Advertisement

Accountability and trust: Two sides of the same coin?

  • Melanie EhrenEmail author
  • Andrew Paterson
  • Jacqueline Baxter
Article

Abstract

Trust and accountability are often positioned as opposites, the argument being that accountability is based on distrust and correction of identified deficiencies. Yet, trust is also important in order for accountability to lead to improvement; only when teachers and principals are open about the quality of their teaching and their school can there be a meaningful discussion about change. How can we overcome this dilemma? This paper will address the inextricable interaction between trust and accountability, presenting examples from a study in South Africa of how external control in a setting of distrust can undermine agency and improvement, and how high levels of trust can promote more effective accountability relationships. Our study provides relevant insights into why some education systems are unable to generate, evaluate and scale innovations in learning when a lack of trust and capacity leads to strong opposition to external accountability, and when strong bureaucratic accountability creates further inefficiencies in pressurizing educators across the education system to report and monitor on various aspects of education where these efforts do not actually improve the quality of teaching in the classroom or provide information on good practices.

Keywords

Accountability Trust System reform 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was funded by the ESRC-DfID; Grant Number ES/P005888/1.

References

References marked with an * were included in phase 4 of your synthesis

  1. Addison, S. J. (2015). Using scenarios as part of a concurrent mixed methods design. In F. Lyon, G. Mőllering, & M. Saunders (Eds.), Handbook of research methods on trust (pp. 154–170). Cheltenham/Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, J. A. (2005). Accountability in education. Paris/Brussels: Unesco.Google Scholar
  3. Barber, M. (2004). The virtue of accountability: System redesign, inspection, and incentives in the era of informed professionalism. Journal of Education,85(1), 7–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barrera, D., Buskens, V., & Raub, W. (2015). Embedded trust: The analytical approach in vignettes, laboratory experiments and surveys. In F. Lyon, G. Mőllering, & M. Saunders (Eds.), Handbook of research methods on trust. Cheltenham/Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  5. Biputh, B., & McKenna, S. (2010). Tensions in the quality assurance processes in post-apartheid South African schools. Compare,40(3), 279–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bush, T., & Heystek, J. (2003a). School governance in the new South Africa. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education,33(2), 127–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bush, T., & Heystek, J. A. N. (2003b). School governance in the new South Africa. Compare: A Journal of Comparative Education,33(2), 127.*CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cameron, R., & Naidoo, V. (2018). Education policymaking at national level: The politics of multiple pricipals. In B. Levy, R. Cameron, U. Hoadley, & V. Naidoo (Eds.), The politics and governance of basic education: A tale of two South African provinces (pp. 61–85). Oxford: Oxford University Press.*Google Scholar
  9. Carnoy, M., Chisholm, L., & Chilisa, B. (2012). The low achievement trap: Comparing schooling in Botswana and South Africa. Cape Town: hSRC Press.Google Scholar
  10. Chisholm, L., Hoadley, U., & Kivilu, M., (2005). Educator workload in South Africa. Report prepared for the Educator Labour Relations Council, Pretoria, Human.Google Scholar
  11. Christie, P., & Monyokolo, M. (Eds.). (2018). Learning about sustainable change in education in South Africa: The Jika iMfundo campaign 2015–2017. Johannesburg: Saide.*Google Scholar
  12. Crooks, T. (2003). Some criteria for intelligent accountability applied to accountability in New Zealand. In Annual meeting of the American educational research association, Chicago, Illinois.Google Scholar
  13. Darling-Hammond, L., & Snyder, J. (2015). Meaningful learning in a new paradigm for educational accountability: An introduction. Education Policy Analysis Archives.  https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v23.1982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. De Clercq, F. (2013). Professionalism in South African education: The challenges of developing teacher professional knowledge, practice, identity and voice. Journal of Education,57(2013), 31–54.Google Scholar
  15. Deacon, R., Osman, R., & Buchler, M. (2010). Education policy studies in South Africa, 1995–2006. Journal of Education Policy,25(1), 95–110.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930903314269.*CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Døssing, H., Mokeki, L., & Weideman, M. (2011). Mapping transparency, accountability and integrity in primary education in South Africa. Berlin: Transparency International. Available at http://www.un.org/en/ecosoc/newfunct/pdf/luxembourg_tisda_south_africa_report_web.pdf. Accessed 18 Aug 2016.
  17. Eddy-Spicer, D., Ehren, M., Bangpan, M., Khatwa, M., Perrone, F. (2016). Under what conditions do inspection, monitoring and assessment improve system efficiency, service delivery and learning outcomes for the poorest and most marginalised? A realist synthesis of school accountability in low- and middle-income countries. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, UCL Institute of Education, University College London. https://www.gov.uk/dfid-research-outputs/protocol-under-what-conditions-do-inspection-monitoring-and-assessment-improve-system-efficiency-service-delivery-and-learning-outcomes-for-the-poorest-and-most-marginalised-a-realist-synthesis-of-school-accountability-in-low-a?cachebust=1481814745. Accessed Nov 2018.
  18. Farrell, C. M., & Law, J. (1999). The accountability of school governing bodies. Educational Management Administration and Leadership,27(1), 5–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gillespie, N. (2015). Survey measures of trust in organizational contexts: An overview. In F. Lyon, G. Mőllering, & M. Saunders (Eds.), Handbook of research methods on trust (pp. 225–240). Cheltenham/Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gundlach, G. T., & Cannon, J. P. (2010). “Trust but verify”? The performance implications of verification strategies in trusting relationships. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,38(4), 399–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gunningham, N., & Sinclair, D. (2009). Regulation and the role of trust: Reflections from the mining industry. Journal of Law and Society,36(2), 167–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Heystek, J. (2014). Principals’ perceptions about performance agreements as motivational action: Evidence from South Africa. Educational Management Administration and Leadership,42(6), 889–902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hooge, E., Burns, T., & Wilkoszewski, H. (2012). Looking beyond the numbers: Stakeholders and multiple school accountability. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 85, Paris: OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5k91dl7ct6q6-en.
  24. Howie, S. (2012). High-stakes testing in South Africa: Friend or foe? Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 19, 81–98.Google Scholar
  25. Ikejiaku, B.-V. (2009). ‘Crime’, poverty, political corruption and conflict in apartheid and post apartheid South Africa: The implications on economic development. African Journal of Political Science and International Relations,3(10), 451.Google Scholar
  26. Jansen, J. (2001). On the politics of performance in South African education: Autonomy, accountability and assessment. Prospects,31(4), 553–564.*CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Klijn, E. J., & Koppejan, J. F. M. (2014). Accountable networks. In: M. Bovens, R. Mark, E. Goodin, & T. Schillemans, (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of public accountability (pp. 242–258). Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
  28. Kramer, R. M. (1999). Trust and distrust in organizations: Emerging perspectives, enduring questions. Annual Review of Psychology,50(1), 569–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lemon, A. (2004). Redressing school inequalities in the Eastern Cape, South Africa. Journal of Southern African Studies,30(2), 269–290.*CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Levy, B. (2018). Improving basic education—The governance challenge. In B. Levy, R. Cameron, U. Hoadley, & V. Naidoo (Eds.), The politics and governance of basic education: A tale of two South African provinces (pp. 1–27). Oxford: Oxford University Press.*CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Levy, B., Cameron, R., Hoadley, U., & Naidoo, V. (2018). The politics and governance of basic education: A tale of two South African provinces. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lewicki, R. J., & Brinsfield, C. (2015). Trust research: measuring trust beliefs and behaviours. In F. Lyon, G. Mőllering, & M. Saunders (Eds.), Handbook of research methods on trust (pp. 46–65). Cheltenham/Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McLennan, A., Muller, M., Orkin, M., & Robertson, H. (2018). Chapter 9. District support for curriculum management change in schools. In P. Christie & M. Monyokolo (Eds.), Learning about sustainable change in education in South Africa: The Jika iMfundo campaign 2015–2017 (pp. 225–255). Johannesburg: Saide.*Google Scholar
  35. Mestry, R., & Khumalo, J. (2012a). Governing bodies and learner discipline: Managing rural schools in South Africa through a code of conduct. South African Journal of Education,32(1), 97–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mestry, R., & Khumalo, J. (2012b). Governing bodies and learner discipline: Managing rural schools in South Africa through a code of conduct. South African Journal of Education,32(1), 97–110.*CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Metcalfe, M. (2018). Chapter 2. Jika iMufundo 2015–2017: Why, what and key learnings. In P. Christie & M. Monyokolo (Eds.), Learning about sustainable change in education in South Africa: the Jika iMfundo campaign 2015–2017 (pp. 17–74). Johannesburg: Saide.*Google Scholar
  38. Mills, R. W., & Rubinstein Reiss, D. (2017). The role of trust in the regulation of complex and high-risk industries: The case of the U.S. Federal Aviation administration’s voluntary disclosure programs. In F. Six & K. Verhoest (Eds.), Trust in regulatory regimes (pp. 37–60). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mkhwanazi, T., Ndlovu, Z., Ngema, S., & Bansilal, S. (2018). Chapter 8. Exploring mathematics teachers’ usage of the curriculum planner and tracker in secondary schools in King Cetshwayo and Pinetown districts. In P. Christie & M. Monyokolo (Eds.), Learning about sustainable change in education in South Africa: the Jika iMfundo campaign 2015–2017 (pp. 195–225). Johannesburg: Saide.*Google Scholar
  40. Moloi, K. (2007). An overview of education management in South Africa. South African journal of education,27(3), 463–476.*Google Scholar
  41. Moloi, K. C. (2010). How can schools build learning organisations in difficult education contexts? South African Journal of Education,30(4), 621–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Moloi, K. C. (2014). The complexity of dealing with change in the South African schooling system: 20 years into democracy. African Identities,12(3/4), 264–282.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14725843.2015.1009619.*CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mthembu, T. T. (2014). The role of circuit managers in enhancing instructional leadership practices in schools: A phenomenological approach. A dissertation in partial of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Education in the discipline Education Leadership, Management and Policy in the School of Education. UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL Education District.*Google Scholar
  44. Mthiyane, N., Naidoo, J., & Bertram, C. (2018). Chapter 7. Balancing monitoring and support: The role of HODs in curriculum coverage. In P. Christie & M. Monyokolo (Eds.), Learning about sustainable change in education in South Africa: The Jika iMfundo campaign 2015–2017 (pp. 169–195). Johannesburg: Saide.*Google Scholar
  45. Näslund, L., & Hallström, K. T. (2017). Being everybody’s accomplice: Trust and control in eco-labelling. In F. Six & K. Verhoest (Eds.), Trust in regulatory regimes (pp. 145–181). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Nattrass, N., & Seekings, J. (2001). “ Two nations”? Race and economic inequality in South Africa today. Daedalus,130(1), 45–70.Google Scholar
  47. NEEDU. (2013). National report. Teaching and learning in rural primary schools. Pretoria: NEEDU. www.education.gov.za/NEEDU/tabid/860/Default.aspx. Accessed Nov 2018.
  48. Ngidi, D. P. (2004). Educators’ perceptions of the efficiency of school governing bodies. South African Journal of Education,24(4), 260–263.Google Scholar
  49. Nordstrum, L. E. (2012). Incentives to exclude: The political economy constraining school fee abolition in South Africa. Journal of Education Policy,27(1), 67–88.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2011.604138.*CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Oomsels, P., & Bouckaert, G. (2017). Interorganizational trust in Flemish public administration: comparing trusted and distrusted interactions between public regulatees and public regulators. In F. Six, & K. Verhoest (Eds.), Trust in regulatory regimes (p. 80–112).Google Scholar
  51. Ostrom, E. (2010). Beyond markets and states: polycentric governance of complex economic systems. American Economic Review, 100(3), 641–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Parliamentary research committee. (2018). Provincial Education Departments Performance Indicators: roundtable discussion. Retrieved from Sept 2019, https://pmg.org.za/committeemeeting/25767/.
  53. Patillo, K. (2012). Quiet corruption: Teachers unions and leadership in South African township schools. Connecticut: A thesis submitted to the faculty of Wesleyan University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Arts with Departmental Honors from the College of Social Studies.Google Scholar
  54. Pawson, R. (2006). Evidence-based policy: A realist perspective. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Poppo, L., Zhou, K. Z., & Ryu, S. (2008). Alternative origins to interorganizational trust: An interdependence perspective on the shadow of the past and the shadow of the future. Organization Science,19(1), 39–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pritchett, L. (2015). Creating education systems coherent for learning outcomes: Making the transition from schooling to learning. Research on Improving Systems of Education (RISE) Working Paper, Preliminary draft.Google Scholar
  57. Rex, J., & Mason, D. (1988). Theories of race and ethnic relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Schollar, E. (2018). Chapter 4. Curriculum management, improving learner performance and the rise of multi-grade classes: A tangled web of challenges to the design, operation and evaluation of educational development programmes in South Africa. In P. Christie & M. Monyokolo (Eds.), Learning about sustainable change in education in South Africa: The Jika iMfundo campaign 2015–2017 (pp. 99–123). Johannesburg: Saide.Google Scholar
  59. Sissener, T. K. (2001). Anthropological perspectives on corruption. Bergen: Chr. Michelsen Institute.Google Scholar
  60. Six, F., & Verhoest, K. (Eds.). (2017). Trust in regulatory regimes. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  61. Smith, M. C. (2011). Which in- and out-of-school factors explain variations in learning across different socio-economic groups? Findings from South Africa, Comparative Education,47(1), 79–102.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2011.541678.*CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Smith, W. J., & Ngoma-Maema, W. Y. (2003). Education for all in South Africa: Developing a national system for quality assurance. Comparative Education,39(3), 345–365.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0305006032000134418.*CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Spaull, N. (2012). SACMEQ at a Glance for 10 African countries. 2 page research note per country.Google Scholar
  64. Spaull, N. (2015) Accountability and capacity in South African education. Education as Change, 19(3), 113–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Taylor, N. (2017). Report on the implementation evaluation of the national curriculum statement grade R to 12 focusing on the curriculum and assessment policy statements (CAPS). Pretoria: Technical Report.Google Scholar
  66. Taylor, N., & Robinson, N. (2016). Towards teacher professional knowledge and practice standards in South Africa. Report commissioned by the Centre for Development and Enterprise.*Google Scholar
  67. Taylor, S., Spaull, N. (2013). The effects of rapidly expanding primary school access on effective learning: The case of Southern and Eastern Africa since 2000 (No. 01/2013).Google Scholar
  68. Taylor, S., & Yu, D. (2009). The importance of socioeconomic status in determining educational achievement in South Africa. Stellenbosch Economic Working Papers.*Google Scholar
  69. Van der Berg, S. (2007). Apartheid’s enduring legacy: Inequalities in education. Journal of African Economies,16(5), 849–880.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Van der Berg, S., Spaull, N., Wills, G., Gustafsson, M., & Kotzé, J. (2016). Identifying the binding constraints in education. Report commissioned by the South African Presidency and funded by the European Union’s Programme to Support Pro-Poor Policy Development (PSPPD) initiative.*Google Scholar
  71. Van der Berg, S., Taylor, S., Gustafsson, M., Spaull, N., & Armstrong, P. (2011). Improving education quality in South Africa. Report for the National Planning Commission. Department of Economics, Stellenbosch University.*Google Scholar
  72. Van Onselen, G. (2012). How Sadtu and the SACE have damaged accountability in SA education. June, [online], Available: http://inside-politics.org/2012/06/25/how-sadtu-and-the-sace-have-damagedaccountability-in-sa-education/. Accessed June 2013.
  73. Volmink, J., Gardiner, M., Msimang, S., Nel, P., Moleta, A., Scholtz, G., & Prins, T. (2016). Report of the ministerial task team appointed by minister angie motshekga to investigate allegations into the selling of posts of educators by members of teachers unions and departmental officials in provincial education departments. Department of Basic Education.*Google Scholar
  74. Wills, G. (2016). An economic perspective on school leadership and teachers’ unions in South Africa. Doctoral dissertation, Stellenbosch University.Google Scholar
  75. Witten, A., & Makole, K. (2018). Chapter 3. Leading to improve learning outcomes in the Jika iMfundo campaign. In P. Christie & M. Monyokolo (Eds.), Learning about sustainable change in education in South Africa: the Jika iMfundo campaign 2015–2017 (pp. 75–95). Johannesburg: Saide.*Google Scholar
  76. World Bank. (2008). Governance, management, and accountability in secondary education in Sub-Saharan Africa. Washington, DC: World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Yamauchi, F. (2011). School quality, clustering and government subsidy in post-aparteid South Africa. Economics of Education Review,30(1), 146–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Zaheer, A., McEvily, B., & Perrone, V. (1998). Does trust matter? Exploring the effects of interorganizational and interpersonal trust on performance. Organization Science,9(2), 141–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Vrije Universiteit AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.JET Education ServicesJohannesburgSouth Africa
  3. 3.OUMilton KeynesUK

Personalised recommendations