Evaluation in Local School Governance: A Framework for Analysis

Abstract

This article develops a conceptual framework for exploring the role and consequences of evaluation at the local level of school governance. It also provides a frame of reference for the articles in this special issue on the role of evaluation in local school governance in Sweden. It consists of key concepts, three models of decentralised governance (state model, local government model and multi-actor model of governance) and four types of evaluation (indicator-based monitoring and evaluation systems; stand-alone evaluations; synthesis studies; and informal, occasional or everyday evaluations). Local school governance refers to governance that occurs in a municipality and in a quasi-market where local school actors govern and influence schooling and education. It includes the efforts of actors and institutions to govern and influence matters such as school policy, education, school climate and school safety. Evaluation is used as a generic term that refers to, for example, evaluation, inspection, quality assurance, ranking and to both stand-alone evaluations and evaluation systems. The article briefly demonstrates how the framework can be applied in an analysis of the role of evaluation at the local level of school governance by providing an example, and discusses the framework's advantages and limitations.

• conceptual framework
• evaluation systems
• local school governance
• functions
• constitutive effects

Notes

1 In school effectiveness research, “student achievement” is the most important effectiveness criterion and school quality and equity are two key concepts. “School quality” refers to “the degree to which a school scores better than other schools, corrected for student intake characteristics”, and “equity” “to the compensatory power of schools”, for example, regarding gender and ethnicity (Reynolds et al. 2014, 205). School improvement research focuses on “change and problem-solving in educational practice” (Creemers and Reezigt 1997). School improvement does not occur if the “school culture” – a key concept here – is not “favourable”, that is, schools “must have shared goals and feel responsible for success”. In addition, there must be a culture of “collegiality”, “risk taking”, “mutual respect and support” and “openness” (Creemers and Reezigt 2005, 363).

2 The framework incorporates knowledge and elements of a framework exploring the functions of evaluation in democratic governance (Hanberger 2011, 2013) and three models of decentralised governance (Hanberger 2009).

3 The classification of democracy is based on three models of democracy: elitist, participatory, and deliberative or discursive democracy (cf. Dryzek 1996; Hanberger 2006).

4 For the purpose of this issue, this model is confined to the local level of government but can also be applied to the regional level of government (Hanberger 2009).

5 Individual citizens can appeal local government decisions if they think they violate the local government mandate.

6 SALSA stands for Skolverkets Arbetsverktyg för Lokala SambandsAnalyser (NAE's tool for local correlation analysis) and SIRIS stands for Skolverkets Internetbaserade Resultat- och kvalitets Informations System (NAE's Internet-based results and quality information system).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Anders Hanberger

Anders Hanberger is Professor in Evaluation and director of research at the Umea Centre for Evaluation Research, Umea University. His research includes public policy and governance, evaluation, evaluation systems, the interplay of evaluation and governance, and evaluation methodology. Special interests include the role of evaluation in democracy and accountability. Email: [email protected]