Jenny OzgaCentre for Educational Sociology

University of Edinburgh

Teacher Professionalism, Quality Assurance and

Evaluation

Perceived consequences of publishing quality indicators and rankings

0

33

67

100

Finland Scotland England Sweden Denmark

1.It is necessary to publish school-specific PIs to enable parents to exercise choice

2.Competition between schools is needed to drive improvement

3.Public ranking of schools leads to " teaching to the test"

4.There is a real danger that public ranking of schools may lead to manipulation of data

Widely shared

Commonly held

Minority view

Perceptions of the effects of externally-driven approaches to QAE

0

33

67

100

Finland Scotland England Sweden Denmark

1.QAE has reduced professional autonomy 2.QAE has made it less attractive to be a teacher 3.Continuous evaluation shows distrust of teachers work

4.QAE has increased trust in the school among the local community

Widely shared

Commonly held

Minority view

Quality improves, respect declines?

47% of survey respondents believe that the quality of education is improving by comparison with the 1980s Is this surprising- given the level of investment by national systems in promoting QAE?

74% of respondents across the different systems believe there is less respect for teaching now than twenty years ago So teachers are raising quality but losing respect

What is Quality in Education?

Teachers’ choices of what defines quality are clustered around the following definitions:

(i) Pupils reaching their full potential(ii) Confident and independent individuals(iii) Good literacy communication and numeracy skills

Teachers and principals give very low priority (between 1 and 2% of respondents) to high attainment, or critical thinking as defining quality

• Teacher self-evaluation (90% said this improved quality)

• School self-evaluation (89%)

• Analysis/tracking of pupils’ progress (88%)

• Targets set by school (73%)

• Quality management models at school level (65%)

• Inspection (62%)

• Use of performance indicators and data (57%)

• Parent or pupil satisfaction surveys (56%)

QAE processes that improve quality

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Scotland teacher

England teacher

Scotland manager

England manager

Reduce quality No effect Improve quality

How does National Testing influence quality in education?

Internal uses of QAE • 91% Pupil-level data help me to identify problems of potential underachievement• 93% In general, evaluation is beneficial for teaching

External uses of QAE• 86% “Public ranking of schools leads to ‘teaching to the test’”• 85% “Publishing school performance tables does not improve teaching”

Internal and external uses of QAE

Teachers' creativity & spontaneity have been eroded by QAE?

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Scotland teacher

England teacher

Scotland manager

England manager

Disagree Neutral Agree

Policy technologies: marketisation, managerialism and performativity

1. Marketisation 2. Managerialism 3. Performativity

(a) parental choice (b) variety of school types(c) league tables

(a) devolution of decision-making(b) school-based management

(a) target-setting (b) evaluation(c) performance related pay

Policy technologies: QAE and teacher attitudes

1. Hard QAE forms 2. Soft QAE forms 3. System characteristics

(a) inspection(b) national testing(c) league tables(d) performance management (e) benchmarking(f) national targets

(a) school self evaluation(b) teacher assessment(c) school benchmarking(d) parental consultation

(a) choice/ marketisation(b) local accountability(c) regulation/ deregulation

The survey was part of the ESF/ESRC project Fabricating Quality in European

Education/Governing by Numbers

Further details at:http://www.ces.ed.ac.uk/research/FabQ/ind

ex.htm

http://www.ces.ed.ac.uk/index.htm