Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
n educaie
Raport Eurydice
Educaie i
Formare
Asigurarea calitii
n educaie:
politici i abordri asupra
evalurii colare n Europa
Raport Eurydice
Educaie i
Formare
Acest document este publicat de ctre Agenia Executiv pentru Educaie, Audiovizual i Cultur
(EACEA, Analiza Politicilor n Educaie i Tineret).
ISBN 978-92-9492-083-6
doi:10.2797/960345
CUV NT NAINTE
ntr-un moment n care Europa a transformat revitalizarea creterii
economice n prioritatea sa politic de vrf, dup cum a precizat
Preedintele Comisiei Europene Jean-Claude Juncker n orientrile
sale politice, atenia este concentrat ntr-un mod fr precedent pe
sistemele de invmnt i pe bun dreptate: Consolidarea calitii
educaiei este esenial pentru eforturile noastre de a restabili creterea
economic pe termen lung i crearea de locuri de munc n Europa.
mbuntirea calitii i a eficacitii investiiei n educaie n ntreaga
UE reprezint unul dintre obiectivele cheie ale Cadrului Strategic
European pentru Educaie i Instruire (ET 2020). Educaia de calitate ridicat este vital pentru
inseria profesional, pentru coeziunea social i pentru succesul economic i social de ansamblu al
Europei. Totui, calitatea trebuie s fie monitorizat i mbuntit continuu, ceea ce impune sisteme
eficiente de asigurare a calitii care acoper toate nivelurile educaionale.
n mai 2014, Minitrii naionali ai Educaiei din UE au recunoscut rolul important jucat de mecanismele
de asigurare a calitii n sprijinirea instituiilor de nvmnt si instruire i a factorilor de decizie
politic pentru a rspunde la provocrile prezente. Cu toate acestea, sistemele de asigurare a calitii
trebuie s se bazeze pe principiile care merg dincolo de o simpl abordare de tip list de verificare:
Trebuie s ntreinem o cultur care se strduiete s mbunteasc n mod constant calitatea
predrii i a nvrii. Statele Membre sunt ncurajate s dezvolte i s promoveze o astfel de cultur,
s asigure transparena rezultatelor evalurii calitii un proces pe care Comisia European este
decis s l consolideze prin promovarea nvrii reciproce n domeniu.
n acest context, sunt ncntat s prezint a doua publicaie Eurydice despre evaluarea colar:
Asigurarea calitii n educaie Politici i abordri asupra evalurii colare n Europa. Aceast
publicaie ofer o imagine cuprinztoare asupra modului n care 32 de state europene evalueaz
calitatea colilor lor. Raportul compar abordri, structuri i rolurile jucate de sistemele de evaluare
colar intern i extern, analiznd n acelai timp procedurile concrete, instrumentele, calificarea
evaluatorilor i utilizarea rezultatelor.
Publicaia realizeaz o contribuie valoroas la dezbaterea despre asigurarea calitii colare. n baza
datelor colectate prin reeaua Eurydice, aceasta ofer att o analiz european comparativ, ct i
profiluri naionale detaliate, bogate n informaii i care indic diversitatea i dinamismul sectorului.
Aceasta demonstreaz faptul ca la nivel european, evaluarea colar evolueaz fr ndoial,
avansnd n mod constant ctre abordri mai incluzive, bazate pe dialog i holistice.
Invit toi specialitii i factorii de decizie politic care se ocup cu evaluarea colar s foloseasc
eficient raportul atunci cnd elaboreaz politici, analizeaz sisteme i evalueaz abordri. Sunt
ncreztor c aceast publicaie va fi benefic pentru viitoarea activitate n ntreaga Europ.
Tibor Navracsics
Commisar pentru Educaie, Cultur, Tineret i Sport
Cuvnt nainte
Lista figurilor
Principalele constatri
Introducere
13
17
17
18
20
23
30
35
37
41
41
43
45
49
Glosar
53
Codurile trilor
53
Coduri statistice
53
Definiii
54
Profiluri naionale
57
Mulumiri
201
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
LISTA FIGURILOR
Figura 1.1:
17
Figura 1.2:
Organisme responsabile pentru realizarea evalurii externe a colilor, nvmnt general obligatoriu
de zi, 2013/14
19
Figura 1.3:
Dispoziii de la nivel central/nalt pentru stabilirea coninutului i criteriilor pentru evaluarea extern a
colilor, nvmnt general obligatoriu de zi, 2013/14
21
Figura 1.4:
Proceduri pentru evaluarea extern a colilor, nvmnt general obligatoriu de zi, 2013/14
24
Figura 1.5:
27
Figura 1.6:
29
Figura 1.7:
31
Figura 1.8:
Tipologia rezultatelor evalurii externe a colilor, nvmnt general obligatoriu de zi, 2013/14
32
Figura 1.9:
Distribuirea rapoartelor de evaluare exten a colilor unice, nvmnt general obligatoriu de zi,
2013/14
36
Figura 1.10:
Calificri necesare evaluatorilor externi ai colilor, nvmnt general obligatoriu de zi, 2013/14
38
Figura 1.11:
Finalizarea obligatorie a unei pregtiri de specialitate pentru evaluatorii externi ai colilor, nvmnt
general obligatoriu de zi, 2013/14
39
Figura 2.1:
44
Figura 2.2:
44
Figura 2.3:
Msuri de sprijin disponibile evaluatorilor interni ai colilor; nvmnt general obligatoriu de zi,
2013/14
45
Figura 2.4:
Utilizri i utilizatori ai rezultatelor evalurii colare interne, nvmnt general obligatoriu de zi,
2013/14
49
(1) Vezi Concluziile Consiliului din 20 mai 2014 cu privire la asigurarea calitii ce sprijin educaia i instruirea, OJ C 183,
14.6.2014.
(2) Eurydice, 2004. Evaluarea colilor care ofer educaie obligatorie n Europa. Bruxelles: Eurydice.
(3) Autoritile locale sunt responsabile pentru evaluarea propriei asigurri a educaiei i sunt ele nsele evaluate de autoritile
centrale sau de agenii.
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
Inspectoratul de la nivel central este responsabil pentru evaluarea colar extern n majoritatea statelor
n 27 din cele 31 de sisteme de nvmnt unde se efectueaz evaluarea colar extern, un organism de
nivel central/de vrf, adesea denumit inspectorat, este responsabil pentru realizarea sa. n Danemarca,
Lituania i Islanda, responsabilitile pentru evaluarea colar extern sunt mprite ntre nivelele central i
regional sau local. n Estonia, Ungaria, Austria, Polonia i Turcia, organismele regionale sau subregionale
sunt responsabile de implementarea evalurii colare, care determin grade diferite de standardizare n
ntregile entiti descentralizate. n final, n Estonia, Slovacia, Regatul Unit (Anglia, ara Galilor i Scoia) i
n fosta Republica Iugoslav a Macedoniei, autoritile locale sau finanatorii colari regionali exercit unele
responsabiliti de evaluare pentru colile pe care le ntrein, alturi de principala abordare a evalurii
colare externe efectuat de un organism de la nivel central (sau regional).
n majoritatea statelor, o calificare pentru predare i un anumit numr de ani de experien
profesional ntr-o coal, ca profesor sau ntr-o funcie de conducere, sunt necesare pentru a aplica
pentru post. n doisprezece state, candidaii cu o gam mai larg de calificri, dobndite n domenii
cum sunt educaia, cercetarea sau psihologia i cu experiene profesionale mai diverse, pot deveni
evaluatori externi. n mod interesant, unele state (de exemplu Italia i Islanda) iau n considerare
includerea persoanelor cu experien dobndit n afara colilor, n domenii cum sunt cercetarea n
evaluare, ca o cerin i un atu pentru echipele de evaluatori externi.
C o n c l u z i i p ri n c i p a l e
Abordrile bazate pe risc i activitile pentru creterea profilului sunt practicate ntr-un numr
extrem de limitat de state
Analiza proceselor instituite pentru evaluarea extern dezvluie, de asemenea, dou practici interesante
care sunt utilizate n cteva state: abordarea bazat pe risc i activitile pentru creterea profilului.
n ase sisteme de nvmnt (Danemarca, Irlanda, Olanda, Suedia i Regatul Unit (Anglia i
Irlanda de Nord)), n ultimii ani a fost introdus o abordare bazat pe risc. Aceast metod este
folosit pentru a axa activitatea evaluatorilor asupra colilor care nu obin performane la
standardele ateptate (Danemarca, Irlanda, Olanda i Regatul Unit (Anglia)), sau pentru a alege
ntre diferite tipologii de inspecii (Suedia i Regatul Unit (Irlanda de Nord)). Abordarea are
implicaii asupra eficienei, att bugetare, ct i n termeni de concentrare a ateniei i a resurselor
acolo unde sunt mai cele mai necesare, dar de asemenea se bazeaz pe acurateea i relevana
indicatorilor luai n considerare. n plus, aceasta ntrete rolul evalurii externe ca proces care
vizeaz identificarea punctelor slabe din sistem i poate avea eventual efectul contrar de a face
invizibile bunele practici. Cu toate acestea, abordarea bazat pe risc i implicaiile sale ar trebui
investigate suplimentar i ar putea reprezenta un domeniu n care statele coopereaz sub form de
cursani inter pares.
n cteva sisteme de nvmnt (Frana (ISCED 1), Lituania, Polonia i Regatul Unit (Anglia, ara
Galilor i Irlanda de Nord)), evaluatorii exteni nu sunt menii doar s descopere defecte n
performana colilor, ci i s creasc vizibilitatea celor care au performane bune i obin rezultate
bune. Abordarea folosirii evalurii externe ca instrument pentru identificarea i oferirea de
vizibilitate bunelor practici permite colectarea i distribuirea dovezilor cu privire la ceea ce
funcioneaz i n ce circumstane cu randamente pozitive att la nivel colar, ct i la nivel de
sistem. n plus, aceasta lrgete i domeniul de aplicare al evalurii externe i ofer o cale pentru
a-i dezvolta suplimentar rolul i funcionarea.
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
tuturor, iar informaiile referitoare la calitatea colii trebuie s fie n primul rnd accesibile celor care iau
decizii cu privire la sistem. Cei doi indicatori care par s ncadreze sistemele ntr-o categorie sau n alta
sunt: (1) publicarea raportului de evaluare extern i (2) gradul de libertate parental/a elevului n
5
alegerea colii ( ). Un raport care este fcut public n cadrul unui sistem care confer puteri depline
prinilor i elevilor de a-i alege coala determin o dinamic similar pieei, unde raportul, i prin
urmare sistemul de evaluare extern care permite elaborarea unui asemenea raport, devine o prghie
care poate influena alegerea prinilor i, drept consecin, poate mri presiunea asupra colilor de a-i
mbunti performana. Din contr, un raport care nu este fcut public sau este distribuit cu limitri, n
cadrul unui sistem care aloc elevii n coli n baza unor criterii predefinite, cum este proximitatea
geografic, mut responsabilitatea colilor n cadrul perimetrului ndatoririlor statului, care este n ultim
instan responsabil pentru educarea cetenilor si i pentru mbuntirea performanei colilor.
n cadrul viziunii orientate spre pia, se ncadreaz sistemele de nvmnt cum sunt Belgia
(Comunitatea Flamand), Irlanda, Olanda i Regatul Unit (Anglia, ara Galilor i Irlanda de Nord). Din
contr, pentru state cum sunt Frana, Cipru, Slovenia i Turcia, responsabilitatea colilor este n mod
clar i primordial fa de stat. Toate celelalte sisteme educaionale pot fi poziionate de-a lungul
acestui spectru fr a subscrie n mod clar la o viziune sau la alta. n unele state, de fapt, n timp ce
rapoartele sunt publice, exist o limit restricionat sau nu exist nicio limit pentru prini i elevi de
a alege stabilimentul colar (de ex. Estonia, Polonia, Portugalia i Islanda), n timp ce n altele exist o
libertate mare sau total pentru prini i elevi de a alege coala, care nu este nsoit de informaii
disponibile n mod public cu privire la calitatea stabilimentului (de ex. Belgia (Comunitatea Francez),
Italia, Letonia i Spania), se modific cel mai probabil mentalitile cetenilor cu privire la calitatea
colilor ctre reelele informale de prini i elevi.
EVALUAREA INTERN A COLILOR
n decursul ultimilor zece ani, au crescut ateptrile cu privire la evaluarea colar intern din Europa.
De la nceputul anilor 2000, statutul evalurii colare interne s-a schimbat de la recomandat sau
6
posibil la obligatoriu n doisprezece sisteme educaionale ( ). Reglementrile de la nivel central/de vrf
stabilesc n prezent faptul c evaluarea intern este obligatorie n 27 sisteme educaionale. Acolo
unde evaluarea intern nu este obligatorie, este de obicei recomandat. Singurele state unde colile
nu sunt obligate sau nu li se recomand s efectueze evaluarea intern sunt Bulgaria i Frana, cea
din urm fiind limitat la colile primare.
Evaluarea intern este structurat de ctre autoritile de la nivel central/de vrf n proporii
diferite n diverse state
Dincolo de imaginea general a colilor de la care se ateapt s efectueze evaluarea intern
aproape pretutindeni, politicile referitoare la implementarea sa variaz pe scar larg i n multe cazuri
las autonomie colilor n aceast privin.
Statele unde colile sunt obligate s utilizeze acelai cadru ca evaluatorii externi (Romnia i fosta
Republic Iugoslav a Macedoniei) sau un cadru specific de autoevaluare (Grecia), sau unde
coninutul raportului de evaluare intern este prevzut de lege (Letonia i Slovacia), reprezint mai
degrab excepii. n Regatul Unit (Scoia), toate colile au adoptat acelai cadru folosit de evaluatorii
externi n baza unui consens naional.
(5) Figura 5B pag. 35, EACEA/Eurydice/Eurostat 2012. Date cheie despre educaie n Europa Ediia 2012. Bruxelles: EACEA
P9 Eurydice.
(6) Estonia (2006), Irlanda (2012), Grecia (2013/14), Croaia (2008), Italia (2011), Luxemburg (2009), Ungaria (2011), Austria
(2012), Portugalia (2002) i Regatul Unit (Irlanda de Nord (2010) i ara Galilor (2010)).
10
C o n c l u z i i p ri n c i p a l e
Aproape toate statele pun la dispoziia colilor msuri de sprijin i instrumente pentru evaluarea intern
Indiferent dac autoevaluarea este obligatorie sau recomandat, toate colile (cu excepia Bulgariei)
folosesc cel puin una (adesea mai multe) msuri de sprijin pentru a le ajuta s-i efectueze evalurile
interne. Acestea includ: formare de specialitate n evaluarea intern, utilizarea cadrelor de evaluare
extern, indicatori care permit colilor s se compare cu alte coli, instruciuni specifice i manuale,
forumuri online, precum i sfaturi din partea specialitilor externi i sprijin financiar.
n timp ce n Belgia (Comunitatea Flamand), Germania, Estonia, Irlanda, Spania, Lituania, Malta,
Austria, Polonia, Romnia i Regatul Unit colile au cinci sau mai multe tipuri diferite de msuri de
sprijin la dispoziie, n alte state, acestea sunt mai limitate. Belgia (Comunitatea Francez), de
exemplu, folosete numai indicatori care le permit colilor s se compare cu alte coli. n Cipru (numai
ISCED 2) i n Olanda, colile au posibilitatea de a folosi un cadru de evaluare extern pentru a le
ajuta cu procesele de autoevaluare, dar nu exist alte msuri de sprijin la dispoziia lor.
Cea mai des ntlnit modalitate de a oferi sprijin colilor, pe teritoriul Europei, este prevederea
instruciunilor i a manualelor. Cu excepia Belgiei (Comunitile vorbitoare de limba francez i de
8
german), Frana (ISCED 1), Cipru, Ungaria ( ), Olanda i fosta Republic Iugoslav a Macedoniei,
toate celelalte sisteme educaionale ofer instruciuni i manuale pentru evaluarea colar intern.
Sprijinul financiar, pe de alt parte, reprezint cea mai puin disponibil msur de sprijin, din moment
ce este accesibil doar n Spania i Croaia.
n anul 2004, doar o ptrime din state au oferit colilor posibilitatea s utilizeze indicatori cum sunt
rezultate ale testrii elevilor pentru a-i compara performana cu alte coli care funcioneaz n condiii
9
similare sau cu mediile naionale ( ). n prezent, acest lucru se ntmpl n dou treimi din sistemele
de nmnt, ceea ce plaseaz asemenea indicatori drept al doilea cel mai frecevent disponibil
instrument pentru evaluarea intern pe teritoriul Europei. Aceast tendin a coincis cu introducerea
unor mecanisme obligatorii de testare naional n multe state n ultimii ani, precum i cu faptul c o
10
serie de ri ofer colilor individuale rezultatele lor colective de testare ( ).
(7) Belgia (Comunitatea vorbitoare de limba german), Estonia, Irlanda, Spania, Luxemburg (ISCED 1), Austria, Regatul Unit
(Irlanda de Nord i Scoia) i Islanda.
(8) Autoritatea Educaional este n procesul de dezvoltare a unui manual de autoevaluare pentru coli.
(9) Pentru informaii suplimentare, vezi: Eurydice, 2004. Evaluarea colilor care ofer educaie obligatorie n Europa. Bruxelles:
Eurydice.
(10) Pentru informaii suplimentare, vezi: EACEA/Eurydice, 2009. Testarea naional a elevilor n Europa: obiective, organizare
i utilizarea rezultatelor. Bruxelles: EACEA P9 Eurydice.
11
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
(11) Eurydice, 2004. Evaluarea colilor care ofer educie obligatorie n Europa: Bruxelles: Eurydice.
(12) Dupriez, V., Franquet, A., 2013. L'valuation dans les systmes scolaires: au-del d'un effet miroir? In: V. Dupriez, dir.
L'valuation dans les systmes scolaires. Accommodements du travail et reconfiguration des professionnalits. Bruxelles:
De Boeck, pag. 21-34.
12
INTRODUCERE
Sistemele de educaie i instruire de calitate superioar sunt eseniale pentru a oferi tinerilor
cunotinele i aptitudinile adecvate i, prin urmare, susin dezvoltarea social i economic a
Europei. mbuntirea calitii educaiei i a instruirii reprezint o preocupare constant n dezbaterea
politicii educaionale att la nivel naional, ct i la nivelul UE, aa cum demonstreaz obiectivele
comune i partajate pentru sistemele de nvmnt coninute n cadrul strategic european pentru
1
cooperare n domeniu ( ).
Nevoia de sisteme i politici care urmresc asigurarea i mbuntirea calitii educaiei a fost
recunoscut pe scar larg la nivel european. O recomandare din 2001 a Parlamentului European i a
2
Consiliului a accentuat puternic importana dezvoltrii unei evaluri de calitate a colilor ( ). Apoi,
importana monitorizrii i evalurii calitii educaiei a fost reiterat de mai multe ori n anii urmtori
3
de ctre Consiliu ( ). n anul 2014, Consiliul a invitat Comisia European s ntreasc nvarea
4
reciproc i s susin statele membre n dezvoltarea acordurilor lor de asigurare a calitii ( ).
Acest raport ofer o analiz specific fiecrui stat i comparativ a structurilor, obiectivelor i
modalitilor de implementare a evalurii colilor pe teritoriul Europei, pentru a promova mprtirea
cunotinelor i abordrilor pentru asigurarea calitii n sistemele europene de nvmnt.
PUNCTUL CENTRAL AL RAPORTULUI: EVALUAREA COLILOR
(1) Vezi concluziile Consiliului din 12 mai 2009 cu privire la un cadru strategic pentru cooperare european n educaie i
instruire (ET 2020), OJ C 119, 28.5.2009, pag. 2.
(2) Recomandarea Parlamentului European i a Consiliului din 12 februarie 2001 cu privire la cooperarea european n
evaluarea calitii n nvmntul colar, OJ L 60, 1.3.2001, pag. 51.
(3) Vezi proiectul de concluzii ale Consiliului i Reprezentanilor Guvernelor statelor membre, care se ntrunesc n Consiliu, cu
privire la eficiena i echitatea n educaie i instruire, OJ C 298, 8.12.2006, p. 3; Concluziile Consiliului din 12 mai 2009 cu
privire la un cadru strategic pentru cooperarea european n educaie i instruire (ET2020), OJ C 119, 28.5.2009, pag. 2.
(4) Vezi Concluziile Consiliului din 20 mai 2014 cu privire la asigurarea calitii n susinerea educaiei i a instruirii, OJ C 183,
14.6.2014, pag. 30.
(5) Eurydice, 2004. Evaluarea colilor care ofer educaie obligatorie n Europa. Bruxelles: Eurydice.
13
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
Evaluarea colar poate fi legat de o gam larg de activiti colare, inclusiv predarea i nvarea
i/sau toate aspectele conducerii colare. Acest raport se refer n principal la abordri care se
concentreaz pe activitile educaionale i de conducere. Evaluarea colar realizat de evaluatori
de specialitate i care se refer la anumite sarcini (legate de evidenele contabile, sntate, siguran,
arhive etc.) nu este luat n considerare n acest raport.
