedish population, there are a few sources that give some indications. Firstly, adults in Sweden seem to

31

be well prepared to learn. In a relatively sophisticated study of reading comprehension, based on tests of representative samples of adults in a number of the most industrialised countries, Swedish adults were on top, in terms of both a large group at the top level of performance and a very small group at the bottom level (OECD & Statistics Canada, 1995). The indication is that other countries with the same or even better economic level in terms of GNP/capita are worse off in this respect. Another study was more focused on knowledge for democracy, where the change in knowledge about politics and the skills to act as a citizen during the last 20 years was investigated. Results showed that knowledge had increased, but that activities based on citizen skills were unequal (Petersson et al, 1998). The study circle participants' stress learning as a significant part of their participation: learning is one of the main categories in the Andersson et al. qualitative study (1996:68). In Svenssons (1996:62) quantitative study a majority of the subjects seem to think along the same lines, and a very large majority indicate that study circle participation gives them useful knowledge. From the perspective of the participants, study circles seem to contribute to the knowledge of the population. From the aspect of democracy one could assume that this indicates that the citizens are generally strengthened. A more precise understanding of the importance of the knowledge that is gained in study circles for taking standpoints and democratic action is, however, still missing. What kind of knowledge is important in relation to action for societal change? What is effective enlightenment in the circles? Here we lack research-based insights. This problem is not only about the lack of studies, it is also about the difficulties to research such questions. If we cannot say anything absolutely conclusive about the empirical evidence of study circles and their contribution to knowledge that is useful to a citizen, we can still discuss the circles as a potential. In an international context it seems as if the study circle institution in the Swedish society constitutes an exception, which opens up a different kind of opportunity for citizens to inform themselves about issues of political importance. As an institution it legitimises itself on that ground and in reality it is extremely well adapted to organising learning opportunities aimed at those who have such an interest. However, it seems that the local organisers are more eager to serve this aim explicitly than the participants are (Lindgren, 1996). As a potential for the civil society it will, however, be something important. Where important issues are a challenge, for the population as a whole or for specific groups of the population, study circles become an organisational

32

instrument for learning more to form opinions which, to varying degrees, will result in action. Through the history of study circles we can learn that they have played an important political role, in those moments when the civil society has been vital. It seems that the trend in many countries is to narrow the scope of adult education to vocational or professional skills or to basic education. This is also evident in the Swedish discourse on education, in political documents as well as the mass media, but has not yet had the effect of destroying the popular adult education sector. However, in such a narrow view of education, the Kantian enlightenment disappears from the scene. As a consequence there will not be any opportunity for adults to learn through an educational institution for the sake of taking standpoints on issues in the society. The downsizing of international equivalents to popular adult education could be understood as something that makes the civil society substantially weaker in those countries. In practice this will mean a less vigorous democracy - sometimes openly legitimated as part of a depoliticisation of society. Instead, there has been an emphasis on education and training controlled by employers or the state. Sometimes this trend is supported by the idea that employers and the state should be in partnership as regards control. This is very far from Oscar Olssons vision of an education for and through the people. Diversity During the last decades there has been a vigorous debate among social theorists concerning the question of basic changes in contemporary society. Many have argued that the more affluent parts of the world are in the middle of a qualitative change into a new kind of society. Different labels have been used - high modern or post-modern. Some characteristics are often highlighted. The globalisation of economy and culture, where the global interferes heavily with the local, a change where life-habits are less related to production and more to consumption, a break-down of collective identities and an individualisation of identities (Giddens 1991, Usher, Bryant & Johnston, 1997). This emerging society is less secure, one reason being a weakened welfare state, not least weakened by the globalisation in the economy, which means that states have to adapt to the interests of the global capital (Castells, 1996, Walters, 1997). Another aspect of the decreased security is a flexible and fast-changing labour market. Yet another aspect of this new society is the dissolution of boundaries: between work and leisure (e.g. distance-work), between the private and the political (gender identities in the kitchen), as well as a blur between civil society and the state. Old dividing lines

33

are dissolved, not least in relation to identities: gender, race, culture, nationality and class are considered as social constructions that are hiding the more complex mixtures and active creation of identities. A comment would be that this does not seem to be completely new it could be looked upon more as a change in perspective than a description of a completely new society. A prominent thought is that individuals form their identities through choice of life-styles, often in consumption patterns, opinions etc. In that way they create their own biographies (Alheit, 1994). It is a picture of a society that is heterogeneous rather than homogeneous; multidimensional rather than uniform (Kvale, 1997). This heterogeneity is very interesting from the perspective of democracy, because it challenges a trait in some theories of democracy, i.e. that there is a common rationality which will constitute the last instance of universal truth across all kinds of dividing lines. The alternative will be a view, where there is no universal truth or correct decision, but rather that democracy is about peaceful solutions of conflicting interests and world-views, in other words, negotiations and compromises between a multitude of groups in the population who have elected representatives. Possibilities to develop a diversity of opinions and form organisations based on this diversity become a prerequisite for such a democracy. Johnston (1999:183) uses the term "pluralistic citizenship", which embraces diversity and cultural pluralism. This is somewhat of a paradox. On the whole, the celebration of a particularistic view is based on some universal values, such as the acceptance and respect of diversity, and the equal value of all individuals, irrespective of what group they belong to. The concept "politics of recognition" is developed for the same purpose - to meet the challenges of heterogeneity (Touraine, 1995). "Recognition" is a term originally used by Hegel. The point is that one has to recognise the other and respect her in order to gain the recognition of the other and thus be respected. The consequence of no recognition is that both sides lose. In the context of a pluralistic society, the politics of recognition could be a central aim. A concrete example is South Africa and the policy of "reconciliation" that has been a guiding principle in the post-apartheid period, strongly connected to Mandela. Here, in line with the concept "recognition", the basic principle is not to oppress the minority but to accept it. In the South African case the alternative would have been for the majority to take revenge on the minority that used such extreme measures to oppress the majority. The results of a policy that is not recognising the other can be found in many places: Bosnia and Kosovo, East Timor and Liberia, just to mention a few.

