Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The role of feedback acceptance and gaining awareness on teachers’ willingness to use inspection feedback

  • Published:
Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Feedback acceptance and use are often seen as requirements for teacher change after a school inspection. Non-educational research, however, points to the role of feedback recipients’ willingness to use the feedback received as an intermediate phase between their acceptance and use of the feedback. It also postulates the importance of a recipient’s awareness gained from the feedback, cognitive responses and individual characteristics. However, quantitative evidence in school inspection context to support this theory has been non-existent. This study draws on quantitative data collected from 687 teachers in 80 Flemish primary schools that had recently been inspected. By means of structural equation modelling, we build a research model that focuses on the relationship between cognitive responses, teachers’ feedback acceptance, awareness gained from the inspection feedback received, and teachers’ willingness to use inspection feedback. In addition, the relationship between individual teacher characteristics and the different components in the research model were also taken into account. The analysis reveals that teachers’ willingness to use the feedback is predominantly explained by the perceived relevance of the inspection feedback. In addition, we found statistically significant relationships between teachers’ willingness to use inspection feedback and feedback acceptance, and also between teachers’ willingness to use inspection feedback and awareness gained from inspection feedback too.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aelterman, A., Engels, N., Van Petegem, K., & Pierre Verhaeghe, J. (2007). The well-being of teachers in Flanders: the importance of a supportive school culture. Educational Studies, 33(3), 285–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altrichter, H., & Kemethofer, D. (2015). Does accountability pressure through school inspections promote school improvement? School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 26(1), 32–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anseel, F., & Lievens, F. (2009). The mediating role of feedback acceptance in the relationship between feedback and attitudinal and performance outcomes. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 17(4), 362–376.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, S. T., & Arthur Jr., W. (2008). Feedback acceptance in developmental assessment centers: the role of feedback message, participant personality, and affective response to the feedback session. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 29(5), 681–703.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boudrias, J. S., Bernaud, J. L., & Plunier, P. (2014). Candidates’ integration of individual psychological assessment feedback. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 29(3), 341–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brett, J. F., & Atwater, L. E. (2001). 360° feedback: accuracy, reactions, and perceptions of usefulness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(5), 930–942.

    Google Scholar 

  • Case, P., Case, S., & Catling, S. (2000). Please show you’re working; a critical assessment of the impact of Ofsted inspection on primary teachers. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 21(4), 605–621.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, C. (2001). Changing classrooms through inspection. School Leadership & Management, 21(1), 59–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, C. (2002). Ofsted and school improvement: teachers’ perceptions of the inspection process in schools facing challenging circumstances. School Leadership & Management, 22(3), 257–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coe, R. (2002). Evidence on the role and impact of performance feedback in schools. In A. J. Visscher & R. Coe (Eds.), School improvement through performance feedback (pp. 3–26). Lisse: Swets and Zeitlinger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2002). Research methods in education. Oxford: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: a construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 386–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dedering, K., & Müller, S. (2011). School improvement through inspections? First empirical insights from Germany. Journal of Educational Change, 12, 301–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehren, M. C. M. (2010). Effecten van toezicht op het basisonderwijs. Pedagogische studiën, 87, 165–182.

  • Ehren, M. C. M. (2016). Introducing school inspections. In M. C. M. Ehren (Ed.), Methods and modalities of effective school inspections. Accountability and educational improvement (pp. 1–16). London: Springer International Publishing.

  • Ehren, M. C. M., & Visscher, A. J. (2008). The relationships between school inspections, school characteristics and school improvement. British Journal of Educational Studies, 56(2), 205–227. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8527.2008.00400.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehren, M. C. M., Altrichter, H., McNamara, G., & O’Hara, J. (2013). Impact of school inspections on improvement of schools—describing assumptions on causal mechanisms in six European countries. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 25(1), 3–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092012-9156-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehren, M. C., Gustafsson, J. E., Altrichter, H., Skedsmo, G., Kemethofer, D., & Huber, S. G. (2015). Comparing effects and side effects of different school inspection systems across Europe. Comparative Education, 51(3), 375–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erdem, A. R., & Yaprak, M. (2013). The problems that the classroom teachers working in villages and county towns confront in educational inspection and their opinions concerning the effect of these problems on their performance. Educational Research and Reviews, 8(1), 455–461.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fedor, D. B. (1991). Recipient responses to performance feedback: a proposed model and its implications. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 9(73), 120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flemish Inspectorate of Education (2018). Onderwijsspiegel 2018 [Education Mirror]. Brussel: Onderwijsinspectie /Vlaams Ministerie van Onderwijs en Vorming.

