State-based curriculum-making: Approaches to local curriculum work in Norway and Finland

Journal of Curriculum Studies

Volumn 47, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 441-461

  Mølstad, Christina Elde ^a  

^a INLAND NORWAY UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES   (Norway)

Author keywords

Finland; Licensing; National curriculum; Norway; Teacher autonomy

Indexed keywords

EID: 84943456607     PISSN: 00220272     EISSN: 13665839     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00220272.2015.1039067     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Aasen, P., Møller, J., Rye, E., Ottesen, E., Prøitz, T. S., & Hertzberg, F. (2012). Kunnskapsløftet som styringsreform—et løft eller et løfte? Forvaltningsnivåenes og institusjonenes rolle i implementeringen av reformen [The Knowledge Promotion as governing reform —A boost or a promise? Administrative levels and the role of the institutions in the implementation of the reform]. Oslo: Nordisk institutt for studier av innovasjon, forskning og utdanning.
2. Afdal, H. W. (2012). Constructing knowledge for teaching profession: A comparative analysis of policy making, curricula content, and novice teachers’ knowledge relations in the cases of Finland and Norway. Oslo: Unipub forlag. Unpublished doctoral diåssertation.
3. Åvik, T. (1988). Hva er lokalt læreplanarbeid, og hvorfor blir dette ansett som såviktig i vår tid? [What is local curriculum work, and why is it important in our time?]. In F. D. Raaen & T. Åvik (Eds.), Håndbok i lokalt læreplanarbeid [Handbook in local curriculum work] (pp. 9-26). Oslo: Gyldendal.
4. Backström-Widjeskog, B., & Hansén, S.-E. (2002). Problem concerning comparative research of curriculum development. In M. Rosenmund, A.-V. Fries, & W. Heller (Eds.), Comparing curriculum-making processes (pp. 55-71). Bern: P. Lang.
5. Biesta, G. (2013). Knowledge, judgment and the curriculum: On the past, present and future of the idea of the practical. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 45, 684-696. doi:10.1080/00220272.2013.798839
6. Blossing, U., Imsen, G., & Moos, L. (2014). Nordic schools in a time of change. In U. Blossing, G. Imsen, & L. Moos (Eds.), The Nordic education model: “A school for all” encounters neo-liberal policy (pp. 1-14). Dordrecht: Springer, Netherlands.
7. Børhaug, K. (2008). Educating voters: Political education in Norwegian upper-secondary schools. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40, 579-600. doi:10.1080/0022027070 1774765
8. Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
9. Cohen, L., Manion, L., Morrison, K., & Bell, R. C. (2011). Research methods in education. London: Routledge.
10. Dale, E. L., Engelsen, B. U., & Karseth, B. (2011). Kunnskapsløftets intensjoner, forutsetninger og operasjonaliseringer: en analyse av en læreplanform [The Knowledge Promotion’s intentions, preconditions and operationalizations: An analysis of a curriculum reform]. Oslo: Pedagogisk forskningsinstitutt, Universitetet i Oslo.
11. Engelsen, B. U. (2008). Kunnskapsløftet sentrale styringssignaler og lokale strategidokumenter [The Knowledge Promotion’s central governing signals and local strategy documents]. Oslo: Universitet i Oslo, Pedagogisk forskningsinsitutt.
12. Engelsen, B. U., & Karseth, B. (2007). Læreplan for Kunnskapsløftet—et endret kunnskapssyn? [The curriculum of the Knowledge promotion—a changed view of knowledge?]. Norsk Pedagogisk Tidskrift, 91, 404-414.
13. Evetts, J. (2003). The sociological analysis of professionalism. International Sociology, 18, 395-415.
14. Gerrard, J., & Farrell, L. (2013). Remaking the professional teacher: Authority and curriculum reform. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 46, 634-655. doi:10.1080/00220272. 2013.854410
15. Gundem, B. B. (2008). Perspektiv pålæreplanen [Perspectives on curriculum]. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.
16. Gundem, B. B., & Hopmann, S. (Eds.). (1998). Didaktik and/or curriculum: An international dialogue. New York, NY: P. Lang.
17. Haft, H., & Hopmann, S. (1990a). Curriculum policy as symbolic action: Connecting education with workplace. In H. Haft & S. Hopmann (Eds.), Case studies in curriculum administration history (pp. 159-174). London: Falmer Press.
18. Haft, H., & Hopmann, S. (1990b). Introduction. Comparative curriculum administration history: Concepts and methods. In H. Haft & S. Hopmann (Eds.), Case studies in curriculum administration history (pp. 1-10). London: Falmer Press.
19. Hansén, S.-E. (1998). Preparing student teachers for curriculum-making. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 30, 165-179.
20. Hopmann, S. (1991). Retracing curriculum theory: The multiple realities of curriculum making. In B. B. Gundem, B. U. Engelsen, & B. Karseth (Eds.), Curriculum work and curriculum content: Theory and practice: Contemporary and historical perspectives: Conference papers: University of Oslo, Institute for Educational Research, 10-12 October 1990 (pp. 49-98). Oslo: Institute for Educational Research.