34

The loss of traditional identities that were developed within the movements challenges both the common views of civil society and the contexts for study circles. The study circle tradition was in the old days closely linked to traditional collective identities. What will be the identity of the free and voluntary popular education in a society where identities are floating and constructed and reconstructed? One such challenge comes from those that are marginalised in the risk-society - the ones that are also marginalised from the civil society. With a democratic value-base the challenge should be to resist this marginalisation, that is, both a lack of economic and cultural capital, and subordination and lack of autonomy as the consequence of unemployment and reliance on allowances (Johnston, 1998). The challenge that diversity puts on the study circles is about strengthening the social networks of these groups and contributing to their possibilities to build cultural identities in a way that is not creating more exclusion. Another aspect of the crossroads between democracy and diversity is to give a possibility for citizens to form a multitude of identities, which are not leading to marginalisation. This means a deeper understanding of the concept of equal value. Contemporary society is, without doubt, heterogeneous in many ways - sometimes the expression multicultural is used. However, it is not only about cultures in a traditional sense, but it is about individuals and groups of people who choose their own life-styles and create their own identities. There will, thus, be a lot of subdivisions along all kinds of lines - musical taste, language, class, sexual preference, political preference. Often identities are based on combinations, where social scientists can dispute what is basic and what is superficial. In that way dividing lines are blurred. Anyway, the challenge for democracy is to accept this diversity and to fight social exclusion based on differences, i.e., defending the idea that all have equal value. In this context we run into the discussion about universalism and particularism. It is obvious that the ideological attitudes in post-modernism mean a celebration of diversity and a multitude of flexible identities - a cosmopolitan ideal. Not least is there an acknowledgement of the lack of legitimation of old divisions - that divisions according to race, nation, class, gender, culture are not in a philosophical sense essential, because mixtures, hybridity and lack of clear lines are obvious. These dividing lines will turn out to be social constructions that are often oppressive, since they operate with the notion of purity - as if we were talking about identities that are essential - have an essence (Osman, 1999). As a result, we have the constructions of a real Swede, a real worker, a real woman and a real gypsy. Because such constructions are rhetorical devices with a

35

strong impact they are important, but the point is that they are manmade. Identities are in a constant flux, races are constructed to be able to divide and to exploit (e.g. apartheid), and national identities are constructed with a purpose to dominate and resist in power plays (e.g., Balkan), and gender identities become straightjackets for men and women. An alternative to this kind of essentialism is the celebration of hybridity, mixtures, blurring boundaries. This is also a critique of uniformity and totalisation of perspectives - the grand narratives, whatever foundations they are erected on. Diversity in a democratic perspective should also mean the paradoxical mix of paying respect to the particular as a universal value. How do the really existing study circles relate to diversity, then? In fact, very well. Every comparison with other educational institutions will point at study circles as more diverse (Larsson, 1998). As we have already pointed out, from the perspective of content, variety is very large, linking to all kinds of interests and purposes. It is simple to introduce new types of content work in the same direction - it will support the creation of new identities by providing learning space. An example is within music, where those interested can learn all kinds of variants: rock, jazz, folk music as well as new forms - there are no restrictions. Content based on the interest of specific groups is another example of the diversities: unions, immigrants from specific countries, political organisations as well as sports clubs can develop curricula in line with their interests. Contrary to the case of the general school system, neutrality is not an obligation, i. e.; content does not have to be fair to all political or religious views. In that way there is a "structural" recognition of "the other". With its lack of uniformity, the study circles give space for diversity to flourish. Diversity in terms of participants is also unusually broad. All ages participate - the English translation popular adult education is in fact bad, since many children participate. On the other extreme: old and very old people participate to a large degree - while most educational institutions, also those dealing with adults address a very narrow age range. Those without jobs are not excluded. Nor is there any exclusion of people without educational qualifications, formal or real. If one can talk about a study circle system, it is very anarchistic. The origin of that trait is not easy to settle, but some factors could be pointed at. First, there are no common curricula or clear rules for the activities that are linked to the state subsidy, despite it being considerably large. Secondly, there are 11 associations independently deciding on the national level, all with local branches that are more or less independent. Furthermore, these 11 study associations are linked to a great number of

36

associations and organisations - the study associations are, in fact, in most cases theirs, as they constitute the formal bases for election of boards etc. Yet another side is a relatively well-staffed administration - one reason for talking about an institution. They want to keep the activity on a high level, i. e. to look for interests among prospective participants that are not provided for by other educational institutions. The effect of all this is anarchistic diversity in terms of content as well as participants. Andersson et al (1996) came to the conclusion that multiplicity was the most general trait. In their study, there was a strong emphasis on understanding how participation was related to people's life-situation. It became obvious that these relations were very complex. One side of the complexity was that study circles almost always contributed to each person in many ways, and the mix was related to the specificity of their life-situation. However, this also means that the participants in the same circle differ in what they get out of it, since their life-situations differ. These differences in background are normally reduced in educational institutions through, for instance entrance requirements or age restrictions. Diversity in the sense of participating is probably often restricted in most educational institutions, when they are linked to the meritocratic system, which study circles are not, in the normal case. 44 qualitatively different ways of finding participation meaningful were distinguished in the Andersson et al study. The idea of diversity is not only something found in the now existing circles, it was declared as a norm early on. The first leader of the very first study association, Rickard Sandler (1937), argued for multiplicity as well as constant change and was even using a word for the opposite of multiplicity which had the double meaning of uniformity and stupidity. The challenge of diversity, which is so much emphasised in post-modern ideology, seems to be easy to deal with in the study circle tradition - it has developed into a system, where diversity and flexibility are already the case, without ever referring to such an ideology (Larsson, 1998). However, as we have already seen, there are problems in delivery - some groups are not participating and study circles are not always so successful when it comes to supporting the marginalised so that their diversity does not become a reason for exclusion. Study circles seem to have a number of paradoxical traits. One is that it is so anarchistic in terms of content and purpose of participating, and yet this is accomplished by an organisation that is institutionalised, and containing different levels, including the national. One reason for this flexibility is the fact that study circles are often in the forefront, in relation to other educational

