Search

Field placement has traditionally been an important component of professional and vocational education programmes, and there is a growing interest in workplace experience in higher education programmes in general. In this article, we examine the direct and the indirect links between classroom preparation for placement, placement quality and programme coherence, and the development of student learning outcomes (general competence, knowledge and skills). Using a longitudinal survey of social work students, combined with data from national registers, we find that programme coherence has a direct positive impact on all three types of learning outcomes, classroom preparation for placement has a positive direct impact on knowledge and general competence, while placement quality only indirectly relates to student learning outcomes and is mediated by programme coherence. Placement quality is therefore important, but its positive impact on learning outcomes depends on whether it has a spillover effect on students' experience of programme coherence.

We explored a theoretical model of relations between students' perceptions of emotional support, numeracy, and assessment for learning and their perceptions of relevance of schoolwork, motivation, persistence, and mastery experiences. We also investigated possible differences between students in lower- and upper secondary school. Participants were 44,702 students in 8th to 13th grade in Norway. The data was analyzed by means of structural equation modeling. The results revealed moderate to strong correlations between the three aspects of the learning environment. In general, they related positively to the outcome variables. However, the relations were almost entirely mediated through relevance and motivation. The present study adds to our understanding of how to work with the learning environment.

Although grades are still considered important signifiers of graduates' quality, greater attention has been paid to other measures of learning outcomes in higher education. This shift in attention is attributed to an increased focus on study quality, employability, quality development and accountability. This article examines how grades relate to different measures of self-reported learning outcomes in engineering, health programmes and education programmes. Longitudinal data from national surveys in Norway are analysed in combination with data from public registers. Self-reported learning outcomes are related to student engagement and factors indicative of effective educational practices, while grades are related more to student background characteristics. Self-reported learning outcomes therefore measure individual gain or value added, using the personal starting point as a reference In this regard, this paper argues that it is important to critically discuss what kind of measures should be used as learning outcomes.

In the initial phase of the pandemic caused by the coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), schools were closed, forcing most students to stay home on school days. In this chaotic and stressful situation, facing a potential life-threatening disease, parents needed to handle their family life, their own work, in addition to being teachers of their children. This situation may have been especially stressful for parents of children in need of special education. In this study, we examined possible determinants of parental satisfaction with the school during the lockdown using a sample of parents (N = 476) with children in need of special education. By applying a multivariate regression model, we found that the strongest predictor of parental satisfaction with the school during the lockdown was good communication between the parents and the school (r =.38), followed by how often the teachers were in contact with the children (r =.18) and how well the teachers guided the parents regarding home-schooling (r =.17). Notably, the degree of the children's difficulties, family climate or socioeconomic status was not related to parental satisfaction with the school during the lockdown. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The emerging interdependent world order poses new challenges for States and citizens alike. For States, interdependence has meant a new concern with integration, whilst for citizens and authorities alike, greater mobility has raised new concerns about recognition of competences, qualifications, quality and transparency. The introduction of learning outcomes is one of the principal instruments to achieve this in higher education. This article analyses how the implementation of higher education learning outcomes (HELOs) can be seen as ambiguous governance and management tools, manifested as parts of international policy development and policy trends. These ambiguous tools intertwine with different disciplinary and stakeholder networks. The desire to implement HELOs in a more or less uniform way across as diverse contexts (countries, disciplines, institutions) as possible has led to a design strategy that favours generic definitions of learning outcomes. In the implementation process, these generic HELOs are experienced as ambiguous, meaning that they are characterised by an openness to different interpretations. This opens up a space of discretionary and interpretational latitude, either because HELOs are assimilated to traditional path dependencies, or because they allow institutional agents (such as institutional leaders and others) the space to introduce change. The ambiguity of HELOs simultaneously provides the flexibility for contextually-diverse implementation, ensures less comparability than initially envisaged, and opens up the possibility for change, although change is contingent on structures and processes that are external to the policy process itself. HELOs are thus a paradigm case of the centrality of context in policy implementation studies.

