‘Managing’ Managerialism: The Impact of Educational Auditing on an Academic ‘specialist’ School

Abstract

Abstract:This paper seeks to nuance arguments about the impact of broad policy technologies of auditing processes upon teachers' practices by providing empirical evidence of the effects of such processes, in context. Specifically, the paper draws upon a cross-section of teachers' accounts of schooling practices in a specialist, academicallyoriented secondary school and languages college in the British Midlands to reveal the complex ways audit practices influence teachers' work, professional development and student learning under current policy conditions. The paper reveals that teachers endeavoured to actively 'manage' audit processes by strategically focusing upon student needs, and critiquing and problematising the more superficial aspects of performance management, systemic inspections, and a narrow focus upon academic results. However, even as these tactics were employed, there was also evidence of a simultaneous focus upon simply 'managing' to cope, particularly when audit processes added considerable pressure upon teachers to improve students' test scores, and when they encouraged conditions antithetical to more educative concerns. This sometimes had dramatic effects upon student and teacher learning and teacher identity. Capturing this empirical complexity, in the context of specific schooling settings, provides evidence to nuance the more general literature on educational auditing, including in European and other transnational settings, and existing understandings of such practices at local sites more generally

Side Effects of School Inspection; Motivations and Contexts for Strategic Responses

“…They find large differences between Scottish and English schools, with English schools reporting more concentration on performance targets at the expense of other important objectives, a greater 'narrowing effect' on the curriculum due to testing and a greater focus on 'borderline' students (those close to the border for national target levels) at the expense of other students. Similar findings have been reported by Kogan and Brunel University (1999), Hall and Noyes (2007), Hardy (2012), Lupton and Hempel-Jorgensen (2012), and Roberts-Holmes (2014) who talk about the narrowing of teaching and the curriculum to exams and to focus on progress in literacy and numeracy, concerns about exam results constraining pedagogical practice and 'substantive student learning in general', and narrowing the understanding of successful pupil outcomes to those that are readily measurable by testing.…”

“…Most studies provide examples of intended strategic responses of teachers and head teachers to Ofsted inspection in England, explaining how teachers plan artificial lessons to please Ofsted during inspection visits, gearing teaching towards what inspectors are going to value and measure as outlined in the inspection framework documentation and 'teach to inspection' (Webb et al, 1998;Kogan and Brunel University, 1999;Hall and Noyes, 2007;Richards, 2014;Hardy, 2012). Kogan and Brunel University (1999) and Perryman's (2009) study also shows how teachers and managers 'perform' during an inspection and put up a show.…”

“…Our systematic literature review suggests a range of other unintended consequences from school inspections. A large number of studies from England describe the intense anxiety, fear, high workload to prepare paperwork and provide data, stress and demoralizing of staff associated with Ofsted inspections, often leading to time off for illness after inspections, particularly in schools who were placed in special measures (Jeffrey and Woods, 1996;Sebba et al, 1996;Webb et al, 1998;Gray and Gardner, 1999;Scanlon, 1999;Lee and Davies, 2000;Chapman, 2000Chapman, , 2002Case, 2000;Follows, 2001;Keeble-Allen, 2004;Hardy, 2012;Berry, 2012). The special measures label was punitive and stigmatising for schools and the sense of being permanently under a disciplinary regime can lead to fear, anger, disaffection and a loss of power and control, according to Perryman (2002Perryman ( , 2007.…”

“…Increased workload is also mentioned in many studies as an unintended consequence of Ofsted school inspections (e.g. Jeffrey and Woods, 1996;Keeble-Allen, 2004;Lee and Davies, 2000;Hardy, 2012;Jones et al, 2015). Hall and Noyes (2007) describe how the requirements for self-evaluation increased the workload when preparing for an inspection, whereas Kogan and Brunel University (1999) and Scanlon (1999) quote school staff reflecting on their preparation for an Ofsted inspection visit as being a very bureaucratic exercise.…”

Performative technologies and teacher subjectivities: A conceptual framework

“…In fact, ever since Stephen Ball combined Lyotard's notion of performativity and Foucault's notion of technology into 'performative technologies' some two decades ago (see e.g. Ball, 2003), performative technologies have been referred to primarily in terms of their various empirical clothing, such as targets (Hardy, 2012), standards (Clarke, 2013), surveillance technologies (Page, 2017a), inspections/auditing (Lynch, 2010) and league tables (Hardy, 2012).…”