DRAFT – NOT TO BE CITED WITHOUT PERMISSION
March 2011
‘Inspecting in a new age’? : Europeanization and Inspection
Sotiria Grek and Martin Lawn
Introduction
This working paper examines European associations and their work during the period 2000-2010, a time which, in European terms, has been marked by the influence of the Lisbon treaty and the accession of a number of new countries into the EU. In particular, we are looking at the field of education with a focus on inspection systems in Europe and an attempt to trace the evolution of inter- and trans-European collaborations of inspectors in the Lisbon era. The working paper focuses on the history of SICI, the Standing International Conference of Inspectorates, a European association which has developed in scope over the last ten years: we will look at its aims and functions in its early period (2000-2004) and today; the contemporary challenges; and conclude with a discussion about the role of associations in post Lisbon Europe. A particular focus for the WP will be to show how SICI reveals the tension between data and judgement in systems which are using regulatory data more and more, and the way in which ‘hard’ data and expert judgement, is now increasingly being dissolved, with hard data opening up to ‘soft’ measures (like the measurement of creativity and innovation), while expert judgement becoming more standardised as it needs to be brought in line with similar judgements in other contexts – in other words, it needs to be comparable in order to flow.
European inspectorates are also faced with other new challenges that, in some ways, not only question their traditional authority in delivering school assessment but sometimes threaten them by rendering them obsolete; on the one hand, they are faced with increasing school autonomy in relation to schools’ own evaluation of learning and teaching, with schools (at least in some contexts) sometimes questioning the extent to which the inspection process offers anything more than a disruption to the life of the school. On the other, due to the proliferation of data and the increasing broadening of learning lifelong and lifewide, their traditional, almost ‘old-worldly’ status as classroom connoisseurs is also questioned; rather than derive clout from their historical position, today they increasingly need to appear fresh, cutting edge, and outward-looking. Therefore, this paper is about how previously powerful, largely disconnected policy communities, now need to come together to redefine and modernise what they do –and above all, protect their internal, local standing by seeking for support and ideas externally. We do not claim that these developments apply to the same degree to all inspectorates in Europe; however, we do argue that if the thesis about the Europeanisation of inspection is correct (and we are explaining why we think it is later), then to some degree most inspectorates in Europe are moving towards this same direction.
Finally, it has to be noted that reflecting on one’s standpoint when examining inspection in Europe seems more vital than in any other analysis of the European education space, due to the long-term differences between institutional traditions –therefore, this paper is written by research teams located in contexts that could be described as being at the more ‘progressive’ end of the inspection spectrum, with self-evaluation heralding the shift away from external evaluation as the sole means of assessing teaching, towards the validation (done by inspectors) of the internal evaluation of learning ( conducted by teachers).
A. SICI. A brief history and main functions: the formative years 2000-2004
The Standing International Conference of Inspectorates (SICI) serves as a forum for exchanging experience in relation to inspection systems and wider education issues across Europe. Initially founded as the ‘Conference of School Inspectorates in Europe’ by the OECD at the instigation of Netherlands in 1985, quality assurance and evaluation have been of prime interest to the organisation right from the beginning:
Open borders in the European Union mean greater mobility among both teachers and pupils. Thus, school inspection needs to include quality assurance at home while, at the same time, opening up to other systems abroad. (SICI Newsletter, 1989)
Increasing internationalisation and mobility across Europe meant that the Conference could only continue to operate if members would meet a certain number of requirements. Therefore, in 1995, it was re-named into SICI and founded as a legally based association in Breda, Netherlands. In the articles of its foundation, the Conference stated the following aims: sharing experience; updating developments regarding education systems; finding ways to improve working methods; and establishing a basis for cooperation between the various school authorities. The two main governing bodies of SICI are the General Assembly, which meets every two years, and the Executive Committee, which meets twice a year, and is chaired by the president of SICI.
In 1997, Douglas A. Osler, Her Majesty’s Senior Chief Inspector (HMI) and leader of the Scottish Inspectorate, was elected President of SICI; during his time, SICI grew through the organisation of workshops, the development of a descriptive study on the supervision and inspection of schools in Europe, the compiling of a critical analysis of school inspection in Europe and the instigation of mutual projects which were based on joint visits or joint inspections. Osler, in his speech at the International SICI Congress in Utrecht in 2000, spoke about ‘The future of school inspectorates in the 21st century’, stressing for the first time the need to focus on continuous improvement. According to him, ‘it is not sufficient in terms of school inspection just to write a report – it is also necessary to supplement each and every evaluation with a proposal for improvement’ (SICI Newsletter).
