Presentation GCES/OECD, Haag - 7.Dec 2015

Frode Nyhamn,

The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training

Accountability and trust in the

Norwegian education system

– the introduction and adjustment of

national tests

“The selling point”

• How to increase accountability and transparency

in an education system traditionally marked by a

high level of trust and decentralisation

What is it about?

What is it about cont.

(Connection to Tracy Burns presentation)

1. The Pisa shock

2. Acceptance of the

quality assessment

system/ national tests?

1. Cultural context - trust in the Norwegian (education) society

Interpersonal trust

Statement: "If you are not careful, other

people will take advantage of you”.

Percentage of individuals who disagree

(From “The Educational roots of

trust” of Borgonovi & Burns)

2. Political context – principles for governance

Two different statements

The Norwegian teacher strike 2014

• Original discussion on working conditions but also a more general discussion on trust and accountability

• Said to reveal an underlying dissatisfaction among teachers

“with all this control I feel that I’m not trusted anymore”

• Feedback from Andreas Schleicher (in Hopfenbeck et al., 2013: p.39):

“I think the high degree of autonomy of teachers and schools (in Norway) is not matched by transparency and an accountability culture”. (Hopfenbeck et al., 2013: 39)

System low

on account-

ability

System low

on trust

Half-way to accountability

The Norwegian position on accountability has been described

as moving only “half-way to accountability” (Hatch, 2013).

..introduced national tests and a system to present

information about performance (..) but these tools are not

matched with high stake follow-up mechanisms and incentive

systems (ibid).

3. The introduction and adjustments of national tests

Consistency and responsiveness

• Adjustment/responsiveness: • Improve quality/develop the tool

• Emphasize the formative aspect

• Consistency over time• Ministers from different political parties in office,

still quite consistent

Governance is a balance act

Balance versus reinforcement, some suggestions

• Leadership as a function of power and trust• Imply each other. No trust > no power / No power > no trust

• Power is about amount

• Trust something magical. Imply itself..

• Reinforcement versus balance• Balance – a way of positioning the system or

understand the adjustment of it

• Mutually reinforcing, understanding

the actual process of changeTrust Power

Cyclical trust-building loop (figure 2 in background paper)

4. Reflection on the process

How to handle

change processes

and build trust

Strategies / key learning points

• Communication

• Illustration: the newspaper article in the end of the text

• Network

• Supplement with external recourses

• Engage in real cooperation

• show that feedback has a consequence for the tool

• “Phased implementation” - a learning mechanism

• divide schools into different groups

• learn and adjust

«Theory of probing»

Educational change: ..‘theory of probing and

understanding the meaning of multiple dilemmas’

(Fullan, 1991)