This study explores teachers’ beliefs about multilingualism and multilingual students in Swedish primary schools. The aim is to support a better-informed discussion about teachers’ decision-making in linguistically diverse classrooms in the European nation-state. The use of Q method combines qualitative and quantitative data analyses. Q material applied in the present study provided the participants with all the necessary language to describe their beliefs. Two Q sets of statements – one regarding the understanding of the phenomenon and the other concerning suggested pedagogical responses in relation to current multilingualism – were constructed using a variety of sources. The participants are forty teachers, predominantly female, employed at three different primary schools in southern Sweden. Applying inverted factor analysis and abductive interpretation, three sets of teachers’ beliefs emerged and descriptions represent the teachers’ complex views about multilingualism in the classroom. Overall, teachers’ beliefs are rather welcoming towards multilingualism and multilingual students and recent concepts with growing acceptance in literature, such as translanguaging, are well accepted. However, sceptical views, often based on monolingual ideologies are present and are likely to pose challenges for the implementation of pluralistic policies. This study contributes to an open debate about benefits and challenges of current multilingualism in education.

Background: Few studies have reported how students enact learner agency in a team setting or examined what elements of team settings students perceive as more supportive of their learning in problem‐ and project‐based learning (PBL) processes.Purpose: This study explores how engineering students perceive their enactment of learner agency, particularly which aspects of the PBL process they find most important.Method: Thirty‐nine students from two PBL civil engineering courses in Qatar participated in the study. Q methodology was chosen for both qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis. A 40‐item Q set based on a theoretical model of learner agency was used.Results: Eight significantly different student viewpoints emerged from the Q methodological factor analysis, indicating a range of individual perceptions of learner agency. Intrapersonal dimensions were highlighted by three of the eight viewpoints, behavioral dimensions were underlined by seven viewpoints, and environmental dimensions were valued by all viewpoints.Conclusion: While the results reveal a wide range of individual experiences with learner agency across the three dimensions, students addressed self‐directed learning aspects both actively and passively, suggesting that many participants still value instructors' roles of providing direct instruction and authorized knowledge in PBL. The results highlight the need for more awareness of learner agency and more opportunities for students to enact learner agency by increasing PBL knowledge, skills, and efficacy. Q methodology can contribute to engineering education research by providing new theoretical and empirical insights into learners' subjective understanding of agency in a PBL setting as a complex system.

The concept of subjectivity has long been controversially discussed in academic contexts without ever reaching consensus. As the main approach for a science of subjectivity, we applied Q methodology to investigate subjective perspectives about ‘subjectivity’. The purpose of this work was therefore to contribute with clarity about what is meant with this central concept and in what way the understanding might differ among Q researchers and beyond. Forty-six participants from different disciplinary backgrounds and geographical locations sorted 39 statements related to subjectivity. Factor analysis yielded five different perspectives. Employing a team approach, the factors were carefully and holistically interpreted in an iterative manner. Preliminary factor interpretations were then discussed with prominent experts in the field of Q methodology. These interviewees were selected due to their clear representation by a specific factor and led to a further enrichment of the narratives presented. Despite some underlying consensus concerning subjectivity’s dynamic and complex structure and being used as individuals’ internal point of view, perspectives differ with regard to the measurability of subjectivity and the role context plays for their construction. In light of the wide range of characterisations, we suggest the presented perspectives to be used as a springboard for future Q studies and urge researchers, within and beyond the Q community, to be more specific regarding their application of the concept. Furthermore, we discuss the importance of attempting to deeply understand research participants in order to truly contribute to a science of subjectivity.

Common definitions of bullying, employed in research and public policy alike, are generally based on adult-imposed categories. To account for students’ needs in school, research should aim to inclu...