Search

The series of responses in this article were gathered as part of an online mini conference held in September 2021 that sought to explore different ideas and articulations of school autonomy reform across the world (Australia, Canada, England, Ireland, the USA, Norway, Sweden and New Zealand). It centred upon an important question: what needs to happen for school autonomy to be mobilised to create more equitable public schools and systems of education? There was consensus across the group that school autonomy reform creates further inequities at school and system levels when driven by the logics of marketisation, competition, economic efficiency and public accountability. Against the backdrop of these themes, the conference generated discussion and debate where provocations and points of agreement and disagreement about issues of social justice and the mobilisation of school autonomy reform were raised. As an important output of this discussion, we asked participants to write a short response to the guiding conference question. The following are these responses which range from philosophical considerations, systems and governance perspectives, national particularities and teacher and principal perspectives.

There is a growing consensus that existing arrangements for policy making in education are far from optimal. This paper is about policy making and the roles of--and relationships between--elected officials, civil servants and academics in the making of policy. It aims to open up a conversation about new ways of making education policy that make better use of academic expertise by shedding light on policy making from the perspective of a former policy broker. With specific reference to England, experiences of the world of policy are drawn on to provide an account of the following: the disconnect between academic research and policy; what good policy advice looks like; and, most significantly, what an expert policy advice mechanism in education could look like. The mechanism put forward is one possibility for further discussion within the academic community in the first instance: an independent group of diverse academic experts to provide trustworthy and transparent policy advice to the education ministry. It is envisaged that by bringing a set of insights together here, understandings of the world of policy making will be enhanced and further thinking and conversations about mechanisms for expert policy advice in education will be induced, starting with this flagship journal's readership. The subsequent accumulation of these discussions may then, in time, lead us towards better policy making.

In this piece the author provides a critical response to the new 'Looking at Our School' quality framework in Ireland and illustrates how policy overlooks critical scholarship. The author questions the claim that the updated policy reflects recent thinking and developments, and critiques the policy's stance on notions of both distributed leadership and effectiveness, and the policy overload it generates. Although much broader issues relating to the disconnect between research and policy and the prominence of the 'what works' discourse in education, this new framework in Ireland typifies a case of critical scholarship being passed over in policy. While this respondent is unconvinced by the policy that has been produced, packaged, and presented by policy makers, perhaps there is room for optimism in that recent personnel changes in the education ministry in Ireland could possibly pave the way for more much-needed critical perspectives in policy making. More critical scholarship is also needed, and there is a need for academics to not only advise policy makers but, professionally of course, challenge their thinking and question their decisions.

Different countries have different histories, traditions, cultures, and practices of student voice and are currently at different stages of their student voice journeys. This paper investigates how student voice is coming to be used in relation to classroom practice in different school types and socio-economic settings in the Irish education system. Ireland is a country without a strong tradition or history of student voice and particularly in relation to teaching and learning matters and it is envisaged that this paper will be of strong interest to those in countries where student voice is not yet prominent, but there are also wider implications. This research shows that students are now being consulted in relation to classroom practice in a variety of ways but that even within single school systems consultations are very much connected to school context with voice being used to different extents in different schools in different settings.

School self-evaluation is a low-stakes policy recently mandated in Ireland and while schools are becoming more consistent in engaging in this internal mode of evaluation, their engagement has not been uniform. This paper provides new ways of thinking about, understanding, and explaining how school self-evaluation plays out in Irish schools. Subscribing to the view that policies are not simply implemented but enacted through the creative processes of interpretation and translation, this paper shows how school self-evaluation is performed in Irish schools in various ways by various people. We identify numerous policy actors in our qualitative data: narrators, entrepreneurs, outsiders, transactors, enthusiasts, translators, critics, and receivers. This assortment of actors helps to bring school self-evaluation to life but as it comprises heterogeneous entities with varying characteristics, levels of experience, and motivations it is simply not possible for this policy to be implemented in schools as policymakers envisage.

