Abstract:

Each year, approximately 1,000 adolescents are placed in secure youth institutions run by the Swedish National Board of Institutional Care (SiS). These young people often present complex and overlapping challenges, including criminal involvement, school failure, psychosocial vulnerability and disrupted educational trajectories. At the same time, they retain the legal right to education under the Swedish Education Act and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

This study examines how education is organised, planned and enacted within secure youth institutions, with particular attention to didactic considerations, support structures and organisational conditions. The project combines qualitative interviews with institutional leaders and subject teachers at SiS (including Enköping and Ekenäs) with a pilot exploration of how education may be reorganised within the Swedish Prison and Probation Service as new youth prison units are established from 2026.

The study asks:
- How is teaching organised in a context characterised by confinement, small groups and high student heterogeneity?
- How do teachers plan collectively and individually for students with highly varied academic and emotional needs?
- What support structures (pedagogical, relational and organisational) are necessary to secure educational quality?
- How is the transition handled before, during and after placement?

Findings indicate that teaching in secure settings requires a shift from traditional classroom didactics towards highly individualised and relational forms of pedagogy. Education is often organised around one student at a time, demanding flexibility, rapid adjustment and strong personal engagement from teachers. Small groups enable tailored support in literacy, Swedish as a Second Language and subject-specific learning, but they also place significant demands on staff competence and coordination with social services and, in some cases, the prison system.

The study highlights that educational quality in secure settings depends not only on subject competence but on broader support structures, including school health services, libraries, emotional support and inter-agency collaboration. As responsibility for some young offenders shifts from SiS to the Prison and Probation Service, questions arise concerning preparedness, competence and the capacity to uphold educational rights in custodial environments.

By focusing on didactic organisation and structural conditions rather than solely on outcomes, this study contributes to discussions on democratic education, educational equity and the right to schooling under conditions of deprivation of liberty.

Keywords:

Secure youth institutions, Education in custodial settings, Didactic organisation, Educational rights.