Contextualizing Language Assessment Literacy: A Comparative Study of Teacher Beliefs, Practices, and Training Needs in Norway and Cyprus

Abstract

This study explores English language teachers’ beliefs and practices regarding assessment and associated training needs in two diverse European educational contexts: Norway and Cyprus. Using a quantitative approach, the research employed survey questionnaires completed by 134 Norwegian and 396 Cypriot teachers. Analysis, including chi-square and Mann–Whitney tests, revealed important foundational beliefs and practices of language assessment literacy (LAL), alongside distinct practices influenced by contrasting educational systems and socio-cultural landscapes. Context emerged as a critical factor shaping teachers’ confidence, knowledge, and professional development needs in assessment. Findings highlight the importance of integrating culturally responsive frameworks into LAL development programs to better address diverse educator needs. Recommendations are also provided for designing localized, context-sensitive teacher training initiatives and fostering collaborative practices to bridge gaps in LAL. The study concludes by highlighting future research directions to expand understanding of LAL in multicultural settings.

1. Introduction

Language assessment has become increasingly significant in education, reflecting the growing diversity and complexity of learning environments worldwide. Research, particularly in the field of language assessment literacy (LAL), highlights the necessity for educators to develop the skills, knowledge, and competencies required to design, implement, and interpret assessments in alignment with both student needs and broader socio-political influences (Fulcher, 2012; Stiggins, 1991; Taylor, 2013). As education systems evolve under the pressures of globalization and policy shifts, the role of LAL becomes central in ensuring assessments that are both pedagogically effective and culturally sensitive.

Against this backdrop, scholarly discussions have explored how LAL is conceptualized and enacted across diverse educational contexts. For example, while (Stiggins, 1991) highlights the importance of critically examining assessment purposes and consequences, (Vogt & Tsagari, 2014) offer a broader perspective, incorporating test design, evaluation, and pedagogical applications in their LAL definition. However, despite these insights, a significant gap remains in understanding how contextual factors shape LAL practices, particularly for teachers navigating culturally diverse educational settings. The literature emphasizes the necessity of culturally responsive assessments (Tsagari & Vogt, 2022; Vogt & Tsagari, in-print; Wiese & Nortvedt, 2023) that integrate learners’ backgrounds and local systems’ traditions and practices into evaluation processes (Scarino, 2013; Yan et al., 2018). Nonetheless, in many educational contexts, studies indicate discrepancies in teachers’ preparedness to implement such assessments. Teachers, particularly in under-resourced settings, often adhere to traditional assessment methods due to limited access to training and mentorship. However, it is equally important to recognize that professional experience plays a crucial role in enabling teachers to contextualize and adapt assessment practices to their unique classroom realities. Experience allows educators to reflect on and refine assessment strategies over time. This reflection makes training more impactful especially when informed by practical insights. Such studies also stress the need for targeted professional development (Kvasova & Kavytska, 2014; Vogt & Tsagari, 2014).

The current study explores English language teachers’ LAL competencies and training needs across two distinct educational contexts: Norway, known for its emphasis on formative assessment practices (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2021, 2022; Burner, 2019; Tveit, 2009), and Cyprus, where an exam-driven system continues to dominate (Tsagari, 2016; Tsagari & Giannikas, 2021). Comparing these contexts is particularly valuable because they represent contrasting assessment cultures―one prioritizing formative, learner-centered practices and the other shaped by summative, high-stakes examinations. By examining LAL in both environments, the study aims to uncover how systemic, cultural, and pedagogical factors shape teachers’ assessment literacy. This comparison not only highlights shared challenges and divergent needs but also provides a basis for developing context-sensitive professional development initiatives that can bridge existing gaps in LAL. The study uses a quantitative survey collecting response data from teachers to address the following research questions:

• What are the similarities and differences in LAL practices among English language teachers in Norway and Cyprus?
• How confident are teachers in their LAL competencies?
• What are teachers’ perceived training needs regarding LAL?
• How do teachers view digital environments for LAL training?

By answering these questions, this research adds to the recent discussions in LAL, advocating for localized and culturally responsive teacher education programs that bridge gaps in assessment knowledge, confidence, and practice. The findings inform policy and curriculum development, positioning LAL as a crucial element of language teacher education.

Before proceeding with the literature review, the educational contexts of the two countries under investigation will be shortly presented.

1.1. Educational Contexts

Norway offers an example of a system where formative assessment and reflective teaching are prioritized (Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training, 2015, 2016, 2019). In Norway, LAL is integrated into teacher training programs through a strong emphasis on formative assessment and reflective teaching practices (Tsagari, 2021). Norwegian educators participate in professional learning communities that promote collaborative assessment design and continuous professional development (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2021). Formative assessment is embedded within Norway’s national curriculum (Bøhn, 2018; Chvala & Graedler, n.d.), which encourages the use of feedback and self-assessment as tools for enhancing student learning. However, despite this policy-driven support for formative assessment, challenges remain in the integration of digital assessment tools revealing a need for targeted training in technology-enhanced assessment practices (Norhagen et al., 2024).

In contrast to Norway, Cyprus demonstrates the constraints of an exam-centric assessment culture on LAL development. The prevalence of summative assessment has led to a restrictive interpretation of LAL, where assessment is primarily viewed as a mechanism for assigning grades rather than a tool for improving learning (Tsagari & Vogt, 2017). Teachers in Cyprus report significant challenges in implementing formative assessment, citing institutional constraints and societal expectations as barriers to innovation (Lamprianou et al., 2021). The lack of professional development opportunities further exacerbates this issue, as many educators have limited access to structured LAL training. Addressing these constraints requires a shift in policy and practice, including the expansion of professional development programs that equip teachers with the skills necessary for integrating formative assessment into their classrooms.

With the rise of educational technology, the integration of digital tools has become a significant focus in LAL research. Digital tools provide opportunities for more dynamic and interactive assessment methods, yet disparities in access and proficiency create challenges for their effective implementation. In Norway, digital assessment tools are increasingly incorporated into teacher training, encouraging educators to explore new assessment strategies (Tsagari, 2021). However, concerns remain regarding the digital divide, as not all teachers have equal access to technology or the necessary training to utilize digital assessment tools effectively (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2024). Similarly, in Cyprus, while digital assessment is gaining traction, infrastructural and pedagogical challenges limit its widespread adoption (Mavroudi & Tsagari, 2018). Bridging these gaps requires investment in both technological infrastructure and digital literacy training to ensure that teachers can effectively integrate digital assessments into their practice.

Norway and Cyprus were selected for this comparative study because they represent contrasting educational contexts in terms of assessment culture, policy, and professional development structures. Norway is known for its formative assessment orientation, emphasis on learner autonomy, and comprehensive digital integration in teacher education. In contrast, Cyprus follows a more summative, exam-focused system with limited access to structured professional development. These systemic and cultural differences provide a valuable basis for investigating how educational contexts influence teachers’ LAL beliefs, practices, and training needs.

1.2. Literature Review

In recent years, the concept of language assessment literacy (LAL) has gained prominence in educational research due to the increasing complexity of teaching and assessment practices in multicultural learning environments. As the demand for effective assessment grows, educators need to develop a comprehensive understanding of assessment principles to ensure equitable and meaningful language learning experiences. The concept of LAL encompasses a range of competencies, including technical expertise in test design, interpretive skills for understanding results, and critical awareness of the wide socio-political implications of assessment (Fulcher, 2012; Taylor, 2009). Researchers emphasize that achieving a balance among these components is essential for educators to engage in effective, ethical, and meaningful assessment practices (Inbar-Lourie, 2008; Vogt et al., 2024).

