As Denmark and Norway share a number of characteristics, this has led to a general tendency towards regarding the three distinct school systems as one comprehensive and unified model (Aasen, 1999; Mediås, 2004; Wiborg, 2004; Telhaug et al., 2006). One of these characteristics is the notion that the two countries, together with Sweden, stands out from other countries in Europe in terms of having national objectives for education and learning (NOU 2007: 6). These objectives provide the formal guidelines for the other legislation and steering documents, while at the same time expressing the norms and values of society.

Since the formation of the Norwegian objects clause in 1848, the process of bringing up new generations within the school system has been in accordance with “basic Christian values” and “a Christian and moral upbringing” (NOU 2007: 6; Tveit, 2007). This tradition indicates that there are important differences also within Scandinavia, in terms of Norway, up to the new regulations in 2009, being the only country which formulates the value base explicitly in accordance with basic Christian values  (NOU 2007: 6). There are of course several explanations of why Christianity has held a stronger position in terms of the value base in Norway than in Denmark. However, one aspect which will be discussed in this paper is the influence of Lutheran Pietism in 18th-century Denmark/Norway. When the King and the Government reacted against the milieu of moral decadence and the exaltation of self above God, in terms of a derivation of religious norms, this created an emphasis on education in both Norway and Denmark (Strom, 2002; Sørensen, 1998; Brown, 1962). The intention in this paper is therefore to investigate whether there are differences between Denmark and Norway in terms of how Lutheran Pietism affected the national schools systems and the future value base for education in the two countries.

Brown, Dale W. (1968). The Problem of Subjectivism in Pietism: A Redefinition with Special Reference to the Theology of Philipp Jakob Spener and August Hermann Francke. Church History, vol. 31, no. 4, p. 455. Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: the critical study of language. London/New York: Longman. Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and Power. London: Longman. 2. edition. Fairclough, N. (2010). Discourse and social change. Cambridge: Polity Press. 12. edition. Mediås, O. A. (2004). Enhetsskolens utvikling i Danmark og Norge. Aalborg: Aalborg Universitetsforlag. NOU 2007: 6 Formål for framtida – Formål for barnehagen og opplæringen Ny forskrift til Opplæringslova, 2006. Strom, Jonathan (2002). Problems and Promises of Pietism Research. Church History, vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 536-554. Sørensen, Aage B. (1998). On Kings, Pietism and Rent-Seeking in Scandinavian Welfare States. Acta Sociologica, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 363-375. Telhaug, A. O. Skolepolitikk og normative regimer. Norsk Pedagogisk Tidskrift, 2006, no. 06. Tveit, K. (2007). Formålsparagrafen - eit 150-årig uroelement. Kirke og Kultur, 2007, No. 2. Wiborg, S. (2004b). Education and Social Integration: A Comparative Study Of The Comprehensive School System in Scandinavia. London Review of Education, 2004, volum 2, no. 2. Wodak. R. (2002). The discourse-historical approach. In R. Wodak.& M. Meyer (ed.). Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis (Introducing Qualitative Methods series). Los Angeles : SAGE Wodak, R. and Fairclough, N. (2010) Recontextualizing European higher education policies: the cases of Austria and Romania. Critical Discourse Studies, volum 7, no. 1, pp. 19-40. Aasen, P. (1999). Det sosialdemokratiske prosjektet. Utdanningsreformer i Sverige og Norge i Etterkrigstiden. In A. O. Telhaug & P. Aasen (ed.), Både-og. 90-tallets utdanningsreformer i historisk perspektiv. Oslo: Cappelen Akademiske Forlag.