Self‐management and School Inspection: complementary forms of surveillance and control in the primary school

Abstract

ABSTRACT This paper seeks to argue, on the basis of data from research in a primary school, that the self‐surveillance systems of self‐management are closely interconnected with the school inspection process. Further, self‐surveillance managerial systems, such as School Development Planning, are reinforced by the constant gaze of the inspectorate. Five modes of teacher response to the impact of the controls are explored: anticipation of surveillance, self‐surveillance, impression management, secondary adjustment and fragmentation. It is argued that the nature of the relationship between inspection and self‐management makes for a more rigorous and pervasive form of control than could be achieved by the use of one form alone. Inspectors are the absent presence in the school, influencing and constraining the decision‐making involved in the formulation of the School Development Plan and activities arising from it. The result of this process is reduced rather than enhanced autonomy for the self‐managing primary school. Furthermore, initiatives in the school which promised school improvement were marginalised in the development planning process.