Comparing effects and side effects of different school inspection systems across Europe

In this article, different inspection models are compared in terms of their impact on school improvement and the mechanisms each of these models generates to have such an impact. Our theoretical framework was drawn from the programme theories of six countries’ school inspection systems (i.e. the Netherlands, England, Sweden, Ireland, the province of Styria in Austria and the Czech Republic). We describe how inspection models differ in the scheduling and frequency of visits (using a differentiated or cyclical approach), the evaluation of process and/or output standards, and the consequences of visits, and how these models lead to school improvement through the setting of expectations, the use of performance feedback and actions of the school’s stakeholders. These assumptions were tested by means of a survey of principals in primary and secondary schools in these countries (n = 2239). The data analysis followed a three-step approach: (1) confirmatory factor analyses, (2) path modelling and (3) fitting of multiple-indicator multiple-cause models. The results indicate that Inspectorates of Education that use a differentiated model (in addition to regular visits), in which they evaluate both educational practices and outcomes of schools and publicly report inspection findings of individual schools, are the most effective. These changes seem to be mediated by improvements in the schools’ self-evaluations and the schools’ stakeholders’ awareness of the findings in the public inspection reports. However, differentiated inspections also lead to unintended consequences as principals report on narrowing the curriculum and on discouraging teachers from experimenting with new teaching methods

The unintended consequences of school inspection: the prevalence of inspection side-effects in Austria, the Czech Republic, England, Ireland, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Switzerland

It has been widely documented that accountability systems, including school inspections, bring with them unintended side effects. These unintended effects are often negative and have the potential to undo the intended positive effects. However the empirical evidence is limited. Through a European comparative study we have had the rare opportunity to collect empirical evidence and study the effects (both intended and unintended) of school inspections (a key system of accountability) in a systematic way, across seven countries. We present the findings of the unintended effects in this paper. Survey self-report responses from school principals in each country, with differing school inspection systems, are analysed to measure the prevalence of these unintended effects and to investigate the part played by pressure to do well in inspections. A key finding is that increasing pressure in school inspection systems is associated with the undesired effect of the narrowing and refocusing of the curriculum and instructional strategies. We also show that a proportion of school principals admit to misrepresenting the school in data sent to the inspectorate and show evidence for formalisation/proceduralisation (excessive focus on records) and ossification (fear of experimentation in teaching), although these factors are less related to changes in pressure

Impact of School Inspections on Teaching and Learning (ISI-TL)

This dataset includes the responses of principals in primary and secondary education to a survey in 2011, 2012 and 2013 about impact of school inspections in 8 countries. This dataset is created within the EU Life Long Learning-project ‘Impact of School Inspections on Teaching and Learning’. This study compares the effects and unintended consequences of school inspections in six European countries (the Netherlands, the UK, Austria, the Czech Republic, Ireland, Sweden). The project ran for a total of three years (January 2011-December 2013); each year principals in primary education and in secondary education in all the eight participating countries were asked to participate in an online survey. The survey includes questions on educational quality and change capacity in schools, changes made in the quality and change capacity of the school, inspection activities in the school, the school’s acceptance and use of feedback, the extent to which inspection standards set expectations and promote self-evaluations and choice/voice/exit of stakeholders in response to inspection reports

Impact of School Inspections on Teaching and Learning (ISI-TL)

This dataset includes the responses of principals in primary and secondary education to a survey in 2011, 2012 and 2013 about impact of school inspections in 8 countries. This dataset is created within the EU Life Long Learning-project ‘Impact of School Inspections on Teaching and Learning’. This study compares the effects and unintended consequences of school inspections in six European countries (the Netherlands, the UK, Austria, the Czech Republic, Ireland, Sweden). The project ran for a total of three years (January 2011-December 2013); each year principals in primary education and in secondary education in all the eight participating countries were asked to participate in an online survey. The survey includes questions on educational quality and change capacity in schools, changes made in the quality and change capacity of the school, inspection activities in the school, the school’s acceptance and use of feedback, the extent to which inspection standards set expectations and promote self-evaluations and choice/voice/exit of stakeholders in response to inspection reports

Impact of School Inspections on Teaching and Learning (ISI-TL)

This dataset includes the responses of principals in primary and secondary education to a survey in 2011, 2012 and 2013 about impact of school inspections in 8 countries. This dataset is created within the EU Life Long Learning-project ‘Impact of School Inspections on Teaching and Learning’. This study compares the effects and unintended consequences of school inspections in six European countries (the Netherlands, the UK, Austria, the Czech Republic, Ireland, Sweden). The project ran for a total of three years (January 2011-December 2013); each year principals in primary education and in secondary education in all the eight participating countries were asked to participate in an online survey. The survey includes questions on educational quality and change capacity in schools, changes made in the quality and change capacity of the school, inspection activities in the school, the school’s acceptance and use of feedback, the extent to which inspection standards set expectations and promote self-evaluations and choice/voice/exit of stakeholders in response to inspection reports