“Governing by templates” through new modes of school inspection in Norway
- 409 Downloads
To date, few observational studies have addressed Scandinavian school inspectors in the field, specifically how inspectors use templates to monitor the formative assessment routines of schools and local school authorities. This paper investigates how the current inspection handbook is being adopted and enacted on the municipal level and the school level in Norwegian compulsory schools. Specifically, this study illuminates through observation two empirical examples of how one of the 17 County Governors’ Offices, as part of a larger study, conducted regular, state school inspection. Conceptually, the paper focuses on how inspection guides and steers though use of fixed templates. Analysis shows that inspectors and schools under scrutiny are struggling in combining the traditional focus on legal compliance with a more performative emphasis on formative assessment of students. In addition, the examples given highlight how combining field observation and the concept of “governing by templates” contributes to school inspection studies, in a dynamic policy context undergoing substantial change.
KeywordsEducational policy Governing by templates Governing tools Policy enactment School inspection School self-evaluation
This work was supported by a grant from the Research Council of Norway (Project No. 212328), who financed the project “Legal Standards and Professional Judgment in Educational Leadership” (LEX-EL), based at the University of Oslo, Norway. The author wishes to thank colleagues at the Faculty of Educational Sciences in Oslo for their valuable comments.
- Baxter, J., Grek, S., & Segerholm, C. (2015). Regulatory frameworks: Shifting frameworks, shifting criteria. In S. Grek & J. Lindgren (Eds.), Governing by inspection. Studies in European education studies (pp. 27–37). Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Bentham, J. (1843). The works of Jeremy Bentham, Vol. IV, J. Bowring (Ed.). (Edinburgh: Simpkin, Marshall and Company) [Reprinted 1962. (New York: Russell and Russell).Google Scholar
- Bitan, K., Haep, A., & Steins, G. (2015). School inspections still in dispute: An exploratory study of school principals’ perceptions of school inspections. International Journal of Leadership in Education: Theory and Practice, 18(4), 419–439.Google Scholar
- Bowe, R., Ball, S. J., & Gold, A. (1992). Reforming Education and Changing Schools: Case studies in policy sociology. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Bryman, A. (2011). Samhällsvetenskapliga metoder [Social research methods]. Malmö: Liber.Google Scholar
- Clarke, J. (2015). Inspections: Governing at a distance. In S. Grek & J. Lindgren (Eds.), Governing by inspection. Studies in European Education Series (pp. 11–26). Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Czarniawska-Joerges, B. (2007). Shadowing: And other techniques for doing fieldwork in modern societies. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press.Google Scholar
- Foucault, M. (1987). Övervakning och straff [Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison]. Lund: Arkiv.Google Scholar
- Government Act. (1992). Act relating to municipalities and county authorities (“The Local Government Act”). Retrieved from www.regjeringen.no/globalassets/upload/krd/tx-23249-kommuneloven-eng.pdf.
- Government Act. (1998). Act relating to primary and secondary education (“Opplæringsloven”). http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/KD/Vedlegg/Grunnskole/Education_Act_Norway_30_September_2010.pdf.
- Grek, S., Lawn, M., Ozga, J., Shapira, M. & Weir, A. (2010). School self-evaluation in Scotland. (Scotland: National Report, 2010.2, 10).Google Scholar
- Grek, S., & Lindgren, J. (Eds.). (2015). Governing by inspection. Studies in European education series. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Grønmo, S. (2004). Samfunnsvitenskapelige metoder [Methods in social science]. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.Google Scholar
- Hall, J. B. (2016). State School Inspection: The Norwegian Example. Doctoral dissertation. Department of Teacher Education and School Research, Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Oslo. ISSN 1501-8962/No. 259.Google Scholar
- Kooiman, J. (1993). Social-political governance: Introduction. In J. Kooiman (Ed.), Modern governance: New government—society interactions (pp. 1–8). London: Sage.Google Scholar
- Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Harvard, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Legal Standards and Professional Judgment in Educational Leadership: The LEX-EL project. (2016). (Oslo: The University of Oslo). http://www.uv.uio.no/ils/english/research/projects/legalstandardsedu/.
- Maroy, C. (2012). Towards post-bureaucratic modes of governance: A European perspective. In G. Steiner-Khamsi & F. Waldow (Eds.), World yearbook of education 2012 (pp. 62–79). London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Nelson, R. & Ehren, M. (2014). Review and synthesis of evidence on the (mechanisms of) impact of school inspections. http://schoolinspections.eu/impact/review-on-the-impact-and-mechanisms-of-impact-of-school-inspections/.
