ࡱ> hkij3k( '/ 00DArialngsRomanXX1 0DGaramondRomanXX1 0 DTimes New RomanXX1 00DWingdingsRomanXX1 0 B0. @n?" dd@  @@`` (dq 5 #$ 5>>()  () A B HIJKLNOQRSTVWXYZ[\]^_` 0AA@8'(wʚ;ʚ;g4kdkd|* 0|ppp@  <4dddd$l 0X<4BdBd$l 0X80___PPT10 ? -O  -bThe performative preschool  narratives about  the best practice in pre-schoolQQ$P >Annica Lfdahl Hctor Prez Prieto Karlstad University Sweden?P? N If we write out that we are bad  it s no good publicity! (quotation from interview with school leader Eva)  & what we wish should be written, it is & It is hardly possible to have that kind of document. It is nothing that will sell! ...  (quotation from interview with pre-school teachers) \(=$2$$w$4 (   Background The last decades increasing societal interest on children and their education A  new professionalism which stresses teachers responsibility for planning, accomplishment and evaluation of the practices The Swedish preschools  new legitimacy , that also brought new demands on visibility Pedagogical documentation that contributes to children s visibility as subjects The state and parental demands on visibility. Practices are supposed to be available for public inspection and control R # !     The visible preschool  three interrelated perspectives A societal level  connections to the last decades increasing decentralization, privatization and new forms of control A local level  connections to parental choice and open competition on a  quasi market A practice level  pedagogical demands on documentation, and access to public control, of children's and teachers activities B8R8N  0The purpose with this paper is to get more insight in  the practice level - the significance of and the practical work with planning- and evaluation documents as well as quality accounts Talks and interviews with teachers and school leaders about these documents were analysed as institutional narratives about the Swedish preschool, about the teachers, the children and their conditions in the preschool >MKMK     Theoretical frames Locally produced texts are regarded as institutional narratives (Somers & Gibson, 1994), designed for public control - from above and from outside  in which the teachers& & stress what the preschool is and should be & relate to local and national guiding documents & emphasize comparative advantages on the local (quasi)market & carry out their own projects As such, the texts are not only descriptions of the practice, but work as normative and powerful tools in the formation of the pedagogical practice.n:S       Tools for analyses in this paper Performativity:  Terrors of performativity (from Lyotard, in Ball, 2006) Performances as means for control and change We use the concept to interpret how teachers show their work and what teachers and school leaders regard as  best practice education and teachers social identity are changed !!%&T    rInterview with Eva  30 years of experience in preschool Teacher, superintendent and now a school leader Our talk focused on content in the preschool activities the efforts to visualize quality in the preschool we try to get her perspective as a school leader on the production of planning- and evaluation textsN:0:0 : . Interview with the pre-school teachers Sven and Ingela Sven has 8 years and Ingela has 20 years of experience as teachers & & working in the same working team for two years Their pre-school is situated in an area with low SES, where many children have special needs Our talk related to the talk with Eva and focused on Their work with planning- and evaluation documents and quality accounts, and & & the significance of these documents in their daily work What priorities were made d7ZZ5ZZZ75  /,Three themes were made from both interviews --&b jFlexibility and adjustment Priorities The  market 6   ! ^Flexible and changeable are key words in Eva s presentation  There is always something, some new direction, a new way to look upon this that makes you  change foot , a bit, even if you keep both feet firmly on the ground, you have to be flexible &  It is also about balancing between different demands  from local and state public administration, parents and themselves  and realise what is reasonable and possible to do &  what does these children need . The image of the flexible leader and the flexible staff is clearly portrayed in Eva s words. =PPPPP^PP  % ` =  0 In the teachers talk, adjustment are the key word. In their daily work they must consider the concrete demands of the pre-school activity as well as specific needs among the children.  