As measurements, indicators, and use of numbers tied to accountability frameworks become increasingly prevalent, this leads to the ubiquity of data practices in education systems. Reflected globally in the form of comparative indicators, such as the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) and precision education governance (Brunila & Nehring, 2023), data practices have become a primary mode of governing education, resulting in the phenomenon of ‘governing by numbers’ (Grek, 2009; Fenwick et al., 2014; Ozga, 2016). The existing research suggests that the increasing datafication process acts as a mechanism that holds teachers accountable for their performance, thus reshaping teacher accountability (Holloway & Brass, 2018; Holloway & Lewis, 2020; Verger et al., 2020; Williamson et al., 2019). As Jarke and Breiter (2019) illustrate, the ubiquity of data practices tied to accountability frameworks in education can be best understood as the increasing visibility of data in all levels of education systems, which includes the individual, classroom, school, region, state and  international. Simultaneously, the emergence of digital technologies in education has further accelerated the digitalisation of education systems (Williamson et al., 2023). Taking this into consideration, Thoutenhoofd (2017) argued that data-driven forms of organising education has rendered education susceptible to manipulation.

Within the Malaysian context, Malaysia has undergone a massive education reform since 2014 through the implementation of the Malaysia Education Blueprint (MEB), a major education policy document. The turn towards standardisation and accountability practices as prescribed in the MEB has resulted in the increasing data-driven practices in the Malaysian teaching landscape aligned with the prevalence of the rise of audit culture globally. Therefore, the overarching research question that this paper aims to address is the characteristics of accountability practices currently adopted in the Malaysia Education Blueprint and other relevant documents, and how teacher accountability underpinned within these new forms of accountability logics continue to shift.

This study will contribute to the understanding of data practices and teacher accountability in Malaysian schools. Although data-driven accountability instruments and the call from Ministry of Education Malaysia to leverage on data practices have a growing presence in the schools based on my experience as an English language secondary school teacher for close to a decade, the topic of teacher accountability is only superficially highlighted, due to its limited access to comprehensive information which includes minimal in-depth discussion. Thus, this research will be the first of its kind within the Malaysian context that specifically looks at the pervasive role of data practices in accountability instruments, subsequently (re)shaping teacher accountability.

Studying these concepts in a non-Western context would expose us to some different and important aspects in relation to the increasing datafication processes in the Malaysian education context, thus broadening the scope beyond filling the gap. Most research on teacher accountability and datafication is centred in Anglosphere, leaving a gap in understanding how these global trends manifest in non-Western settings like Malaysia. This study can offer a context-specific analysis, showing how cultural, policy and institutional factors influence the implementation of data-driven accountability in Malaysian schools. The study is also able to provide empirical evidence for policymakers, highlighting potential challenges in the local teaching ground. 

In order to demonstrate how these accountability-driven national education reforms that have resulted from a neoliberal governing strategy manifest locally in the Malaysian context, I collect and analyse the policies, practices and instruments associated with the teacher accountability practices in a local school in Malaysia. This study seeks to address the research question: What are the accountability practices happening in the context of Malaysian secondary school, in the age of datafication? In order to investigate this, I deploy critical discourse analysis from the lens of Foucault’s governmentality in order to explore the emergence of accountability frameworks in the Malaysian education system. In short, ‘governmentality’ refers to the way populations are governed through a combination of control and rationality (Holloway, 2014), and for the context of this study – teachers. As Dean (1999) highlights governmentality is not simply about government structures, but rather about how individuals are shaped and managed through various strategies and techniques of appropriate, moral behaviour. This concept involves both the mentality of governance and the technologies of governance that turn individuals into subjects who are self-regulated and aligned with societal norms. Governmentality emphasises how power operates through the ‘conduct of conduct’, shaping individuals to be responsible, ethical, and competitive members of society. Other data sources used in the study will include the teachers’ appraisal KPI form, related students’ results both standardised test and school-based assessment and national education policy documents published by the Ministry of Education in Malaysia.

Through the methodology, I am able to draw insights on how these education reforms constitute teachers and shape the construct of teacher quality within the Malaysian context. Preliminary findings suggest that this turn towards data-driven accountability practices are aligned with Ball’s (2003) performativity, that has resulted in the increasing pressure of teachers to excel due to the elevated expectations and demands that necessitate their effective performance in teaching (Jamil et al., 2011). This study concludes that the recent wave reforms in the Malaysian education system, amplified by datafication processes are also facilitated through the emergence of digitalisation in education. Thus, this study suggests that while education is transformed by a rapid technological advancements, it is vital to be critical of the digitalisation process unfolding in education which can (re)shape the work of teachers negatively.

Ball, S. J. (2015). Education, governance and the tyranny of numbers. Journal of Education Policy, 30(3), 299-301. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2015.1013271 Bradbury, A. (2020). Datafied at four: The role of data in the ‘schoolification’ of early childhood education in England. In The Datafication of Education (pp. 8-22). Routledge. Brunila, K., & Nehring, D. (2023). Precision education governance and the high risks of fabrication of future-oriented learning human kinds. Research Papers in Education, 38(5), 727-742. Carvalho, L.M. (2018). International assessments and its expertise fabricating expert knowledge for policy. In S. Lindblad, D. Pettersson & T. S. Popkewitz (Eds.), Education by the numbers and the making of society (pp. 110-127). London: Routledge Dubnick, M. J. (2006, April). Orders of accountability. In World Ethics Forum: Leadership, ethics and integrity in public life. Grek, S. (2009). Governing by numbers: the PISA ‘effect’ in Europe. Journal of Education Policy, 24(1), 23-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930802412669 Grek, S., Maroy, C., & Verger, A. (Eds.). (2020). World yearbook of education 2021: Accountability and datafication in the governance of education. Routledge. Holloway, J. (2020). Teacher accountability, datafication and evaluation: a case for reimagining schooling. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 28(56). Holloway, J. (2021). Teachers and teaching:(Re) thinking professionalism, subjectivity and critical inquiry. Critical Studies in Education, 62(4), 411-421. Holloway, J., & Lewis, S. (2022). Governing teachers through datafication: Physical–virtual hybridity and language interoperability in teacher accountability. Big Data & Society, 9(2), 20539517221137553. Holloway, J., Sørensen, T. B., & Verger, A. (2017). Global perspectives on high-stakes teacher accountability policies: An introduction. Lewis, W. D., & Young, T. V. (2013). The politics of accountability: Teacher education policy. Educational policy, 27(2), 190-216. Thoutenhoofd, E. D. (2018). The datafication of learning: Data technologies as reflection issue in the system of education. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 37(5), 433-449. Verger, A., Fontdevila, C., & Parcerisa, L. (2019). Constructing school autonomy with accountability as a global policy model: A focus on OECD’s governance mechanisms. The OECD’s historical rise in education: The formation of a global governing complex, 219-243.