21. Hopmann, S. (2003). On the evaluation of curriculum reforms. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35, 459-478. doi:10.1080/00220270305520
22. Hopmann, S. (2007). Restrained teaching: The common core of Didaktik. European Educational Research Journal, 6, 109-124. doi:10.2304/eerj.2007.6.2.109
23. Hopmann, S. (2008). No child, no school, no state left behind: Schooling in the age of accountability. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40, 417-456. doi:10.1080/00220270801989818
24. Hopmann, S., & Riquarts, K. (2000). Introduction. In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann, & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice. The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 3-11). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
25. Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 1277-1288. doi:10.1177/1049732305276687
26. Hudson, C. (2007). Governing the governance of education: The state strikes back? European Educational Research Journal, 6, 266-282. doi:10.2304/eerj.2007.6.3.266
27. Kirke-utdannings-og forskningsdepartementet. (1996). Læreplanverket for den 10-årige grunnskolen [Curriculum framework for the 10 year compulsory education]. Oslo: Nasjonalt læremiddelsenter.
28. Klette, K., & Carlgren, I. (2000). Restructuring in education and reconstruction of the teacher. In K. Klette, I. Carlgren, J. Rasmussen, H. Simola, & M. Sundkvist (Eds.), Restructuring Nordic teachers: An analysis of policy texts from Finland, Denmark, Sweden and Norway (pp. 7-22). Oslo: Institute for Educational Research, University of Oslo.
29. Korkeamäki, R. L., & Dreher, M. J. (2010). Early literacy practices and the Finnish national core curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 43, 109-137. doi:10.1080/00220271003801959
30. Kunnskapsdepartementet. (2006). FOR 2006-06-23 nr 724: Forskrift til opplæringslova [Regulation of the education act].
31. Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
32. Langfeldt, G. (2011). Ansvarsstyrning-didaktikens slutpunkt? [Accountability-The endpoint in Didaktik]. In S.-E. Hansén & L. Forsman (Eds.), Allmändidaktik: vetenskap för lärare [General didactic: Science for teachers] (pp. 133-151). Lund: Studentlitteratur.
33. Littig, B. (2009). Interviewing the elite—Interviewing experts: Is there a difference? In A. Bogner, B. Littig, & W. Menz (Eds.), Interviewing experts (pp. 98-113). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
34. Löfström, J. (2014). How finnish upper secondary students conceive transgenerational responsibility and historical reparations: Implications for the history curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 4, 515-539.
35. Mausethagen, S. (2013). Reshaping teacher professionalism. An analysis of how teachers construct and negotiate professionalism under increasing accountability. Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Oslo. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
36. Melin, H. (2014). The Nordic model and social inequalities. In D. Eißel, E. Rokicka, & J. Leaman (Eds.), Welfare state at risk (pp. 105-119). Cham: Springer.
37. Meuser, M., & Nagel, U. (2009). The expert interview and changes in knowledge production. In A. Bogner, B. Littig, & W. Menz (Eds.), Interviewing experts (pp. 17-41). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
38. Mølstad, C. E., & Hansén, S.-E. (2013). Curriculum as a governing instrument—A comparative study of Finland and Norway. Education Inquiry, 4, 735-753. doi:10.3402/edui.v4i4.23219
39. Mølstad, C. E., & Karseth, B. (in press). National curricula in Norway and Finland: The role of learning outcomes. Manuscript submitted for publication. Unpublished.
40. Moos, L. (2013). Prelude: Tuning the instrument. In L. Moos (Ed.), Transnational influences on values and practices in Nordic educational leadership: Is there a Nordic model? (pp. 1-18). Dordrecht: Springer.
41. Niemi, H. (2012). The societal factors contributing to education and schooling in Finland. In H. Niemi, A. Toom, A. Kallioniemi, & A. A. A. M. Mikkola (Eds.), Miracle of education: The principles and practices of teaching and learning in Finnish schools (pp. 19-38). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
42. Pepin, B. (2002). Methodological issues of cross-national comparisons: Efforts to establish equivalence in a cross-national study of mathematics teachers’ work in England, France and Germany. In M. Rosenmund, A.-V. Fries, & W. Heller (Eds.), Comparing curriculum-making processes (pp. 269-281). Bern: P. Lang.
43. Priestley, M., & Biesta, G. (2013). Introduction: The new curriculum. In M. Priestley & G. Biesta (Eds.), Reinventing the curriculum: New trends in curriculum policy and practice (pp. 1-12). London: Bloomsbury Pub.