37

institutions, but that the others have taken over later. They gave learning possibilities to the less educated, when only the elite was educated. Later the ordinary school system adopted the idea of an education for all; for instance, they offered education in the Swedish language to immigrants. Later the municipal adult education took over. This fosters flexibility and creativity, when there are few restrictions. At the same time, to give up is not an option for those who earn their daily bread from the organisation, so they look for new ways to keep the numbers of participants in study circles high. Another paradox is that study circles are subsidised by the state without it intervening with the content in any direct way - it only gives an indication that study circles should contribute to democracy and social change. In this way the civil society is not only something different from and independent of the state - it has for a long time been supported financially by the state. There is reason to believe that study circles would not have been a mass phenomenon, had the state not provided subsidies. This means dependence on the state financially, but independence as regards content. A third paradox has to do with modernity and postmodernity. The study circle emerged as part of the modern project and of movements ensuring that modernity was delivered. In today's Sweden they are sometimes considered as part of an oldfashioned life-style. However, it seems to be the educational institution that is best adapted to the requirements of a post-modern view of society (Larsson, 1998). In their book about the post-modern challenge to adult education, Usher, Bryant & Johnston (1997) criticise heavily the Anglo-Saxon adult education traditions and present an alternative vision, where the post-modern challenge should be met. This vision seems to be very much in line with the existing study circle tradition in Sweden, in a sense an irony of history. So far, we may conclude that the study circle tradition provides a system that is very much adapted to supporting diversity. We can also note that this is not only a potential but it is in fact used in practice as a place to produce and reproduce diverse identities. However, the success is limited. In the introduction to this chapter we pointed at some evidence that there are large marginalised minorities, such as, the unemployed, immigrants, people without permanent jobs. They are much less active in an efficient way in political life, and they participate to a lesser degree in elections. Along with other information, this indicates that they are already partly excluded from democratic participation in society. Their role in the civil society is thus limited, while they do

38

not influence the public discourse or the political decision-making to the same degree as others. This marginalisation is, to a great extent, related to diversity, as these groups of people often feel that they are different, and because of that difference, they do not feel that they belong to the civil society which is a forum for others. The problem that the study circles have, in spite of being adapted to support diversity, is that they have the same pattern of low participation from these groups as can be found elsewhere. To put a strong effort in working with these groups seems to be the most urgent challenge for the study associations to deal with. It is about supporting the identities of those that are excluded as well as showing respect for and supports their need to organise themselves for political participation and social change. The challenge for these people themselves is to improve their situation by creating a strong position in the civil society in order to influence the structures that form their lives. Internal democracy Is decision-making within the circles democratic? Can the participants influence the course of the circle they take part in? The overall issue in this article is the relation between democracy in general and the contribution that the study circles can make to it. However here we have the question of democracy within the study circle institution itself. As a matter of convenience we can call this internal democracy. On one hand, this is about the division of power within the specific circle; on the other hand, it is about the influence that the participants have on the study circle institution on different levels of the study associations and the council for popular adult education. The first aspect seems to be related to the concept of participatory democracy, while the second relates to democracy through elected representatives. The concept of participatory democracy has its roots in the early conception of democracy. In the examples from the Greek Antique Era referred to as democracies, in spite of excluding slaves and women, we meet something that could be called participatory democracy. It was a rule that had its basis in the Town Square agora - where public affairs could be discussed and decided on, without any system of representation. What was happening at the agora can be seen as the prototype of a democracy, with a public discourse that was directly linked to decision-making. The concept of participatory democracy seemed to get a revival in the 1960s (Pateman, 1970). At that time the most pronounced competing views used a market-metaphor: democracy as a system where different elites are competing for votes from the people. However, in relation to study circles and their contribution to democracy, the

39

issue as such presupposes a different notion of democracy than the one that is focusing on competing elites. One issue that is pivotal is the relation between the local small-scale participation and larger structures. Since the Antique Era, we have seen town states (polis) become nations and nowadays the weaknesses in democracy are not least linked to the global scale in economy and culture (Korsgaard, 1997). Study circles work along democratic lines - they are often considered to be their most essential trait, making them very uncommon and interesting flowers in the educational garden. The self-educating ideology also belongs to the complex. This thought had some implications; for instance, that control of the education was in the hands of the collective, i. e., decisions were made within the specific collectives structure, which was always democratic on principle. Self-education did not necessarily result in study circles, though - it could take any form suitable for the particular movement. Nevertheless, there was an educational credo in the concept, that the participant interpreted and appropriated the content without any mediating hands and corrections made afterwards(Arvidsson, 1996:10) The play-ground for local decisions in study circles is different from most other Swedish educational institutions: there is no national curriculum, which means, there are, in principle, few restrictions for local decision-making in that respect (Larsson, 1993). The influence from the elected representatives of the people, the parliament and the government, is weak, there are only general objectives related to the state subsidy, and a demand for regular evaluations. Other limitations include restrictions introduced within the study associations. There are two aspects of democracy here. First, there is the influence the participant may have in the study associations at different levels, and, secondly, there is the size of the playground that is given to participants for decision-making within each specific study circle. Pertaining to the first aspect the conclusion will be a diffuse picture. In most study associations, study circle participants are not directly represented. The reason is that the organisations linked to the different study associations are also the ones that constitute the bases for electing representatives to the study associations. Thus, in most associations, participants are represented as long as they are also members of the organisations behind them, which is not necessarily the case (Hartman, 1998). Consequently, representative democracy within the study associations is ambiguous - the associations are governed by democratic decision-making, but the participants do not necessarily have a vote. Many participants are therefore excluded from influencing formal decisions outside the

