School self-evaluation and student achievement

Figures & data

Figure 1. Conceptual research model.

Table 1. Psychometric characteristics of dimensions and indicators of SSE.

	M	SD	Range	n items	Alpha
1. Perspective or focus on SSE
• Focus of SSE on schools as learning organization (LO)	3.33	.51	1–4	5	.70
• Focus of SSE on pupils within a High Reliability Organization (HRO)	3.11	.43	1–4	9	.70
• Focus of SSE on external pressure	3.11	.70	1–4	2	.60
2. Characteristics of the SSE system
• Use of a Plan-Do-Check-Act/Adapt cycle (PDCA)	2.93	.40	1–4	14	.86
• Use of an integrated and systematic SSE system	2.57	.29	1–3	12	.72
3a. Degree of accountability (AC) overall	1.82	.16	1–2	27	.84
• Accountability context/input (C/I)	1.72	.24	1–2	7	.70
• Accountability processes school (PS)	1.87	.18	1–2	8	.88
• Accountability processes teachers (PL)	1.88	.19	1–2	7	.64
• Accountability outcomes/output (O)	1.82	.24	1–2	5	.63
3b. Degree of school improvement (SI) overall	2.66	.62	1–4	27	.93
• School improvement C/I	2.67	.77	1–4	7	.84
• School improvement PS	2.56	.76	1–4	8	.84
• School improvement PL	2.75	.74	1–4	7	.82
• School improvement O	2.72	.79	1–4	5	.78
4. Groups, support, and instruments for SSE
• Expertise of teachers in SSE	2.64	.48	1–3	4	.88
• Support by external community and network of schools	1.88	.53	1–4	7	.80
• Use of instrument for SSE in general	2.62	.48	1–4	12	.88
• Use of SSE instrument for school improvement	2.34	.60	1–4	8	.88

Table 2. The best fitting SSE cluster solution.

	Overall n = 939 (100%)	Cluster 1 n = 73 (7.8%)	Cluster 2 n = 309 (32.9%)	Cluster 3 n = 286 (30.5%)	Cluster 4 n = 271 (28.9%)	F/sig.
Accountability C/I	1.72 (.24)	− −	−	+	+	217.427/.000
Accountability PS	1.87 (.18)	−	0	+	+	278.375/.000
Accountability PC	1.88 (.19)	−	0	+	+	282.036/.000
Accountability O	1.82 (.23)	− −	0	+	+	273.363/.000
School improvement C/I	2.67 (.77)	−	−	++	−	103.596/.000
School improvement PS	2.56 (.75)	−	−	++	−	195.518/.000
School improvement PL	2.75 (.74)	−	−	++	−	135.539/.000
School improvement O	2.72 (.79)	0	−	++	−	160.532/.000
Significance based on F testing with Post-hoc analysis.
Deviation: − −, −, 0, + , ++ significant deviation between mutual clusters at p < .05.
Overall column: mean M for subscales (correlation).

Table 3. Comparison of types of SSE and quality assessments of the Inspectorate.

	Types of School Self-evaluation
Scales of the Inspectorate	Type l (hardly) (7.8%)		Type 2 (moderate) (32.9%)		Type 3 (advanced) (30.5%)		Type 4 (mixed) (28.9%)		F/Sig.
• Quality control	−.10	0	−.06	0	.11	0	−.02	0	1.767/.152
• Quality of the teaching and learning process	−.04	0	−.03	0	.19	+	–.16	−	6.314/.000
• Student achievement	.02	0	.06	0	.02	0	−.10	0	1.239/.294
ANOVA: Significance based on F testing with Post-hoc analysis.
Deviation: – –, –, 0, + , ++ significant deviation between mutual clusters at p < .05.

Table 4. Significant differences in cognitive achievement between SSE types (subset).

	Total	Type 1 (hardly)	Type 2 (moderate)	Type 3 (advanced)	Type 4 (mixed)	F / Sig.
Math	71.38 (20.75)	65.44 (23.08)	71.81 (20.13)	70.76 (20.41)	72.44 (21.14)	3.274/.020
ANOVA: Significance based on F testing with Post-hoc analysis.
Deviation: – –, –, 0, + , ++ significant deviation between mutual clusters at p < .05.

Table 5. Multilevel analyses for maths (Grade 8).

Model 0: Variance components	Maths
• School level (n = 81)	13.1%
• Student level (n = 2099)	86.9%
Model 1: Covariates students	ß (s.e)
• SES	0.199 (0.022)
• IQ	0.355 (0.019)
• SEXE	0.202 (0.035)
Model 2: Covariates school
• More schools 1 board	0.327 (0.158)
Model 3: SSE Types (Type 1 hardly SSE as baseline)	none sign.
• Type 2
• Type 3
• Type 4
Model 4: Indicators of the Inspectorate	none sign.
Indicators of SSE process (expertise teachers in SSE, influence of actors, external support, SSE instruments)	none sign.
Indicators of SSE focus or perspective
• Learning organization	0.113 (0.053)
• High Reliability Organization
• External pressure
Outcomes of Model 4 with all variables/scales; standardized betas.
Only significant effects included in the model: in bold.

Table

The 7 indicators of quality control
1. The school understands the differences in the educational needs of its pupil population
2. The school systematically evaluates the quality of achievements every year
3. The school regularly evaluates learning and education
4. The school works systematically on activities to initiate improvements
5. The school guarantees the quality of learning and education
6. The school transparently reports to interested parties on the quality of education and learning being realized
7. The school guarantees safety for pupils and personnel
2005 Supervisory Framework Subjects in the basic set of indicators	Number of indicators
Curriculum	6 indicators
Time	2 indicators
Pedagogical performance of teachers	1 indicators
Didactic performance of teachers	3 indicators
Harmonization with the educational needs of pupils	2 indicators
Active and independent role for pupils	2 indicators
School climate	2 indicators
Support and guidance, including testing instruments	4 indicators
Achievements: results of pupils and their progress in development	5 indicators
Quality control: the school systematically preserves and improves the quality of its education	7 indicators