We need to adjust to the situation as it actually looks ,  It might not be what one has imagined that is prioritized, but other things in need of prioritizing. Most of the planned activities are still there, but not in the same amount as initially planned. According to the teachers, what you have planned and written in the documents might come secondly when the real everyday situations appear. 4ZZZZ=r     " About priorities: The quality account and its supposed content becomes an argument and a criterion for what is done in Eva s preschools  & but we cannot do everything at the same time, one have to pick out something, and of course it must characterize our work, because later it has to be part of our quality account  how it went on, how it turned out, what happened &  Eva tells us they have been engaged with great effort in developing common templates with special design for content and structure of the accounts& Lv  1 6The teachers show another perspective of what is prioritized by focusing on what is not present in the pre-schools presentations.  I think that one doesn t always show the whole practice, rather one show what is, what is visible in some way&  They argue there is some pedagogical stuff that is not possible to show, due to the reasons of secrecy, as  all the social work we do with the children . The templates  initially designed to visualize their practice- also contributes to the in-visibility of what s problematic in the practice ql0S+ql0 # fThe market Eva and her colleagues discuss the possibility to write different accounts.  When discussing it we thought like this: why are we doing this quality account?, why are we doing it for& for whom? Is it for us, for the administration, for the Agency for Education, for the government? For whom are we doing this? The parents maybe & Actually it is a quality account that we want to do for our own, to evaluate our own work related to the steering documents, to see if : are we getting better?, are we developing our activities?, if anything happens? p M MR&  l $ & continuation& Then, we ought to have one quality account for the Internet, where parents log in and look, and the public at large can log in and look &  are we suppose to place out children at preschool xx, or xx, that might be something? And then they are reading& Who on earth want to write all failings!, & published on the net, and the parents who are suppose to choose our preschool, they should say   No, they never make it within the limits of the budget, they have to cut down, now this way, now that& We don t want that, because we want children to come here, that is for us to stay alive of course, we want children and parents to apply for our preschool& If we write out that we are bad  it s no publicity! PY(^_ % P & continuation& We want to keep that for our selves, so actually we should formulate one for our selves, one for the Internet and maybe one for the administration, so they can have their stuff, what they want to know about. We have been discussing this in my group of school leaders, but to be able to make three accounts - blowed if I know  because we discussed it a lot & for whom are we writing this? This is a keystone to one of the paradoxes of performativity: the accounts that are supposed to make the preschool more visible, might in practice make them more opaque The issue for Eva and her colleagues is to write one account that answer questions from authorities, and form the basis for their own development work, and to write in a manner that makes the failings and shortcomings invisible. Z?ZQZ ? ( 2 When talking to the teachers, they agree about the fact that it is common to produce a saleable account, though within this particular school-area, among families with low SES, the reality is somehow different. Ingela describes how she wishes to present their pre-school activities:  What is written will be grounded in play based language learning, because this is a multi cultural area, & but then what we wish should be written, it is & It is hardly possible to have that kind of document. It is nothing that will sell! But we don t sell us either, because no one will buy us, they just come here. That is how I look upon it. But those who comes are very pleased, both parents and children. But you don t buy this place! ZZZ 3  TSome final words& When Eva thinks of receivers of the accounts, she refers to parents with other possibilities to make choices than those Ingela and Sven meet everyday. The discussions about the receivers of the quality account documents illustrate on the practice level, what Stephen Ball calls the  struggle over visibility where  tactics of transparency produce a resistance of opacity, of elusivity; but that this resistance is also paradoxical and