Norwegian teachers’ and school leaders’ working context has long traditions built on the Nordic welfare model, social democratic norms, high levels of trust and equity (e.g. Ottesen & Møller, 2016). Accountability policies are described as softer compared to countries such as the USA and England which have longer traditions for (Mausethagen, 2013). Market mechanisms are downplayed, and education governance emphasises a process-oriented view of learning, promoting equity and broader social and humanistic aims combined with increasing performance orientation focusing on student performance data as the main indicator of teaching quality, where teachers and school leaders should engage in data use to improve teaching and student learning (Skedsmo et al., 2020; Mausethagen et al., 2018). Increased focus on teacher accountability has been described as a shift from “trust in the profession” to “trust in results” (Uljens, et al., 2013). This paper explores emerging teacher evaluation practices in the Norwegian educational context. Norway makes a specifically interesting case for studying teacher evaluation (TE) as a policy tool for education governance, as there are currently no national frameworks for TE in place. National policy documents refer to recommendation by the OECD about introducing TE and the need for feedback to teachers. The performance of schools and teachers is assessed by various quality indicators, such as national tests and user surveys. So far, local authorities on municipal level and principals are given discretion to ensure school quality by developing local practices of TE. There is limited research about how emerging TE is perceived and enacted on school level and how this is linked to quality standards for teaching and accountability. This paper generates new knowledge by reporting from case studies of TE practices in two lower-secondary schools that differ largely with regard to migrant background and socio-economic status of the student populations, both located in a large municipality. The analysis draws on document analysis and interviews with principals, superintendents and teachers. Preliminary findings demonstrate how focus on student outcomes, competition between schools and benchmarking are present, influencing on emerging standards for good teaching, new organizational routines such as systematic classroom observations and feedback. Still teachers’ responsibility for collective and individual professional development is emphasized. The paper contributes to insights on how local TE practices are shaped by school culture and approaches to accommodate needs of heterogenous student populations.

Mausethagen, S., Prøitz, T.S. & Skedsmo, G. (2018): Teachers’ use of knowledge sources in ‘result meetings’: Thin data and thick data use. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 43(6), 37-49. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2017.1379986 Mausethagen, S. 2013. “A Research Review of the Impact of Accountability Policies on Teachers’ Workplace Relations.” Educational Research Review 9: 16–33. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2012.12.001. Ottesen, E., and Møller, J. 2016. “Organizational Routines—The Interplay of Legal Standards and Professional Discretion.” European Educational Research Journal 15 (4): 428–446. doi:10.1177/1474904116638853. Skedsmo, G., Rönnberg, L. & Ydesen, C. (2020). National Testing and Accountability in the Scandinavian Welfare States: Education Policy Translations in Norway, Denmark and Sweden. In: Verger, A., Grek, S. & Maroy, C. (Eds.). World Yearbook of Education – Accountability and Datafication in the Governance of Education (p. 113-129). London: Routledge. Uljens, M., Møller, J., Ärlestig, H., & Frederiksen, L. F. (2013). The Professionalisation of Nordic School Leadership. In L. Moos (Ed.), Transnational Influences on Values and Practices in Nordic Educational Leadership: Is there a Nordic Model? (pp. 133-157). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.