Evaluarea colilor poate fi extern sau intern. Prima dintre ele este realizat de evaluatori care nu
sunt membri ai personalului colii respective, care sunt adesea organizai ntr-un inspectorat i
raporteaz autoritilor responsabile pentru educaie. Cea din urm se refer la evaluarea realizat n
6
principal de membrii personalului colar ( ). Att evaluarea colar extern, ct i cea intern pot
implica ali actori colari implicai, cum sunt elevii, prinii sau membrii comunitii locale.
Mai muli factori au susinut dezvoltarea evalurii colilor ca practic des ntlnit de msurare i
7
mbuntire a calitii educaiei pe teritoriul statelor europene ( ). Tendinele ctre descentralizarea
sistemelor educaionale ncepnd din anii 1980, combinate cu autonomia mai tradiional conferit
nivelelor locale i colare n alte cteva state, a determinat ca autoritile locale i colile s apar
drept actori cheie n politica educaional. n mai multe ri, colilor le sunt conferite responsabiliti de
luare a deciziilor cu privire la managementul personalului i resurselor, precum i cu privire la
coninutul prevederilor educaionale. Uneori, aceast autonomie a fost confundat cu
responsabilitatea de definire a planurilor strategice pentru perfecionare i cu dezvoltarea
suplimentar a prevederilor educaionale. Reformele care cresc autonomia colar au deschis calea
unui transfer de responsabilitate de la autoritile educaionale la colile individuale.
Semnificaia evalurii colare n cadrul sistemului educaional variaz pe teritoriul statelor. Firete,
fiecare stat dezvolt o cultur de evaluare care se concentreaz pe diferite aspecte. Evaluarea colilor
este doar un aspect al sistemelor de asigurare a calitii, care pot fi mai mult sau mai puin dezvoltate
n funcie de statul respectiv. Pentru a v forma o idee despre modul n care evaluarea colilor este
legat de ntregul sistem de evaluare, acest raport ofer profiluri statale care ofer o descriere
celorlalte abordri utilizate n asigurarea calitii.
Profilurile statale ofer loc i pentru a descrie sistemul de asigurare a calitii n statele care nu au un
sistem pentru evaluarea colilor extern i uneori intern, cum sunt Bulgaria, Croaia, Grecia, Cipru
(ISCED 1), Luxemburg, Finlanda i Norvegia. Pentru a asigura calitatea, aceste state se pot baza n
mare msur pe monitorizarea sistemului de nvmnt ca ntreg n baza rezultatelor elevilor din
evaluarea standardizat, a evalurii asigurrii educaiei de ctre autoritile locale sau a evalurii
profesorilor la nivel individual. Exist doar cteva referine la aceste state n analiza comparativ.
(6) Termenul auto-evaluare este folosit frecvent pentru a se referi n linii mari la toate tipurile de evaluare care pot aprea n
coli. Pentru a clarifica conceptele, o distincie a fost trasat ntre auto-evaluare (n care evaluatorii formeaz opinii cu
privire la sarcinile pe care le efectueaz ei nii) i evaluarea intern (n care, independent de colectarea datelor, opiniile
sunt formate de persoane individuale sau de un organism compus din persoane, care sunt membri ai personalului sau elevi
la coal). n scopul acestui raport, toate evalurile realizate de coala nsi sunt desemnate drept interne.
(7) Vezi Eurydice, 2007. Autonomia colar n Europa. Politici i msuri. Bruxelles: Eurydice.
14
Introducere
15
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
Acest raport ofer o privire de ansamblu asupra sistemelor pentru evaluarea colilor la nivel primar i
8
general (inferior i superior) la nivel secundar obligatoriu de zi ( ).
Raportul acoper colile publice din toate rile. colile particulare nu sunt incluse, cu excepia colilor
private subvenionate n numrul redus de state unde asemenea coli nscriu un mare procent de
elevi, respectiv Belgia, Irlanda, Olanda i Regatul Unit (Anglia). colile private subvenionate sunt coli
n care jumtate din finanarea lor de baz provine din bugetul public.
Anul de referin este 2013/14. Raportul acoper toate statele membre UE, precum i Islanda, fosta
9
Republic Iugoslav a Macedoniei, Norvegia i Turcia ( ).
Informaiile au fost colectate prin chestionare i modele pentru profilurile naionale completate de
experi naionali i/sau reprezentani naionali ai Reelei Eurydice. Documentele oficiale emise de
autoritile educaionale de la nivel central/de vrf reprezint principalele surse de informaii.
(8) Pentru informaii precise cu privire la nvmntul general obligatoriu primar i secundar de zi din fiecare ar, v rugm s
consultai: Structuri ale sistemelor europene de nvmnt 2014/15 disponibil la
http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice/facts_and_figures_en.php#diagrams
(9) Urmtoarele state din reeaua Eurydice nu au participat la acest raport: Bosnia i Heregovina, Liechtenstein,
Muntenegru i Serbia.
16
ISCED 1
CY
Sursa: Eurydice.
17
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
Italia: Implementarea complet a evalurii colare externe va ncepe n anul 2015/16, ca urmare a unei faze pilot.
Ungaria: Un proiect pilot de 3 ani se desfoar n prezent pentru a pregti introducerea unui tip de evaluare extern
cuprinztoare (inspecie pedagogic/profesional) n anul 2015, alturi de evaluarea extern care vizeaz verificarea
ca colile s funcioneze n conformitate cu legislaia.
n apte sisteme educaionale, nu exist prevederi centrale pentru evaluarea colar extern.
n Croaia, evaluarea extern a colilor sau a cadrelor didactice nu este principalul obiectiv al
reformelor sau politicilor educaionale naionale. i n Bulgaria, acest lucru s-a ntmplat pn de
curnd. Totui, un proiect recent care i propune s schieze un sistem de inspecie s-a desfurat
ntre anii 2012 i 2014. n urma acestui proiect, Ministerul Educaiei i tiinei pregtete o nou lege
pentru nvmntul precolar i colar care ncorporeaz un sistem de inspecie tradiional. Legea ar
putea fi adoptat n anul 2015.
n Grecia, Cipru (nvmnt primar) i Luxemburg, evaluarea extern de ctre inspectorat sau
consilieri colari vizeaz n principal profesorii. Dei o oarecare evaluare extern a colilor exist n
aceste state, este relativ limitat n privina domeniului su de aplicare, deoarece este legat de
anumite elemente, cum sunt conturi financiare, sntate, siguran, arhive i alte chestiuni.
n Finlanda, nu exista reglementri centrale cu privire la evaluarea colar extern. Totui, autoritile
locale pot decide s foloseasc o asemenea abordare pentru colile de care sunt responsabile.
Legislaia cu privire la nvmntul de baz nu se concentreaz asupra colilor, ci asupra furnizorilor
de educaie (de ex. municipalitile pentru colile publice). n consecin, drepturile i responsabilitile
sunt definite pentru acetia din urm, mai degrab dect pentru primii. Furnizorii de educaie au o
ndatorire legal de a evalua educaia pe care o ofer i de a participa la evalurile externe ale
sistemului de nvmnt ca ntreg sau la nivel regional. Constatrile semnificative ale acestor evaluri
externe trebuie publicate. Reglementrile nu specific formele i procedurile de evaluare la nivel local
i las o foarte mare libertate furnizorilor de educaie. Scopul evalurii este de a susine dezvoltarea
educaional i de a mbunti condiiile pentru nvare.
n Norvegia, evaluarea extern realizat de inspectoratul naional se concentreaz pe asigurarea
conformitii activitilor furnizorilor colari locali cu legislaia educaional. n special, inspectorii
verific dac furnizorii colari i respect obligaiile statutare pentru a se asigura c copiii i tineri au
un drept egal la educaie, indiferent de sex, istoric social i cultural, locul unde triesc sau orice nevoi
speciale. colile ar putea fi implicate n procesele de evaluare extern prin interviuri cu persoane
cheie. Cu toate acestea, inspectorii se concentreaz n principal pe fondatorii colii.
18
ISCED 1
CY
Sursa: Eurydice.
Not explicativ
Aceast hart arat organismul sau organismele responsabile pentru realizarea evalurii externe a colilor. Aceasta nu
arat acele organisme care exercit doar o responsabilitate formal.
Oficiile regionale sau sub-regionale ale autoritilor educaionale centrale sunt divizii administrative ale autoritilor
centrale/de vrf care funcioneaz la nivel regional sau sub-regional.
n ase sisteme de nvmnt (Estonia, Slovacia, Regatul Unit (Anglia, ara Galilor i Scoia) i fosta
Republic Iugoslav a Macedoniei), autoritile locale sau fondatorii regionali colari exercit
19
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
20
valuat. Acestea ofer baza (cantitativ i/sau calitativ) n care sunt formate opiniile. Analiza comparativ
relev faptul c pentru majoritatea statelor, evaluatorii externi folosesc criterii standardizate stabilite la nivel
de autoritate central/de vrf i se axeaz asupra unei game largi de activiti colare. n restul statelor,
unde criteriile de evaluare nu sunt standardizate la nivel central/de vrf, evaluarea extern tinde s se
concentreze pe aspecte limitate ale activitii colare i/sau nu este realizat ca un lucru de la sine neles.
Dou treimi din sistemele de nvmnt unde evaluarea extern a colilor este implementat au
proiectat cadre structurate i standardizate care stabilesc coninutul i ateptrile evalurilor externe
(vezi Figura 1.3). n astfel de ri, toi evaluatorii externi trebuie s utilizeze acelai cadru (aceleai
1
cadre). Acest proces a nceput n anii 1990 ( ) i a continuat n noul mileniu n unele state. De exemplu
n 2009, Belgia (Comunitatea vorbitoare de limba german) a publicat primul document care a descris
sistematic un set de caracteristici i standarde de baz pentru colile bune (Cadru de orientare pentru
2
calitatea colar ( )). Merit menionat faptul c utilizarea obligatorie a unui cadru stabilit la nivel central
poate fi de asemenea identificat n statele unde responsabilitile pentru evaluarea extern sunt
descentralizate la nivele regionale, i anume Polonia i Austria (vezi Seciunea 1.2).
Figura 1.3: Acorduri la nivel central/de vrf pentru stabilirea coninutului i criteriilor pentru evaluarea extern a
colilor, nvmnt general obligatoriu de zi, 2013/14
ISCED 1
CY
Sursa: Eurydice.
21
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
De obicei, cadrele pentru evaluarea extern proiectate la nivel central acoper o gam vast de
aspecte colare, inclusiv calitatea predrii i nvrii, rezultatele nvrii elevilor, diverse domenii de
management colar, precum i conformitatea cu reglementrile. Cu toate acestea, n Turcia,
evaluarea extern a colilor se axeaz n principal pe respectarea reglementrilor.
Cadrele de evaluare variaz n lungime i complexitate. Acestea sunt de obicei structurate n
conformitate cu principalele domenii ale activitilor colare (de ex. predare i nvare, sprijin pentru
elevi, leadership), ele nsele organizate n parametri mai specifici. Pentru a ajuta evaluatorul s
evalueze i s noteze calitatea colii, cadrul ofer descriptori care definesc nivelul de realizare
ateptat pentru fiecare parametru sau domeniu al activitii colare sau diferitele nivele posibile de
realizare care pot fi ntlnite. n dou cazuri (Cehia i Austria), n timp ce parametrii ce trebuie luai n
considerare sunt stabilii la nivel central, standardele preconizate nu sunt. Inspectorii stabilesc ce
ateapt de la o coal n baza propriei lor experiene.
Mai multe state cu cadre proiectate la nivel central au stabilit sisteme pentru adaptarea domeniului de
aplicare i a baremului de evaluare la circumstanele speciale ale colilor. Acest sistem de inspecie
difereniat urmrete s pun mai mult accent pe colile sau domeniile unde riscul de performane
slabe este mai ridicat (vezi Seciunea 1.4).
n sistemele de nvmnt unde nu exist niciun cadru la nivel central/de vrf cu parametri i
standarde care s ofere un proces extrem de structurat pentru evaluarea extern a colilor, cerinele
sunt de obicei mai limitate. Evaluarea extern tinde s se axeze pe anumite aspecte ale activitii
colare.
n Belgia (Comunitatea Francez), evaluarea extern se axeaz pe aspecte limitate ale activitii
colare care sunt specificate de ctre decretul care modeleaz sistemul actual de inspecie. Sistemul
de inspecie este organizat n mod tradiional n jurul evalurii cadrelor didactice individuale. ncepnd
cu anul 2007, legislaia s-a reorientat ctre evaluarea nivelului de nvare (niveau des tudes) din
cadrul colilor, ceea ce nseamn c echipele de predare dintr-un anumit domeniu de studiu sunt
acum principalul subiect al inspeciei.
n Danemarca, n evaluarea sa anual a colilor primare i secundare inferioare, Agenia Naional
pentru Calitate i Supraveghere se concentreaz pe indicatorii de calitate stabilii de Ministerul
Educaiei. Aceti indicatori includ, de exemplu, rezultatele din testele naionale i examinrile finale,
precum i ratele de nscriere n nvmntul secundar superior.
n Frana, nu exist niciun protocol standardizat care s defineasc coninutul i procedurile de
evaluare extern. Totui, pentru a ghida activitatea inspectorilor locali i regionali, autoritile
educaionale ofer un set de indicatori legai de principalele rezultate ale educaiei i variabillele
contextuale defalcate pe coli. n plus, monitorizarea contractelor bazate pe obiectiv (contrat
d'objectifs), introduse n anul 2005, a determinat autoritile educaionale regionale s desfoare
evaluri mai sistematice ale politicilor colilor secundare i ale funcionrii lor n legtur cu obiectivele
educaionale vaste stabilite n astfel de contracte.
n Estonia i Slovenia, evaluarea extern a colilor se concentreaz n special pe respectarea
legislaiei n raport cu un set de teme care sunt fie specificate anual (Estonia), fie se regsesc n
Legea Inspeciei (Slovenia).
n Suedia, punctul central al evalurii externe este expus n Legea Educaiei, precum i n ndrumarul
pentru Inspectorat i n contractul su de servicii publice. Inspectoratul colilor Suedeze (SSI) dispune
de autonomie cu privire la parametrii i standardele pe care trebuie s le ia n considerare.
Principalele domenii examinate n evaluarea extern sunt: progresul elevilor n atingerea obiectivelor
educaionale, leadership-ul, mbuntirea calitii educaiei i drepturile individuale ale elevilor.
22
23
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
Stnga
ISCED1
Dreapta
ISCED 2-3
Sursa: Eurydice.
Not explicativ
MK: Vezi Glosar.
24
Evaluarea riscurilor
Evaluarea riscurilor este realizat ca pas preliminar n Danemarca, Irlanda, Olanda, Suedia i Regatul
Unit (Anglia i Irlanda de Nord). Aceast practic este folosit pentru a focaliza activitatea
evaluatorilor asupra colilor care nu funcioneaz conform ateptrilor (Danemarca, Irlanda, Olanda i
Regatul Unit (Anglia)) sau pentru a alege ntre diferite tipologii de inspecii (Suedia i Regatul Unit
(Irlanda de Nord)). Indicatorii cu privire la performana elevilor n mare parte bazai pe rezultatele din
testele naionale, reprezint o trstur cheie. Datele cu privire la rezultatele nvrii sunt n orice caz
completate de alte surse de informaii cum sunt, de exemplu, datele financiare ale colii n Olanda;
25
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
rezultatele unui chestionar colar, n Suedia; pstrarea elevilor i prezena elevilor, n Irlanda; i
opiniile formulate n inspeciile anterioare, n Regatul Unit (Anglia i Irlanda de Nord).
n Regatul Unit (Anglia), inspeciile sunt ciclice i n fiecare coal este efectuat o inspecie n
decursul unei perioade de cinci ani. Cu toate acestea, colile considerate excepionale ntr-o
evaluare anterioar sunt scutite de alte inspecii de rutin i sunt supuse numai unei evaluri a
riscurilor dup trei ani de la ultima inspecie i ulterior anual, atta timp ct este meninut calitatea
colii, n timp ce prima evaluare a riscurilor exercitat asupra colilor care a fost clasificat drept 'bun'
determin intervalul de dinainte de urmtoarea inspecie. n alte state (Irlanda, Olanda i Suedia),
evaluarea riscurilor este realizat anual. n Irlanda, n plus fa de colile selectate prin evaluarea
riscurilor, inspectoratul include n programul anual de activitate al inspeciilor coli selectate n mod
aleatoriu de toate nivelele de calitate.
Vizitele la coal
Vizitele la coal reprezint o etap standard n procedurile tuturor rilor. Vizitele sunt menite s
ofere evaluatorilor dovezi de prim mn ale performanei i funcionrii colii i sunt implementate n
mare parte n moduri similare aproape peste tot.
Lungimea vizitelor poate varia de la o ar la alta, pornind de la minim o zi (Austria i Suedia) la
maxim apte zile n Slovacia, media situndu-se ntre dou i trei zile. n majoritatea rilor, lungimea
depinde de complexitatea inspeciei sau de mrimea colii, calculat n funcie de numrul de elevi. n
Malta, numrul membrilor personalului este cel care determin lungimea vizitei.
n majoritatea rilor, vizitele sunt organizate n jurul a trei activiti principale:
Interviuri cu personalul;
Observaia la clas;
Inspecia activitilor colare, a incintei i/sau documentelor interne.
Interviurile cu personalul reprezint o trstur comun n toate vizitele. Discuiile au loc n principal
cu directorii unitilor de nvmnt i ali reprezentani ai conducerii colii. Profesorii sunt de
asemenea intervievai, precum i ali membrii ai personalului colar. n Regatul Unit (Irlanda de Nord),
profesorii sunt abordai i prin intermediul unui chestionar online, disponibil tuturor cadrelor didactice,
participarea fiind voluntar. n Portugalia, aceast practic se limiteaz la un eantion de profesori. n
Ungaria, evaluarea pedagogic/profesional fiind n stadiu pilot, se consemneaz c cel puin 5 %
din profesori sunt intervievai.
Observaia la clas este prezent n aproape toate rile, excepiile fiind Estonia, Ungaria (pilot), i
Portugalia. n anumite ri, n protocolul pentru vizitele la coli se consemneaz numerele minime de
clase sau lecii care urmeaz s fie observate. n Belgia (Comunitatea vorbitoare de limba german),
inspectorii trebuie s observe leciile colare de la cel puin 50 % din profesori, n timp ce n Islanda
acest procent ajunge pn la 70 % din profesorii observai la clas. n Letonia, procedurile sugereaz
observarea a cel puin 12 lecii, n timp ce n Malta acestea recomand observarea a ct mai multe
lecii posibile n funcie de lungimea vizitei i capacitatea evaluatorilor. n Islanda i Lituania,
inspectorilor li se cere s foloseasc un formular structurat n mod specific pentru a concentra
observaiile.
Observarea altor activiti colare, inspectarea incintei colii i/sau a documentelor interne
este o activitate mult mai puin omogen, dei practicat n multe ri. De obicei, evaluatorii viziteaz
infrastructura colar (sli de clas, laboratoare etc.), verific documentele administrative i observ
elevii n timpul pauzelor pentru a nelege mai bine climatul colii.
26
Elevi
ISCED 1
CY
RO
Prini
Comunitatea local
Toate cele trei tipologii
Nicio participare a factorilor interesai
Nicio evaluare colar extern/
nicio reglementare central cu privire la
evaluarea colar extern
Sursa: Eurydice.
27
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
fosta Republic Iugloslav a Republicii Macedonia i Turcia), factorii cointeresai implicai sunt limitai
la elevi i prini, n timp ce n Olanda i Romnia (ISCED 1), la prini i la comunitatea local. n
Malta, procedurile prevd doar implicarea prinilor, n timp ce n Cipru (ISCED 2) i Slovacia, doar
elevii particip la proces. n Ungaria, evaluarea pedagogic profesional care va intra n vigoare n
anul 2015 i care este n prezent n stadiu pilot, prevede implicarea prinilor. n trei ri (Belgia
(Comunitatea Francez), Frana i Austria), nu exist nicio prevedere pentru consultarea factorilor
cointeresai.
n timp ce n marea majoritate a rilor este prevzut implicarea factorilor cointeresai, aplicarea sa
nu este ntotdeauna sistematic. n ase sisteme de nvmnt (Belgia (Comunitatea flamand),
Cehia, Germania, Italia (pilot), Olanda i Slovenia), adunarea informaiilor de la prini, copii sau
comunitatea local este considerat un instrument printre alte instrumente, pentru a evalua mai bine
calitatea asigurrii educaiei i pentru a sprijini formularea unor opinii. Prin urmare, evaluatorii pot
decide ei nii dac s foloseasc sau nu asemenea instrumente.
n cazul n care se ntmpl, implicarea prinilor i/sau a copiilor poate fi bazat pe anchete, interviuri
sau pe ambele. Interviurile pot fi individuale sau organizate n focus-grupuri. n majoritatea rilor, toi
elevii i prinii lor sunt consultai prin intermediul chestionarelor. Cu toate acestea, n Belgia
(Comunitatea vorbitoare de limba german), Irlanda, Cipru (ISCED 2), Portugalia, Islanda, fosta
Republic Iugoslav a Macedoniei i Turcia, doar un eantion de elevi i/sau prini sau reprezentanii
lor n consiliul colar sau n alte organisme de conducere colar sunt consultai. n Malta, cnd
populaia colar este mai mare de 150 elevi, analiza chestionarelor se limiteaz la acest numr.
n 14 ri, comunitii locale i se ofer oportunitatea de a contribui la evaluarea extern mai ales prin
interviuri. Comunitatea local este considerat n linii mari n toate rile ca fiind constituit din actori
cu rol de conducere, cum sunt municipalitile, consiliile, administratorii sau proprietarii. n Lituania i
Romnia, implicarea comunitii locale reprezint o posibilitate, dar nu o obligaie. n Lituania, pot fi
consultai reprezentanii sindicatelor profesorilor i reprezentanii proprietarului colii, n timp ce n
Romnia, reprezentanii administraiei locale pot fi invitai s observe procesul i s ofere informaii n
timpul vizitei la coal. n Suedia, n cazul evalurilor aprofundate, i personalul de asisten social
este audiat.
