Reflections on a paradigm for school improvement: the potential complementarity of internal and external evaluation

High-quality education is associated with children’s positive learning and development experiences and supports the development of skills and dispositions that are central for future learning and wellbeing. ( 1). Studies have shown that monitoring quality can be related to better standards in programmes of learning. Researchers contend that increased audit and inspection activity by governments has been driven by a focus on promoting improvement ( 2).

In this chapter, we take a look at both external evaluation and internal evaluation (school self-evaluation) as a means of monitoring quality within the Irish education system, and we consider the potential complementarity of both in a paradigm for school improvement ( 3).

Inspection of educational settings by external agents is a feature of practice in most countries world-wide ( 4). External inspections are employed by many European education organisations as a means of monitoring and promoting the quality of provision in education settings ( 5). An external evaluation is generally undertaken by officials external to the setting with a mandate from a national or local authority. External inspection can prompt a move towards change, which can then result in educational improvement ( 6).

School inspections are considered to be performance and accountability mechanisms through which governments oversee and manage education ( 7). External inspections usually culminate in a summary of the positive aspects of provision and areas in need of improvement. The inspection and monitoring process can act as a catalyst for reflection and acceleration of developments on aspects of provision ( 8). Inspectorates generally suppose that development activities will be created from the inspection’s oral and written feedback ( 9). These actions may then result in enhancements in the standard of educational provision ( 10).

An inspection system can be an element of both a monitoring and an accountability system. It can serve a number of functions. Common aims across differing Inspectorates include accountability, support and promoting improvement. There is an important distinction to be made between a regulatory inspection system that focuses solely on compliance and accountability with reference to rules and regulations, and one that focuses on more developmental aspects of the work of the organisation being inspected ( 11).

The approach of the Department of Education Inspectorate in Ireland encompasses a clear focus on accountability and a strong commitment to inspection for improvement and capacity-building. The Code of Practice of the Inspectorate ( 12) sets out the general principles and standards in accordance with which members of the Inspectorate carry out their work. These principles govern the full range of inspectors’ evaluation and advisory work. The principle of ‘Development and Improvement’ underpins the emphasis on promoting improvement and capacity-building in settings; the principle of ‘Responsibility and Accountability’ commits the Inspectorate to providing ‘the public with an assurance of the quality of teaching and learning in publicly funded schools and other educational settings’, and that we will ‘report objectively and fairly… having taken the context of the school or setting into account' ( 13).

Historically, sole responsibility for the external evaluation of educational provision in Ireland has rested with the Inspectorate in the Department of Education. Section 13 of the Education Act 1998 ( 14) provides the Inspectorate with legislative quality assurance and advisory functions. Inspectors visit schools, early learning and care settings, and other education settings periodically and evaluate the quality of educational provision from an independent, external viewpoint and through a variety of inspection models. External evaluation is designed to evaluate key aspects of the work of the setting, to promote improvement and to build capacity while ensuring accountability.

In collaboration with school communities and stakeholders, the Inspectorate has developed a number of inspection models that have helped to ensure engagement with settings on a reasonably regular basis and for a variety of purposes ( 15). Some models, such as the child protection and safeguarding inspections, have a strong compliance focus. Others, such as the incidental inspections and follow-through inspections, are seen as being particularly beneficial in ensuring that recommendations for improvement are acted upon at school level, and that co-professional dialogue between setting leaders and inspectors is fostered, thereby building capacity for improvement ( 16).

School self-evaluation (SSE) is an internal process in which a school actively outlines and evaluates its own performance ( 17). This appraisal of the school by the school leads to a reflection on policy decisions and to the undertaking of actions ( 18). The ‘self’ in self-evaluation is key. SSE has been described as something that schools ‘do to themselves, by themselves and for themselves’ ( 19).

Vanhoof and Van Petegem (2010) conceptualise SSE as a cyclical process. In this process, a school independently describes and evaluates various aspects of its operations in a systematic way, guided by a global quality assurance framework, with the goal of identifying areas for improvement if needed ( 20). The SSE process gives settings a means of identifying strengths, addressing priorities, and of ensuring a whole-school focus on improving specific aspects of teaching and learning and leadership and management. It is an important process influencing the quality of education provided for children and young people ( 21).

School self-evaluation has become fundamental to school improvement approaches in many educational organisations ( 22). A report by the European Commission (2020) ( 23) states

SSE and external evaluation are now seen as mutually beneficial school improvement processes ( 24). Research on evaluation and improvement has found that the quality of teaching and learning in schools and settings is enhanced through a range of measures, including external and internal evaluation ( 25).

One of the leading thinkers in this area, David Nevo, states a combination of internal and external evaluation is possible and that teachers must be involved, consulted and highly respected in attempts to develop school evaluation ( 26). Even though a tension may exist, Nevo believes a way can be found to develop complementarity between the two processes. A well-integrated system of evaluation that combines the external perspective with the reflective and collective insights of school leaders, teachers, parents and students is perceived to be the most powerful agent of improvement ( 27).

The Synergies for Better Learning Project ( 28) highlights the complementarity of external and internal evaluation and the significant benefits for learners when effective self-evaluation in schools is complemented by external inspection. The authors note that ‘external evaluation can potentially play a key role in reinforcing and supporting school self-evaluation by either validating or challenging the school’s own findings’ (p.94). Internal evaluation can deepen the scope of external evaluation by increasing awareness of local issues and it can improve the interpretation of external findings by making them more sensitive to local needs. It can also improve the utilisation of external evaluation by diminishing resistance to it and increasing evaluation mindedness ( 29).

Internationally, there has been a substantial growth in the use of SSE as an internal mechanism of school review and improvement in schools. A review of education policies by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) found that SSE is a component of the school accountability system in twenty-seven countries with available data. In an era of school autonomy, greater policy attention is given to areas such as school leadership, capacity for schools to self-manage (including self-evaluation and the monitoring of the quality of teaching and learning) and ability to implement improvement processes ( 30). In Spain, Bulgaria and Greece, school principals and teachers view SSE as a reflective, collaborative process that supports school improvement (31).

In Hong Kong, SSE is a critical way of working for school leaders. It is part of a developmental cycle of school improvement and is used as an internal mechanism to lead and manage organisational change. It supports evidence-based organisational change and school leaders in embedding a self-renewal framework in their daily managerial practices. Schools improve continuously as there is an embedded self-renewal framework and a set of valid, reliable, and school-based performance indicators available. This supports school leaders to lead and manage change effectively and efficiently ( 32).

In recent years, Ireland, as with other countries in the OECD, has developed more comprehensive evaluation and assessment frameworks which advocate that more responsibility be given to the school itself, through increased focus on SSE ( 33). SSE in Ireland is designed as a process of collaborative, internal school review that is focused on school improvement. It is viewed as an inclusive, participatory process founded on thorough, reliable information from a variety of sources, including school management, all staff, learners and their parents/guardians ( 34). It is designed as a process of reflective enquiry leading to action planning for improvement that is informed by evidence gathered within each school’s unique context. The process is intended to enable schools to use this evidence to identify meaningful and specific targets and actions for improvement that focus on teaching, learning, wellbeing, equity and inclusion. It supports schools to create and implement improvement plans, to measure their progress, and to identify their achievements.

In Ireland, both external evaluation and internal evaluation (SSE) are underpinned by the same quality framework. The framework is intended to be used by schools to support their engagement with the six-step SSE process ( 35). It sets out what effective and highly effective learning, teaching, leadership and management practices look like. Having the one framework to support both external evaluation and SSE is designed to foster a complementarity between the two processes. In the quality framework, school leaders (principal, deputy and others) are identified as responsible for leading the school’s engagement in a continuous process of self-evaluation. The framework contains a number of statements that describe what positive and effective SSE processes look like in practice. For example,

The Whole-School Evaluation – Management Leadership and Learning (WSE-MLL) model of inspection takes account of schools’ identified priorities and their engagement with, and the outcomes of, self-evaluation while remaining sensitive to the individual context factors of schools at varying stages of their SSE journey.

(Extract from WSE-MLL Primary)

(Extract from WSE-MLL Post-Primary)

The Inspectorate recognises that for SSE to be truly effective, schools need to own the process. Through SSE, schools can shape their own improvement agenda by identifying priority areas for development and by planning for improvement in a way that takes account of their own unique school context. Balanced with this view is the recognition that schools also work within a system of national requirements, including those relating to child safeguarding (including child protection and anti-bullying) and wellbeing. There are also expectations relating to curriculum, inclusion and equity, digital education and education for sustainable development.

For SSE to work it needs to balance school and system goals. A significant challenge for schools is to maintain a level of autonomy and to achieve meaningful improvement in a context where there are expectations on them to use SSE to give effect to a number of national initiatives. As one stakeholder expressed, these requirements in effect ‘remove the self from self-evaluation'.

