Search results

Throughout Latin America, policy-makers are struggling to reconcile two conflicting political pressures: (i) the push to become more globally competitive on the basis of international assessments such as the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), and (ii) the simultaneous need to address long-standing, entrenched inequities in both educational quality and access throughout much of the region. This chapter documents how policy-making elites throughout Latin America are trying to address these two goals by incorporating “evidence-based” policy solutions that can be empirically defended as promoting equity. However, scholars throughout Latin America argue that instead of promoting equity, an increasing focus on accountability in educational policy at the national level throughout the region has resulted instead in a shift in priorities from the governance of educational systems to evaluation of those systems, with the state functioning primarily as an Evaluative State. This argument is developed through secondary analysis of the Hispanophone and Lusophone academic education literatures of Latin America, whose robust and rigorous studies of these trends at both national and regional levels remain little explored within the Anglophone academic tradition.

So I want to take you back to about 20 years ago, as a first year graduate student I was doing a research assistantship with a professor interested in math test performance and motivation. This was the period when the U.S. was equally awed by the Japanese automobile import/production cycle and the Japanese educational system. The systems were both efficient and effective. As part of that assistantship, I helped some staff from the Midwest State Board of Education (MSBE) do a modest longitudinal study. It was all very informal – MSBE and Midwest University (MU) faculty thought it would be interesting to see how the students in 1984 compared with 1974 – called the Decade Study. MU faculty also wanted to pilot some scales assessing student motivation and test anxiety.

This chapter examines the potential and barriers for evidence-based practices in Californian schools. In a large and complex school system, the state plays an important role in legitimating the use of certain types of evidence, but evidence-based practices are heavily determined by the resources, actors, and prevailing cultures in a local district environment. Until recently, high-stakes accountability policies mandated improvements in student test performance and intrusive interventions for failure. In recent years, the state has shifted to a different accountability approach that emphasizes local control and the use of multiple measures of school performance to pursue continuous improvement around locally developed goals and interventions. Amid this context, two stories arise about evidence-based practices in California. In one story, a set of major and highly touted districts have led the way in demonstrating evidence-informed continuous improvement district-wide. In these districts, the new state accountability approach, enabling leadership, long-term commitments to collective learning, networked opportunities to learn, and access to elite external expertise have contributed to fairly extensive practices of disciplined team problem-solving involving rich data. In a second story, schools and districts that face resource scarcity, high turnover, and conflict and in which past high-stakes accountability left a deep imprint on prevailing norms and routines, leaders and teachers have had difficulty establishing a conducive context for collective learning. However, given ingrained practices and limited absorptive capacity, it is not entirely clear how to enable productive evidence-based practices in such contexts.

This chapter examines organisational change processes that occur when accountability demands from powerful external stakeholders change. It investigates, firstly, whether these external accountability demands impact on the performance management systems of two different types of organisations. Secondly, it considers whether the goals for improved performance contained within the external accountability demands are realised. The chapter derives its primary insights from analysing in-depth interviews with managers working in a private sector company and in public sector organisations. The analyses reveal complex organisational responses. In the public sector case study, the organisations tended to reorient their performance management systems towards the external accountability demands; whilst in the private sector organisation, pressures from falling share prices forced managers to focus their decision making on the preferred performance measures contained in shareholders’ accountability demands. However, whilst there is some evidence of performance management system changes, the desires for improved performance subsumed by the external accountability demands are not necessarily realised through the performance management system changes.

A range of educational reforms were implemented in the 1980s and 1990s. These reforms were underpinned by a fundamental assumption that education, in a similar way to any other service, can be traded as a commodity in the marketplace. This chapter identifies the shifting priorities of the state and explores the impacts of these educational reforms on the teaching profession. It traces the emergence of new forms of schools and schooling that are ostensibly part of the ongoing privatization of public education. Conclusions on future directions for both schools and the education of teachers are offered.

This paper examines the effects of immigration, urban residency, poverty, and race/ethnicity on the education of students in K-12 school. Findings of this study critiques the gaps between NCLB policy and its implementations as well as the outcomes, and makes several recommendations. This chapter recommends multiple standards and assessment approaches for accountability. The author believes that accountability must be addressed along with, equality, and fiscal adequacy. Accountability can work in a pluralistic nation only when diversity is taken into serious consideration. Recognizing this diversity is critical in developing successful strategies and effective approaches for working with immigrant families and students. Education policy for disadvantaged families and communities should not be limited to conventional education policy alone. Socioeconomic policies that benefit lower-income families and communities also should be recognized as educational policies on behalf of children.

In this chapter, Turkish educational system and institutional quality assessment initiatives of education are explained. And also, the relationship between educational quality assurance (QA) in Turkey and issues of effective schooling is summarised in terms of Turkish literature.

Education is widely accepted as a lifelong process. The school is an institution established in order to provide qualified education which contains complex and more abstract knowledge and ideas as well as literacy and simple numerical skills to the students. Each country has basically established education systems and educational institutions to ensure social integration, continuity and stability, and to sustain the social and cultural heritage of a society. Education in Turkey is one of the state’s basic functions according to the constitution and performed under the supervision and control of the state with the declaration of the Republic of Turkey. Ministry of National Education is responsible for the implementation of all education activities centrally managed in the Republic of Turkey. Higher Education Council (YÖK) is responsible for the management and thus the quality processes of the higher education institutions in Turkey. Two major attempts in this perspective are YÖK, which assesses the institutions with standards which are coherent with international accreditation institutions, and Higher Education Quality Council (YÖKAK), an independent and specific council which is established by YÖK. YÖK and YÖKAK are governmental-based quality-assessment institutions. Association for Evaluation and Accreditation of Teacher Colleges’ Educational Programs (EPDAD) is also an independent institution for quality assessment of education faculties which focusses on teacher training and education. The purpose of EPDAD is to strengthen the student learning in formal training and to ensure the quality standards for candidate teachers. Any undergraduate programme which meets the standards of EPDAD is accredited for three years. Standards of EPDAD are detailed in this chapter.

Given the importance of trust in social life, the concept has had little direct attention from evaluators.¹ Trust is central to the seeming integrity of social processes, including, of course, the social processes we call evaluation. Evaluation depends for its success on cooperative relationships and a measure of trust. Evaluation stands in an interesting relationship to trust. The credibility and utility of evaluation rests on trust. Loss or lack of trust is a major impetus to evaluation, and evaluation sometimes takes the place of trust. The process of evaluation requires trust, and evaluation is used to underpin or provide a warrant for trust.