Prinii, elevii i, n cazul n care acest lucru este prevzut, comunitatea local, sunt consultai cu
privire la o multitudine de subiecte. n majoritatea rilor, principala problem se refer la satisfacia lor
cu privire la calitatea global a colii, asigurarea educaiei de ctre aceasta i infrastructura colar.
Sunt abordate i alte domenii, cum sunt volumul de munc al elevilor, sigurana, mediul de studiu i
climatul colar. n Regatul Unit (Anglia), prinii i pot exprima prerea cu privire la modul n care
coala gestioneaz intimidarea, printre alte lucruri, n timp ce n Letonia consultarea cuprinde
elemente cum sunt organizarea activitilor extra-curriculare sau autonomia colii. De asemenea, n
Suedia este evaluat leadership-ul educaional de ctre prini i elevi. n Spania, colile primesc o
serie de chestionare contextuale care trebuie completate de elevi i prini, pe lng profesori i
directorii unitilor de nvmnt. Scopul acestor chestionare este de a aduna informaii cu privire la
variabilele contextuale, cum sunt contextul familial, nivelul socio-economic, mediul colar i aa mai
departe, pentru a permite o mai bun nelegere a performanei elevilor la testrile naionale.
28
n majoritatea rilor, elaborarea unui raport de evaluare constituie un proces dialogic ntre evaluatori
i conducerea colii. n unele cazuri, sunt implicai i profesorii. n ase sisteme de nvmnt (Belgia
(Comunitatea francez), Frana, Italia (pilot), Ungaria, Olanda i Suedia), raportul de evaluare este
finalizat fr nicio consultare cu coala. Totui, n Olanda, colile pot respinge concluziile cu privire la
raportul final prezentndu-i opinia autoritii competente.
Figura 1.6: Consultarea cu coala nainte de finalizarea raportului de evaluare, nvmnt general obligatoriu de
zi, 2013/14
ISCED 1
CY
Da
Nu
Nicio evaluare colar extern/
nicio reglementare central cu privire la
evaluarea colar extern
Sursa: Eurydice.
Procesul dialogic care duce la un raport final de evaluare poate avea diferite grade de complexitate.
Schema de baz urmeaz un model n trei etape alctuit din (1) evaluatorii care trimit colilor un
proiect de raport; (2) directorii unitilor de nvmnt care ofer feedback; i (3) evaluatorii care
finalizeaz raportul.
Totui, unele ri prezint variaii la schema de mai sus, uneori suplimentnd-o sau completnd-o.
n Polonia, raportul n sine nu poate fi comentat de ctre coal, ns constatrile sunt discutate verbal
cu toi profesorii ntr-o ntrunire dedicat nainte de redactarea acestuia. n plus, concluziile raportului
final pot fi respinse de ctre directorul colii i, drept urmare, evaluatorilor li se poate cere de ctre
administratorul regional s analizeze din nou datele colectate. n Letonia, coala are dreptul de a
prezenta obiecii cu privire la raportul final i de a face propuneri preedintelui Comisiei de Acreditare.
Feedback-ul verbal cu privire la proiectul de raport este practicat n Belgia (Comunitatea vorbitoare de
limba german). n Letonia, Portugalia, Regatul Unit i Turcia, acest feedback este urmat de o discuie
29
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
Tipologii de rezultate
n timp ce procedurile pentru implementarea evalurilor externe n coli se bazeaz n linii mari pe o
schem alctuit din trei etape, reflectat n marea majoritate a sistemelor de nvmnt, analiza
rezultatelor evalurilor externe relev o imagine mult mai fragmentat i mai diversificat, cu doar
cteva modele adoptate n majoritatea rilor.
n pofida acestei diversiti, o caracteristic pare s se regseasc n aproape toate sistemele de
nvmnt: recomandrile. n toate rile unde este realizat evaluarea extern i pentru care sunt
disponibile date, cu excepia Belgiei (Comunitatea vorbitoare de limba german) i a Poloniei,
evaluatorii formuleaz recomandri pentru perfecionare n rapoartele lor. n Polonia, astfel de
recomandri sunt emise doar n cazul n care cerinele legale sunt nclcate sau sunt comise alte
neregulariti.
Totui, natura i tonul recomandrilor variaz de la o ar la alta, trecnd de la obligaii ferme pentru
coli de a lua msuri specifice, la sugestii generale de perfecionare n domenii vaste. n Cehia de
exemplu, colile nu au nicio obligaie de a respecta recomandrile care vizeaz mbuntirea calitii
educaiei, dar trebuie s le urmeze n cazul unor deficiene grave. n Italia, innd seama n mod
corespunztor de faza sa pilot i n Cipru (ISCED 2), colile au autonomie deplin de a decide dac
vor urma sau nu recomandrile formulate de evaluatori. n Frana, n ceea ce privete ISCED 1,
angajamentul de a le urma este considerat mai mult moral dect contractual. n Estonia i n fosta
Republic Iugoslav a Macedoniei, recomandrile trebuie urmate i obiectivele atinse pn la anumite
termene limit.
30
Urmnd aceste recomandri, colile, evaluatorii i/sau autoritile responsabile iau msuri. Acestea
pot fi grupate n trei categorii mari:
1. msuri corective;
2. msuri disciplinare;
3. msuri de cretere a vizibilitii.
Prima categorie se refer la msuri care vizeaz combaterea punctelor slabe i a deficienelor n
calitatea educaiei oferite de coli sau remedierea nclcrilor regulamentelor (vezi Figura 1.8). n
unele ri, evaluatorii pot fi angrenai n activiti de monitorizare, cum sunt inspecii sau analize
suplimentare cu privire la modul n care coala a combtut deficienele sale iniiale. n altele, colile
pot fi obligate s ia msuri directe care abordeaz domeniile de interes evideniate de evaluatori i n
unele cazuri msurile trebuie strnse ntr-un plan specific de mbuntire. n final, n mai multe ri
sunt prevzute msuri de sprijin care constau n resurse suplimentare, ndrumare i formare.
A doua categorie se refer la msurile disciplinare, luate de obicei de autoritile responsabile i
aplicate n acele cazuri n care msurile corective nu au fost eficiente.
Figura 1.7: Tipologia rezultatelor care urmeaz raportului de evaluare colar extern, nvmnt general
obligatoriu de zi, 2013/14
Msuri corective
ISCED 1
FR
CY
Msuri disciplinare
Msuri de cretere a vizibilitii
Toate cele trei tipologii
Nicio evaluare colar extern/
nicio reglementare central cu privire la
evaluarea colar extern
Sursa: Eurydice.
31
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
A treia categorie include msuri care vizeaz recunoaterea, diseminarea i promovarea bunelor
practici. n timp ce majoritatea rilor au elaborat prevederi care intr n primele dou categorii, n
cteva cazuri rezultatele sunt concepute de asemenea ca un instrument pentru a consolida
vizibilitatea colilor care au performane bune, cu randamente potenial pozitive n ceea ce privete
imaginea colii i mbuntirea practicilor colare n ansamblu.
Figura 1.8: Tipologia rezultatelor evalurii externe a colii, nvmnt general obligatoriu de zi, 2013/14
Recomandri pentru
perfecionare
Monitorizare de ctre
evaluatori
Obligaia de a redacta un
plan de perfecionare
Resurse suplimentare
Formare suplimentar
Msuri disciplinare
Msuri de cretere a
vizibilitii
Stnga
ISCED1
Dreapta
ISCED 2-3
Sursa: Eurydice.
Not explicativ
MK: Vezi Glosar.
Msuri corective
n plus fa de formularea unor recomandri, evaluatorii pot fi angrenai n msuri de monitorizare. n
contextul acestui raport, msurile de monitorizare sunt considerate ca fiind acelea care i implic pe
evaluatori n analizarea sau verificarea msurii n care coala a dus la ndeplinire recomandrile
formulate n momentul raportului. Aceasta este situaia n aproximativ dou treimi din sistemele de
nvmnt care realizeaz evaluarea extern a colilor lor (vezi Figura 1.8). Msurile de monitorizare
constau de obicei n vizite suplimentare sau, mai rar, ntr-o analiz a rapoartelor elaborate de coli i
n prezentarea msurilor luate pentru a soluiona deficienele identificate de ctre evaluatori. Cu
excepia Maltei, i ntr-o oarecare msur a Irlandei, msurile de monitorizare sunt luate numai cnd
deficienele, eecurile sau nclcrile sunt detectate i raportate de ctre evaluatori. n Belgia
32
(Comunitatea vorbitoare de limba german) de exemplu, numai deficienele grave duc la msuri de
monitorizare, n timp ce n Slovenia msurile de monitorizare se aplic numai cnd msurile urmeaz
s fie supravegheate pentru o perioad extins de timp. n Regatul Unit (ara Galilor), severitatea
deficienelor determin programarea vizitei de monitorizare. n Malta, toate colile primesc o vizit de
monitorizare neanunat de o zi n termen de un an calendaristic de la publicarea raportului de
evaluare, n timp ce n Irlanda inspeciile de monitorizare sunt realizate pe un eantion de coli. n
Letonia, se consider c colile trebuie s depun rapoarte n fiecare an pn cnd toate
recomandrile sunt implementate.
n toate rile unde are loc evaluarea extern, colilor li se cere s ia msuri care urmresc
mbuntirea calitii educaiei oferite sau corectarea deficienelor detectate de evaluatori. n
12 sisteme de nvmnt (Belgia (Comunitile vorbitoare de limba german i flamand), Spania,
Letonia, Lituania, Polonia, Portugalia, Regatul Unit (ara Galilor i Irlanda de Nord), Islanda, fosta
Republic Iugoslav a Macedoniei i Turcia), procedurile pentru evaluarea extern prevd obligaia
colilor de a furniza un plan de msuri care abordeaz n mod specific deficienele identificate. Totui,
n Polonia, acesta se limiteaz la cazurile de performan extrem de slab. n Belgia (Comunitatea
Flamand), planul de mbuntire constituie o opiune pe care colile o pot alege pentru a evita
nchiderea imediat, sub rezerva unei decizii finale a Ministerului. Planul este nsoit de obligaia de a
primi ndrumare din partea serviciului de consultan al colii. n Italia, dei n faza sa pilot i n
Regatul Unit (Anglia), nu exist nicio cerere de a elabora un plan specific de msuri, dar planurile
existente de mbuntire trebuie modificate lund n considerare recomandrile evaluatorilor.
Inspecia pedagogic/profesional din Ungaria, n prezent n faza sa pilot i care urmeaz s fie
lansat n anul 2015, prevede ca colile s elaboreze planuri de msuri pe o perioad de cinci ani ca
urmare a recomandrilor inspectorilor. Doar n Belgia (Comunitatea Flamand) i Lituania, exist
prevederi clare care urmresc asigurarea implicrii profesorilor n avizarea planului de msuri.
n mai multe ri sunt disponibile msuri de sprijin pentru coli. Acestea constau de obicei ntr-o
formare suplimentar sau resurse suplimentare care pot fi de natur financiar sau profesional. n
15 sisteme de nvmnt (Belgia (Comunitatea flamand), Germania, Irlanda, Spania, Frana, Italia
(pilot), Ungaria (doar pentru sistemul pedagogic/profesional care este n faza pilot), Cipru (ISCED 2),
Lituania, Malta, Austria, Regatul Unit (Anglia, ara Galilor i Irlanda de Nord) i fosta Republic
Iugoslav a Macedoniei), formarea suplimentar este conceput ca o msur de sprijin i poate fi
activat fie la recomandarea evaluatorilor, fie chiar de coli ca parte a planului lor de mbuntire. n
14 sisteme de nvmnt (Belgia (Comunitile vorbitoare de limba francez i german), Germania
(unele Lnder), Irlanda, Frana (ISCED 1), Italia (pilot), Ungaria (doar pentru sistemul pedagogic/profesional care este n faza pilot), Cipru (ISCED 2), Lituania, Malta i Regatul Unit (Anglia, ara
Galilor i Irlanda de Nord) i fosta Republic Iugoslav a Macedoniei, sunt puse la dispoziia colilor
resurse suplimentare n caz de nevoie. Cu excepia sistemului pilot de evaluare extern al Italiei i cu
excepia Lituaniei, resursele suplimentare sunt concepute n mare msur drept sprijin profesional,
sub form de ndrumare, oferite fie chiar de organismul de evaluare, fie de organizaii specializate. n
Lituania, poate fi alocat sprijin financiar suplimentar colilor pentru a sprijini, de exemplu, angajarea
personalului pedagogic care ofer asisten elevilor. Unul din cele dou proiecte pilot care se
desfoar n Italia prevede alocarea a 10 000 EURO ctre colile care urmresc s dezvolte practici
inovative n planurile lor de mbuntire. n Frana (ISCED 1), Cipru (ISCED 2) i Malta, resursele
suplimentare sunt de asemenea concepute s creasc numrul de angajai din coal. n Regatul Unit
(Anglia), sprijinul poate fi oferit prin nfrirea colilor cu performane sczute cu cele mai puternice.
33
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
Msuri disciplinare
n 18 sisteme de nvmnt din cele 31 cu scheme de evaluare extern, legislaiile prevd utilizarea
msurilor disciplinare n cazul nclcrii regulamentelor sau inabilitii de a recupera deficienele dup
o anumit perioad. n Cehia, Ungaria (sistemul de verificare al conformitii legale) i Austria,
msurile disciplinare pot fi luate doar dac legile au fost nclcate, n timp ce n toate celelalte ri ele
includ incapacitatea de a rspunde la recomandrile formulate de evaluatori.
n linii mari, msurile disciplinare se clasific n dou categorii: acelea care sunt destinate personalului
care lucreaz n coal i acelea care vizeaz coala n ntregime sau organismele sale responsabile.
n majoritatea cazurilor, sistemele permit ambele tipologii.
Prima categorie se prezint de obicei sub form de amenzi, sanciuni, verificare meticuloas sau
nlocuirea directorilor unitii de nvmnt sau mai rar a altui tip de personal. Concedierea
directorului colii sau a echipei de conducere este prevzut explicit ca o posibilitate n Cehia,
Polonia, Slovenia i Slovacia. Totui, n Polonia, ea este limitat expres la eecul n aplicarea planului
de mbuntire. Dei nu este disponibil n mod oficial o list de msuri disciplinare, aceast msur
a fost adoptat i n cteva cazuri n Malta. n fosta Republic Iugoslav a Macedoniei, orice membru
al personalului colii poate fi propus pentru concediere de ctre evaluator n cazurile unor nclcri
grave, cum sunt abuzul de alcool i droguri, hruirea elevilor sau utilizarea abuziv a bugetului colii.
A doua tipologie de msuri disciplinare vizeaz de obicei capacitatea colii de a funciona pe deplin i
poate merge pn la nchiderea colii, reducerea dispoziiilor sale bugetare sau invalidarea bazei sale
legale. n ceea ce privete cazul din urm, n Letonia, de exemplu, colile i pot pierde dreptul de a
emite certificate recunoscute de stat la finalizarea nvmntului general; n Cehia i Slovacia,
Inspectorul colar Central poate propune ca coala s fie exclus din Registrul colar; n Estonia,
Ministerul poate declara invalid licena de nvmnt, prin urmare mpiedicnd coala s
funcioneze; i n Regatul Unit (Anglia), n cazul unei academii, Secretarul de Stat poate decide s
rezilieze acordul su de finanare. Consecine financiare sunt prevzute i n Olanda, unde n cazuri
extreme fondurile bugetare anuale complete ale colii pot fi reinute i sunt posibile n Comunitatea
francez din Belgia, dei aceast msur nu a fost nc aplicat.
n Ungaria (n temeiul sistemului de verificare a conformitii legale) i Suedia, autoritile
responsabile pot nchide colile cu desvrire, o msur prevzut i n Comunitatea Flamand din
Belgia, dei este rareori implementat. n Suedia, o coal poate fi nchis doar pentru ase luni dup
care inspectoratul intervine pentru a lua msurile considerate necesare pentru a mbunti
performana colii.
n unele ri, alte msuri disciplinare sunt aplicate, cum este cazul n Regatul Unit (Anglia) unde
colilor crora li s-au aplicat msuri speciale li se poate interzice s angajeze profesori recent
calificai; sau Estonia i Suedia unde proprietarul colii poate primi o amend.
n timp ce n majoritatea rilor, autoritile responsabile iau msuri disciplinare, n Slovenia inspectorii
nii au temeiul legal pentru aplicarea unor tipologii de sanciuni, inclusiv suspendarea temporar a
tuturor activitilor colare, dei aceasta din urm nu s-a petrecut nc.
34
tip de msur de cretere a vizibilitii. n Frana, colile de nivel 1 ISCED considerate a fi performante
sau inovative pot primi resurse suplimentare; n Lituania, organismul de evaluare (NASE) are
mandatul de a aduna informaii cu privire la cele mai bune practici din coli i de a distribui aceste
informaii n cooperare cu directorul i profesorii unor astfel de coli; n Polonia, evaluatorii trebuie s
pregteasc o form specific de bune practici pentru colile care au un punctaj foarte ridicat la
cteva standarde. O astfel de form este apoi diseminat prin site-ul web al supraveghetorului; n
Regatul Unit (Anglia, ara Galilor i Irlanda de Nord), dovezile colectate n timpul inspeciilor pot fi
folosite pentru informarea rapoartelor tematice i a altor rapoarte cu privire la bunele practici, i
valorificate prin site-urile web ale inspectoratelor.
Aceast abordare permite creterea gradului de contientizare cu privire la ceea ce funcioneaz i n
ce circumstane i crete vizibilitatea colilor care au obinut rezultate bune. De asemenea, aceasta
sprijin o cultur de feedback pozitiv i nvare reciproc care poate contribui la evoluia rolului i
obiectivelor evalurii externe.
35
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
Figura 1.9: Distribuirea rapoartelor de evaluare extern ale colilor unice, nvmnt general obligatoriu de zi,
2013/14
ISCED 1
CY
Sursa: Eurydice.
Nota explicativ
Harta se refer la rapoartele de evaluare extern ale colilor unice. Aceasta nu ia n considerare distribuirea rapoartelor
cu date agregate elaborate n unele ri. Nicio distribuire a raportului ctre pri din exterior nu exclude transmiterea
raportului ctre autoriti educaionale de la nivel central/de vrf.
n zece sisteme de nvmnt, rapoartele sunt accesibile cu restricii, fie punndu-le la dispoziie la
cerere, fie distribuindu-le numai factorilor co-interesai relevani.
n Belgia (Comunitatea vorbitoare de limba german), raportul este transmis tuturor celor implicai n
exerciiul de evaluare, care include de obicei factorii colari co-interesai, cum sunt reprezentanii
prinilor sau ai elevilor. n Malta, sunt elaborate rapoarte succinte specifice pentru prini, iar
directorul unitii de nvmnt trebuie s comunice prinilor n scris principalele rezultate. n Frana,
posibilitatea de distribuire a raportului ctre prini i elevi este la discreia directorului unitii de
nvmnt. n mod similar, n Lituania distribuirea raportului reprezint o decizie a colii. Totui,
directorului unitii colare i se solicit s ofere personalului, prinilor i elevilor o prezentare a
rezultatelor evalurii i principalele rezultate n ceea ce privete punctele forte i punctele slabe la
nivel global sunt publicate pe site-ul web al organismului de evaluare.
n Italia, Slovacia i fosta Republic Iugoslav a Macedoniei, raportul de evaluare poate fi consultat la
cerere. n ceea ce privete Italia, noul sistem de evaluare extern care este n stadiu pilot prevede o
faz de raportare social, dei modalitile nu au fost nc stabilite, lsnd o oarecare libertate
36
colilor de a-i pune rapoartele la dispoziia publicului general prin intermediul propriului site web. n
Slovenia, unele date de natur personal sau confidenial ar fi nc clasate. n fosta Republic
Iugoslav a Macedoniei, conducerea colii este n orice caz obligat s informeze toate prile
interesate cu privire la rezultatele evalurii.