  • Franck, E., De Raedt, R., Barbez, C., & Rosseel, Y. (2008). Psychometric properties of the Dutch Rosenberg self-esteem scale. Psychologica Belgica, 48(1), 25–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, I. A., & Kass, E. (2002). Teacher self-efficacy: a classroom-organization conceptualization. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(6), 675–686.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fullan, M. (2002). The role of leadership in the promotion of knowledge management in schools. Teachers and Teaching, 8(3), 409–419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gärtner, H., Hüsemann, D., & Pant, H. A. (2009). Wirkungen von Schulinspektion aus Sicht betroffener Schulleitungen. Die Brandenburger Schulleiterbefragung. [The effects of school inspection from the viewpoint of school principals affected]. Empirische Pädagogik, 23(1), 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gärtner, H., Wurster, S., & Pant, H. A. (2014). The effect of school inspections on school improvement. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 25(4), 489–508. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2013.811089.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, P., Wineburg, S., & Woolworth, S. (2001). Toward a Theory of Teacher Community. The Teachers College Record, 103, 942–1012.

  • Gustafsson, J. E., & Myrberg, E. (2011). School inspections of Swedish schools: a critical reflection on intended effects, causal mechanisms and methods. Unpublished working paper, LLP-project ‘Impact of school inspections on teaching and learning’. Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gustafsson, J. E., Ehren, M. C. M., Conyngham, G., McNamara, G., Altrichter, H., & O’Hara, J. (2015). From inspection to quality: ways in which school inspection influences change in schools. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 47(1), 47–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2015.07.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ilgen, D. R., Fisher, C. D., & Taylor, M. S. (1979). Consequences of individual feedback on behavior in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64(4), 349–371. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelchtermans, G. (2007). Macropolitics caught up in micropolitics: the case of the policy on quality control in Flanders (Belgium). Journal of Education Policy, 22(4), 471–491. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930701390669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kemethofer, D., Gustafsson, J. E., & Altrichter, H. (2017). Comparing effects of school inspections in Sweden and Austria. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 29(4), 319–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinicki, A. J., Prussia, G. E., Wu, B. J., & McKee-Ryan, F. M. (2004). A covariance structure analysis of employees’ response to performance feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 1057–1069.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory.

  • Landwehr, N. (2011). Thesen zur Wirkung und Wirksamkeit der externen Schulevaluation [Theses on the impact and effectiveness of the external evaluation of schools]. In C. Quesel, V. Husfeldt, N. Landwehr, & N. Steiner (Eds.), Wirkungen und Wirksamkeit der externen Schulevaluation (pp. 35–70). Bern: h.e.p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lapp, D., & Fisher, D. (Eds.). (2011). Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts: co-sponsored by the International Reading Association and the National Council of Teachers of English. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leithwood, K. (2000). Introduction: understanding schools as intelligent systems. In K. Leithwoord (Ed.), Understanding schools as intelligent systems (pp. 1–15). Stamford: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leung, K., Su, S., & Morris, M. W. (2001). When is criticism not constructive? The roles of fairness perceptions and dispositional attributions in employee acceptance of critical supervisory feedback. Human Relations, 54(9), 1155–1187. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726701549002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linderbaum, B. A., & Levy, P. E. (2010). The development and validation of the Feedback Orientation Scale (FOS). Journal of Management, 36(6), 1372–1405.

    Google Scholar 

  • London, M., & Smither, W. (2002). Feedback orientation, feedback culture, and the longitudinal performance management process. Human Resource Management Review, 12, 81–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacBeath, J. (2006). School inspection and self-evaluation: working with the new relationship. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Makiney, J. D., & Levy, P. E. (1998). The influence of self-ratings versus peer ratings on supervisors’ performance judgments. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 74(3), 212–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCrone, T., Rudd, P., Blenkinsop, S., Wade, P., Rudd, S., & Yeshanew, T. (2007). Evaluation of the impact of section 5 inspections. Slough: National Foundation for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCroskey, J. C., & Teven, J. J. (1999). Goodwill: A reexamination of the construct and its measurement. Communications Monographs, 66(1), 90–103.

  • OECD. (2013). Synergies for better learning. An international perspective on evaluation and assessment OECD Reviews of Evaluation and Assessment in Education. Paris: OECD.

  • Onderwijsinspectie (2019). Onderwijsspiegel 2019 [Education Mirror]. Brussel: Onderwijsinspectie / Vlaams Ministerie van Onderwijs en Vorming16.

