Self-Evaluation in Schools Results Workshop 1 Self-Evaluation in Schools

Workshop 1a: Scope, SWOT-Analysis Contributions made by 8 participants from7 countries (Albania, Belgium, Cyprus, Germany, Ireland, Malta, Sweden) Discussing differences and similarities of tasks of school evaluation/inspections in these countries Defining the scope of self-evaluation (narrowing the discussion to „Self-evaluation of Whole School as organization“) Focusing on three aspects: Data collection, Valuation, Use of Data Defining Strengths and Weaknesses Discussing Targets for Measures to Ensure Quality of Self-Evaluation (Pre-conditions of self-evaluation)

Workshop 1b: SWOT-Analysis (con.), Measures Contributions made by 13 participants from 9 countries (Czech Republic, France, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Scotland, Southern Tyrolian, Sweden) Defining Opportunities and Threats Discussing Targets for Measures to Ensure Quality of Self-Evaluation (Training of Teachers for Evaluation) Discussing some Measures developed and used in different countries for supporting self-evaluation.

Tasks for School Evaluation / Inspection Meta-Level Accounting Meta-Evaluation (e.g. of Self-Evaluations) School-Level Whole School (as an Organization) Whole School (Climate) Quality Management / Using Data for School Development Key Elements of School Human Ressources Teaching and Learning Student Attainment (e.g. Students with special needs) Curriculum Special Topics Subject specific Evaluation (e.g. literacy, maths etc.) Special programs (e.g. for disadvantaged students)

Strength Selection of data/sources They have access to all data/ richness of data / collect data from a variety of sources but not too much / some may have already collected data Collection is based on their specific needs/ it is used to set targets / they have a real interest because the data is based on their own questions They evaluate what is important for their school Spirit of teachers (Engagement) It would be a way for a headmasters to get teachers wanting to change Teaching professionals Defining their own goals Motivation for Self-Evaluation

Thinking in Causalities Deciding about Publication Weakness Thinking in Causalities Do not know how to set realistic targets / They may give too much attention to less important areas / They tend to „explain“ the result rather thank think about what has „caused“ it No experiences with the instruments / don‘t ask the right questions and come to wrong conclusions / Digital literacy / they don‘t know the data they have / accuracy of data / they don‘t know how to analyse data Most schools have too small populations, it is hard to use statistics / Insufficient data in relation to student voice on teaching and learning If the self evaluation is published there is a danger not to evaluate the priorities / the school is not open for the community Technical Knowledge Quality of Data Deciding about Publication

Awareness rising for Evaluation Opportunities Awareness rising for Evaluation Involvement of Staff and Stakeholders / Increasing the Motivation of Staff / Empowerment / Development of a common process (Plan- Do-Check-Act) / Development of a common evaluation culture / Collaborative team spirit Improves acceptance of evaluation (even external evaluation) / it might build trust/ Experience in internal evaluation can help schools to understand external evaluation better Gain insight into a schools capacity to improve/ Understand the local context of the school / Taking into account the school context / Increase ownership on what quality means / Multiple perceptions on quality Gives answers to the specific questions of the individual schools / refers to the school improvement program / fosters change and development / supports cultural change and new ways of doing things Increasing Trust Concept of Quality “Needs Assessment”

Threats Learning to be self-critical Threatening Objectiveness / Lack of transparency on quality / Publicity of results („window dressing“) / If results not been used it may lead to refuse of evaluation Lack of integration between internal and external purposes / Different Indicators / Danger of comparing results from different schools with different conditions / No need for external evaluation (from perspective of schools) / self- sufficency of self-evaluation / Different starting points Unable to be agile to respond to school‘s own evaluation / Someone else prioritizes for you – they might not have the same information you do – „upset your plans“ / Need someone that understand the theme/subject and someone that can be in charge of the self-assessment Integrating different levels Balancing Standards and Specifics

Pre-conditions (Targets for Measures) Thinking in Causalities Awareness rising for Evaluation Selection of data/sources Learning to be self-critical Technical Knowledge Increasing Trust Defining their own goals Integrating different levels Quality of Data Concept of Quality Motivation for Self-Evaluation Balancing Standards and Specifics Deciding about Publication “Needs Assessment”

Measures – Some Examples (Preparing Teachers for Self-Evaluation) School Projects (France – no further information available) Portal.eval.nibis.de (Germany, Lower Saxony – same instruments for internal and external evaluation, UBB and questionairs, in German) School Quality Framework (Ireland – information in English & Irish) Tools for private schools (tavla.udir.no/egenvurdering) and public schools/municipalities (reflex.udir.no – press „se temaer for egenvurdering) (Norway – information in Norwegian) How good is our School? (Scotland –information in English) IQES-Online (South Tyrolian – same tool for internal & external evaluation, integrated into teachers education) www.kolladinskola.se (Sweden – tool to evaluate primary and upper secundary school, pre school, subject technical scene, subject history)