40

circle they are participating in. The historical background could be that study circles in the early period were completely integrated with the popular movements and their organisations. This is not that clear any more. The other aspect is the size of the play-ground within the individual study circle. Neither in this case will there be an unequivocal conclusion. Rather, we have to distinguish between a number of variants. In preliminary interpretations of her study of circle leaders, Andersson (1998) was able to distinguish between three qualitatively different circles: teaching-, discussion-, and handicraft-circles. The variants are different in relation to the potential for internal democracy. In the discussion-circles the equality between participants and leaders is most pronounced. Furthermore, here participants influence on the content is larger, even though the point of departure is mostly a study material. According to the description of the circle leaders, it seems as if those circles have some traits of the collective self-education that has been proposed as the essence of the tradition. In another study, by Hartman (1996), one out of four study circles investigated is related to the local history association. Hartman notices that the participants take turns in introducing themes they think are relevant, not least by bringing in artefacts they have found at home to be discussed in the circle. In this case, decisions are also made about external activities to enhance the interest in local history and also local tourism. In the handicraft-circles, the pattern, according to Andersson, seems to be different - here the tempo is individualised and the inequality between leader and participants greater. The leader here is an expert. In the teaching-circle the inequality between participants and leader becomes still more pronounced - as a rule, albeit unwritten according to the existing plan which the leader is following, the participant seems to be subordinated from the start. In a still to-be-completed project using participant observation, Hartman has studied decision-making more closely. Based upon a limited number of circles Hartman's preliminary results support Andersson's conclusion: the pedagogy is not unequivocal in terms of decision-making. In one circle the whole process is focused around a leader who, almost in a patriarchal way, makes all the decisions. In another case we find a lot of genuine cooperation forming the process. In a third example, there is a lack of responsibility and no clear line throughout the process. It is obvious that the study associations have taken a lot of decisions before the participants are introduced to the play. As was pointed out this is done to a varying degree; depending on the kind

41

of circle we are talking about. Circles built around a group of people who will meet over the years around different topics have better potential for internal democracy. These people will be able to decide about content, and the influence of a leader who has already made plans will be reduced. In other cases, where the participants have chosen to participate in a course that is officially advertised, the potential is reduced - the content is fixed and a leader is already chosen, often paid, and plans are made beforehand by the leader. In the latter case the local branch of the study association has a lot of power, i. e., the local administrators (Assarsson & Larsson, 1996). However, since participation is free and voluntary, in these cases prospective participants form the content through showing interest or not, i.e., they vote with their feet. However, this is more a market metaphor, and does not fall within the theme of democratic decision-making. The forms of democratic decision-making that have been established, not least as part of the movements culture, contain a lot of routines. The core is to secure, in principle, that all have an equal vote and that the majority support these decisions. There is no parallel to this in the study circles. What seems to dominate is a pronounced informality. However, this informality can be combined with all kinds of decision-making, from patriarchal to anarchistic, as the last mentioned Hartman study shows. The norm is to be kind to everyone and to create a nice atmosphere, but democratic decision-making does not necessarily come with this. If some kind of democratic rule is there, it seems not to be following any standard routines. The problem here is, there is little to secure equality and majority behind decisions. The informality is probably indirectly important, since it gives participants a psychological security that will be important for voicing opinions and thus participating in discussions. But this is not enough to be able to talk about democratic decisions - empirical evidence shows that the informality can be combined with undemocratic rule, if we take the perspective of a participatory democracy. When the father of the study circles, Oscar Olsson, launched the expression education for and through the people he underlined that education through study activities within the popular movements had been democratic, since the participants governed themselves. In our time the implications of this idea should be considered, so that study circles will be basically for the people and governed through the people. One obvious way to support Olsson's aim is to promote those circles that have the best potential in this respect, i.e., study circles where the same participants meet in a series of circles. Another, still better, way

42

would be to creatively deliberate around ways of strengthening the influence that participants have over the study circles.

Meanings of democracy as a chain that should form the society

By using different notions from the discourse on democracy, I have tried to highlight different aspects of study circles, democracy and the civil society. The lines that were drawn in that way gave a mixed picture, however hopefully rich in meaning as well as structured. In this final part, I want to take a more comprehensive look at the phenomenon that is in focus. It seems reasonable to depict democracy as a process that should have a number of links in the chain. What has previously been labelled aspects thus becomes links For democracy to become complete all those links must be there. All people must be involved and they must act in solidarity for the delivery of the decisions that are made: the responsibilities of the people are based on the power of the people (equality). Citizens must therefore have the possibility to create a platform, from which to formulate standpoints on issues that are vital to them. This platform should make it possible to transcend the isolation of the individual so as to co-operate on equal terms (relations). This platform must have some kind of independence from the strategic influences that they are targeted by, so that the people can form opinions that express their standpoints - some kind of autonomy must exist or there will be no meaningful democracy. The deliberations should be free of coercion (deliberations). To be able to take wise decisions, the deliberations must be informed and based on what the participants judge to be warranted claims about the matter at stake (a kind of knowledge, that the Greeks in the Antique called fronesis). The citizens must be able to form opinions and act on their standpoints according to their diverse meanings, identities and interests (diversity). However, in the end something must come out of it - there must be power to make things happen: the whole process must have an impact on the society - Pateman (1970) discusses this by using the term "influence" and Habermas (1991) by using the term "communicative action" which co-ordinates action and thus forms society. Another way of expressing it is: The civil society must be so strong that it forms the society. This will be translated for the study circles into the question: Are the study circles promoting the power of the civil society? The study circles must offer the form of education that is best suited for the needs of a civil society: in this people can, in principle,

