ABSTRACT

Performance-based accountability systems that rank schools based on their effectiveness produce ‘winners’ and ‘losers’. Substantial evidence has pointed to the (side)effects of these classifications, particularly in the most disadvantaged communities. Whilst previous studies have compared schools under different effectiveness categories within and between countries, this qualitative study takes a cross-case comparison approach to analyse education policies, grey literature and previous research evidence to explore the mechanisms that construct ‘failing’ schools in three notable high-stakes accountability systems worldwide: Chile, the USA and England. After describing (1) the identification and classification of ‘failing’ schools; (2) the instruments used to justify these classifications; and (3) who make these judgements, we conclude that the construction of ‘failing’ schools serves the competition and differentiation required for maintaining neoliberal hierarchical and unequal market-oriented regimes. Instead of disciplining only ‘failing’ schools, these labels also provide a caution for the whole school system.

摘要

基于绩效的问责制根据学校的有效性对学校进行排名，产生“赢家”和“输家”。大量证据表明这些分类的（副作用）影响，特别是在最弱势的社区。虽然之前的研究比较了国家内部和国家之间不同有效性类别下的学校，但本定性研究采用跨案例比较的方法来分析教育政策、灰色文献和之前的研究证据，以探索在三个显着的高中构建“失败”学校的机制- 在全球范围内建立责任体系：智利、美国和英国。在描述（1）“失败”学校的识别和分类之后；(2) 用来证明这些分类的工具；(3) 谁做出这些判断，我们得出结论，“失败”学校的建设服务于维持新自由主义等级制和不平等的市场导向制度所需的竞争和差异化。这些标签不仅对“失败”的学校进行纪律处分，还为整个学校系统提供了警告。