Assessment in Transformation Teachers’ Perceived Opportunities and Challenges in the Assessment of Multimodal Texts

Main Article Content

Eva Insulander
Patrik Hernwall
Anna Åkerfeldt
Elisabeth Öhman


Using data from focus group interviews, this study aims to analyze the perceived opportunities and challenges encountered by groups of secondary school teachers regarding the assessment of multimodal texts. Previous research has shown that digital technologies introduce new kinds of texts in the classroom. The possibility of combining verbal text with image, sound, and movement has an impact on students’ text production. However, the changing role of writing on the screen has left teachers uncertain of how to assess these new forms of texts. Apart from attending to digital competence, assessing multimodal texts may involve following writing conventions and organizing text using different resources and components. Quality in multimodal texts may concern using multimodal components to communicate complex ideas effectively, which may or may not be noticed by teachers. The data is based on group interviews with 11 secondary school teachers at two different schools. The study conducted a thematic content analysis using the analytical concepts of transformation, recognition, design, and form and meaning. Findings show that teachers find it challenging to acknowledge certain qualities in students’ multimodal texts without support from the steering documents. On the other hand, they notice opportunities to follow students’ learning processes. In addition, they stress an increased opportunity and need for shared assessment across school subjects. The article concludes with a discussion of tensions regarding opportunities and challenges when assessing students’ multimodal texts in relation to the different subject syllabuses.

Article Details

How to Cite
Insulander, E., Hernwall, P., Åkerfeldt, A., & Öhman, E. (2022). Assessment in Transformation: Teachers’ Perceived Opportunities and Challenges in the Assessment of Multimodal Texts. Educare, (1), 132–153.
Author Biographies

Eva Insulander, Stockholm University

Eva Insulander is associate professor in education at the Department of education, Stockholm University. Her research interests cover designs for learning inside and outside of schools, multimodal communication as well as assessment.

Patrik Hernwall, Stockholm University

Patrik Hernwall is associate professor in education at the Department of computer and systems sciences, Stockholm University. His research concerns conditions for children in technologically dense environments.

Anna Åkerfeldt, Stockholm University

Anna Åkerfeldt is senior lecturer in education at the Department of mathematics and science education, Stockholm University. Her research interest concerns digital learning environments and cultures of recognition in educational settings.

Elisabeth Öhman, Stockholm University

Elisabeth Öhman is senior lecturer in education at the Department of humanities and social sciences education, Stockholm University. Her research interests centers on students’ work with moving images, film, images and music as well as the work of teachers.

Received 2020-04-08
Accepted 2022-02-24
Published 2022-02-24


Aagaard, T. & Lund, A. (2013). Mind the Gap: Divergent Objects of Assessment in Technology-rich Learning Environments. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 8(04), 225-243. DOI:

Bearne, E. (2017). Assessing children's written texts: a framework for equity. Literacy. 51(2), 74-83. DOI:

Björck, C (2014). Klicka där. En studie om bildundervisning med datorer [Click there. A study of visual arts education using computers]. Diss. Stockholm: Stockholm University.

Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5-31. DOI:

Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5 (1), 7–74 DOI:

Borgfeldt, E. (2017). Multimodal textproduktion i årskurs 3 – analys av en lärares bedömning [Multimodal text production in year 3 – an analysis of a teacher’s assessment]. EDUCARE, (1), 118-151. DOI:

Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology. 3: 77-101. DOI:

Cederlund, K. & Sofkova Hashemi, S. (2018). Multimodala bedömningspraktiker och lärares lärande. EDUCARE, (1), 43-68. DOI:

Edwards-Groves, C. (2011). The multimodal writing process: changing practices in contemporary classrooms. Language and Education, 25(1), 49-64. DOI:

Godhe, A. (2014). Creating and assessing multimodal texts: negotiations at the boundary. Diss. Göteborg: Göteborg university.

Grönlund, Å (2014). Att förändra skolan med teknik: bortom ”en dator per elev” [To change school using technology: beyond “one computer per student”. Örebro: Örebro University.