Un caz specific este Letonia, unde restricia se aplic asupra tipologiei informaiilor i nu asupra
modului n care sunt distribuite. De fapt, n aceast ar, doar pri ale raportului sunt fcute publice
pe un ablon specific care conine numele experilor, notarea evalurii, punctele forte i
recomandrile. ablonul este publicat pe site-ul web al organismului de evaluare i este accesibil
oricui. Cu toate acestea, raportul complet poate fi pus la dispoziia prinilor, profesorilor i
reprezentanilor municipalitii, la cerere.
n Germania, raportul este fie distribuit factorilor co-interesai relevani, fie pus la dispoziie la cerere,
iar ambele modaliti coexist n funcie de Lnder-ul specific. n Slovenia, acesta este distribuit acelor
angajai a cror activitate este afectat de inspecie sau municipalitilor dac vreuna dintre
recomandri intr n domeniul lor de competen. De asemenea, raportul poate fi pus la dispoziie la
cerere, dar unele date de natur personal sau confidenial ar fi clasate.
n final, n apte sisteme de nvmnt (Belgia (Comunitatea Francez), Danemarca, Spania, Cipru
(ISCED 2), Ungaria (pentru sistemul de evaluare i verificare a conformitii legale), Austria i Turcia),
rapoartele de evaluare (sau rezultatele detaliate ale exerciiului de evaluare a riscurilor n cazul
Danemarcei) nu sunt accesibile publicului.
37
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
ISCED 1
CY
Calificri de predare
Sursa: Eurydice.
Not explicativ
Aceast figur nu ia n considerare membrii neprofesioniti care se altur echipei de evaluare n mod voluntar i nici
experii din domenii specifice care se altur echipelor de inspectori n mod ad-hoc.
Un grad relevant poate include o calificare de predare, dar nu se limiteaz la aceasta.
n dousprezece ri, candidaii cu o gam mai larg de calificri i experiene profesionale mai
diverse pot deveni evaluatori externi.
n Belgia (Comunitatea Flamand), Cehia, Estonia, Ungaria (evaluatorii efectueaz verificarea
conformitii legale), Olanda, Slovenia, Suedia i Turcia, dei este nevoie de o calificare la nivelul
nvmntului superior, nu exist limitri la domenii specifice, iar experiena profesional necesar
pentru a deveni evaluatori poate fi dobndit i n afara colilor, n sectoare cum sunt nvmntul,
cercetarea, psihologia sau adminstraia educaional. n Turcia, n plus fa de o diplom de licen n
mai multe domenii posibile, inspectorii candidai fie pot avea o experien de predare, fie trebuie s fi
obinut un scor minim specificat la examenul de selecie a personalului public. n Cehia, cnd are loc
38
Formarea specializat
n 19 sisteme de nvmnt (vezi Figura 1.11), evaluatorii externi trebuie s fi beneficiat de formare
specializat fie nainte de numirea lor, fie n timpul formrii lor iniiale sau perioadei lor de prob. n
funcie de ara n cauz, formarea specializat poate trata evaluarea n mod specific sau poate
acoperi alte domenii.
Figura 1.11: Finalizarea obligatorie a unei formri specializate pentru evaluatorii externi ai colilor, nvmnt
general obligatoriu de zi, 2013/14
ISCED 1
CY
Sursa: Eurydice.
Not explicativ
Graficul nu ia n considerare membrii neprofesioniti care se altur echipei de evaluare n mod voluntar i nici experii
din domenii specifice care se altur echipelor de inspectori n mod ad-hoc.
39
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
Note statale specifice (Figura 1.11)
Danemarca: Agenia Naional pentru Calitate i Supraveghere efectueaz o verificare anual a colilor individuale
pentru a identifica municipalitile unde sunt necesare mbuntiri. Partea care rmne din proces este de competena
municipalitilor cu sprijinul autoritii de la nivel central.
Estonia, Slovacia, Regatul Unit (ENG/WLS, SCT) i fosta Republic Iugoslav a Macedoniei: Harta se aplic numai
abordrii principale a evalurii colare externe realizat de un organism de la nivel central (sau regional) i nu
reponsabilitilor de evaluare ale autoritilor locale pentru colile pe care le gestioneaz (vezi Seciunea 1.2).
Italia: Informaii bazate pe dou proiecte pilot (vezi Profilul Naional).
Ungaria: Harta indic situaia pentru inspectorii care efectueaz verificarea conformitii legale. Candidaii pentru o
funcie de evaluator pentru inspecia pedagogic/profesional, care urmeaz s fi implementat pe deplin n anul
2015, vor trebui s participe ntr-un program de formare organizat de ctre Autoritatea Educaional nainte de numirea
lor n funcie.
Slovenia: Un curs de formare de 16 ore oferit de ministerul responsabil pentru administraia public este disponibil
inspectorilor poteniali sau numii, pentru a-i pregti s treac examenul obligatoriu pentru inspectorii colari.
Finlanda: Furnizorii de educaie au obligaia legal de a evalua educaia pe care o asigur i de a participa la evalurile
externe ale sistemului de nvmnt n ntregime sau la nivel regional. Reglementrile nu specific formele i
procedurile de evaluare de la nivel local.
n nou sisteme de nvmnt, candidaii pentru rolul de evaluator extern trebuie s urmeze o
formare specializat n evaluare colar sau evaluare n general. n Belgia (Comunitatea vorbitoare de
limba german), candidaii trebuie s urmeze apte luni de formare intensiv, asigurat de Ministerul
Educaiei i Formrii al North Rhine-Westphalia, privind diferite aspecte ale procesului de evaluare
colar. n Spania, o etap obligatorie de formare profesional i practic face parte din procesul de
selecie. n Frana, candidaii care reuesc s ocupe un post de inspector de Educaie Naional
lucreaz i urmeaz cursuri de formare, n mod alternativ, timp de un an. n Lituania, Letonia,
Romnia i Regatul Unit (Anglia), acolo unde evaluatorii externi sunt contractai n mod special pentru
una sau mai multe evaluri, dreptul de a realiza evaluri este acordat numai dup ce acetia au
beneficiat de un curs de formare obligatorie n evaluare colar. n Anglia, inspectorii suplimentari
beneficiaz de formare constnd n 5-6 zile de evaluare i ateliere de lucru, intercalate cu experiena
practic. n Islanda, unde evaluatorii externi sunt contractai i pentru evaluri specifice, n fiecare
echip trebuie s existe persoane care au urmat un curs de evaluare colar la nivel de nvmnt
superior sau un curs specializat de evaluare inut de Institutul de Testare Educaional. n final, n
fosta Republic Iugoslav a Macedoniei, candidaii la posturile de inspector trebuie s finalizeze
sesiuni de formare profesional cu durata ntre trei i ase luni inute de inspectori cu experien.
n Belgia (Comunitatea Flamand), Irlanda, Malta, Regatul Unit (ara Galilor, Irlanda de Nord i
Scoia) i Turcia, formarea specializat n evaluare este asigurat n timpul programului de formare
iniial sau n timpul perioadei de prob urmate de toii evaluatorii sau inspectorii noi. n Regatul Unit
al Marii Britanii (Anglia), acest lucru se aplic Inspectorilor Majestii Sale care sunt angajai direct de
ctre inspectorat.
n Cipru i Ungaria (verificarea conformitii legale), evaluatorii colari externi trebuie s fi urmat un
curs de formare specific n alte domenii dect evaluarea colar nainte de numirea lor n funcie. n
Cipru, evaluatorii colari din nvmntul secundar inferior trebuie s fi participat la un curs de
formare n domeniul conducerii colilor de 200 ore. n Ungaria, inspectorii care efectueaz verificarea
conformitii legale trebuie s dein un certificat special de formare n administraie public. n
Austria, inspectorii trebuie s urmeze un curs de formare n management colar, nainte sau dup
numirea n funcie.
40
41
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
ISCED 1
FR
CY
Obligatorie
ISCED 2 i 3
LU
Sursa: Eurydice.
42
C a p i t o l u l 2 : E v a l u a r e a i n t e rn a c o l i l o r
43
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
precum i realizrile colii n raport cu Planul de Dezvoltare a colii i Programul General Anual. n
Regatul Unit (Irlanda de Nord), Consiliul Guvernatorilor mparte cu directorul colii responsabilitatea
pentru evaluarea intern.
Figura 2.2: Pri implicate n evaluarea intern a colilor n conformitate cu reglementrile de la nivel central/de
vrf, nvmnt general obligatoriu de zi, 2013/14
ISCED 1
FR
CY
ISCED 2 and 3
LU
Personal colar
Personal colar + prini/elevi/ali
factori colari co-interesai
Nicio reglementare de la nivel
central/de vrf cu privire la prile
implicate
Sursa: Eurydice.
Not explicativ
Pentru o definiie a factorilor colari co-interesai, vezi Glosar.
n Luxemburg, diveri factori colari co-interesai intervin n analiza datelor i elaborarea opiniilor n
timpul procesului de evaluare intern desfurat n colile primare. Comitetul colar n colaborare cu
reprezentanii prinilor, coordonatorii materiilor colare i preedintele comisiei colare a autoritii
locale este responsabil pentru efectuarea autoevalurii colare care pivoteaz n jurul planului de
dezvoltare pe trei ani.
n sfrit, n Romnia, Islanda, fosta Republic Iugoslav a Macedoniei i Turcia, este obligatoriu sau
recomandat colilor s alctuiasc grupuri compuse din diverse pri i n mod specific pentru
realizarea evalurii interne. n Romnia, Comitetul pentru Evaluarea i Asigurarea Calitii din fiecare
coal trebuie s aib reprezentani ai profesorilor, prinilor, elevilor (ncepnd cu nivelul secundar
inferior), ai administraiei locale, minoritilor etnice, precum i ali factori co-interesai considerai
importani de ctre coal. Comitetul concepe strategia i planul de mbuntire a calitii,
supervizeaz activitile de evaluare intern i elaboreaz raportul anual cu privire la evaluarea
intern. n Islanda, fiecare coal trebuie s evalueze sistematic rezultatele i calitatea activitilor
colare cu participarea activ a personalului colar, elevilor i prinilor, dup caz. n acest scop,
colilor li se recomand s stabileasc un grup responsabil pentru planificarea, realizarea i
raportarea cu privire la evaluarea intern. n fosta Republic Iugoslav a Macedoniei, directorul colii
trebuie s includ ct mai multe pri diferite n grupurile de evaluare intern care trebuie alctuite. n
Turcia, este nfiinat o echip de autoevaluare n fiecare coal, care include directorul, ali
administratori ai colii, profesori, elevi, prini i ali factori co-interesai.
44
C a p i t o l u l 2 : E v a l u a r e a i n t e rn a c o l i l o r
Stnga
ISCED1
Dreapta
ISCED 2-3
Sursa: Eurydice.
Note explicative
Indicatorii care permit colilor s se compare cu alte coli se refer la datele cantitative care permit colilor s se
compare cu alte coli sau cu medii naionale, regionale sau locale. Acetia se pot referi la rezultatele testrii elevilor,
progresul elevilor, datele administrative cu privire la personal sau la condiiile de munc din coal etc.
MK: Vezi Glosar.
45
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
i profesori i n unele ri ali membri ai personalului. De exemplu n Estonia, directorii colilor decid
dac unii membri ai personalului trebuie s participe sau dac coala particip ca echip. n Irlanda, n
afar de directorul colii, un alt membru al personalului este invitat s participe la formare.
De obicei, formarea n autoevaluare nu este obligatorie, dar este disponibil la cerere. Formarea n
evaluare este totui obligatorie n Luxemburg (Agenia pentru Dezvoltarea Calitii n coli (ADQS)
organizeaz instruiri anuale obligatorii i sedine de lucru periodice pentru colile primare), iar n ri
precum Ungaria, Malta, Slovacia i Regatul Unit unde aceasta face parte din formarea intiial sau la
locul de munc pentru directorii colilor i/sau profesori. n Ungaria i Slovacia, dei nu exist cursuri
specifice de formare n ceea ce privete evaluarea intern, formrile obligatorii la locul de munc
pentru directorii colilor i/sau directorii adjunci ai colilor includ elemente referitoare la aceast
chestiune. De asemenea, mai multe cursuri de formare la locul de munc pentru profesori se ocup
de evaluarea colar intern. n Polonia, directorul colii este obligat s asigure profesorilor formare
n evaluarea intern dac acesta/aceasta consider acest lucru ca fiind necesar. n Slovenia,
profesorii i directorii colilor, ca parte a dezvoltrii lor profesionale continue, pot s urmeze cursuri de
formare n autoevaluarea colar, ca parte din dezvoltarea lor profesional.
Formarea n domeniul evalurii poate lua forma unor seminarii specifice, ateliere de lucru sau module
online. n ceea ce privete coninutul, acesta se axeaz mai ales pe sprijinul metodologic pentru
dezvoltarea proceselor de evaluare intern i nelegerea i utilizarea datelor privind performanele i
a instrumentelor de analiz a datelor.
46
C a p i t o l u l 2 : E v a l u a r e a i n t e rn a c o l i l o r
larg de instrumente virtuale pentru analiza i compararea datelor n diferite moduri. n anumite ri,
accesul la aceti indicatori este limitat la coli, dar n alte cteva ri, muli indicatori sunt pui la
dispoziia publicului, i anume pe site-urile web ale oficiilor statistice naionale.
Instruciuni i manuale specifice evalurii interne
Cu excepia Belgiei (Comunitile vorbitoare de limba francez i german), Frana (ISCED 1), Cipru,
4
Ungaria ( ), Olanda i fosta Republic Iugoslav a Macedoniei, autoritile responsabile, organismele
lor consultative sau executive sau alte organisme care sprijin procesele de nvmnt sau evaluare
au emis instruciuni i manuale specifice pentru evaluarea intern. Aceste documente diverse se
axeaz pe instrumentele care pot fi folosite, cum sunt analizele SWOT, chestionarele, interviurile,
utilizarea criteriilor de msurare a performanei etc. Uneori, ca de pild n Irlanda, acestea pot reflecta
cadrele utilizate pentru evaluarea extern. n Slovacia, nsi reglementarea central include
instruciuni i un manual pentru evaluare intern, i specific i coninutul rapoartelor de autoevaluare.
n Islanda, Asociaia Autoritilor Locale a publicat un manual de informare pentru autoritile
educaionale locale pentru a le ajuta s sprijine evaluarea intern n coli. n plus, o echip de
voluntari din Societatea de Evaluare Islandez (grup de persoane cu experien n evaluare) a
compilat un scurt manual de orientare cu privire la evaluarea intern pentru a ajuta colile n ceea ce
privete procesul.
n unele ri, aceste manuale i orientri sunt accesibile publicului pe site-ul web al autoritii
educaionale relevante.
Autoritile centrale din Grecia i Finlanda nu au stabilit un sistem sau un cadru pentru evaluarea
extern a colilor. Totui, au dezvoltat un cadrul destul de elaborat de evaluare intern pentru coli. n
Grecia, Institutul de Politic Educaional (IEP), un organism executiv al Ministerului Educaiei i
Afacerilor Relgioase a conceput n mod special un cadru pentru evaluarea colar care se axeaz pe
observaii, procese i rezultate i n care asigurarea educaiei de ctre coal este evaluat n funcie
de 15 indicatori calitativi i cantitativi a cror importan i semnificaie poate varia conform situaiei
speciale i mediului colii. n Finlanda, Ministerul Educaiei i Culturii a emis o list de criterii de
calitate care reprezint un instrument pentru mbuntirea calitii colii la nivel local i colar. Patru
din principalele domenii se refer la calitatea structurilor i vizeaz guvernana, personalul, resursele
economice i aspecte privind evaluarea. Celelalte ase domenii principale se refer la elevi i
abordeaz implementarea curriculei, modalitile de instruire i predare, sprijinul pentru nvare,
cretere i bunstare, incluziunea i influena, cooperarea coal-cas i sigurana mediului de
nvare.
Forumuri online
Ministerele, inspectoratele, autoritile educaionale sau alte organisme care se ocup cu educaia
dintr-o treime din sistemele de nvmnt au dezvoltat accesul la forumuri online pe site-urile lor web
pentru a sprijini evaluarea intern. Aceste forumuri ofer acces la o mare varietate de aplicaii online
permind schimbul de informaii, opinii, schimbul de bune practici i idei ntre diferite categorii de
membri ai personalului colii/experi n evaluare. Aceste instrumente online permit i accesul la unelte
utile (foi de observaie, chestionare, tutoriale video, ntrebri frecvente, serviciu de asisten etc.). n
De exemplu, n Polonia, forumul este disponibil ca parte a formrii i a atelierelor de lucru asigurate
pentru evaluarea intern. n Spania, unele Comuniti Autonome nfiineaz reele virtuale de lucru
ntre coli pentru a face schimb de experiene i bune practici, instrumente i resurse de evaluare. n
Lituania, platforma online IQES online Lietuva ofer acces la instrumente de evaluare intern
proiectate n mod profesionist, care pot fi personalizate, precum i pentru a consilia cu privire la
metodologie i accesul la informaii mai generale. n Romnia, aplicaia online permite colilor
(4) Autoritatea Educaional lucreaz la dezvoltarea unui manual de autoevaluare pentru coli.
47
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
individuale s cear ajutor i sprijin i le asigur experilor de la Agenia Romn pentru Asigurarea
Calitii n nvmntul Preuniversitar (ARACIP) un forum pentru a publica tiri i un sistem pentru
contactarea colilor selectate dac sunt obligai s realizeze sarcini specifice.
Resurse suplimentare
Specialitii externi
n peste jumtate din sistemele de nvmnt, colile cer sfatul i sprijinul specialitilor externi. Astfel
de profesioniti au o varietate de experiene profesionale, inclusiv experi academici, consilieri sau
consultani educaionali i pe probleme de mbuntire a colilor, specialiti din departamentele
municipale de nvmnt, formatori pentru cadre didactice, directori de coli, precum i profesori.
Implicarea specialitilor externi const mai ales n oferirea de sfaturi, ndrumare i instruire cu privire
la modul de desfurare a unei evaluri interne i la modul de a mbunti procesele, ce instrumente
pot fi utilizate, cum trebuie prezentate rezultatele i cum trebuie redactate planurile de aciune n baza
unor astfel de rezultate. Acetia pot oferi sprijin i pentru planificarea obiectivelor i msurilor pentru
asigurarea i dezvoltarea calitii, precum i pentru implementarea lor efectiv.
Aceti experi externi pot s fie ori angajai ai sectorului public ori experi externi particulari. n ambele
cazuri, autoritatea educaional este cea care i pune la dispoziia colilor n mod gratuit, la cerere. De
exemplu, n Belgia (Comunitatea vorbitoare de limba german), consiliul de dezvoltare colar din
cadrul Ministerului Educaiei este cel care le ofer colilor serviciile acestora cu titlu gratuit. n Polonia,
sprijinul pentru evaluarea colar intern este realizat de ctre angajaii centrelor de formare a
cadrelor didactice, ai centrelor de ndrumare i consiliere i ai bibliotecilor educative (de ex. profesori,
psihologi, specialiti n educaie, bibliotecari etc.). Dup cum prevede reglementarea central cu
privire la supravegherea pedagogic, este de datoria acestor instituii s sprijine procesul de
mbuntire a colilor. colile pot apela la sprijin n funcie de necesiti. n Regatul Unit (Scoia),
autoritatea local are obligaia legal de a sprijini evaluarea i, drept urmare, unele autoriti locale
implic consultani independeni pentru a le ajuta cu analizarea datelor sau cu alte aspecte ale
autoevalurii. Unele autoriti locale implic profesorii n evaluarea reciproc a altor coli.
n unele sisteme de nvmnt, specialitii externi sunt implicai n mod sistematic n procesul de
evaluare. De exemplu, n Regatul Unit (ara Galilor), fiecrei coli i este alocat un membru al
personalului autoritii locale care lucreaz cu coala un numr minim de zile n fiecare an pentru a
sprijini evaluarea. n Norvegia, unele regiuni au stabilit grupuri de evaluare extern care funcioneaz
dincolo de frontierele municipale care sunt alctuite din educatori din diferite municipaliti care au
lucrat ca profesori, directori de coal sau cu autoritatea educaional; n unele municipaliti, acetia
invit i consultani din sectorul privat.
n cteva ri, inspectoratul nsui este extrem de implicat n procesul de evaluare intern i ntr-o
anumit msur acioneaz ca un specialist extern pentru coli. Aceasta este situaia n Spania de
exemplu, unde Serviciile de Inspecie a Educaiei joac un rol cheie n procesul de evaluare, n
colaborare cu actorii colari i lund n considerare att rezultatele evalurii externe, ct i cele
interne. i Luxemburg pune un foarte mare accent pe evaluarea colar intern ca modalitate de
mbuntire a calitii colilor, iar Agenia pentru Dezvoltarea Calitii colare (ADQS) care a fost
creat n cadrul Ministerului Educaiei, Copiilor i Tineretului (MENJE) ofer sprijin metodologic i
bazat pe dovezi pentru a ajuta colile s-i mbunteasc calitatea. Inspectorii colari (neimplicai n
evaluarea extern) i profesorii-resurse (anumii profesori care sunt atribuii n mod legal fiecrui
inspector pentru sprijin pedagogic suplimentar) ofer sprijin semnificativ colilor pentru implementarea
planurilor i monitorizarea progreselor acestora.
