A review of Scandinavian writing research between 2010 and 2020
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/wap.21637Keywords:
Writing research, qualitative synthesis review, primary and secondary education, ScandinaviaAbstract
Scandinavian writing research forms a relatively new field, with an increased number of studies conducted in the last two decades. In this qualitative synthesis review of 87 peer reviewed journal articles from Denmark, Norway, and Sweden published between 2010 and 2020, the aim was to outline the landscape of current educational writing research from the region. The sample included research articles published in both Scandinavian and international journals. Our analysis focused on the articles’ research approaches and main themes regarding the object of investigation. The main themes identified were Writing Instruction, Writing Assessment, and Students’ Text. We found a predominance of studies conducted in the context of language arts/first language (L1) education, concerning either disciplinary or general aspects of writing. We also found a predominance of approaches based on either sociocultural or social semiotic theory. Furthermore, a majority of the reviewed studies were explorative and small-scale, and, for the Writing Assessment studies in particular, directed at the secondary stages of school. The results suggest a call for future studies focusing on writing interventions and studies deploying a wide range of methodological approaches, as well as studies based on inter-Scandinavian collaborations across Denmark, Norway, and Sweden.
References
In the list of references, an asterisk (*) is used to indicate that the article in question is included in the review.
*Aamotsbakken, B., & Askeland, N. (2012). Literacy i naturfag og fysikk. Hva kreves av grunnleggende ferdigheder? [Literacy in science and physics: Which basic skills are needed?] Acta Didactica Norge, 6(1), 1–18.
*Alatalo, T., & Johansson, A. M. (2019). ‘Kan man köre en skottkärra med firkantigt hjul?’ Läs- och skrivutvecklande praktiker i teknikundervisning i förskoleklass [’Can you ride a wheelbarrow with square wheels?’ Practices that develop reading and writing in technology teaching in Preschool]. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 5(3), 63–81. https://doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v5.2018
*Andersson, S., Sandberg. G., & Garpelin, A. (2019). To teach writing: Teachers’ perspectives on how to promote children’s writing development in the Swedish preschool class. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 5(2), 23–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v5.1460
*Apelgren, B. M., & Holmberg, P. (2020). Upper secondary students’ discursive writing in two languages. Writing & Pedagogy, 12(1), 47–71. https://doi.org/10.1558/wap.36367
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (2010). Language assessment in practice: Developing language assessments and justifying their use in the real world. Oxford University Press.
Bazerman, C., Graham, S., Applebee, A., Matsuda, P., Berninger, V., Murphy, S., Brandt, D., Rowe, D. W., & Schleppegrell, M. (2017). Taking the long view on writing development. Research in the Teaching of English, 51(3), 351–360.
Behizadeh, N., & Engelhard, G. (2011). Historical view of the influences of measurement and writing theories on the practice of writing assessment in the United States. Assessing Writing, 16(3), 189–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2011.03.001
Berge, K. L. (1988). Skolestilen som genre. Med påtvungen pen [The school essay as a genre: With forced pen]. LNU/Cappelen.
Berge, K. L. (2019). Skriftkulturforsking i Norden. Nokre overordna perspektiv pa? forskingsfeltet og forskingsresultat pa? 2000-talet [Writing culture research in the Nordic countries. Overall perspectives on the research field and research results]. I S. J. Helset & E. Brunstad (Red.), Skriftkulturstudiar i ei brytingstid (s. 21–51). Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademisk. https://doi.org/10.23865/noasp.67
Berge, K. L., Evensen, L. S., Hertzberg, F., & Vagle, W. (Eds.). (2005). Ungdommers skrivekompetanse (Bind I & II) [Adolescents’ writing competence]. Universitetsforlaget.
*Berge, K. L., Skar, G. B., Matre, S., Solheim, R., Evensen, L. S., Otnes, H., & Thygesen, R. (2019). Introducing teachers to new semiotic tools for writing instruction and writing assessment: Consequences for students’ writing proficiency. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 26(1), 6–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2017.1330251
*Björk, O., & Folkeryd, J. W. (2021). Emergent literary literacy. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 20, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.17239/L1ESLL-2021.21.01.03
*Björkvall, A. (2014). Practices of visual communication in a primary school classroom: Digital image collection as a potential semiotic mode. Classroom Discourse, 5(1), 22–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2013.859845
Björnsson, C. H. (1960). Uppsatsbedömning och uppsatsskrivning [Essay assessment and writing]. Almqvist & Wiksell.
