Theoretical framework and objective It is generally accepted that teaching quality makes a difference to student learning. What exactly is meant by teaching quality is, however, debatable, but there is growing consensus that it is characterised by instructional clarity, cognitive activation of students, adapted learning, student engagement and supportive classroom climate (Hayeset.al., 2006; Klette, et.al., 2017). Whilst the Nordic educational systems are generally described as homogeneous, studies where video and other classroom data have been collected about the practices of teachers and interactions in classrooms in Norway, Sweden and Finland (Klette et.al., 2017) have indicated certain differences across schools and subjects. In Iceland, classroom research has indicated that direct teaching and individual seatwork with low level of cognitive challenges and limited student participation is a significant feature of lower secondary schooling (Óskarsdóttir, 2014; Sigurjónsson & Gísladóttir, 2020; Sigþórsson, 2008). Nevertheless, examples of more productive pedagogies and students’ participation have been revealed (Jónsdóttir, & Sigþórsson, 2013; Svanbjörnsdóttir, et.al., 2016). The objective of this paper is to present the preliminary findings drawing on selective elements from the Protocol for Language Arts Teaching Observation (PLATO) manual applied to Icelandic video classroom data. Methods and data sources The focus of the present paper is on video classroom data as a lens on teaching quality. It presents preliminary findings from 30 classrooms in ten Icelandic compulsory schools video-recorded through 2019. Altogether 120 lessons from respectively language arts, mathematic and social science were recorded. All data were subsequently analysed and coded building on the PLATO observation system. In this paper we report from a first step of the ongoing analyses. Results and significance The findings, so far, seem to confirm existing findings from research in Icelandic schools. We will discuss selective findings that relate to teaching quality, such as intellectual challenge, purpose, feedback and the role of classroom- and time management. Tentative analyses suggest, for example rather low scores on intellectual challenge (Sigurjónsson & Gísladóttir, (2020) and classroom management. Extensive use of classroom data and the thoroughly validated analytical framework potentially provide a common point of reference for discussing strengths and weaknesses of quality teaching and learning even in small countries like Iceland.

Hayes, D., Mills, M., Christie, P., & Lingard, B. (2006). Teachers and schooling making a difference: Productive pedagogies, assessment and performance. Allen & Unwin. Klette, K., Blikstad-Balas, M., & Roe, A. (2017). Linking Instruction and Student Achievement -Research design for a new generation of classroom studies. Acta Didactica Norge 11(3), 1–19. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5617/adno.4729 https://www.kau.se/files/2018-02/4729-16297-1-PB.pdf Jónsdóttir, Þ. B., & Sigþórsson, R. (2013). Þátttaka og áhrif nemenda í skólastarfi. In R. Sigþórsson, R. Eggertsdóttir and G. H. Frímannsson (Eds.), Fagmennska í skólastarfi: Skrifað til heiðurs Trausta Þorsteinssyni (pp. 257–283). Háskólinn á Akureyri & Háskólaútgáfan. Óskarsdóttir, G.G. (Ed). (2014). Starfshættir í grunnskólum við upphaf 21. aldar. Háskólaútgáfan. Sigurjónsson, J.Ö. & Gísladóttir, B. (2020).Vitsmunaleg áskorun í stærðfræðikennslu á unglingastigi. Icelandic Journal of Education, 29(2), 149–171. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24270/tuuom.2020.29.8 Sigþórsson, R. (2008). Mat í þágu náms eða nám í þágu mats. Samræmd próf, kennsluhugmyndir kennara, kennsla og nám í náttúrufræði og íslensku í fjórum íslenskum grunnskólum. Kennaraháskóli Íslands. Svanbjörnsdóttir, B., Macdonald, A., & Frímannsson, G. (2016). Teamwork in establishing a professional learning community in a new Icelandic school. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 60(1), 90–109, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2014.996595