disciplinary . Eva and her colleagues state that visualizing one s failings is no good publicity. Instead, in order to avoid such transparency, they find detours to make the accounts more opaque. Paradoxically, such  detour actions will at the same time be disciplinary, as the preschool teachers adjust to the logic of performativity and competition. x&    4! Ingela s story of difficulties to fill in the templates with her stuff informs us about a pre-school that, through the templates, are adjusted to the school leaders ideas of the  best practice and designed for a specific group of parents. It seems to be a less well functional market, a so called  quasi-market where some parents are able to make choices while other neither choose pre-school nor bye the profile available for sale. Due to their everyday work with lots of children with special needs, Ingela and Sven show us the impossibility to fully work in accordance with the documents. Though, the presentations in the planning documents looks like in any ordinary pre-school. These institutional narratives outline a picture of a quasi-market where pre-school teachers - due to secrecy reasons  are unable to tell what they are good at or describe their actual practice, but rather stick to the templates and present a picture of a traditional ordinary  best practice pre-school. ZZZ3ZZZ=3  .     /()*+,   0` 3333ff3` 3333f33ff3` "3333̙ff3` Kf3̙` &e̙3g3f` f333̙po7` ___f3̙;/f9` ff3Lm` ff3LmNLm>?" dd@*?nAd@q<nAqFLK#M n?" dd@   @@``PR    M`2p>>   (      H? ?" `}  WKlicka hr fr att ndra format   E   Hp? ?" `  WKlicka hr fr att ndra format p bakgrundstexten Niv tv Niv tre Niv fyra Niv fem3    X    6H #" `] `}  \*     6 #" ``   V*      6@ #" `] `}  V*      C @ABCDE FjJ@3"0`B   s *DjJ"0 `0H   0޽h ? ___f3̙;/f9___PPT10i.  +D=' r= @B + Kant ' 0   (    H? ?"@  WKlicka hr fr att ndra format     H`? ?"   s;Klicka hr fr att ndra format p underrubrik i bakgrunden<<   6 #" `] `}  \*    6P$ #" `]}   V*     6( #" `] `}  V*     C @ABCDE F8c@3"@B  s *DjJ"  ,$ 0H  0޽h ? ___f3̙;/f9___PPT10i.  +ityD=' r= @B +' 0 w@(    0,٘ P2   P*    0  2  R*  d  c $ ?ul    0< ] 0"  WKlicka hr fr att ndra format p bakgrundstexten Niv tv Niv tre Niv fyra Niv fem3     X  6| P   P*    60    R*  H  0޽hv ? 3380___PPT10.\PȾ; H8(  H H 04 P2   >*  H 0$9  2  @*  H 6< P   >*  H 6@A    @* H H 0޽hv ? 3380___PPT10.d0( 0 @0(  x  c $3@  x  c $5   H  0޽h ? 3380___PPT10.\ѷ ' 0  @(  @x @ c $}   `p  H @ 0޽h ? 333380___PPT10.\ ' 0 P\(  \r \ S 4 P `p  H \ 0޽h ? }ff80___PPT10.\4 ' 0  (  x  c $  `p  H  0޽h ? }ff80___PPT10.\4 ' 0  t(  tx t c $t P `p  H t 0޽h ? }ff80___PPT10.\4 ' 0 ``(  `r ` S  P `p  H ` 0޽h ? }ff80___PPT10.\ ' 0  pd(  dx d c $ @ 0  H d 0޽h ? }ff80___PPT10.\4 ' 0  0(  x  c $@ P `p  H  0޽h ? }ff80___PPT10.\4 ' 0 ph(  hr h S     `  H h 0޽h ? ___f3̙;/f980___PPT10.4X$ ' 0 l$(  lr l S ,  `}   r l S   `  H l 0޽h ? ___f3̙;/f980___PPT10.6U`/ ' 0 ,(  ,r , S X"  `  H , 0޽h ? ___f3̙;/f980___PPT10.{dP@b ' 0 p(  pr p S 3  `  H p 0޽h ? ___f3̙;/f980___PPT10.@$f ' 0 - 0(  0r 0 S dh  `  H 0 0޽h ? ___f3̙;/f980___PPT10.|d W ' 0 t(  tr t S m  `  H t 0޽h ? ___f3̙;/f980___PPT10.Aj ' 0 4(  4r 4 S ܂  `  H 4 0޽h ? ___f3̙;/f980___PPT10.}dPhp ' 0 8(  8r 8 S $q P `  H 8 0޽h ? ___f3̙;/f980___PPT10.~d ' 0 <(  <r < S   `  H < 0޽h ? ___f3̙;/f980___PPT10.dy  ' 0 x(  xr x S 쪘   `  H x 0޽h ? ___f3̙;/f980___PPT10.FNPr ' 0 0(|(  | | S   `  "8]%H | 0޽h ? ___f3̙;/f980___PPT10.F  ' 0 (  r  S   `  H  0޽h ? ___f3̙;/f980___PPT10.L}#  0 l d D (  D^ D S ul   ^  D c $] 0"    What is prioritized are suppose to characterize our work, Eva says and continues  because later it has to be part of our quality account . The quality account and its supposed content becomes an argument and a criterion for what is done in preschool. In Ball s terms  Crucially and invariably acts of fabrication and the fabrications themselves act and reflect back upon the practices they stand for. The fabrication becomes something to be sustained, lived up to. (2006, 696). Evaluation- and quality accounts are institutional narratives constructed with the purpose to be scrutinized from outside, they consist of selected  among several possible  versions about the work in preschool. The main point with these narratives (called fabrications by Ball) is not that they are truth, but &  the point is their effectiveness, in the market or for the inspection, as well as the work they do  on and  in the organisation  their transformational impact (2006, 696). In the  visible preschool, that is open for inspection from outside and subject for competition with other, it is necessary to take these accounts seriously. Eva tells us they have been engaged with great effort in developing common templates with special design for content and structure of the accounts, and simultaneously been deeply concerned in discussions on the actual meaning of the same accounts. a H D 0޽hv ? 