Hernwall, P., Insulander, E., Åkerfeldt, A., & Öhman, L. (2016). Bedömning av multimodala elevarbeten: lärares uppfattning om bedömning [Assessment of students’ multimodal texts: teachers perception of assessment]. In: Nygårds, K. & Raymond, T. (ed.) Navigera i den digitala samtiden: en antologi om den nya lärarrollen. Stockholm: Lärarförlaget.

Jakobsen, I.K. & Tønnessen, E.S. (2018). A design-oriented Analysis of Multimodality in English as a Foreign Language. Designs for Learning, 10(1). 40-52. DOI:

Jewitt, C. (2003). Re-thinking assessment: Multimodality, literacy and computer-mediated learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 10(1), 83-102. DOI:

Jewitt, C. (2005). Multimodality, ‘‘Reading’’, and ‘‘Writing’’ for the 21st Century. Discourse: studies in the cultural politics of education. 26(3), 315-331. DOI:

Johnson, D. & Kress, G. (2003). Globalisation, Literacy and Society: redesigning pedagogy and assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, Practices, 10(1), 5-14. DOI:

Kress. G. (2010). Multimodality: a social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London: Routledge.

Kress, G., Jewitt, C., Ogborn, J., & Tsatsarelis, C. (2001). Multimodal teaching and learning: the rhetorics of the science classroom. London: Continuum.

Kress, G. & van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images. The grammar of visual design. London: Routledge. DOI:

Lantz-Andersson, A. & Säljö, R. (red.) (2014). Lärare i den uppkopplade skolan [Teachers in the connected school]. Gleerups.

Magnusson, P. & Godhe, A. (2019). Multimodality in Language Education – Implications for Teaching. Designs for Learning 11(1), 127- 137. DOI:

Mickwitz, L. (2015). En reformerad lärare: konstruktionen av en professionell och betygssättande lärare i skolpolitik och skolpraktik [School reform and the teacher: the construction of a professional and assessing teacher in policy and teachers interviews]. Diss. Stockholm: Stockholm University.

National agency for education (2011). The curriculum for the compulsory school, preschool class and school-age educare. [Läroplan för grundskolan, förskoleklassen och fritidshemmet 2011]. Stockholm: National agency for education.

Nihalani, P. & Robinson, D. (2012). Collaborative versus individual digital assessments. In: Mayrath, M., Clarke-Midura, J., Robinson, H. (Eds). Technology-based assessments for 21st century skills. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Selander, S. (2018). En tradition av läroböcker - tills nu [A tradition of textbooks - until now]. In: Insulander, E., & Selander, S. (Eds) Att bli lärare. Stockholm: Liber.

Smith, K.,Måseidvåg Gamlem, S.,Sandal, A-K. and Engelsen, K.S.(2016). Educating for the future: A conceptual framework of responsive pedagogy. Cogent Education 3, 1-11. DOI:

Stenliden, L. (2018). Geovisual Analytics in School: Challenges for the Didactic Design of the Classroom. International Journal of Information and Education Technology 8, 178-185. DOI:

Stenliden, L. & Nissen, J. (2019). Students as producers of Interactive Data Visualizations - Digitally Skilled to Make their Voices Heard. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 0, 1-17. DOI:

Stewart, D. W., Shamdasani, P. N. & Rook, D. W. (2007). Introduction: focus group history, theory, and practice. In Focus groups (pp. 1-17). SAGE Publications, Ltd., DOI:

Svärdemo Åberg, E., & Åkerfedt, A. (2017). Design and recognition of multimodal texts – selection of digital tools and modes in the basis of social and material premises? Journal of Computers in Education. Vol 4. Issue 3, s 283-306. DOI: 10.1007/s40692-017-0088-3 DOI:

Vaismoradi, M., Turunen, H. & Bondas T. (2013). Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nursing & Health Sciences 15 (3): 398-405; Australia: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. DOI:

Wiliam, D. (2011). What is assessment for learning? Studies in Educational education, 37, 3-14. DOI:

Åkerfeldt, A. (2014). Didaktisk design med digitala resurser: en studie av kunskapsrepresentationer i en digitaliserad skola [Didactic design with digital resources: A study of representations of knowledge in a digitalised school]. Diss. Stockholm: Stockholm university.