Regimes of competence in the subject Art and crafts
Journal article, Peer reviewed
This work is licensed under a creative commons attribution 3.0 license.
MetadataVis full innførsel
OriginalversjonLutnæs, E. (2013). Regimes of competence in the subject Art and crafts. Techne Series: Research in Sloyd Education and Craft Science A, 20(3). https://journals.hioa.no/index.php/techneA/article/view/757/720
This article explores the assessment repertoire of art and crafts teachers at two different lower secondary schools in the context of an on-going reform of assessment practice in Norwegian general education. New regulations have put pressure on the assessment vocabulary of teachers in all subjects as teachers now are expected to make rubrics articulating low, medium and high achievement levels. Developing assessment criteria at three different achievement levels is by large a linguistic exercise in which each subjects’ repertoire of quality descriptors is tested, (e.g., does the verb “copy” signify a higher level of achievement than the verb “imitate”?). My PhD fieldwork came to an end before the rubric trend began and was analysed as the reform evolved. What struck me as I analysed the assessment repertoire of art and crafts teachers was that the big picture of capability in the subject appeared to be unsettled. With a reform aiming towards more subject-related and fair assessment practices, it seemed a paradox to encourage teachers to make detailed assessment criteria of goal achievement, prior to a debate on the components of the bigger picture of capability. This article outlines four different visions of art and crafts education and their regimes of competence as a tool to discuss aims, content and assessment evidence.