43

study freely and voluntarily what they themselves think is important. They have the possibility to learn about the issues in varying contexts, i.e. where the value-basis often differs according to the study association. Study circles are accessible - there is normally nothing that will exclude anyone from participating. The fact that they are a mass phenomenon in Sweden also makes them accessible, not exclusive. There are few external constraints that hinder self-education - a democratic rule in the circles. It seems as if the circles constitute a great potential for the civil society. The question will be if that potential is realised: Do the study circles actually contribute to strengthening the contemporary civil society? If we look at what has been accomplished, one particular characteristic is recurrent: the circle is only partly successful in its democratic mission. The participation is huge in international comparisons. It is for a substantial share of Swedish women and a smaller share of men a part of everyday life. Thus, the circles are especially a resource for the less powerful sex. It is almost the only option for the older half of the adult population. On the other hand, all people are not involved - those who are at the bottom of the society, especially from the viewpoint of democratic influence, are less involved. The circles seem to be a platform for horizontal relations among the more blessed majority. Thus, there remains for the study associations the need to reach more people and to reach those worst off. The potential to be a democratically working forum for study is, likewise, only partially realised. Many circles seem to lack the ambition, and often leaders are not aware of this aspect. There is no evidence that there exist any routines securing the internal democracy. Behind the informality, which has a lot of value in itself, many kinds of power-relations exist. It is; therefore, not always evident that horizontal relations are built. In spite of this, there is some evidence that many circles are working in a democratic way, discussion-circles, in particular. The circles seem to work as a place for deliberations, free of coercion, but often on the margin of the main activity: most circles have a content, where deliberation is not the main focus, but opinions on societal issues are expressed as a side-activity. In that way one can say that circles contribute to forming opinions in two ways - either as a consequence of the studies, or as an effect of the study circle's function as a meeting-place, where opinions can be tested or developed alongside the main activity. However, there is no clear evidence on the quality of these conversations - if they are deliberations, if they are rational, or if arguments are critically examined.

44

Study circles do support diversity - it is clearly the result of the wide variety of content and links to almost all kinds of organisations. Study circles thus become a tool for constructing identities of almost any kind. In this respect study circles have few competitors, and here delivery is clear, since diversity is so much linked to content. However, it seems that there is a problem that those who are marginalised are not involved as much as others and for these groups the acceptance and support of their identities should contribute to resisting the marginalisation. The results of these links in the chain, social change - the outcome in terms of influencing the society - is often not visible in the studies that have been made. Thus, when we come to the heart of the matter in democracy - that society is formed as the out-come of the process - there is very little evidence of such an influence. The interpretation of this conclusion is difficult. One can only discuss and try to point at some possibilities. On the whole, it seems as if collective action, as a part of the circle activities, is often missing. If that is not compensated by very obvious activities in other contexts, based on the circle activities, the democratic power in the study circles seems to be weak. The consequences of participation will then be individual and private rather than something that is supporting the influence and power of a civil society versus other societal powers. However, to put this general impression of lack of political action into perspective, two things must be considered. Firstly, one obvious argument is that most study circles do not aim at any actions, not to mention political action. To some extent, this has always been a fact - one can point to all those circles in the early period that were focused on literature and art, with the purpose of giving everybody access to culture. Participation has many meanings apart from those that can be related to democracy. Not least is this obvious when we listen to the participants. This means that participants have other motives that are difficult to judge as illegitimate, such as, learning and social needs, and all those 44 different motives identified in the Study Circle Society-study (Andersson et al., 1996), out of which only a limited number were directly related to democracy. Study circles have always had several purposes and if we take into account what the participants' view as legitimate and meaningful this becomes even more pronounced. Furthermore, this multiplicity of uses and meanings is combined in ways that make it difficult to distinguish between activities that are forming society and those that are not. One example becomes visible in the study, where it is pointed out that handicraft circles are reproducing certain handicrafts that are part of a culture (e.g. Finnish music instruments), and that are essential in

45

certain collective identities. Is that forming society? Thus there are a lot of grey zones between forming society or not. The general conclusion is that the multitude of meanings is the most eminent characteristic of study circles. There seems to be reason to accept this and not make study circles uniform, with only one purpose. We have already pointed out that this is not a new way of thinking. The simplest argument is that it guarantees the magnitude of participation. Democracy is a major value, but there are also other values linked to study circles. The second crucial point is the question: Are study circles the proper context for action? From the start, study circles were part and parcel of the popular movements. In study circles members studied, became more educated or prepared themselves for action in the movements. Thus, it was in the different organisations in the movements that collective action was the main focus, not in the circles. Action was mediated through individuals, acting in other contexts based on opinions they had formed in study circles. This is a case of recreating the collective in a new context. It is obvious that this kind of transformation often was the case in the movements what you learned in a study circle was applied to activities in an association or on the board of a union or in a conglomerate of organisations that the participant was a member of. Arvidsson (1996:23) points out that the studies were instrumental in relation to interests of the movements. In this phase, there are no problems in the relation between knowledge and action. When the study associations become more independent from the movements and when participants are not part of movements, the situation is changed. The visibility of such patterns becomes unclear. There are reasons to believe that the contexts for action could be more individual than collective - studies into who influences society nowadays in Sweden point to that. There seems to be little research focusing on this question: where are the action contexts related to learning in contemporary circles? That kind of effect seems furthermore to be difficult to research, not least since even the persons themselves have difficulties sorting out the ways opinions where formed and where they impacted on their own actions. Even though we have no clear picture of the action arena, and the possibility exists that study circle participation results in action to a large degree, however unknown, we should also try to discuss the possibility that there is a genuine lack of action. How can such lack of action be interpreted? One line of reasoning is to connect it to the historical link between study circles and movements, as the civil society's arenas for political action. What has happened over the years is a pronounced autonomy between circles and movements. We have

46

also witnessed a crisis in terms of activity level and participation in the movements. It seems reasonable to assume that the price for this autonomy was a loss of the arena for action - there will be no obvious platform for collective action. The possibility remains that action becomes individual instead, which seems to have some empirical support. The combined effect is probably that the civil society as an arena for co-ordinated action is weaker than before: it has less power to influence the future. The question will be; should the circles take over the role of the movements and provide an arena for action? It seems problematic - the crises in the movements are probably based on changes in the society that would also affect the study circles if they were going to be arenas for collective action. It seems more justified to focus on the civil society as a whole and look for solutions or progress in the whole complex, than to look just at one component, however large. What kind of changes could be depicted? A quick look at the century, which has witnessed the breakthrough of democracy, will provide a broader picture. In the first phase a great number of people became involved in the decision-making at state, county, and local levels. Parallel to this, a civil society grew to become very strong through popular movements and all kinds of organisations that were democratically ruled. The civil society influenced structures like the state and local government, and, thus, there was a link between small-scale activities in the civil society and large-scale decision-making, that was made available through the equal vote. Many persons were active in as well the civil society as in the public power structures. An abundance of activities could be found on the local level that involved many people in decision-making as members or functionaries. It could be sports-clubs, unions, consumers' and producers' co-operatives, electricity distribution associations, temperance associations etc. This was done on a small scale at the local level, with many people involved. In descriptions of the first part of this century based on local history, one is struck by how many needs that were met by organisations run by the citizens themselves and based on democratic rule. A lot of this has disappeared - citizens are now, to a limited extent, involved in organisations in order to meet everyday needs. One change is that paid blue- or white-collar workers run most services. Another change is that everything has been fused into very large units, in organisations within the civil society as well as the public and the corporate sectors. Fewer people are involved in small-scale decision-making. The effect is, exactly as Johansson wrote in 1954; that people actively involved in movements with political purposes become, if not an elite, at least a selected group.