  • Quintelier, A., Vanhoof, J., & De Maeyer, S. (2018). Understanding the influence of teachers’ cognitive and affective responses upon school inspection feedback acceptance. Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability, 30(4), 399–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-018-9286-4.

  • Quintelier, A., De Maeyer, S., & Vanhoof, J. (2019). Determinants of Teachers’ Feedback Acceptance during a School Inspection Visit. School Effectiveness and School Improvement. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2020.1750432.

  • Penninckx, M. (2015) Inspecting school inspections. Doctoral dissertation. University of Antwerp.

  • Penninckx, M., & Vanhoof, J. (2015). Insights gained by schools and emotional consequences of school inspections. A review of evidence. School Leadership & Management, 35(5), 477–501. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2015.1107036.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penninckx, M., Vanhoof, J., De Maeyer, S., & Van Petegem, P. (2014). Exploring and explaining the effects of being inspected. Educational Studies, 40(4), 456–472. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2014.930343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plunier, P., Boudrias, J. S., & Savoie, A. (2013). Appropriation cognitive du feedback en évaluation du potentiel: validation d’une mesure. Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée/European Review of Applied Psychology, 63(2), 87–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, V., & Placier, P. (2001). Teacher change. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 905–947). Washington, DC: AERA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: an R package for structural equation modeling and more. Version 0.5–12 (BETA). Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, M., Alcantara, V., Cervantes, L., Del Razo, J., Lopez, R., & Perez, W. (2017). Getting to teacher ownership: how schools are creating meaningful change. Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown University.

  • Shin, D. (2017). Conceptualizing and measuring quality of experience of the Internet of things: Exploring how quality is perceived by users. Information and Management, 54(8), 998–1011.

  • Shrauger, J. S., & Rosenberg, S. E. (1970). Self-esteem and the effects of success and failure feedback on performance 1. Journal of Personality, 38(3), 404–417.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stapleton, L. M., McNeish, D. M., & Yang, J. S. (2016). Multilevel and single-level models for measured and latent variables when data are clustered. Educational Psychologist, 51(3–4), 317–330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steelman, L. A., & Rutkowski, K. A. (2004). Moderators of employee reactions to negative feedback. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 19(1), 6–18. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940410520637.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strijbos, J. W., Narciss, S., & Dünnebier, K. (2010). Peer feedback content and sender’s competence level in academic writing revision tasks: are they critical for feedback perceptions and efficiency? Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 291–303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, G., Yee, W. C., & Lee, J. (2000). ‘Failing’ special schools - action planning and recovery from special measures assessments. Research Papers in Education, 15(1), 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/026715200362925.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuytens, M., & Devos, G. (2014). How to activate teachers through teacher evaluation? School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 25(4), 509–530.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vlaams Ministerie van Onderwijs en Vorming (2016). The Reference Framework for Quality in Education: quality expectations and quality images. Available at https://www.onderwijsinspectie.be/sites/default/files/atoms/files/OK_magazine_eng.pdf. Accessed 12 Nov 2019.

  • Vlaamse Overheid (2018). Vlaams onderwijs in cijfers 2017–2018 [Flemish education in figures 2017–2018]. Available at https://onderwijs.vlaanderen.be/nl/onderwijsstatistieken. Accessed 12 Nov 2019.

  • Weiner, G. (2002). Auditing failure: moral competence and school effectiveness. British Educational Research Journal, 28(1), 789–804. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192022000019062.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilcox, B., & Gray, J. (1996). Inspecting schools: holding schools to account and helping schools to improve. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wurster, S., & Gärtner, H. (2013). Schulen im Umgang mit Schulinspektion und deren Ergebnissen. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 59(3), 425–445.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zuber, J., & Altrichter, H. (2018). The role of teacher characteristics in an educational standards reform. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 30(2), 183–205.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Edubron Research Unit, University of Antwerp, Sint-Jacobstraat 2 S.Z.305, B-2000, Antwerp, Belgium

    Amy Quintelier, Sven De Maeyer & Jan Vanhoof

Authors
  1. Amy Quintelier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sven De Maeyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jan Vanhoof
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amy Quintelier.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 5 Results of the EFA
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Quintelier, A., De Maeyer, S. & Vanhoof, J. The role of feedback acceptance and gaining awareness on teachers’ willingness to use inspection feedback. Educ Asse Eval Acc 32, 311–333 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-020-09325-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-020-09325-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation