英语继续教育中的表演性认知

IF 0.9 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Research in Post-Compulsory Education Pub Date : 2022-01-02 DOI:10.1080/13596748.2021.2011518
Richard Poole
{"title":"英语继续教育中的表演性认知","authors":"Richard Poole","doi":"10.1080/13596748.2021.2011518","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The notions of performativity and the use of accountability practices within the UK education sector are contentious. Although some commentators suggest that statistically driven performativity measures do not align with practitioner values, little research has investigated any potential differences in relation to job role and level of management responsibility. This study focused on whether perceptions of performativity change according to someone’s job role and whether there is a differential between managers and teachers. An electronic questionnaire was disseminated at a single FE college, with 107 participants surveyed across a wide range of subject areas. Quantitative analysis revealed that perceptions of managers differ from those of teaching staff regarding the effectiveness of statistical performativity targets to drive factors which are integral to an efficacious learning environment. Results are far from unequivocal though. As practitioners take on more of a managerial emphasis within their role, the perceived benefit of and their affinity for target setting and performativity measures increase. However, the magnitude of this more favourable outlook towards performativity is limited, with managers also broadly sceptical concerning any benefit and positive impact that target setting practices can have.","PeriodicalId":45169,"journal":{"name":"Research in Post-Compulsory Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perceptions of performativity in English Further Education\",\"authors\":\"Richard Poole\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13596748.2021.2011518\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The notions of performativity and the use of accountability practices within the UK education sector are contentious. Although some commentators suggest that statistically driven performativity measures do not align with practitioner values, little research has investigated any potential differences in relation to job role and level of management responsibility. This study focused on whether perceptions of performativity change according to someone’s job role and whether there is a differential between managers and teachers. An electronic questionnaire was disseminated at a single FE college, with 107 participants surveyed across a wide range of subject areas. Quantitative analysis revealed that perceptions of managers differ from those of teaching staff regarding the effectiveness of statistical performativity targets to drive factors which are integral to an efficacious learning environment. Results are far from unequivocal though. As practitioners take on more of a managerial emphasis within their role, the perceived benefit of and their affinity for target setting and performativity measures increase. However, the magnitude of this more favourable outlook towards performativity is limited, with managers also broadly sceptical concerning any benefit and positive impact that target setting practices can have.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45169,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research in Post-Compulsory Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research in Post-Compulsory Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13596748.2021.2011518\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Post-Compulsory Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13596748.2021.2011518","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

在英国教育部门,绩效和问责制实践的概念是有争议的。尽管一些评论家认为,统计驱动的绩效指标与从业者的价值观不一致,但很少有研究调查与工作角色和管理责任水平相关的任何潜在差异。这项研究的重点是,人们对绩效的看法是否会随着工作角色的不同而改变,以及管理者和教师之间是否存在差异。一份电子问卷在一所FE学院分发,调查了107名参与者,涉及广泛的学科领域。定量分析表明,对于有效学习环境不可或缺的驱动因素的统计绩效目标的有效性,管理人员的看法与教学人员的看法不同。然而,结果远非明确。当从业者在他们的角色中承担更多的管理重点时,他们对目标设定和绩效度量的感知利益和亲和力就会增加。然而,这种对绩效更有利的前景的重要性是有限的,管理人员也普遍怀疑目标设定实践可能带来的任何好处和积极影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Perceptions of performativity in English Further Education
ABSTRACT The notions of performativity and the use of accountability practices within the UK education sector are contentious. Although some commentators suggest that statistically driven performativity measures do not align with practitioner values, little research has investigated any potential differences in relation to job role and level of management responsibility. This study focused on whether perceptions of performativity change according to someone’s job role and whether there is a differential between managers and teachers. An electronic questionnaire was disseminated at a single FE college, with 107 participants surveyed across a wide range of subject areas. Quantitative analysis revealed that perceptions of managers differ from those of teaching staff regarding the effectiveness of statistical performativity targets to drive factors which are integral to an efficacious learning environment. Results are far from unequivocal though. As practitioners take on more of a managerial emphasis within their role, the perceived benefit of and their affinity for target setting and performativity measures increase. However, the magnitude of this more favourable outlook towards performativity is limited, with managers also broadly sceptical concerning any benefit and positive impact that target setting practices can have.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Research in Post-Compulsory Education
Research in Post-Compulsory Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
14.30%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: Throughout the world, there is a growing awareness of the significance of vocational and post-compulsory education and training systems. The majority of countries are working hard to develop their provision, recognising the importance of post-compulsory education in providing educated and skilled people in sufficient numbers at appropriate levels to assist economic and social development. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, sponsored by the United Kingdom"s Further Education Research Association (FERA), recognises the need for more international research and analysis and the generation of relevant theory in order to identify policy needs and trends as well as priorities in this growing area.
期刊最新文献
College higher education commuter students’ experiences of belonging, mattering and persisting with their studies Voices from the deck: lecturers’ and middle managers’ perceptions of effective FE sector professional development In pursuit of equity vocational education and training and social justice Teaching practices that are conducive to supporting the positive emotional well-being of learners in post-compulsory education Teacher vulnerability in teacher identity in times of unexpected social change
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1