*Bjuland, R., Helgevold, N., & Munthe, E. (2015). Lesson study og lærerstudenters fokus på elevers læring i veiledningssamtaler [Lesson study and student teachers’ focus on pupils’ learning in counselling sessions]. Acta Didactica Norge, 9(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.1299
*Blikstad-Balas, M. (2018). Skrivediskurser i norskfaget – en analyse av hvordan norsklærere gir skriveoppgaver på åttende trin [Discourses of writing in Norwegian as L1: An analysis of how Norwegian L1 teachers assign writing tasks in year 8]. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 4(1), 42–60.
*Blikstad-Balas, M., Roe, A., & Klette, K. (2018). Opportunities to write: An exploration of student writing during language arts lessons in Norwegian lower secondary classrooms. Written Communication, 35(2), 119–154.
*Borgfeldt, E., & Lyngfeldt, A. (2017). ’Jag ritade först sen skrev jag’. Elevperspektiv på multimodal textproduktion i årskurs 3 [’I drew first and then I wrote’. Student perspectives on multimodal text production in Grade 3]. Forskning om undervisning och lärande, 5(1), 64–89. https://forskul.se/ffiles/005173D1/ForskULvol5_nr1_s64-89.pdf
*Borgström, E. (2014). Vad räknas som belägg för skrivförmåga? Ett textkulturellt perspektiv på skrivuppgifter i den svenska gymnasieskolans nationella prov [What is accepted as indications of writing skills? A textcultural perspective on writing tasks at the national exam in Swedish Upper Secondary School]. Sakprosa, 6(1), 1–34.
Brandt, D. (2015). The rise of writing. Cambridge University Press.
*Breivega, K. M. R., & Myklebust, H. (2020). Refleksjonsloggar i KRLE-faget. Ein studie av reflekterande skriving på niande steget [Reflection logs in the KRLE subject. A study of reflective writing at the ninth step]. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 6(1), 107–125. http://dx.doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v6.2050
Brok, L. S., Bjerregaard, M. B., & Korsgaard, K. A. (2015). Skrivedidaktik: En vej til læring [Writing didactics: A way to learn]. Klim.
*Bueie, A. A. (2016). Nyttige og mindre nyttige lærerkommentarer – slik elevene ser det [Useful and less useful teacher comments ? as the students see it]. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 2, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.17585/njlr.v2.188
*Bueie, A. A. (2019). Bedre revisjonskompetanse gjennom eksplisitt opplæring i revisjonsstrategier? [Improving revision skills through explicit instruction in revision strategies?]. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 5(2), 39–61. https://doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v5.1410
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory. Sage.
*Dagsland, S. (2019). Aspekt som analytisk tilnærming til utforskende elevtekster [Aspect as analytical approach to exploratory student texts]. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 5(2), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v5.1458
Elf, N., Hanghøj, T., Skaar, H., & Erixon, P. (2015). Technology in L1: A review of empirical research projects in Scandinavia 1992–2014. L1-Educational Studies in Languages and Literature, 15(3), pp. 1–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.17239/L1ESLL-2015.15.01.03
*Elvebakk, L., & Jøsok, E. (2017). ’Et bra prosjekt som har gjort meg til en bedre skriver’ – arbeid med skrivestrategier i videregående skole [‘A good project that has made me a better writer’: Applying writing strategies in upper secondary school]. Acta Didactica Norge, 11(1), 1–16.
*Eriksen, H. (2017a). Vurdering for læring i norskfaget: Hva kjennetegner norsklæreres skriftlige tilbakemeldinger til egne elever? [Assessment for learning in Norwegian as L1: What characterises Norwegian L1 teachers’ written feedback to their students?]. Acta Didactica Norge, 11(1), 1–26.