48
C a p i t o l u l 2 : E v a l u a r e a i n t e rn a c o l i l o r
Sprijinul financiar
n final, n Spania i Croaia, prevederile financiare sunt disponibile ca resurse suplimentare. n
Spania, pentru a ncuraja, a stimula i a promova implementarea planurilor de autoevaluare i a
planurilor pentru mbuntirea calitii educaiei din coli, unele autoriti regionale finaneaz
cheltuielile i organizeaz apeluri pentru ajutor financiar. n Croaia, autoevaluarea colilor face parte
din proiectul Centrului Naional pentru Evaluarea Extern a Educaiei. Fondurile pentru acest proiect
sunt incluse n bugetul naional pentru educaie i asigurate prin intermediul Ministerului tiinei,
Educaiei i Sportului.
Stnga
ISCED1
Dreapta
ISCED 2-3
Sursa: Eurydice.
49
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
50
C a p i t o l u l 2 : E v a l u a r e a i n t e rn a c o l i l o r
Utilizarea rezultatelor evalurii interne de ctre autoritile de la nivel central/de vrf sau
regionale
Autoritile de la nivel central/de vrf sau regionale utilizeaz constatrile evalurii interne n
aproximativ dou treimi din ri. Aceste constatri sunt exploatate pentru a fi folosite pentru evaluarea
extern a colilor, n scopuri de monitorizare sau ambele.
Utilizarea constatrilor evalurii interne pentru evaluarea extern
Constatrile evalurii interne sunt deseori folosite ca parte a procesului de evaluare extern
desfurat de organisme de la nivel central/de vrf, regional sau provincial. Cu toate acestea,
importana lor n procesele de evaluare extern variaz de la o ar la alta. Constatrile evalurii
interne sunt de obicei folosite ca surs de informaii pentru evaluarea extern a unei anumite coli. n
unele ri, evaluatorii externi consider c aceste constatri fac parte din dovezile utilizate pentru a
evalua calitatea i eficacitatea proceselor de evaluare intern implementate de coli individuale. De
exemplu, n Portugalia, cadrul de referin utilizat de evaluatorii externi include impactul autoevalurii
asupra planificrii, organizrii i practicilor profesionale. n final, n unele cazuri, constatrile evalurii
interne constituie referina principal pentru definirea domeniului de aplicare al evalurii externe. De
exemplu, n Regatul Unit (Scoia), inspectorii folosesc raportul de autoevaluare i planul de
mbuntire pe care colile trebuie s le elaboreze anual ca punct de pornire pentru evaluarea
extern. Sistemul se bazeaz n mare msur pe evaluarea intern. colile trebuie s raporteze cu
privire la standardele i calitatea tuturor aspectelor activitii lor, n timp ce atenia inspectorilor se
limiteaz la cinci aspecte principale ale activitii colare, evaluarea intern fiind unul din ele.
n zece sisteme de nvmnt (vezi Figura 2.4), utilizarea constatrilor evalurii interne de ctre
organismele centrale sau regionale care realizeaz evaluarea extern nu constituie o practic comun
sau sistematic. n Polonia, colile pot alege s mprteasc constatrile evalurii interne cu
evaluatorii externi, dac doresc s fac acest lucru. Aceast politic poate reflecta dorina de a
permite colilor s fie deintorii principali ai proceselor lor de evaluare intern. n Belgia (Comunitatea
Flamand), evaluarea intern nu este obligatorie i colile decid cum folosesc constatrile. Inspecia
verific dac o procedur sau un sistem de evaluare intern exist n coal, dar nu folosete
constatrile evalurii interne. n Belgia (Comunitatea Francez), att evalurile interne, ct i cele
externe se axeaz pe aspecte specifice i distincte ale activitii colare. Inspectorii realizeaz
evaluarea disciplinelor de studiu, n timp ce evaluarea intern vizeaz implementarea proiectului
colar i raportul de activitate. n Estonia, Slovenia i Turcia, evaluarea extern a colilor vizeaz n
principal respectarea legislaiei de ctre acestea, n timp ce evaluarea intern este orientat mai mult
spre mbuntire i rezultate. n Irlanda, deoarece implementarea complet a unei abordri mai
sistematice a autoevalurii colare introdus la finalul anului 2012 este nc n desfurare, inspectorii
nc nu iau n considerare n mod sistematic rezultatele evalurii interne n scopuri de evaluare
extern. n Frana, ambele procese (cel intern i cel extern) au acelai punct central, i anume
implementarea contractelor bazate pe obiectiv ntre coli i autoritile educaionale, iar aceste
procese sunt concepute ca paralele. colile secundare realizeaz evaluarea intern pentru a-i
adapta contractele. Inspectorii evalueaz performanele colii cu privire la implementarea obiectivelor
cuprinse n contract.
Utilizarea constatrilor evalurii interne n scopuri de monitorizare
n zece sisteme de nvmnt (vezi Figura 2.4), autoritile centrale sau regionale folosesc
constatrile evalurii interne n scopuri de monitorizare. Acestea pot anuna decizii cum sunt
selectarea subiectelor pentru formarea la locul de munc sau alocarea resurselor. De asemenea,
constatrile le pot permite autoritilor educaionale s rspndeasc exemple de bune practici. De
51
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
exemplu, n Turcia, autoritile educaionale promoveaz, prin ntlniri i vizite pe teren, bunele
practici selectate n baza rapoartelor de evaluare intern. Modalitatea n care constatrile sunt
transmise autoritilor centrale sau regionale i utilizate n continuare n scopuri de monitorizare
variaz de la o ar la alta. De exemplu, Agenia Romn pentru Asigurarea Calitii n nvmntul
Preuniversitar utilizeaz rapoartele de evaluare colar intern pentru a elabora raportul de activitate
anual, precum i rapoartele periodice cu privire la calitatea sistemului de nvmnt. n Islanda, este
la latitudinea ministerului responsabil pentru educaie s cear informaii cu privire la evaluarea
intern a colilor, care sunt disponibile pe site-urile web ale colilor.
Constatrile evalurii interne sunt mai rar folosite n scopuri de monitorizare dect n scopuri de
evaluare extern. ntr-adevr, utilizarea constatrilor evalurii interne pentru a forma o imagine de
ansamblu a calitii sistemului de nvmnt ar putea fi mai uoar cnd autoritile relevante sunt
responsabile pentru un numr relativ limitat de coli avnd n vedere dimensiunea zonei geografice
sub jurisdicia lor (Cipru, Letonia, Lituania, regiuni din Austria i Islanda). De asemenea, aceasta are
loc unde nu exist nicio evaluare extern a colilor i, prin urmare, rapoartele de evaluare intern
reprezint o surs esenial de informaii despre colile individuale, cum este de exemplu Grecia.
52
GLOS AR
Codurile rilor
EU/EU-28
BE
Uniunea European
Belgia
HU
Ungaria
MT
Malta
NL
Olanda
BE fr
AT
Austria
BE de
PL
Polonia
BE nl
PT
Portugalia
BG
Bulgaria
RO
Romnia
CZ
Cehia
SI
Slovenia
DK
Danemarca
SK
Slovacia
DE
Germania
FI
Finlanda
EE
Estonia
SE
Suedia
IE
Irlanda
UK
Regatul Unit
EL
Grecia
UK-ENG
Anglia
ES
Spania
UK-WLS
ara Galilor
FR
Frana
UK-NIR
Irlanda de Nord
HR
Croaia
UK-SCT
Scoia
IT
Italia
CY
Cipru
IS
Islanda
LV
Letonia
MK*
LT
Lituania
NO
Norvegia
LU
Luxemburg
TR
Turcia
MK*: ISO cod 3166. Cod provizoriu care nu prejudiciaz n niciun mod nomenclatura definitiv pentru aceast ar, care va fi convenit n urma ncheierii
negocierilor care se deruleaz n prezent sub auspiciile Naiunilor Unite (http://www.iso.org/iso/country_codes/iso_3166_code_lists.htm)
Coduri statistice
:
()
Date indisponibile
53
Nu este aplicabil
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
Definiii
Asigurarea calitii: poate fi neleas ca un termen atotcuprinztor care se refer la politicile,
procedurile i practicile care sunt concepute s obin, s menin sau s mbunteasc calitatea n
anumite domenii i care se bazeaz pe un proces de evaluare. Prin evaluare, nelegem un proces
general de analiz sistematic i critic a unei teme definite care include colectarea datelor relevante
i duce la opinii i/sau recomandri pentru perfecionare. Evaluarea se poate concentra pe diferite
teme: instituii educaionale, directori de coli, profesori i alt personal educaional, programe,
autoriti locale sau performana ntregului sistem de nvmnt.
Auto-evaluarea: se refer la toate tipurile de evaluare care apar n coli. Pentru a clarifica conceptele,
a fost trasat o distincie ntre auto-evaluare (n care evaluatorii i formeaz preri referitoare la
sarcini pe care le ndeplinesc ei nii) i evaluare intern (n care prerile sunt formate de persoane
individuale sau de un organism compus din persoane care sunt membri ai personalului sau elevi ai
colii). n scopul acestui raport, toate evalurile desfurate de o coal nsi sunt denumite
interne.
Autoriti de la nivel central/de vrf: Nivelul de vrf al autoritii cu responsabilitate pentru educaie
ntr-o anumit ar, de obicei localizat la nivel naional (statal). Totui, pentru Belgia, Germania,
Spania i administraiile descentralizate ale Regatului Unit, Communauts, Lnder, Comunidades
Autnomas i, respectiv, administraiile descentralizate, sunt responsabile pentru toate sau
majoritatea domeniilor legate de educaie i, prin urmare, sunt considerate drept nivelul de vrf al
autoritii.
Cadrul de evaluare: Unicul document sau mai multe documente utilizate de evaluatori pentru a-i
elabora parametrii i/sau standardele necesare pentru a evalua colile. Acestea ofer baza
(cantitativ i/sau calitativ) pe care sunt formate prerile.
Consultarea cu conducerea colii nainte de elaborarea raportului de evaluare final: O
procedur de evaluare care exist n unele ri i presupune o discuie ntre evaluatori i anumii
membri ai colii cu privire la constatrile evalurii. Aceast discuie intervine nainte de redactarea
raportului final de evaluare i ofer colilor i n special organismelor lor de conducere o
oportunitate de a reaciona la el, corectnd erorile faptice sau clarificnd anumite puncte.
Criterii: Criteriile de evaluare se bazeaz pe dou componente, i anume parametrul (sau aspectul
msurabil al unui domeniu care trebuie evaluat) i standardul obligatoriu (etalon, nivel de performan
sau norm) fa de care parametrul este evaluat. Acestea ofer baza (cantitativ i/sau calitativ) pe
care sunt formate opinii.
Evaluare: Evaluarea const n procesul unei analize sistematice i critice care duce la opinii i/sau
recomandri pentru perfecionare cu privire la calitatea unei instituii de nvmnt, a unui profesor
sau unei autoriti locale. Evaluarea poate fi intern sau extern.
Evaluarea asigurrii educaiei de ctre autoritatea local: poate fi realizat de ctre autoritile
educaionale de la nivel central/de vrf, de ctre inspectorat sau de ctre o agenie educaional
naional. Aceasta evalueaz autoritile locale cu privire la administrarea de ctre acestea a colilor
din zona geografic aflat sub jurisdicia lor.
54
Glosar
Evaluarea extern a colilor: este realizat de evaluatorii care raporteaz unei autoriti locale,
regionale sau centrale/de vrf i care nu sunt direct implicai n activitile colii care este evaluat. O
asemenea evaluare nglobeaz o gam vast de activiti colare, inclusiv de predare i nvare
i/sau toate aspectele conducerii colii. Evaluarea care este realizat de evaluatori specializai i
preocupat de anumite sarcini (legate de evidenele contabile, sntate, siguran, arhive etc.) nu
este privit drept evaluare extern a colii.
Evaluarea individual a cadrelor didactice: implic formarea unei preri cu privire la activitatea
cadrelor didactice i transmiterea unui feedback personal, verbal sau scris pentru a-i cluzi i a-i
ajuta s-i mbunteasc predarea. Aceast evaluare poate aprea n timpul procesului de evaluare
colar (caz n care duce, n general, la feedback verbal), sau poate fi desfurat separat (ducnd
eventual la o evaluare formal a profesorului).
Evaluarea intern a colilor: Evaluarea ntreprins de persoane sau grupuri de persoane care sunt
direct implicate n coal (cum este directorul colii sau cadrele sale didactice i personalul su
administrativ i elevii). Pot fi evaluate sarcinile de predare i/sau de conducere.
Evaluarea colilor: se axeaz pe activitile desfurate de personalul colar fr a cuta s aloce
responsabiliti membrilor individuali ai personalului. Evaluarea de acest fel caut s monitorizeze sau
s mbunteasc calitatea colii i/sau rezultatele elevilor, iar concluziile sunt prezentate ntr-un
raport general care nu include informaiile cu privire la evaluarea cadrelor didactice individuale.
Evaluarea colilor poate fi extern sau intern.
Evaluatori: Persoana sau grupul de persoane a cror responsabilitate este de a selecta datele
relevante i de a forma o opinie evaluativ despre coninutul lor.
Factorii cointeresai din coal: cuprind pe toi cei care sunt direct implicai n activitatea unei
anumite coli (profesori, directorul colii, elevi sau orice persoan care este membru al unui organism
colar), precum i toi cei care sunt asociai indirect cu aceasta. Cei din urm nu aparin personalului
colii i nu sunt reprezentai ntr-unul din organismele sale, ci sunt privii ca fiind printre partenerii si,
deoarece au un interes n activitatea sa. Acetia pot fi prini, reprezentani ai autoritii locale sau
reprezentani ai comunitii economice locale etc.
Monitorizarea evalurii: O procedur de evaluare care exist n unele state i n timpul creia
evaluatorii externi examineaz ct de mult i-au dus colile la ndeplinire obiectivele pe care le-au
stabilit n timpul evalurii lor sau verific dac au respectat recomandrile care le-au fost fcute.
Monitorizarea performanei sistemului de nvmnt la nivel naional sau regional: presupune
un proces de colectare i analizare a informaiilor pentru a verifica performana sistemului n raport cu
obiectivele i standardele i pentru a permite orice modificri necesare care trebuie efectuate. Gama
de date folosite poate include, de exemplu, rezultatele auto-evalurii colare, examinrile externe sau
alte evaluri naionale, indicatori de performan pregtii n mod special sau rezultate ale evalurilor
intenaionale (inclusiv PIRLS, TIMSS, PISA etc.). Unele ri se bazeaz pe dovezile experilor sau ale
unei autoriti speciale cum este un consiliu alctuit pentru a monitoriza reforma.
Parametru: Aspect msurabil al unei sarcini care este evaluat.
Specialiti externi: Persoane neimplicate direct n activitile colii, care realizeaz evaluarea intern
i sprijin procesul de evaluare n diverse modaliti posibile. Persoanele-resurse au experien n
domeniul educaiei sau al evalurii i pot avea experiene profesionale variate (experi academici care
55
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
lucreaz n domenii relevante pentru evaluarea colilor, consultani privai, formatori de cadre
didactice, experi din instituiile sectorului public etc.) Doar situaiile n care autoritile educaionale
ofer un anumit tip de sprijin (financiar sau de alt tip) colilor pentru folosirea specialitilor externi sunt
luate n considerare n acest raport.
Standard: un reper, o norm, o reglementare sau un standard de competen n raport cu care este
evaluat un aspect msurabil al unei sarcinii.Testele naionale: se refer la administrarea naional a
testelor standardizate i la examinrile stabilite la nivel central pentru elevi. Testele conin proceduri
stabilite la nivel central pentru pregtirea coninutului lor, administrarea i marcarea lor i pentru
interpretarea i folosirea rezultatelor acestora. Aceste teste sunt standardizate de ctre autoritile
educaionale de la nivel central (nalt).
56
NATIONAL PROFILES
Belgium French Community
59
National profiles
61
65
Bulgaria
70
Czech Republic
71
Denmark
74
Germany
77
Estonia
79
Ireland
82
Greece
87
Spain
89
France
96
Croatia
102
Italy
103
Cyprus
108
Latvia
111
Lithuania
115
Luxembourg
119
Hungary
121
Malta
125
The Netherlands
129
Austria
133
Poland
136
Portugal
141
Romania
144
Slovenia
149
Slovakia
152
Finland
156
Sweden
159
163
169
175
180
Iceland
184
188
Norway
194
Turkey
197
2. Evaluators
The subsection provides information on the
evaluators' qualifications and professional
experience. Details of any specialist training in
evaluation and its duration are mentioned. The
information on the employment status of the
evaluators is also included.
3. Evaluation framework
List of parameters and/or required standards are
often used by evaluators to analyse the school
performance and elaborate their judgments. The
subsection indicates if these exist, if they are
applied to all schools and in which circumstances, and which aspects are under scrutiny.
57
4. Procedures
This subsection describes the various procedures used by external evaluators for collecting
information, reaching conclusions and reporting
on the findings, including specific protocols
followed to ensure the participation of school
stakeholders, or the compiling of the final
evaluation report. It also identifies the frequency
with which external evaluations are conducted in
each country.
IV. Reforms
This section lists any forthcoming reform that will
significantly alter information provided in any of
the three previous sections. Only reforms that
are already introduced in the political decisionmaking process are mentioned while general
debates are excluded.
2. Parties involved
This part describes how participation in internal
evaluation is regulated in each country, and if
possible, what it the role of the various school
stakeholders involved.
58
National Profiles
2. Evaluators
Inspectors are former teachers who must be fulltime permanent employees (appointees), having
taught for at least 10 years, or former head
teachers. They must have the required educational qualifications. They are recruited based on
a selection test followed by a two-year probationary period.
3. Evaluation framework
Belgium
French Community
4. Procedures
59
2. Participation of players
The school council of each school, which is
responsible for evaluating the implementation of
the school plan (see Section II.1), includes
members of the school (management, staff
representatives), parents, student representatives and external representatives.
60
National Profiles
The
German-speaking
Community
sees
evaluation as an important tool for quality
assurance and ensuring the improvement of
schools and teaching. The purposes of external
school evaluation are to:
2. Evaluators
The three people currently involved in carrying
out external evaluation of schools are full-time
employees of the higher education institution
department which carries out the external
evaluation. Evaluators must have a teaching
qualification for one of the levels of education
being evaluated (primary, lower or upper
secondary education). When a school is being
evaluated, at least one of the evaluators must
be qualified for the level of education provided
by the school. Evaluators must have at least ten
years teaching experience.
61
4. Procedures
External evaluation is carried out at all schools
in a five-year cycle.
3. Evaluation framework
The guiding framework for school quality (1),
published in 2009, is the first document
published by the German-speaking Community
of Belgium which systematically describes a set
of core characteristics and standards for good
schools.
School results
2.
3.
School culture
4.
5.
Teacher professionalism
6.
()
http://www.ahsdg.be/PortalData/13/Resources/20131009_Der_Orient
ierungsrahmen_Schulqualitaet.pdf
62
National Profiles
63
2. Parties involved
The pedagogical council is responsible for
organising the internal evaluation related to the
school plan; the views of parents and student
representatives should be sought. In addition,
the school is free to decide whether to seek
support in this process (see point 3).
64
National Profiles
Belgium
Flemish Community
3. Evaluation framework
The Inspectorate inspects whether the school
respects the relevant regulations and whether it
systematically monitors its quality. If the school
does not respect the conditions for recognition
(minimum goals, safety and hygiene, etc.), a
restricted positive or even a negative recommendation (multiple, severe and structural
deficiencies) can be given. In the event of a
negative recommendation, the Inspectorate
judges explicitly whether the school is capable
of independently setting up a policy to address
its shortcomings (the so-called policy-making
capacities of schools).
2. Evaluators
The inspectors are educational staff employed
by the Inspectorate under a specific statute.
Under the 2009 Decree on Quality of Education,
inspectors should have eight years relevant
professional experience within a school, as a
teacher, principal or member of middle
management. People with other relevant
experience in education, quality assurance and
evaluation may also apply.
The Inspectorate has developed sets of qualification requirements for prospective candidates.
These focus on outputs (auditing, reporting,
65
4. Procedures
The Inspectorate audits all schools at least
every 10 years, as stipulated in the 2009 Decree
on Quality of Education. The audits follow a
three-weekly model: the preliminary investigation (first week), the actual inspection visit
(second week), and the drafting of the report
(third week).
( ) www.onderwijsinspectie.be
66
National Profiles
( ) www.doorlichtingsverslagen.be
67
2. Parties involved
Where a school drafts a plan to improve its
quality after having received a negative
classification in a final attempt to keep its
recognition (see Section I.5), all key stakeholders mentioned in the Participation Decree of
2004 must be consulted.
( ) http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/gok/
( ) http://www.scholierenkoepel.be/DeLeerkrachtLeert
68
National Profiles
(7) http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/toetsenvoorscholen/
69
Bulgaria
with
and
70
National Profiles
Czech Republic
2. Evaluators
Inspection activities in schools are carried out by
school inspectors, controllers/auditors (employees of the Czech School Inspectorate), and
by other invited persons. School inspectors
must have a university degree and at least five
years teaching experience or pedagogical and
psychological experience (preferably in managerial positions). Their role is to evaluate educational and management tasks. The invited
persons are external experts who are able to
provide expert opinions on a specific subject or
problem. For this reason, there are no set
qualification requirements for invited persons.
Controllers/auditors must have a university
degree and at least five years professional experience, or secondary education confirmed by
a school-leaving examination and 20 years of
professional experience. They evaluate operations related to accounting and finances.