3380___PPT10.dF9 0 F>P(  P^ P S ul   8 P c $`] 0"   :Our starting point in this presentation about the perfomative preschool is the preschool teachers concerns about the quality accounts - for whom they are writing these accounts  and their worries about what to write that might cause parents to place their children in other settings.<;N22    H P 0޽hv ? 3380___PPT10.d % 0  T((  T^ T S ul    T c $] 0"    H T 0޽hv ? 3380___PPT10.d 8 0 0X((  X^ X S ul    X c $] 0"    H X 0޽hv ? 3380___PPT10.dp?3\ 0 @\l(  \^ \ S ul    \ c $#] 0"   b2Who is the receiver or receivers of the accounts? It is an important reflection for Eva and her colleagues as they discuss the possibility to write different accounts. Te issue is not so much, referring to Ball, to constantly be visible, but  the uncertainty and instability of being judged in different ways, by different means, through different agents (2006, 693). Making the effort to write three different accounts is not likely, according to Eva. The problem, as Eva puts it, is that if they point out their own failings they risk to  scare away presumptive parents from their preschools, something they cannot afford as they need children  to stay alive .  H \ 0޽hv ? 3380___PPT10.dʷr(@`: ʎ ;kw!P:ȣz'`XL:Z.p\d,ި!41!k( '/ 00DArialngs*<$v0<04DGaramond*<$v0<04 DTimes New Roman<$v0<040DWingdingsRoman<$v Roman WingdingsKantQThe performative preschool narratives about the best practice in pre-schoolBild 2Bild 3Bild 4Bild 5Bild 6Bild 7Bild 8Bild 9-Three themes were made from both interviews Bild 11Bild 12Bild 13Bild 14Bild 15Bild 16Bild 17Bild 18Bild 19Bild 20 Anvnt teckensnittFormgivningsmall BildrubrikerD 4<Version@Garamond-.  2 1."System-̙-- %BB--'̙--%--'@Garamond-. f302 The perfRoot EntrydO)U jCl@Current User&SummaryInformation(< PowerPoint Document(7  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdevgwxyz{|}~f  !"#$%&'()+,-./012345678_7PCPCAnnikaOh+'0 px    (PowerPoint PresentationEdgeAnnika90Microsoft PowerPoint@Jԯ@@@xGg  e@  -@Arial-. $2 T$Karlstad University.-@Arial-. 2 Y$Sweden.-՜.+,D՜.+,`    Bildspel p skrmen7t Arial GaramondTimes New Roman WingdingsKantQThe performative preschool narratives about the best practice in pre-schoolBild 2Bild 3Bild 4Bild 5Bild 6Bild 7Bild 8Bild 9-Three themes were made from both interviews Bild 11Bild 12Bild 13Bild 14Bild 15Bild 16Bild 17Bild 18Bild 19Bild 20 Anvnt teckensnittFormgivningsmall BildrubrikerD 4<Version0<04 B0. @n?" dd@  @@`` (dq 5 #$ 5>>()  () A B HIJKLNOQRSTVWXYZ[\]^_` 0AA@8'(wʚ;ʚ;g4LdLdT0ppp@  <4dddd̨0<4BdBd̨080___PPT10 ? -O  -bThe performative preschool  narratives about  the best practice in pre-schoolQQ$P >Annica Lfdahl Hctor Prez Prieto Karlstad University Sweden?P? N If we write out that we are bad  it s no good publicity! (quotation from interview with school leader Eva)  & what we wish should be written, it is & It is hardly possible to have that kind of document. It is nothing that will sell! ...  (quotation from interview with pre-school teachers) \(=$2$$w$4 (   Background The last decades increasing societal interest on children and their education A  new professionalism which stresses teachers responsibility for planning, accomplishment and evaluation of the practices The Swedish preschools  new legitimacy , that also brought new demands on visibility Pedagogical documentation that contributes to children s visibility as subjects The state and parental demands on visibility. Practices are supposed to be available for public inspection and control R # !     The visible preschool  three interrelated perspectives A societal level  connections to the last decades increasing decentralization, privatization and new forms of control A local level  connections to parental choice and open competition on a  quasi market A practice level  pedagogical demands on documentation, and access to public control, of children's and teachers activities B8R8N  0The purpose with this paper is to get more insight in  the practice level - the significance of and the practical work with planning- and evaluation documents as well as quality accounts Talks and interviews with teachers and school leaders about these documents were analysed as institutional narrativesDocumentSummaryInformation8*Root EntrydO)y@Current User2SummaryInformation(< PowerPoint Document(7f  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdevgwxyz{|}~  !"