Session Information
Contribution
In order to promote quality assurance and quality improvement in schools, most European countries have introduced instruments supporting the concept of evidence-based policy, such as educational standards and annual comparative student assessment. For instance, student achievement data can be reported to all actors in a school system to reinforce evidence-based school improvement.
Through the introduction of these new steering mechanisms, the formal steering architecture in multi-level school systems has changed. Under the new policy, all actors – government representatives, regional school administrators, teachers, parents and students – are to provide guidance and motivation for quality improvement in accordance with their individual roles (e.g. Halbheer & Reusser, 2008; Klieme, 2004; Oelkers & Reusser, 2008). Thus, actors must reorganise and reposition themselves in their roles and constellations within the multi-level system. The most drastic changes have been reported in school administrations: Their traditional intermediary role in matters of administration has shifted towards triatic counselling, inspection and administrative tasks (Preuss, 2013). This reflects the necessity of discussing quality improvement steps with schools based on data feedback under the new evidence-based policy.
Previous studies investigating the allocation of new tasks under evidence-based governance have primarily focused on teachers and the in-house use of data feedback for quality improvement in schools (e.g. van Gathen, 2006; Groß Ophoff, 2013; Maier, 2008). A few additional studies report findings on quality improvement strategies emerging from administrations and principals (e.g. Muslic, Ramsteck & Kuper, 2013). Although the new monitoring concept prescribes greater involvement on the part of parents (e.g. Kohler, 2003; Krumm, 1996), their role in the multi-level school system has not yet been investigated.
According to Altrichter and Kanape-Willingshofer (2012), parents’ involvement in the new evidence-based policy is especially important in intermediary mechanisms such as communication processes and the development of new decision-making policies. To date, there is no data on how parents implement these mechanisms or how they have reorganised and repositioned themselves under the new evidence-based policy. The newly introduced educational standards policy in Austria provides an opportunity to investigate the extent to which evidence-based steering instruments such as educational standards are implemented on all levels of the multi-level school system. This study seeks to provide first evidence of parents’ degree of involvement in the implementation of educational standards based on their subjective experiences
Method
Expected Outcomes
References
Altrichter, H., & Kanape-Willingshofer, A. (2012). Bildungsstandards und externe Überprüfung von Schülerkompetenzen: Mögliche Beiträge externer Messungen zur Erreichung der Qualitätsziele der Schule. In B. Herzog-Punzenberger (Hrsgin.), Nationaler Bildungsbericht. Österreich 2012. Band 2 (S. 355-394). Graz: Leykam. Halbheer, U., & Reusser, K. (2008). Output-Steuerung, Accountability, Educational Go-vernance – Einführung in die Geschichte, Begrifflichkeiten und Funktionen von Bildungsstandards. Beiträge zur Lehrerbildung, 26, 253-266. Gathen, J.v.d. (2006). Grenzen der innerschulischen Rezeption von Rückmeldungen aus Large-Scale-Assessments. Journal für Schulentwicklung, 10(4), 13-19. Groß Ophoff, J. (2013). Lernstandserhebungen. Reflexion und Nutzung. Münster: Waxmann. Klieme, E. (2004). Begründung, Implementation und Wirkung von Bildungsstandards. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 50, 625-634. Kohler, B. (2006). Schulleistungen aus der Sicht der Eltern. Eine empirische Untersuchung zum Umgang mit Ergebnissen leistungsvergleichender Studien. Die Deutsche Schule, 98(3), 337-350. Krumm, V. (1996). Schulleistung – auch eine Leistung der Eltern. Die heimliche und die offene Zusammenarbeit von Eltern und Lehrern und wie sie verbessert werden kann. In W. Specht und J. Tonhauser (Hrsg.), Schulqaulität (S. 256-290). Innsbruck: Studien Verlag. Maier, U. (2008). Rezeption und Nutzung von Vergleichsarbeiten aus der Perspektive von Lehrkräften. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 54, 95-117. Mayring, P. (2010). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Grundlagen und Techniken. Beltz Verlag. Muslic, B., Ramsteck, C., & Kuper, H. (2013). Das Verhältnis von Schulleitung und Schulaufsicht im Kontext testbasierter Schulreform. Die Deutsche Schule, 12, 97-121. Oelkers, J., & Reusser, K. (2008). Qualität entwickeln – Standards sichern – mit Differenz umgehen. Berlin: Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung. Peek, R. (2004). Qualitätsuntersuchung an Schulen zum Unterricht in Mathematik (QuaSUM) – Klassenbezogene Ergebnisrückmeldung und ihre Rezeption in Brandenburger Schulen. Empirische Pädagogik, 18, 82-114. Preuß, B. (2013). Akteurskonstellation zwischen Schulträger und Schule. Die Deutsche Schule, 12, 154-172.
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.