Whole school evaluation and student achievement in Taiwan and UK: Accomplishments and Challenges

Author(s):

Li-yun Wang(presenting / submitting)

Conference:

ECER 2015

Network:

11. Educational Improvement and Quality Assurance

Format:

Paper

Session Information

11 SES 06 B, Factors Impacting on the Quality of Education

Paper Session

Time:

2015-09-09

15:30-17:00

Room:

IX. Előadó [C]

Chair:

Andra Fernate

Contribution

Background and Research Questions

School evaluation is a systematic assessment of the process or outcomes of school based on a set of explicit standards for the purpose of decision-making and improvement. Other similar terms include school inspection, school audit, or school accreditation. All of them refer to the process of systematic collection of data on many aspects of school, including teacher quality and teaching, learning, and school management to reach a judgment on school quality and effectiveness.

UK is well known for its school inspection. Ofsted is the national agency responsible for school inspection. In Taiwan, school inspection is a responsibility of local government. As such, the practice of school inspection vary greatly from city to city. In some cities, school evaluation does not exist. In the other cities, rigorous school evaluation has been implemented. School evaluation as an act of quality assurance does not seem to affect the quality of schools because Taiwan students perform well in international comparison with its diverse quality assurance system of schools. UK, with its rigorous school inspection policy applied almost to all schools, has an average performance in PISA(see http://www.bbc.com/news/education-25187997) . It is thus interesting to find out how school evaluation systems in two countries differ and how do they contribute to school improvement and student evaluation.

The research questions to be addressed are as follows.

How are the school evaluation systems in Taiwan and UK designed? What are their roles and functions?
How are student performance emphasized and evaluated in school evaluation?
What contributions and limitations do school evaluation have towards improving student performance?

The contributing factors for variations of student achievements are a lot. It is possible that school evaluation has little to do with the student performance. However, serving as a mechanism for school quality assurance, it is important to examine the connections between student performance and school evaluation to advance the design of school evaluation in assuring the quality of schools.

In this paper, inspection and evaluation are considered as the same.

Literature Review

Two bodies of literature are examined. The first part is the design of school evaluation in UK and Taiwan. UK has a national-wide school inspection policy that covers almost all schools. Documents from Ofsted are examined and analyzed. In Taiwan, after reviewing the school evaluation policies across differing cities, the school evaluation of New Taipei City is analyzed in-depth for comparison. The scope of literature review includes the purposes of school evaluation (inspection), evaluation criteria, methods of data collection for judging school performance, and specifically, the role of student performance in student evaluation.

Another body of literature is test-based accountability. In some parts of the world, such as UK and Australia, test results have been used as an important piece of information in making judgment about school performance in school evaluation (inspection)(Knapp & Feldman, 2012).School evaluation is able to provide more authoritative information and suggestions on school improvement (Fitz & Lee, 1997; OZga, 2009; Schagen & Weston, 1998）。However, test-based accountability has its limitations. Critiques include the ignorance the learning of complicated skills, test-driven teaching, and lack of innovation and creativity in teaching. Failing to consider the value schools add to students is another criticism.

Method

Research Methods Document review is employed as the major research method for addressing the research questions. Most of the document reviewed were the publications from Ofsted and Taiwan local governments. Interviews t were conducted when necessary to clarify the contents. For in-depth comparison, school evaluation in New Taipei City was used as the representative case of Taiwan. It has by far the best school evaluation system in Taiwan. Documents are analyzed according to the following themes, which include the roles and functions of school evaluation, the content and criteria of school evaluation, data collected for school evaluation, and the utilization of the results of school evaluation. Most importantly, the analysis focused on the role of student performance in school evaluation.

Expected Outcomes

Findings UK school inspection is considered as the high-stake evaluation because the result of the school inspection can lead to school closure. The UK government used school inspection to control the quality of school system. In Taiwan, school evaluation is often used as a tool responding to public criticisms on school accountability. In some cities where school evaluation is carried out rigorously, it is considered as a method for city government to get information about school performance. In new Taipei city, processes that theoretically lead to student performance are emphasized in the evaluation contents, including leadership and management, curriculum and instruction, facilities and finance, etc. Student academic performance was never examined. In UK, student performance was used in school evaluation. The league table provide inspectors with information on student performance at the school. New public management theory is clearly behind school evaluation in UK. Results of school evaluation are made available to the stakeholders. In Taiwan, results of school evaluation are supposed to be a secret for the fear of parent flight towards better schools. At the end, the role of student performance in student evaluation is discussed.

References

Case, P., Case, S., & Catling, S. （2000）. Please show you're working: A critical assessment of the impact of OFSTED inspection on primary teachers. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 21（4）, 605-621. Dahler-Larsen, P. （2009）.Learning-oriented educational evaluation in contemporary society.inK.E.Ryan &J.B.Cousins （Eds.）,The Sage international handbook of educational evaluation （pp. 307-322）.Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage. Drakeford, B. （2012）. The whole-school audit. New York: David Fulton Publisher. Elmore, R. （2005）. School reform from the inside out: Policy, practice, and performance. MA: Harvard Education Press. Fitzpatrick, K.A. （1998）. Indicators of schools of quality. Schaumburg,IL: National Study of School Evaluation. Guba, E.G., & Lincoln, U.S.（1989）. Fourth generation evaluation.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hargreaves, D. H. （1995）.Inspection and school improvement. Cambridge Journal of Education, 25（1）: 117-125. Hopkins, D. （1989）. Evaluation for school development. PA: Open University Press. Janssens, F. G.,& van Amelsvoort, G. （2012）. School self-evaluation and school inspections in Europe: An exploratory study. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 34（1）: 15-23. Knapp, M.S.,& Feldman, S.B. （2012）.Managing the intersection of internal and external accountability. Journal of Educational Administration, 50（5）: 666-694. Lee, J.,& Fitz, J. （1997）. HMI and OFSTED: Evolution or revolution in school inspection. Journal of Educational Studies, 45（1）: 39-52. Matthews, P. & Smith, G. （2006）. OFSTED: Inspecting schools and improvement through inspection.Cambridge Journal of Education, 25（1）: 23-34. OECD（2013）, Synergies for better learning: An international perspective on evaluation and assessment, Paris: OECD. Ofsted（2014a）. The framework for school inspection.Ofsted. Ofsted（2014b）. School inspection handbook.Ofsted. Ozga, J. (2009). Governing education through data in England: From regulation to self-evaluation, Journal of Education Policy, 24(2): 149-162. Ryan, K.E. & Feller, I. （2009）. Evaluation, accountability, and performance: Measurement in National Education Systems. in Ryan, K.E. & Cousins, J. B.（Eds.）, The Sage international handbook of educational evaluation, 171-191.Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage. Santiago, P., Donaldson, G., Herman, J. & Shewbridge, C. （2011）.OECD reviews of evaluation and assessment in education─Australia. Paris: OECD. Schagen, I. & Weston, P. （1998）. Insights into school effectiveness from analysis of Ofsted’s school inspection database. Oxford Review of Education, 24（3）, 337-344. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development （2014）.Education policy outlook Germany, Paris: OECD. Weiss, H. （1998）. Evaluation: Methods for Studying Programs and Policies, 2nd Edition.Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice Hall. Whitby, K. （2010）. School inspection: Recent experiences in high performing education systems. Berkshire, UK: CfBT. Wilcox, B. （2000）. Making school inspection visits more effective: The English experience. Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning, UNESCO. Woods, D. & Orlik, S. （1994）. School review and inspection. London; Philadelphia: Kogan Page.

Author Information

Li-yun Wang (presenting / submitting)

National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan, Republic of China

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.