Developing strategies for self-assessment is in this research project seen as a part of capacity building for improved vocational proficiency. Vocational education (VET) in Norway is based on a model where the four year educational program is divided; two years teaching within school context and two years as apprentices in a training establishment. The apprentice are expected to document their learning processes according to the national curriculum competence statements and learning goals set by the supervisor.

This research project aims at investigating self-assessment within formative assessment. The empirical study is a mixed methodology investigating the apprentice use of a digital learning management system (LMS). Preliminary data analysis is signaling that the self-assessment tool is resulting in increased learning outcomes as well as higher level of vocational proficiency.

The dichotomy of formative and summative assessment with reference to evaluation has been the preferred perspective when discussing the overriding purposes of assessment in education (Scriven,1991). The recent classification is assessment of and for learning (Black & Wiliam, 1998) and finally assessment as learning (Earl, 2003). These terms indicate the relationship between learning, assessment and views on student participation and learning (Eggen, 2004; Gardner, 2006). Assessment of learning often implies no student participation, the audience is outside the school and has been defined in advance, use of grades, relates to given criteria and standards that are context-free, is reliable in comparisons and used for accountability purposes. Assessment for learning implies use in further teaching, the audience includes teachers and students who therefore need to be part of all stages, is used for motivation and feed-forward purposes, relates to student progression, has references based on ipsative criteria, is reliable and valid according to student progression and is authentic and dependent on the learning context (Birenbaum, et al., 2006; Gardner, 2006; Stiggins, 2002). Within the third approach – assessment as learning – the major point is to keep the relationship between the learner, the teacher and the curricula content in mind. The main concern is now rather which reference the assessment is valid for.

With the present national curriculum (Knowledge promotion) in 2006, assessment has become one of the major foci for professional capacity building. National and international summative tests, as well as capacity building in assessment for and as learning, have been given political, financial and professional attention. The specific attention to formative approaches has encompassed strategies or self-assessment. The study reported here is a particular way of implementing national curricula statements and investigate the students learning using these statements as a part of a digital learning management tool (LMS).

Vocational training is a part of two cultures and epistemologies; the tacit knowlegde of working places on the one hand, and on the other hand the explisit stated standards of schooling (Deichman-Sørensen 2009). The empirical question then becomes how these cultures are combined into students learning prosesses by the use of self-assessment and the LMS. (Nielsen & Kvale 1999; Polanyi 1966; Collins 2010; Rafoss & Witsø, 2014).

Within a social-cognitive framing the students’ active participation in their own learning has been emphasized (Zimmerman, 2000; Pintrich, 2002). Self-regulated learning, focus on how students modify their thought, affect and behaviour, by using specific mechanisms and support meta-strategies towards achieving their goals. Volitional strategies, intended to regulate effort, are essential for maintaining motivation and effort towards learning goals (Kuhl, 2000). When students experience problems in translating their goals into action (e.g., they procrastinate or becoming distracted), they may strategically call on automatic processes in an attempt to secure goal attainment. Implementation intentions in the form of time schedules or pre commitment to tasks further the attainment of goals (Gollwitzer, 1999).

Black, P & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and Classroom Learning, Assessment in Education, 5 (1)7-74. Collins, Harry (2010). Tacit and Explicit Knowledge. Chicago, IL, USA: University of Chicago. Deichman-Sørensen, Trine (2009). Hvor går norsk fag- og yrkesopplæring? Om modernisering, organisering og styring av fag- og yrkesopplæringen i Norge. Oslo: Høgskolen i Akershus. Earl, L.M. (2003). Assessment As Learning: Using Classroom Assessment to Maximize Student Learning. Thousand Oaks: Corwin press. Eggen, A. B. (2004). Alfa and Omega in Student Assessment: Exploring Identities of Secondary School Science Teachers. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Oslo, Norway. Gardner, J. (2006). Assessment and Learning. London: Sage. Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist, 54(7). Kuhl, J. (2000). A Functional-Design Approach to Motivation and Self- REgulation. In M. Zeidner, P. R. Pintrich & M. Boekaerts (Eds.), Handbook of self regulation (pp. 13 - 39). San Diego, Calif.: Academic Press. National Curriculum for Knowledge Promotion in Primary and Secondary Education and Training, http://www.udir.no. Nielsen, Klaus & Kvale, Steinar (red.) (1999). Mesterlære: Læring som sosial praksis. Oslo: Gyldendal. Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The Role of Metacognitive Knowledge in Learning, Teaching, and Assessment. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 219-225. Polanyi, Michael (1966). The tacit dimension. New York: Doubleday & Company. Rafoss, Tore Witsø. & Witsø, Hilde. (2014) Fagenes krav og lovens bokstav. En kvantitativ undersøkelse av prøvenemndene på Agder i Norsk Pedagogisk Tidsskrift nr 2. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget Scriven, M. (1991). Beyond Formative and Summative Evaluation, in M.W. McLaughlin & D.C. Philips (Eds) Evaluation and Education: at quarter century. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Stiggins, R. (2002). Assessment Crisis: the absence of assessment for learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 83 (10).758-765. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining Self-regulation. A Social Cognitive Perspective. In M. Zeidner, P. R. Pintrich & M. Boekaerts (Eds.), Handbook of self regulation (pp. 13 - 39). San Diego, Calif.: Academic Press.