La Narcovalija Contextualización

The first research question aims to capture principals‟ and teachers‟ experiences and perceptions of SI in primary schools in SVG. This section assists with achieving that purpose.

Dean (1995) identified a key finding from a study conducted in fourteen English primary and secondary schools between 1992 and 1993, around the beginning of the Ofsted system of inspection. Firstly, regarding the planning and preparation for inspection, some head teachers and teachers responded positively to being included in the planning process, and knowing from inspectors‟ explanation the nature of the inspection. Although this was so, there was still some degree of anxiety and worry in schools about being inspected (Dean, 1995). Moreover, according to Dean, teachers and principals raised some concerns about the credibility of inspectors. They were concerned about inspectors‟ experience and expertise to inspect primary schools in particular. In Dean‟s study, principals and teachers were of the perception that the inspectors being present in classes appeared to have had

39

some negative impact on teachers and students. Chapman (2001) also found this to be the case.

Wilcox and Gray (1994) conducted a study of three primary school in three LEA‟s in England that speak to teachers‟ and principals‟ experiences and perceptions of SI. In two of the schools in the study, the participants felt the inspection did not result in new insights. However, some participants felt that the inspection was beneficial to the current and future context of their school. In another school, they had difficulty accepting the fact that a school could have good relations and yet still have unsatisfactory leadership, teaching, and learning. Participants expressed the feeling that the two to five days, allocated to the inspection was inadequate to make a judgment of the school. Teachers expressed a preference for SSE over SI. The experiences and perceptions gathered by Wilcox and Gray (1994) were just about two years after Ofsted came into effect. Comparatively, this is a similar period to my own study.

In another study, Milewski (2012) did an oral history case study of teachers who taught in primary schools in different regions of Ontario, Canada during the 1930 to learn about their experiences with SI at that time. She found that teachers often had advance information about the inspector‟s impending arrival. This then became a „potent factor‟ (Milewski, 2012, p.650) in the teachers‟ work as the anticipation of the inspector‟s visit brought fear and anxiety on teachers (Milewski, 2012). She goes on to say that, teachers recalled their experiences of school inspection as surveillance and a disciplinary function of their work. Jeffery and Woods (1996) and Perryman (2006) also see Ofsted inspections as surveillance of teachers. Further, Milewski (2012) elaborates that in the teachers‟ views the inspectors did not encourage creativity in teaching and ensured that teachers adhered to a prescriptive curriculum. This is in effect ensuring that they are accountable to the inspector and consequently the government, parents and children. Milewski‟s historical study of teachers‟ experiences with SI in the 1930s is similar to some experiences in the contemporary context of SI.

Principals too have experienced negative effects of SI (de Wolf & Janssens, 2007; Ouston & Davies, 1998). Ouston and Davies (1998) stressed that head teachers complained that the number of inspections placed pressure on them. In the week

40

leading up to an inspection, head teachers became nervous about the process (Jeffrey & Woods, 1996). It would appear, however, that a negative or positive effect of SI on head teachers relates to whether they are new or established in the position. Fergusson et al (1999) found that new head teachers did not feel as negatively affected by school inspection as did established head teachers.

SI had similar effects on teachers as it did on principals. Many teachers face stress because of the SI process (Case et al., 2000; Jeffrey & Woods, 1996; Brimblecombe et al., 1995). Case et al (2000) reveal that in spite of receiving favourable inspection reports after observation of their lessons teachers low self- image did not lessen during inspection. Further, inspection often led to absenteeism and illness among teachers (de Wolf & Janssens, 2007; Case et al., 2000). Case et al (2000) also report that there was fatigue among teachers for an extended period following Ofsted. Additionally, many dedicated and motivated teachers displayed nervousness because of school inspection (Fergusson et al., 1999). These features indicate that there are considerable psychological and physiological effects of SI on principals and teachers (Brimblecombe et al., 1995). The physiological effects ranged from stress, sleepless nights, eczema, alcoholism, to a reduction in the quality of family life. Given the tendency for teaching to be female dominated, a study of gender differences of inspection (Brimblecombe et al. 1995) found that female teachers were more likely to experience nervousness because of inspection. These are all negative side effects of inspection that Ehren and Visscher (2006) speak to earlier in their theory of SI effects.

Building on this, de Wolf and Janssens (2007) conducted a study that explored the unintended negative consequences of SI. In their view window dressing was the most known of the intended strategic behaviours in which schools engaged. Window dressing is, „the creation of proactive and reactive arrangements, which are generated simply and solely to be assessed favourably by the supervisor‟ (de Wolf & Janssens, 2007, p.382). What happens in window dressing is schools take measures prior to and after inspection to ensure that inspectors give them a positive feedback. Again, Ehren and Visscher (2006) articulate these unintended consequences in their work.

41

Another term used to speak to the intended strategic behaviour is gaming. Regarding gaming, Chapman (2001, p. 70) claims, „some teachers play the inspection game and prepare to provide inspectors with what they want to see by changing their practice to conform to the Ofsted orthodoxy but only for inspection week‟. I consider gaming to be deception since it only serves a temporary function and benefits teachers and not the long-term teaching and learning process. In adding to this view, teachers sometimes choreographed performances for the Ofsted inspectors (Case et al., 2000). Clearly, this reveals that staging schools take place in an effort to provide a façade for inspectors. Teachers perform for the inspectors giving them what they want to see during the inspection (Perryman, 2009). One of the things my research explores is the critical role teaching and learning, leadership and management play in SI and its achievement of school improvement. In light of this, I discuss, in the upcoming section, the literature in relation to them.