IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Balancing Trust and Accountability? The Assessment for Learning Programme in Norway: A Governing Complex Education Systems Case Study


  • Therese Hopfenbeck

    (Oxford University)

  • Astrid Tolo

    (University of Bergen)

  • Teresa Florez

    (Oxford University)

  • Yasmine El Masri

    (Oxford University)


This report explores the development of implementation strategies used to enhance the programme “Assessment for Learning – 2010-2014” in Norwegian schools. Norway’s educational governance is highly decentralised, with 428 municipalities and 19 counties responsible for implementing education activities, organising and operating school services, allocating resources and ensuring quality improvement and development of their schools. This case study is based on56 interviews with 98 key actors and stakeholders in the Norwegian education system, as well as analysis of key policy and legal documents and a range of media articles. Key findings include the importance of clear communication between governance levels and a high degree of trust between stakeholders; the need for a clear understanding of programme goals, the role of learning networks between schools to aid the exchange of knowledge and provide peer support during the implementation process. Innovative forms of capacity building were of particular importance for the smaller municipalities, who reported being overextended by the continual stream of policy changes and struggling with prioritising activities. The case study also provides a series of recommendations for improvement. Ce rapport examine le développement de stratégies de mise en oeuvre utilisées pour l’amélioration du programme « Assessment for Learning – 2010-2014 » dans les établissements scolaires norvégiens. La gouvernance éducative de la Norvège est fortement décentralisée, comptant 428 municipalités et 19 provinces en charge de mettre en oeuvre les activités éducatives, d’organiser et de faire fonctionner les services scolaires, d’allouer les ressources, d’améliorer la qualité des établissements et d’assurer leur développement. Cette étude de cas s’appuie sur 56 entretiens avec 98 acteurs-clé et parties prenantes du système éducatif norvégien, ainsi que sur l’analyse de documents-clé politiques et légaux, et d’un ensemble d’articles médias. Les principaux résultats soulignent : l’importance d’une communication claire entre les différents niveaux de gouvernance et un haut niveau de confiance entre les différentes parties ; la nécessité d’une compréhension nette des objectifs du programme, du rôle des liens d’apprentissage entre les établissements pour faciliter l’échange de savoir et fournir un soutien par les pairs pendant le processus de mise en oeuvre. Des formes innovantes de renforcement des capacités se sont montrées d’importance majeure dans les municipalités de petite taille, lesquelles ont déclaré avoir été dépassées par les fluctuations incessantes dans les politiques à mettre en oeuvre, et avoir eu du mal à décider des activités auxquelles donner priorité. Cette étude de cas conclut par une série de recommandations pour l’amélioration du programme.

Suggested Citation

  • Therese Hopfenbeck & Astrid Tolo & Teresa Florez & Yasmine El Masri, 2013. "Balancing Trust and Accountability? The Assessment for Learning Programme in Norway: A Governing Complex Education Systems Case Study," OECD Education Working Papers 97, OECD Publishing.
  • Handle: RePEc:oec:eduaab:97-en

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Janet W. Looney, 2009. "Assessment and Innovation in Education," OECD Education Working Papers 24, OECD Publishing.
    2. Hendrik Jürges & Kerstin Schneider, 2010. "Central exit examinations increase performance... but take the fun out of mathematics," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 23(2), pages 497-517, March.
    3. John H. Tyler & Richard J. Murnane & John B. Willett, 2000. "Do the Cognitive Skills of School Dropouts Matter in the Labor Market?," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 35(4), pages 748-754.
    4. Janet W. Looney, 2011. "Integrating Formative and Summative Assessment: Progress Toward a Seamless System?," OECD Education Working Papers 58, OECD Publishing.
    5. Paco Martorell & Damon Clark, 2010. "The Signaling Value of a High School Diploma," Working Papers 1248, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    6. Ludger Woesmann, 2003. "Schooling Resources, Educational Institutions and Student Performance: the International Evidence," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 65(2), pages 117-170, May.
    7. Winters, Marcus A. & Trivitt, Julie R. & Greene, Jay P., 2010. "The impact of high-stakes testing on student proficiency in low-stakes subjects: Evidence from Florida's elementary science exam," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 138-146, February.
    8. Joshua Angrist & Victor Lavy, 2009. "The Effects of High Stakes High School Achievement Awards: Evidence from a Randomized Trial," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1384-1414, September.
    9. Ou, Dongshu, 2010. "To leave or not to leave? A regression discontinuity analysis of the impact of failing the high school exit exam," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 171-186, April.
    10. Bishop, John, 2006. "Drinking from the Fountain of Knowledge: Student Incentive to Study and Learn - Externalities, Information Problems and Peer Pressure," Handbook of the Economics of Education, Elsevier.
    11. John P. Papay & Richard J. Murnane & John B. Willett, 2008. "The Consequences of High School Exit Examinations for Struggling Low-Income Urban Students: Evidence from Massachusetts," NBER Working Papers 14186, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Lillard, Dean R. & DeCicca, Philip P., 2001. "Higher standards, more dropouts? Evidence within and across time," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 459-473, October.
    13. Bishop, John H. & Mane, Ferran, 2001. "The impacts of minimum competency exam graduation requirements on high school graduation, college attendance and early labor market success," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 203-222, May.
    14. Morten Anstorp Rosenkvist, 2010. "Using Student Test Results for Accountability and Improvement: A Literature Review," OECD Education Working Papers 54, OECD Publishing.
    15. Bishop, John H, 1997. "The Effect of National Standards and Curriculum-Based Exams on Achievement," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(2), pages 260-264, May.
    16. Banks, Joanne & Byrne, Delma & McCoy, Selina & Smyth, Emer, 2010. "Engaging Young People? Student Experiences of the Leaving Certificate Applied," Research Series, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), number RS15.
    17. Graham, Amy E. & Husted, Thomas A., 1993. "Understanding state variations in SAT scores," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 197-202, September.
    18. Wikstrom, Christina & Wikstrom, Magnus, 2005. "Grade inflation and school competition: an empirical analysis based on the Swedish upper secondary schools," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 309-322, June.
    19. Ludger Wöbmann & Elke Lüdemann & Gabriela Schütz & Martin R. West, 2007. "School Accountability, Autonomy, Choice, and the Level of Student Achievement: International Evidence from PISA 2003," OECD Education Working Papers 13, OECD Publishing.
    20. Bishop, John H. & Moriarty, Joan Y. & Mane, Ferran, 2000. "Diplomas for learning, not seat time: the impacts of New York Regents examinations," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 333-349, October.
    21. Montmarquette, Claude & Mahseredjian, Sophie, 1989. "Could teacher grading practices account for unexplained variation in school achievements?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 335-343, August.
    22. Bishop, J., 1997. "The Effect of national Standards and Curriculum-Based Exams on Achievement," Papers 97-01, Cornell - Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies.
    23. Jacob, Brian A., 2005. "Accountability, incentives and behavior: the impact of high-stakes testing in the Chicago Public Schools," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(5-6), pages 761-796, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oec:eduaab:97-en. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.