A significant paradox of school autonomy is that it tends to constrain the autonomy of teachers, instead subjecting them to the increased controlling of their work, heightened monitoring, and greater accountability. This paper draws on interview data to show how teachers in accountability-driven and business-like schools face three different but overlapping types of surveillance: vertical surveillance involving both top-down monitoring from management in the form of lesson observations and bottom-up monitoring via student voice initiatives; horizontal surveillance by way of peer observations and parents commenting on teacher effectiveness; and intrapersonal surveillance through teachers engaging in the act of self-surveillance and management analyzing their paperwork and student performance data. In mapping out this surveillance, this paper demonstrates that teachers are aware of the stakeholders watching them, the tools and techniques used, and that this surveillance takes place at all times. Significantly, some teachers are willing participants in their own surveillance. With the element of opacity removed from the surveillance process, this paper ultimately shows that the oft-cited panopticon is no longer an appropriate metaphor for scholars to use in the literature to convey the intense monitoring teachers face as we have now entered the post-panoptic era.

This paper makes a novel and important contribution to scholarship by developing and presenting a set of concepts and questions for those researching student voice in Ireland to consider and explore in their studies, and specifically in relation to classroom practice at post-primary level. Here, a distinction is drawn between consultations that take place inside classrooms between students and teachers and consultations that take place between management and students and cognisance is paid to school patronage, school socio-economic context, and the career stage of teachers and positions in the school hierarchy. This paper ultimately offers a heuristic device as a starting point for future research on student voice in Irish post-primary schools and sets out to bring about more critical thinking regarding how student voice plays out vis-à-vis classroom practice.

This paper picks up and elaborates on the conception of policy translators in schools -- key actors in the enactment of policy. The qualitative data presented here highlight how it is often middle leaders doing high-profile policy work in schools, turning ideas into actions and bringing policy to life. As translators, they organise, manage, lead, plan, produce, inspire, persuade, and appease, and in doing so they translate policy into practice and make it a collective effort. At the same time, they are often overloaded and inundated. In focusing on middle leaders as policy translators, this research makes several important contributions to scholarship: empirical data is provided to support and expand on policy enactment theory, the limited research base on middle leadership is developed, and understandings of how school self-evaluation plays out in schools are strengthened. Thus, it is envisaged that this paper will not only be of interest and of use to researchers and policymakers concerned with policy, evaluation, and leadership but to practising teachers and school leaders attempting to make sense of their own experiences at the coalface.

Student voice is, of course, fundamental -- who could argue against democracy? It is important that we do not return to a time where students were seen and not heard and positioned as subordinate figures but at the same time, do teachers suffer because of this democracy? Although student voice policies can represent positive developments, it would be naïve to be overly celebratory of pro-voice policies. This critical account focuses on some of the unsavoury ways that student voice can play out in schools: it can be used for surveillance; it can give rise to suspicion; and it can see dissenters stigmatised. Qualitative data generated through interviews with school staff are drawn on in this paper and researcher subjectivity is treated as a key asset as the author's student voice experiences at the coalface are first expounded in an autoethnographic account and then reflected in the interpretations and presentations of the interview data. What is coined the 'I(nterest) behind this research' means that student voice is not taken at face value or as an unquestionably positive initiative but something that can, even unintentionally, be more sinister.

School self-evaluation (SSE) or data-based decision making is now a common feature of mainstream education in an increasing number of jurisdictions. The participation of stakeholders including students, is promoted internationally as a key feature of effective SSE. Despite this, very little research has been carried out on how education systems might involve students in SSE and even less research has explored how student involvement can move beyond mere tokenism. Similar to many other jurisdictions, Irish schools are encouraged to include students in SSE. However, the research to date would indicate that while students are frequently consulted through the use of surveys they have little or no involvement in decisions that are made as part of the SSE process at a whole school level. This case study explores an atypical approach to student engagement in SSE which was tested in one Irish post-primary school where students participated as co-researchers along with their teachers in the SSE process. In doing so, student participation in SSE shifted from student as data sources to students as co-researchers. Students became members of the SSE Team, responsible for consulting with the wider staff team, student body and parents. They were actively involved in the completion of a whole school self-evaluation report on assessment and the development of a school improvement plan. The study outlines the key stages of the project and how student participation evolved through the process. Interviews conducted with both the teacher and student members of the SSE Team illuminates the experience of the students and staff on the SSE team. The findings indicate that this approach resulted in significant positive outcomes for the school and the individuals involved, but there were also a number of challenges. Student involvement resulted in greater awareness among, and participation of the wider staff team in the SSE process. However, it required more resources and time than is usually the case for an SSE process in Irish schools. The research suggests that this level of participation by students may require a more systematic and sustained engagement of students in decision making at a classroom level in order to build capacity of students to contribute to decision making at a whole school level on an ongoing basis. This study may have an application in jurisdictions aiming to include students in SSE, particularly at a higher level, and it also provides a glimpse into the deliberate planning and structures required if schools are to move beyond an instrumentalist, compliance model of 'student voice' towards a more authentic model of inclusive democracy.

This paper shows how the commitment of senior leadership teams to student voice is not necessarily shared by teachers. As part of a wider study, this paper presents qualitative data generated through interviews with school staff in one Irish post-primary school with a strong culture of student voice to illustrate the discrepancy that can exist between senior leaders and teachers in terms of how they embrace, enact, and experience student voice. Student voice customs can be rhetorical, perhaps even exaggerated by some, and peripheral to others, and positions on student voice are often determined by positions in the school hierarchy. As student voice remains considerably underdeveloped in Irish post-primary schools despite Irish education and most Irish schools becoming replete with student-centred discourses, this paper provides one possible way of making sense of the current state of play. More broadly, it points to how different actors work on and with student voice in different ways.

This paper, as part of a European Commission-funded project entitled REBEL (Repurposing Education through Blended Learning), deconstructs school communities understanding of the challenges and opportunities for blended learning in the school sector in Ireland with perceptions shaped by experiences of enforced school closures during the pandemic. It provides an overview of five case studies in primary and post-primary schools in Ireland. The findings from this research indicate that the emergency remote teaching experience has cast an unhelpful shadow on blended learning. To avoid stigmatising online teaching and learning based on less than ideal experiences, in spring 2020, Hodges and co-authors referred to this period as 'emergency remote teaching.' (Hodges et al., 2020). Perhaps blended learning is also the victim of a similar stigmatising effect. The paper makes several contributions, including a need to differentiate between blended learning, emergency remote teaching and the suite of additional factors that impacted the school closure experience for teachers and schools. In addition, the findings signpost some succinct questions for consideration, that is, what conditions, social, cognitive, and teacher presence, resources and supports are necessary for effective intentional blended learning in schools.

This paper reflects on compulsory school self-evaluation in Ireland. It sets important historical and contemporary context by documenting the development of a culture of evaluation in Ireland throughout the 1990s and into the new millennium before charting the rise of school self-evaluation during the austere economic conditions of post-2008 Ireland. Three key reasons are proposed for the rise of school self-evaluation: the influence of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the perceived need for more accountability, and the drive towards self-managing schools. In debating the purpose of school self-evaluation in Ireland it is put forward that it is not underpinned by any single logic, but an assemblage of overlapping logics interwoven by complements and contradictions. It is concluded that while improvement is predominantly promoted in official discourse, it is accountability and economic logics that dominate.

The purpose of this paper, which is part of a three-year EU Erasmus+-funded study titled 'Distributed Evaluation and Planning in Schools' (DEAPS), is to provide an analysis of policies, structures, processes, supports and barriers that exist to enable or inhibit the involvement of students and parents in school evaluation in four European countries (Belgium, Ireland, Portugal and Turkey). Document analysis was used for this study and some 348 peer-reviewed articles, and 28 national and transnational policy documents were included in the analysis. Based on this review it would be reasonable to suggest that the student/parent voice agenda around evaluation in schools remains, by and large, aspirational. It is extolled in policy but in practice is mainly tokenistic with very little evidence of impact on the work of schools. In light of this, it is argued that government and school-level policies and strategies need to be reconsidered to enhance students' and parents' engagement in school evaluation. As a first step, significant further empirical research on the limitations on and conditions necessary for stakeholder voice in education is required.

This paper offers a comprehensive account of Irish teachers' perspectives on life inside schools in England, as reported in empirical studies. The research literature shows that Irish teachers report experiencing intense pressure from the inspectorate, but also internally as a consequence of the demands placed on English schools. Within these low-trust environments they experience what they feel to be unsustainable and time-consuming workloads which compound and perpetuate the pressure and stress they feel. Of most significance are Irish teachers' views on the motives of English schools, which they interpret and perceive to be dictated by and for the inspectorate as opposed to serving the best interests of students. Overall, Irish teachers' experiences in English schools are shaped by the overarching and inescapable pressures of high-stakes accountability and are far from positive.

School self-evaluation (SSE) has emerged as a widely used approach to school evaluation in recent decades. This has occurred in the context of what is referred to as "New Public Management," an element of which seeks to empower public institutions to make decisions locally about improving their processes and standards. Inspection regimes in many countries have developed legislative, methodological, and support mechanisms for schools to carry out SSE. This paper, by using the evolution of the SSE process in Irish education, analyses the efficacy of SSE by exploring teachers and school principals' perceptions of both the challenges and supports concerning the integration of SSE in their schools. Results derived from this study suggest that respondents were, overall, fully aware of the support services available to them. However, support capacity challenges also emerged, in particular as it relates to data use and target setting. Importantly, it is argued that since there are striking resemblances between SSE as it has developed in Ireland and other systems, the challenges and solutions identified in this paper will have wide application in other contexts.

This paper provides an analysis of the leadership and planning strategies employed by school leaders during the COVID-19 Pandemic. It draws on a series of focus group interviews with school principals from all school types in Northern Ireland. Results derived from the study shows that despite the benefits of various modes of leadership such as distributed leadership and a consensus-based approach to educational provision that is increasingly promoted across many education systems; school leaders spoke of the need to revert to other modes of leadership in the form of situational leadership that quite frequently became the default strategy to cope with the multitude of challenges for school personnel during this period. While the theory and subsequent benefits of distributed and networked leadership are not disputed, what is questioned is the fragmentary ways in which various modes of leadership are advocated across education systems. This leads to a more succinct question that we suggest should be considered in Northern Ireland and other jurisdictions; that is, what conditions, resources and supports are necessary to ensure that distributed leadership is not only perceived as yet another leadership strategy that can in the main, be implemented in unchallenging as opposed to challenging times.

This paper explores poststructural tools as a particularly helpful ontological stance in advancing the concerns of marginalized groups in educational research. Although largely academic in nature, poststructuralism has had real and tangible effects as it interrogates everyday binaries, categories and hierarchies that oppress so many. This paper draws on the experiences of two separate studies of teacher identity in Ireland to explore how poststructural approaches to methodology allow for new understandings of teacher identity formation. The first study focuses on the daily lived experiences of 11 Irish male primary school teachers. The second study looks at the increasing neoliberal tone of Irish education and the potential implications for teacher identity. Both studies are united by their interest in the relationship between self and other. Specific emphasis is placed on the following critical concerns: difference and how it is understood in academic realms; the social nature of language, and the importance of reflexivity in the research process. Two key questions are explored. First, how do we produce research that goes beyond the experiences of the researched? Second, is there value in moving beyond the reality-rhetoric binary? This paper intends to launch a fresh conversation on ontology within the current educational climate.

Current approaches to the regulation of schools in most jurisdictions tend to combine elements of external inspection with systems of internal self-evaluation. An increasingly important aspect of the theory and practice of both, but particularly the latter, revolves around the role of other actors, primarily parents and students, in the process. Using literature review and documentary analysis as the research method, this article explores the research literature from many countries around the concerns of schools and teachers about giving a more powerful voice to parents and pupils. Then, focusing on Ireland, this article tries to clarify three things, official policy concerning stakeholder voice in school self-evaluation and decision making, the efforts by schools to implement this policy and the response to date of school leaders and teachers to this rather changed environment. Using Hart's ladder of genuine, as opposed to token, participation, it is argued that policy mandating parental and student involvement has evolved significantly, that schools have responded positively and that there is little evidence, as yet, of teacher concern or resistance. This response is explained by the low stakes and improvement-focused education environment; the controlled, structured and simplified nature of the self-evaluation process; and the limited extent of parental and student participation in decision making.

This paper discusses the various ways privatisation processes affect Irish education. Due to the long history of considerable church involvement, the notable absence of middle tiers of governance, and more recently, the embrace of neoliberal principles, in large part due to and for economic reasons, the Irish education system represents a fascinating example of a complex interplay between the public and private sectors. The conceptual and analytical tools provided by Cultural Political Economy are used in this paper to highlight why and how privatisation has unfolded and might yet unravel further in Irish education. These tools offer a useful lens through which to examine country-specific developments, whilst locating them in the global picture. Utilising the conceptualisations offered by Cultural Political Economy, this paper demonstrates how different forms of privatisation in Ireland have contributed to what can be described as a complex system of governance with strong private involvement.

As with school self-evaluation in most European countries, the Irish education system now promotes the involvement and inclusion of stakeholders such as parents and students in the evaluation process. Yet, in the Irish context, there is limited research exploring the role of these stakeholders in this internal mode of school evaluation. To address this lacuna, this research draws on a national survey of post-primary school principals and interviews conducted with 109 stakeholders now placed at the centre of the evaluation process: school staff, parents and students. While there are some optimistic indications in the data, this research highlights that only slight progress has been made in terms of including parents and students in school self-evaluation in Ireland. The data presented in this paper corroborate that many age-old obstacles in the Irish context still exist and continue to dominate. Ultimately, this research concludes that changes in policy do not necessarily produce changes in practice.