44. Sandberg, N., & Aasen, P. (2008). Det nasjonale styringsnivået. Intensjoner, forventninger og vurderinger. Delrapport I Evaluering av Kunnskapsløftet [The national governing level. Intentions, expectations and evaluations. Report 1 evaluations of the Knowledge Promotion]. Oslo: NIFU STEP.
45. Seikkula-Leino, J. (2010). The implementation of entrepreneurship education through curriculum reform in Finnish comprehensive schools. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 43, 69-85. doi:10.1080/00220270903544685
46. Silverman, D. (2013). Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
47. Simola, H. (1998). Constructing a school-free pedagogy: Decontextualization of Finnish state educational discourse. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 30, 339-356. doi:10.1080/002202798183648
48. Simola, H., Rinne, R., Varjo, J., & Kauko, J. (2013). The paradox of the education race: How to win the ranking game by sailing to headwind. Journal of Education Policy, 28, 612-633. doi:10.1080/02680939.2012.758832
49. Sivesind, K., van den Akker, J., & Rosemund, M. (2012). The European curriculum: Restructuring and renewal. European Educational Research Journal, 11, 320-327. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2012.11.3.320
50. Skedsmo, G. (2009). School governing in transition? Perspectives, purposes and perceptions of evaluation policy (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Oslo: University of Oslo.
51. Sundberg, D., & Wahlström, N. (2012). Standards-based curricula in a denationalised conception of education: The case of Sweden. European Educational Research Journal, 11, 342-356.
52. Telhaug, A. O., Medias, O. A., & Aasen, P. (2006). The Nordic model in education: Education as part of the political system in the last 50 years. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 50, 245-283. doi:10.1080/00313830600743274
53. Toom, A., & Husu, J. (2012). Finnish teachers as “makers of the many”: Balancing between broad pedagogical freedom and responsibility. In H. Niemi, A. Toom, & A. Kallioniemi (Eds.), Miracle of education: The principles and practices of teaching and learning in Finnish Schools (pp. 39-54). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
54. Tveit, S. (2014). Educational assessment in Norway. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 21, 221-237. doi:10.1080/069594X.2013.830079
55. Utbildningsstyrelsen. (2004). Grunderna för läroplanen för den grundläggande utbildningen 2004 [National core curriculum for basic education 2004]. Helsingfors: Utbildningsstyrelsen.
56. Utdanningsdirektoratet. (2009). Veiledning i lokalt arbeid med læreplaner [Guidance in local work with curricula]. Oslo: Utdanningsdirektoratet.
57. Utdanningsdirektoratet. (2013a). Rettleiing til læreplan i samfunnsfag [Guidance in social science curriculum]. Oslo: Utdanningsdirektoratet.
58. Utdanningsdirektoratet. (2013b). Veiledning til læreplan i engelsk [Guidance in English curriculum]. Oslo: Utdanningsdirektoratet.
59. Utdanningsdirektoratet. (2013c). Veiledning til læreplan i kroppsøving [Guidance in physical education curriculum]. Oslo: Utdanningsdirektoratet.
60. Utdanningsdirektoratet. (2013d). Veiledning til læreplan i norsk [Guidance in Norwegian curriculum]. Oslo: Utdanningsdirektoratet.
61. Utdanningsdirektoratet. (2013e). Veiledning til læreplanene i matematikk fellesfag [Guidance in mathematics curriculum]. Oslo: Utdanningsdirektoratet.
62. Utdanningsdirektoratet. (2013f). Veiledning til læreplanene i naturfag [Guidance in science curriculum]. Oslo: Utdanningsdirektoratet.
63. Varjo, J., Simola, H., & Rinne, R. (2013). Finland’s PISA results: An analysis of dynamics in education politics. In A. Benavot & H.-D. Meyer (Eds.), PISA, power, and policy: The emergence of global educational governance (pp. 51-76). Oxford: Symposium Books.
64. Vitikka, E., Krokfors, L., & Hurmerinta, E. (2012). The Finnish national core curriculum: Structure and development. In H. Niemi, A. Toom, & A. Kollinniemi (Eds.), Miracle of education. The principles and practices of teaching and learning in Finnish schools (pp. 83-96). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
65. Wermke, W., & Höstfält, G. (2014). Contextualizing teacher autonomy in time and space: A model for comparing various forms of governing the teaching profession. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 45, 58-80, doi:10.1080/00220272.2013.812681
66. Westbury, I. (2008). Making curricula: Why do states make curricula and how? In F. M. Connelly, M. F. He, & J. Phillion (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of curriculum and instruction (pp. 45-65). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
67. Westbury, I. (2000). Teaching as a reflective practice: What might Didaktik teach curriculum. In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann, & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice: The German Didaktik tradition. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.