Background: Anumber of countries have had school inspection for many years. Theorigins of these systems date back to the nineteenth century when mass publicschooling was introduced, and educationand other emerging public services were required to comply with centrallymandated rules and programmes. Incontrast, many countries across the world have only introduced schoolinspection over recent decades as the perceived importance of educationalquality as a driver of economic competitiveness has become influential in statepolicy. International bodies such as the OECD and, in particular, comparativeevaluations of education systems such as PISA have led to a constant stream ofinterventions and reforms designed to deliver higher student performanceoutcomes. These factors have driven the growth of inspection. Purpose of Study: The purpose of this study is to providean analysis of the factors that have led to the rapid rise of inspection as aschool governance mechanism. It goes on to examine how developing conceptualisations of the ways in whichinspection can be employed to achieve the range of outcomes with which it is tasked are leading to an evolving toolkit ofinspection approaches and models. A number ofthese are examined in detail with a view not only to description but in terms ofwhether some of the demands that they place on schools are, in fact, realisticin practice. Sources of Evidence: This study used document analysis ofpolicy documents and existing research todeconstruct factors relating to the changing face of school inspection sincethe late 1990’s. Main Argument: Formal processes of school inspectionhave become virtually universal. It is alsoargued that inspection, as it is now widely understood and practiced,has moved quite far from its historical roots and purposes. Inspection is now acomplex component of wider modern concepts of public sector management andgovernance including quality, improvement, accountability, transparency andcost effectiveness. Conclusions: Historically inspection was largelyabout compliance with rules and to an extent to judge the work of individualteachers. Now, at least, in theory, it is as much concerned with creating aregulatory framework within which schools as organisations can enjoy greaterautonomy while simultaneously being held responsible for student performanceoutcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brown et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: