Teacher accountability to improve learning outcomes; synthesis of 4 RLO-studies
Lead Research Organisation:
Free (VU) University of Amsterdam
Department Name: Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sci
Abstract
We propose to implement an online research lab to synthesize findings from the four studies and explain the variation in teacher accountability across the four studies. Online research labs are collaborative research initiatives structured around a set of webinars with further research activities in between sessions to analyse and share data from existing studies and work towards a joint outcome. The data we will analyse are existing transcripts from interviews and school/policy documents from our current RLO-funded studies. We will analyse these sources for differences in teachers' professional qualifications and professional development, and the school and system context in which teachers operate. The webinars are used to organize the work, starting with the development of a framework for the synthesis and comparative analysis, discussing preliminary findings and comparing and contrasting findings across countries to answer our research questions. In a final writers' retreat we will finalize the synthesis paper and also prepare for dissemination to other stakeholders through a set of webinars.
Publications
Baxter J
(2023)
Factors contributing to and detracting from relational trust in leadership: The case of primary schools in South Africa
in Frontiers in Education
Ehren M
(2023)
Place-based disparities faced by stuck schools in England: a contextual understanding of low performance and the role of inspection outcomes
in School Effectiveness and School Improvement
Ehren M
(2023)
Trust in standardised assessments
in European Journal of Education
Kameshwara K
(2023)
Decentralisation in School Management and Student Achievement: Evidence from India
in The Journal of Development Studies
Munoz Chereau B
(2024)
Turning around 'stuck' schools in England: effective leadership in extremely challenging circumstances
in Perspectiva Educacional
Shields R
(2024)
From experience to actions for justice: learners' views on epistemic, environmental and transitional justice in Nepal, Peru and Uganda
in Global Social Challenges Journal
Smith W
(2024)
Global governance of education: The Sustainable Development Goals as a product and mechanism?
in International Review of Education
Trani J
(2024)
What is inclusion? Children perspective on education at primary schools in rural Afghanistan
in Research in Comparative and International Education
| Description | Our study findings show how school staff in high and low performing primary schools in South Africa understand trust and accountability and the extent to which organisational trust and formal and informal systems and cultures of accountability vary across both types of schools. Trust: Respondents in both high and low performing schools have similar understandings of trust with no significant differences between low and high performing schools in agreement in trust ratings. In both types of schools 'doesn't lie' and 'means well and 'tries to do the right thing' score high, while 'reputation' and 'returning a favour' are considered less important. These findings suggest that, across schools and regardless of the level of performance, integrity is of key importance in how school staff come to trust someone else, more so than competence or benevolence; two other elements of our commonly used trust definition. Accountability: There is more variation between low and high performing schools in how staff understand accountability. School staff in high performing schools understand accountability as taking (pro-active) responsibility for one's work and role, particularly to ensure student learning and well-being, being transparent and open about mistakes towards colleagues and the school management team, practicing what you preach and doing what you promised to do. The understanding of accountability in these schools is clearly linked to a sense of professionalism where staff feel agentive in determining the quality of their school. This in contrast to how staff in low performing schools tend to describe accountability, for example with reference to compliance, subjugation and implementation of specific tasks and activities as directed by those in line management positions, and/or external policy (including CAPS). Capacity: School staff understanding of accountability and variation between low and high performing schools can also be seen in how they organize their internal quality control. High performing schools tend to have relatively well functioning internal systems for decision-making and discussing problems, where staff are involved in or consulted about decisions, and are encouraged to follow the line of command to report problems. These systems include relatively well-organized systems for planning and monitoring, informed by the IQMS, and reporting to the district with grade/subject meetings to moderate assessments (sometimes including an item analysis), discuss assessment outcomes and learner progress, classroom observations, checking of book and teacher files and logging teacher/learner attendance in a school management system (SA SAMS/principal primary). Internal decision-making and monitoring in low performing schools is overall much less developed with various examples of nepotism, conflict, unsafe culture to discuss complaints in which problems are immediately escalated to (in case of parents) the principal or the district (by teachers). Monitoring and evaluation in these schools is implemented to comply with district requirements but doesn't seem to inform improvement on the school level or further support by the district but only done for reporting purposes. |
| Exploitation Route | The findings are relevant for policymakers who are in charge of school accountability. They need to consider the required capacity that needs to be in place, both in schools and with external evaluators/inspectors to ensure school accountability leads to improvement, rather than reduces agency and leads to adverse effects. |
| Sectors | Education |
| URL | https://www.google.nl/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwihp6uZlP-LAxW8g_0HHaakIr0QFnoECBYQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.jet.org.za%2Fresources%2Fcomparative-case-study-report.pdf%2Fdownload&usg=AOvVaw1LXWgGVMfMcIn5Ez_g4qMJ&opi=89978449 |
| Description | Our theoretical framework on the relation between trust, accountability and capacity was taken up last year by various policy-makers across the world in reflecting why education reform is or is not successful. We were invited on a number of occasions to present findings and conversations with international colleagues also culminated in an edited book with a website with video interviews. http://business-school.open.ac.uk/research/project s/trust-capacity-and-accountability/book In the past year we have worked with South African partners (University of Johannesburg, University of the Witwatersrand, Khanyisa Inanda Seminary Community Projects, Global Teachers Institute, Thuto Trust) on a proposal to the EU's Regional Teachers' Initiative for Africa. As part of the proposal development we shared our project findings on teacher agency and teacher accountability and how this could inform an approach to school-based support for student teachers, particularly those that are doing extended internships as part of their initial teacher training. |
| First Year Of Impact | 2020 |
| Sector | Education |
| Impact Types | Societal Policy & public services |
| Description | Teaching university students |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Influenced training of practitioners or researchers |
| Impact | Prospective teachers are reading the paper as part of their degree programme and we do a structured activity to help them think about teacher agency within the school organisation. This enhances their own professionalism and how they can interact with the external inspections in their own school context. |
| Description | UNESCO Global Education Monitoring Report expert committee |
| Organisation | United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization |
| Country | France |
| Sector | Academic/University |
| PI Contribution | Professor Ehren served on the expert panel to the UNESCO Global Education Monitoring report 2024. She reviewed the system leadership chapter and reviewed the full report. In her review she was able to draw on findings from the synthesis. |
| Collaborator Contribution | The Global Education Monitoring Report 2024 is a highly influential report which provides countries with recommendations on how to improve leadership within their education systems. Our advice on the expert committee contributed to the chapters on system leadership which particularly deal with public servants in charge of school and teacher accountability. We were able to draw on our synthesis to advice on how those roles can ensure beneficial outcomes for students and teachers. |
| Impact | The contribution is part of the UNESCO GEM 2024 report. |
| Start Year | 2024 |
| Description | UNESCO Global Education Monitoring Report expert committee |
| Organisation | United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization |
| Country | France |
| Sector | Academic/University |
| PI Contribution | Professor Ehren served on the expert panel to the UNESCO Global Education Monitoring report 2024. She reviewed the system leadership chapter and reviewed the full report. In her review she was able to draw on findings from the synthesis. |
| Collaborator Contribution | The Global Education Monitoring Report 2024 is a highly influential report which provides countries with recommendations on how to improve leadership within their education systems. Our advice on the expert committee contributed to the chapters on system leadership which particularly deal with public servants in charge of school and teacher accountability. We were able to draw on our synthesis to advice on how those roles can ensure beneficial outcomes for students and teachers. |
| Impact | The contribution is part of the UNESCO GEM 2024 report. |
| Start Year | 2024 |
| Description | Seminar trust and accountability with Chilean Quality Agency and Summa |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Regional |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | The PI presented and discussed findings from the project, particularly questions about trust and standardized assessments and consequences for schools and teachers with colleagues at the quality agency in Chile in November 2023 and with colleagues from SUMMA (The Knowledge and Innovation Exchange Centre (KIX) for Latin America and the Caribbean). |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2023 |
| Description | Talk at CIES 2024 |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Other audiences |
| Results and Impact | A seminar to share and discuss our synthesis with academic colleagues. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2024 |
| Description | Talk to colleagues and graduate students at the University of Hong Kong, Faculty of Education |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Postgraduate students |
| Results and Impact | Professor Ehren presented the conceptual framework and initial findings to students and colleagues from the faculty of Education at Hong Kong University. The presentation was also live streamed on YouTube to allow for other regional colleagues to join. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2024 |
| Description | Workshop with Kenya teacher trainers and NGO's |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Regional |
| Primary Audience | Schools |
| Results and Impact | We organized a workshop with NGO's in Nairobi (VVOB, ZiziAfrique, Dignitias, Shining hope for communities) and a teacher training college to discuss and share the preliminary findings from our synthesis. These NGOs are all working with teachers and grappling with questions around how to enhance their agency and quality of their work in a context of bureaucratic accountability. Our synthesis findings offered recommendations on how they can build capacity in the schools they are working with, including through continuous professional development of teachers. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2024 |