The growing interest for measurement of learning outcomes relates to long lines of development in higher education, the request for accountability, intensified through international reforms and movements such as the development and implementation of qualifications frameworks. In this article, we discuss relevant literature on different approaches to measurement and how learning outcomes are measured, what kinds of learning outcomes are measured, and why learning outcomes are measured. Three dimensions are used to structure the literature: Whether the approaches emphasise generic or disciplinary skills and competence, self-assessment or more objective test based measures (including grades), and how the issue of the contribution from the education program or institution (the value-added) are discussed. It is pointed out that large scales initiatives that compare institutions and even nations seem to fall short because of the implicit and explicit differences in context, whilst small-scale approaches suffer from a lack of relevance outside local contexts. In addition, competence (actual level of performance) is often confused with learning (gain and development) in many approaches, laying the ground for false assumptions about institutional process-quality in higher education.

Despite striking similarities, the adoption and implementation of policy shifts regarding higher education governance vary considerably across the globe, suggesting a mixed picture of diversification and isomorphism both within and across national higher education systems. By unpacking one particular structural reform process, this paper focuses on mergers as both a governance tool and a governance result in higher education. The paper analyzes the strategic decisions taken by Norwegian higher education institutions during 2014 in the light of a proposed national reform to merge institutions in order to enhance quality in higher education. The empirical basis of the paper consists of analyses of the commissioned self-evaluations of the higher education institutions, and the strategic choices and dilemmas they expressed. The process can be seen as organizational engineering in the sense that it emerges from the self-evaluation process, but is also subject to "governancing" on the part of the ministry.

Teachers often describe their first teaching job following graduation as a shocking experience. This description raises several questions: Do novice teachers actually have a lower level of coping than experienced teachers? Are there factors in the work environment that make coping difficult for all teachers at a school? This paper compares the ability of novice and experienced teachers to cope with their work, and how this ability is affected by the level of collegial and superior support and collaboration offered. Although we find few differences between novice and experienced teachers' coping level, these two groups of teachers do differ in terms of the levels of collegial and superior support and collaboration. In addition to receiving a lower level of professional support from their superiors, novice teachers generally lack ways to articulate their own needs to colleagues. The ability of novice teachers to cope with their work should be considered a collective responsibility in schools rather than the fate of the individual teacher. This paper is based on observations, interviews and survey data from Norwegian schools.

Learning outcomes of higher education are a quality tool in a changing higher education landscape but cannot be seen as neutral measures across professions and disciplines. Survey results from graduates and recent graduates indicate that prevailing measures of learning outcomes yield the same result within and across disciplinary and professional divides. The main interpretation is that learning outcomes must be seen as a valid construct but that the results are highly dependent on the profession and discipline in a way that cannot be reduced to differences in learning outcomes only; measurements of learning outcomes must also be interpreted as mirroring different knowledge structures and knowledge bases in different professions and disciplines. Thus, attempts to make neutral comparisons of learning outcomes between different professions and disciplines are vulnerable to measuring only the differences in knowledge structures.

The transition from teacher education to work in schools has been described as an "epistemic clash". Teacher educators', novice teachers' and experienced teachers' valuation of the academic, practical and normative demands of teaching are compared using survey data from teacher education and schools. All groups value academic knowledge and practical skills highly. Teacher educators take a more positive attitude toward inclusion, and differ in their views of the normative demands of teaching. The role of teacher education as a corrective to the contemporary demands made of schools through political and international policy initiatives is emphasized. (Contains 4 tables and 1 figure.)

In this paper, we analyse mechanisms of exclusion in Norwegian daycare facilities for children ("Skolefritidsordning - SFOs), which provide after-school care. Such mechanisms are analysed and discussed as unanticipated consequences of reform policy initiatives or simply as accepted trade-offs left to the SFO staff's discretion. The data are taken from a reanalysis of a national evaluation of Norwegian SFOs. The results show several examples of new exclusion mechanisms occurring as old inequalities are addressed through social policy reforms. Examples from case studies are used to highlight and discuss the staff's reactions and actions when faced with dilemmas of meeting demands from the system while taking care of demands from the children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Field placement has traditionally been an important component of professional and vocational education programmes, and there is a growing interest in workplace experience in higher education programmes in general. In this article, we examine the direct and the indirect links between classroom preparation for placement, placement quality and programme coherence, and the development of student learning outcomes (general competence, knowledge and skills). Using a longitudinal survey of social work students, combined with data from national registers, we find that programme coherence has a direct positive impact on all three types of learning outcomes, classroom preparation for placement has a positive direct impact on knowledge and general competence, while placement quality only indirectly relates to student learning outcomes and is mediated by programme coherence. Placement quality is therefore important, but its positive impact on learning outcomes depends on whether it has a spillover effect on students' experience of programme coherence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]