Bureaucratic control or professional autonomy?: Performance management in New Zealand schools

School Leadership and Management

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 91-

  Fitzgerald, Tanya ^a,b,c   Youngs, Howard ^d   Grootenboer, Peter ^d  

^a UNITEC INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (New Zealand)

^b Bethlehem Institute of Education   (New Zealand)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WAIKATO   (New Zealand)

^d NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 27244446909     PISSN: 13632434     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/1363243032000080050     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Bennett, H. (1999) One drop of blood: teacher appraisal mark 2. Teacher Development, 3:3, pp. 411-428.
2. Brownie, S. (1993) Evaluating staff performance: an act of control or a professional responsibility?. Tutor, 40, pp. 34-37.
3. Carter, B. (1997) The restructuring of teaching and the restructuring of class. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 18:2, pp. 201-215.
4. Darling-Hammond, L Wise and AE SR, Pease (1983) Teacher evaluation in the organizational context: a review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 53:3, pp. 285-328.
5. Duncan, R. (1999) The new secondary teachers' professional standards: implications for professional development and performance management. New Zealand Journal of Educational Administration, 14, pp. 33-38.
6. Fidler, B. (1995) Staff Appraisal and the Statutory Scheme in England. School Organisation, 15:2, pp. 97-109.
7. Fitzgerald, T. (2000) Middle Managers in Secondary Schools: who are they and what do they need to know?. New Zealand Journal of Educational Administration, 15, pp. 71-75.
8. Grootenboer, P. (2000) Appraisal for quality learning. Waikato Journal of Education, 6, pp. 121-132.
9. Gunter, H. (2002) Teacher Appraisal 1988-1998: a case study. School Leadership and Management, 22:1, pp. 61-72.
10. Gunter, H. (1999) Adding Values: the role of LEA appraisal co-ordinators in the implementation of teacher appraisal 1991-1996. Educational Management and Administration, 27:4, pp. 375-387.
11. Haertel, E. (1991) New forms of teacher assessment. Review of Research in Education, 17:1, pp. 3-29.
12. Ker, P. (1992) Appraisal can only control: stop pretending you are empowering. Tutor, 39, pp. 31-35.
13. Labaree, DF (1992) Power, knowledge, and the rationalization of teaching: a genealogy of the movement to professionalize teaching. Harvard Educational Review, 62:2, pp. 123-154.
14. McLellan, J. and Ramsey, P. (1993) Teacher appraisal: an aid to professional development. The New Zealand Principal, 8:1, pp. 16-21.
15. Irvine, E. (2000) Appraisal: the impact of increased control on the 'state of play' in New Zealand schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 38:4, pp. 331-349.
16. Sullivan, K. (1999) Teacher standards and professionalism, Contested perspectives in a decade of reform. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 34:1, pp. 144-155.
17. Townsend, F. (1995) Appraisal: a process of betrayal?. New Zealand Journal of Educational Administration, 10, pp. 12-20.
18. Wildy, H. and Wallace, J. (1998) Professionalism, portfolios and the development of school leaders. School Leadership and Management, 18:1, pp. 123-140.