*Eriksen, H. (2017b). Elevers oppfatning av lærers tilbakemeldingspraksis: om sammenheng mellom graden av VfL-praksis og elevenes opplevde nytte av lærers skriftlige tilbakemeldinger i skriftlig norsk [Students’ perceptions of teachers’ feedback practice: On the relationship between the degree of assessment for learning practice and the students’ perceptions of the usefulness of the teachers’ written feedback in written composition in L1]. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 3(2), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v3.683
*Erixon, P. (2018). Necessity or Eccentricity – Teaching Writing in a New Media Ecology. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 62(6), 865–883. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2017.1307275
Evensen, L. S., Halse, M. E., Hoel, T. L., Lorentzen, R. T., Moslet, I., & Smidt, J. (1991). Utvikling av skriftspråklig kompetanse: Forskningsbakgrunn og kunnskapsutfordringer. Allforsk.
*Folkeryd, J. W., & af Geijerstam, Å. (2019). Formal and informal metalanguage in primary teachers’ talk about informational student texts. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 5(3), 123–134. http://dx.doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v5.2020
Gamlem, S. M., Rogne, W. M., Rønneberg, V., & Uppstad, P. H. (2020). Study protocol: DigiHand – the emergence of handwriting skills in digital classooms. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 6(2), 25–41. https://doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v6.2115
Gourvennec, A. F., Höglund, H., Johansson, M., Kabel, K., & Sønneland, M. (2020). Literature education in Nordic L1s. Cultural models of national lower-secondary curricula in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 20, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.17239/L1ESLL-2020.20.01.07
Graham, S., & Hebert, M. (2010). Writing to read: Evidence for how writing can improve reading. A Carnegie Corporation Time to Act Report.
Graham, S., Gillespie, A., & McKeown, D. (2013). Writing: importance, development, and instruction. Read Writ, 26, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-012-9395-2
Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools – A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York. Alliance for Excellent Education.
*Graham, S., Skar, G. B., & Falk, D. Y. (2021). Teaching writing in the primary grades in Norway: A national survey. Reading & Writing, 34, 529–563. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-020-10080-y
Grant, M. J. & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 26, 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
*Hallesson, Y., & Wisén, P. (2018). Från källtext till elevtext – Spår av lästa ämnestexter i elevtexter i en årskurs 5-klass [From sources to student text: Traces of read subject texts in student texts in grade 5]. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 4(1), 98–120. https://doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v4.1172
*Hanghøj, T., Lützen, P. H., & Geer, S. L. (2020). Positioning students as game journalists: Transforming everyday experiences into professional discourse. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 6(1), 67–85. https://doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v6.1991
Harmey, S. J., & Wilkinson, I. A. G. (2019). A critical review of the logics of inquiry in studies of early writing development. Journal of Writing Research, 11(1), 41–78. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2019.11.01.02
*Hasund, I. K. (2019). Informal language in English L2 writing: What are pupils taught from textbooks? Acta Didactica Norge, 13(3), 1–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.5617/adno.6599
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The Power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
*Hermansson, C. (2017). Processes of becoming-writer: Thinking with a situated, relational, and nomadic analysis to literacy research. Language and Education, 31(5), 463–478. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2017.1305395
*Hertzberg, F., & Roe, A. (2016). Writing in the content areas: A Norwegian case study. Read Writ, 29, 555–576. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9607-7
Holmberg, P., Krogh, E., Nordenstam, A., Penne, S., Skarstein, D., Skyggebjerg, A. K., Tainio, L., & Heilä-Ylikallio, R. (2019). On the emergence of the L1 research field: A comparative study of PhD abstracts in the Nordic countries 2000–2017. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 19, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.17239/L1ESLL-2019.19.01.05
*Horverak, M. O. (2015). English writing instruction in Norwegian upper secondary schools. Acta Didactica Norge, 9(1), 1–20.
*Hultin, E. (2020). Barn som demokratiska agenter i skolans skriftspråkspraktiker. Att lära av och med barn och unga i skolan [Children as democratic agents in the writing practices in school: To learn from and with children in school]. Utbildning & Demokrati, 29(2), 81–100. https://doi.org/10.48059/uod.v29i2.1144
Igland, M., & Ongstad, S. (2002). Introducing Norwegian research on writing. Written Communication, 19(3), 339–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/074108802237748
Ivani?, R. (1998). Writing and Identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing (Vol. 5). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Ivani?, R. (2004). Discourses of writing and learning to write. Language and Education, 18(3), 220–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500780408666877
*Jakobsen, K. S. (2013). ’En helt anden måde at skrive på’: Et studie i skriftlighed i projektarbejde med tysk som fremmedsprog [‘A completely different way of writing’: A study on writing in project-based teaching in German as foreign language]. Nordic Journal of Modern Language Methodology, 2(1), 1–20.