#$%&'()+,-./012345678_7AnnikaAnnikaOh+'0 px    (PowerPoint PresentationEdgeAnnika90Microsoft PowerPoint@Jԯ@@@xGg  e@  - about the Swedish preschool, about the teachers, the children and their conditions in the preschool >MKMK     Theoretical frames Locally produced texts are regarded as institutional narratives (Somers & Gibson, 1994), designed for public control - from above and from outside  in which the teachers& & stress what the preschool is and should be & relate to local and national guiding documents & emphasize comparative advantages on the local (quasi)market & carry out their own projects As such, the texts are not only descriptions of the practice, but work as normative and powerful tools in the formation of the pedagogical practice.n:S       Tools for analyses in this paper Performativity:  Terrors of performativity (from Lyotard, in Ball, 2006) Performances as means for control and change We use the concept to interpret how teachers show their work and what teachers and school leaders regard as  best practice education and teachers social identity are changed !!%&T    rInterview with Eva  30 years of experience in preschool Teacher, superintendent and now a school leader Our talk focused on content in the preschool activities the efforts to visualize quality in the preschool we try to get her perspective as a school leader on the production of planning- and evaluation textsN:0:0 : . Interview with the pre-school teachers Sven and Ingela Sven has 8 years and Ingela has 20 years of experience as teachers & & working in the same working team for two years Their pre-school is situated in an area with low SES, where many children have special needs Our talk related to the talk with Eva and focused on Their work with planning- and evaluation documents and quality accounts, and & & the significance of these documents in their daily work What priorities were made d7ZZ5ZZZ75  /,Three themes were made from both interviews --&P  jFlexibility and adjustment Priorities The  market 6   ! ^Flexible and changeable are key words in Eva s presentation  There is always something, some new direction, a new way to look upon this that makes you  change foot , a bit, even if you keep both feet firmly on the ground, you have to be flexible &  It is also about balancing between different demands  from local and state public administration, parents and themselves  and realise what is reasonable and possible to do &  what does these children need . The image of the flexible leader and the flexible staff is clearly portrayed in Eva s words. =PPPPP^PP  % ` =  0 In the teachers talk, adjustment are the key word. In their daily work they must consider the concrete demands of the pre-school activity as well as specific needs among the children.  We need to adjust to the situation as it actually looks ,  It might not be what one has imagined that is prioritized, but other things in need of prioritizing. Most of the planned activities are still there, but not in the same amount as initially planned. According to the teachers, what you have planned and written in the documents might come secondly when the real everyday situations appear. 4ZZZZ=r     " About priorities: The quality account and its supposed content becomes an argument and a criterion for what is done in Eva s preschools  & but we cannot do everything at the same time, one have to pick out something, and of course it must characterize our work, because later it has to be part of our quality account  how it went on, how it turned out, what happened &  Eva tells us they have been engaged with great effort in developing common templates with special design for content and structure of the accounts& Lv  1 6The teachers show another perspective of what is prioritized by focusing on what is not present in the pre-schools presentations.  I think that one doesn t always show the whole practice, rather one show what is, what is visible in some way&  They argue there is some pedagogical stuff that is not possible to show, due to the reasons of secrecy, as  all the social work we do with the children . The templates  initially designed to visualize their practice- also contributes to the in-visibility of what s problematic in the practice ql0S+ql0 # fThe market Eva and her colleagues discuss the possibility to write different accounts.  