This paper describes the educational model four partner countries have developed in the context of Community Service Engineering (CSE). CSE is a project co-funded by the European Commission within the Lifelong Learning Programme 2013-2016.All participating institutions start from real-life project work with technology students (EQF level 6 or 7). All partners underpin this project work with a taught programme and the mentoring of the students. All students create an online portfolio in which they illustrate both the process and the final result of their project. (International) interaction is stimulated in the project based course work in various stages and for various reasons. International interaction is also facilitated via the taught programme to touch hot topics and compare between country contexts.The paper sums up the four building blocks which form the educational model and are the stepping-stones to move forward the real-life project work and allow for (international) interaction with students and other stakeholders. In the next paragraphs the paper identifies the prerequisites,process and outcomes that made collaboration for Community Service Engineering possible on the level of institutions, teachers/professors and students. Here we also touch the importance of networking with partners in the field in the various countries. The CSE curriculum also offers new opportunities and perspectives for them. In the last two paragraphs the paper pays detailed attention to the role of the teacher/professor and the future plans partners have for the CSE curriculum. Here the concept of ally partners will be explained and a call to join the consortium will be launched.

The article discusses how teachers who work with people with intellectual disabilities in a daily activity center specializing in horticultural work, and in an upper secondary special school specializing in farming, argues in favor of the value of nature. The theoretical starting point is based on a discourse inspired approach. Three interpretative repertoires have been identified: nature makes us happy, nature demands motivation and nature leads to fellowship, which all emphasize or deny different values connected with nature. They may also be seen as common resources that can be used when there is a need to legitimate the existence of the activities studied. The repertoires are also discussed in relation to texts about the relationship between man and nature.

I artikeln diskuteras hur handledare som arbetar med personer som har intellektuella funktionsnedsättningar i en kommunal daglig verksamhet med trädgårdsinriktning och i gymnasiesärskolans naturbruksprogram argumenterar för värdet av natur. Den teoretiska utgångspunkten består av ett diskursinspirerat förhållningssätt. Tre tolkningsrepertoarer har identifieras: naturen gör oss lyckliga, naturen kräver motivation och naturen leder till gemenskap, som alla betonar eller förnekar olika värden med naturen. De kan också ses som gemensamma resurser som kan användas vid behov för att legitimera verksamheternas existens. Tolkningsrepertoarerna diskuteras även i viss mån i relation till texter om relationen mellan människa och natur.

Aim: The education system in Sweden has not yet formed a sustainable way into higher education and lifelong learning for students with intellectual disabilities. Discussions on inclusive education nationally in society are ongoing but few concrete examples have yet been implemented. This presentation will present experiences from the first attempt to organize and provide courses for students with intellectual disabilities within higher music education in Sweden. Methods: Two courses were given at the Academy of Music in Malmö, Lund University in 2010 and 2011. The content of the first course focused on the history of music, rhythm and ensemble playing. The second one focused on Opera as an art form with both process and product as means of learning. Results & Conclusions: The experiences show the students' capability to develop and enhance musical expression. However, questions concerning (a) the quality of music education currently available to students with ID, (b) pedagogical approaches in the academy, (c) rules for admission to higher education and (d) different attitudes to widening participation within the academies has emerged and need to be processed.