Purpose: The aim is to qualitatively explore Civics teachers’ assessment decisions regarding content, skills, and methods in Swedish upper secondary schools.

Methodology: Thematic analyses of assignments and interviews of thirteen Civics teachers in Swedish upper secondary school.

Findings: The open Swedish curriculum and Civics syllabus enables teacher agency in assessment decisions and teachers do not find it necessary to assess all content. The thirteen teachers varied their assessment methods, which are mainly chosen from rationales other than measured content and skills. Teacher agency in assessment decisions is affected by teachers’ experiences and beliefs, Civics canonic traditions, and context, rather than education or curricular demands, except for a performative discourse focusing on grades.

Research limitations/implications: Though limited to a small sample in Swedish upper secondary schools and Civics, findings may be applicable in similar open/flexible subjects and similar national contexts.

Internal and external factors influence teachers daily assessment decisions. The purposes of teachers assessments are crucial, as these purposes guide the assessment process. Still, little is known about teachers assessment purposes. The aim of this study is to identify and describe the different purposes of assessments that Civics teachers describe. Thirteen Civics teachers in Swedish upper secondary school were interviewed about their assessment practices. A thematic analysis generated four main themes about teachers purposes: enacting policy, improving learning, pulling for students and handling administration. There are tensions between different purposes, and teachers need to balance these in their assessment decisions and when validating. Specific Civics subject matter also influences purposes and tensions. This study contributes to the understanding of the influence of internal and external factors on teachers assessment practices in Civics, and to the understanding of the complexity of validity with multiple purposes in the school context.

The aim of this study is to investigate the assessment practices of civics teachers in upper secondary school. The main purpose is to analyze, using Bloom’s revised taxonomy, which kind of knowledge civics teachers test in their written test examinations. The analyses show that they mainly test factual and conceptual knowledge. Procedural knowledge is tested in other ways, mostly by means of essays. Metacognitive knowledge is not found in this study. In contrast to earlier findings the teachers in this study test a variation of cognitive processes. Between 50 and 90 percent of test questions relate to the category remember, but there are also questions testing the categories to understand, analyze and evaluate, only a few test apply and create. There is a good alignment in teachers’ knowledge of the grading criterions and the curriculum. There are however discrepancies between this knowledge and their testing practices, which causes some problems concerning the validity of their tests.

As the tests mainly are used for summative purposes, teachers varying practices lead to problems with grade equality. Frame factors may explain differences in practices. Mainly administrative factors such as working hours and schedule are significant, since teachers need time to prepare and to mark the tests and pupils need time to write them. Pupils also wish to have written tests and teachers adapt to this. Still, the significance of these factors is decided by teachers’ freedom of action. Most teachers know how to and want to make valid tests, but they need the time, both to prepare and to mark them, and the possibilities to extend lessons when more writing time is needed.