*Jakobsen, K. S. (2017). Skriveridentitet og skriverpraktikker i elevperspektiv [Writer identity and writer practices in a student perspective]. Sprogforum, 65, 34–41.
*Jeffery, J. V., Elf, N., Skar, G. B., & Wilcox, K. C. (2019). Writing development and educational standards in cross-national perspective. Writing & Pedagogy, 10(3), 333–370. https://doi.org/10.1558/wap.34587
Jeffery, J. V., & Parr, J. M. (Eds.). (2021). International perspectives on writing curricula and development. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003051404
*Jølle, L. (2014). Pair assessment of pupil writing: A dialogic approach for studying the development of rater competence. Assessing Writing, 20, 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2014.01.002
Juul Jensen, M., Krogh, E., Nordsborg, I. L., Rasmussen, A., & Witzke, A. (1998). Når sproget vokser [Language growth]. Dansklærerforeningens forlag.
Kress, G. 2011. ‘Partnerships in research’: Multimodality and Ethnography. Qualitative Research, 11, 239–260.
*Kristoffersen, C. S. (2018). Walk the talk: Using a shared terminology within writing education for eight- to ten-year-olds. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice, 11(3).
*Kristoffersen, C. S. (2019). Where do my words come from? Towards methods for analyzing word choice in primary level writing. Apples – Journal of Applied Language Studies, 13(3), 59–75. https://doi.org/10.17011/apples/urn.201907163639
*Krogh, E. (2012). Writing in the literacy era: Scandinavian teachers’ notions of writing in mother tongue education. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 12, 1–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.17239/L1ESLL-2012.03.01
Krogh, E., & Jakobsen, K. S. (Eds.). (2019). Understanding young people’s writing development: Identity, disciplinarity, and education. Routledge.
Krogh, E., & Penne, S. (2015). Introduction to languages, literatures, and literacies: Researching paradoxes and negotiations in Scandinavian L1 subjects. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 15, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.17239/L1ESLL-2015.15.01.10
*Krogh, E., & Piekut, A. (2015). Voice and narrative in L1 writing. L1-Educational Studies in Languages and Literature, 15, 1–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.17239/L1ESLL-2015.15.01.10
*Larsen, A. S., Brujordet, M. O., Ofte, I., & Torvatn, A. C. (2018). Arbeid med argumenterende tekst på 3. trinn. En delstudie fra prosjektet Innføring av sjangerpedagogikk i tre trondheimsskoler [Working with argumentative texts in Year 3: A sub-study from the project Introducing genre pedagogy in three schools in Trondheim]. Acta Didactica Norge, 12(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.4726
*Ledin, P., Holmberg, P., Wirdenäs, K., & Yassin, D. (2013). Skrivundervisning bör ha tydliga mål. TOKIS: En skrivpedagogisk modell för textaktiviteter och textsamtal i skolan [Writing instruction should have clear objectives. TOKIS: A writing pedagogical model for text activities and text conversations in schools]. In Resultatdialog 2013 (pp. 89–101). Vetenskapsrådets rapportserie 4: 2013.
Liberg, C., Folkeryd, J. W., af Geijerstam, Å., & Edling, A. (2002). Students’ encounter with different texts in school. In K. Nauclér (Ed.), Papers from the third conference on reading and writing. Working Papers no. 50 (pp. 46–61). Lund University, Department of Linguistics.
