Den gemensamma europeiska referensramen för språk har sedan den gavs ut av Europarådet år 2001 fått allt större inflytande vad gäller språkutbildning och bedömning, främst i Europa men även i andra delar av världen. I artikeln behandlas referensramen som sådan, liksom den europeiska språkportfolio som kan ses som en didaktisk operationalisering av dokumentet. Efter inledande bakgrundsinformation, som även innehåller ett avsnitt kring diskussioner och dilemman runt referensramen, fokuseras situationen i de nordiska länderna utifrån de tre aspekter som nämns i dokumentets titel, nämligen lärande, undervisning och bedömning. Frågor om mottagande, användning och effekter behandlas från ett såväl deskriptivt som problematiserande perspektiv, baserat på skrivna källor samt upplysningar från informanter i de nordiska länderna. I texten berörs vidare aktuell utveckling och diskussion kring referensramen.Nyckelord: gemensam europeisk referensram för språk; lärande, undervisning och bedömning; europeisk språkportfolio; de nordiska länderna Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment - a nordic perspectiveAbstractSince its publication by the Council of Europe in 2001, the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) has gained increasing influence, mainly in Europe but also in other parts of the world. In the current article, the Framework of Reference is focused upon, as is the European Language Portfolio that can be seen as an educational operationalization of the document. After some initial background information, including a section on discussions and dilemmas related to the CEFR, the situation in the Nordic countries is focused upon, based on the three aspects mentioned in the title of the document, namely learning, teaching and assessment. Issues related to reception, use and effects are treated from a descriptive as well as a problematizing perspective, based on written sources and reports from informants in the different countries. Further, current developments and discussion related to the CEFR are touched upon.    Keywords: Common European Framework of Reference; learning, teaching and assessment; European Language Portfolio; Nordic countries

To be able to communicate fluently in a foreign language is the number one goal for many language learners. However, it seems that the teaching of oral skills in language classrooms does not have an important role. There are many reasons: the higher status of written language, teaching to the te sts (of written language), teaching the textbook (with emphasis on written language), and lack of know ledge of how to teach speaking. The purpose of the article is to discuss the issue of how foreign language (FL) speaking can be taught based on 1) how spe aking is learned and 2) how speaking proficiency is defined. More specifically, 1) How do learning theories translate into teaching speaking at classroom level? and 2) What is the significance of the current understanding of language proficiency as reflect ed in the models of communicative competence and the Common European Framework ( Council of Europe, 2001) and its Companion Volume with New Descriptors (Council of Europe, 2018) to the teaching of speaking in formal foreign language contexts? On the basis of the theoretical and research reviews, some pedagogical implications and suggestions for research are provided. The pedagogical implications concern the teaching of fluency and formulaic sequences, the teaching of spoken grammar, the teaching of linguistic, sociolinguistic and pragmatic competences. Classroom applications of the sociocultural theory include pair and group work, communicative activities with opportunities for the negotiation of meaning, and creative spoken production. It is suggested that teachers' pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) be applied as a means to integrate theory with classroom applications. Suggestions for related research are provided.

Children explore their environment through experiences and each experience is meaningful in developing their environmental consciousness and identity. On the basis of the drawn landscape experiences, the present qualitative study set out to find out what landscapes the participating students deemed worth conserving. The data consisted of the drawings of 11- to 16-year-old Finnish (n = 311) and Swedish (n = 246) students. Deductive and inductive content analyses were used to analyse the data. The results showed that all three landscape types; nature, built, and social were presented in the drawings. Nature and built landscapes were the most frequent types, with the proportion of nature landscapes increasing and that of built landscapes decreasing with age. There were gender and cultural preferences: boys drew built landscapes more often than girls; and Finnish students drew summer cottages, a cultural phenomenon typical of Finnish landscapes, which was not found in Swedish drawings. Similarities in Finnish and Swedish data were identified e.g., in forest and water and “cultural landscapes”. Some of the students displayed a more distant, observing role, whereas others adopted an active one in relation to all three landscape types. The results are discussed in connection to the landscape theories and earlier findings of the drawn environments.