47

Even if the link to large-scale decision-making is there, the base has shrunk. More and more the society is formed by forces outside of the civil society. One reason is globalisation, which has increased the power of the market and decreased that of politics: there is no democratically elected power that can deal with the global market. As the civil society works mainly by influencing the political structures, its impact is weakened by this lack of power in the political structures (Korsgaard, 1997). Furthermore, there has been a reduction in the power of politics through political decision privatisations, pseudo-markets in the public sector as well as giving experts more power, as is the case of the economies in many countries. The conclusion seems to be that the power and the possibilities of the civil society have been reduced, since there is less that is decided upon through democratic decision-making in the society as a whole. From this kind of reasoning, it comes as no surprise that study circles seem not to result in collective action as much as before. As we have pointed out earlier, this is not the study circles' crisis; it is the crisis of the larger context, i.e., the civil society. However, one still has to be reminded of the fact that this way of reasoning is conditional; it is based on the assumption that there is not a lot of action emanating from Swedish study circles. A completely different aspect of the arenas for influencing society is that of private life. Here we are not focusing on the government or other elected power structures, but on everyday-life and its political structures. "The personal is political" is a perspective that has been highlighted, not least by feminists. The way everyday life is lived has a very close connection to questions of equal value, diversity, and democratic decision-making. It is about the equality in the kitchen as well as how to deal with pollution and the environment. This personal side is not new to neither popular movements, like the temperance movement, nor study associations, that wanted to make the life of those that did not belong to the elite more dignified and make them more aware of their value. The effects of the study circles on this aspect of political action are probably considerable. However, we do not have any clear evidence about the relation between study circle participation and this sphere of life. It seems reasonable to expect, though, that study circles have contributed to the empowerment of women, if not in a specific way, at least in a general way. If we return to the less private sphere, the conclusion will be that the problem with the lack of active outcomes of the study circles must not be viewed as an internal problem. I suggest that the problem rather concern the interplay between the study circles and

48

popular movements, or NGOs, which are the civil society's arenas for collective action. It is not the study circles that have failed, the situation is caused by the decline of parts of the civil society, especially those parts that should mobilise and involve citizens in activities that aim at influencing society, i. e., social change. Thus, I would suggest that the problem basically is about the diminishing power of the civil society to form the society according to varying visions. The study circles could still be looked upon as a success, at least in terms of participation. The study associations could probably do more, and some suggestions have been presented in this text. However, is it not more reasonable to believe that the cure for the lack of power in the civil society should be to revitalise those arenas that are traditionally arenas of action? Life-wide, inclusive and contemporary? As has already been pointed out, study circles are and have always been useful in other ways than explicitly contributing to democracy. There are many ways to legitimise the existence of the study circle tradition; democracy is only one of them. Learning, pursuing personal interests and togetherness are prominent in the eyes of the participants (Andersson et al. 1996). We should accept that the study circles have many important functions, that they are meaningful in different ways, which seems to be the views of the participants. Furthermore, the multiplicity of ways to legitimise popular education, such as study circles, is part of the tradition, as Gustavssons (1991) work has demonstrated. From early on there have been competing views of education, which have been able to live side by side - as one aspect of the lack of uniformity. Another part of that pluralism is the magnitude of the participation. Any measure to reduce the variation has to be considered in relation to the reduction of participation it will result in. There will be tension between the fact that a lot of study circle activity does not have an impact on the formation of society, and the fact that one can assume that a reduction to only pure civil society" circles would reduce a lot of activities that do relate to the formation of society. Examples such as the textile circles suggest the role of such circles in relation to deliberations. It would also reduce assumed values of creating horizontal relations that would be indirectly related to an effective democracy. Another aspect of study circles in the context of learning possibilities as a whole is that it promotes educational values that have been marginalised in the last decade, when learning more and more has been placed into an economistic world view. Since learning in that context will only be legitimate if it pays as an

49

investment, educational values, such as equality, democracy, personal growth, enlightenment and formation of identities have little meaning. Since educational institutions on secondary and tertiary levels are more and more linked to that discourse, it seems as if popular education, like the study circles, will increase in importance as an alternative to the main-stream discourse on education. In this way they will contribute to the realisation of a lifewide vision of learning, i.e. that there will be possibilities for learning that relate to all aspects of life (Rubenson, 1996, Larsson, 1997a, 1997b). The life-wide aspect relates to content. Another characteristic that should be highlighted is the relative inclusiveness of the study circles. A large number of the people who participate in study circles are in fact excluded from other avenues of organised learning. A very large group will not be entitled to any education or training according to the economistic perspective, since the predictable gain from the investment in education is too low, for instance, because of age, position in the labour market, or because they are as individuals not considered a good investment. This perspective permeates not only human resource development, but also institutions like universities. A very large part of the adult population is not part of the labour market, since they are retired or on sick leave. Study circles do not exclude anyone on any of these grounds. Thus, there is an inclusiveness that is missing in other institutions organising learning opportunities. Even though economy is a valid and central aspect of education, the problem with reducing it to the only perspective is that there are other challenges in contemporary society. The anarchistic character of the study circles makes them contemporary - they can and will be used for purposes that are pressing; democracy being one; identity and relations within the society being another. One could also argue that, from a very pragmatic perspective, study circles also play a role in producing more life qualities that will not only be of value to the individual, but will also create a less frustrated and less violent society, where people feel that they can develop their interests in co-operation with others. In order for this to happen, study circles have to be free and voluntary and not too restricted in terms of activities. Study circles can be viewed as an oasis where humanistic values have an impact, and it can be argued, that every democratic society should cultivate such oases. What about the future? What role can study circles play in the late-modern or post-modern world that is supposed to have emerged in the more affluent parts of the earth? It seems as if the study circles should have a very good position from which to relate to this new world. The challenge will