3. Evaluation framework
The assessment follows the Criteria for
Evaluation of Conditions, Course and Results of
Education (9) set by the Czech School Inspectorate and approved by the Ministry of Education.
The same criteria apply to all schools. The
school inspectors determine, on the basis of
their own experience, what they expect from a
school for each indicator on the list.
4. Procedures
( ) http://www.csicr.cz
( ) http://www.csicr.cz/cz/DOKUMENTY/Kriteria-hodnoceni
71
72
National Profiles
2. Parties involved
Schools have full power to decide who
participates in an internal evaluation. No national surveys or sources of information on the parties involved in internal evaluation are available.
( ) http://www.nuv.cz/
12
( ) http://www.nidv.cz/cs/
73
Denmark
2. Evaluators
Evaluators in charge of the annual screening of
schools are employed by the National Agency
for Quality and Supervision.
3. Evaluation framework
In its annual screening of schools, the National
Agency for Quality and Supervision focuses on
the quality indicators fixed over time by the
Ministry of Education. These indicators may
differ between primary and lower secondary
education. They include, for example, the results
of national tests and final examinations,
enrolment rates in upper secondary education
as well as, standardised measurements of
student
well-being
from
2014/15
(see
Section IV). National Agency staff analyses
pupils academic achievements in different
subjects in order to assess whether the school is
performing as well as expected given its
13
14
( ) http://www.niqes.cz/
74
National Profiles
4. Procedures
2. Parties involved
There are no central requirements about
participation in schools internal evaluation. It is
up to municipalities to establish their own
policies in this area.
The National Agency for Quality and Supervision has launched and now manages an evaluation internet portal, which offers a wide range of
evaluation tools, articles, and research case
studies, etc.
The Ministry of Education has created a school
development programme, which provides
schools with a number of ICT-based selfevaluation tools. The evaluation system builds
75
The National Agency for Quality and Supervision administers the compulsory national tests
and final exams.
15
( ) http://eng.uvm.dk/~/media/UVM/Filer/English/PDF/
131007 %20folkeskolereformaftale_ENG_RED.ashx
76
National Profiles
2. Evaluators
The qualifications required for work as a school
evaluator are determined by the Lnder. As a
rule, evaluation teams consist of teachers who
are civil servants of the Land. Often these
teachers have experience as head teachers,
deputy head teachers or teacher trainers. In
some Lnder, representatives of industry or
parents may be members of the evaluation team
on a voluntary basis. Evaluation teams usually
consist of three or four people. Evaluators who
are teachers have normally completed several
years teaching service. In some Lnder, at least
one of the teachers in the evaluation team is
required to have the same qualifications as the
teachers at the school level under evaluation.
Depending on the individual Land, evaluators
are expected or required to have expert
knowledge in the following areas: teaching
quality, school pedagogics, the structure of the
school system, school legislation and school
administration, school evaluation procedures
and observational and data analysis skills.
Evaluators receive specialist training.
3. Evaluation framework
The evaluation procedures for schools in the
Lnder are in line with the educational standards
for the primary sector, the Hauptschulabschluss
and the Mittlerer Schulabschluss as adopted by
the Standing Conference of the Ministers of
Education and Cultural Affairs in 2003 and 2004.
Educational standards are binding on all Lnder.
They are based upon the areas of competence
for the individual subject or subject group which
set down the capabilities, skills and knowledge
students should have acquired at a certain stage
of their school career. These cross-Lnder
attainment targets are, in most Lnder,
complemented by the provision of frameworks
for school quality. The frameworks include
evaluation criteria that define what constitutes
good quality schools and teaching practices,
and thus provide external evaluators and
schools with a frame of reference.
Germany
Section I. External evaluation of schools
1. Purpose of external evaluation and
responsible bodies
In 15 of the 16 Lnder, external school
evaluation (externe Evaluation, also: Fremdevaluation, Schulinspektion) is regularly carried
out. Responsibility lies either with the school
supervisory authorities (as a rule, the Ministries
of Education and Cultural Affairs, sometimes the
middle-level school supervisory authorities) or
with the institutes for school pedagogy
(Landesinstitute fr Schulpdagogik).
School evaluation in Germany has a dual aim:
monitoring the quality of school education and
offering feedback and advice in order to improve
provision.
77
4. Procedures
78
National Profiles
2. Parties involved
participation in international
studies of pupil achievement;
comparative
No planned reforms.
Estonia
Section I. External evaluation of schools
Methods of internal evaluation include standardised questionnaires for teachers, pupils and
parents with questions about their attitudes and
opinions of the school, data analysis, and comparison of test results with those of other
schools working under similar conditions, classroom visits, and feedback from pupils. Methods
and instruments may vary between the Lnder.
17
( ) http://www.hm.ee/en/activities/external-evaluation
79
4. Procedures
2. Evaluators
Those exercising state supervision are either
officials of the External Evaluation Department
of the Ministry or inspectors of the education
departments of county governments. The
Minister of Education and Research has
established the qualification requirements for
these officials: he/she must have a Masters
degree in any field or an equivalent qualification,
at least five years experience in teachingrelated work and leadership competences.
Teaching-related experience may include, for
instance, teaching in schools, working as a
research fellow at a university or as a school
psychologist.
3. Evaluation framework
80
National Profiles
2. Parties involved
The internal evaluation report form is compiled
by the head of the school who submits it to the
board of trustees and to the owner of the school
for the expression of an opinion beforehand.
Schools are free to decide whether to involve
any other parties.
81
year period, or against average data for educational institutions of the same type. Similar
educational institutions have been grouped
according to their size and location as well as
other factors.
Ireland
Section I. External evaluation of schools
1. Purpose of external evaluation and
responsible bodies
( ) https://www.education.ie/en/The-Department/
Management-Organisation/Inspectorate.html
82
National Profiles
Incidental inspections are low-stakes evaluations, in that the emphasis is on advice and
there is no published report. In contrast, a
whole-school evaluation engages school management, teachers, parents and learners in a
review of the work of the school and the
inspection report is published.
Incidental
inspections
are
unannounced
inspections which an inspector carries out in a
school for the purpose of evaluating a specific
aspect of the schools work and provision, such
as teaching, learning, pupils achievement, and
supports for pupils. They have the advantage of
facilitating a review of the work in classrooms on
a normal school day without the formality that
accompanies a planned WSE.
3. Evaluation framework
2. Evaluators
In order to be considered for appointment,
inspectors are required to hold a recognised,
relevant first or second class honours primary
degree (Level 8, National Qualifications
Framework) and hold a recognised teacher
education qualification (minimum Level 8). They
have to be registered with the Teaching Council
in Ireland and have at least five years'
satisfactory service as a teacher. They also
have to be able to demonstrate an ability to
( ) www.education.ie/en/Schools-Colleges/Services/QualityAssurance/
83
and learning and student support. At postprimary level, the majority of whole-school
evaluations are shorter and more focused on
management, leadership and learning.
4. Procedures
The frequency of external evaluation is
determined by the Inspectorate of the
Department of Education and Skills. The
Inspectorate has moved from cyclical evaluation
in schools to smart regulation of schools. A
risk-based approach is used to support planning
for inspection. At primary level, the inspection
planning process involves risk assessment
based on data from a significant number of
unannounced incidental inspections that will be
conducted each year and a range of other data,
including school size, for example. At postprimary level, data from stand-alone subject
inspections, incidental inspections and other
school
evaluations
facilitates
risk-based
assessment in the selection of schools for WSE
or other forms of inspection. Other data
available to the Department of Education and
Skills such as performance in state certificate
examinations, student attendance and student
retention data is considered as part of the risk
assessment process.
84
National Profiles
Depending on the nature of the recommendations, support for improvement may be provided
by the school itself, through its own staff
resources. In addition, management representative bodies, including bodies representing school
principals and deputy principals, board or
patron/trustees may provide support to schools.
The school may also access additional training
from the Professional Development Service for
Teachers, which can provide some targeted
support to schools in response to specific issues
that may arise during inspection. This service is
funded by the Department of Education and
Skills to provide professional development and
support services to teachers.
85
2. Parties involved
The school is fully autonomous, within parameters set down by the Department of Education
and Skills, to identify its own priorities and to set
relevant targets. The school is required to
publish its school improvement plan to parents.
21
( ) https://www.education.ie/en/Publications/InspectionReports-Publications/Evaluation-ReportsGuidelines/insp_looking_at_self_evaluation_second_lev
el_schools_pdf.pdf
20
22
( ) http://www.education.ie/en/Publications/InspectionReports-Publications/Evaluation-ReportsGuidelines/sse_guidelines_post_primary.pdf
( ) http://www.education.ie/en/Publications/InspectionReports-Publications/Evaluation-ReportsGuidelines/sse_guidelines_post_primary.pdf
86
National Profiles
Procedures for dealing with professional competence and disciplinary matters for teachers are
in place for all schools. Under the penultimate
stage of these formal procedures, boards of
management may to seek (by application to the
Chief Inspector) an independent evaluation of
the work of a teacher where the board of school
is dissatisfied with the professional standards of
the teachers work. When asked for such
assistance, the Inspectorate conducts the
necessary inspection visits and provides reports
to the boards of management involved.
From time to time, the Inspectorate publishes
composite reports on aspects of education
provision so as to inform the wider school sector
of its evaluation findings. Most recently, the
Chief Inspectors Report 2010-2012 presented
key findings about standards in schools
attended by primary and post-primary students.
2. Parties involved
The school head in cooperation with the
schools teachers assembly is responsible for
the implementation of school self-evaluation
procedures as well as for decisions taken in
relation to the final report. The review and
processes connected with it (data gathering,
consultation through questionnaires, etc.) are
recommended to be conducted by groups of
teachers established specifically for this
purpose. Representatives of parents and
students may also participate, if agreed by the
schools teachers assembly.
Greece
23
87
24
( ) http://www.iep.edu.gr
88
National Profiles
Spain
2. Evaluators
25
( ) http://myschool.sch.gr
89
Andalusia 2012-2016 (26), for example, is a fouryear plan that includes six general categories of
school organisation and management (key
factors), which are further subdivided into the
specific indicators that inspectors must consider
in their evaluation and supervision work. The
Plan also sets down standards as well as the
expected results for each priority action.
3. Evaluation framework
The 2006 Education Act regulates the general
framework for the inspection of education. Each
Autonomous Community develops this framework further and specifies the functions of the
Education Inspectorate in greater detail. The
Communities may also publish annual or multiannual Action Plans for Education Inspection,
setting priority action areas for the Inspectorate,
defining the scope of their responsibilities and
specifying any other activities they must carry
out. They also issue guidelines on evaluation
procedures and publish the regulations for each
plan in their official bulletins. These include the
objectives; the areas, scope and frequency of
evaluation; as well as the indicators to be used.
The nature of these documents varies according
to each Community, as does the information
they contain, which range from wide areas of
intervention to specific indicators. The General
Action Plan for the Education Inspectorate in
4. Procedures
To carry out external evaluation, inspectors are
allowed by the regulations to gather, analyse
and evaluate information, as well as to resort to
a series of procedures and actions that are
specified in the Education Inspectorate Action
26
( ) http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/boja/2012/61/d18.pdf
27
( ) http://www.mecd.gob.es/inee/sistema-indicadores.html
90
National Profiles
91
2. Parties involved
For most of the Autonomous Communities the
internal evaluation procedure and the parties
involved are as follows:
at the end of each school year, the school
board evaluates the school development
plan, as well as the annual general
programme in relation to the planning and
organisation of teaching, the development of
extra-curricular activities, changes in student
academic performance, the results of internal
and external evaluations, and the effective
management of human and material
resources. It also examines the overall
management of the school with a view to
improving its quality;
In addition, the education authorities of the Autonomous Communities may also recommend
Innovation Projects for Quality and Selfevaluation or Self-evaluation and Quality
Improvement Plans, which schools are expected
to adopt. Similarly, some evaluation institutes in
the Autonomous Communities have developed
a series of indicators to guide internal evaluation
by suggesting the main areas on which schools
should focus.
92
National Profiles
in
the
internal
28
( )
93
http://www.docv.gva.es/datos/2005/04/15/pdf/
2005_X3903.pdf.
29
( ) http://evalua.educa.aragon.es/admin/admin_1/
file/BlogCPR/ASTURIAS%20MANUAL%20AUTOEVAL
UACION.pdf
30
( ) http://www.educacion.navarra.es/documents/
57308/57761/Sistema_indic_sgto_planes_mejora.pdf/35
3bab4b-6f4d-435f-acca-cb1a19903f87
31
( ) http://www.educa.jccm.es/es/normativa/resolucion-30mayo-2003-direccion-general-coordinacion-poli
94
National Profiles
After consultation with the Autonomous Communities, the INEE must present a report to
Parliament based on the main State Education
System Indicators as well as on the results of
the General Diagnostic Evaluations and any
international evaluations in which Spain has
taken part. This report must also include any
recommendations arising from the report on the
Education System carried out by the State
School Council (34).
35
( ) http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/educacion/
agaeve/index.html
32
( ) http://www.mecd.gob.es/inee/portada.html
33
( ) http://www.mecd.gob.es/inee/publicaciones.html
36
( ) http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/educacion/
agaeve/docs/Orden_ESCALA.pdf
34
( ) http://www.mecd.gob.es/cee/portada.html
95
France
37
( ) http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2013/12/10/pdfs/BOE-A2013-12886.pdf
38
( ) http://www.boe.es/buscar/pdf/2006/BOE-A-2006-7899consolidado.pdf
96
National Profiles
2. Evaluators
Evaluators are mostly management staff from
the Ministry of National Education. IENs are
recruited from among primary and secondary
school teachers. They must prove that they
have been teaching for five years and any
experience as a trainer is an advantage. For one
academic year, they alternate work and training
at the National College for Education
Management, Higher Education and Research
(ESENESR), during which they cover the
evaluation of individual staff and schools. They
also undergo in-service training organised by
the Ministry of National Education or by the
regional education authorities (acadmies).
4. Procedures
IENs do not systematically evaluate all schools,
as these are chosen because their results are
unsatisfactory, or to understand good results, or
even due to human resources management or
other random issues. Schools can be chosen by
the inspector or through a decision by his or her
superior (regional director or director of
education for the acadmie). On average, the
IENs inspect 4 000 schools every year out of a
total of more than 50 000.
There is no nationally standardised school
evaluation protocol for IENs to follow. Each
inspector enjoys broad discretion in conducting
the external evaluation and defines the
procedures to be used, which often stem from
the training organised by the ESENESR.
3. Evaluation framework
As regards the external evaluation of primary
schools, there are no official parameters or
standards. The only reference documents are
the teaching skills guide (39) and official
curricula (40). IENs view the school plan as an
important tool in the external evaluation. They
also consult the results of student evaluations
carried out by teachers.
indicators concerning the locally and nationally aggregated repetition rates (41);
indicators such as school out of area
requests made by families and stability of the
teaching staff, who provide information on
the attractiveness of the school, with this
data being aggregated nationally and by
dpartement;
39
97
2. Evaluators
6. Reporting of external evaluation findings
3. Evaluation framework
There is no single evaluation model, or even any
national recommendations on the approach to
be taken. However, the General Inspectorate of
National Education has produced several
reports from which regional authorities can get
inspiration (42).
The Ministrys Evaluation, Forecasting and Performance Department (DEPP) provides regional
education authorities with a very detailed set of
42
98
National Profiles
4. Procedures
The methods for conducting school evaluations
differ from one regional education authority to
another. The frequency of such evaluations is
very difficult to establish. As individual staff
inspections form the priority in the work of
inspectors, the time that they can spend on
school evaluation is traditionally limited: it could
take several years to cover all schools
(depending on the size of the regional education
area and the extent of the resources employed).
In addition, the large number of schools compared to the number of inspectors does not allow
for frequent observation. In the past (1990s),
just one regional education authority (Lille)
conducted a systematic evaluation operation
covering all its schools. However, such operations have not generally been conducted in the
other regional education areas. A recent
(unpublished) report indicated that only eight regional education authorities out of thirty expressly included the evaluation of secondary schools
in their plan. However, in five of these authorities, this involved a self-evaluation in the context of the monitoring of performance contracts.
43
99
2. Parties involved
The primary school plan is assessed by the
teachers together with the head teacher. At their
request, a district educational adviser can
provide support.
44
100
National Profiles
Secondary schools have access to a selfevaluation tool (APAE) provided by the central
education authorities in order to diagnose their
strengths and weaknesses. The APAE includes
indicators covering, in particular, the characteristics of the schools population and its available
human resources and working hours, as well as
its performance, identified using the added value
statistical concept (see Section I.3). Head
teachers of secondary schools, and by extension other members of the school community,
have access to the results for their school in
relation to these indicators.
101
Croatia
2. Parties involved
According to the National Curriculum Framework for Pre-school Education and General
Compulsory and Secondary Education (2010),
the self-evaluation process should involve, in
addition to the employees of pre-school and
school institutions, students, parents, representatives of the local community, administrative
and professional services and others. Their
opinion will offer a wider perspective on the education provided by those institutions and facilitate better development of those institutions (45).
( ) http://www.ncvvo.hr
47
( ) http://dokumenti.ncvvo.hr/Samovrjednovanje/2009-0324/vodic.pdf
48
( ) http://dokumenti.ncvvo.hr/Samovrjednovanje/
Tiskano/prirucnik.pdf
45
( ) public.mzos.hr/fgs.axd?id=17504
102
National Profiles
Italy
The focus of the SNV is on the efficiency and effectiveness of the education and training system
as well as the quality of education provision.
The three-year VALeS pilot project (2012-2015)
involves 300 schools at all levels, which were
50
( ) http://www.invalsi.it/invalsi/index.php
49
51
( ) http://www.invalsi.it/invalsi/ri/vales/
( ) http://www.indire.it/
103
The Valutazione e Miglioramento project (20132014) (52), carried out by INVALSI, has mainly
involved primary and lower secondary schools
(first cycle of education): 400 comprehensive
schools and approximately 23 upper secondary
schools. Schools have been randomly assigned
to
two
possible
evaluation
pathways:
1) evaluation of outcomes and processes
related to the organisational environment and
2) evaluation and class observation with the
specific aim of analysing educational and
didactic practices.
2. Evaluators
In the context of VALeS, INVALSI has defined
two external evaluator profiles: experts with
school-based experience (profile A) and those
with expertise in other areas (profile B).
For profile A, in addition to a first degree, there
are specific requirements in terms of
professional experience for each type of expert:
A1: experts in school leadership school
head currently in service and with at least
three years experience; school head not
currently in service; inspector in service;
teacher (in service or not) with at least five
years experience in management/ administrative work in schools.
3. Evaluation framework
Pending the implementation of the National
Evaluation System, the reference framework is
provided by the school evaluation and
development project known as VALeS (53)
(Valutazione e sviluppo della scuola), which
52
53
( ) http://www.invalsi.it/invalsi/ri/vales/documenti/
Logiche_gen_progetto_VALeS.pdf
104
National Profiles
educational practices;
organisational
environment
(leadership,
teamwork,
partnerships
and
internal
evaluation);
social and environmental context within
which the school operates.
This document explains the elements identifying
a good school in these four areas. It enables
the results to be interpreted in light of the
schools internal processes and resources, and
taking account of the context in which the school
operates. The final results through which
schools can be characterised vary widely
because of the independence of schools. They
aim to ensure the educational success of all
students, acquisition of skills, particularly core
skills, and equity of outcomes.
4. Procedures
The frequency of evaluation has not yet been
established.
The evaluation process within the SNV has four
phases:
school self-evaluation involves an internal
audit of the schools services, the drafting of
a self-evaluation report in electronic format
following the framework set up by
INVALSI (54), and the development of an
improvement plan. The audit is based on
data from the Ministry of Educations
54
( ) http://www.invalsi.it/invalsi/index.php
105
There is no consultation with school management whilst finalising the evaluation report.
55
( ) http://www.invalsi.it/invalsi/ri/vales/documenti/
Linee_guida_autovalutazione.pdf
106
National Profiles
2. Parties involved
Schools are free to choose their internal selfevaluation team, which, together with the school
head, is responsible for the preparation of the
report. The school is also at liberty to decide on
the involvement of other stakeholders. In the
context of the two pilot projects described in
Section I, INVALSI highly recommends the
involvement of teachers, non-teaching staff,
students, and parents in the evaluation teams.
56
( ) http://www.iso.org/iso/home/standards/managementstandards/iso_9000.htm
57
( ) http://www.efqm.org/the-efqm-excellence-model
58
( ) http://qualitapa.gov.it/it/iniziative/caf-per-miur/
107
Cyprus
Lower secondary school evaluations are conducted by a team of inspectors under the supervision of the General Inspectorate of Secondary
Education of the Ministry of Education (59).
The main purposes of external school evaluation
are: monitoring the compliance of schools and
school heads with regulations; and evaluating
teaching staff and schools educational
processes with a view to improving the quality of
education provision.
External school evaluation: the external evaluation activities will be rolled-out in the 2015/16
school year. Each year, for the following three
school years, 10 % of the total number of
schools will receive an external evaluation.
Schools will be chosen on the basis of efficiency
and effectiveness indicators, and up to 3 % on
the basis of a random sampling
( ) http://www.moec.gov.cy/dme/en/index.html
108
National Profiles
2. Evaluators
3. Evaluation framework
There are no set standards or specific documents to be used by evaluators. The evaluation
committee prepares an evaluation report
focusing on the areas mentioned above.
