Subversive Resistance in Teacher Evaluation

• In Event: Disrupting the Discipline: Subversive Teaching in the Secondary English Language Arts Classroom

Abstract

Objectives
In this presentation we will share the case of Courtenay, an ELA teacher who creatively
subverted her administrators’ reductive enactments of teacher evaluation policy (Ball, Maguire,
& Braun, 2012) for justice-driven teaching. Driven by the pressure to demonstrate “Adequate
Yearly Progress,” Courtenay’s administrators enforced teacher evaluation that diminished ELA
teaching to a narrow list of suggested “best practices”. Frustrated by this, Courtenay began to
push back, and engaged in creative resistance by coupling strategic compliance with acts of
subversion. She leveraged the Danielson Framework for Teaching (1996) to engage her students
in analyses of power and privilege through readings of Foucault (1977). Courtenay’s case calls
into question current assumptions about school reform, providing an empowering example of
educator agency and classroom activism for social justice teaching.

Theoretical Perspective
This study engaged in a critical policy analysis drawing on Ball, Maguire, and Braun’s (2012)
theory of enactment. This theory is grounded in a Foucauldian understanding of power within
policy interpretation and translation, holding that policies normalize judgements through
examinations of teachers’ work. Yet, Ball, et al. assert that policy enactment in schools relies on
“interpretations of interpretations of interpretations” (p. 17), enabling teachers like Courtenay to
enact resistance in order to better serve their students and justice commitments. This orientation
guided coding of transcribed interviews, teaching and evaluation artifacts, and observational
field notes collected over the course of three semesters.

Data and Methods
Courtenay was a white, cisgender female teacher working at a semi-rural public high school.
Approximately 4% of Courtenay’s students identified as having mixed ethnic heritage, 3%
identify as Latinx, 2% Asian, 1% African American, and 90% White. Approximately 16% of the
students in Courtenay’s school were from households labeled as “low-income” however, Courtenay taught a greater proportion of these students which motivated her critical, justice-
oriented teaching. Data for this investigation was taken from two larger studies of teacher evaluation policy enactment. Courtenay’s case was selected for additional analysis due to her efforts to thread critical texts into her ELA teaching and engage in subversive teaching (Postman
& Weingartner, 1969) in the evaluation context.

Findings and Conclusions
By examining the intersection of reductive teacher evaluation with critically engaging ELA
teaching, we are afforded a new perspective on the problematic impacts of school reform (Croft,
Roberts, & Stehnhouse, 2015; Gilbert, 2014). Courtenay’s subversion of evaluation requirements
is consistent with existing scholarly findings demonstrating teacher push-back against restrictive
regulation (e.g., Clayton, 2017; Mills, 1997; Postman & Weingartener, 1969; Portelli &
Konecny, 2013; Zembylas, 2003). While tensions often exist between social justice and
regulation, Courtenay’s case demonstrates that the two may not be mutually exclusive for
English teachers. As she put it:
I understand that we have to do x, y, and z, but we’re going to have to figure out how to
do [evaluation requirements] at the same time that we are doing this thing that we
fundamentally believe in.
Driven by this perspective, Courtenay was able to negotiate resistance to policies that otherwise
may have imposed limitations on her and her students.

Authors

• Meghan A Kessler, University of Illinois Springfield

• Angela Leigh Masters, CUSD #3