Based on teachers' knowledge base of students, teacher expectations of students' (future) abilities and potential are shaped, in which bias may occur. This study investigates data on multiple attributes of 535 sixth-grade Flemish students to find out (1) whether teacher expectations of students' cognitive and non-cognitive attributes, of teacher-student relationships, and of parental involvement in education are biased, and (2) whether teachers differ in their expectation bias towards SES, ethnicity, and gender. By means of correlation analysis, in which we compared teacher expectations with multiple measured student attributes (i.e., their achievement test scores and self-assessments), the results showed statistically significant, positive correlations for all the attributes included, indicating an overall correspondence between teacher expectations and students' measured attributes. At the same time, using an indicator of teacher expectation bias by subtracting the students' measured attributes from the corresponding teacher expectations, this study highlighted an expectation bias in terms of over- and underestimation by teachers, especially with respect to teachers' expectations of students cognitive attributes and parental involvement in education. Also, a specific bias in teacher expectations towards SES and gender was found.
Several countries have implemented monitoring systems where students need to take standardized tests at regular intervals. These tests may serve either a development-oriented goal that supports public trust in schools, or a more accountability-oriented perspective to increase control. Currently, the Flemish education system has no standardized testing. The idea of implementing a monitoring system is highly contentious. By means of a Delphi study with policy makers, education specialists, school governors, principals, teachers, and a student representative (n=24), we identified the characteristics of a monitoring system that would be accepted by different stakeholders. Based on these characteristics, we proposed eight scenarios for future policy development. Next, the desirability of these scenarios was assessed by each respondent. The results show that in order to gain broad social support, a focus on strengthening trust is preferred over a focus on control through such measures as avoiding the public availability of test results. In addition, other key results for the development and implementation of a system to monitor student learning outcomes are discussed.
This study evaluates the effectiveness of a large-scale training programme on pupil well-being. The research questions are (1) to what extent did the training programme have an impact at the level of schools, and (2) to what extent did the training programme have an impact at the level of pupils? Using a survey with teachers and school principals (n=899), a survey with primary school pupils (n=2,612), and semi-structured interviews and focus groups with the main stakeholders (n=14), it was concluded that, notwithstanding high participant satisfaction, no substantial effects on school practices or on pupil well-being could be observed. Insufficient training time and the absence of post-training school counselling were key factors in the lack of success.
The present study investigates how Flemish middle school mathematics teachers make sense of schoolperformanfeedback data from low-stakes, external standardised tests. We take an in-depth look into the interpretive steps they take, based on a conceptual model that integrates intuitive and rational aspects of individual and collective sensemaking and empirical data collected in semi-structured interviews. We describe the nature of these sensemaking processes and consider the impact of influencing factors. Our findings demonstrate that the mere availability of school performance feedback data does not spontaneously spark sensemaking, nor does it necessarily lead to improvements in instructionalpractice. Teachers' sensemaking of schoolperformancefeedback data appears to be a largely intuitive process, grounded in external attributions and absent of triangulation. Challenges regarding expertise and lack of inquiry-based attitude and commitment result in superficial and often incorrect interpretations of the data that tend to remain uncorrected as teachers barely engage in collaborative professional dialogue about the data.