Studier av omständigheterna kring ett ämnes framväxt och utveckling är en del av pedagogisk forskning. Uppsatsen belyser ekonomisk utbildning i Litauen utifrån de förändringar som frigörelsen från forna Sovjetunionen inneburit och studiens syfte är att ge en bild av hur företagsekonomi som universitetsämne formats i Litauen 1988-1997. Utgångspunkten i studien är individen och individens närkontext. Den teoretiska referensramen utgörs av en modifierad modell av Bronfenbrenners utvecklingsekologi, kompletterad med Bergs nivåmodell. Insamling av data har primärt skett genom intervjusamtal med universitetslärare vid litauiska universitet och högskolor. Utöver dessa intervjusamtal har styrdokument i form av litteraturlistor, kursplaner och centrala dokument insamlats och studerats. Ett av studiens grundläggande antagande är att verkligheten är socialt konstruerad. Fokus i analysen ligger i individens uppfattningar utifrån tre huvudtema; omprogrammering, kursplaner och kurs-litteratur samt attityder och intresse. Studien visar att konstituering av företagsekonomi i Litauen formats av politiska/ideologiska, ekonomiska, institutionella och individuella faktorer. Bakom dessa villkor finns beslut fattade på olika nivåer såväl nationell (makro), lokal/institutionell (exonivå) som kollegial (meso) nivå samt på individ (mikro)-nivå. Internationella influenser har haft stor betydelse, och dessa influenser kan sägas representera en ytterligare nivå – en exmakronivå. En ytterligare faktor utgörs av mötet mellan en tidigare doktrinär, rigid föreställning till en ny sådan, som inte var doktrinär utan istället innebar en akademisk frihetsgrad, ett frirum som tidigare inte fanns, åtminstone inte i retoriken. En tredje faktor utgörs av det som konsekvenser, influenser och frirum fick på det konkreta ämnesinnehållet och undervisningen.

Studies of the circumstances surrounding the creation and development of a university discipline are a part of pedagogical research. This thesis highlights the development of management and economic education against the background of changes caused by the Lithuania’s emancipation from the Soviet Union and aims to present a picture of how management as a university discipline has been created in Lithuania between the period 1988-1997. The nexus of this study is individuals and individuals in context. The theoretical frame of reference is provided by a modified model of Bronfenbrenners developmental ecology, complimented by Bergs tier (level) model. Data collection has primarily been in the form of interviews with university staff from Lithuanian institutions for higher education. In addition to the interviews, literature lists, course schedules and other key documents have been collected and analysed. One of the studies primary foundations is that reality is a social construct. The analysis focuses on individual’s conceptualisation of three main areas: re-programming, course schedules and literature lists, alongside their attitudes and interests. The study demonstrates how the creation of management and economics as a university discipline in Lithuania has been formed by a combination of political/ideological, economic, institutional and individual factors. Behind these factors are decisions taken at a variety of different levels, including national level (macro), local/institutional level (exo), collegial level (meso) and individual level (micro). International influences have also played an important role and their effects represent an additional level, the so-called exmacro level. A further factor comes into play in the meeting between the previously rigid doctrine and the new doctrine, which isn’t so much a doctrine but rather more of an academic freedom; a freedom that didn’t exist previously, at least not one that was acknowledged. A final factor in the study is the impact that the consequences of change, the various influences described above and this new-found freedom, have had on the subject’s content and method of teaching. One of the study’s main contributions is to highlight the significance of the concept of academic freedom and to focus on the paradox, where constraint under the old system is replaced by another form of constraint. In this case, where the rigidity of the old Soviet doctrine is replaced by a new freedom; but instead of being given greater opportunities to influence and change the subject, the academic staff are forced into a position where, once again they are subjugated to the influences of outside (international) sources.

This study highlights how a profession acquires knowledge in the context of the German welfare state. This is achieved by studying the organisation, transformation and sphere of influence of social work in Germany. The theoretic frame of reference is provided by a modification of Bronfenbrenner’s model of developmental ecology. If we view Social work as an action-oriented discipline, then both action and intervention are essential elements. Social work can thus be said to contain five different levels of intervention. This study is focusing the meso-social level and the exo-social level. The main result of this article leads us to a paradox and a professional dilemma. The social worker’s freedom and power within their own profession, a professional empowerment, can be said to be more conditional, where, whilst creativity has been stimulated, these are acceptable only within the boundaries defined by the newly created civil structures and interest groups. Key Words: developmental ecology, knowledge acquisition, social work, sphere of influence, transformation

How academic disciplines are constituted and the related professional development must be viewed within their wider social, political and economic aspects. When studying the organisation, transformation and spheres of influence of professions, the Development Ecology model provides a tool for understanding the encounter between societal, organisational and individual dimensions, a continual meeting point where phenomena and actors occur on different levels, including those of the organisation and society at large. However, the theory of development ecology may be questioned for how it looks at the individual’s role in relation to other actors in order to define and understand the forces underlying the professional development and constitution of academic disciplines. Factors relating to both the inside of the individual and social ties between individuals and in relation to global factors need to be discussed.