Abstract
This chapter aims to outline a process of school collaboration with peer review at its heart, conceived at UCL Institute of Education by David Godfrey and piloted by the authors for the first time in 2016/17 in London. We outline some of the learning that has resulted for participating school staff and reflect on what we have learned as facilitators and evaluators of Research-informed Peer Review (RiPR). The chapter looks at the principles and theories that underpin RiPR and its relationship to other research-practice models. We present findings from follow up surveys two years since completing the first RiPR cycle, and apply additional learning from its implementation and adaptation in Chile (see also Chap.7). Finally we look at how evaluation theory is linked to evaluation policy in this model and on the potential impact of RiPR on teacher collective efficacy
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Alkin, M. C., & Christie, C. A. (2004). An evaluation theory tree. In Evaluation roots: Tracing theorists’ views and influences (pp. 12–65). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Argyris, C. (1976). Single-loop and double-loop models in research on decision making. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(3), 363–375.
Baker-Doyle, K., & Yoon, S. A. (2010). Making expertise transparent: Using technology to strengthen social networks in teacher professional development. In A. Daly (Ed.), Social network theory and educational change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117–148.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.
Belfi, B., Gielen, S., De Fraine, B., Verschueren, K., & Meredith, C. (2015). School-based social capital: The missing link between schools’ socioeconomic composition and collective teacher efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 45, 33–44.
Biesta, G. (2007). Why “what works” won’t work: Evidence-based practice and the democratic deficit in educational research. Educational Theory, 57(1), 1–22.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2005). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. London: Granada Learning.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). New York: Greenwood.
Brown, C., Daly, A., & Liou, Y. H. (2016). Improving trust, improving schools: Findings from a social network analysis of 43 primary schools in England. Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 1(1), 69–91.
Bryk, A., Sebring, P., Allensworth, E., & Luppescu, S. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Christie, C. A., & Lemire, S. T. (2019). Why evaluation theory should be used to inform evaluation policy. American Journal of Evaluation. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214018824045.
Donohoo, J., Hattie, J., & Eells, R. (2018). The power of collective efficacy. Educational Leadership, 75(6), 40–44.
Earley, P., & Porritt, V. (2014). Evaluating the impact of professional development: The need for a student-focused approach. Professional Development in Education, 40(1), 112–129.
Eells, R. J. (2011). Meta-analysis of the relationship between collective teacher efficacy and student achievement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Loyola University of Chicago.
Fielding, M., Bragg, S., Craig, J., Cunningham, I., Eraut, M., Gillinson, S., Horne, M., Robinson, C., & Thorp, J. (2005). Factors influencing the transfer of good practice. Nottingham: DfES research brief RR615.
Gilbert, C. (2012). Towards a self-improving system: The role of school accountability. Nottingham: National College of School Leadership.
Goddard, R. (2002). A theoretical and empirical analysis of the measurement of collective efficacy: The development of a short form. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 62(1), 97–110.
Godfrey, D. (2017). What is the proposed role of research evidence in England’s ‘self-improving’school system? Oxford Review of Education, 43, 433–446.
Godfrey, D., & Brown, C. (Eds.). (2019a). An ecosystem for research-engaged schools: Reforming education through research. Abingdon/New York: Routledge.
Godfrey, D., & Brown, C. (2019b). Chapter 6: Innovative models that bridge the research-practice divide. In D. Godfrey & C. Brown (Eds.), An ecosystem for research-engaged schools: Reforming education through research. London: Routledge.
Godfrey, D., & Handscomb, G. (2019). Chapter 1: Evidence use, research-engaged schools and the concept of an ecosystem. In D. Godfrey & C. Brown (Eds.), An ecosystem for research-engaged schools: Reforming education through research. London: Routledge.
Greany, T., & Higham, R. (2018). Hierarchy, markets and networks: Analysing the ‘self-improving school-led system’ agenda in England and the implications for schools. London: UCL Institute of Education Press.
Hall, G. E. (2013). Evaluating change processes: Assessing extent of implementation (constructs, methods and implications). Journal of Educational Administration, 51(3), 264–289.
Handscomb, G., & MacBeath, J. (2003). The Research-engaged school on behalf of FLARE, Essex County Council.
Hattie, J. (2016, July 11). Third annual visible learning conference (subtitled Mindframes and Maximizers). Washington, DC.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.
Hattie, J., & Zierer, K. (2018). Kenne deinen Einfluss!: “Visible Learning” für die Unterrichtspraxis. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag Hohengehren GmbH.
Heracleous, L., & Jacobs, C. D. (2008). Understanding organizations through embodied metaphors. Organization Studies, 29(1), 45–78.
James, K. T., Mann, J., & Creasy, J. (2007). Leaders as lead learners: A case example of facilitating collaborative leadership learning for school leaders. Management Learning, 38(1), 79–94.
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2008). Linking leadership to student learning: The contributions of leader efficacy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(4), 496–528.
Matthews, A. P., & Headon, M. (2015). Multiple gains: An independent evaluation of challenge Partners’ peer reviews of schools. London: Institute of Education Press.
Moolenaar, N. M., Sleegers, P. J., & Daly, A. J. (2012). Teaming up: Linking collaboration networks, collective efficacy, and student achievement. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(2), 251–262.
Muijs, D., & Rumyantseva, N. (2014). Coopetition in education: Collaborating in a competitive environment. Journal of Educational Change, 15(1), 1–18.
Nelson, R., Ehren, M., & Godfrey, D. (2015). Literature review on internal evaluation. London: Institute of Education.
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
Robinson, V. (2017). Reduce change to increase improvement. Thousand Oaks: Corwin.
Robinson, V. M., & Timperley, H. (2013). School improvement through theory engagement. In S. Kushner & M. Lei (Eds.), A developmental and negotiated approach to school self-evaluation (pp. 163–177). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Saunders, W. M., Goldenberg, C. N., & Gallimore, R. (2009). Increasing achievement by focusing grade-level teams on improving classroom learning: A prospective, quasi-experimental study of title I schools. American Educational Research Journal, 46(4), 1006–1033.
Sharp, C., Eames, A., Sanders, D., & Tomlinson, K. (2005). Postcards from research-engaged schools. Slough: National Foundation for Educational Research.
Spillane, J., Healey, K., & Kim, C. (2010). Leading and managing instruction: Formal and informal aspects of elementary school organization. In A. Daly (Ed.), Social network theory and educational change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Stevens, J. (2013). Design as communication in microstrategy: Strategic sensemaking and sensegiving mediated through designed artifacts. AI EDAM, 27(2), 133–142.
Stoll, L., Bolam, R., McMahon, A., Wallace, M., & Thomas, S. (2006). Professional learning communities: A review of the literature. Journal of Educational Change, 7(4), 221–258.
Swaffield, S., & MacBeath, J. (2005). School self-evaluation and the role of a critical friend. Cambridge Journal of Education, 35(2), 239–252.
Tschannen-Moran, M. (2004). Trust matters: Leadership for successful schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Watkins, C. (2010). Learning, performance and improvement (Research Matters (34)). London: IOE.
Wilkins, R. (2011). Research engagement for school development. London: Institute of Education.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Godfrey, D., Spence-Thomas, K. (2020). Research-Informed Peer Review. In: Godfrey, D. (eds) School Peer Review for Educational Improvement and Accountability. Accountability and Educational Improvement. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48130-8_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48130-8_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-48129-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-48130-8
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)