CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 19Educational Assessment and ImprovementGlobal Educational Policies and ReformsPublic Policy and Administration Research

Redefining public values: data use and value dilemmas in education

Open access
Mausethagen, Sølvi, Prøitz, Tine S., Skedsmo, Guri·2021·Education Inquiry
DOI 10.1080/20004508.2020.1733744
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

In this article, we explore how values in education are negotiated and partly redefined by teachers, school leaders and local administrators with data use and accountability. Two dilemmas are prominent for the teachers: 1) Testing and data use are perceived as important to meet the needs of the students and to create transparency and initiating innovation in schools, yet they lead to performance pressure on the students and narrow the societal mandate in education, and 2) Although it is important to identify students at the lowest proficiency levels, the established accountability chains acknowledge the progress of these students and the teachers’ efforts only to a limited extent. However, values such as meeting the needs of individual students, transparency and innovation/renewal are partly redefined and narrowed on other institutional levels. The dilemmas represent real normative conflicts in public services that are ultimately unsolvable yet not necessarily at odds with professional values.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/20004508.2020.1733744

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • As similar accountability-focused policies have begun to be implemented beyond anglophone contexts including Norway and Brazil, the findings from this study of teacher agency may have relevance for teacher educators and researchers working within higher levels of regulatory control.

    “As similar accountability-focused policies have begun to be implemented (although perhaps to a lesser extent) beyond anglophone contexts including for example Norway (Mausethagen et al., 2021) and Brazil (Lennert da Silva & Mølstad, 2020), the findings from this study of teacher agency may have relevance for teacher educators and researchers working within higher levels of regulatory control.”

    From Space as a lens for teacher agency: A case study of three beginning teachers in England, <scp>UK</scp> (2024) · cites this paper as Mausethagen et al., 2021

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Mausethagen, S., Prøitz, T. S., & Skedsmo, G.
Affiliations
  • OsloMet – Oslo Metropolitan University (NO)
  • University of South-Eastern Norway (NO)
  • University of Oslo (NO)
Corresponding author
Mausethagen, Sølvi
ORCID
Venue
Education Inquiry
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2020-03-02
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
1-16
ISSN
2000-4508 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1080/20004508.2020.1733744
OpenAlex
W3010166375
Cited by
19
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1
FWCI
3.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Education Inquiry (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Educational Assessment and Improvement
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Global Educational Policies and Reforms
  • Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
Keywords
public value, educational data use, educational accountability, normative conflict, teacher values, school leadership, standardized testing, performance pressure, educational innovation, public service values

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review