To deepen our understanding of LAL, scholars have proposed theoretical frameworks that highlight the varied needs of different educational stakeholders. A theoretical foundation for understanding LAL lies in its differentiated applications for various stakeholders. Taylor’s (2009) provisional framework, which is still the most influential, argues that different stakeholders require different levels of expertise. Taylor suggests that assessment literacy should not be seen as a universal competency. Instead, it varies depending on the role and responsibilities of the stakeholders involved. For example, teachers, test developers, policymakers, and administrators each engage with assessment differently, necessitating distinct competencies that align with their specific professional needs. A holistic understanding of LAL thus requires an approach that integrates technical, interpretive, and ethical dimensions while considering the localized demands of various educational systems. While theoretical discussions on LAL are well-developed, there remains a pressing need to explore how these competencies manifest in specific educational contexts. Contextualization plays a critical role in assessment literacy, as assessments must be designed to reflect the social, cultural, and educational landscapes in which they are applied (Scarino, 2013). Therefore, educators need to consider curriculum mandates, institutional policies, learners’ diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds and teachers’ LAL levels and affordances when developing and implementing assessments (Kremmel & Harding, 2020; Yan et al., 2018). However, although models of LAL emphasize the importance of both assessment design and interpretation (Fulcher, 2012; Pill & Harding, 2013), studies have shown that teachers often struggle to translate their conceptual knowledge into classroom-based assessment practices (Tsagari & Rousoulioti, 2025; Vogt & Tsagari, 2014).

Building on these theoretical perspectives, teacher cognition was found to play a pivotal role in mediating the implementation of assessment practices in the classroom. Teacher cognition and beliefs about assessment significantly influence classroom assessment practices. Research in teacher cognition suggests that beliefs, formed through personal experiences and professional training, directly influence pedagogical decisions (M. Borg, 2001; Phipps & Borg, 2009). Teachers’ assessment practices are not simply dictated by policy mandates or curriculum requirements but are mediated by their individual conceptions of what constitutes effective assessment. Alongside formal training, accumulated classroom experience significantly contributes to these conceptions. Experience enables teachers to contextualize assessment, apply reflective judgment, and adapt practices over time. As Yan et al. (2018) argue, contextual and experiential factors are key mediators of assessment practice and perceived training needs. Burns (1996) and S. Borg (2003) also argue that institutional constraints often create tension between teachers’ beliefs and their actual practices. This dissonance is particularly evident in language assessment, where teachers may recognize the importance of formative, student-centered approaches but feel compelled to adhere to high-stakes, summative testing due to systemic pressures. For example, Vogt and Tsagari (2014) found that limited professional development opportunities further exacerbate this gap, as teachers often rely on their own educational experiences rather than formal training to inform their assessment strategies. Similarly, Kvasova and Kavytska (2014) observed that Ukrainian teachers compensated for their lack of structured assessment training by adopting informal, experiential learning methods.

Policy frameworks also play a significant role in shaping the scope and direction of LAL in diverse educational systems. Studies by Fulcher (2012) and Taylor (2012) highlight the foundational competencies required for effective assessment, including knowledge of validity, reliability, and ethical considerations. These competencies form the basis of teacher training programs, yet research suggests that national and regional policies significantly shape how LAL is enacted in practice (Yan et al., 2018). Vogt et al. (2020) stress that the alignment between policy directives and teacher training is critical for ensuring coherence in assessment practices. Scarino (2013) further argues that self-awareness and reflective engagement with LAL can help teachers navigate systemic constraints and develop assessment strategies that are both contextually appropriate and pedagogically meaningful.

Against this backdrop, this study examines the LAL experiences of English language teachers in Norway and Cyprus, two contrasting educational contexts. Norway and Cyprus were specifically selected for this comparative study due to their contrasting educational policies, cultural practices, and historical trajectories in language assessment. Norway represents an educational system emphasizing formative assessment and learner autonomy, underpinned by comprehensive professional development initiatives and digital integration policies (Looney et al., 2008; OECD, 2011). In contrast, Cyprus exemplifies a summative assessment-oriented system with high-stakes standardized examinations and relatively limited structured professional development opportunities for teachers (Tsagari & Kontozi, 2016). These contrasting contexts provide a unique opportunity to explore how systemic, cultural, and educational policy differences shape teachers’ language assessment literacy, enabling valuable insights into the contextual determinants of assessment practices and professional training needs.

2. Materials and Methods

This study investigates LAL competencies and training needs by examining the experiences of English language teachers in Norway and Cyprus, two educational contexts with contrasting assessment cultures. The study also identifies pathways for improving teacher preparedness through localized training initiatives. Addressing these concerns, the study contributes to a broader understanding of how LAL can be effectively developed across diverse educational contexts, paving the way for more inclusive and equitable assessment practices worldwide.

2.1. Participants

Participants were in-service teachers of English at the primary and secondary levels recruited from various regions, ensuring a mix of rural and urban contexts. A total of 134 teachers from Norway and 396 teachers from Cyprus voluntarily participated in the study. Participation was designed to minimize the time burden on respondents, in line with ethical considerations outlined by Cohen et al. (2011).

In Norway, 84.3% of participants identified as female and 15.7% as male, while in Cyprus, the respective proportions were 93.4% female and 6.6% male. The majority of teachers were in the 36–45 and 46–55 age ranges, with Cyprus showing a higher percentage of older teachers (46.0% in the 46–55 range and 35.6% aged 56+). In contrast, teachers in Norway were more evenly distributed across age categories, with 42.5% aged 36–45 and 24.6% aged 46–55.

2.2. Teaching Experience

Teaching experience varied significantly between the two countries. In Norway, 35.3% of teachers reported having 15+ years of experience, while in Cyprus, this figure was much higher at 66.7%.

Regarding the age of the students they teach, teachers in Norway mostly teach students within the 6–12 age range, while teachers in Cyprus mostly teach students aged 13–18.

As for their academic qualifications, the majority of teachers in both countries held at least a bachelor’s degree. In Norway, 64.8% of participants had a bachelor’s degree, and 14.8% held a master’s degree or equivalent. Similarly, in Cyprus, 72.4% of teachers had a bachelor’s degree, while 26.1% had a master’s degree, and 1.3% had completed a PhD or EdD.

2.3. Assessment Training and Practices

A notable difference was observed in assessment training experience: 48.1% of Norwegian teachers reported having prior training, compared to 73.2% of their Cypriot counterparts. This disparity may reflect differing teacher education policies or professional development opportunities in the two countries.

The inclusion of participants from Norway and Cyprus provides a diverse dataset reflecting distinct educational contexts and strengthens the comparative validity of the study. The survey’s emphasis on professional experiences, demographic diversity, and training needs ensures a comprehensive understanding of LAL in these settings, aligning with contemporary research priorities in the field

2.4. Data Collection and Instruments

Data were collected using an online questionnaire (see Appendix A) distributed via email to the participants and institutions and via social media platforms (e.g., Facebook), ensuring accessibility and convenience for participants. The questionnaire was adapted from the TALE (Teachers’ Assessment Literacy Enhancement) project (www.taleproject.eu) aiming to explore the LAL levels of English language teachers in Norway and Cyprus. The participants received an invitation with a short description of the study and a link to the questionnaire. The questionnaire comprised five sections and was informed by the standards for teacher competence in educational assessment established by the American Federation of Teachers, the National Council on Measurement in Education, and the Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation (Yarbrough et al., 2011). Additionally, EFL-specific competencies, such as alignment with the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR), were incorporated to address contemporary issues in language testing and assessment literacy (Vogt & Tsagari, 2014).

2.5. Data Analysis

Quantitative data from survey questionnaires were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics to examine differences between Norwegian and Cypriot teachers. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to validate survey constructs. Responses were numerically coded, verified for accuracy, and analyzed using SPSS software version 29.

For each question in the main part of the questionnaire, the numerical answers were entered as the dependent variable in the statistical analysis with country (Norway vs. Cyprus) as the independent variable. If the dependent variable was dichotomous (e.g., “Yes” vs. “No”), a chi-square test for independence was performed; if the dependent variable was ordinal (e.g., “Very Confident–Confident–Somewhat Confident–Not Confident”), a Mann–Whitney test was performed.

In addition to the above general comparisons, comparisons between the two countries were also performed taking into account the participants’ demographics. For instance, regarding the participants’ gender, separate comparisons were made between the two countries for male participants and for female participants. The same was carried out for each level of other demographic factors, namely the following: teacher age group; teaching experience; teachers’ highest qualification; the age range of the participants’ learners; and whether they had received any testing and assessment training.

3. Results

The results are presented in the order of the questions in the survey questionnaire of Appendix A.2 “Assessment Practices” and Appendix A.3 “Assessment Profiles and Training Needs”, as shown in Appendix A.

3.1. Content of Teacher Assessment (Q.6)

Assessment practices play a crucial role in shaping language instruction, determining how students develop linguistic proficiency across different skill areas. The findings revealed distinct assessment practices between Norwegian and Cypriot teachers, shaped by differing educational priorities (see Figure 1).

The assessment of speaking skills differs significantly between Norway and Cyprus, reflecting broader educational philosophies. The findings reveal a statistically significant disparity in speaking assessment practices between Norwegian and Cypriot teachers. In Norway, 97% of teachers assessed speaking, compared to 87.1% in Cyprus, χ²(1) = 10.538, p = 0.001. This difference reflects Norway’s strong emphasis on communicative competence in teacher training programs, aligning with CEFR principles (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2021; Council of Europe, 2001). In contrast, Cypriot teachers operate within an exam-oriented system that prioritizes written assessments, with logistical constraints and large class sizes limiting speaking assessments (Hasselgreen et al., 2004; Tsagari, 2021). Norwegian teachers’ frequent assessment of speaking highlights their commitment to developing students’ oral proficiency.

The assessment of writing skills follows an inverse pattern, with Cypriot teachers placing greater emphasis on written evaluation. The findings indicate that Cypriot teachers assess writing more frequently than Norwegian teachers, with 97.5% in Cyprus compared to 90.3% in Norway, χ²(1) = 12.420, p < 0.0005. This reflects the requirements of the Cypriot exam-oriented system, where essays, reports, and formal writing are prioritized for standardized assessments (Lamprianou et al., 2021; Tsagari & Kontozi, 2016). In contrast, Norwegian teachers integrate writing into broader learning activities, fostering creativity and exploratory thinking (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2021). The differences highlight once more Cyprus’s structured, high-stakes testing approach, unlike Norway’s promotion of a flexible, process-oriented writing pedagogy that emphasizes functional language use over rigid formal structures.

A similar divergence appears in the assessment of vocabulary and grammar, where Cypriot teachers seem to place a stronger emphasis on discrete language components. The findings highlight differences in vocabulary and grammar assessment between Cypriot and Norwegian teachers, with 93.4% and 95.5% of Cypriot teachers assessing these areas, compared to 84.3% and 70.9% of teachers from Norway (for vocabulary: χ²(1) = 10.273, p = 0.001; for grammar: χ²(1) = 62.916, p < 0.0005). Cypriot teachers seem to emphasize explicit assessment, reflecting a test-driven approach that prioritizes grammatical accuracy (Tsagari & Giannikas, 2021). However, Norwegian educators embed grammar and vocabulary within communicative tasks rather than isolating them following local curricula mandates (Utdanningsdirektoratet, n.d.). This contrast illustrates Cyprus’ structured, exam-oriented model versus Norway’s process-based pedagogy that fosters natural language development (Caspersen & Smeby, 2023; Hansen et al., 2023; Looney et al., 2008).

The assessment of receptive skills, such as reading and listening, further reflects the differences between these two systems. The findings reveal notable differences in reading and listening assessments between Cyprus and Norway, with Cypriot teachers assessing these skills more frequently at 93.4% and 91.4%, compared to 85.8% and 78.4% in Norway (for reading: χ²(1) = 7.469, p = 0.006; for listening: χ²(1) = 16.294, p < 0.0005). Cypriot teachers prioritize receptive skills as measurable components of standardized assessments, aligning with exam-driven instruction (Tsagari, 2016), while Norwegian educators embed reading and listening into communicative tasks which is also in alignment with CEFR’s holistic language learning approach (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2022). Greater use of digital tools in Norway further supports interactive listening activities (Mavroudi & Tsagari, 2018). These findings highlight the broader contrast between Norway’s formative assessment focus and Cyprus’s summative evaluation model.

Overall, these findings emphasize the role of national policies and pedagogical traditions in shaping assessment practices, underscoring the need for professional development programs that bridge the gap between standardized testing and communicative competence. The contrast between the two countries highlights the ongoing debate between summative and formative approaches, reinforcing the importance of contextually relevant assessment strategies.

3.2. Feedback Practices (Q.7)

Assessment and feedback practices play a fundamental role in shaping students’ learning experiences. The comparison between Cypriot and Norwegian teachers’ feedback practices highlights key differences in their assessment cultures.

These variations reflect broader educational philosophies, with Cyprus emphasizing summative assessment due to high-stakes examinations (Tsagari & Giannikas, 2021), whereas Norway prioritizes formative assessment to foster student engagement and autonomy (OECD, 2011).

More specifically, the use of numerical feedback differs significantly between Cypriot and Norwegian teachers, reflecting broader assessment priorities, as Cypriot educators displayed a strong preference for marks, percentages, and letter grades (see Figure 2). This reflects the Cypriot education system’s emphasis on high-stakes exams and grades as primary indicators of student achievement (Tsagari & Giannikas, 2021). In contrast, Norwegian teachers rely less on numerical feedback, χ²(1) = 158.136, p < 0.0005, incorporating qualitative assessment and collaborative evaluation methods (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2024). Norwegian policies encourage formative assessment that supports student learning, diverging from Cyprus’s traditional grade-focused model (Eurydice, 2024; Vogt et al., 2020). These differences reflect broader distinctions in assessment literacy and pedagogical priorities.

The role of brief comments as feedback shows no significant difference between the two educational contexts, χ²(1) = 0.111, p = 0.739, yet some disparities exist. Specifically, compared to male teachers in Norway (100.0%), male teachers in Cyprus reported that they provide such feedback at lower rates (57.7%), χ²(1) = 11.599, p = 0.001. Also, compared to teachers in Norway with students of 16–18 years of age (50.0%), their Cypriot counterparts reported that they provide such feedback at higher rates (83.5%), χ²(1) = 7.363, p = 0.007. M. Borg (2001) suggests that teacher beliefs shape assessment practices, and Cypriot educators may view brief comments as insufficient for meaningful feedback. In contrast, Norwegian teachers embed such comments within formative assessment strategies that provide scaffolding and actionable guidance (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2021; Looney et al., 2008). This reflects Norway’s structured approach to feedback, aligning with principles of culturally responsive assessment (Gay, 2018).

Regarding detailed feedback, the findings suggest that Cypriot teachers provide detailed written and oral feedback more frequently than Norwegian teachers, though the difference is not statistically significant, χ²(1) = 1.587, p = 0.208. Cypriot educators view extensive feedback as essential for bridging performance gaps, particularly in literacy assessments (Karagiorgi & Petridou, 2019). However, detailed comments are most effective when actionable, a principle Norwegian teachers may implement more effectively through peer and self-assessment (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2022; Fulcher, 2012). Norwegian teachers integrate feedback into a student-centered model, encouraging active participation and self-regulation (Council of Europe, 2001), reflecting a formative approach to assessment.

Constructive hints and guidance for student improvement are slightly more common among Norwegian teachers, reinforcing their formative approach; this difference, though, is not statistically significant, χ²(1) = 0.864, p = 0.352. However, compared to teachers with 6–10 years of experience in Norway (92.9%), their Cypriot counterparts reported that they provide such feedback at lower rates (69.6%), χ²(1) = 5.747, p = 0.017. The high percentage of such feedback (81.3%) aligns with Norway’s focus on formative assessment, where feedback supports student self-regulation (Tsagari & Kontozi, 2016). Norwegian teachers prioritize scaffolding learning rather than solely correcting mistakes, reflecting strong assessment literacy practices (Inbar-Lourie, 2008). In Cyprus, feedback tends to focus on errors rather than student-driven improvement (Meletiadou & Tsagari, 2012). While Norwegian teachers emphasize guidance, both contexts could benefit from enhancing feedback strategies that foster autonomy (OECD, 2011).

The findings highlight key differences in feedback practices between Cypriot and Norwegian teachers, reflecting broader pedagogical priorities. Cypriot educators prefer numerical feedback, reinforcing an exam-driven system, while Norwegian teachers emphasize formative assessment and qualitative feedback (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2024; Tsagari & Giannikas, 2021). Brief comments show no significant differences, though Cypriot male teachers use them less frequently than male Norwegian teachers (M. Borg, 2001). Detailed feedback emerged as fairly common in both countries; however, practices differ, as Cyprus may lack actionable guidance, whereas Norwegian teachers integrate feedback into self-assessment practices (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2022; Karagiorgi & Petridou, 2019). Both contexts could benefit from enhancing feedback strategies that promote student autonomy (OECD, 2011).

3.3. Assessment Methods (Q.8)

The comparative analysis of assessment practices between Cypriot and Norwegian teachers provides significant insights into how different educational cultures prioritize various assessment methods (see Figure 3).

Teachers in Cyprus assess oral presentations significantly more frequently than their Norwegian counterparts, U = 22,381.000, p = 0.025, indicating that oral presentations are more systematically integrated into assessment practices in Cyprus. This may be due to the exam-driven culture of Cypriot education, where oral presentations serve as structured assessments rather than formative exercises. In contrast, Norwegian education prioritizes communicative competence, using oral presentations as a pedagogical tool rather than a formal assessment measure. However, gender played a role in the direction of this finding, as female teachers in Cyprus reported using oral presentations to assess their learners’ English significantly less frequently than what female teachers in Norway reported, U = 13,709.000, p < 0.0005. Also, Cypriot teachers who had received testing and assessment training reported using oral presentations less frequently than the respective Norwegian teachers, U = 6151.000, p < 0.0005.

Tests with open-ended answers are more common in Cyprus, with Cypriot teachers reporting significantly higher use, U = 9813.500, p < 0.0005, reflecting the country’s emphasis on high-stakes national exams. Open-ended assessments, such as essays and analytical responses, align with the rigorous examination system that values extended responses. Norwegian teachers, by contrast, rely less on open-ended assessments due to their focus on formative and competency-based evaluation. While open-ended responses promote critical thinking, their effectiveness depends on the quality of feedback provided, which is more systematically integrated into Norwegian pedagogical frameworks.

Portfolio assessment is reported as more frequently used by Cypriot teachers than their Norwegian counterparts, with a significant difference, U = 19,755.000, p = 0.004, suggesting that Cypriot educators value portfolios for tracking student progress. However, the implementation of portfolios in Cyprus tends to be summative rather than formative, as they are compiled primarily for grading purposes. Norwegian teachers, despite using portfolios less frequently, incorporate them more meaningfully into formative assessment, encouraging student self-reflection and ownership of learning in alignment with CEFR principles.

Norwegian teachers make significantly greater use of peer assessment than their Cypriot colleagues, U = 18,678.500, p < 0.0005, aligning with the broader emphasis on collaborative learning and student autonomy in Norwegian education. Cypriot teachers may be less inclined to implement peer assessment due to concerns about reliability and student preparedness to evaluate each other’s work (Meletiadou & Tsagari, 2016). The traditional teacher-led assessment model in Cyprus prioritizes accuracy over formative student involvement, limiting the implementation of peer assessment. However, research indicates that effective peer assessment enhances student engagement and learning outcomes, suggesting a potential area for professional development among Cypriot educators. An interesting indication towards the benefits of such professional development is the result that, contrary to the main finding above, Cypriot teachers who had received testing and assessment training reported using peer assessment more frequently than the respective Norwegian teachers, U = 6343.500, p = 0.001.

Tests with closed answers, such as multiple-choice and gap-fill exercises, are more commonly used by Cypriot teachers than by Norwegian teachers, U = 9743.500, p < 0.0005. This preference aligns with Cyprus’ standardized assessment system, which values the reliability and efficiency of closed-answer tests. In Norway multiple-choice testing is perceived as less valuable. Nevertheless, closed-answer tests remain an effective tool for assessing factual knowledge and comprehension, particularly within structured education systems.

Self-assessment is reported as more widely used by Norwegian teachers than Cypriot teachers, U = 20,793.000, p = 0.050, though Cypriot educators with less than ten years of experience show greater confidence in employing self-assessment than their Norwegian counterparts, U = 323.500, p = 0.014. This reflects Norway’s commitment to student-centered learning, where self-assessment is considered an essential skill for lifelong learning (Vattøy & Gamlem, 2024). While self-assessment is not as widely integrated into Cypriot classrooms, younger teachers appear more receptive to its potential benefits, indicating a shift in pedagogical practices. Regarding gender, female teachers in Cyprus reported using self-assessment significantly more frequently than what female teachers in Norway reported, U = 13,466.000, p < 0.0005.

Extended writing assessments are significantly more common in Cyprus, U = 12,127.500, p < 0.0005, aligning with the country’s emphasis on essay writing in national exams (Lamprianou et al., 2021). Norwegian teachers use extended writing assessments less frequently, favoring alternative forms of evaluation such as project-based learning and oral assessments. While extended writing fosters analytical and expressive skills, its effectiveness depends on whether it is integrated into a formative feedback process rather than serving purely as a summative measure. Contrary to the above general result, it was also found that teachers with students of 16–18 years of age in Cyprus reported using extended writing less frequently than what teachers with students of 16–18 years of age in Norway reported, U = 398.000, p < 0.0005.

Active class participation is used as an assessment method more frequently in Cyprus than in Norway, U = 21,295.500, p = 0.008, though Norwegian female teachers employ this method more often than their Cypriot counterparts, U = 3782.500, p < 0.0005. The high frequency of participation-based assessment in Cyprus indicates that educators value student engagement in learning. However, participation in Cyprus may be assessed informally rather than systematically within a structured formative assessment framework. Norwegian teachers integrate participation into broader feedback mechanisms, ensuring that it contributes to student learning rather than functioning as an isolated metric.

Translation is more common in Norwegian classrooms, as Norwegian teachers reported significantly higher use of translation exercises in assessment compared to Cypriot teachers, U = 10,189.000, p < 0.0005. Even though the grammar-translation method in Cypriot education remains a key strategy for teaching and assessing linguistic accuracy (Karagiorgi & Petridou, 2019), 52% of Cypriot teachers reported that they never use it (against 13% of Norwegian teachers), while only 2% stated that they frequently use it (against 16% of Norwegian teachers). Most Norwegian teachers, in contrast, use translation (sometimes: 39%; frequently: 32%). While translation exercises reinforce vocabulary and grammar, excessive reliance on this method may hinder students’ ability to use language spontaneously and creatively. Research suggests that a balanced approach integrating both accuracy-focused and communicative methods yields the most effective language learning outcomes.

These findings highlight distinct pedagogical differences between Cyprus and Norway, shaped by cultural and systemic factors. Cypriot education places greater emphasis on structured, exam-driven assessment methods, while Norwegian education leans toward formative, competency-based approaches. The prevalence of open-ended and extended writing assessments in Cyprus underscores its exam-oriented system, whereas Norway’s reliance on peer and self-assessment fosters student autonomy and collaboration. The integration of oral presentations and portfolios varies in purpose, reinforcing how each country prioritizes learning objectives. Recognizing these differences allows for a deeper understanding of how assessment shapes educational experiences, suggesting opportunities for balanced methodologies that integrate both summative and formative approaches effectively.

3.4. Comparative Analysis of Norwegian and Cypriot Teachers’ Confidence Levels (Q.9) and Preferred Training Needs (Q.10) in Assessment

Assessment literacy plays a critical role in shaping effective teaching and learning practices. Teachers’ ability to design, implement, and interpret assessments influences student outcomes, curriculum effectiveness, and pedagogical approaches. This analysis examines Norwegian and Cypriot teachers’ self-reported confidence levels (see Figure 4 and Figure 5) and their preferences for professional development (see Figure 6 and Figure 7) across multiple assessment areas. The findings are contextualized within Norway’s and Cyprus’ educational policies, the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR), and contemporary research on assessment literacy.

Teachers in Norway exhibit significantly lower confidence in identifying different purposes of assessment than their Cypriot counterparts, U = 15,248.000, p < 0.0005, with 83% of Cypriot teachers feeling assured in this area compared to 54% of Norwegian teachers. Accordingly, Norwegian teachers expressed a greater preference for training (38%) compared to Cypriots (17%), suggesting a culture of continuous professional development in Norway, χ²(1) = 25.854, p < 0.0005. These results indicate that Cypriot teachers, largely reliant on summative assessments, may not perceive additional training as relevant, whereas Norwegian teachers seek to refine their understanding in alignment with CEFR standards (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2021).

Confidence levels in selecting suitable assessment methods were also significantly lower among Norwegian teachers (58%) than among Cypriot teachers (87%), reflecting their respective pedagogical traditions, U = 14,165.000, p < 0.0005. Norwegian educators demonstrated a stronger interest in professional development in this domain (41% vs. 20%), likely influenced by Norway’s emphasis on inclusive education and formative assessment, χ²(1) = 24.274, p < 0.0005. In contrast, Cyprus’ rigid, standardized assessment culture (Tsagari & Kontozi, 2016) may lead teachers to feel that their existing assessment skills are sufficient and in less need of enhancement.

Designing classroom-based tests yielded significantly higher confidence levels for Cypriot teachers, who reported 90% confidence, compared to Norwegian teachers, who reported 44% confidence, U = 10,262.500, p < 0.0005. Accordingly, Norwegian teachers expressed a significantly higher preference for further training in this area (44%) than Cypriots (14%), χ²(1) = 53.876, p < 0.0005. This finding reflects Norway’s integration of both formative and summative assessment design into teacher training programs (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2021), whereas Cyprus’ limited exposure to professional development in assessment design may account for the lower interest in training (Mavroudi & Tsagari, 2018).

Norwegian teachers exhibited lower confidence in assessing listening skills (44%) than their Cypriot counterparts (82%), U = 12,096.500, p < 0.0005, and they demonstrated a greater preference for training (43% vs. 20%), χ²(1) = 40.532, p < 0.0005. Similarly, Norwegian teachers showed significantly lower confidence (63%) in assessing speaking skills compared to Cypriot teachers (88%), U = 15,921.000, p < 0.0005, and they expressed a much greater interest in training (39% vs. 14%), χ²(1) = 37.539, p < 0.0005. These findings align with Norway’s focus on communicative competence and the CEFR framework (Hasselgreen et al., 2004), whereas Cyprus’ exam-driven culture continues to place less emphasis on oral assessment (Tsagari, 2021).

Reading and writing skills assessments revealed different confidence and training preferences between the two groups. Confidence in assessing reading was significantly higher in Cyprus (Norway: 64% vs. Cyprus: 94%), U = 11,455.000, p < 0.0005, with Norwegian teachers showing a stronger preference for training (Norway: 35% vs. Cyprus: 5%), χ²(1) = 84.184, p < 0.0005. Regarding the assessment of writing, Cypriot teachers displayed again greater confidence (Norway: 63% vs. Cyprus: 93%), U = 13,686.500, p < 0.0005, and they showed a lower preference for training (Norway: 34% vs. Cyprus: 12%). These differences reflect Cyprus’ emphasis on written exams and structured writing assessment, whereas Norwegian teachers seek to explore broader assessment techniques that complement their communicative approach (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2024).

Integrated skills assessment was an area where Norwegian teachers expressed significantly lower confidence (35%) and a greater interest in training (40%) than Cypriot teachers (86% confidence, 15% training interest): for confidence, U = 11,044.000, p < 0.0005; for training interest, χ²(1) = 39.530, p < 0.0005. Norway’s adherence to CEFR-driven holistic language assessment accounts for this trend (Council of Europe, 2001), while Cyprus’ preference for skill-specific testing (Tsagari, 2016) discourages demand for integrated assessment approaches.

Self-assessment and peer assessment were more sought-after by Norwegian teachers than Cypriots, with the former reporting lower confidence than the latter. Norwegian educators reported lower confidence in self-assessment (31% vs. 58%), U = 17,982.000, p < 0.0005, and higher interest in training (44% vs. 23%), χ²(1) = 21.256, p < 0.0005. Similarly, confidence in peer assessment was lower in Norway (37%) than in Cyprus (52%), U = 20,658.500, p = 0.002, with Norwegian teachers expressing a significantly greater preference for training (44% vs. 22%), χ²(1) = 23.113, p < 0.0005. Norway’s commitment to learner autonomy and reflective assessment fosters demand for further training in these areas (Looney et al., 2008), whereas Cyprus’ teacher-centered approach (Tsagari & Kontozi, 2016) may limit interest in these practices.

Portfolio assessment was another area where Norwegian teachers showed lower confidence (21%) than Cypriot teachers (29%), U = 20,313.500, p = 0.005, and they demonstrated a greater preference for training (45% vs. 35%), χ²(1) = 4.443, p = 0.035. Norway’s emphasis on formative documentation aligns with this preference (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2021), while the summative focus in Cyprus reduces the perceived need for training in this area (Mavroudi & Tsagari, 2018).

Special educational needs (SEN) assessment confidence was lower among Norwegian teachers (15%) than Cypriot teachers (20%), a difference which, however, was not significant, U = 24,922.500, p = 0.985. Norwegian educators also showed greater interest in training (66% vs. 55%), χ²(1) = 4.846, p = 0.028. Norway’s robust SEN policies encourage adaptive assessment (Looney et al., 2008), while Cyprus’ limited training opportunities and resources contribute to lower confidence and interest (Karagiorgi & Petridou, 2019).

Teachers in Cyprus reported feeling more confident (77%) than teachers in Norway (34%) in their ability to prepare their learners for external tests, U = 12,278.000, p < 0.0005, and they identified a need for training in this area at a lower percentage (14%) compared to Norwegian teachers (31%), χ²(1) = 20.400, p < 0.0005.

Teachers in Cyprus reported feeling more confident (80%) than teachers in Norway (48%) in their ability to use assessment results to make decisions about individual students, U = 16,039.500, p < 0.0005, and they identified a need for training in this area at a lower percentage (9%) compared to Norwegian teachers (33%), χ²(1) = 42.677, p < 0.0005.

Teachers in Cyprus reported feeling more confident (86%) than teachers in Norway (68%) in their ability to use assessment results to plan teaching, U = 18,577.500, p < 0.0005, and they identified a need for training in this area at a lower percentage (10%) compared to Norwegian teachers (27%), χ²(1) = 23.866, p < 0.0005.

Teachers in Cyprus reported feeling more confident (85%) than teachers in Norway (39%) in their ability to identify how tests influence their teaching, U = 12,284.000, p < 0.0005, and they identified a need for training in this area at a lower percentage (8%) compared to Norwegian teachers (31%), χ²(1) = 44.214, p < 0.0005.

Teachers in Cyprus reported feeling more confident (55%) than teachers in Norway (7%) in their ability to identify the relevance of the Common European Framework of Reference for the assessment of their learners, U = 7671.000, p < 0.0005, and they identified a need for training in this area at a lower percentage (31%) compared to Norwegian teachers (54%), χ²(1) = 10.281, p = 0.001.

Teachers in Cyprus reported feeling more confident (87%) than teachers in Norway (63%) in their ability to explain assessment results to pupils, U = 15,625.500, p < 0.0005, and they identified a need for training in this area at a lower percentage (7%) compared to Norwegian teachers (26%), χ²(1) = 34.686, p < 0.0005.

Teachers in Cyprus reported feeling more confident (88%) than teachers in Norway (70%) in their ability to explain assessment results to parents and others, U = 16,951.500, p < 0.0005, and they identified a need for training in this area at a lower percentage (7%) compared to Norwegian teachers (22%), χ²(1) = 25.288, p < 0.0005.

Norwegian teachers reported lower confidence (35%) in identifying invalid or biased assessments than Cypriots (72%), U = 14,746.000, p < 0.0005, and they demonstrated a significantly greater preference for training (46% vs. 18%), χ²(1) = 43.763, p < 0.0005. This aligns with Norway’s emphasis on assessment literacy (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2024) compared to Cyprus’ reliance on established standardized methods (Tsagari, 2021).

These findings highlight fundamental differences in assessment practices between Norway and Cyprus, shaped by cultural, systemic, and pedagogical factors. Norwegian teachers consistently exhibit lower confidence and a stronger preference for professional development across various assessment domains, reflecting a culture of continuous learning and alignment with formative assessment principles. Cyprus, on the other hand, prioritizes standardized, exam-oriented assessments, leading to a lower demand for training in formative approaches. While both education systems demonstrate strengths in specific areas, integrating elements of Norway’s formative assessment strategies into Cyprus’ predominantly summative framework could offer a more balanced and reflective approach to language assessment. Recognizing these distinctions allows educators to refine their practices, ensuring that assessment methods effectively support student learning and align with broader educational objectives.

3.5. Online Training Format (Q.11)

The comparative analysis of Norwegian and Cypriot teachers’ preferences for training formats reveals key differences influenced by systemic, cultural, and pedagogical factors (see Figure 8). The findings indicate that Cypriot teachers favor printed self-study materials and online resources, while Norwegian teachers show a clear preference for blended learning formats that combine online self-study with face-to-face interactions. These preferences align with their respective educational environments and professional development opportunities.

Cypriot teachers demonstrated a significantly stronger preference for printed self-study materials than their Norwegian counterparts (88% vs. 79%), U = 18,969.000, p < 0.0005, reflecting a deep-rooted reliance on textbooks and structured learning resources. In Cyprus, printed materials are central to teacher education and classroom instruction, offering a tangible and familiar format for standardized exam preparation (Tsagari, 2021). In contrast, Norwegian teachers, who operate in a digitally advanced educational environment, seem to be less dependent on static printed resources and instead favor interactive, technology-driven methods of learning (also in Looney et al., 2008).

The growing interest in digital learning is evident in Cypriot teachers’ higher preference for interactive online courses (89% vs. 85%), U = 22,619.500, p = 0.033. This trend indicates an increasing recognition of the flexibility of online education while maintaining a need for structured guidance and engagement (Mavroudi & Tsagari, 2018). The COVID-19 pandemic likely accelerated this shift, exposing Cypriot educators to digital training opportunities they previously lacked access to. Norwegian teachers, with broader exposure to blended learning, prioritize interactive professional development formats that emphasize collaboration and experiential learning over passive, instructor-led online courses (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2021).

The preference for self-directed online learning also differs significantly between the two groups. Cypriot teachers expressed a strong inclination toward online self-study resources, with 90% considering them useful compared to 84% of Norwegian teachers, U = 17,473.000, p < 0.0005. This preference highlights the need for flexible training options and independent learning in Cyprus, where professional development is less structured (Tsagari, 2021). In contrast, Norwegian teachers benefit from institutionalized teacher training programs and rely more on practice-based and collaborative learning (Looney et al., 2008). Their greater familiarity with digital platforms and tools may also contribute to their reduced interest in static self-study materials.

Norwegian teachers, however, exhibited a significantly stronger preference for blended learning formats, with 97% finding them useful compared to 89% of Cypriot teachers, U = 21,727.000, p < 0.0005. This preference reflects Norway’s strong focus on collaborative learning, teacher autonomy, and professional development that integrates technology with interactive, discussion-based learning (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2021). In Cyprus, lower enthusiasm for blended learning may stem from a preference for more structured, instructor-led training programs (Mavroudi & Tsagari, 2018). Additionally, logistical challenges, such as access to training centers, may further discourage Cypriot teachers from engaging in blended learning opportunities, limiting their exposure to the benefits of integrating online and face-to-face instruction.

These findings emphasize significant differences in how Cypriot and Norwegian teachers engage with learning resources and professional development opportunities. Cypriot educators tend to favor traditional, structured formats, while Norwegian teachers show a preference for collaborative and interactive learning environments. The preference for printed materials and structured online courses in Cyprus reflects an exam-focused education system that values direct instruction. In contrast, Norway’s preference for blended learning and dynamic online resources aligns with a more flexible and autonomous pedagogical approach. Understanding these differences can help inform more adaptive and inclusive professional development strategies that cater to the needs of educators in both contexts.

3.6. Training Materials (Q.12)

The comparative analysis of Norwegian and Cypriot teachers’ preferences for professional development formats reveals key differences shaped by their respective assessment cultures, professional development structures, and pedagogical traditions (see Figure 9). The findings highlight both shared and divergent trends, particularly regarding preferences for video-based learning, reading materials, practical application, and collaborative training approaches.

Both Norwegian and Cypriot teachers highly valued short video presentations as a training format, with preferences of 98.5% and 98.7%, respectively. Cypriot teachers showed a slightly stronger preference, although the difference was not statistically significant, U = 24,915.000, p = 0.104. This aligns with global trends favoring engaging, digestible training methods (Mavroudi & Tsagari, 2018). Cyprus’s preference may result from limited access to structured professional development, making flexible, self-paced formats appealing. Norwegian teachers benefit from institutionalized training, thus potentially prioritizing interactive alternatives (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2021).

Regarding reading materials such as articles and summaries, Cypriot teachers expressed a significantly stronger preference (94%) than Norwegian teachers (89%), U = 18,693.000, p < 0.0005. Written resources likely play a central role in Cyprus due to its traditional, text-based educational culture (Tsagari, 2021). Limited interactive training opportunities in Cyprus heighten reliance on written guides. Conversely, Norwegian teachers may depend less on texts because of frequent exposure to interactive and experiential training methods, reducing reliance on traditional reading materials (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2021).

Both groups valued practical training materials, with slightly higher ratings from Norwegian teachers (96%) compared to Cypriots (93%), though without statistical significance, U = 24,352.500, p = 0.114. Norway’s emphasis on formative assessment and experiential methods explains this slightly higher preference (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2021). In Cyprus, rigid, exam-focused assessment structures may limit experimentation, slightly decreasing practical material preference (Tsagari, 2021).

Cypriot teachers significantly favored collaborative discussions compared to Norwegian teachers, U = 23,375.500, p = 0.024; even though their percentages in Figure 9 appear the same, the statistical significance results from the percentages for answering ‘very useful’, which was 73% for Cypriot teachers and 61% for Norwegian teachers. Cyprus’s limited formal training opportunities likely drive reliance on peer collaboration, supporting professional learning communities (Mavroudi & Tsagari, 2018). Norwegian teachers, with institutionalized professional support, depend less on informal peer-based learning (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2021).

Reflecting on these findings, it is evident that teachers’ preferences for professional development vary significantly based on cultural and institutional contexts. Cypriot teachers favor self-directed and collaborative methods due to limited structured opportunities, aligning with Tsagari’s (2021) observation of traditional and exam-focused constraints. Norwegian educators, benefiting from established institutional support, prioritize interactive and experiential formats, consistent with findings from Bøhn and Tsagari (2021). Overall, these insights highlight the importance of context-specific approaches to teacher training, emphasizing the necessity for diverse, flexible professional development programs that accommodate both individual preferences and systemic educational realities (Mavroudi & Tsagari, 2018).

4. Discussion

The comparative analysis reveals that Norwegian teachers are well-versed in self-assessment and peer assessment, reflecting Norway’s commitment to learner-centered pedagogy and formative evaluation (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2021; Looney et al., 2008). In contrast, Cypriot teachers prioritize structured, standardized assessments, aligning with Cyprus’ test-driven education system (Tsagari, 2021).

A notable distinction is Cypriot teachers’ stronger awareness of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) and their ability to incorporate its descriptors into assessment (Council of Europe, 2001; Hasselgreen et al., 2004). Cypriot teachers also demonstrate greater confidence in preparing students for external standardized tests compared to the formative culture in Norway (Tsagari, 2021; Tsagari & Giannikas, 2021)

In terms of training needs, Norwegian teachers expressed a stronger preference for collaborative, practice-based, and blended learning formats for professional development. This aligns with Norway’s emphasis on collegial learning and professional learning communities (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2024). In contrast, Cypriot teachers favor printed self-study materials, reading-based resources, and trial-based assessments, which may reflect limited access to structured professional development opportunities (Mavroudi & Tsagari, 2018). However, the growing preference for interactive digital resources in Cyprus suggests a shift towards more flexible, technology-enhanced learning formats (Mavroudi & Tsagari, 2018).

Both groups value hands-on experiences in assessment training and willingness to try out and evaluate assessment materials, indicating their exposure to assessment-for-learning (AfL) strategies, especially in Norway (Looney et al., 2008). Cypriot teachers, while open to practical applications, appear less familiar with dynamic assessment approaches due to the prevalence of traditional grading systems (Tsagari, 2016).

The findings overall reveal distinct variations in assessment confidence between Norwegian and Cypriot teachers. Norwegian teachers reported greater confidence in formative and integrated assessment methods, consistent with the country’s educational emphasis on professional autonomy and student-centered teaching (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2021). Conversely, Cypriot teachers displayed stronger confidence in almost all dimensions identifying with particular emphasis on traditional, standardized assessments, reflecting Cyprus’s historically exam-oriented educational culture (Tsagari, 2021). Despite their already high confidence, Norwegian teachers identified significant needs for additional training in areas like self-assessment and peer assessment, indicating a commitment to reflective professional growth. Conversely, Cypriot teachers felt confident primarily with standardized testing due to systemic reliance on traditional assessments.

These differences may also reflect the varying levels of teaching experience between the two groups. Notably, two-thirds of Cypriot teachers reported over 15 years of teaching experience compared to only one-third in Norway. This depth of experience may contribute to their higher confidence in applying traditional assessment methods, even without recent training. Conversely, less experienced Norwegian teachers may be more attuned to formative approaches and more open to new assessment practices, especially when supported by structured professional development. Therefore, teacher experience emerges as a critical factor that both reinforces existing practices and shapes receptiveness to training.

Teachers’ preferred training formats also differed significantly between the two contexts. Cypriot teachers preferred printed and online self-study resources, possibly influenced by limited structured professional development opportunities available locally (Tsagari, 2021). Norwegian teachers favored more interactive, experiential, and practical forms of training, expressing strong preferences for video presentations and practical assessment materials. The prevalence of structured professional development initiatives in Norway likely contributed to this preference, reflecting broader educational policies supporting digitalized and hands-on formative assessment (OECD, 2011). Additionally, interactive online courses were positively received in both contexts, although Cypriot teachers were slightly more receptive, reflecting a growing acceptance of digital education influenced by recent experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic (Maaoui et al., 2023).

Engagement with assessment literacy (AL) and collaborative learning practices also exhibited clear differences. Norwegian teachers displayed higher levels of familiarity and competency with formative and pedagogically integrated assessments, stemming from Norway’s established culture of teacher collaboration and practical assessment integration (Fulcher, 2012). These teachers frequently discussed and experimented with assessment tools collaboratively, reflecting embedded institutional practices of professional reflection and sharing. In Cyprus, teachers displayed growing enthusiasm toward collaborative discussions, potentially compensating for a lack of formal professional development structures (Mavroudi & Tsagari, 2018). Thus, Norwegian educators integrated assessment literacy naturally within their pedagogical methods, while Cypriot teachers relied on peer exchanges to overcome gaps in structured training opportunities (Fulcher, 2012).

Technological integration into assessment practices highlighted further differences. Norwegian teachers clearly favored digital and interactive methods, aligning with national educational policies promoting digital formative assessment practices (OECD, 2011). Their preference for blended, digitalized materials, such as practical digital tools, underscored a systemic shift towards technological integration in assessment. Cypriot teachers, however, demonstrated a stronger inclination towards traditional, text-based training, reflecting the historically exam-centric education system (Tsagari, 2021). Nonetheless, a gradual shift toward digital acceptance appeared to be underway, evidenced by increasing preferences for online and interactive training resources. This transition in Cyprus may be influenced by recent shifts towards digital education following global disruptions such as COVID-19 (Maaoui et al., 2023).

Cultural and systemic factors played a significant role in shaping teachers’ assessment preferences in both countries. Norway’s educational system, emphasizing formative assessment and autonomy, supported teachers’ high confidence and competence in integrated, interactive methods (OECD, 2011). Teachers preferred experiential, collaborative, and digitally supported assessment training formats, indicative of an educational culture emphasizing formative feedback and ongoing reflection (Looney et al., 2008). In contrast, Cyprus’s traditional educational system prioritized summative, standardized examinations, reinforcing teachers’ reliance on structured, self-study training methods and fostering greater confidence in conventional assessments (Tsagari, 2021). Yet, increasing interest in collaborative and digital training opportunities among Cypriot teachers suggests a potential cultural shift toward more dynamic and diversified assessment literacy approaches.

In summary, Norway’s emphasis on formative assessment, collaborative learning, and policy-driven professional development provides a strong foundation for LAL integration, yet challenges remain in aligning digital assessment competencies with classroom practice. Conversely, Cyprus’s exam-oriented system presents significant obstacles to the adoption of formative assessment, necessitating policy reforms and targeted professional development initiatives. The comparative analysis highlights the role of teacher beliefs in shaping assessment practices, emphasizing the need for reflective engagement with assessment literacy to navigate systemic constraints.

The findings suggest that professional development initiatives must be designed with context-specific considerations, ensuring that teachers receive training that aligns with their educational environments and assessment challenges. Digital technologies offer promising avenues for enhancing LAL, but disparities in access and training must be addressed to maximize their impact. Future research should explore long-term professional development strategies that support sustainable improvements in LAL and investigate how localized adaptations of assessment literacy training can better align with the specific needs of educators.

These findings also imply important recommendations for policy and practice in both contexts. Norway would benefit from strengthening teachers’ skills in standardized test design and reliability, despite their strong competencies in formative assessments, esp. in view of the introduction of the new assessment system (Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training, 2025). By providing targeted training on test fairness and validity, Norway can ensure balanced assessment literacy (Fulcher, 2012). Additionally, empowering teachers with greater autonomy in selecting assessment methods aligned with student needs would further enhance educational effectiveness (OECD, 2011). Specialized training in assessment methods addressing special educational needs (SEN) could promote equity and inclusive practices, complementing Norway’s already robust formative assessment culture (Eurydice, 2024).

Cyprus would benefit from a gradual transition away from high-stakes, exam-focused assessments toward more balanced approaches emphasizing formative assessment practices as requested in the curriculum (Cyprus Ministry of Education, Sport and Youth (MOEC), n.d.). By introducing formative frameworks that include self-assessment, peer assessment, and portfolios, the Cypriot education system can promote greater teacher engagement and student-centered learning (Tsagari, 2021). Professional development opportunities should be expanded, incorporating structured collaborative learning models, such as professional learning communities (PLCs) (Vescio et al., 2008) or Community of Practice (CoP) as conceptualized by Wenger (1998) and interdisciplinary mentorship programs, to increase teachers’ access to dynamic, practice-based training opportunities (Bøhn & Tsagari, 2024). Investment in digital assessment tools and targeted training in technology-enhanced assessment practices could bridge existing gaps between traditional and modern assessment literacies, aligning Cyprus more closely with contemporary educational practices (Mavroudi & Tsagari, 2018).

Both Norway and Cyprus stand to benefit from cross-national exchanges fostering assessment literacy development. Encouraging international collaboration, through joint workshops, professional exchanges, and digital forums, would facilitate shared learning and the dissemination of best practices, ultimately enhancing teacher competencies across both countries (Vogt et al., 2020).

Future research should explore the longitudinal impacts of targeted teacher training programs on assessment literacy, specifically examining sustained effects on teaching practices and student outcomes. Further investigation into technology’s role in shaping assessment literacy is necessary, especially given increasing reliance on digital training platforms. Additionally, understanding the relationship between teachers’ beliefs about assessment and actual classroom practices would offer valuable insights into aligning professional development programs more closely with teachers’ pedagogical realities (M. Borg, 2001). Exploring student perspectives on assessment could further enrich understanding of the effectiveness of assessment systems, providing additional dimensions for educational improvement. Lastly, comparative analyses of policy implementation and systemic barriers across educational contexts could help identify challenges and opportunities in effectively translating national policies into classroom practices.

4.1. Explicit Justification for Selecting Norway and Cyprus

Norway and Cyprus were specifically selected for this comparative study due to their contrasting educational policies, cultural practices, and historical trajectories in language assessment. Norway represents a progressive educational system emphasizing formative assessment and learner autonomy, underpinned by comprehensive professional development initiatives and digital integration policies (Looney et al., 2008; OECD, 2011). In contrast, Cyprus exemplifies a traditional, summative assessment-oriented system with high-stakes standardized examinations and relatively limited structured professional development opportunities for teachers (Tsagari & Kontozi, 2016). These contrasting contexts provide a unique opportunity to explore how systemic, cultural, and educational policy differences shape teachers’ language assessment literacy, enabling valuable insights into the contextual determinants of assessment practices and professional training needs.

4.2. Strengthening Discussion Through Theoretical Connections

The findings clearly reflect Taylor’s (2009) differentiated framework of assessment literacy, demonstrating varied levels of expertise required by teachers in different assessment roles. Norwegian teachers’ confidence in formative assessment practices aligns strongly with formative assessment theories emphasizing ongoing feedback and learner-centered pedagogies (Black & Wiliam, 1998). Conversely, Cypriot teachers’ reliance on summative assessments resonates with Scarino’s (2013) discussion of culturally responsive assessment, illustrating the impact of socio-cultural traditions on assessment choices. Furthermore, the challenges Cypriot educators face in adopting formative assessment approaches corroborate previous findings by Vogt and Tsagari (2014), highlighting how limited professional development opportunities restrict teachers’ ability to implement theoretically grounded practices. By explicitly connecting these findings to the established theoretical frameworks discussed earlier, the study reinforces its theoretical and practical contributions.

4.3. Expanded Implications with Concrete Recommendations

This study highlights important implications for practitioners and policymakers. In Norway, continued investment in structured digital assessment literacy programs focusing on standardized test design and assessment for special educational needs is recommended. Policymakers should consider enhancing teachers’ autonomy to select assessment methods aligning with student needs and curriculum goals. For Cyprus, educational authorities would benefit from gradually introducing structured formative assessment training initiatives, incorporating blended-learning platforms and collaborative professional learning communities to gradually transition from summative, exam-driven methods. Cross-national collaborative programs, teacher exchanges, and joint workshops between Norway and Cyprus could further facilitate the sharing of best practices, enhancing overall assessment literacy. These concrete recommendations offer clear pathways to improve assessment practices, teacher competence, and student learning outcomes in both contexts.

4.4. Study Limitations

Several limitations of this study must be acknowledged. Firstly, participant recruitment relied on voluntary sampling, which may introduce self-selection bias, possibly resulting in a sample that over-represents highly motivated or assessment-confident teachers. Additionally, data gathered through self-reported questionnaires are subject to biases such as social desirability or inaccuracies due to participants’ subjective perceptions. While the findings provide valuable insights, their generalizability might be limited due to demographic constraints or variations within national contexts not fully captured by the sample. Future studies could employ more representative sampling methods and supplement questionnaires with classroom observations or interviews to mitigate these limitations, providing deeper, contextualized insights into actual classroom practices. Finally, further research could examine how the year of teacher qualification affects digital assessment integration, especially given the growing emphasis on educational technology in recent teacher education programs. Longitudinal research would also help track the development of LAL over time and evaluate the sustained effects of professional development programs. Qualitative studies, including classroom observations or teacher interviews, could provide deeper insights into how beliefs and experiences translate into actual assessment practices. Furthermore, comparative studies across additional educational contexts could expand understanding of culturally responsive LAL practices globally.

5. Conclusions

This manuscript significantly advances the literature on language assessment literacy (LAL) by providing a comprehensive, comparative analysis of English language teachers’ assessment beliefs, practices, and training needs across distinct educational contexts—Norway and Cyprus. Its strength lies in highlighting how systemic, cultural, and pedagogical differences influence teachers’ perceptions and confidence regarding various assessment methodologies. By revealing that context-sensitive and culturally responsive professional development approaches are essential, the study provides valuable empirical evidence supporting tailored teacher training initiatives. This comparative framework uniquely contributes to our understanding of LAL by explicitly connecting localized teacher beliefs and practices to broader educational policy and assessment frameworks.

This study highlights key differences and similarities in the assessment literacy, confidence levels, and training preferences of Norwegian and Cypriot English language teachers. The findings provide valuable insights into how systemic educational structures, cultural influences, and professional development opportunities shape teachers’ assessment practices in these two distinct contexts.

The research underscores the critical role of assessment literacy in shaping effective teaching practices. While Norwegian teachers benefit from a comprehensive, formative assessment culture, Cypriot teachers excel in exam preparation and summative evaluation. By leveraging each country’s strengths and addressing existing gaps, both educational systems can enhance assessment literacy, teacher confidence, and student learning outcomes.

The study also emphasises the importance of designing LAL training that is responsive to local educational cultures. In Norway, training should continue to promote formative assessment and enhance competencies in digital and standardized testing. In Cyprus, efforts should focus on integrating formative practices into traditionally summative environments, supported by structured, collaborative professional development. Both systems would benefit from cross-national collaboration, peer learning, and investment in context-sensitive digital training resources.

Moving forward, cross-national collaborations, targeted professional development, and systemic policy reforms will be essential in ensuring that teachers are well-equipped to implement effective, equitable, and learner-centered assessment practices in diverse educational contexts.

In conclusion, this study identifies clear differences in language assessment literacy between Norwegian and Cypriot teachers. Norwegian educators demonstrated higher confidence in formative and integrated assessment methods, reflecting the influence of their student-centered educational system and institutionalized professional development. Cypriot teachers, conversely, displayed stronger competencies and confidence in traditional, summative, and standardized assessment practices, consistent with Cyprus’s exam-oriented culture. Training preferences were contextually distinct, with Norway favoring collaborative and blended-learning approaches, while Cyprus showed increasing interest in digital and self-paced professional development resources. These findings underscore the critical role of cultural and systemic contexts in shaping assessment literacy, emphasizing the need for context-sensitive professional development frameworks to enhance teacher effectiveness and student achievement.