From 1995 SICI was involved in a number of interesting studies and exchanges of expertise in inspectorates across Europe. However, it is since around 2000 that the association appears far more active, with the organisation of workshops and meetings of inspectors from a number of countries and the increased collaboration with international organisations, who are invited in meetings, such as the OECD and the European Commission. Interestingly, in a SICI meeting for the celebration of the 200th anniversary of the Netherlands Inspectorate in 2001, Edward Tersmette, a representative of the Education Policy unit of the DG Education and Culture, suggested that a new era had just began with the arrival of the Open Method of Coordination and the launch of indicators and benchmarking for education policy in Europe. He called it ‘a silent revolution’ and argued that it would be a ‘new frontier for European integration’ comparing it with the completion of the internal market, the introduction of the Euro and the enlargement of the Union (Tersmette, 2001). Tersmette emphasised the new significance given to Education by the Lisbon Treaty (‘so what the Lisbon agenda does, is that it places typical education and training issues firmly back in the hands of education and training authorities themselves, who do not want to play second fiddle to their colleagues in the Employment Council. They are taking back what is theirs and in doing so they are advancing European integration’ 2001; no page numbers) and suggests that the work of associations such as SICI is crucially in this process as, he suggests, there is a need ‘not only to close performance gaps between countries, but rather to close communication gaps’. Further, he contends that
I believe that when we start debating and comparing quality issues in education, the process counts perhaps more than the results. It is about agreeing on terminology, on concepts, finding common ground, speaking common language (Tersmette 2001; no page numbers).
By 2002 SICI was already an organisation of 20 member countries from across Europe, with also associate members who were allowed to participate in SICI for 2 years without paying the required fee (currently 3000 euros). Some of its main functions was (and is) the organisation of workshops, which ‘have formed the backbone’ (SICI 2003; 6) of SICI, as they ‘provide opportunities to discuss and analyse key aspects of education and inspection…also [they] provide opportunities to develop the valuable personal contacts that can be built into partnerships’ (SICI 2003; 6).
One of the main developments during the first years after the establishment of SICI was the production of what was called the Blue Book or the ‘Inspectorates of Education in Europe’ book, compiled by the Flemish DVO (Dienest Voor Onderwijsontwikkeling/ Department for Educational Development) with the aim to provide with a quick overview of European inspectorates. The effort began in 1998 and the descriptive mapping covered 14 countries, the then members of SICI. Some of the themes developed in the Book are the organisation of the inspectorate; its areas of responsibility; the process of inspection, as well as its methods (frameworks, indicators and criteria for data gathering); relation between inspectorate evaluation and self-evaluation of schools; and instruments and methods –the way inspectors collect information and the approaches they use when carrying out their work. Although printed to start with, the Blue book was soon developed into a web database which could be searched (and still is) both country-based but also cross-country thematically.
Further, newsletters are produced up to four times a year by the Secretariat, covering a wide range of inspection-related topics. All members –and other inspectors, on occasion- are invited to contribute short papers or articles for these newsletters, as well as inform members about the work of the Executive Committee and the General Assembly.
In line with all similar associations, SICI developed a website which ‘has greatly enhanced the speed and effectiveness of communication’ (SICI 2003;9); it contains contact information about members’ inspectorates, including hyper links to their official websites and acts as an archive for SICI documents, working papers and newsletters. Again, similar with other association of its kind, the problems with designing an effective, interactive website that is regularly updated and attracts interest, appear to exist; throughout the last decade the need to improve the SICI website is a recurrent theme of discussions, with more problems appearing more recently when a very large sum of funds was lost when a contractor did not deliver what was expected –a new contractor has been employed and the new website is now under construction.
B. Links and Projects
international organisations
As we saw with the Termette contribution above, as well as with the regular funding of SICI activities, a clear indication was given by Commission officials that SICI was fulfilling a vital role towards the Lisbon process, an idea that would assist the further development of the organisation throughout the last decade with Commission staff either being present or continuously being informed about the activities of the association. The OECD, CIDREE (Consortium of Institutions for Development and Research in Education) and the European Schoolnet have been other organisations actively involved with SICI work. CIDREE for example, in the context of 9/11, paid for all the costs for the organisation of a social inclusion workshop in Belgiun in 2002; Northern Ireland and Scotland were very keen on the event and CIDREE decided to base the workshop on a case study from a Scottish school.
SICI has developed mainly links with the OECD and the European Commission, which has funded SICI activities in many occasions. Indeed, SICI looks at its contribution to these ‘stakeholders’ as vital, both for the inspectors themselves as well as for the international organisations working with them:
Our members can improve their professional knowledge and skills through links with PISA…We have much professional knowledge and skills that we can contribute to European-wide initiatives (2001; 24)
Finally, SICI collaborated in a few projects with the European Schoolnet, through its former chairman Ferry de Rijke who was also a member of Schoolnet (more on this later).
Examples of project work
‘Evaluation of mathematics teaching in secondary schools’ project 1999-2002
The final report of this project was submitted in 2002. The project was initiated as a joint exercise between England and the Netherlands and was later broadened to include several other countries. It involved observations of maths teaching and its evaluation in the participating countries with data being collated in December 2000 and a project meeting to decide on how to make this data comparable in Belfast in the same month. In the end, a four point grading scale was constructed and all the indicators were judged by the inspectors involved –the experience was seen as very positive. As for the purposes of the project, the inspectors worked for a week in host countries and ‘found it very useful to have discussions with foreign counterparts; a good deal had been learnt about the methodology of lesson observation’ (SICI 2001;8). The project leader, Wim Kleijne suggested that the success of the project could open up the opportunity for a much bigger inspection of teaching project, taking account challenges such as the difficulties of finding a common approach to inspection to the different curricula from country to country, as well as ‘the value of seeking common indicators, but the danger of presenting the outcomes in a “league table”’ (SICI 2001;8). Finally, it was seen that one of the most significant contributions of the project was training the whole group of inspectors on a common methodology, as well as the professional development gained from joint working.