Since its formal introduction in 2012, the Department and the Inspectorate have provided a range of supports to assist schools in embedding SSE. These include the publication of School Self-Evaluation: Guidelines for Schools ( 37) and a range of circulars.

During the first cycle of SSE (2012-2016), schools were urged to create and implement improvement plans for teaching and learning, with a specific emphasis on literacy and numeracy ( 38). In the second cycle of SSE (2016-2020), while teaching and learning continued to be the focus, schools had a degree of flexibility in relation to the selection of the curriculum or aspects of teaching and learning on which they intended to concentrate. This stage was extended in light of the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. In this extended phase, schools were encouraged to use the SSE process to tackle challenges brought about by the pandemic, to finish any outstanding SSE tasks, and to focus on areas the school had identified as priorities. For further details on the first and second stages of the SSE journey, please refer to the Chief Inspector’s Report (2016 – 2020) ( 39).

The most recent publication, School Self-Evaluation: Next Steps September 2022 – June 2026, including Circular 0056/2022 ( 40) considers the experience of SSE up to 2022 and provides guidance on how schools can further develop and implement SSE in a way that ensures that school and system goals for equity, inclusion, teaching, learning and wellbeing can be achieved. The circular included in the document outlines the requirements for schools regarding SSE during the period September 2022 – June 2026.

SSE has been a transformative journey for many Irish schools. As Professor Harold Hislop noted in his 2017 public lecture, ‘when teachers examine their own individual and collective practice in a constructive yet structured way, they can bring about significant improvement in the learning of students' ( 41). Nationally and internationally, there is evidence of how SSE can improve school leadership, contribute to shared values and lead to increased sense of teamwork, high staff morale and a strong sense of professionalism ( 42). Inspectors in Ireland have noted similar enablers of SSE in schools where meaningful, internal evaluation practice is well embedded as an ongoing way of working. In such schools, SSE has empowered school communities, enhancing the agency of leaders, teachers, parents and learners through collaborative reflection and internal review.

As Coolahan et al. (2017) noted, SSE has helped to support ‘greater collaborative and collegial work within school communities, breaking away from a more traditional model in Ireland of teachers working in isolation with king/queen of the classroom syndrome’ ( 43).

The Department of Education has continued to develop its thinking about SSE and recognises the need to support schools in developing their capacity to engage with meaningful self-evaluation practices. The current SSE cycle (2022-2026) aims to assist schools to make the process as effective as it can be to meet the needs of the children and young people they serve ( 44). The Inspectorate’s ongoing advisory engagements with schools and stakeholders help provide a range of perspectives on how SSE is working in schools. These engagements also inform the Inspectorate's deliberations on how effectively SSE is working and how it might continue to evolve to ensure that its primary purposes in the Irish system - school improvement and capacity building - are met.

In a survey conducted by the Inspectorate in 2022, principals and teachers generally reported a positive impact of SSE in their schools ( 45). They indicated that the process had improved teaching and learning practices, strengthened leadership, and promoted a reflective culture within schools. These findings correlate with the findings from academic research. For example, Skerritt et al. (2023) ( 46) reported that in schools in their research ‘SSE was spoken of in very positive terms and was promoted as being very active” (p. 707). Similarly, McNamara et al. (2021) ( 47) found that principals, deputy principals and teachers were ‘overwhelmingly positive’ about SSE. Key elements such as ‘collaboration with all stakeholders’ in addition to other conceptual aspects of SSE, such as ‘reflective practice and evidenced-based processes that focused on enhancing teaching and learning’, were well received (p. 5). They also found that there was a general understanding regarding SSE and, overall, schools believed that SSE should continue to be mandatory.

However, it is evident that schools are at different stages in their engagement with SSE, particularly in effectively incorporating the perspectives of parents and students in the SSE process. The Inspectorate survey findings indicated that the level and depth of engagement that was happening with parents and students needed to improve. Not all principals were confident that they had the means by which they could include parents effectively in the SSE process ( 48). Brown et al. (2020a) ( 49) replicated these findings in their research.

They found that the opportunities for students to get involved in decision-making processes in schools were below international average, despite students valuing participation. In terms of limited parental involvement, they surmised that there may well remain a legacy in Ireland where education is left to others, which originally was the church but now falls to school management and teachers. Brown et al. (2020b) ( 50) acknowledge the aspirations of the Inspectorate to involve all stakeholders in the SSE process. However, they found that the typical practice in schools is that SSE teams generally comprise authority figures such as teachers and school management.

The Inspectorate’s advisory visits between 2018 and 2023 revealed a spectrum of SSE engagement among schools. Some have established robust self-evaluation cultures, while others have yet to engage meaningfully with the process. A number of schools view SSE primarily as a compliance exercise rather than a tool for genuine improvement.

SSE that leads to school improvement requires agentic teachers who are reflective members of a teaching team, with an interest and a voice in whole-school matters that impact on teaching, learning and assessment. By collecting and exploring data, asking questions of themselves, their learners, and their parents about how teaching takes place and how well pupils are learning, teachers can readily identify what needs to change to get better outcomes for pupils.

A school’s policy-making capacity is a key factor in school self-evaluation. Jan Vanhoof at al. (2011) ( 51) advise that ‘A pre-condition for good-quality self-evaluations is that the school must have the necessary expertise in-house and/or call in external support. If schools have a limited learning capacity and a negative attitude with regard to self-evaluation, they are not going to be transformed overnight into institutions capable of carrying out excellent self-evaluations. Establishing good-quality self-evaluation processes requires the right knowledge, skills and attitudes. An incremental approach and a strategy which does not treat schools on a “one size fits all” basis are to be recommended’.

Ongoing conversations by inspectors with stakeholders, along with internal discussions in the Inspectorate and the wider Department, have provided insights that will inform future thinking on a paradigm for school improvement in the Irish education system. These include feedback such as:

Additional views expressed by stakeholders included the creation of opportunities for collaboration with other schools and simplifying guidelines and supporting documents. Research findings from both national and international studies on the potential of polycentric inspection, which involves collaborating schools and agencies working together to improve education provision with support from an external actor like a school inspectorate, are favorable ( 52). The need for training in relation to gathering, processing and interpreting school information has been highlighted in feedback and is also reflected in recent research findings ( 53).

The Inspectorate continues to support schools through SSE advisory visits. There is also a dedicated SSE section on the Department of Education website ( 54) which contains many useful resources. As the education system emerges from the third cycle of SSE, a reimagined school improvement paradigm, shaped by the voices and experiences of all stakeholders, has the potential to further strengthen school improvement and bring significant enrichment and improved outcomes for all learners in Ireland.

Innovative ideas are emerging from the advisory stakeholder group as to how the Inspectorate might

• Promote a sustainable school improvement model that is collaborative, evidence-based, and connects internal and external evaluation more closely
• Enhance the impact of school improvement processes by fostering school agency and strengthening the professional capacity of teachers to engage in meaningful, impactful school improvement initiatives.
• Empower schools to prioritise improvements relevant to their context while maintaining teaching, learning (including assessment), wellbeing, inclusion and equity as key focus areas for continuous school improvement
• Build greater capacity of school leaders and teachers in identifying evidence, gathering, and analysing data, setting targets, monitoring, and reporting
• Encourage the agency of students, teachers, and schools.

Effective evaluation is a process of thorough examination and discussion of findings and of engagement with additional information ( 55). Studies have proposed that evaluation cannot be adequately conducted in a single evaluation and that evaluation works best when it takes into account the school’s SSE process ( 56). Hattie et al. ( 57) advocate that educational success lies in the critical nature of collaboration among stakeholders and the strength of believing that together, administrators, faculty and students can accomplish great things. This is the power of collective efficacy. Relationships in inspections are a key feature in facilitating school improvement ( 58).

Central to any advances in optimising the potential complementarity of external evaluation and SSE are openness, trust and respectful engagement between all. Reciprocity is an important dimension in our work; transparency, open communication and inclusion of the views of learners, schools, parents, teachers and boards are essential as nobody has a definitive claim to truth ( 59).

The Inspectorate has established a team to look at how internal and external evaluation could be enhanced. The team is currently engaging with partners across Europe and beyond to see how they have combined internal and external evaluation. The Inspectorate aims to build on the strengths of the SSE process, while empowering school leaders and teachers in their reflections on the quality of school provision and practice and in their internal school improvement processes and actions. The Inspectorate will also strive to more effectively integrate internal and external evaluation processes and outcomes.

The Inspectorate looks forward to continuing this journey of collaboration and shared learning with stakeholders to articulate a paradigm for school improvement in which the impact of the potential complementarity of external and internal evaluation can be strengthened.