Educational assessment and marking, in particular, give teachers considerable power over students and their future possibilities. Analysing a teachers' meeting discussing school reports in a secondary school showed that marking involves teachers' accountability to colleagues. An examination of the situated interpretations and explanations of unsatisfactory school marks also showed how various discursive devices were used for building a factual account. Confirmed expectations, extreme case formulations, introducing corroborating witnesses, the deployment of cited others, defining exceptional cases, detailed descriptions and narratives, and the use of different accounts all served to emphasize the role of the students and hide the teachers from view. In addition, teachers' joint constructions had practical consequences for remedial interventions. Decisions for intervention were dependent on the accounts given.
Antaki, C. (1994) Explaining and Arguing: The Social Organization of Accounts. London: Sage.
2.
Auer, P. and Di Luzio, A. (eds) (1992) The Contextualization of Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
3.
Broadfoot, P. (1979) Assessment, Schools and Society. London: Methuen.
4.
Brophy, R. (1983) `Research on the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy and Teacher Expectations', Journal of Educational Psychology75: 631-661.
5.
Cazden, C. (1988) Classroom Discourse: The Language of Teaching and Learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
6.
Edwards, D. (1997) Discourse and Cognition. London: Sage.
7.
Edwards, D. and Mercer, N. (1987) Common Knowledge: The Development of Understanding in the Classroom. London: Routledge.
8.
Edwards, D. and Potter, J. (1992) Discursive Psychology. London: Sage.
9.
Gee, J.P. and Green, J.L. (1998) `Discourse Analysis, Learning, and Social Practice: A Methodological Study', in P.D. Pearson and A. Iran-Nejad (eds) Review of Research in Education, Vol 23, pp. 119-169. Washington: American Educational Research Association.
10.
Gee, J.P. , Michaels, S. and O'Connor, C. (1992) `Discourse Analysis', in M.D. LeCompte, W. Millroy and J. Preissle (eds) Handbook of Qualitative Research in Education, pp. 227-291. New York: Academic Press.
11.
Gipps, C. (1990) `National Assessment: A comparison of English and American Trends', in P. Broadfoot, R. Murphy and H. Torrance (eds) Changing Educational Assessment: International Perspectives and Trends, pp. 53-64. London: Routledge.
12.
Goffman, E. (1979) `Footing', Semiotica25(1): 1-29.
13.
Goffman, E. (1974) Frame Analysis. New York: Harper & Row.
14.
Grize, J-B. (1982) De la logique à l'argumentation. Geneva: Droz.
15.
Goodwin, C. and Duranti, A. (1992) `Rethinking Context: An Introduction', in A. Duranti and C. Goodwin (eds) Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16.
Hester, S. (1990) `The Social Facts of Deviance in School: A Study of Mundane Reasoning', British Journal of Sociology42: 443-463.
17.
Hester, S. (1998) `Describing “Deviance” in School: Recognizably Educational Psychological Problems', in C. Antaki and S. Widdicombe (eds) Identities in Talk. London: Sage.
18.
Hewitt, J.P. and Stokes, R. (1975) `Disclaimers', American Sociological Review40: 1-11.
19.
Hicks, D. (1995) `Discourse, Learning, and Teaching', in M.W. Apple (ed.) Review of Research in Education, pp. 49-95. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
20.
Hoffman, B. (1962) The Tyranny of Testing. New York: Crowell-Collier.
21.
Little, A. (1990) `The Role of Assessment, Re-examined in International Context', in P. Broadfoot, R. Murphy and H. Torrance (eds) Changing Educational Assessment: International Perspectives and Trends, pp. 9-22. London: Routledge.
22.
Luke, A. (1995) `Text and Discourse in Education: An Introduction to Critical Discourse Analysis', in M.W. Apple (ed.) Review of Research in Education, pp. 3-48. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
23.
Mehan, H. (1991) `The School's Work of Sorting Students', in D. Boden and D.H. Zimmerman (eds) Talk and Social Structure: Studies in Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis, pp. 71-90. Cambridge: Polity Press.
24.
Noah, H.J. and Eckstein, M.A. (1990) `Trade-offs in Examination Policies: An International Comparative Perspective', in P. Broadfoot, R. Murphy and H. Torrance (eds) Changing Educational Assessment: International Perspectives and Trends, pp. 84-97. London: Routledge.
25.
Pomerantz, A. (1984) `Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes', in M.J. Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds) Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversational Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
26.
Pomerantz, A. (1986) `Extreme Case Formulations: A New Way of Legitimating Claims', Human Studies9: 219-230.
27.
Potter, J. (1996) Representing Reality: Discourse, Rhetoric and Social Construction. London: Sage.
28.
Sacks, H. (1992) Lectures on Conversation. Oxford: Blackwell.
29.
Satterly, D. (1989) Assessment in School, 2nd edn.Oxford: Blackwell.
30.
Schegloff, E.A. (1992) `In Another Context', in A. Duranti and C. Goodwin (eds) Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31.
Schegloff, E.A. and Sacks, H. (1973) `Opening up Closings', Semiotica7: 289-327.
32.
Scott, M.B. and Lyman, S.M. (1968) `Accounts', American Sociological Review33: 46-62.
33.
Semin, G.R. and Manstead, A.S.R. (1983) The Accountability of Conduct. London: Academic Press.
34.
Shepard, L.A. and Smith, M.L. (eds) (1989) Flunking Grades: Research and Policies on Rentention. London: Falmer.
35.
Smith, D.E. (1978) ` “K is Mentally Ill”: The anatomy of a factual account', Sociology12: 23-53.
36.
Watson, D.R. and Weinberg, T.S. (1982) `Interviews and the Interactional Construction of Accounts of Homosexual Identity', Social Analysis11: 56-78.
37.
Wooffitt, R. (1992) Telling Tales of the Unexpected: The Organization of Factual Discourse. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
