Non-challenging education and teacher control as factors for marginalization of students in diverse settings

This article discusses teachers’ attitudes towards immigrant students in poor settings and the effect these attitudes have on organization of education on classroom level. It draws on results from two ethnographic studies where some primary school classes in Sweden were followed with participant observation and interviews as main research methods. The article focuses on classroom activities and teachers’ attitudes towards immigrant students and students with low socio-economic status. In the article is argued for the importance of presenting students in poor settings with demanding tasks and challenging education. In these cases, intellectually undemanding tasks in combination with little room for students’ own initiatives resulted in low enthusiasm among students regarding schoolwork and accordingly low learning, while classroom work that demanded active involvement by students in combination with high level of students’ influence on what took place in classrooms resulted in high level of students’ engagement and high outcome.

Preparers’ and non-preparers’ lobbying on the proposed prohibition of goodwill amortisation in ED3 ‘business combinations’

In this paper preparers’ and non-preparers’ positions regarding accounting for goodwill are examined through studying submitted comment letters on ED3 ‘Business Combinations’. Preparers have, because of economic consequences, incentives to lobby for the non-amortisation approach and non-preparers for the amortisation approach. As hypothesised, non-preparers are found to support amortisation of goodwill to a greater extent than do preparers. Moreover, the two groups’ supportive arguments, i.e. how they argue for or against the non-amortisation or amortisation approach, are studied. Again, as hypothesised, the results show that the two groups use the same type of ‘sophisticated’ framework based arguments instead of economic consequences arguments. Taken together the examination of the comment letters thus indicates that both preparers and non-preparers point at conceptual strengths and weaknesses, instead of pointing at the real cause of the lobbying activities, i.e. perceived economic consequences, when they try to affect the final outcome of the standard. These findings confirm earlier research which has suggested that self-interested lobbyists use accounting theories and concepts as useful justifications.