The performative shift: middle leadership ‘in the line of fire’

Abstract

State school inspection in Norway is currently changing with targeted schools becoming subject to more complex methods of inquiry. Not only school principals but middle leaders are exposed to this shifting system, for the latter are in the frontline of their schools' everyday practices. The article examines how state school inspection is used as means of controlling legal compliance, as well as evaluating the formative assessment routines and practices of schools, middle leaders, and individual teachers. Drawing on the concepts of accountability and performativity, field observations of inspectors interrogating department heads in primary education are analysed. The empirical study demonstrates how use of standardised rubrics steer the inspection process in schools, aiming more towards completing on task, rather than supporting middle leaders in their struggle to comply with legal standards. During such interrogation, the department heads comply with the system, and are at the same time open towards the inspectors' questioning concerning the school's lack of fully implemented routines.

School middle leadership: A systematic review

“…Some discuss accountability as line management to principals (Bryant, 2019; Farchi and Tubin, 2019) and colleagues (Fitzgerald, 2009; Gurr 2019). Others discuss accountability of responsibilities, for example, teacher performance (Hall, 2018) and professional learning (Edwards-Groves et al, 2019). Hall (2018) suggests that MLs’ accountability for teacher performance can be attributed to external performative measures, however Heng and Marsh (2009) argue that external accountability should be replaced with ‘professional accountability’ focussed on internal capacity building of colleagues.…”

“…The findings reveal that increased accountability, resulting in the performance management of colleagues, is a significant and complex responsibility for MLs. This responsibility results in tensions between being supportive, collaborative colleagues and being quality assurers and monitors of teacher colleagues’ performances (Grice, 2019; Hall, 2018; Heng and March, 2009). This conflict has previously been noted by Bennett et al (2007) who found MLs’ preferences were for an informal approach to management of colleagues rather than a formalised one.…”

“…mentoring, facilitating professional development). This shift has been attributed to the redistribution of school leadership (Bryant, 2019; Hirsh and Segolsson, 2019; Lipscombe et al, 2020b), the devolution of authority to schools (Fitzgerald, 2009; Heng and Marsh, 2009), an increased focus on school improvement (Grice, 2019; Grootenboer and Larkin, 2020; Koh et al, 2011; Thorpe and Bennett-Powell, 2014) and school compliance (Hall, 2018).…”

“…The review has uncovered middle leadership is no exception and is complex, diverse and problematic to define. Consequently, many studies choose either not to define the field (Bennett et al, 2007; Hall, 2018; Jarvis, 2008) or to rely on literature in teacher leadership to support explanation (Bassett and Shaw, 2017; Gurr and Drysdale, 2013; Irvine and Brundrett, 2016).…”

Análisis Bibliométrico sobre Inspección Educativa en la Base de Datos Web of Science

“…En los últimos tiempos, sus actuaciones se están centrando más en emitir menos juicios y ofrecer más descripciones objetivas de lo observado, además de darles más importancia a los propios representantes escolares, principalmente a los equipos directivos (Piezunka, 2019), ofreciendo modelos de evaluación co-profesional entre la inspección y los agentes de las escuelas (Brown et al, 2018) o rúbricas estandarizadas dirigidas al proceso de supervisión (Hall, 2018). Además, están comenzando a desarrollar actuaciones relacionadas con la investigación en los procesos de supervisión pedagógica (Cunha et al, 2018).…”