The importance of school self-evaluation (SSE) as a school improvement mechanism has been acknowledged by increases in the number of countries with legal requirements for schools to conduct self-evaluation. Despite the provision of a range of support to schools to encourage their engagement with SSE, many implementation challenges have been highlighted in research from various jurisdictions, where SSE has been introduced. The provision of professional development (PD) to schools is a common response to such challenges, yet there is a dearth of research into the models of PD that might best support schools to apply the learning and address the common implementation issues that have been identified in the literature. This action research study explored a PD intervention for teachers leading SSE in Irish post-primary schools. The findings explored the experiences and perceptions of staff from 15 of the schools involved, and in particular focused on the features of the intervention that supported participants to apply the learning, by leading the SSE process in their respective schools. The findings indicate that this model of PD for teachers leading SSE may offer some useful solutions to the ongoing challenges experienced by schools in relation to SSE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite a lack of conclusive evidence connecting autonomous schools and academic success, school autonomy is regularly championed as being a way of not only improving schools but as a way of improving the quality of education in socially and economically deprived areas. This research builds on a recent paper published in "Irish Educational Studies" that argues that school autonomy should not be advanced in Ireland by exploring how teachers feel about features of autonomous schools. Irish teachers who have previously worked in academy schools in England, and who now teach in disadvantaged schools in Ireland, were interviewed about their experiences and how they would feel about features of autonomous schools being implemented in Ireland. The experiences the participants had in England indicate how school autonomy can be experienced in different ways -- morally proper ways that engage with the broad purposes of schooling such as focusing on students and their learning, and morally improper ways that prioritise looking good on external measures at the expense of students and their learning. Overall, the participants were opposed to schools in Ireland becoming more like English academies but felt that having greater local flexibility over the curriculum in schools and offering a wider range of subjects would be beneficial, provided that it was embraced and enacted in a morally proper manner.

A post-structural approach to exploring identity is taken in this paper in that identity is considered here as being socially constructed through discourse, which has deep implications for the shaping of subjectivity and practice. Given both the potential academisation and Anglicisation of Irish schools, and the additional re-drawing of what constitutes as a 'good teacher', repositioning Irish teachers' subjectifications, this paper highlights the important issue of how teachers (re-)construct themselves in particular ways and make sense of their professional selves when their personal values, motivations, principles and deeply held beliefs about education and how it should be experienced are challenged. Ultimately, this paper projects that adopting a business-like ethos in Irish schools will have a negative impact on Irish teachers' identities.

Symbolic of the rise of neoliberal principles in Irish education policy, there is now a move towards advancing school autonomy and decentralizing decision-making to individual schools, possibly emulating the academy model that has become widespread in England. Increasing the freedom and independence of schools may involve using private actors to provide what has traditionally been the service of the state, but it will most definitely involve schools behaving more like private sector organizations. While some of the new powers that would be devolved to schools might seem attractive, especially in how they are presented at an official level, this paper highlights how features of autonomous schools that may initially seem appealing are, in practice, likely to be unsuited to the Irish context. In this regard, this paper advises that school autonomy should not be advanced in Ireland.

With many Irish teachers migrating to England, and with the Irish education system moving in a more neoliberal direction as accountability slowly permeates the landscape, this paper reports on Irish migrant teachers' experiences and perceptions of autonomy and accountability in the English education system, where accountability is perhaps more high-stakes than in any other jurisdiction. The primary research consisted of semi-structured interviews with Irish migrant teachers in England. The qualitative data not only offer insights into their experiences and perceptions of teacher autonomy and accountability in the English system, but also shed some light on how similar policies and mechanisms would be received in Ireland by Irish teachers. Ultimately, the participants had overwhelmingly negative experiences and perceptions of the English education system. They reported a very one-sided autonomy/accountability balance and unsustainable workloads, and consequently a range of negative emotions due to the critical and unsupportive manner in which they were judged, scrutinised, and held to account. The participants did feel however, that there was a need for classroom practice in Irish schools to become more observable but they were thoroughly opposed to an accountability framework similar to England's being adopted in Ireland - as they also envisaged the teacher unions would be.