Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison and Benchmarking as Key Elements in Governing Processes in Norwegian Schools

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Education Policies and the Restructuring of the Educational Profession

Part of the book series: Perspectives on Rethinking and Reforming Education ((PRRE))

Abstract

Over the past 15 years, the assessment of the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), which is sponsored by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), has become a strategically important actor in international education. This chapter aims to demonstrate how the OECD, and particularly the PISA, has influenced assessment policies and school governing in Norway. First, I examine the key functions of international and national assessment policies. Second, I explore the ways of which the use of national test results is included in local quality assessment systems and how superintendents, principals and teachers perceive the use of these results. Based on this, I will discuss the functions of national achievement tests, how comparison and benchmarking are integrated in school governing and the possible consequences for accountability practices in which visibility creates pressure on key actors in the school system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Per 1. January 2018 there are 422 municipalities in Norway and many of them are quite small (approximately one fourth of the municipalities have more than 10.000 inhabitants).

  2. 2.

    Riverside has more interviews than the other schools because this school was also used as the pilot for the study.

  3. 3.

    The national student survey (Elevundersøkelsen) is organised by the Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training and conducted annually to collect data about students’ perceptions of their learning environment.

  4. 4.

    The Seven Star Network is an inter-municipal collaboration on specific areas such as school evaluation and continuous professional development for teachers.

  5. 5.

    The concept of “introduction class” (In Norwegian: mottaksklasse) refers to a class for students from immigrant families who have just come to Norway.

