Teachers’ assessment experiences and perceptions in the practical-aesthetic subjects

References

• Apple, M. W. (2004). Ideology and curriculum. New York: Routledge Falmer.
   Google Scholar
• Bacci, S., Bartolucci, F., & Gnaldi, M. (2012). A class of multidimensional latent class IRT models for ordinal polytomous item responses. Retrieved July 28, 2014, from http://arxiv.org/pdf/1201.4667v1.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Bamford, A. (2006). The wow factor: Global research compendium on the impact of arts in education. Műnchen: Waxmann.
   Google Scholar
• Bamford, A. (2012). Arts and cultural education in Norway 2010/2011. Retrieved January 21, 2014, from http://www.kunstkultursenteret.no/sites/k/kunstkultursenteret.no/files/1f0ba571783fe8dc31a13ac76d5f196a.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Rockville, MD: National Inst. of Mental Health.
   Google Scholar
• Benn, J. (2009). Practical wisdom, understanding of coherence and competencies for everyday life. International Journal of Home Economics, 2(1), 2–14.
   Google Scholar
• Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box. Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139–148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15. doi: 10.3102/0013189X033008003
   Google Scholar
• Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J.-C. (1990). Reproduction in education, society and culture. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Brænne, K. (2009). Mellom ord og handling. Om verdsetjing i kunst og handverksfeltet [Between words and actions. On evaluation in the field of Arts and Craft]. (PhD), The Oslo School of Architecture and Design, Oslo.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, G. T. L. (2004). Teachers' conceptions of assessment: Implications for policy and professional development. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 11(3), 301–318. doi: 10.1080/0969594042000304609
   Google Scholar
• Costantino, T., & Bresler, L. (2010). Assessment in schools - Creative subjects. In P. Peterson, E. Baker, & B. McGaw (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of education (3rd ed., pp. 262–267). Amsterdam: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dale, E. L. (2008). Del III: Reproduksjon av sosial ulikhet og ettergivenhet i utdanningssystemet [Reproduction of social inequality and submission in the education system]. In E. L. Dale (Ed.), Fellesskolen - reproduksjon av sosial ulikhet (pp. 279–377). Oslo: Cappelen Akademisk forlag.
   Google Scholar
• Egeberg, G., Guðmundsdóttir, G. B., Hatlevik, O. E., Ottestad, G., Skaug, J. H., & Tømte, K. (2012). Monitor 2011: Skolens digitale tilstand [The ICT Monitor 2011: The digital condition in schools]. Tromsø: Senter for IKT i utdanningen.
   Google Scholar
• Elstad, E., & Sivesind, K. (2010). PISA - sannheten om skolen? [PISA - The truth about school?]. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
   Google Scholar
• Engelsen, K. S., & Smith, K. (2010). Is “excellent” good enough? Education Inquiry, 1(4), 415–431. doi: 10.3402/edui.v1i4.21954
   Google Scholar
• Espeland, M., Allern, T. H., Carlsen, K., & Kalsnes, S. (2011). Praktiske og estetiske fag og lærerutdanning [Practical-aesthetic subjects and teacher education]. HSH-rapport 2011/1. Stord: Høgskulen Stord/Haugesund.
   Google Scholar
• Gamlem, S. M., & Munthe, E. (2014). Mapping the quality of feedback to support students’ learning in lower secondary classrooms. Cambridge Journal of Education, 44(1), 75–92. doi: 10.1080/0305764X.2013.855171
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gamlem, S. M., & Smith, K. (2013). Student perceptions of classroom feedback. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 20(2), 150–169. doi: 10.1080/0969594X.2012.749212
   Google Scholar
• Goodson, I. F., Mangan, J. M., & Anstead, C. J. (1998). Subject knowledge: Readings for the study of school subjects. London: Falmer Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gorozidis, G., & Papaioannou, A. (2011). Teachers's self-efficacy, achievement goals, attitudes and intentions to implement the new Greek Physical Education curriculum. European Physical Education Review, 17(2), 231–253. doi: 10.1177/1356336X11413654
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grønmo, L. S., & Onstad, T. (2009). Tegn til bedring: norske elevers prestasjoner i matematikk og naturfag i TIMMS 2007 [Signs of improvement: Norwegian students' performance in mathematics and science in TIMMS 2007]. Oslo: Unipub.
   Google Scholar
• Hallås, O., Holthe, A., Vindenes, N., & Styve, E. T. (2012). De grunnleggende ferdighetene i de praktisk-estetiske fagene [The core skills in the practical-aesthetic subjects]. In I. Pareliussen, B. B. Moen, A. Reinertsen, & T. Solhaug (Eds.), FOU i praksis 2012. (pp. 111–119) Trondheim: Tapir.
   Google Scholar
• Hardman, K. (2008). Physical education in schools: A global perspective [TJELESNI ODGOJ U ŠKOLAMA: GLOBALNI PREGLED STANJA]. Kinesiology, 40(1), 5–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2012). Professional capital. Transforming teaching in every school. New York, NY: Teachers College Press/Ontario Principals' Council.
   Google Scholar
• Hargreaves, L. (2009). The status of prestige of teachers and teaching. In L. J. Saha & A. G. Dworkin (Eds.), International handbook of research on teachers and teaching (pp. 217–229). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Holthe, A., Hallås, O., Styve, E. T., & Vindenes, N. (2013). Rammefaktorenes betydning for opplæringen i de praktisk-estetiske fagene - en casestudie [The importance of frame factors for education in the practical-aesthetic subjects - A case study]. Acta Didactica Norge, 7(1), Article no. 13. Retrieved from https://www.journals.uio.no/index.php/adno/article/view/1118
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., & Estrada, V. (2013). Technology Outlook for Norwegian Schools 2013-2018: An NMC Horizon project regional analysis. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2011). Chapter 19: Data analysis in qualitative and mixed research. In R. B. Johnson & L. B. Christensen (Eds.), Educational research methods: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (4th ed., pp. 515–545). Los Angeles: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Kalsnes, S. (2008). Fagdidaktikk i musikk [Didactics in music]. In E. M. Halvorsen (Ed.), Didaktikk for grunnskolen (pp. 236–261). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.
   Google Scholar
• Kimbell, R., & Stables, K. (2008). Researching design learning: Issues and findings from two decades of research and development. London: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Klafki, W. (2001). Dannelsesteori og didaktik: nye studier [Neuse Studien zur Bildungstheorie und Didaktik]. Århus: Klim.
   Google Scholar
• Klette, K. (2003). Lærerens klasseromsarbeid; interaksjon- og samarbeidsformer i norske klasserom etter Reform 97. [The teacher's classroom work; interaction and cooperation in Norwegian classrooms after Reform 97]. In K. Klette (Ed.), Klasserommets praksisformer etter Reform 97. Synteserapport. Oslo: Pedagogisk forskningsinstitutt. Retrieved from http://www.google.no/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CBoQFjAAahUKEwiik6z5mOfGAhUFLHIKHeHMA-Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.forskningsradet.no%2Fcsstorage%2Fvedlegg%2Fklette.doc&ei=8JerVaLbJIXYyAPhmY-wDg&usg=AFQjCNE1tt6sp0TdVfQuaNg3OxzAPg_2Eg&sig2=SIQb4p4DnxclwF_rW1Bgsw
   Google Scholar
• Klewe, L., Berg, L., Neset, T., & Sørlie, A. M. (2012). Videreutdanningsbehov blant lærere i grunnopplæringen: Læreres og rektorers vurdering av behovet [The need for further training among teachers in compulsory school: Teachers’ and principals’ assessment of the need]. København: Aarhus Universitet/Oxford Research.
   Google Scholar
• Krumsvik, R. (2008). Situated learning and teachers’ digital competence. Education and Information Technologies, 13(4), 279–290. doi: 10.1007/s10639-008-9069-5
   Google Scholar
• Krumsvik, R. (2014). Teacher educators' digital competence. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 58(3), 269–280. doi: 10.1080/00313831.2012.726273
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kvale, S. (2001). Det kvalitative forskingsintervju [The qualitative research interview]. Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk.
   Google Scholar
• Limstrand, K., & Abrahamsen, G. (2009). Bedre vurdering i kunstfagene [Better assessment in the arts subjects]. Bodø: Nasjonalt senter for kunst og kultur i opplæringen.
   Google Scholar
• Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2003). The role of self-efficacy beliefs in student engagement and learning in the classroom. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 19, 119–137. doi: 10.1080/10573560308223
   Google Scholar
• Lutnæs, E. (2011). Standpunktvurdering i grunnskolefaget Kunst og håndverk [Grading overall achievement in the elementary school subject Arts and Craft]. (PhD), Arkitektur- og designhøgskolen i Oslo, Oslo.
   Google Scholar
• Lysne, A. (2004). Karakterer og kompetanse. Bind 2 (Vol. B. 2). [Grades and competence]. Haslum: AVA Forlag.
   Google Scholar
• M&R, C. G. (2014). Om statistikk for 2013, fastsetting og klage på standpunktkarakter [Statistics for 2013, final grades and complaints]. Retrieved September 21, 2014, from http://www.fylkesmannen.no/Documents/Dokument%20FMMR/Barnehage%20og%20oppl%C3%A6ring/Eksamen%20og%20vurdering/M%C3%B8te%2007.02.14%20-%20Klager%20p%C3%A5%20standpunkt%20-%20statistikk%20-%20Fylkesmannen%20i%20MR.pdf?epslanguage=nn
   Google Scholar
• MOK. (2006a). Forskrift til opplæringslova (FOR 2006-06-23 nr 724) [Regulation to the education act]. Lovdata. Retrieved September 3, 2014, from http://lovdata.no/dokument/SF/forskrift/2006-06-23-724
   Google Scholar
• MOK. (2006b). Læreplanverket for Kunnskapsløftet. Midlertidig utgave juni 2006 [National curriculum for knowledge promotion. Temporary release, June 2006]. Oslo: Ministry of Knowledge.
   Google Scholar
• Møller, J., Ottesen, E., & Herzberg, F. (2010). Møtet mellom skolens profesjonsforståelse og Kunnskapsløftet som styringsreform [The meeting between schools’ professional philosophy and the Knowledge Promotion as government reform]. Acta Didactica Norge, 4(1), 1–23.
   Google Scholar
• NDET. (2013). Veiledning til vurdering i kroppsøving. Bruk av fysiske og tekniske testar i kroppsøving. [Guidelines for assessment in physical education. The use of physical and technical tests in Physical Education]. Oslo: Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. Retrieved February 3, 2014, from http://www.udir.no/Lareplaner/Veiledninger-til-lareplaner/Revidert-2013/Veiledning-til-revidert-lareplan-i-kroppsoving/4-Tematekster/Bruk-av-fysiske-og-tekniske-testar-i-kroppsoving/?read=1
   Google Scholar
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2011). OECD reviews of evaluation and assessment in education. Norway. Retrieved May 7, 2013, from www.oecd.org/dataoecd/60/60/48632032.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Opheim, V., Grøgaard, J. B., & Næss, T. (2010). De gamle er eldst? Betydning av skoleressurser, undervisningsformer of læringsmiljø for elevenes prestasjoner på femte, åttende og tiende trinn i grunnopplæringen [The old are the eldest? The importance of school resources, forms of teaching and learning community for students’ achievement at fifth, eighth and tenth level in elementary and lower secondary school]. Rapport 34/2010. Oslo: NIFU-STEP.
   Google Scholar
• Oppland, C. G. (2013). Flest klager på standpunktkarakteren i praktiske-estetiske fag [Most complaints about final grade in practical-aesthetic subjects]. Retrieved September 21, 2014, from http://www.fylkesmannen.no/Oppland/Arkiv---Nyheter/Flest-klager-pa-standpunktkarakteren-i-praktiske-estetiske-fag/
   Google Scholar
• Pedder, D., & Opfer, V. D. (2013). Professional learning orientations: Patterns of dissonance and alignment between teachers' values and practices. Research Papers in Education, 28(5), 539–570. doi: 10.1080/02671522.2012.706632
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prøitz, T. S. (2013). Variations in grading practice - Subjects matter. Education Inquiry, 4(3), 555–575. doi: 10.3402/edui.v4i3.22629
   Google Scholar
• Prøitz, T. S., & Borgen, J. S. (2010). Rettferdig standpunktvurdering - det (u)muliges kunst? Læreres setting av standpunktkarakter i fem fag i grunnopplæringen [Fair assessment – The (im)possible? Teachers’ grading in five subjects in elementary and lower-secondary school] Rapport 16/2010 (pp. 138). Oslo: NIFU STEP.
   Google Scholar
• Ross, J. A. (1994). Beliefs that make a difference: The origins and impacts of teacher efficacy. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies, Calgary, Alberta (Canada).
   Google Scholar
• Sadler, R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119–144. doi: 10.1007/BF00117714
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Statistic-Norway. (2007). Kompetanse i grunnskulen. Hovedresultater 2005/2006 [Teacher competence in elementary and lower secondary school. Main results 2005/2006]. Oslo-Kongsvinger: Statistisk sentralbyrå [Statistics-Norway].
   Google Scholar
• Stobart, G. (2008). Testing times. The uses and abuses of assessment. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Thagaard, T. (2009). Systematikk og innlevelse. En innføring i kvalitativ metode (3.utgave) [Systematics and sensitivity. Introducing qualitative method]. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.
   Google Scholar
• Tveit, S. (2013). Educational assessment in Norway. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 21(2), 221–237. doi: 10.1080/0969594X.2013.830079
   Google Scholar
• Vestfold, C. G. (2013). Trenden med færre klager på standpunktkarakterer i grunnskolen fortsetter [Less complaints about final grades in elementary school]. Retrieved September 21, 2014, from http://www.fylkesmannen.no/Vestfold/Nyheter/Trenden-med-farre-klager-pa-standpunktkarakterer-i-grunnskolen-fortsetter-/
   Google Scholar
• Vinge, J. (2014). Vurdering i musikkfag: en deskriptiv, analytisk studie av musikklæreres vurderingspraksis i ungdomsskolen [Assessment in music: A descriptive, analytical study of music teachers' assessment practices in lower secondary school]. (PhD), Norges musikkhøgskole, Oslo.
   Google Scholar
• Wheatley, K. F. (2002). The potential benefits of teacher efficacy doubts for educational reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 5–22. doi: 10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00047-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar