The teacher as street-level bureaucrat: science teacher’s discretionary decision-making in a time of reform

References

• Abrahams, I., & Reiss, M. J. (2012). Practical work: Its effectiveness in primary and secondary schools in England. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(8), 1035–1055. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adami, S. (2014). Street-level bureaucrats: Role and dimension in the policy arena. https://steveadami.myefolio.com/Uploads/Street-Level%20Bureaucracy.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, K. J. (2012). Science education and test-based accountability: Reviewing their relationship and exploring implications for future policy. Science Education, 96(1), 104–129. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20464
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baird, J.-A., Ahmed, A., Hopfenbeck, T., Brown, C., & Elliott, V. (2013). Research evidence relating to proposals for reform of the GCSE (Centre for Educational Assessment Report OUCEA/13/1). Oxford University.
   Google Scholar
• Baird, J.-A., Caro, D., Elliott, V., El Masri, Y., Ingram, J., Isaacs, T., de Moira, A., Randhawa, A., Stobart, G., & Meadows, M. (2019). Examination reform: Impact of linear and modular examinations at GCSE (Ofqual/19/6506/2). Ofqual.
   Google Scholar
• Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., Braun, A., & Hoskins, K. (2011). Policy actors: Doing policy work in schools. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 32(4), 625–639. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2011.601565
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bevan, Y., Brighouse, T., Mills, G., Rose, J., & Smith, M. (2009). Report of the expert group on assessment (DCSF 00532-2009-EN). Department for Children, Schools and Families.
   Google Scholar
• Bew, P. (2011). Independent review of key stage 2 testing, assessment and accountability. DfE.
   Google Scholar
• Braun, A., Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., & Hoskins, K. (2011). Taking context seriously: Towards explaining policy enactments in the secondary school. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 32(4), 585–596. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2011.601555
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun, A., Maguire, M., & Ball, S. J. (2010). Policy enactments in the UK secondary school: Examining policy, practice and school positioning. Journal of Education Policy, 25(4), 547–560. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680931003698544
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
   Google Scholar
• Childs, A., & Baird, J.-A. (2020). General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) and the assessment of science practical work: An historical review of assessment policy. The Curriculum Journal, 31(3), 357–378. https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.20
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. W. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, E. A., Janssen, F. J. J. M., & Driel, J. H. V. (2016). Teachers and science curriculum materials: Where we are and where we need to go. Studies in Science Education, 52(2), 127–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2016.1161701
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, K. S. (2003). “Change is hard”: What science teachers are telling us about reform and teacher learning of innovative practices. Science Education, 87(1), 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10037
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dearing, R. (1993). The national curriculum and its assessment. National Curriculum Council York, England.
   Google Scholar
• DfE. (2010a). The importance of teaching: The case for change.
   Google Scholar
• DfE. (2010b). The importance of teaching: The schools white paper.
   Google Scholar
• DfE. (2011). The national strategies 1997-2011: A brief summary of the impact and effectiveness of the national strategies (No. 00032-2011PDF-EN-01). DfE.
   Google Scholar
• DfE. (2013). National curriculum in England consultation report—FINAL.
   Google Scholar
• DfE. (2014a, December). National curriculum in England: Framework for Key Stages 1 to 4. GOV.UK. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-framework-for-key-stages-1-to-4/the-national-curriculum-in-england-framework-for-key-stages-1-to-4
   Google Scholar
• DfE. (2014b). Science KS4 programme of study. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/381380/Science_KS4_PoS_7_November_2014.pdf
   Google Scholar
• DfE. (2016). Section 8: Science sampling - 2016 Key Stage 2: Assessment and reporting arrangements. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/2016-key-stage-2-assessment-and-reporting-arrangements-ara/section-8-science-sampling
   Google Scholar
• DfE. (2019a). Key stage 4 including multi-academy trust performance, 2018 (revised).
   Google Scholar
• DfE. (2019b). Secondary accountability measures: Guide for maintained secondary schools, academies and free schools (DFE-00278-2017; p. 56). DfE.
   Google Scholar
• DfE. (2019c). School workforce in England: November 2018.
   Google Scholar
• DfE, & Gove, M. (2013, February). Curriculum, exam and accountability reform. https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/curriculum-exam-and-accountability-reform
   Google Scholar
• DfE, & Standards and Testing Agency. (2018). National Curriculum Assessments at Key Stage 2 in England, 2018 (provisional)—Gov.uk. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-assessments-key-stage-2-2018-provisional/national-curriculum-assessments-at-key-stage-2-in-england-2018-provisional–2
   Google Scholar
• Donnelly, J., & Ryder, J. (2011). The pursuit of humanity: Curriculum change in English school science. History of Education, 40(3), 291–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/0046760X.2010.521196
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, T., & Harris, J. (2006). A case of mistaken identity? Debating the dilemmas of street-level bureaucracy with Musil et al. European Journal of Social Work, 9(4), 445–459. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691450600958494
   Google Scholar
• Gill, T. (2012). Provision of GCSE subjects 2010 (No. 34; Statistics Report Series, p. 16).
   Google Scholar
• Gilson, L. (2015). Michael lipsky—street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service. In M. Lodge, & S. Balla (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of classics in public policy and administration (pp. 383–404). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hall, M. (2020). Science education in England: Exploring the evidence for, and evidence of, reform [PhD thesis, University of Sussex].
   Google Scholar
• Hall, M. (2020). Science education in England: Exploring the evidence for, and evidence of, reform [PhD Thesis]. http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/id/eprint/93728
   Google Scholar
• Hanna, D., David, I., & Francisco, B. (Eds.). (2010). Educational research and innovation: The nature of learning using research to inspire practice. OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Hardy, I. J., & Melville, W. (2019). Professional learning as policy enactment: The primacy of professionalism. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 27(90), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.27.4401
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartley, D. (2010). Paradigms: How far does research in distributed leadership ‘stretch’? Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 38(3), 271–285. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143209359716
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henze, I., van Driel, J. H., & Verloop, N. (2009). Experienced science teachers’ learning in the context of educational innovation. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(2), 184–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487108329275
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HMSO. (1988). Education Reform Act 1988. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/40/pdfs/ukpga_19880040_en.pdf
   Google Scholar
• HM Treasury. (2014). Our plan for growth: Science and innovation (CM 8980). Department for Business Innovation & Skills.
   Google Scholar
• House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts. (2018). Delivering STEM skills for the economy: Forty-Seventh Report of Session 2017-2019 (HC 691; p. 21). House of Commons.
   Google Scholar
• Hoy, W. K. (2003). An analysis of enabling and mindful school structures: Some theoretical, research and practical considerations. Journal of Educational Administration, 41(1), 87–109. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230310457457
   Google Scholar
• IEA. (2014). TIMSS 2015 Teacher Questionnaire Science Grade 8. https://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2015/questionnaires/downloads/T15_TQS_8.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins, E. W. (2000). The impact of the national curriculum on secondary school science teaching in England and Wales. International Journal of Science Education, 22(3), 325–336. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006900289903
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leckie, G., & Goldstein, H. (2017). The evolution of school league tables in England 1992-2016: “Contextual value-added”, “expected progress” and “progress 8”. British Educational Research Journal, 43(3), 193–212. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3264
   Google Scholar
• Lieberman, A. (2000). Networks as learning communities: Shaping the future of teacher development. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(3), 221–227. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487100051003010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy, 30th Ann. Ed.: Dilemmas of the individual in public service. Russell Sage Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Long, R. (2017). GCSE, AS and A level reform (England) (Briefing Paper No. 06962). House of Commons Library.
   Google Scholar
• Loyens, K., & Maesschalck, J. (2010). Toward a theoretical framework for ethical decision making of street-level bureaucracy: Existing models reconsidered. Administration & Society, 42(1), 66–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399710362524
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lumby, J. (2013). Distributed leadership: The uses and abuses of power. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 41(5), 581–597. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143213489288
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maynard-Moody, S., & Musheno, M. (2012). Social equities and inequities in practice: Street-level workers as agents and pragmatists. Public Administration Review, 72(s1), S16–S23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02633.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melville, W. (2008). Mandated curriculum change and a science department: A superficial language convergence? Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(5), 1185–1199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2007.03.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore, A., & Clarke, M. (2016). ‘Cruel optimism’: Teacher attachment to professionalism in an era of performativity. Journal of Education Policy, 31(5), 666–677. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2016.1160293
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muijs, D., & Reynolds, D. (2017). Effective teaching: Evidence and practice (4th ed). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, C., Smith, G., Varley, J., & Razi, O. (2015). Changing practice: An evaluation of the impact of a nature of science inquiry-based professional development programme on primary teachers. Cogent Education, 2(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2015.1077692
   Google Scholar
• OECD. (2010). Learning for jobs: Synthesis report.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. (2013). Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) teacher questionnaire. OECD.
   Google Scholar
• Ofqual. (2015). Assessment of practical work in GCSE Science Regulatory Impact Assessment (Ofqual/15/5625; p. 10). Ofqual.
   Google Scholar
• Ofqual. (2016). Postcard grading new GCSEs. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/537147/Postcard_-_Grading_New_GCSEs.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Opposs, D. (2016). Whatever happened to school-based assessment in England’s GCSEs and A-levels? Perspectives in Education, 34(4), 52–61. https://doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v34i4.4
   Google Scholar
• Park, S., Jang, J.-Y., Chen, Y.-C., & Jung, J. (2011). Is pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) necessary for reformed science teaching? Evidence from an empirical study. Research in Science Education, 41(2), 245–260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-009-9163-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearson. (2018). BTEC works for science. https://qualifications.pearson.com/content/dam/pdf/btec-works/leaflets/BTEC-Science.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Pyhältö, K., Pietarinen, J., & Soini, T. (2014). Comprehensive school teachers’ professional agency in large-scale educational change. Journal of Educational Change, 15(3), 303–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-013-9215-8
   Google Scholar
• QCA. (2007). Science Programme of Study for Key Stage 4. QCA. https://www.stem.org.uk/system/files/elibrary-resources/legacy_files_migrated/11571-QCA-07-3345-p_Science_KS4_tcm8-1799.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, N. (2016). The school curriculum and SATs in England: reforms since 2010. (Briefing Paper No. 06798). House of Commons Library.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, N. (2017). “SATS” and primary school assessment in England (Briefing Paper No. 07980; p. 18). House of Commons.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, N. (2018). The school curriculum in England (Briefing Paper No. 06798). House of Commons Library.
   Google Scholar
• Robertson, S. (2015). What teachers need to know about the global education reform movement. In G. Little (Ed.), Global education “reform”: Building resistance and solidarity (pp. 10–17). Manifesto Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ryder, J., & Banner, I. (2013). School teachers’ experiences of science curriculum reform. International Journal of Science Education, 35(3), 490–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.665195
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryder, J., Banner, I., & Homer, M. S. (2014). Teachers’ experiences of science curriculum reform. School Science Review, 95(352), 126–130. http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/83044/
   Google Scholar
• Ryder, J., Lidar, M., Lundqvist, E., & Östman, L. (2018). Expressions of agency within complex policy structures: Science teachers’ experiences of education policy reforms in Sweden. International Journal of Science Education, 40(5), 538–563. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1435921
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharma, M. (2018). Seeping deficit thinking assumptions maintain the neoliberal education agenda: Exploring three conceptual frameworks of deficit thinking in inner-city schools. Education and Urban Society, 50(2), 136–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124516682301
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Standards and Testing Agency. (2018). 2018 Key Stage 2 teacher assessment exemplification science. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/763065/2018_key_stage_2_teacher_assessment_exemplification_science.pdf
   Google Scholar
• STEM Learning. (2018). What we do. STEM. https://www.stem.org.uk/what-we-do
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, I. (2007). Discretion and control in education: The teacher as street-level bureaucrat. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 35(4), 555–572. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143207081063
   Google Scholar
• Toplis, R., & Allen, M. (2012). “I do and I understand?” Practical work and laboratory use in United Kingdom schools. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 8(1), 3–9. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2012.812a
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tummers, L., & Bekkers, V. (2014). Policy implementation, street-level bureaucracy, and the importance of discretion. Public Management Review, 16(4), 527–547. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.841978
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vieluf, S., Kaplan, D., Klieme, E., & Bayer, S. (2012). Teaching practices and pedagogical innovation: Evidence from TALIS. OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Wellcome Trust. (2011). Wellcome trust primary science survey report. Wellcome Trust.
   Google Scholar
• Whetton, C. (1989). A brief history of a testing time: National curriculum assessment in England. Educational Research, 51(2), 137–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131880902891222
   Google Scholar
• Winter, C. (2017). Curriculum policy reform in an era of technical accountability: ‘Fixing’ curriculum, teachers and students in English schools. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 49(1), 55–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2016.1205138
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wragg, T. (2011). An introduction to classroom observation (classic edition). Routledge.
   Google Scholar