As a result of the present investigation, four major categories of evaluation system may be identified, depending on what is evaluated (see Figure 1). Individual schools are at the heart of the evaluation system in the first two kinds.
In both these categories, schools as entities are evaluated by an inspectorate in the case of external evalu- ation, and also by the school community during (compulsory or strongly recommended) internal evalu- ation. Evaluation conducted by the inspectorate is of great importance in almost all countries. In many of them, it is supplemented by inspections carried out by specific government departments.
Most of these countries have drawn up lists of national criteria for the purposes of external evaluation. Furthermore, in some countries (especially those in the second group) pupil attainment may be used as a basis for evaluating the education system.
The difference between the two categories hinges on whether or not teachers are evaluated. Alongside the evaluation of schools as entities, teachers in the first group of countries are evaluated on an individual basis by their school heads in nearly all cases.
This applies to Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, Austria, Portugal and the United Kingdom (Northern
Ireland), as well as to Latvia and Poland. It is also common practice in the Czech Republic, Estonia and Slovakia, bearing in mind that, in these countries, the educational providers also act as evaluators, as they do in Liechtenstein in which teachers are externally evaluated.
In Hungary, the situation is similar, but schools are evaluated by the local authorities and not an inspectorate or central body. Secondary education in France also tends to reflect this pattern, while retaining the external evaluation of teachers alongside their evaluation by the school head.
The United Kingdom (with the exception of Northern Ireland) and Lithuania are in a comparable position, with the addition of two further elements, namely the evaluation of schools by the local authorities which are themselves evaluated by central government. In Lithuania, the evaluation of teachers on an individual basis is conducted by the teachers’ evaluation committee at the school.
Finally, Cyprus may be associated with this group in that it simultaneously carries out evaluation of teachers and schools, the first of which is both internal and external and the second exclusively external.
In the second group of countries, the system of evaluation is concerned solely with the evaluation of schools as entities. Teachers are not evaluated on an individual basis as a matter of course. They may be under exceptional circumstances, particularly if they are candidates for promotion.
Belgium (the Flemish Community), Spain, Iceland, Romania and Slovenia display features of this model. Italy is in a similar position, although it does not provide for the external evaluation of schools. The system of
evaluation is based essentially on the internal evaluation of schools. Malta is also in a comparable position: the internal evaluation of schools as entities is compulsory, whereas external evaluation is still very largely focused on individual teachers.
FIGURE A: ASPECTS CENTRAL TO THE SYSTEM OF EVALUATION, COMPULSORY EDUCATION, 2000/01
In the other two categories of country, schools are not central to the system of evaluation.
The third group of countries is characterised by (generally external) evaluation concerned first and fore- most with teachers.This may be go hand in hand with external evaluation of the school as a whole by spe- cialist evaluators who focus on relatively narrow aspects.The internal evaluation of schools as entities is vir- tually non-existent or not very widespread.
In 2001, this was the situation in Belgium (the French and German-speaking Communities), Greece, France (in primary education), Luxembourg (in primary education) and Bulgaria. Most of these countries are moving gradually towards the evaluation of schools but this approach has not really yet become fully established, either because schools have little autonomy, or because the evaluation of schools is a politically sensitive issue. In sec- ondary education in Luxembourg, teachers are evaluated by the school head.
Source: Eurydice. Schools as entities and teachers
(and also local authorities in some countries) Solely schools as entities Primarily teachers Primarily the local authorities
FR
In the last group of countries, the system of evaluation focuses on the local authorities, which are respon- sible for evaluating the education they provide and themselves evaluated by the central authorities. This latter evaluation is in general conducted by national agencies. In these countries, individual schools are not central to the system of evaluation. Decentralisation has been largely towards the municipalities, which are empowered to delegate their responsibilities to schools and they do so virtually whenever they wish. The logic of the situation requires that municipalities should be the central focus of evaluation. Teachers are generally not evaluated on an individual basis. On the other hand, pupil attainment is used everywhere as a basis for evaluating the system.
This is the situation in the Nordic countries except Iceland. Evaluation of educational provision is carried out by the municipality which, in several of these countries, forwards the information to central government. Internal evaluation (self-evaluation) exists everywhere but is not always compulsory. However, the evaluation of schools as entities by the central government occurs on an occasional or secondary basis in Denmark (where it is car- ried out by special departments and undergoing development at the EVA). Central government evaluation is also gathering momentum in Sweden where the NAE, which has ensured supervision of compliance with regu- lations in schools since the early 1990s, is assuming a higher degree of responsibility for evaluating schools as entities with effect from 2003.
Very clearly, a relationship may be established between the significance of the school as an entity in the system of evaluation of any particular country and the degree of school autonomy in that country. Where schools are not central to that system (as in the case of systems in which the evaluation of teachers or local authorities is the main priority), their autonomy appears to be more limited.