Jón Torfi Jónasson

Phonological recoding and lexical access

Four experiments are reported that examine the effects of homophony (e.g., SAIL/SALE) on response latency in a lexical decision task. The results indicated that an effect of homophony was evident only if the nonword distractors consisted of legal, pronounceable strings (e.g., SLINT), but that this effect disappeared if the nonwords sounded like English words (e.g., BRANE). An optional encoding strategy is proposed to account for this differential effect. It is suggested that while both graphemic and phonemic encoding occurred simultaneously, naive subjects tended to rely on the outcome of the phonological route. However, when such reliance produced a high error rate (i.e., when the nonwords sounded like English words),. these subjects were able to abandon a phonological strategy and rely on the graphemic encoding procedure instead. Two further aspects of the results are of interest. First, the less frequent member of a homophone pair was slower when compared with a control item if the nonword distractors were of the SLINT type, but not different if they were of the BRANE type. The high-frequency members did not differ from their controls in either nonword environment. Second, in a homophone “repetition” experiment, the frequency order of presentation within pairs of homophones (i.e., the high-frequency member followed by the low-frequency member, or vice versa) had a substantial effect. A spelling recheck procedure and a response-inhibitory mechanism are postulated to incorporate these effects into a dual-encoding direct-access model of word recognition.

Dropout in a Small Society: Is the Icelandic Case Somehow Different?

Early in the 20th century, the Icelandic education system was poorly developed, with no compulsory education and no legal framework for primary education. During the next 100 years, however, the system became mature, flexible and fairly advanced – largely on par with systems in the other Nordic countries (Guttormsson, 2008). While the total Icelandic population did not reach 300,000 until the 21st century, numerous studies have shown that Icelandic education developed in ways similar to much larger systems, both in qualitative and quantitative terms, and apparently dealt with many of the same problems (e.g., Johannsdottir, 2006; Jonasson, 1999, 2003; Jonasson & Tuijnman, 2001). Such studies draw attention to important similarities between different systems and warn against over-emphasising their differences, though they of course exist. The conclusion is that much can be learned about various aspects of many major problems in Iceland simply by analysing studies from its neighbours. Moreover, these neighbours may also benefit from Iceland’s experience, as information about a number of issues is relatively easy to come by in the quite well-documented Icelandic setting.

Policy and reality in educational development: an analysis based on examples from Iceland

This paper probes the relationship between educational policy and actual changes in the field of education in Iceland. It attempts to relate previous analysis of the role of the State in changing education and give some reasons why it may sometimes be less effective than expected. Educational change is inspected from three different perspectives: First, from the perspective of expansion of participation in education; secondly, from a perspective that involves probing the nature of educational problems; and, finally, from a perspective which demands a birds-eye view of the educational debate in order to expose inconsistencies or contradictions that may not normally be appreciated. The data brought forward, related to the first perspective, suggest that governmental intervention is not clearly visible and intervention by central authorities does not account for educational expansion. Two examples related to the second perspective suggest that if the problems at hand are not appropriately analysed, policies ...This paper probes the relationship between educational policy and actual changes in the field of education in Iceland. It attempts to relate previous analysis of the role of the State in changing education and give some reasons why it may sometimes be less effective than expected. Educational change is inspected from three different perspectives: First, from the perspective of expansion of participation in education; secondly, from a perspective that involves probing the nature of educational problems; and, finally, from a perspective which demands a birds-eye view of the educational debate in order to expose inconsistencies or contradictions that may not normally be appreciated. The data brought forward, related to the first perspective, suggest that governmental intervention is not clearly visible and intervention by central authorities does not account for educational expansion. Two examples related to the second perspective suggest that if the problems at hand are not appropriately analysed, policies to deal with them will not be effective. The third perspective brings forward a number of contradictions inherent in major educational goals and it is argued that if these are not addressed properly the impact of any policies involving them will be lessened. It is concluded that educational research may fruitfully inform educational policy from the perspectives discussed in the paper.

Access and stratification in Nordic higher education. A review of cross-cutting research themes and issues*

ABSTRACT The purpose of this review is to investigate cross-cutting research themes and issues related to access and stratification in Nordic higher education (H.E.) (Denmark, Iceland, Finland, Norway and Sweden). We synthesise how recent changes in H.E. policy, practise, and appropriations have influenced educational opportunities along social class, gender and age. In this review we highlight results and conclusions shared by various recent Nordic studies. The emphasis is on the common trends and patterns related to social stratification in access.

What Characterises the Public-Private Distinction in He in a Nordic Perspective?

In recent years, Icelandic society has moved towards the free market, mainly in business and finance, but not so much in the health, education and social services. Privatization of these areas has been relatively minor. Nevertheless there are at least three Icelandic higher education institutions that have been categorised as private institutions. This state of affairs has been debated, in particular with reference to the fact that the private institutions in Iceland receive full per student state contributions for their teaching function, exactly as the public universities. The discussion has followed two tracks simultaneously. On the one hand it has posed question what are the essential differences between a public and a private institution of higher education and on other whether we should follow the lead of our Nordic neighbours in that they have apparently moved, if very slightly out of the traditional public domain.