*Liberg, C., & Nordlund, A. (2019). Lärares samtal om elevers skrivande av berättande texter i tidiga skolår [Teachers’ conversations about students’ writing of narrative texts in the first years of school]. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 5(2), 120–139. http://dx.doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v5.1666
*Lorentzen, V., Igland, M.-A., & Solheim, R. (2020). Skriving i naturfag: En analyse av nettbaserte undervisningsressurser fra to nasjonale sentre [Writing in science: An analysis of internet-based learning resources from two national centers]. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 6(2), 39–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v6.2072
*Løvland, A. (2018). Planken som forsvann. Ein analyse av avgangsprøva i norsk gjennom 50 år [The plank that disappeared: An analysis of the final exam in Norwegian as L1 through 50 years]. Sakprosa, 10(2), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.5617/sakprosa.5971
*Lundgren, B. (2013). Bridging discourses in a writing classroom. Education Inquiry, 4(2), 315–332. https://doi.org/10.3402/edui.v4i2.22076
*Lyngfelt, A. (2019). Digital text production as narratives: An analysis of text production in a multilingual classroom at primary school. Educational Role of Language Journal 2019, 1(1), 93–104. https://doi.org/10.36534/erlj.2019.01.09
*Magnusson, J. (2018). Det diskursiva skrivandets funktion – en läromedelsanalys [The function of discursive writing: An analysis of a leaning material]. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 4, 22–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v4.960
*Magnusson, J. (2019). Läroboken och det diskursiva skrivandet: genrer, textaktiviteter och medierande redskap i läromedel för årskurs 1 till 3 [The textbook and discursive writing: Genres, text activities and mediating tools in a learning material for year 1 to 3]. Forskning om undervisning och lärande, 7(2), 67–94.
Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2008). Genre relations: Mapping culture. Equinox.
*Matre, S., & Solheim, R. (2016). Opening dialogic spaces: Teachers’ metatalk on writing assessment. International Journal of Educational Research, 80, 188–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2016.07.001
Matre, S., Solheim, R., Otnes, H., Berge, K. L., Evensen, L. S., & Thygesen, R. (2021). Nye grep om skriveopplæringa. Universitetsforlaget.
*Matthiesen, C. (2015). (U)synlig læring og modeltekster – erfaringer med elevstyret imitatio i modersmålundervisning [(In)visible learning and model texts: Student initiated imitation in Mother tongue teaching]. Rhetorica Scandinavica, 70, 51–73.
McNamara, T. F. (1996). Measuring second language performance. Longman.
*Michelsen, M. (2020). Barns tekstproduksjon på Snapchat: Multimodale svar på kommunikative forventninger og fiksjonalisering av det hverdagslige [Children’s text production on Snapchat: Multimodal responses to communicative expectations and fictionalization of the everyday]. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 6(3), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v6.2059
Ministry of Children and Education (Denmark). (2019). Faghæfte for dansk [National curriculum for Danish L1].
Moje, E. (2007). Developing socially just subject-matter instruction: A review on the literature on disciplinary literacy teaching. Review of Research in Education, 31, 1–44.
Moje, E. (2015). Doing and teaching disciplinary literacy with adolescent learners: A social and cultural enterprise. Harvard Educational Review, 85(2), 254–278.
*Myklebust, H. (2017). Posisjonering og evaluering i argumenterande elevtekstar [Positioning and evaluation in argumentative student texts]. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 3, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v3.589
*Myklebust, H., & Høisæter, S. (2018). A study of addressivity and the uses of arguments in argumentative student texts. Acta Didactica Norden / Norge, 12(3), 1–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.5617/adno.4727
*Nordlund, A. (2016). Berättarteknik i elevberättelser från tidiga skolår [Narrative techniques in student stories from early school years]. Forskning om undervisning och lärande, 4(2), 46–67. https://forskul.se/ffiles/0002A54F/ForskUL_vol4_nr2_s46-67.pdf
*Nordmark, M. (2017). Writing roles: A model for understanding students’ digital writing and the positions that they adopt as writers. Computers and composition, 46, 56–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2017.09.003
*Norén, N., Bowden, H. M., & Evaldsson, A-C. (2021). Young students’ treatment of synthetic voicing as an interactional resource in digital writing: Classroom discourse, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2020.1814367
Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training (2021). Læreplan i norsk [Norwegian L1 curriculum]. https://www.udir.no/lk20/nor01-06/kompetansemaal-og-vurdering/kv111?lang=nob)
Nygard, A. O. (2017). A shift from spectator to creator: A study of blog writing in a print and photo high school class. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 3, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v3.535
*Nygard, A. O., & Skaftun, A. (2017). The assignment transformed: Building a disciplinary affinity space in student blogs. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 17, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.17239/L1ESLL-2017.17.01.04
*Øgreid, A. K. (2016). Skriveramme som støtte i arbeidet med fagskriving? Studie av 8. klasse elevers tekstskaping i samfunnsfag [Writing frames as support in disciplinary writing? A study of students’ text creation in social studies in Year 8]. Acta Didactica Norge, 10(1), 1–19.