References

  • Åkerstrøm Andersen, N., & Thygesen, N. T. (2004). Styring af styringsværktøjer. Nordisk Administrativ Tidsskrift, 1, 28–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bachmann, K., Sivesind, K., Afsar, A., & Hopmann, S. (2004). Hvordan formidles læreplanen? En komparativ evaluering av læreplanbaserte virkemidler - deres utforming, konsistens og betydning for læreres praksis. Kristiansand: Høyskoleforlaget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bachmann, K., Sivesind, K., & Bergem, R. (2008). Evaluering og ansvarliggjøring i skolen (evaluation and school accountability). In G. Langfeldt, E. Elstad, & S. Hopmann (Eds.), Ansvarlighet i skolen. Politiske spørsmål og pedagogiske svar (pp. 94–122). Fagernes: Cappelen Akademisk Forlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, D. P., & LeTendre, G. (2005). Global similarities and national differences. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball, S. (2015). Education, governance and the tyranny of numbers. Journal of Education Policy, 30(3), 299–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benveniste, L. (2002). The political structuration of assessment: Negotiating state power and legitimacy. Comparative Education Review, 46(1), 89–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (1998). Administrative reform policy: The case of Norway. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 64(3), 457–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elstad, E. (2008). Ansvarliggjøringsmekanismer: Når skoleeier eller pressen stiller skoler til ansvar. In G. Langfeldt, E. Elstad, & S. Hopmann (Eds.), Ansvarlighet i skolen. Politiske spørsmål og pedagogiske svar (pp. 204–234). Fagernes: Cappelen Akademisk Forlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elstad, E. (2009). Schools which are named, shamed and blamed by the media: School accountability in Norway. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(2), 173–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elstad, E., & Sivesind, K. (Eds.). (2010). PISA sannheten om skolen? Universitetsforlaget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeland, Ø. (2000). Skolen i kommunalt eie - politisk styrt eller profesjonell ledet skoleutvikling? PhD thesis. Faculty of Education, University of Oslo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeland, Ø., & Langfeldt, G. (2009). Forholdet mellom stat og kommune i styring av norsk utdanningspolitikk 1970-2008. Acta Didactica, 3(1), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2000). The European Report on Quality of School Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunter, H., Hall, D., Serpieri, R., & Grimaldi, E. (Ed.). (2016). New public management and the reform of education: European lessons for policy and practice. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gustafsson, J. E. (2008). Effects of international comparative studies on educational quality on the quality of educational research. European Educational Research Journal, 7(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hacking, I. (1983). Representing and intervening: Introductory topics in the philosophy of natural science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C. (2007). Intellectual obsolescence and intellectual makeovers: Reflections on the tools of government after two decades. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 20(1), 127–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopmann, S. (2003). On the evaluation of curriculum reforms. In P. Haug & T. A. Schwandt (Eds.), Evaluating educational reforms. Scandinavian perspectives (pp. 111–132). Greenwich, Connecticut: Information Age Publishing.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howie, S., & Plump, T. (2005). International comparative studies of education and large-scale change. In N. Bascia, A. Cumming, A. Datnow, K. Leithwood, & D. Livingstone (Eds.), International handbook of educational policy (Vol. 1, pp. 75–99). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jarning, H. (2010). Resultater som teller - Kunnskapskontroll og resultater i skolens århundre. In E. Eyvind & K. Sivesind (Eds.), PISA sannheten om skolen? (pp. 199–221). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. ISBN 978-82-15-01487-6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karlsen, G. E. (1993). Desentralisert skoleutvikling. En utdanningspolitisk studie av norsk grunnskole med vekt på 70- og 80-tallet. Oslo: Ad Notam Gyldendal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karlsen, G. E. (2006). Utdanning, styring og marked: norsk utdanningspolitikk i et internasjonalt perspektiv. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langfeldt, G. (2008). Resultatstyring som verktøy og ideologi. Statlige styringsstrategier i utdanningssektoren. In G. Langfeldt, E. Elstad, & S. T. Hopmann (Eds.), Ansvarlighet i skolen. Oslo: Cappelen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lascoumes, P., & Le Gales, P. (2007). Introduction: Understanding public policy through its instruments—From the nature of instruments to the sociology of public policy instrumentation. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 20(1), 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linn, R., & Baker, E. L. (1995). What do international assessments imply for world-class standards? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 17(4), 405–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundgren, U. P. (1990). Educational policy-making, decentralisation and evaluation. In M. Granheim, M. Kogan, & U. P. Lundgren (Eds.), Evaluation as policymaking. Introducing evaluation into a national decentralised educational system (pp. 23–41). London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundgren, U. P. (2003). The political governing (governance) of education and evaluation. In P. Haug & T. A. Schwandt (Eds.), Evaluating educational reforms: Scandinavian reforms (pp. 99–110). Information Age Publishing Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mausethagen, S., Skedsmo, G., & Prøitz, T. (2016). Ansvarliggjøring og nye organisasjonsrutiner i skolen – rom for læring? Nordiske organisasjonsstudier, 18(2), 79–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, H.-D., & Benvot, A. (2013). PISA and the globalization of education governance: Some puzzles and problems. In H.-D. Meyer & A. Benvot (Eds.), Pisa, power and policy—The emergence of global educational governance (pp. 9–26). Southhampton: Symposium Books.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Møller, J., & Skedsmo, G. (2013). Centralization and decentralization as twin reform strategies. In: L. Moos (Ed.), Transnational influences on values and practices in Nordic educational leadership—Is there a Nordic model (pp. 61–72). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Nóvoa, A., & Yariv-Mashal, T. (2003). Comparative research in education: A mode of governance or a historical journey? Comparative Education, 39(4), 423–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (1988). Reviews of national policies for education Norway. Paris: Department of the Examiners.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2007). PISA—The OECD programme for international student assessment. Retrieved March 21, 2009 from http://www.pisa.oecd.org/dataoecd/51/27/37474503.pdf.

  • OECD. (2016). PISA 2015. Results in focus. Retrieved February 2, 2017 from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisa-2015-results-in-focus.pdf.

  • Ozga, J. (2009). Governing education through data in England: From regulation to self-evaluation. Journal of Educational Policy, 24(2), 149–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ozga, J. (2012). Assessing PISA. European Educational Research Journal, 11(2), 166–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paulsen, J. M., & Høyer, H. C. (2016). External control and professional trust in norwegian school governing. Synthesis from a Nordic research project. Nordic Studies in Education, 36(2), 86–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petterson, D., Popkewitz, T., & Lindblad, S. (2017). In the grey zone: Large scale assessment-based activities betwixt and between policy, research and practice. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 3(1), 29–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sivesind, K., & Bachmann, K. (2008). Hva forandres med nye standarder? Krav og utfordringer med Kunnskapsløftets læreplaner. In G. Langfeldt, E. Elstad, & S. Hopmann (Eds.), Ansvarlighet i skolen. Politiske spørsmål og pedagogiske svar (pp. 62–93). Fagernes: Cappelen Akademisk Forlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sivesind, K., Bachmann, K., & Afsar, A. (2003). Nordiske læreplaner (Nordic Curricula). Oslo: Læringssenteret.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skedsmo, G. (2009). School governing in transition. Perspectives, purposes and perceptions of evaluation policy (Doctoral thesis. Department of Teacher Education and School Development, Faculty of Education, University of Oslo).

    Google Scholar 

  • Spillane, J. P. (2012). Data in practice: Conceptualizing the data-based decision-making phenomena. American Journal of Education, 118(2), 113–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Education Act. Regulation (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  • The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2005). Nasjonalt kvalitets vurderings system for grunnopplæringen (A national system for quality assessment in comprehensive education). February 14, 2008 from http://udir.no/Artikler/_Vurdering/Nasjonal-kvalitetsvurderingssystem-for-grunnopplaringen-/.

  • The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2008a). Analysis of results from the national tests. Retrieved February 21, 2009 from http://www.udir.no/upload/Nasjonale_prover/Analyse_av_resultater_fra_nasjonale_prover_2007.pdf.

  • The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2008b). Hva måler nasjonale prøver? (What do the national tests measure?). Retrieved February 2, 2009 from http://www.utdanningsdirektoratet.no/templates/udir/TM_Artikkel.aspx?id=3546.

  • The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2012). Rettleiing og retningslinjer: Om nasjonale prøver (Framework for national tests). Retrieved November 1, 2016 from http://www.udir.no/Vurdering/Nasjonale-prover/Rettleiing-og-retningslinjer-nasjonale-prover/1-Om-nasjonale-prover/.

  • The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2017a). Analyse av nasjonale prøver på 5. trinn. Retrieved December 1, 2017 from https://www.udir.no/tall-og-forskning/finn-forskning/tema/nasjonale-prover/resultater-fra-nasjonale-prover-pa-5.-trinn/.

  • The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2017b). Analyse av nasjonale prøver på 8. og 9. trinn. Retrieved December 1, 2017 from https://www.udir.no/tall-og-forskning/finn-forskning/tema/nasjonale-prover/resultater-fra-nasjonale-prover-pa-8.-og-9.-trinn/.

  • Tveit, S. (2014). Educational assessment in Norway. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 21(2), 221–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uljens, M., Møller, J., Ârlestig, H., & Frederiksen, L. F. (2013). The professionalisation of Nordic school leadership. In L. Moos (Ed.), Transnational influences on values and practices in Nordic educational leadership. Is there a Nordic model? (pp. 133–158). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Werler, T., & Sivesind, K. (2007). Norway. In H. Döbert, W. Hörner, B. von Kopp, & W. Mitter (Eds.), The education system of Europe. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • White Paper No. 30. (2003–2004). Kultur for læring (Culture for learning). The Ministry of Education and Research.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Teacher Education and School Research, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

    Guri Skedsmo

Authors
  1. Guri Skedsmo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guri Skedsmo .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France

    Romuald Normand

  2. Institute of International and Comparative Education, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China

    Min Liu

  3. Institute of Education, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal

    Luís Miguel Carvalho

  4. Faculty of Education, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil

    Dalila Andrade Oliveira

  5. Faculty of Educational Sciences, Université Laval, Quebec City, Québec, Canada

    Louis LeVasseur

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. and Educational Science Publishing House

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Skedsmo, G. (2018). Comparison and Benchmarking as Key Elements in Governing Processes in Norwegian Schools. In: Normand, R., Liu, M., Carvalho, L., Oliveira, D., LeVasseur, L. (eds) Education Policies and the Restructuring of the Educational Profession. Perspectives on Rethinking and Reforming Education. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8279-5_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8279-5_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-8278-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-8279-5

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation