One size fits nobody: En casestudie av yrkesfaglæreres deltakelse i kompetanse-utviklingsarbeid i videregående skole
[One size fits nobody: A case study of vocational education and training teachers’ participation in professional development pro-jects in upper secondary school]
Vocational education and training (VET) teachers have a dual profession as teachers and vocational workers. Professional development projects in school must apply to both sides of their profession. However, VET teachers’ need for professional development, particularly in terms of student assessment, has not been significantly explored. This ethnographic case study examines what aspects of professional development projects VET teachers perceive as meaningful for developing their assessment literacy. Data was collected through observations of 31 VET teachers in two upper secondary schools, in the context of a professional development project aiming to strengthen assessment literacy. Eighteen of these teachers also participated in focus group interviews. Findings show that if VET teachers are to find professional development projects in school meaningful for developing their assessment literacy, the projects must 1) have vocational relevance, 2) maintain a vocational perspective on the validity of assessment of students’ vocational competence, and 3) take place in a learning and development-oriented culture. Unfortunately, professional development projects do not address teachers’ developmental needs due to tensions among professional, socio-cultural and organisational contexts in school and vocational workplaces.
Andersson, P. & Köpsén, S. (2015). Continuing professional development of vocational teachers: Participation in a Swedish national initiative. Empirical Research in Vocational Education and Training, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40461-015-0019-3
Aspøy, T. M., Skinnarland, S. & Tønder, A. H. (2017). Yrkesfaglærerens kompetan-se. FAFO-rapport 2017:11. https://www.fafo.no/images/pub/2017/20619.pdf
Assessment Reform Group. (2002). Assessment for learning: 10 principles. Uni-versity of Cambridge.
Black, P. & William, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171009200119
Black, P. & William, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5
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. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594042000304609
Cochran-Smith, M. & Lytle, S. L. (2009). Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next generation. Teachers College Press.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions (2. utgave). SAGE.
DeLuca, C., Chavez, T. & Cao, C. (2013). Establishing a foundation for valid teacher judgement on student learning: The role of pre-service assessment education. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 20(1), 107–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2012.668870
DeLuca, C. & Klinger, D. A. (2010). Assessment literacy development: Identify-ing gaps in teacher candidates’ learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 17(4), 419–438. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2010.516643
DeLuca, C. (2012). Preparing teachers for the age of accountability: Toward a framework for assessment education. Action in Teacher Education, 34(5–6), 576–591. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2012.730347
DeLuca, C, Coombs, A., MacGregor, S. & Rasooli, A. (2019). Toward a differen-tial and situated view of assessment literacy: Studying teachers’ responses to classroom assessment scenarios. Frontiers in Education, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00094
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of edu-cation. Macmillian.
Dreyfus, H. & Dreyfus, S. (1986). Mind over machine: The power of human intuition and expertise in the era of the computer. Free Press.
Eggen, A. B. (2011). Vurdering for skoleutvikling. Gyldendal akademisk.
Engh, R. (2011). Vurdering for læring i skolen: På vei mot en bærekraftig vurderings-kultur. Høyskoleforlaget.
Fejes, A. & Köpsén, S. (2014). Vocational teachers’ identity formation through boundary crossing. Journal of Education and Work, 27(3), 265–283. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2012.742181
Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Quali-tative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800405284363
Gills, S. & Bateman, A. (1999). Assessing in VET: Issues of reliability and validity. Review of research. NCVER. https://www.ncver.edu.au/research-and-statistics/publications/all-publications/assessing-in-vet-issues-of-reliability-and-validity-review-of-research
Gjerustad, G. & Waagene, E. (2015). Spørsmål til Skole-Norge 2015: Resultater og analyser fra Utdanningsdirektoratets spørreundersøkelse blant skoler og skoleeiere NIFU-rapport 2015:19). NIFU.
Grande, S., Lyckander, R., Landro, J. & Rokkones, K. (2014). Frem i lyset! En kartlegging av status og behov for lærerutdanning for yrkesfag. HIOA. https://www.ntnu.no/documents/150035/20502917/Fram+i+lyset!/60886d96-25e0-4ef3-b67d-a153770ef7c4
Hiim, H. (2020). Å vurdere yrkeskompetanse: Hva er yrkeskompetanse, og hvordan kan den vurderes? Nordic Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 10(3), 45–66. https://doi.org/10.3384/njvet.2242-458X.2010345
Høst, H. (2015). Kvalitet i fag- og yrkesopplæringen (NIFU-rapport 2015:14). NIFU. http://hdl.handle.net/11250/284140
Kane, M. T. (2015). Explicating validity. Assessment in Education: Principles, Poli-cy & Practice, 23(2), 198–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2015.1060192
Kemmis, R. B. & Green, A. (2013). Vocational education and training teachers’ conceptions of their pedagogy. International Journal of Training Research, 11(2), 101–121. https://doi.org/10.5172/ijtr.2013.11.2.101
Klenowski, V. & Wyatt-Smith, C. (2014). Assessment for education: Standards, judgement and moderation. SAGE.
Köpsén, S. (2014). How vocational teachers describe their vocational teacher identity. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 66(2), 194–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2014.894554
Kvale, S., Brinkmann, S., Anderssen, T. M. & Rygge, J. (2015). Det kvalitative forskningsintervju. Gyldendal akademisk.
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Harvard University press.
Lewkowicz, D. J. (2001). The concept of ecological validity: What are its limita-tions and is it bad to be invalid? Infancy, 2(4), 437–450. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327078IN0204_03
Looney, A., Cumming, J., van Der Kleij, F. & Harris, K. (2018). Reconceptualis-ing the role of teachers as assessors: Teacher assessment identity. Assess-ment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 25(5), 442–467. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2016.1268090
Messick, S. (1992). The interplay of evidence and consequences in the valida-tion of performance assessments. ETS Research Report Series, 1992(1), i–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.1992.tb01470.x
Moss, P. (2013). Validity in action: Lessons from studies of data use. Journal of Educational Measurement, 50(1), 91–98. www.jstor.org/stable/23353799
Moss, P. A., Girard, B. J. & Haniford, L. C. (2006). Chapter 4: Validity in educa-tional assessment. Review of Research in Education, 30(1), 109–162. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X030001109
NTNU & TRFK. (2017). Skolebasert kompetanseutvikling i vurdering (SKUV)—Kunnskapsgrunnlaget. https://www.ntnu.no/documents/1272526547/1272693899/SKUVkunnskapsgrunnlag+versjon+31.01.17.pdf/67a5578e-3a26-4d05-9912-d4efa5f0a6de
Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. Doubleday & Co.
Popham, W. J. (2009). Assessment literacy for teachers: Faddish or fundamen-tal? Theory into Practice, 48(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840802577536
Ragin, C. C. & Becker, H. S. (Red.). (1992). What is a case? Exploring the founda-tions of social inquiry. Cambridge University Press.
Räisänen, A. & Räkköläinen, M. (2014). Assessment of learning outcomes in Finnish vocational education and training. Assessment in Education: Princi-ples, Policy & Practice, 21(1), 109–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2013.838938
Robson, J., Bailey, B. & Larkin, S. (2004). Adding value: Investigating the dis-course of professionalism adopted by vocational teachers in further educa-tion colleges. Journal of Education and Work, 17(2), 183–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080410001677392
Schmuckler, M. A. (2001). What Is ecological validity? A dimensional analysis. Infancy, 2(4), 419–436. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327078IN0204_02
Sennett, R. (2008). The craftsman. Yale University Press.
Stiggins, R. J. (1995). Assessment literacy for the 21st century. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(3), 238–245.
Stiggins, R. J. (1991). Relevant classroom assessment training for teachers. Edu-cational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 10(1), 7–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.1991.tb00171.x
Street, B. V. (2002). Literacy and Development: Ethnographic Perspectives (1. ut-gave). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203468418
Sund, G., Nore, H. & Vagle, I. (2009). Vurdering for og av læring i yrkesfag. I S. Dobson, K. Smith & A. B. Eggen (Red.), Vurdering, prinsipper og praksis (s. 214–234). Gyldendal.
Sylte, A. L. (2014). Vurdering for yrkesrelevant opplæring. Nordic Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 4(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3384/njvet.2242-458X.14v4i1a4
Taylor, L. (2009). Developing assessment literacy. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 29, 21–36. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190509090035
Throndsen, I., Hopfenbeck, T. N., Lie, S. & Dale, E. L. (22009). Bedre vurdering for læring: Rapport fra evaluering av modeller for kjennetegn på måloppnåelse i fag. Universitet i Oslo.
Xu, Y. & Brown, G. T. L. (2016). Teacher assessment literacy in practice: A re-conceptualization. Teaching and Teacher Education, 58, 149–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.05.010
Aamodt, P. O., Carlsten, T. C., Caspersen, J., Grøgaard, J. B. & Røsdal, T. (2016). Kompetanseutvikling blant yrkesfaglærere: En undersøkelse basert på OECD Tea-ching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) (NIFU-rapport 2016:6). https://www.udir.no/globalassets/filer/tall-og-forsk-ning/forskningsrapporter/kompetanseutvikling_blant_yrkesfaglarere.pdf
Aarkrog, V. & Wahlgren, B. (2015). Assessment of prior learning in adult voca-tional education and training. International Journal for Research in Vocational Education and Training, 2(1), 39–58. https://doi.org/10.13152/ijrvet.2.1.3
Copyright (c) 2021 Julie Klovholt Leonardsen
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
NJVET is an open access journal, this means anyone can access, freely download and read the journal. There are no commercial interests for Linköping University Electronic Press or the Nordic network for vocational education and training (NordYrk) in publishing the journal. From 2021 NJVET publishes all articles under the Creative Commons License CC-BY 4.0.
The core idea of open access is that copyright remains with the authors. However, we publish with the agreement of the authors that if they decide later to publish the articles elsewhere, the publisher will be notified, prior to any acceptance, that the article has already been published by NJVET.
When publishing with NJVET, it is with the agreement of the authors that if they make their articles available elsewhere on the internet (for example, on their own websites or institutional websites), that they will do so by making links to the articles as published in NJVET using the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) numbers of the articles and acknowledge in the text of the sites that the articles have been previously published in NJVET.