From Evaluation to Action, Without Using Time for Reflection

Author(s):

Anne Berit Emstad(presenting / submitting)

Conference:

ECER 2012

Network:

01. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations

Format:

Paper

Session Information

01 SES 04 B, Square Peg in a Round Hole?

Parallel Paper Session

Time:

2012-09-19

09:00-10:30

Room:

FCEE - Aula 2.7

Chair:

Daniela Acquaro

Contribution

School evaluation in Norway has traditionally been used as a tool for development. The purpose of the paper is to discuss how external school evaluation is used for organizational learning. The reseach question is: How does school use external evaluation as a tool for organizational learning?

Theoretical framework is based on a review of organizational learning, where some common aspects of organizational learning make the structure of the analysis. The four aspects are collective learningprocesses, inquiry and feedback, interpretation and responding and higher levels of learning. Based on the analyzes I discuss hoe the school experienced the external evaluation, how they interpreted the results, how they followed up the results and how they experienced change, increased knowledge and learning.

Method

The paper is based on a qualitative study of how four primary schools used external evaluation as a part of the schools development work. Main data in this collective case study consists of phenomenological interviews. A total of six principals, one assistant principal, 22 teachers and one group of students at every school were interviewed (some of the teachers were deputy principals). The interviews lasted between 40 and 60 minutes. All participants were asked how the evaluation was used, how they had worked and how they experienced development of practice. The evaluation reports and other documents (e.g. project plans, reflection notes, and organizational analyses) were also analyzed.

Expected Outcomes

Findings indicate that the evaluation results was used instrumental, it was mainly used to make a decision about what to do next. The research participants experienced the development work as useful as they gained new knowledge and skills. There was very little reflection around the findings, and the teachers were not involved in any interpretation of reflection in all of the schools. In one school the principal sat alone doing this, in another the principal involved the teachers after making an essence of the report suggesting what to do next. Lack of interpretation of the findings and involvement in the reflection did not lead to lack of motivation for the development work. Still I argue that reflection is an important aspect if school evaluation shall contribute as a tool for organizational learning. When a decision is based on the result of an external evaluation without inquiring and reflecting on what’s behind the results, the opportunity to higher levels of learning and professional development of teachers is not exploited properly.

References

Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: a theory of action perspective. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley. Collinson, V., & Cook, T. F. (2007). Organizational learning: improving learning, teaching, and leading in school systems. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Cousins, J., & Leithwood, K. (1986). Current empirical research on evaluation utilization. Review of Educational Research, 56(3), 331 - 364. Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). A behavioural theory of the firm: Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Dewey, J. (1997). How we think. Mineola, N.Y.: Dover Publ. Emstad, A.B., & Robinson, V.M.J. (2011) The role of eadership in evaluation utilization: Cases from Norwegian primary schools. Nordic Studies in Edication, 31 (4), 245-247 Fiol, C. M., & Lyles, M. A. (1985). Organizational learning. Academy of management review, 803-813. Hammerness, K., Darling-Hammond, L., Bransford, J., Berliner, D., Cochran-Smith, M., McDonald, M. (2005). How teachers learn and develop. In L. Holly, P., & Hopkins, D. (1988). Evaluation and school improvement. Cambridge Journal of Education, 18(2), 221-245. Huber, G. P. (1991). Organizational learning: The contributing processes and the literatures. Organization science, 2 (1), 88-115. Kim, D. H. (2004). The link between individual and organizational learning. I K.Starkey, S. Tempest & A. McKinley. How Organizations Learn–Managing the Search for Knowledge, s.29-50. Levitt, B., & March, J. G. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual review of sociology, 14, 319-340. MacBeath, J. E. C., & McGlynn, A. (2002). Self-evaluation: what's in it for schools? London: RoutledgeFalmer. March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization science, 2 (1), 71-87.. Schildkamp, K., Vanhoof, J., & Petegem, V. (2011). The use of school self-evaluation results in the Netherlands and Flanders. British Educational research Journal, Weiss, C. (1998). Have we learned anything new about the use of evaluation? American Journal of Evaluation, 19(1), 21-33

Author Information

Anne Berit Emstad (presenting / submitting)

Noerwegian university of science and technology

Department of teachers education

Trondheim

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.