The article aims to depict the political framing of three grading reforms in Swedish compulsory school, in terms of the political problem they are supposed to solve and what kind of attention is given to the lowest performing pupils. Discourse analysis is employed, focusing on statement producers. The empirical material consists of policy documents from the late 1930s to 2010. The analyses show that three cases of the same type of policy change, a new grading system, rely on very different problem representations. The changes were launched as an equality tool, an accountability measure and a remedy for declining results, respectively. The discourse about the least successful pupils differs. Reasonable demands and a ranking scale without a failing grade characterize the introduction of a norm-referenced system; a first criterion-referenced system rests on a belief that virtually all pupils will meet the formulated levels for passing, an expectation not met, and a changed focus behind the second criterion-referenced system normalizes that some pupils will fail compulsory school. The article also illustrates the merits of studying educational policy change through the theoretical lens of problem representations and directs attention to how reforms can have discursive effects as well as unintended side effects that matter substantially for some people.

本文旨在描述瑞典义务学校的三项分级改革的政治框架，从其应解决的政治问题以及表现最差的学生方面给予什么样的关注。进行语篇分析，重点是陈述产生者。经验材料包括1930年代末至2010年的政策文件。分析表明，三种类型的相同政策变化案例（一种新的分级系统）依赖于非常不同的问题表示形式。这些更改分别作为平等工具，问责措施和结果下降的补救措施而启动。关于最不成功的学生的论述是不同的。合理的要求和等级评分而没有不及格的等级是引入规范参考系统的特征；第一个参照标准系统的信念是，几乎所有学生都将达到所制定的及格水平，没有达到期望，而第二个参照标准系统背后的重点改变使某些学生将无法完成义务教育。本文还通过问题表征的理论视角阐述了研究教育政策变革的优点，并着重关注了改革如何能够产生话语效果以及对某些人而言至关重要的意料之外的副作用。