Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Accountable for what and to whom? Changing representations and new legitimation discourses among teachers under increased external control

  • Published:
Journal of Educational Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article discusses how teachers construct new representations about accountability and professionalism in the context of increased external control. Over the last decade in particular, concerns about the quality of schooling and the quality of teachers has been raised by both politicians and the public alike, while prominent policy responses have seen an increased emphasis on student performance and the external control of professional work. Based on a 1 year long fieldwork in a Norwegian municipality, the findings imply how forms of external accountability are accepted by many teachers as a necessary and desirable development, but also one that is resisted as the policies are seen to downplay the broader aims of education. In this tension of external and internal accountability, however, alternative discourses have developed. In particular, an emphasis on scientific knowledge and research-informed practice becomes an important representation for enhancing professional legitimacy and trust. By opening up the concept of accountability, it is possible to investigate how teachers’ representations of being accountable may take new forms when teacher professionalism is reconstructed in policy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This article follows Abelmann and Elmore’s definition of external accountability, but departs from their description of internal accountability. Abelmann and Elmore (1999) uses the term ‘internal accountability’ for accountability mechanisms that are internal to the schools, such as providing lesson copies or writing daily schedules on the blackboards.

References

  • Abelmann, C., & Elmore, R. (1999). When accountability knocks, will anyone answer?. Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allerup, S., Kovac, V., Kvåle, G., Langfeldt, G., & Skov, S. (2009). Evaluering av det Nasjonale kvalitetsvurderingssystemet for grunnopplæringen. FoU-rapport no. 8/2009. Kristiansand: Agderforskning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arfwedson, G. (1994). Nyare forskning om lärare: presentation och kritisk analys av huvudlinjer i de senaste decenniernas engelskspråkiga lärarforskning. Stockholm: HLS Förlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergesen, H. O. (2006). Kampen om kunnskapsskolen. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biesta, G. J. J. (2004). Education, accountability, and the ethical demand: Can the democratic potential of accountability be regained? Educational Theory, 54(3), 18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biesta, G. (2010). Good education in an age of measurement. Ethics, politics, democracy. Colorado: Paradigm Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blumer, H. (1956). What is wrong with social theory? American Sociological Review, 19(1), 8p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buzzelli, C., & Johnston, B. (2001). Authority, power, and morality in classroom discourage. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 873–884.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlgren, I., & Klette, K. (2008). Reconstructions of Nordic teachers: Reform policies and teachers’ work during the 1990s. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 52(2), 117–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carnoy, M., & Loeb, S. (2002). Does external accountability affect student outcomes? A cross-state analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(4), 305–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charlton, B. G. (2002). Audit, accountability, quality and all that: The growth of managerial technologies in UK Universities. In S. Prickett & P. Erskine-Hill (Eds.), Education! Education! Education! Managerial Ethics and the Law of Unintended Consequences. England: Imprint Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. (1990). Key issues facing state policymakers. In R. Elmore (Ed.), Restructuring schools: The next generation of educational reform. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

  • Cohen, J. L. (2008). “That’s not treating you as a professional”: Teachers constructing complex professional identities through talk. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 14(2), 79–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, A., Levin, B., & Campbell, C. (2009). The growing (but still limited) importance of evidence in education policy and practice. Journal of Educational Change. 10(2–3), 159–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Datnow, A. (2011). Collaboration and contrived collegiality: Revisiting Hargreaves in the age of accountability. Journal of Educational Change, 12, 147–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Day, C. (2002). School reform and transitions in teacher professionalism and identity. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(8), 16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elstad, E., & Sivesind, K. (2010). PISA: sannheten om skolen?. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evetts, J. (2003). The sociological analysis of professionalism: Occupational change in the modern world. International Sociology, 18, 395–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evetts, J. (2008). The management of professionalism: A contemporary paradox. In S. Gewirtz, P. Mahony, I. Hextall, & A. Cribb (Eds.), Changing teacher professionalism/international trends, challenges and ways forward. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, B. (2008). Liberal learning in centralizing states. In Strong states, weak schools: The benefits and dilemmas of centralized accountability (Vol. 16, pp. 1–29). Emerald: Research in Sociology of Education.

  • Furlong, J., Barton, L., Miles, S., Whiting, C., & Whitty, G. (2000). Teacher education in transition: Re-forming teaching professionalism. Buckingham: Open University Press.

  • Gee, J. P. (1999). An introduction to discourse analysis. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gewirtz, S. (2002). The managerial school post-welfarism and social justice in education. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodlad, J. I., Soder, R., & Sirotnik, K. (1990). The Moral Dimensions of teaching. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

  • Hardy, C., & Phillips, N. (2004). Discourse and Power. In D. Grant, C. Hardy, C. Oswick, & L. Putnam (Eds.), Handbook of organizational discourse. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heggen, K., Karseth, B., & Kyvik, S. (2010). The relevance of research for the improvement of education and professional practice. In S. Kyvik, & B. Lepori (Eds.), The research mission of higher education institutions outside the university sector striving for differentiation. Dortrecht: Springer.

  • Helgoy, I., & Homme, A. (2007). Towards a new professionalism in school? A comparative study of teacher autonomy in Norway and Sweden. European Educational Research Journal, 6(3), 232–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howarth, D. R. (2000). Discourse. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingersoll, R. M. (2003). Who controls teachers’ work? Power and accountability in America’s schools. MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeffrey, B. (2002). Performativity and primary teacher relations. Journal of Education Policy, 17(5), 531–546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, K. (2008). Profesjonslæring i endring (Prolearn). Populærvitenskapelig rapport til forskningsrådets KUL-program 2008.

  • Jensen, R., & Møller, J. (2012). School data as mediators in professional development. Journal of Educational Change,. doi:10.1007/s10833-012-9197-y.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joram, E. (2007). Clashing epistemologies: Aspiring teachers’, practicing teachers’, and professors’ beliefs about knowledge and research in education. Teaching & Teacher Education, 23(2), 123–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karseth, B., & Sivesind, K. (2010). Conceptualising curriculum knowledge within and beyond the national context. European Journal of Education, 45(1), 103–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitzinger, J. (1995). Introducing focus groups. British Medical Journal, 311, 299–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). Interviews. Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. Los Angeles: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • LaBoskey, V. K. (2006). ‘Reality check’: Teachers’ lives as policy critique. Teachers & Teaching, 12(2), 12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lasky, S. (2005). A sociocultural approach to understanding teacher identity, agency and professional vulnerability in a context of secondary school reform. Teaching & Teacher Education, 21(8), 18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, T. B., & Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutions and institutional work. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, & T. B. Lawrence (Eds.), Handbook of organization studies (2nd ed.). London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, B. A. U., Sutton, M., & Winstead, T. (2009). Education Policy as a Practice of ower: Theoretical Tools, Ethnographic Methods, Democratic Options. Educational Policy, 23(6), 29p.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Little, J. W. (2012). Understanding data use practices among teachers: The contribution of micro-process studies. American Journal of Education, 118(2), 143–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, T., Vulliamy, G., Webb, R., & Hill, M. (2005). Being a “professional” primary school teacher at the beginning of the 21st century: A comparative analysis of primary teacher professionalism in New Zealand and England. Journal of Education Policy, 20(5), 555–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacLure, M. (2003). Discourse in educational and social research. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mausethagen, S. (2013). A research review of the impact of accountability policies on teachers’ workplace relations. Educational Research Review, 9, 16–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mausethagen, S., & Granlund, L. (2012). Contested discourses of teacher professionalism: Current tensions between education policy and teachers’ union. Journal of Education Policy, 27(6), 815–833.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education. (2004). White Paper 30 (2003–2004). Kultur for læring. [A culture for Learning]. Oslo: The Ministry.

  • Molander, A., Grimen, H., & Eriksen, E. O. (2012). Professional discretion and accountability in the welfare state. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 29(3), 214–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moos, L., Krejsler, J., & Kofod, K. K. (2008). Successful principals: Telling or selling? On the importance of context for school leadership. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 11(4), 341–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Müller, J., & Hernández, F. (2010). On the geography of accountability: Comparative analysis of teachers’ experiences across seven European countries. Journal of Educational Change, 11, 307–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munthe, E., Malmo, K.-A., & Rogne, M. (2011). Teacher education reform and challenges in Norway. Journal of Education for Teaching, 37(4), s. 441–s. 450.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ng, J. (2006). Understanding the impact of accountability on preservice teachers’ decisions about where to teach. Urban Review, 38(5), 20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poulson, L. (1994). Accountability: A key-word in the discourse of educational reform. Journal of Education Policy, 11(5), 579–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puchta, C., & Potter, J. (2004). Focus group practice. London: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sachs, J. (2001). Teacher professional identity: Competing discourses, competing outcomes. Journal of Education Policy, 16(2), 13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sahlberg, P. (2010). Rethinking accountability in a knowledge society. Journal of Educational Change, 11, 45–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons, M., & Kelchtermans, G. (2008). Teacher professionalism in Flemish policy on teacher education: A critical analysis of the decree on teacher education (2006) in Flanders, Belgium. Teachers & Teaching: Theory and Practice, 14(4), 12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skedsmo, G. (2009). School governing in transition: Perspectives, purposes and perceptions of evaluation policy. Doctoral thesis, Department of Teacher Education and School Development, Faculty of Education, University of Oslo.

  • Slagstad, R. (1998). De nasjonale strateger. Oslo: Pax Forlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stronach, I., Corbin, B., McNamara, O., Stark, S., & Warne, T. (2002). Towards an uncertain politics of professionalism: Teacher and nurse identities in flux. Journal of Education Policy, 17(1), 30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sugrue, C., & Solbrekke, T. D. (2011). Professional responsibility: New horizons of praxis. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Svensson, L. G. (2006). New professionalism, trust and competence: Some conceptual remarks and empirical data. Current Sociology, 54(4), 579–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svensson, L. G., & Karlsson, A. (2008). Profesjoner, kontroll og ansvar. In A. Molander & L. I. Terum (Eds.), Profesjonsstudier. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trent, J. (2010). From rigid dichotomy to measured contingency. Hong Kong preservice teachers’ discursive construction of identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 906–913.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trent, J. (2011). “Four years on, I’m ready to teach”: Teacher education and the construction of teacher identities. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 17(5), 529–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Troman, G. (2008). Primary teacher identity, commitment and career in performative school cultures. British Educational Research Journal, 34(5), 15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Dijk, T. (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Leeuwen, T. (2007). Legitimation in discourse and communication. Discourse & Communication, 1(1), 91–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, R., Vulliamy, G., Hamalainen, S., Sarja, A., Kimonen, E., & Nevalainen, R. (2004). A comparative analysis of primary teacher professionalism in England and Finland. Comparative Education, 40(1), 83–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkins, C. (2011). Professionalism and the post-performative teacher: New teachers reflect on autonomy and accountability in the English school system. Professional Development in Education, 37(3), 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winther Jørgensen, M., & Phillips, L. (1999). Diskursanalyse som teori og metode. Frederiksberg: Roskilde Universitetsforlag Samfundslitteratur.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sølvi Mausethagen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mausethagen, S. Accountable for what and to whom? Changing representations and new legitimation discourses among teachers under increased external control. J Educ Change 14, 423–444 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-013-9212-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-013-9212-y

Keywords

Navigation