50

be to relate to this contemporary world that is ambiguous, focused as it is on consumption, identities, and experiences, as well as aesthetics. Such aspects are linked to information technology and to the strong impact of a global cultural economy as well as a global economy. These are areas that study circles are heavily involved in with mass-participation. They probably form the educational institution that is closest to being challenged by the emergent society, especially in relation to culture and to the civil society. The study circles' challenge must be to promote what is in line with the values that constitute the basis for study circles generally, and the specifics that relate to each study association. They must relate to a diversity, which provokes both positive and negative attitudes. They must relate to the challenges that the globalisation will force upon the citizens as well as unions and political parties. The globalisation is a threat, but also a possibility. They must relate to the focus of aesthetics that can be the consumption of soap operas as well as creating art or music. In this way they are already well placed in the contemporary world, but they must also take standpoints about how to relate to it. In the anarchistic world of the study circles the self-education tradition will tell that it is up to the study associations as much as to the organisations in the civil society to decide how they want to relate to the contemporary world. References Ahlberg, Alf (1935) Tankelivets frigrelse. Andra upplagan. Stockholm: Kooperativa frbundets frlag. Alheit, P. (1994) The biographical question as a challenge to adult education. International Review of Education. 40 (3-5) pp 283-298. Ambjrnsson, Ronny (1988) Den sktsamme arbetaren. Stockholm: Carlssons. Andersson, Eva (1998) Cirkelledarskapet. En fallstudie och en enktstudie med cirkelledare. Paper presenterat vid Mimers konferens fr folkbildningsforskning, Bosn, 10-11 november 1998 Andersson, Eva, Laginder, Ann-Marie, Larsson, Staffan och Gunnar Sundgren (1996) Cirkelsamhllet - Studiecirklars betydelse fr individ och lokalsamhlle. SoU 1996:47. Stockholm: Utbildningsdepartementet Arvidsson, Lars (1985) Folkbildning i rrelse. Pedagogisk syn i folkbildning inom svensk arbetarrrelse och frikyrkorrelse under 1900-talet - en jmfrelse. Malm: Studies in Education and Psychology 16. Arvidsson, Lars (1989) Popular Education and Educational Ideology. In: Ball, Stephen, J & Larsson, Staffan (Eds.) (1989) The Struggle for Democratic Education. Equality and Participation in Sweden. New York & London:The Falmer Press.

51

Arvidsson, Lars (1991) Folkbildning och sjlvuppfostran; en analys av Oscar Olssons id och bildningssyn. Linkpings universitet; IPP, Vuxenpedagogiska forskningsgruppen. Arvidsson, Lars (1996) Cirklar i rrelse. Mimers smskriftserie nr 1. Linkping: Mimer Assarsson, Liselotte och Larsson, Staffan (1996) Hur formas vuxenutbildningen p det lokala planet? Paper presenterat p NFPFs konferens i Lillehammer, Mars, 1996. Ball, Stephen, J & Larsson, Staffan (Eds.) (1989) The Struggle for Democratic Education. Equality and Participation in Sweden. London: The Falmer Press. Bergstedt, Bo och Larsson, Staffan (red.)(1995) Folkbildningens innebrder. MIMER: Skapande vetande: Linkping Berntsson, R. (1999) Unpublished Manuscript. Bron, A., Field, J. Kurantowicz (eds.) Adult Education and Democratic Citizenship II. Krakow: Impuls Publisher. 1998 s. 50 - 70. Castells, Manuel (1996) The Information Age, Economy, Society and Culture. Volume 1: The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford: Blackwell Dewey, John (1966) Democracy and education. New York: The Free Press Ehnmark, Anders (1994) Den dda vinkeln. Problemet med demokratin. Stockholm: Utbildningsfrlaget Brevskolan. Field, John (1998) Globalisation, Social capital and Life Long Learning: Connections for our Times? In: Bron, A., Field, J. Kurantowicz (eds.) Adult Education and Democratic Citizenship II. Krakow: Impuls Publisher. 1998 s. 50 - 70. Folkbildningsrdet (1999 a)Folkbildningsrdets budgetunderlag 2000-2002. Folkbildningsrdet. Stockhom: 1999 Folkbildningsrdet (1999 b) Handling till punkt 7 p styrelsemte. 1999-09-23 Folkbildningsrdet (1999 c) Fakta om folkbildning. Foucault, Michael (1993) Diskursens ordning. Stockholm: Symposion. Frazer, Elisabeth (1999) Introduction: the idea of political education. Oxford Review of Education, Vol 25, Nos 1&2, 1999, pp 5-22 Giddens, A. (1991)Modernity and Self-Identity. Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Gustavsson, Bernt (1991) Bildningens vg: tre bildningsideal i svensk arbetarrrelse 1880 - 1930. Stockholm: Wahlstrm&Widstrand Gustavsson, Bernt (1996) Bildning i vr tid. Om bildningens mjligheter och villkor i det moderna samhllet. Stockholm: Wahlstrm&Widstrand. Habermas, Jurgen (1991) The Theory of Communicative Action. Vol. 1. Reason and rationalisation of society. Boston: Beacon Press och Cambridge: Polity Press.

52

Hartman, Per (1996) Studier i frening. Ngra medlemmars tankar om demokrati och cirkelstudier i folkrrelser. Linkping: Skapande vetande. Hartman, Per (1998) Arbetsmanus fr delrapport: Studiecirklar. Projektet Mte med vuxna i studier. Hess, D.,J. (1989) Teaching Ethnographic Writing: A Review Essay. Anthropology and Education Quarterley, Vol. 20. No 3. 163 - 176. Holm, Pelle (1976) Bevingade ord. Stockholm: Bonniers Jackson, Keith (1997) The State, Civil Society and the Economy: Adult Education in Britain. In: Walters, Shirley (Ed) Globalization, Adult Education & Training. Impact & Issues. London & New York: Zed Books. Johnston, Rennie (1998) Adult Learning for Citizenship: shaping a framework for action within civil society. Paper. Johnston, Rennie, (1999) Adult learning for citizenship: towards a reconstruction of the social purpose tradition. International journal of Lifelong Education, Vol. 18, No 3, pp 175 - 190 Jonsson, Jan O. och Ghler, Michael (1995) Folkbildning och vuxenstudier. Rekrytering, omfattning, erfarenheter. SoU 1995:141. Stockholm: Utbildningsdepartementet Johansson, Hilding (1954) Folkrrelserna. Stockholm: Ehlins, Folkbildningsfrlaget. Kant, Immanuel (1989) Svar p frgan: Vad r upplysning? I: stling, Brutus (Red) Vad r upplysning? Kant, Foucault, Habermas, Mendelsohn, Heidegren. Stehag: Symposion Korsgaard, Ove (1997) The Impact of Globalization on Adult Education. In: Walters, Shirley (Ed) Globalization, Adult Education & Training. Impact & Issues. London & New York: Zed Books. Kilgore, Deborah, W. (1999) Understanding learning in social movements: a theory of collective learning. International journal of Lifelong Education, Vol. 18, No 3, pp 191 - 202. Kvale, Steinar (1996) InterViews. An Introduction to Qualitative research Interviewing. Thousand Oaks:Sage. Larsson, Staffan. (1993) Initial encounters in formal adult education. Qualitative Studies in Education, 1993,Vol. 6, No 1, pp 49 - 65. Larsson, Staffan (1995) Folkbildningsbegreppet ur en vuxenpedagogisk synvinkel. I: Bergstedt, B., Larsson, S.(red) Folkbildningens innebrder. MIMER: Skapande vetande: Linkping, 1995 Larsson, Staffan. (1996) Vardagslrande och vuxenstudier. I: Ellstrm, Per-Erik, Gustafsson, Bernt, Larsson, Staffan (red) (1996) Livslngt lrande. Lund: Studentlitteratur. s 9 - 28. Larsson, Staffan (1997a) The meaning of life-long learning. In: Walters, Shirley (Ed) Globalization, Adult Education & Training. Impact & Issues. London & New York: Zed Books.

53

Larsson, Staffan (1997b) Livslngt och livsvitt lrande. I: Mkitalo, sa och Olsson, Lars-Erik (red) Vuxenpedagogik i teori och praktik. En antologi frn Kommittn om ett nationellt kunskapslyft fr vuxna. SOU 1997:158. s. 41 - 54. Larsson, S, Andersson, E, Laginder, A-M, Larsson, S. , Sundgren, G. (1997c) On the significance of study circles. Educazione Comparata, Anno 8, No 26-27. Larsson, Staffan (1998) Defining the Study Circle Tradition. In: Bron, A., Field, J. Kurantowicz (eds.) Adult Education and Democratic Citizenship II. Krakow: Impuls Publisher. 1998 s. 50 - 70. Lave, Jean, Wenger, E. (1991) Situated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lindgren, Lena (1996) Kan en filthatt strka demokratin? Om ml och medel i folkbildning. Stockholm: Carlssons bokfrlag OECD & Statistics Canada (1995) Literacy, Economy and Society. Oftedal Telhaug, A (1990) Den nye utdanningspolitiske retorikken. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget Osman, A (1999) The Strangers Among Us. Ethnicity, Culture, and Immigrants: The Social Construction of Identity in Adult Education. Linkping: Linkping Studies in Education and Psychology, No 61. Palme, Olof, Adress to the Social Democrat's congress 1969 Pateman, Carole (1970) Participation and Democratic theory. Cambridge University Press. Pettersson Olof, Hermansson, Jrgen, Micheletti, Michele, Teorell, Jan och Anders Westholm (1998) Demokrati och medborgarskap. Demokratirdets rapport 1998. Kristianstad: SNS Frlag Prop. 1997/98: 115. Folkbildning Putnam, Robert, D.(1993) Making democracy work. Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Rubenson, Kjell (1996) Livslngt lrande: mellan utopi och ekonomi. In: Ellstrm, Gustavsson & Larsson (eds.) Livslngt lrande. Lund: Studentlitteratur. Sandler, Rickard (1937) Mngfald eller enfald. Tal och artiklar utgivna till Arbetarnes Bildningsfrbunds 25-rshgtid. Stockholm: Tiden. Svensson, Alvar (1996) Vilka deltar i studiecirklar? II. Rapport frn en underskning av deltagare i studiefrbundens cirkelverksamhet hsten 1995. Stockholm: Folkbildningsrdet Touraine, A. (1995) Democracy:from a Politics of Citizenship to a Politics of Recognition. In: Maheu,L.(Ed.) Social movements and social classes:the future of collective action. Sage. pp 258 -275. Tyack, D., Tobin, Tobin, W. (1994) The "Grammar" of Schooling: Why Has it Been so Hard to Change? American Educational Research Journal, Vol 31, Nr 3.

54

Usher, Robin, Bryant, Ian och Johnston, Rennie (1997) Adult Education and the postmodern challenge. Learning beyond the limits. London and New York: Routledge. Waldn, Louise (1994) Handen och Anden. De textila studiecirklarnas hemligheter. Stockholm: Carlssons Bokfrlag. Walters, S (Ed) Globalization, Adult Education & Training. Impact & Issues. London & New York: Zed Books. Walters, Shirley (1999) Globalisation, adult education and development, Introduction. Manuscript Wellton, Michael, (1997) In Defence of Civil Society: Canadian Adult Education in neo-conservative Times. Walters, S (Ed) Globalization, Adult Education & Training. Impact & Issues. London & New York: Zed Books.