Ongstad S. (2002). Positioning Early Research on Writing in Norway. Written Communication, 19(3), 345–381. https://doi.org/10.1177/074108802237749
*Otnes, H., & Solheim, R. (2019). Acts of responding: Teachers’ written comments and students’ text revisions. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 26(6), 700–720. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1595524
*Piekut, A. (2018). Trapped in the genres – A student’s writer development in the subject of Danish: On possibilities and restrictions of narratives in Danish upper secondary education. Education Inquiry, 9(3), 316–330. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2017.1415096
*Reichenberg, M. (2016). Predicting and explaining Swedish teachers’ documentation practices for students’ reading and writing difficulties. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 16, 1–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.17239/L1ESLL-2016.16.01.01
*Rødnes, K. A. (2012). ‘It’s insanely useful!’: Students’ use of instructional concepts in group work and individual writing. Language and Education, 26(3), 183–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2011.614050
*Saliu-Abdulahi, D., & Hellekjær, G. O. (2020). Upper secondary school students’ perceptions of and experiences with feedback in English writing instruction. Acta Didactica Norden, 14(3), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.8299
*Sandberg, G., & Norling, M. (2020). Teachers’ perspectives on promoting reading and writing for pupils with various linguistic backgrounds in grade 1 of primary school, Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 64(2), 300–312, https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2018.1554600
Schultz, K., & Fecho, B. (2000). Society’s child: Social context and writing development. Educational psychologist, 35(1), 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3501_6
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1), 40–59.
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2012). What is disciplinary literacy and why does it matter? Topics in Language Disorders, 32(1), 7–18. https://doi.org/10.1097/TLD.0b013e318244557a
*Skaar, H. (2020). Affordances of writing in digital media in and out of school – Comparing Norwegian 5th graders’ practices in 2005 and 2017. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 6(3), 70–90. https://doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v6.2034
*Skar, G. B., & Aasen, A. J. (2016). Risikotrekk og skjulte kvalitetar i elevtekstar [Features of risk taking and hidden qualities in student texts]. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 2(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.17585/njlr.v2.199
*Skar, G. B., Aasen, A. J., & Jølle, L. (2020). Functional writing in the primary years: Protocol for a mixed-methods writing intervention study. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 6(1), 201–216. https://doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v6.2040
*Skar, G. B., Jølle, L., & Aasen, A. J. (2020). Establishing scales to assess writing proficiency development in young learners. Acta Didactica Norge, 14(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.7909
Skar, G. B., & Tengberg, M. (2014). Vilken forskning bedrivs egentligen inom forskningsfältet Svenska med didaktisk inriktning? [What kind of research is actually conducted within the research field of the didactics of Swedish as L1]. In P. Andersson, P. Holmberg, A. Lyngfelt, A. Nordenstam & O. Widhe (Eds.), Mångfaldens möjligheter. Litteratur- och språkdidaktik i Norden (pp. 353–374).
Smidt, J. (2010). Skrivekulturer og skrivesituasjoner i bevegelse – fra beskrivelser til utvikling. In J. Smidt (Ed.), Skriving i alle fag – innsyn og utspill (pp. 11–35). Tapir akademisk forlag.
Smidt, J. (2012). Skrivepedagogikk – skriveforskning – skrivedidaktikk. Skolerettet skriveforskning i Norge fra 1980 til i dag [Writing pedagogy – writing research – writing didactics: School oriented writing research in Norway from 1980 until today]. In S. Ongstad (Ed.), Nordisk morsmålsdidaktikk. Forskning, felt og fag. Oslo: Novus, s. 76–107.