When discussing it we thought like this: why are we doing this quality account?, why are we doing it for& for whom? Is it for us, for the administration, for the Agency for Education, for the government? For whom are we doing this? The parents maybe & Actually it is a quality account that we want to do for our own, to evaluate our own work related to the steering documents, to see if : are we getting better?, are we developing our activities?, if anything happens? p M MR&  l $ & continuation& Then, we ought to have one quality account for the Internet, where parents log in and look, and the public at large can log in and look &  are we suppose to place our children at preschool xx, or xx, that might be something? And then they are reading& Who on earth want to write all failings!, & published on the net, and the parents who are suppose to choose our preschool, they should say   No, they never make it within the limits of the budget, they have to cut down, now this way, now that& We don t want that, because we want children to come here, that is for us to stay alive of course, we want children and parents to apply for our preschool& If we write out that we are bad  it s no publicity! PY(^_.  ! % P & continuation& We want to keep that for our selves, so actually we should formulate one for our selves, one for the Internet and maybe one for the administration, so they can have their stuff, what they want to know about. We have been discussing this in my group of school leaders, but to be able to make three accounts - blowed if I know  because we discussed it a lot & for whom are we writing this? This is a keystone to one of the paradoxes of performativity: the accounts that are supposed to make the preschool more visible, might in practice make them more opaque The issue for Eva and her colleagues is to write one account that answer questions from authorities, and form the basis for their own development work, and to write in a manner that makes the failings and shortcomings invisible. Z?ZQZ ? ( 2 When talking to the teachers, they agree about the fact that it is common to produce a saleable account, though within this particular school-area, among families with low SES, the reality is somehow different. Ingela describes how she wishes to present their pre-school activities:  What is written will be grounded in play based language learning, because this is a multi cultural area, & but then what we wish should be written, it is & It is hardly possible to have that kind of document. It is nothing that will sell! But we don t sell us either, because no one will buy us, they just come here. That is how I look upon it. But those who comes are very pleased, both parents and children. But you don t buy this place! ZZZ 3  TSome final words& When Eva thinks of receivers of the accounts, she refers to parents with other possibilities to make choices than those Ingela and Sven meet everyday. The discussions about the receivers of the quality account documents illustrate on the practice level, what Stephen Ball calls the  struggle over visibility where  tactics of transparency produce a resistance of opacity, of elusivity; but that this resistance is also paradoxical and disciplinary . Eva and her colleagues state that visualizing one s failings is no good publicity. Instead, in order to avoid such transparency, they find detours to make the accounts more opaque. Paradoxically, such  detour actions will at the same time be disciplinary, as the preschool teachers adjust to the logic of performativity and competition. x&    4! Ingela s story of difficulties to fill in the templates with her stuff informs us about a pre-school that, through the templates, are adjusted to the school leaders ideas of the  best practice and designed for a specific group of parents. It seems to be a less well functional market, a so called  quasi-market where some parents are able to make choices while other neither choose pre-school nor bye the profile available for sale. Due to their everyday work with lots of children with special needs, Ingela and Sven show us the impossibility to fully work in accordance with the documents. Though, the presentations in the planning documents looks like in any ordinary pre-school. These institutional narratives outline a picture of a quasi-market where pre-school teachers - due to secrecy reasons  are unable to tell what they are good at or describe their actual practice, but rather stick to the templates and present a picture of a traditional ordinary  best practice pre-school. ZZZ3ZZZ=3   /()*+, ' 8(  8r 8 S \s P ` s H 8 0޽h ? ___f3̙;/f980___PPT10.~dr$5ji74-$--'@Garamond-.  2 1."System-̙-- %BB--'̙--%--'@Garamond-. f302 The performative preschool " *  .-@Garamond-. f3 2 .-@Garamond-. f3@2 &narratives about the best practice      .-@Garamond-. f32 Rzin pre .-@Garamond-. f3 2 R-.-@Garamond-. f32 Rschool .-@Arial-. 2 Annica Lfdahl .-@Arial-. $2 Hctor Prez Prieto   .-@Arial-. $2 Karlstad University    .-@Arial-. 2 0Sweden.-՜.+,D՜.+,`    Bildspel p skrmen7t Arial GaramondTimes New