Perspectives on the standards agenda: exploring the agenda's impact on primary teachers' professional identities

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate teachers' perspectives on the practical implementation of the standards agenda and its impact on their professional identities. Q-methodology was used alongside semi-structured interviews with UK primary school teachers. The study explored the views of 25 teachers in 6 schools, selected through purposive sampling to give a range of individual and institutional demographics. Teachers in this research commented on the impact the standards agenda has had on parental and societal judgements that affect their identity as professionals. Teachers held differing positions on whether they experienced constraint or flexibility when implementing standards objectives. These differing positions were mainly influenced by whether they taught above or below Year 3. Teachers who found flexibility in the agenda's objectives had less occupational stress and increased ownership of their own actions and the standards agenda. Teachers' positions were complex and changed according to situational influences at a classroom level.

Lessons learnt from a large-scale curriculum reform: The strategies to enhance development work and reduce reform-related stress

“…However, research on the interrelation between school reform implementation strategies and the stress experienced by those responsible for it is surprisingly scarce. A few studies have focused primarily on teachers and principals involved in standard-based reforms characterised by high accountability (see Brown and Manktelow 2016;Lainas 2010;Lasky 2005;Valli and Buese 2007). Accordingly, little is known about how reform implementation strategies, in national non-standardised reforms, contribute to both meaningful learning and burdening for those carrying out the reform work.…”

Elementary educator job satisfaction in the age of accountability

“…MCAS labels students through a system based on standardized testing and data points as exceeding expectations, meeting expectations, partially meeting expectations, or not meeting expectation decisions (Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2018). As a consequence of the labeling and comparison of students, educators have identified a change in parental views toward teachers, increases in the questioning of teacher judgment, and the narrowing of the curriculum and instruction, resulting in a conflict between teachers and society as to the purpose of education (Au, 2011;Brown & Manktelow, 2016;McNess et al, 2003).…”

“…Many schools across the United States have implemented the CCSS as a guideline to have all students ready for entry-level careers, college coursework, or workforce training programs (CCSS Initiative, 2016). These new standards assist teachers in measuring student progress with a reliance on common assessments such as standardized testing that move away from teacher judgment of student progress (Brown & Manktelow, 2016). Literature has shown that the tendency to expect academic conformity shifts pedagogy to increase testing results through testing preparation (Brown & Manktelow, 2016).…”

“…According to Brown and Manktelow (2016), teachers measure instructional success by evaluating the individual progress of the student versus reliance on standardized testing results that fail to measure pupil, teacher, and school achievement insufficiently.…”

“…Classroom practices defined by individuals and organizations outside of education result in a division between teachers' knowledge of evaluative measures for student success and the technical requirements established by policymakers, increasing teacher stress (Brown & Manktelow, 2016). Research performed by Goldrick-Rab and Mazzeo (2005) shows that the public focus on standardized test outcomes influences the actions of states and districts to reform education practices to improve student achievement to meet proficiency standards.…”