IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v56y2016icp88-98.html

Toward a model of school inspections in a polycentric system

Author

Listed:
  • Janssens, Frans J.G.
  • Ehren, Melanie C.M.

Abstract

Many education systems are developing towards more lateral structures where schools collaborate in networks to improve and provide (inclusive) education. These structures call for bottom-up models of network evaluation and accountability instead of the current hierarchical arrangements where single schools are evaluated by a central agency. This paper builds on available research about network effectiveness to present evolving models of network evaluation. Network effectiveness can be defined as the achievement of positive network level outcomes that cannot be attained by individual organizational participants acting alone. Models of network evaluation need to take into account the relations between network members, the structure of the network, its processes and its internal mechanism to enforce norms in order to understand the achievement and outcomes of the network and how these may evolve over time. A range of suitable evaluation models are presented in this paper, as well as a tentative school inspection framework which is inspired by these models. The final section will present examples from Inspectorates of Education in Northern Ireland and Scotland who have developed newer inspection models to evaluate the effectiveness of a range of different networks.

Suggested Citation

  • Janssens, Frans J.G. & Ehren, Melanie C.M., 2016. "Toward a model of school inspections in a polycentric system," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 88-98.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:56:y:2016:i:c:p:88-98
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2016.03.012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718915300136
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2016.03.012?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:cup:apsrev:v:55:y:1961:i:04:p:831-842_12 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Robert Newcombe, 2003. "From client to project stakeholders: a stakeholder mapping approach," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(8), pages 841-848.
    3. McLaughlin, John A. & Jordan, Gretchen B., 1999. "Logic models: a tool for telling your programs performance story," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 65-72.
    4. Mayne, John, 2008. "Contribution analysis: An approach to exploring cause and effect," ILAC Briefs 52525, Institutional Learning and Change (ILAC) Initiative.
    5. Roux, A.V.D., 2011. "Complex systems thinking and current impasses in health disparities research," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 101(9), pages 1627-1634.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bolte, Gabriele, 2018. "Epidemiologische Methoden und Erkenntnisse als eine Grundlage für Stadtplanung und gesundheitsfördernde Stadtentwicklung," Forschungsberichte der ARL: Aufsätze, in: Baumgart, Sabine & Köckler, Heike & Ritzinger, Anne & Rüdiger, Andrea (ed.), Planung für gesundheitsfördernde Städte, volume 8, pages 118-134, ARL – Akademie für Raumentwicklung in der Leibniz-Gemeinschaft.
    2. McGill, Elizabeth & Er, Vanessa & Penney, Tarra & Egan, Matt & White, Martin & Meier, Petra & Whitehead, Margaret & Lock, Karen & Anderson de Cuevas, Rachel & Smith, Richard & Savona, Natalie & Rutter, 2021. "Evaluation of public health interventions from a complex systems perspective: A research methods review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 272(C).
    3. Jiaxin Huang & Shui Ming Li, 2024. "Data-Driven Analysis of Supply Chain Integration’s Impact on Procurement Performance in International EPC Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-32, December.
    4. Tim Benijts, 2014. "A Business Sustainability Model for Government Corporations. A Belgian Case Study," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 204-216, March.
    5. Wasserman, Deborah L., 2010. "Using a systems orientation and foundational theory to enhance theory-driven human service program evaluations," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 67-80, May.
    6. Peyton, David J. & Scicchitano, Michael, 2017. "Devil is in the details: Using logic models to investigate program process," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 156-162.
    7. Jason M. Orr & Jonathon P. Leider & Margaret J. Gutilla, 2023. "System approaches in governmental public health: Findings from an analysis of the literature," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 159-169, January.
    8. Matt Andrews, 2022. "This is How to Think About and Achieve Public Policy Success," CID Working Papers 413, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    9. Wifo, 2021. "WIFO-Monatsberichte, Heft 10/2021," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 94(10), October.
    10. Sobelson, Robyn K. & Young, Andrea C., 2013. "Evaluation of a federally funded workforce development program: The Centers for Public Health Preparedness," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 50-57.
    11. Wu, Huang & Shen, Jianping & Jones, Jeffrey & Gao, Xingyuan & Zheng, Yunzheng & Krenn, Huilan Y., 2019. "Using logic model and visualization to conduct portfolio evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 69-75.
    12. Vinícius P. Rodrigues & Daniela C. A. Pigosso & Jakob W. Andersen & Tim C. McAloone, 2018. "Evaluating the Potential Business Benefits of Ecodesign Implementation: A Logic Model Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-26, June.
    13. Janger, Jürgen & Schubert, Torben & Andries, Petra & Rammer, Christian & Hoskens, Machteld, 2017. "The EU 2020 innovation indicator: A step forward in measuring innovation outputs and outcomes?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 30-42.
    14. Jürgen Janger & Agnes Kügler, 2018. "Innovationseffizienz. Österreich im internationalen Vergleich," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 61111.
    15. Fangyuan Chang & Andrea Eriksson & Britt Östlund, 2020. "Discrepancies between Expected and Actual Implementation: The Process Evaluation of PERS Integration in Nursing Homes," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-18, June.
    16. Louise R. Manfredi & Meriel Stokoe & Rebecca Kelly & Seyeon Lee, 2021. "Teaching Sustainable Responsibility through Informal Undergraduate Design Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-13, July.
    17. Ahmad Salman & Mastura Jaafar & Diana Mohamad & Mana Khoshkam, 2023. "Understanding Multi-stakeholder Complexity & Developing a Causal Recipe (fsQCA) for achieving Sustainable Ecotourism," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(9), pages 10261-10284, September.
    18. Laura Kreiling & Ahmed Bounfour, 2020. "A practice-based maturity model for holistic TTO performance management: development and initial use," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(6), pages 1718-1747, December.
    19. Reynolds, Joanna & Egan, Matt & Renedo, Alicia & Petticrew, Mark, 2015. "Conceptualising the ‘community’ as a recipient of money – A critical literature review, and implications for health and inequalities," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 88-97.
    20. Hyun-Kyu KANG, 2015. "Development of Guideline for Preliminary Feasibility Study on Government R&D Programs in Korea," Proceedings of International Academic Conferences 2805212, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:56:y:2016:i:c:p:88-98. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.