Implementing performance management in England's primary schools

Emerald - Tập 54 Số 5/6 - Trang 468-481 - 2005
Andrew Brown1
1Wolfson College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

Tóm tắt

PurposeTo provide an overview of the various ways in which performance management is being implemented in England's primary schools.Design/methodology/approachA combination of documentary analysis, participant observation and audio‐taped interviews with primary school headteachers, deputy headteachers, teachers and school governors.FindingsInformation is provided on the following aspects of performance management in primary schools: the meaning and purposes of performance management in primary schools; education and training for performance management; formulation and content of performance management objectives; measuring the performance of heads and teachers; the effects of performance management on teachers' professional development; and perceptions concerning the appropriateness and reality of performance related pay.Research limitations/implicationsOwing to the relatively small number of research participants, the findings might not be entirely representative of the opinions and experiences of primary school headteachers, teachers and governors throughout England as a whole. The value of introducing performance management into primary schools remains an area for further research.Practical implicationsA useful paper both for managers who are reviewing the operational effectiveness of performance management within their own schools, as well as for organisations that are considering the introduction of performance management into their school system.Originality/valueThis paper might be of particular value to national governments and smaller organisations that wish to consider how to evaluate the effectiveness of the various options before introducing a system of performance management into their whole primary school network.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Armstrong, M. and Baron, A. (1998), Performance Management: The New Realities, Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, London. DfEE (2000a), Performance Management in Schools: Performance Management Framework, Department for Education and Employment, London. DfEE (2000b), Performance Management in Schools: Guidance Note, Department for Education and Employment, London. DfEE (2000c), Performance Management: Guidance for Governors, Department for Education and Employment, London. DfEE (2000d), Performance Management in Schools: Model Performance Management Policy, Department for Education and Employment, London. DfES (2001a), Guidance on the Threshold Process in 2001 (round 2) in England, Department for Education and Skills, London. DfES (2001b), Teachers' Standards Framework, Department for Education and Skills, London. DfES (2003a), Performance Management 2003: Support guide for Governors and Headteachers, Department for Education and Skills, London. DfES (2003b), Performance Management 2003: Support Guide for Governors and Headteachers Workbook, Department for Education and Skills, London. DfES (2004), National Standards for Headteachers, Department for Education and Skills, London. Elliot, K. and Sammons, P. (2001), “Using pupil performance data: three steps to heaven?”, Improving Schools, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 54‐65. Elliot, K., Smees, R. and Thomas, S. (1998), “Making the most of your data: school self‐evaluation using value added measures”, Improving Schools, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 59‐67. Foxman, D. (1997), Educational League Tables: For Promotion or Relegation? A Review of the Issues, Association of Teachers and Lecturers, London. Goldstein, H. (2001), “Using pupil performance data for judging schools and teachers: scope and limitations”, British Educational Research Journal, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 433‐42. Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. (1996), The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Karsten, S., Visscher, A. and De Jong, T. (2001), “Another side to the coin: the unintended effects of the publication of school performance data in England and France”, Comparative Education, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 231‐42. Mahony, P. and Hextall, I. (2001), “Performing and conforming”, in Gleeson, D. and Husbands, C. (Eds), The Performing School: Managing Teaching and Learning in a Performance Culture, RoutledgeFalmer, London. NAHT (1999), Response to the Green Paper “Teachers: Meeting the Challenge of Change” and Technical Consultation Paper on Pay and Performance Management, NAHT, Haywards Heath. Neely, A., Adams, C. and Kennerly, M. (2002), The Performance Prism: The Scorecard for Measuring and Managing Business Success, FT/Prentice‐Hall, London. Poister, T. (2003), Measuring Performance in Public and Nonprofit Organizations, Jossey‐Bass, San Francisco, CA. Rogers, S. (1999), Performance Management in Local Government, 2nd ed., Financial Times/Pitman, London. Williams, R. (2002), Managing Employee Performance: Design and Implementation in Organizations, Thomson, London. Wragg, T., Haynes, G., Chamberlin, R. and Wragg, C. (2003), “Performance‐related pay: the views and experiences of 1,000 primary and secondary headteachers”, Research Papers in Education, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 3‐24.