ECER 200719-22 September
Contested Qualities of Educational Research
Session 3a
Reflection and Self Evaluation for Teachers and Trainers
Gerald Heidegger and Irina Michel
How should Self Evaluation be approached?
National and international discussions concentrate too much on quality assurance
Development of quality is strongly
connected to self evaluation and reflection of teachers and trainers
Reflection gives a systematic possibility to dectect actions to improve quality
Aspects of the history of quality management and its tranfer to the educational sector
- The idea of quality management stems from production industry (ISO 9000)
- During the last decade the idea of quality management has been broadly transfered to non-profit organisations (EFQM – European Foundation for Quality Management)
- The first non-profit sector that has taken over quality management was the care sector – soon stressing self-evaluation (because a lack of „hard“ outcomes)
- Today a lot of public schools go through evaluation processes.
- For disadvantaged young people: Our method QSED (Quality through Self-Evaluation and Development)
Contexts of Evaluation
common understanding of the
phenomenon that should be evaluated
historical and cultural embeddedness of the
phenomenon of evaluation
national annd international evaluation discussions
Output indicators or
personal development
From ISO 9000 via EFQM to Q2E, QSED
different evaluation interests, fears and,
targets
Carried out by OECD, CEDEFOP
Evaluation trends
Carried out by IDEA, IOCE
Indicator centered evaluation
innovative evaluation approaches
targeting empowerment or
participation
strict, highly structured procedures Measuring soft
outcomes
External EvaluationAdvantages• Seemingly „objective
„ Reliable Outcomes• Easily transferable
results• No self-deception• No cheating (???)
• Should be combined with (internal) self-evaluation
• In order to….
Disadvantages• To measure „soft“
outcomes is very difficult/impossible
• Processes are aiming at the targets of the external evaluation
• In this way processes are severely narrowed down
• Teachers/Trainers are objects of external powers
• They become disempowered
• They become passive
• avoid these
staff orientation(3)
staff contentedness
(7)
processes(5)
societal responsibility and image (8)
resources(4)
customer contentedness
/satisfaction (6)
company results(9)
criteria of EFQM
politic and strategy
(2)
leadership(1)
Figure 6.1: Criteria of EFQM
Existing European evaluation approaches: example EFQM
… basic instrument for focus evaluation…as basis for the
development of a quality handbook
… as basis for a quality comparison between
schools
...basic instrument for the development of a
school specific evaluation instrument
…help for the development of a school specific profile
of strengths and weaknesses
… basic instrument for the development of a
quality model
Q2E can be used as ...
Figure 6.4: Options for using Q2E
How should Self Evaluation be approached?
Quality Development through Self Evaluation with a Web Based
Tool? CVET actors from six European countries were involved in the
construction process from the beginning of the project
„REFLECTIVE EVALUATION“
The main product: a web based tool is centred on self evaluation of
teachers/trainers & adaptable to specific cultural/ institutional needs
FOR
People at risk in the labour market
(at threat of being fired; unemployed; women returners)
AND
Participants in conventional CVT courses !
Quality Developmentthrough Self Evaluation with a Web Based Tool?
• Interactive web based tool• Six dimensions (reflection areas)• Four Levels• Adaption through the users themselves • Pictures, audio, video • Multiple methods for reflection • Material pool
Six dimensions
Reflective Evaluation
Self-Evaluation &
Quality Development
CCollaboration &
Networking
AAssessment &Recognition
Work Work ConditionsConditions
Values &Values & RolesRoles
Teaching & Teaching & LearningLearning
next
Four Levels
• System
• Institution
• Team/Interpersonal
• Individual
ChallengesSystem Level
- Criteria for QM dictated from outside
- Stiff quality assurance instead of dynamic qualitydevelopment
Institutional Level- Adaption to market oriented results instead of own aims
Team-/Individual Level- Resentment to participate actively
- Feeling forced by QM
Solutions
SystemAcknowledgement of „soft“ outcomes
InstitutionsExternal evaluation combined with internal self evaluation
Team/IndividualFor an easier and continuing adjustment to self evaluation for example our self reliant quality development tool for higher motivation through interactivity and multimedia