This article presents a study that aimed to understand the contributions of self-evaluation (SE) processes towards the development of curricular and social justice and educational improvement. The study focuses on data collected from the schools’ external evaluation (SEE) process and from the TEIP programme (Educational Territories of Priority Intervention) implemented in Portugal, namely, 144 SEE reports from 2012/2013 and 3 interviews to the responsible people for the educational project from a TEIP school. The collected data were analysed by content analysis using NVivo software, showing that the external evaluation of education systems can be one of the pillars in achieving justice when it causes a pedagogical intervention which reaffirms the links between curriculum, teaching and students’ learning. It also shows that SEE processes can have empowering potential when social justice and equity principles are present throughout its development and with the support of critical friends.
AfonsoA. (2009). Nem tudo o que conta em educação é mensurável ou comparável: Crítica à accountability baseada em testes estandardizados e rankings escolares. Revista Lusófona de Educação (Not everything that counts in education is measurable or comparable: Critique of accountability based on standardized tests and school rankings.), 13, 13–29.
2.
AfonsoN.CostaE. (2011). A avaliação externa das escolas: Um instrumento de regulação baseado no conhecimento. In BarrosoJ.AfonsoN. (Eds.), Políticas educativas: Mobilização de conhecimentos e modos de regulação (The schools external evaluation: a knowledge-based regulation instrument. In J. Barroso & N. Afonso (Eds.), Educational policies: knowledge and mobilization ways of regulation.) (pp. 155–189). Vila Nova de Gaia, Portugal: Fundação Manuel Leão.
3.
AppleM.BeaneJ. (2007). Democratic schools (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
4.
AppleM. (2013). Sociologia da Educação: Análise Internacional. Porto Alegre: Penso Editora.
BogdanR.BiklenS. (2003). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (4th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson Education Group.
7.
BolívarA. (2003). Como melhorar as escolas: Estratégias e dinâmicas de melhoria das práticas educativas (How to improve schools: strategies and dynamics educational practices improvement.). Porto, Portugal: Edições Asa.
8.
BovensM. (2010). Two concepts of accountability: Accountability as a virtue and as a mechanism. West European Politics, 33, 946–967.
9.
CampbellC.LevinB. (2009). Using data to support educational improvement. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21, 47–65.
10.
CarreraS.GeyerF. (2009). EU policy on education: The impact on the social inclusion of vulnerable groups. Brussels, Belgium: Center for European Policy Studies.
11.
ClarkB. (2000). The quality initiative in Scottish schools: Working together to achieve excellence. Retrieved from Scotland: Quality, Standards and Audit Division
12.
ConnellR. (1995). Justiça, conhecimento e currículo na educação contemporânea. In SilvaL. H.AzevedoJ. C. (Eds.), Reestruturação curricular, Teoria e prática no cotidiano da escola (Justice, knowledge and curriculum in contemporary education. In L. H. Silva & J. C. Azevedo (Eds.), Curricular restructuring, theory and practice in daily school life.) (pp. 11–35). Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Vozes.
13.
ConnellR. (1999). Escuelas e justicia social. Madrid, Spain: Edicionaes Morata.
14.
CorreiaJ. (1999). As ideologias educativas em Portugal nos últimos 25 anos. Revista Portuguesa de Educação, (The educational ideologies in Portugal in the last 25 years) 12, 81–110.
15.
CostaE.PiresA. (2011). The role of the European inspections in the European educational space: Echoes from Portugal regarding the evaluation of schools. Research in Higher Education, 1, 1–10.
16.
CrahayM. (2000). L’école peut-elle être juste et efficace? De l’égalité des chances et l’égalité des acquis. Revue Française de Pédagogie (Can the school be fair and effective? Equality of opportunities and equality of opportunities acquired), 135, 223–225.
17.
DaviesP.NewcomerK.SoydanH. (2007). Government as structural context for evaluation. In ShawI.GreeneJ.MarkM. (Eds.), Handbook of evaluation: Policies, programs and practices (pp. 163–183). London, England: SAGE.
18.
DubetF. (2004). L’école des chances: Qu’est-ce qu’une école juste? (The School of Oportunities: what is a fair schools?) Paris, France: Éditions du Seuil.
19.
Educational National Council. (2012). Estado da Educação 2012. Autonomia e Descentralização. Ministério da Educação e Ciência.
20.
EhrenM.SwanbornM. (2012). Strategic data use of schools in accountability systems. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 23, 257–280.
21.
FieldS.KuczeraM.PontB. (2007). No more failures: Ten steps to equity in education. Paris, France: OECD.
22.
FullanM.Rincon-GallardoS.HargreavesA. (2015). Professional capital as accountability. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 23, 1–22.
23.
HofmanR.DijkstraN.HofmanW. (2009). School self-evaluation and student achievement. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 20, 47–68.
24.
HopfC. H. (2004). Qualitative interviews: An overview. In FlickU.KardoffE.SteinkeI. (Eds.), A companion to qualitative research (pp. 203–208). London, England: SAGE.
25.
HulmeM.CrossB. (2011). Pupil participation in Scottish schools: How far have we come?Improving Schools, 14, 130–144.
KrippendorffK. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. London, England: SAGE.
28.
Law No. 31/2002. (2002). Sistema de avaliação da educação e do ensino não superior (Evaluation System of Education and Non Higher Education.). ’ in ‘Law No. 31/2002.
29.
Law No. 46/1986. (1986). Portuguese Educational System Law (1986)’ in ‘Law No. 3/2010 (2010).
30.
L’ÉcuyerR. (1990). Méthodologie de l’analyse développementale de contenu. (Methodology of developmental content analysis.) Quebec City, Québec, Canada: Presses de l’Úniversité.
31.
LeiteC. (2002). O currículo e o multiculturalismo no sistema educativo Português. (Curriculum and multiculturalism in the Portuguese educational system) Coimbra, Portugal: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian.
32.
LeiteC.FernandesP. (2012). Curricular studies and their relation with the political agenda for education. Transnational Curriculum Inquiry, 2, 35–49.
33.
LeiteC.FernandesP.SilvaS. (2013). O lugar da educação para a cidadania no sistema educativo Português: Perspetivas de docentes de uma escola TEIP. (Education for citizenship in the Portuguese educational system: Perspectives of teachers from a TEIP school.)Educação, 36, 35–43.
34.
LemosV. (2013). Políticas públicas de educação: Equidade e sucesso escolar. Sociologia, Problemas e Práticas (Public policies of education: Equity and school success.), 73, 151–169.
35.
MacBeathJ. (2004). Putting the self back into self-evaluation. Improving Schools, 7, 87–91.
36.
MacBeathJ. (2006). School inspection & self-evaluation: Working with the new relationship. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
37.
MagalhãesA.StoerS. (1998). Orgulhosamente filhos de Rousseau. (Proudly sons of Rousseau.) Porto, Portugal: Profedições.
38.
MainardesJ.MarcondesM. (2009).Entrevista com Stephen J. Ball: um diálogo sobre justiça social, pesquisa e política educacional. Educ. Soc., Campinas, 30(106), pp. 303-318.
39.
MarshJ. C. (1990). Managing for total school improvement. In ChapmanJ. (Ed.) School-Based Decision-Making and Management, (pp. 147–159). Lewes: Falmer Press.
40.
MeuretD.MorlaixS. (2003). Conditions of success of a school’s self-evaluation: Some lessons of an European experience. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 14, 53–71.
41.
MuijsD.HarrisA.ChapmanC.StollL.RussJ. (2004). Improving schools in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas: A review of research evidence. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 15, 149–175.
42.
MullenC.JohnsonB. (2006). Accountability-democracy tensions facing democratic school leaders. Action in Teacher Education, 28, 86–101.
43.
NevoD. (2001). School evaluation: Internal or external. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 27, 95–106.
OECD. (2012). Equity and quality in education: Supporting disadvantaged students and schools. Paris, France: OECD Publishing.
46.
OzgaJ.GrekS. (2012). Governing through learning: School self-evaluation as a knowledge-based regulatory tool. Recherches sociologiques et anthropologiques, 43, 83–103.
47.
PapadoupolosY. (1994). Complexité sociale et politiques publiques. (Social Complexity and Public Policy.) Paris, France: Montchrestian.
48.
PerrymanJ. (2010). Improvement after inspection. Improving Schools, 13, 182–196.
ReezigtG.CreemersB. (2005). A comprehensive framework for effective school improvement. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 16, 407–424.
51.
ReynoldsD. (2010). Smart school improvement: Towards schools learning from their best. In HargreavesA.LiebermanA.FullanM.HopkinsD. (Eds.), Second international handbook of educational change (pp. 595–610). Dordrecht, NL: Springer.
52.
RochaA. (2012). Avaliação Externa de Escolas: resultados e autoavaliação. Que relação? Foro de Educación, 14, pp. 207–223
53.
RodríguezE. (2013). Melhorar o currículo por meio da sua avaliação. In SacristánJ. G. (Ed.), Saberes e incertezas sobre o currículo (Improve curriculum through assessment. In J. G. Sacristán (Ed.), Knowledge and uncertainties about curriculum.) (pp. 478–507). Porto Alegre, Brazil: Penso.
54.
RoggeroR. (2009). Educação e diversidade: Uma análise crítica da proposta da UNESCO. In DiasE.LorieriM. (Eds.), Teorias e políticas em educação (Education and diversity: a critical analysis of the UNESCO proposal. In E. Dias, & M. Lorieri (Eds.), Theories and policies in education.) (pp. 96–108). São Paulo, Brazil: Xama Editora.
55.
SantoméJ. (2010). La justicia curricular: El caballo de Troya de la cultura escolar. (Curriculum Justice: The Trojan Horse of School Culture.) Porto Alegre, Brazil: Penso.
56.
ScraseT. (1997). Social justice, education, and the third world. In ScraseT. (Ed.), Social justice and third world education (pp. 11–21). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
57.
SampaioM.LeiteC. (2015). A Territorialização das Políticas Educativas e a Justiça Curricular: o caso TEIP em Portugal. (Territorialization of Educational Policies and Curricular Justice: the TEIP case in Portugal.) Currículo sem Fronteiras, . 15 (3), 715–740, set./dez. 2015.
58.
SeidmanI. (2013). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education & the social sciences. New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University.
59.
StarkieE. (2006). El papel de la política educativa europea en la formación de los ciudadanos europeos. Revista Ciencias de la Educación, (The role of European education policy in the European citizens training.) 28, 105–118.
60.
StoerS. (2008). O estado e as políticas educativas: Uma proposta de mandato renovado para a escola democrática. Educação, Sociedade & Culturas (State and educational policies: a proposal for a renewed mandate for a democratic school.), 26, 149–173.
VelosoL.AbrantesP.CraveiroD. (2011). A avaliação externa de escolas como processo social. Educação, Sociedade & Culturas (The schools external evaluation as a social process.), 33, 69–88.
65.
VincentC. (2003). Social justice, Education and Identity. Routledge.
66.
YoungM. (2011). What are schools for?Educação, Sociedade & Culturas, 32, 145–155.