4. Procedures
Lower secondary external school evaluation is
not conducted routinely. It takes place whenever
it is deemed necessary to assess the work done
in school. The decision for conducting an
external evaluation is based on formal and
informal information collected by the Administration of Secondary Education about the
administrative and academic performance of
schools. The analysis of such information
provides inspectors with the necessary background information.
are
not
published
or
60
( ) http://www.pi.ac.cy/pi
109
In lower secondary education, internal evaluation takes the form of an activity report and is
prepared annually by school heads. The report
is based on a specific template provided centrally. Annual school activity reports are gathered
centrally and help educational authorities to
monitor schools and the education system.
2. Parties involved
Primary schools have full autonomy in deciding
who participates in internal evaluation.
110
National Profiles
Latvia
3. Evaluation framework
In addition, a methodological tool was developed by IKVD in 2011. The Quality Evaluation
Methodology of Education Institutions, Examination Centres and Education Programmes (63) is
designed to help evaluators match the defined
parameters with agreed standards.
The main areas addressed by this framework
are: (1) education content school education
programmes; (2) teaching and learning; (3) pupil/student achievement; (4) support for pupils/
students; (5) school climate; (6) school resources and (7) organisation, management and quality assurance for which there are 19 evaluation
parameters. The 19 evaluation parameters are
evaluated according to four evaluation levels:
level I unsatisfactory,
level II satisfactory,
level III good and level IV very good. A
descriptive evaluation is provided for three of
these parameters. This evaluation framework
applies to all general education schools.
2. Evaluators
The external evaluation of schools and education programmes is carried out by an Accreditation Experts Commission. Commissions may
include: one representative of the Ministry of
Education and Science or the National Centre
for Education or State Service of Education
Quality; representatives of education institutions,
(but not from the school being evaluated); and
education specialists nominated by the municipalities. A Commission usually has three or four
members (depending on the size of school)
including a head of commission and experts
who must hold a teaching qualification or a
relevant degree (in law or education management) and have at least one year of teaching
experience or experience in school management. They must also undertake a specialist
training course in evaluation organised by the
4. Procedures
The external evaluation of schools and their
programmes normally takes place every six
years. However, whereas schools are accredited for a period of six years, education
programmes are accredited for a period of either
two or six years.
For instance, in 2012, 83 % of education
programmes were accredited for six years and
16 % of education programmes for two years
62
( ) http://m.likumi.lv/doc.php?id=217947
63
( ) http://ikvd.gov.lv/assets/files/faili/24.05.2011.Ieksej
ie_noteikumi_Nr.5.pdf
61
( ) http://www.ikvd.gov.lv/
111
112
National Profiles
2. Parties involved
The Cabinet Ministers Regulation stipulates that
all stakeholders in schools teachers, students
and parents should take part in internal
evaluation. A school has the right to decide on
the degree of stakeholder involvement in the
evaluation process. However, during the
external evaluation process, the external experts
consider the involvement of all stakeholders as
part of their evaluation criteria. Parents, students
and local government representatives are usually consulted through questionnaires and interviews during the internal evaluation process.
64
( ) http://ikvd.gov.lv/visprj-izgltba/
113
114
National Profiles
Lithuania
3. Evaluation framework
2. Evaluators
4. Procedures
66
( ) http://www.nmva.smm.lt/external-evaluation-2/basicinformation/
65
( ) http://www.nmva.smm.lt/en/
115
116
National Profiles
(based
on
2. Parties involved
It is recommended that the entire school
community participates in internal evaluation,
including the school head and other staff as well
as students and parents. The recommended
model has the following stages:
preparation;
general evaluation;
in-depth analysis and evaluation of selected
aspects;
reporting on the evaluation procedures used
and notification of the conclusions; and
117
118
National Profiles
Luxembourg
67
119
2. Parties involved
Internal school evaluation revolves around the
school development plan. In primary schools,
the school committee (comprising teachers and
management representatives) is responsible for
producing the school development plan in
collaboration with parent representatives, school
subject coordinators and the president of the
school commission of the local authority. The
plan is based on pedagogical recommendations
and advice of the inspectors. The ADQS further
verifies whether the plan conforms to national
methodological recommendations before final
approval is given by the local authority.
( ) https://portal.education.lu/qualitescolaire/Accueil.aspx
69
( ) http://www.ccpe.lu/index.php
120
National Profiles
No planned reforms.
Hungary
Section I. External evaluation of schools
1. Purpose of external evaluation and
responsible bodies
The results of student performance in standardised tests (70) administered to all students in
grades 3 and 9 are sent to schools by the
MENJE, in order to help them monitor and raise
the level of student achievement. Individual student results may be compared to class, school
and national averages taking into account the
socio-economic status of students. Class feedback encourages teachers to identify strengths
and weaknesses and adapt their teaching.
These school and student level data are neither
published in league tables, nor used for external
control or sanctioning purposes. The question of
publishing individual school results in order to
focus attention on accountability remains an
issue of discussion among all school partners.
Class teachers are free to distribute student
results to parents but this is very rare. Parents
may request student performance results for the
school, but again this is not yet customary.
70
121
3. Evaluation framework
For the legal compliance check, the SRU
examines all schools using several criteria.
These deal with diverse issues such as, for
example, equal treatment, number of students in
the class, prevention of accidents and the
implementation of action plans.
2. Evaluators
There are no evaluators directly appointed by
the Ministry or the educational authority.
Inspectors performing the legal compliance
check are civil servants, in most cases permanent employees of the SRU, holding at least a
higher education qualification and a special
training certificate in public administration.
Evaluators for the pedagogical/professional
inspection will be external professionals, mostly
teachers, appointed for a specific period and
specific inspections by the SRU. Offices will
appoint experts listed in a catalogue issued by
the educational authority. Inspectors must hold a
higher education degree, a teaching qualification, and a post-graduate teaching qualification
as well as have 14 years teaching experience.
They must participate in the in-service training
programme organised by the educational
authority.
4. Procedures
The yearly work programme of the SRU details
which schools and which aspects of provision
must be checked. There is no set frequency for
the legal compliance but the process includes:
analysis of documents relevant to the areas
inspected, for example, in the case of equal
treatment of students, enrolment and class
registers showing the distribution of students
between classes;
122
National Profiles
123
2. Parties involved
Schools have full autonomy in deciding who
should participate in the internal evaluation
process and there are no central requirements
or recommendations. There is no national
overview on participation of stakeholders in
internal evaluation processes.
124
National Profiles
Malta
3. Evaluation framework
The external evaluation framework used by the
QAD for all schools is described in 'The
Integrated School Improvement Framework: the
External Review' (74).
2. Evaluators
( ) https://education.gov.mt/en/education/qualityassurance/Pages/default.aspx
73
74
( ) http://curriculum.gov.mt/en/Resources/TheNCF/Documents/NCF.pdf
( ) http://education.gov.mt/en/education/qualityassurance/Pages/External-Reviews.aspx
125
4. Procedures
No specific frequency is specified by the QAD
for external evaluations, however evaluations
are cyclical. Schools showing through their
development plan that they are (a) aware of the
main challenges they are facing, particularly in
the areas of Leadership & Management and
Learning & Teaching, and (b) provide evidence
in the form of clear action plans that show active
work to address challenges and improve, will be
evaluated again after all other schools have
been evaluated (i.e. when the second cycle
starts). However, if a school fails to provide such
evidence, the QAD will ask for a tighter
evaluation cycle, in which case another evaluation will take place after one year.
126
National Profiles
2. Parties involved
Following
present
practice,
the
QAD
recommends that the internal evaluation
involves all school stakeholders, i.e. school
management, educational staff, pupils, parents,
the school council and the local community. The
QAD does not prescribe the role each of these
stakeholders should play in the internal
evaluation process.
75
( ) http://education.gov.mt/en/education/qualityassurance/Documents/QAD%20SCHOOL%20IMPROV
EMENT/Knowing%20Our%20School.pdf
76
( ) http://education.gov.mt/en/education/qualityassurance/Documents/QAD%20SCHOOL%20IMPROV
EMENT/SDP%20handbook%20FINAL%20COPY.pdf
127
128
National Profiles
2. Evaluators
The Netherlands
3. Evaluation framework
The inspectorate works with several risk-based
assessment frameworks (differentiated according
to the levels and sectors of education) (78), which
incorporate the indicators and standards for
assessing the quality of schools.
Following the 2008 amendment to the requirements on annual reporting for schools, the
inspectorate now operates with a system of riskbased inspection that makes a distinction
between: (i) schools at risk, which receive a full
quality inspection; and (ii) schools to be
trusted, which are visited only once every four
years for a basic inspection.
78
( ) http://www.onderwijsinspectie.nl/onderwerpen/
Toezicht/Toezichtkaders
77
( ) http://www.onderwijsinspectie.nl/english
129
Based on the indicators, the inspectorate determines whether the school is of basic quality
or to be classified as weak or very weak.
4. Procedures
The inspectorate carries out a risk analysis of all
schools every year and visits each school at
least once every four years.
130
National Profiles
2. Parties involved
The school board is responsible for internal
quality management and self-evaluation.
In the annual report, schools describe the various activities of the preceding school year. It
describes the policy of the school and its outcomes. This annual report includes a management report and an annual financial statement.
131
79
( ) http://www.cito.com/
132
National Profiles
Austria
2. Evaluators
School inspectors are employed as civil
servants by the central government but exercise
their duties at the school inspection offices of
the boards of education in the nine Austrian
Lnder and in the districts.
133
The SQA (81) (School Quality in General Education), which has been officially implemented
from school year 2013/14 as a quality
management initiative, provides six evaluation
parameters: learning outcomes, teaching and
learning, the classroom environment and the
environment of the school in general, leadership
and school management, the professionalism of
staff and staff development, school partnerships
and external relations.
4. Procedures
The frequency of school inspection is not
defined centrally, although there are requirements for periodic planning and reporting at all
levels. Within SQA (School Quality in General
Education initiative) schools have to draw up
clearly defined development plans, which are
discussed in meetings between the school and
school inspectors. The targets agreed in the
development plans are monitored on a yearly
basis. Nevertheless, more frequent and more
detailed monitoring is likely to be carried out in
schools where problems have been identified.
Before visiting a school, in addition to the school
development plans, inspectors analyse documents such as staff development plans, pupils'
results in national tests, the rate of early school
leaving,
turn-over
of
teachers,
parent
complaints, burn-out of school heads, and other
information that can provide evidence on school
performance or signal potential problems.
3. Evaluation framework
Inspectors base their work on a range of official
documents, directly linked to external evaluation, which provide the necessary information to
ensure consistency in their work. These are:
The Federal School Inspection Act (80), which
includes a definition and description of school
quality and prescribes a system for periodic
planning and reporting. It also calls for regular
agreements on target setting at all levels, and
provides for guidance and self-evaluation
instruments as well as support measures for
schools.
80
( ) http://www.ris.bka.gv.at/GeltendeFassung.wxe?Ab
frage=Bundesnormen&Gesetzesnummer=10009264
81
( ) http://www.sqa.at/
134
National Profiles
2. Parties involved
School heads are ultimately responsible for
internal evaluation. Teachers nominated as
SQA-school coordinators support the school
head in this process. In some schools, working
groups on quality include representatives of all
school partners, such as teachers, pupils,
parents, and members of the local community.
( ) http://www.sqa.at/course/view.php?id=44
135
Poland
136
National Profiles
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
(or
3. Evaluation framework
Inspectors are obliged to undertake a professional development course every two years.
2.
9.
2. Evaluators
1.
8.
83
( ) www.npseo.pl
84
( ) http://www.men.gov.pl/
137
4. Procedures
85
86
( ) http://www.npseo.pl/action/externalevaluation
( ) http://www.npseo.pl/data/documents/4/313/313.pdf
138
National Profiles
2. Parties involved
Legislation specifies that the school head must
carry out internal evaluation in cooperation with
teachers. Parents should also take part in
internal evaluation and this fact is reflected in
the evaluation tools developed for school
inspectors.
( ) www.nauczycielbadacz.pl
139
88
( ) http://2013.ewd.edu.pl/educational-value-added-inpoland/
140
National Profiles
Portugal
Section I. External evaluation
1. Purpose of external evaluation and
responsible bodies
3. Evaluation framework
2. Evaluators
The external evaluation team comprises three
members: two inspectors employed by IGEC
and an external evaluator selected by IGEC
from among a roster of university lecturers
and/or researchers working in the area of
89
( ) https://www.ige.min-edu.pt/upload/AEE_2013_2014/
AEE_13_14_(1)_Quadro_Referencia.pdf
141
4. Procedures
in
external
( ) http://www.ige.min-edu.pt/
142
National Profiles
2. Parties involved
The participation of stakeholders differs from
school to school as they are free to make their
own arrangements. The degree of stakeholder
participation also varies a great deal, whereas in
some cases they are fully engaged in the
processes from the designing stage to
decision-taking in others they may only be
consulted through questionnaires.
143
Romania
Section I. External evaluation of schools
1. Purpose of external evaluation and
responsible bodies
144
National Profiles
provisional
schools);
2. Evaluators
The external evaluators are known as an
experts in evaluation and accreditation. They
must:
authorisation
(given
to
new
3. Evaluation framework
145
4. Procedures
146
National Profiles
2. Parties involved
According to legislation, the Committee for
Evaluation and Quality Assurance must have
representatives of teachers, parents (up to
tertiary/non-university level), pupils (from lower
secondary level), local administration, ethnic
minorities, as well as other stakeholders
considered important by the school (e.g.
employers for IVET). The committee devises the
quality improvement strategy and plan,
supervises quality improvement and internal
evaluation activities, and produces the annual
report on internal evaluation. All these activities
must be approved by the school board.
( ) https://calitate.aracip.eu/
147
the County School Inspectorate in specific circumstances (such as for promotion and
transfer).
148
National Profiles
Slovenia
Section I. External evaluation of schools
1. Purpose of external evaluation and
responsible bodies
External school evaluation is carried out in the
form of inspections under the jurisdiction of the
Inspectorate of the Republic of Slovenia for
Education and Sport, which is affiliated to the
Ministry for Education, Science and Sport. The
Inspectorate is responsible for ensuring the
adherence of the management and education
activities of schools to legislation. The purpose
of school inspection is, therefore, to ensure the
implementation of educational legislation, the
appropriate use of funds and the quality of
educational provision.
3. Evaluation framework
Inspectors check that legislation and other
regulations are correctly implemented. The
21 areas covered by the inspection are
determined by the School Inspection Act; they
relate to the organisation, funding, and provision
of education programmes, as well as ensuring
the rights of pupils and teaching staff.
The Chief Inspector draws up the annual work
programme of the inspectorate with the
agreement of the minister and, taking into
account current legislative priorities and any
forthcoming reforms, decides which issues are
to be addressed in regular inspections.
2. Evaluators
Inspection
is
performed
by
inspectors
(inpektorji), who are employed by the State as
public servants. School inspectors must have at
least a masters degree or equivalent, a minimum of seven years professional experience (in
education, counselling, research or educational
administration), and before appointment or
within six months from the appointment at least;
must have passed the school inspectors examination (including knowledge of administrative,
offence and inspection procedures). A 16-hour
training course provided by the ministry
responsible for public administration is available
to prospective candidates to prepare for this
examination. The Chief Inspector is the head of
149
4. Procedures
teacher
or
150
National Profiles
2. Parties involved
94
( ) http://kviz.solazaravnatelje.si/samoevalvacija/priporocilaza-samoevalvacijsko-porocilo
93
( ) http://www.solazaravnatelje.si/ISBN/978-961-6637-695.pdf
95
( ) http://kviz.solazaravnatelje.si/gradiva/
151
No planned reforms.
Slovakia
96
97
( ) http://www.ric.si/national_assessment_of_
knowledge/analyses
( )
152
http://www.ssiba.sk/Default.aspx?text=
g&id=1&lang=en
National Profiles
specific
2. Evaluators
of
quality
control
and
school services.
Criteria for the evaluation of educational/
training facilities/resources:
personnel working conditions;
space;
material resources and
information technology;
provision
for
3. Evaluation framework
98
( ) http://www.ssiba.sk/Default.aspx?text=
g&id=32&lang=sk
99
( )
153
http://www.nucem.sk/en/medzinarodne_merania
4. Procedures
100
) http://www.ssiba.sk/admin/fckeditor/editor/userfiles/
file/Dokumenty/PIC_minister_13_14 %281 %29.pdf
154
National Profiles
2. Evaluators
The founders themselves decide what
qualifications their own external evaluators
should have.
3. Evaluation framework
At regional and local level, there is no centrally
set evaluation framework.
4. Procedures
101
) http://www.ssiba.sk/admin/fckeditor/editor/
userfiles/file/Dokumenty/sprava12_13.pdf
155
2. Parties involved
The reports are prepared by head teachers in
cooperation with other senior educational staff
and teachers. Educational associations and
curricular review groups and advisory bodies
may also play a significant role.
156
National Profiles
Finland
2. Parties involved
The education provider decides on the methods
used and the frequency with which the quality
assurance procedures are carried out.
According to the 'Quality Criteria for Basic
Education' developed by the Ministry of
Education, the views of municipal decision
makers, pupils and their guardians, teachers,
principals and other stakeholders should be
taken into account in the schools quality work.
102
103
) http://www.oph.fi/download/
148966_Quality_assurance_in_general_education.pdf
157
) http://www.minedu.fi/OPM/Julkaisut/
2009/Perusopetuksen_laatukriteerit.html?lang=en
158
National Profiles
2. Evaluators
3. Evaluation framework
Sweden
The main areas under scrutiny in external evaluation are: students progress towards educational goals, leadership, the improvement of
quality in education, and individual students
rights.
4. Procedures
All educational activities in Sweden are monitored through regular inspections every five years.
105
) http://www.skolinspektionen.se/en/
About-Skolinspektionen/About-the-Swedish-SchoolsInspectorate/
159
) http://www.riksdagen.se/sv/DokumentLagar/Lagar/Svenskforfattningssamling/Forordning2011556-med-inst_sfs-2011-556/?bet=2011:556
centralised
moderation
of
106
) http://www.skolverket.se/om-skolverket/
andra-sprak-och-lattlast/in-english/the-swedishnational-agency-for-education-1.61968
107
160
) http://siris.skolverket.se/siris/f?p=SIRIS:33:0
National Profiles
2. Parties involved
) http://www.skolverket.se/skolutveckling/
kvalitetsarbete/sa-gor-andra
109
161
) http://www.q-steps.se/Templates/Page____125.aspx
111
) http://english.skl.se/
113
(
110
) http://www.ifau.se/en/About-IFAU/
112
) http://webbutik.skl.se/bilder/artiklar/pdf/7585-0573.pdf?issuusl=ignore
114
) http://www.skolverket.se/skolutveckling/
kvalitetsarbete
162
) http://skolinspektionen.se/sv/Tillsyn-granskning/Nyheter1/Ny-tillsynsmodell-fran-2015/
National Profiles
3. Evaluation framework
To evaluate schools, Ofsted uses
Framework for School Inspection (117)..
2. Evaluators
116
) http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/qualificationsexperience-and-standards-required-of-additionalinspectors-undertaking-inspections-be
117
115
the
) http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/
163
) http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/framework-forschool-inspection-january-2012
4. Procedures
Schools will be notified of an inspection on the
afternoon of the previous working day, although
they may be inspected without notice where
concerns have been identified. The frequency of
inspection is proportionate to the performance
and circumstances of schools. Academies are
inspected within two years of opening and
thereafter are subject to the same inspection regime as schools maintained by local authorities.
Regulations prescribe that schools must be
inspected every five years, except for schools
judged to be 'outstanding' at their previous
inspection, which are exempt from further
routine inspections unless a risk assessment
raises concerns. Outstanding schools are
subject to a risk assessment three years after
the outstanding judgement and this is carried
out annually thereafter. The risk assessment
focuses on pupils attainment, progress and
attendance, the outcomes of any other
inspections carried out at the school (e.g. survey
118
119
) http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/school-inspectionhandbook
164
) https://www.raiseonline.org/login.aspx?ReturnUrl
= %2findex.aspx
National Profiles
120
) https://parentview.ofsted.gov.uk/
165
3. Evaluation framework
4. Procedures
2. Evaluators
Several grades of staff with various job titles are
involved in school or educational improvement
services and the required qualifications vary. It
is for local authorities themselves to determine
their own service delivery arrangements, the
qualifications required and the extent to which
staff are directly employed, contracted or
commissioned. Examples of different delivery
models can be found in The Council Role in
School Improvement; Case Studies of Emerging
Models (121). However, a senior school improvement officer, and often grades below, will
generally hold a relevant degree and a teaching
qualification, and have leadership experience in
teaching or inspection. Commonly, data analysis
skills are also required.
(
121
) http://www.local.gov.uk/publications//journal_content/56/10180/4024018/PUBLICATION
166
National Profiles
2. Parties involved
Teachers and other staff, school governors,
pupils and parents may all be involved in
internal evaluation. It depends on the approach
adopted by the individual school whether
participants take an active part in the process,
providing and analysing data themselves, or
inform evaluation through discussions or
consultation.