- Ozga, J., Dahler-Larsen, P., Segerholm, C., & Simola, H. (Eds.). (2011). Fabricating quality in education: Data and governance in Europe. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Ozga, J., & Grek, S. (2008). Governing by numbers? Shaping education through data, CES Briefing No 44. Edinburgh: Centre for Educational Sociology.Google Scholar
- Ozga, J., & Segerholm, C. (2015). Neo-liberal agenda(s) in education. In S. Grek & J. Lindgren (Eds.), Governing by inspection. Studies in European education studies (pp. 27–37). Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Power, M. (1997). The audit society: Rituals of verification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Ragin, C., & Amoroso, L. M. (2011). Constructing social research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Oaks Press/Sage.Google Scholar
- Regulation. (2006). Forskrift til opplæringsloven FOR-2006-06-23-724 [Regulation pertaining to the Education Act, 1998]. Oslo: The Ministry of Education and Research.Google Scholar
- Silverman, D. (2011). Interpreting qualitative data. London/Los Angeles, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Simons, M. (2014a). Governing education without reform: The power of the example. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 36(5), 712–773.Google Scholar
- Simons, M. (2014b). Governing through feedback: From national orientation towards global positioning. In T. Fenwick, E. Mangez, & J. Ozga (Eds.), World yearbook of education 2014: Governing knowledge: Comparison, knowledge-based technologies and expertise in the regulation of education (pp. 155–171). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Sivesind, K. (2012). Law + pedagogy = truth? Regular, state inspection of schools: On new forms of governing and use of professional judgment. In H. Jakhelln & T. Welstad (Eds.), Utdanningsrettslige emner - artikler med utvalgte tema fra skole- og arbeidsrettens område (pp. 655–681). Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademiske.Google Scholar
- Sivesind, K., Skedsmo, G. & Hall, J. B. (2016). Et felles nasjonalt tilsyn: reformbaner og scenarier. [Regular, state inspection: reform trajectories and scenarios through history]. In K. Andenæs & J. Møller (Eds.), Retten i skolen – mellom pedagogikk, jus og politikk (pp. 99–122). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
- Skedsmo, G. (2009). School governing in transition. Perspectives, purposes and perceptions of evaluation policy. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Teacher Education and School Research, Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Oslo.Google Scholar
- Statistics Norway (SSB). (2016a). Key figures on municipal activities(KOSTRA). https://www.ssb.no/en/offentlig-sektor/kostra.
- Statistics Norway (SSB). (2016b). Official website. http://www.ssb.no/en/.
- The Knowledge Promotion. (2006). Oslo: The Ministry of Education. Retrieved from http://www.udir.no/Stottemeny/English/Curriculum-in-English/_english/Knowledge-promotion—Kunnskapsloftet/.
- The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2013a). Methods for inspection: A handbook of inspection methods in compliance with the Pre-school Act and the Education Act. Oslo: The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training.Google Scholar
- The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2013b). The education mirror (2013): Facts and analysis of kindergarten, primary and secondary education in Norway. (Oslo: The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training). http://www.udir.no/globalassets/upload/rapporter/theeducationmirror_2013.pdf.
- The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2015). Endringer i regelverket om vurdering [Amendments in regulations concerning assessment]. https://www.fylkesmannen.no/PageFiles/606861/Endringer-i-regelverket-om-vurdering.pdf.
- The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2016a). Regelverk - Tilsyn i utdanningssektoren [Regulations: Inspection in the educational sector]. http://www.udir.no/Regelverk/regelverk/tilsyn/.
- The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2016b). Felles nasjonalt tilsyn 2014–2017 [Regular state inspection 2014–2017]. http://www.udir.no/regelverk-og-tilsyn/tilsyn/felles-nasjonalt-tilsyn/felles-nasjonalt-tilsyn-2014-2017/.
- Weick, K. E. (2009). Enacting an environment: Infrastructure of organizing. In K. E. Weick (Ed.), Making sense of the organization: The impermanent organization (Vol. II, pp. 184–197). Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Wiliam, D. (2013). Att följa lärande - formativ bedömning i praktiken [Embedded formative assessment]. Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar