Exploring the Changing Face of School Inspections

Öz

Background: A number of countries have had school inspection for many years. The origins of these systems date back to the nineteenth century when mass public schooling was introduced, and education and other emerging public services were required to comply with centrally mandated rules and programmes. In contrast, many countries across the world have only introduced school inspection over recent decades as the perceived importance of educational quality as a driver of economic competitiveness has become influential in state policy. International bodies such as the OECD and, in particular, comparative evaluations of education systems such as PISA have led to a constant stream of interventions and reforms designed to deliver higher student performance outcomes. These factors have driven the growth of inspection.

Purpose of Study: The purpose of this study is to provide an analysis of the factors that have led to the rapid rise of inspection as a school governance mechanism. It goes on to examine how developing conceptualisations of the ways in which inspection can be employed to achieve the range of outcomes with which it is tasked are leading to an evolving toolkit of inspection approaches and models. A number of these are examined in detail with a view not only to description but in terms of whether some of the demands that they place on schools are, in fact, realistic in practice.

Sources of Evidence: This study used document analysis of policy documents and existing research to deconstruct factors relating to the changing face of school inspection since the late 1990’s.

Main Argument: Formal processes of school inspection have become virtually universal. It is also argued that inspection, as it is now widely understood and practiced, has moved quite far from its historical roots and purposes. Inspection is now a complex component of wider modern concepts of public sector management and governance including quality, improvement, accountability, transparency and cost effectiveness.

Conclusions: Historically inspection was largely about compliance with rules and to an extent to judge the work of individual teachers. Now, at least, in theory, it is as much concerned with creating a regulatory framework within which schools as organisations can enjoy greater autonomy while simultaneously being held responsible for student performance outcomes.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• school inspection,accountability,school self-evaluation,governance,school development

Kaynakça

1. Atkinson, PA & Coffey, A. (2011) Analysing Documentary Realities. In: Silverman D (eds), Qualitative Research - 3rd edition, United Kingdom: Sage Publications Ltd, pp. 77 – 93.
2. Alvik, T. (1996) Self-evaluation: what, why, how, by whom, for whom? Dundee: Scottish Consultative Council on the Curriculum.
3. American Statistical Association. (ASA) (2014) ASA Statement on Using Value-Added Models for Educational Assessment. Available at: http://www.amstat.org/policy/pdfs/ASA_VAM_Statement.pdf (accessed May 1 2014).
4. Ball, S. (2012) Global Education Inc.: New Policy Networks and the Neoliberal Imaginary. United Kingdom: Routledge.
5. Ball, S. (2003) The teacher’s soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Education Policy, 18(2): 215–228.
6. Barber, M. & Moursehead, M. (2009) Shaping the Future: How Good Education Systems Can Become Great in the Decade Ahead - Report on the International Education Roundtable, July 7. Available at: http://www.mckinsey.com/locations/southeastasia/knowledge/Education_Roundtable.pdf (accessed 20 April 2014).
7. Barnett, R. (1994) Power, Enlightenment and Quality Evaluation. European Journal of Education, Wiley, 29(2): 165–179.
8. Beckmann, A., Cooper, C. & Hill, D. (2009) Neoliberalisation and managerialisation of ‘education’ in England and Wales–a case for reconstructing education. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, 7 (2): 311-345.

9. Bowen, G. A. (2009) Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative research journal, 9 (2): 27- 40.
10. Brown, M. (2013) Deconstructing Evaluation in Education: The case of Ireland. PhD Thesis, Dublin City University, Ireland.
11. Cambridge, J. & Carthew, C. (2007) Schools Self-evaluating Their International Values: a Case Study. In: Hayden M, Thompson J, and Levy J (eds), The SAGE Handbook of Research in International Education, United Kingdom: Sage Publications Ltd, pp. 283-298.
12. Coe, R. & Visscher, A. (2006) School Improvement Through Performance Feedback. United Kingdom: Taylor & Francis Ltd.
13. Considine, M. (2002) The End of the Line? Accountable Governance in the Age of Networks, Partnerships, and Joined-Up Services. Governance, 15(1): 21–40.
14. Davis, H. & Martin, S. (2008a) The Rise of Public Service Inspection. In: Davis H, and Martin M (eds), Public Service Inspection in the UK, United Kingdom: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, pp. 7-19.
15. Davis, H. and Martin, S. (2008b) The Future of Public Service Inspection. In: Davis H., and Martin, M. (eds), Public Service Inspection in the UK, United Kingdom: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, pp. 135-152.
16. Dedering, K. and Müller, S. (2010) School improvement through inspections? First empirical insights from Germany. Journal of Educational Change, Springer, 12(3): 301–322.
17. Department of Education, Ontario. (2007) Ontario statistical neighbours - Informing our strategy to improve student achievement. Available at: http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/osneng.pdf (accessed March 19 2014)
18. Donaldson, G. (2013) The SICI Bratislava memorandum on inspection and innovation. Available at: http://www.sici-inspectorates.eu/About-us/Vision-mission/The-Bratislava-Memorandum-is-on-the-Website (accessed October 20 2014