*Sturk, E., & Lindgren, E. (2019). Discourses in teachers’ talk about writing: Written communication, 36(4), 503–537. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088319862512
*Sturk, E., Randahl. A-C., & Olin-Scheller, C. (2020). Back to basics? Discourses of writing in Facebook groups for teachers. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 6(2), 1–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v6.2005
Suri H., & Clarke, D. (2009). Advancements in research synthesis methods: From a methodologically inclusive perspective. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 395–430. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308326349
*Svanes, I. K., & Klette, K. (2018). Teachers’ instructional practices during pupils’ individual seatwork in Norwegian language arts. Education Inquiry, 9(3), 247–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2017.1380485
*Svanes, I. K., & Øgreid, A. K. (2020). ’Jeg vet ikke hva jeg skal skrive om!’ Læreres stillasbygging i oppstarten av skrivesituasjoner på barnetrinnet [‘I don’t know what to write about’: Teachers’ scaffolding when initiating writing situations in primary school]. Acta Didactica Norden, 14(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.7758
Swedish National Agency for Education (2021, July 3). Svenska [Swedish]. https://www.skolverket.se/undervisning/grundskolan/laroplan-och-kursplaner-for-grundskolan/laroplan-lgr11-for-grundskolan-samt-for-forskoleklassen-och-fritidshemmet?url=-996270488%2Fcompulsorycw%2Fjsp%2Fsubject.htm%3FsubjectCode%3DGRGRSVE01%26tos%3Dgr&sv.url=12.5dfee44715d35a5cdfa219f#anchor4
*Thorsten, A. (2019a). Att undervisa om berättelseskrivande i årskurs 3 och 4 – med variationsteorin som redskap [To teach narrative writing in year 3 and 4 – using variation theory as a tool]. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 5(3), 82–101.
*Thorsten, A. (2019b). How to compose a narrative: Students’ approaches and pedagogical implications. Writing & Pedagogy, 11(1), 23–47. https://doi.org/10.1558/wap.33676
*Tjernberg, C., Forsling, K., & Roos, C. (2020). Design för multimodal och kreativ skrivundervisning i tidiga skolår – Lärare reflekterar i fokusgruppsamtal [Design for multimodal and creative writing instruction in the first years of school: Teachers reflect in focus group interviews]. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 6(1), 217–237. http://dx.doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v6.2044
Thornberg, R. (2012). Grounded theory. In J. Arthur, M. Waring, R. Coe & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), Research methods & methodologies in education (pp. 85–93). Sage.
*Troelsen, S. (2018). En invitation man ikke kan afslå – analyse af afgangsprøven i skriftlig fremstilling med særligt fokus på skriveordren [An invitation you cannot refuse: An analysis of the final exam in written composition focussin on the writing task]. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 4(1), 142–166. https://doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v4.1267
*Troelsen, S. (2020). At håndtere flertydighed under pres – elevskriveres tekstnormer og skriverselv ved folkeskolens afgangseksamen i skriftlig fremstilling [To handle ambiguity under pressure: Student writers’ textual norms and writer-self at the final exam in written composition]. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 6(1), 126–183. https://doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v6.1853
*Ulland, G., Røskeland, M., & Herheim, R. (2018). Språk teller! Om hvordan elever løser, tenker rundt og skriver om et regnestykke [Language tells! On how students solve, think, and write about a calculation]. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 4(1), 121–141. https://doi.org/10.23865/njlr.v4.1256
Utdanningsdirektoratet (2021, July 3). Overgang til videregående opplæring [Transition to upper secondary education]. https://www.udir.no/tall-og-forskning/statistikk/statistikk-grunnskole/overganger-til-videregaende-opplaring/).
*Varga, P. A., & Carlsson, M. A. (2015). Writing for life? A case study of affordances of writing in four L1 upper secondary classrooms. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 15, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.17239/L1ESLL-2015.15.01.06
*von Koss Torkildsen, J., Morken, F., & Helland, W. A. (2015). The dynamics of narrative writing in primary grade children: Writing process factors predict story quality. Reading & Writing, 29, 529–554. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9618-4
*Walldén, R. (2020). ‘It was that Trolle thing’, Negotiating history in grade 6: A matter of teachers’ text choice. Linguistics and Education, 60, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2020.100884
Warren, L. L. (2000). Teacher planning: A literature review. Educational Research Quarterly, 24(2), 37–42.
Wray, D., & Medwell, J. (2006). Progression in writing and the Northern Ireland Levels for Writing. Research report, University of Warwick.
