Nordic Welfare State Models (5cr)

Evaluation scale

H-5

Objective

The aim of the course is providing students with an in-depth understanding of the Nordic Welfare State Models (NWSMs), its history and future challenges in a national and European context.

The course
- provides students with basic theoretical knowledge about the Nordic welfare state models (NWSMs)
- introduces core principles of the NWSMs
- describes what is (claimed to be) distinctive about the NWSMs in comparison to European welfare states/welfare systems of European countries
- briefly introduces historical development of the NWSMs, as well as similarities and differences between the NWMs
- discusses some contemporary struggles and future challenges of/for NWSs.

Execution methods

Online course in Moodle.

Accomplishment methods

This is an 8-week Moodle-based course of video presentations of international experts in the field of Nordic Welfare State development, as well as recommended readings and a two-part written assessment. Teaching and learning will be facilitated using critical questioning and reflective thinking.

The learning assignment for this course will consist of two related and interconnected parts, both of which students are required to pass:
- Learning task 1: Learning diary based on the four constituent lectures
- Learning Task 2: Short essay.

Content

The history, development and contemporary challenges of the Nordic Welfare model. Welfare state models in a comparative context including the general characteristics of the NWSM from both national and European perspectives. Topics of labour policy & precarity, disability policy, welfare sustainability and migration policy as well future challenges for Nordic Welfare States and the NWSM are highlighted.

Part A will focus on basics of NWSM development, and Part B will focus on contemporary struggles and future challenges of/for NWSM.

Materials

The course provides the students with web links of open access books, chapters, and articles.

Assessment criteria, satisfactory (1)

Fail: Performance is highly deficient or erroneous. The work may be based on serious misunderstandings.

Sufficient and satisfactory (1-2): Performance is lacking in scope, superficial, or corresponds poorly to the assignment. The author merely lists things out of context or addresses them one-sidedly. The work may contain errors or obscurities.

Assessment criteria, good (3)

Good and very good (3-4): Performance corresponds to the assignment, manifesting comprehension and a skill to analyse and justify. The author has addressed the issue comprehensively. The work may contain some deficiencies.

Assessment criteria, excellent (5)

Excellent (5): Performance delineates an extensive whole and the author can apply knowledge in a multifaceted way or place it in various contexts. The work manifests independency and insight, and it is a flawless entity that involves justified thinking or critical contemplation. The work is well written and implemented.