Keywords: juridification, school environment, students’ rights. Abstract: Juridification implies increased focus on the law, and such movement has clear implications on society, also in a school setting. Concurrently, individual rights are more in the limelight than previously, at the expense of collective ideals. Also, schools are increasingly scrutinized according to legal standards and justice (Murphy, 2022). Blichner and Molander (2008) distinguish between five dimensions of juridification; for example, the expansion and differentiation of juridification, and as conflict resolution based on the law. Together, these forms of juridification express emphasis on the legal consequences of decisions made at different levels in public administration, also at local level by school authorities and leaders (Hall, 2019; Andenæs & Møller, 2016). The aim of this paper is to study how amendments in the Education Act may be understood as expressions of juridification and governance of the Norwegian school system. Drawing on the theoretical perspectives of Teubner (1988) and Blichner and Molander (2008), as well as previous, empirical research in the Nordics (e.g. Hall & Johansson, 2023; Karseth & Møller, 2020; Rosén et al., 2021), this study investigates recent changes in Norwegian legislation, more closely section 9A of the Education Act (1998), which ensures students’ individual right to a safe and good school environment. Through content analysis of section 9A itself, the paper also includes a selection of key documents leading up to the changes in 2017, such as Grey Paper 2015: 2 (Ministry of Education and Research, 2015). Early findings in the study suggest that this shift has been paramount in challenging school leaders and their professional discretion. For example, we observe a general increase of regulatory procedures, which tests established practices and positions within and across schools (Murphy, 2022). This is supported by recent survey data showing that the demands in this area of the law are experienced as highly stressful to abide by (Baldersheim et al., 2023).

Andenæs, K., & Møller, J. (Eds.) (2016). Retten i skolen: mellom pedagogikk, juss og politikk. Universitetsforlaget. Baldersheim. H. et al. (2023). Rektors handlingsrom: Er vi styrt eller støttet. Report, Agderforskning. Blichner, L.C., & Molander, A. (2008). Mapping juridification. European Law Journal, 14(1), 36–54. Hall, J. B. (2019). Rettslig styring og rettsliggjøring av grunnopplæringen – konsekvenser for skoleledere som juridiske aktører. In R. Jensen et al. (Eds.), Styring og ledelse i grunnopplæringen - spenninger og dynamikker. Cappelen. pp. 39-55. Hall, J. B., & Johansson. L. (2023). Shifting school environment policies: A Deleuzian problematisation of universal rights in Norwegian education. Policy Futures in Education (Open Access). Karseth, B., & Møller, J. (2020). Legal regulation and professional discretion in schools. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 64(2), 195–210. Murphy, M. (2022). Taking education to account? The limits of law in institutional and professional practice. Journal of Education Policy 37(1), 1-16. Rosén, M. et al. (2021). A conceptual framework for understanding juridification of and in education. Journal of Education Policy, 36(6), 822-842. Teubner, G. (1988). The transformation of law in the welfare state. In G. Teubner (Ed.). Dilemmas of law in the welfare state. Walter de Gruyer. pp. 3-10.