How Do Accountability Mechanisms Shape Culture, Identity, and Dispositions to Teaching?

• In Event: The Enactment of Accountability, Learning Standards, and Data Use Policies in Education: Global Perspectives

Abstract

Objectives
Drawing on data collected from multiple schools in the U.S., this paper examines the relationships between accountability policy mechanisms and teacher-level consequences. Specifically, the authors examine how mechanisms of testing, evaluation, and dis/incentivisation shape teacher culture, teacher identity, and disposition to teaching.

Perspectives
Globally, teacher accountability policies have become rooted in testing, evaluation and dis/incentivisation as a means for (re)directing teacher practice, behavior, and ‘quality’. Advocates suggest such systems will improve teacher agency and output. Yet, scholars have found these policies and practices lead to a myriad of undesirable consequences for teachers. This includes diminished autonomy in decision-making processes, as these systems produce cultures where individuals are discouraged from trusting their expertise and practicing their professional discretion in their classrooms and schools (Bradbury, 2019; Taubman, 2009). Additionally, teacher accountability policies are shown to narrow curriculum, stifle collaboration, and create a culture of distrust and teachers-as-technicians (Author, 2018; Hardy, 2018). In policy contexts with particularly aggressive teacher accountability climates (e.g., U.S., U.K.), these consequences have fundamentally reshaped teachers’ identities and stances toward teaching.

Methods and Data Sources
This paper draws on data collected from a qualitative case study that investigated the ways in which teacher accountability policies impacted how teachers saw themselves and their teaching practice. Interviews were conducted with 31 teachers across two upper elementary schools located in mid-sized, U.S. cities. Teachers represented a wide range of subjects, including both traditionally tested subjects (e.g., reading/language arts and mathematics) and non-tested subjects (e.g., music, history).

The authors analyzed the interview data in five steps: data reading, inductive and axial coding (Charmaz, 2014; Strauss & Corbin, 2014), analytic memoing, checking for disconfirming evidence, and review of interpretations. The authors developed a framework based on instructional improvement cultures (Author, 2017; Firestone & Gonzalez, 2007) and policy technologies of performativity, markets, and managerialism (Ball, 2003) to examine culture, identity, and dispositions towards test-based accountability in their schools.

Findings
Our analysis found that teachers operated within cultures of accountability where their ‘quality’ was defined by numbers. The teachers measured student progress through test performance, and they explained and interpreted such performance through their own perceptions of students and families. They used interventions (e.g., computer-based programs, interventionist coaching) in their approach to instructional improvement, and they used rubrics and student outputs to guide their learning and teaching decisions.

We also found that ‘improvement’ was often defined as increasing test or evaluation numbers, rather than improving practice or fostering collaboration. For example, the teachers engaged in strategies to boost scores on their evaluations, which was encouraged and facilitated by administrators (e.g., targeted coaching and professional development). This emphasis on numbers led to teachers measuring their worth through numbers and valuing compliance over professional discretion.

Significance
Although accountability and data-driven decision-making is not inherently bad, problems may emerge when accountability tools and techniques supersede teacher expertise, training and experience. We argue that this undermines the value of professional discretion that is necessary for responding to the immediate needs of students.

Authors

• Priya Goel La Londe, The University of Hong Kong

• Jessica Holloway, Australian Catholic University