123
) http://dashboard.ofsted.gov.uk/
124
) http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/performance/
125
) http://www.local.gov.uk/publications//journal_content/56/10180/4024018/PUBLICATION
126
167
) https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/teachersstandards
Teachers,
including
headteachers,
are
evaluated annually as part of performance
management. Headteachers either evaluate
teachers themselves or appoint another staff
member to do so. Headteachers are evaluated
by the governing board, with the support of an
external adviser.
There is a separate inspection framework for
Ofsted to evaluate how well a local authority is
performing its role in promoting high standards,
ensuring equality of access to opportunity,
fulfilling childrens potential and providing
support to schools causing concern. Inspection
is not universal. It is carried out only where
concerns about performance are apparent or at
the request of the Secretary of State. Ofsted
publishes the inspection findings in letter form,
setting out briefly the context of the inspection,
the evidence gathered, any strengths and
weaknesses and areas recommended for
improvement. There is not an equivalent
inspection of the trusts which run academy
chains (groups of academies).
168
National Profiles
2. Evaluators
Estyn delivers its work through personnel who
fall into one of five categories:
127
128
) http://www.estyn.gov.uk
169
) https://www.gov.uk/disclosure-barring-service-check
3. Evaluation framework
Inspections carried out by Estyn are conducted
against the Common Inspection Framework
(CIF) (129) introduced in 2010. This is used as
the basis for all inspections. The main areas
(Key Questions) which are addressed by the
CIF are Outcomes, Provision, and Leadership.
There are a total of 10 Quality Indicators,
allocated under the three Key Questions (so that
each one contains 2-4 Quality Indicators)
including aspects such as wellbeing, the
learning environment, or resource management.
4. Procedures
129
) http://www.estyn.gov.uk/english/inspection/inspectionexplained/
170
National Profiles
171
2. Evaluators
All local authorities employ Challenge Advisors
who evaluate schools work as part of their role
to help to raise performance. This work follows
processes which include reviewing a schools
key data (outcomes of assessments, attendance, number of exclusions, etc.) and comparing it
to that of other schools, including those with
similar socio-economic characteristics.
4. Procedures
Local authority evaluations are conducted on an
annual basis.
3. Evaluation framework
Frameworks used in Wales to support school
evaluation for which local authorities are
responsible are produced by consortia of local
authorities (130). Local frameworks are also used
to assess specific areas of schools work such
Local authority evaluations involve the headteacher and possibly members of the school
Senior Leadership Team.
131
(
130
) http://www.erw.org.uk/regional-support-challenge-andintervention-framework-rscif/
) http://wales.gov.uk/topics/educationandskills/
publications/guidance/schooleffectivenessframework/?
lang=en
132
172
) http://learning.wales.gov.uk/resources/nlnf/?lang=en
National Profiles
2. Parties involved
School leaders are required to produce the
annual internal evaluation of their schools
performance. Other school staff members may
be asked to contribute to this work by providing
data, and school leaders may use information
such as lesson observations and reviews of
pupil work or lesson plans as part of this work.
The headteacher discusses the outcomes of the
school's annual self-evaluation with the schools
chair of governors and this is then reported to
governors, during a scheduled meeting.
Governing bodies may appoint a sub-committee
to examine the issues raised in greater detail.
173
) http://wales.gov.uk/topics/educationandskills/
publications/guidance/schooleffectivenessframework/?
lang=en
134
135
(
(
136
) http://www.estyn.gov.uk/english/inspection/inspectionguidance/primary-schools/
137
) http://www.estyn.gov.uk/english/inspection/inspectionguidance/secondary-schools
174
) http://wales.gov.uk/docs/dcells/publications/
120118bandingpresentationen.pdf
) http://wales.gov.uk/docs/dcells/publications/
121206-guide-to-school-banding-en.pdf
National Profiles
2. Evaluators
Inspectors are directly employed by the
inspectorate. They can cover different responsibilities and roles. District inspectors have
responsibility for a group of organisations within
an educational phase and within a particular
geographical area. They carry out ongoing
monitoring visits. In the case of follow-up
inspections, the district inspector will generally
be the reporting inspector. Reporting inspectors
manage the inspection team and are supported,
in most cases, by a deputy reporting inspector.
Inspections of individual organisations are normally undertaken by a team of specialist
inspectors, supported where appropriate by
associate
assessors
(see
below)
and
professional associates.
All inspectors must be qualified to at least
degree level or equivalent, and must have a
qualification enabling them to teach in a grantaided school (as publicly funded schools are
referred to in Northern Ireland). Most inspection
teams include specialist inspectors (e.g. of
particular subjects, pastoral care/safeguarding,
Irish-medium education) and qualifications
specific to the post will be required. All
inspectors have substantial teaching experience. Requirements depend on the specific post
but, typically, these are ten years experience,
three of which would be at senior level and
include such areas as leading or implementing
improvement strategies or influencing or
monitoring evaluation.
United Kingdom
Northern Ireland
Section I. External evaluation of schools
1. Purpose of external evaluation and
responsible bodies
The Education and Training Inspectorate (138)
(ETI), a division within the Department of
Education, is the body responsible for inspecting
and reporting on the quality of education in
schools. The purpose of inspection is to promote
the highest possible standards of learning,
teaching and achievement, by evaluating the
quality of provision and identifying schools'
strengths and areas for improvement. In addition
to regular inspections of individual schools,
particular surveys/evaluations are undertaken to
gain evidence on a specialist area of the
curriculum or on matters of priority interest.
Results of these may be used to disseminate
examples of good practice. Evidence collected
during individual school inspections may be
Newly
appointed
inspectors
serve
a
probationary period of one year, during which
they follow an appropriate programme of
induction and staff development. Core induction
lasts for 12 weeks. Staff development continues
throughout an inspectors service with the
organisation.
The ETI also recruits a pool of 'associate
assessors' from among senior school staff, such
as principals, deputy principals or senior
teachers. Associate assessors may be asked to
join an inspection team up to a maximum of
138
) http://www.etini.gov.uk/
175
3. Evaluation framework
The general framework and quality indicators
guiding inspections of schools are provided in
the ETI's 2010 publications Together Towards
Improvement:
a
process
for
self139 140
evaluation ( ) ( ).
4. Procedures
ETI has developed a proportionate and riskbased inspection strategy for schools, which is
being phased in over a six-year period which
began in September 2010. All schools will have
a formal inspection activity at least once in a
three-year period, but the length and nature of
the inspection activity varies according to
assessment of risk. This involves using information from performance indicators, such as the
percentage of pupils achieving the target levels
for attainment in assessments and national
tests; risk factors, such as the length of time
since the previous inspection; and ongoing
monitoring of school by district inspectors.
How effective are leadership and management in raising achievement and supporting
learners? This question deals with strategic
leadership, action to promote improvement,
staffing, accommodation and physical
resources, links and partnerships, equality of
opportunity, diversity and good relations, and
public value.
How effective are teaching, learning and
assessment? Here, the areas under scrutiny
are planning, teaching and learning, and
assessment.
Schools receive two weeks' notice of an inspection. Prior to an inspection, primary schools
have to submit some documentation to ETI that
helps the inspectorate in understanding the
context of the school. The documentation
includes basic information on aspects such as
class sizes, pupil: teacher ratios, teachers
timetables, teaching staff details and numbers of
children with special educational needs. Postprimary schools are required to complete an
inspection overview document and provide it to
the reporting inspector. This document consists
of a concise, up-to-date summary of the school's
priorities and how these were set, the actions
currently being taken and the evidence available
under the three headings of 'achievements and
standards', 'the quality of provision for learning'
and 'leadership and management'. Schools are
encouraged to ensure that some form of selfevaluation on the three main parameters is
available for inspection. ETI provides a sample
139
) http://www.etini.gov.uk/index/together-towardsimprovement/together-towards-improvementprimary.htm (primary)
140
) http://www.etini.gov.uk/index/together-towardsimprovement/together-towards-improvement-postprimary.pdf (post-primary)
176
National Profiles
141
177
) http://www.deni.gov.uk/index/curriculum-and-learningtnew/standards-and-school-improvements/everyschool-a-good-school.htm
2. Parties involved
The prime responsibility for self-evaluation lies
with the principal and the board of governors.
They are responsible for selecting the other
stakeholders, e.g. teachers, other staff, parents,
or pupils who will be involved. The approach of
the individual school determines whether
participants are actively involved through
providing and analysing data themselves or
inform evaluation through discussions or
consultation.
178
) http://www.deni.gov.uk/sdp_guidance_2010__english_published_version_revised.pdf
National Profiles
No reforms.
143
) http://www.eschools.co.uk/
144
) http://www.rtuni.org/uploads/docs/
21672_National %20Standard.pdf
145
) http://www.esags.tv/welcome/
179
United Kingdom
Scotland
3. Evaluation framework
To evaluate schools, the inspectors use a
common framework, 'How good is our
school?' (146), which contains six key areas:
2. Evaluators
School inspections are carried out by Her
Majestys Inspectors who are civil servants
working for Education Scotland. School
inspections are led by a managing inspector
(MI). Staff who are recruited as HM Inspectors
must have a University Honours degree or
equivalent and a teaching qualification, have
had successful professional experience in
education and a proven track record in a
significant leadership role (for example as a
headteacher, depute headteacher, or subject
leader). Once appointed as inspectors, the
successful candidates are provided with a ninemonth probationary period which includes
bespoke training in evaluation and shadowing
school inspections.
4. Procedures
From 2011/12, Education Scotland moved from
a generational cycle of inspection (where a
school was inspected every six to seven years)
to a sampling model where around 220 school
inspections take place each year. Education
Scotlands statisticians identify a statistically
valid sample of schools to be inspected within
the annual programme. The sample of school is
146
180
National Profiles
5. Outcomes
There are four main outcomes of the inspection
procedure:
In the 'no continuing engagement' option,
Education Scotland is satisfied with the overall quality of provision and confident that the
schools self-evaluation processes are
leading to improvements. As a result, they
will make no further visits in connection with
this inspection. The local authority will inform
parents about the establishments progress
as part of their arrangements for reporting to
parents on the quality of their establishments.
In the 'additional support' option, Education
Scotland is satisfied with the overall quality of
provision and confident that most of the
schools self-evaluation processes are
181
6. Reporting findings
Inspection reports are published as a matter of
course by Education Scotland. The school will
be provided with a draft copy of the report, in the
format of a letter to parents, within two weeks
after the inspection. At the same time, the local
authority and Chair of the Parent Council will
receive a draft copy of the letter. The head
teacher, local authority and the Chair of the
Parent Council will be asked to provide an
agreed response, including any comments or
suggested corrections, during the following
week.
147
148
182
National Profiles
2. Parties involved
4. Use of results
There is a legislative requirement for local
authorities to support their schools in using the
results and findings of self-evaluation to produce
an annual report on the standards and quality of
their work, and to plan for improvement.
Education Scotland uses the schools self-evaluation as the starting point for its inspections.
151
149
150
(
(
) http://www.gtcs.org.uk/standards/standards-forregistration.aspx
152
) https://www.scotxed.net/default.aspx
) http://www.journeytoexcellence.org.uk/
153
) http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Education/S
chools/curriculum/seniorphasebenchmarking
183
) http://www.gtcs.org.uk/standards/about-thestandards.aspx
Iceland
154
) http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/
inspectionandreview/Images/QISE_tcm4-722667.pdf
155
156
(
(
157
) http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/inspectionan
dreview/Images/QIRESI130612_tcm4-722669.pdf
) http://eng.menntamalaraduneyti.is/media/law-andregulations/Compulsory-School-Act-No.-91-2008.pdf
158
) http://www.namsmat.is/vefur/
184
) http://reykjavik.is/heildarmat-grunnskolastarfi
National Profiles
2. Evaluators
Evaluators carrying out the external evaluation
for the Ministry of Education, Science and
Culture work in teams of two or three. In every
team there must be teachers with experience of
working at the same school level as the one
they are evaluating, and people who have
experience or expertise in research and school
evaluation either a through a course in school
evaluation at university level or specialised
course on evaluation run by the Educational
Testing Institute. One of these inspectors/
evaluators comes from the Educational Testing
Institute, and the other is appointed by local
authorities.
These teams are independent inspectors
contracted for each individual school evaluation.
The Ministry of Education, Science and Culture
sets some rules for the evaluators they contract.
During the term of inspection evaluators are not
allowed to work in schools of the same level
they are inspecting. No specific courses or
specialist training is required other than that
mentioned above and no specialist training or
courses are initiated regularly by the top-level
authorities. Training for these specialists is
sporadic. The most recent training course,
initiated by the Educational Testing Institute,
took place in 2013.
3. Evaluation framework
159
) http://www.namsmat.is/vefur/ytra_mat_skola/
grunnskoli/vidmid_visbendingum.pdf
160
) http://www.namsmat.is/vefur/ytra_mat_skola/
grunnskoli/sidareglur_matsadila.pdf
161
185
) http://www.namsmat.is/vefur/ytra_mat_skola/
grunnskoli/vidmid_visbendingum.pdf
4. Procedures
186
National Profiles
2. Parties involved
187
) http://www.samband.is/media/mat-og-rannsoknir-askolastarfi/Leidbeiningar-og-vidmid-fyrir-eftirlit-medinnra-mati-lokaskjal.pdf
Former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia
164
) http://netla.hi.is/menntakvika2010/alm/026.pdf
188
) http://mon.gov.mk/
National Profiles
2. Evaluators
The Evaluators are Education Inspectors
employees of the Ministry of Education and
Sciences State Inspectorate for Education.
Evaluators must have teaching qualifications
and at least five years work experience in
schools or other educational institutions. They
must complete professional training courses
lasting three to six months run by senior
evaluators from the SIE and pass the
evaluators professional exam.
3. Evaluation framework
The process of evaluation is carried out in
accordance with the Law on Education
Inspection; the Regulation on the Methods and
Procedures for Inspection Monitoring; and the
Manual of Regular Evaluation. The standards
and instruments for the evaluation of schools
are defined in two documents:
4. Procedures
Regular Evaluation of Schools
The SIE Director adopts an Annual Programme
for the Work of the State Inspection for Education and is responsible for its implementation.
Regular evaluations have four phases:
preparation, implementation, notification and
control. During the preparation phase, SIE
evaluators draw up a list of documents that will
be required of the school in question and define
the objectives of the evaluation: The documents
examined can include, for instance, the school
work programme; its annual report, timetable;
previous regular evaluation report (if any),
school self-evaluation report; school develop-
189
165
190
National Profiles
2. Evaluators
Each municipality may appoint, by Mayors
decision, an authorised external evaluator
(inspector) who conducts the external evaluation, inspection and monitoring of primary and
secondary schools in the municipality. However,
so far, out of a total of 84 municipalities, only
eleven
evaluators/inspectors
have
been
authorised by mayors across the whole territory
of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.
The reason for this low rate of appointment/
authorisation is the shortage of qualified staff. If
the Mayor does not appoint an authorised
evaluator (inspector), then their respective
duties are transferred to the inspectors of the
State Inspectorate for Education.
the
resolution
of
167
191
3. Evaluation framework
Pursuant to Article 10 of the Law for Education
Inspection (168), authorised municipal evaluators
must use the national regular evaluation
framework. The following areas are inspected:
employment conditions and procedures for
school staff;
working conditions in the schools;
4. Procedures
168
) http://edulaws.mk/index.php?option=com_content
&view=article&id=247&Itemid=175&lang=en
192
National Profiles
2. Parties involved
The internal evaluation must involve all groups
in the school: teaching staff, administration staff,
psychologist, pedagogue, librarian, the student
community, Council of Parents, School Board,
representatives of the local and the business
community. The school director is responsible
for the whole process of internal evaluation.
He/she appoints five other persons who will
monitor the process. Seven groups are set up
one for each area of evaluation. By involving as
many people as possible, the intention is to
produce a comprehensive, detailed and credible
internal evaluation report.
193
Norway
The National Examinations Centre is also responsible for planning, organising and implementing the national external tests, and sends
individual students results to schools. The
National Examinations Centre also provides
aggregated student results to each school
together with an assessment of the schools
performance, as well as credits or penalties for
teachers.
2. Parties involved
National authorities recommend that school
leaders, teachers, parents and pupils in all
schools participate in analysing data from tests,
exams and users surveys.
169
) http://ec.europa.eu/education/internationalcooperation/western-balkans_en.htm
170
194
) www.Skoleporten.no
National Profiles
to
to
at
to
195
regarding
school/
media coverage;
scores on national tests and outcomes of
national/local surveys;
other local
municipality.
knowledge
of
the
school/
196
National Profiles
Turkey
2. Evaluators
External evaluation is carried out by education
inspectors who are civil servants employed by
Provincial Education Inspectors Units. Prospective Inspectors must undertake a two-tier
competition comprising a written and oral
examination administered by the Ministry of
National Education. To be admitted to this
competition, the candidate must hold a four-year
bachelors degree in one of the fields relevant to
the area as specified in the examination guide
(e.g. education, science and literature, law,
political science, economics and administrative
sciences etc.) and be under the age of thirtyfive. There are two possible pathways to
become an education inspector: eight years
teaching experience within the Ministry; or by
direct application, having first obtained a
specified minimum score from the Public
Personnel Selection Examination
171
) http://www.meb.gov.tr/english/indexeng.htm
172
197
4. Procedures
School evaluations are done on a three-year
basis. While evaluating schools, the processes
of data collection, analysis and interpretation are
coordinated by the Guidance and Control Directorate of the MoNE and conducted by the inspectors of the Provincial Education Inspectors
Units.
3. Evaluation framework
Inspectors carry out their school evaluation
activities following the School Guidance and
Control Guidelines prepared by the Guidance
and Control Directorate for the different school
types and levels. Inspectors are required to
identify, examine and evaluate reliable information and documentation to achieve the audit
objectives. Control principles and guidelines
shape inspectors' working methods but do not
limit their ability to control and do not pose an
obstacle to the development of auditing practice.
The School Guidance and Control Guideline
serves as a framework for the areas to be
addressed during inspections. The framework
includes five main areas to be evaluated:
(1) education and training activities, (2) management
activities,
(3) financial
processes,
(4) monitoring and evaluation processes, and
(5) evaluation of school management. Each
domain is subdivided into various areas. For
instance, in the education and training activities
area, educational processes such as preparation, measurement and evaluation, guidance
activities, social activities, the physical condition
of the school and student outcomes are
evaluated. The financial processes area deals
with the effective and efficient use of financial
resources; and the monitoring and evaluation
area addresses to what extent the school has
implemented the suggestions made at the
previous inspection, i.e., the improvement
measures taken by the school.
198
National Profiles
evaluation is to establish
management system in schools.
the
quality
2. Parties involved
leadership;
199
No planned reforms.
200
MULUMIRI
Editor coordonator
Arlette Delhaxhe
Autori
Isabelle De Coster (coordonare), Peter Birch, Sylwia Czort,
cu contribuia lui Orla Colclough
Coordonator de producie
Gisle De Lel
201
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
CIPRU
Eurydice-Informationsstelle
Bundesministerium fr Bildung und Frauen
Abt. IA/1b
Minoritenplatz 5
1014 Wien
Contribuia unitii: Responsabilitate comun
Unitatea Eurydice
Ministerul Educaiei i Culturii
Kimonos i Thoukydidou
1434 Nicosia
Contribuia unitii: Christiana Haperi;
experi: Yiannis Ioannou (Director Educaie General
Secundar, Ministerul Educaiei i Culturii); Panayiotis Kyrou
(Director Educaie Primar, Ministerul Educaiei i Culturii)
BELGIA
Unit Eurydice de la Fdration Wallonie-Bruxelles
Ministre de la Fdration Wallonie-Bruxelles
Direction des relations internationales
Boulevard Lopold II, 44 Bureau 6A/012
1080 Bruxelles
Contribuia unitii:
Eurydice Vlaanderen
Departement Onderwijs en Vorming/
Afdeling Strategische Beleidsondersteuning
Hendrik Consciencegebouw
Koning Albert II-laan 15
1210 Brussel
Contribuia unitii: experi de la Departamentul de Educaie i
Formare: Katrijn Ballet, Ann Dejaeghere, Kristof Veekmans;
expert de la Inspectorat: Leen Helsen; coordonare din partea
Unitii Flamande Eurydice: Eline De Ridder
Eurydice-Informationsstelle der Deutschsprachigen
Gemeinschaft
Autonome Hochschule in der DG
Monschauer Strasse 57
4700 Eupen
Contribuia unitii: Stphanie Nix;
experi: Isabelle Mllender i Sabine Schieren
BOSNIA I HEREGOVINA
Ministerul Afacerilor Civile
Departamentul pentru Educaie
Milijana Lale
B&H 1
71000 Sarajevo
BULGARIA
Unitatea Eurydice
Centrul de Dezvoltare al Resurselor Umane
Unitatea de Cercetare i Planificare n domeniul Educaiei
15, Graf Ignatiev Str.
1000 Sofia
Contribuia unitii: Mariana Nesheva
CROAIA
Ministarstvo znanosti, obrazovanja i sporta
Donje Svetice 38
10000 Zagreb
Contribuia unitii: Duje Bonacci
CEHIA
Unitatea Eurydice
Centru pentru Cooperare Internaional n Educaie
Dm zahranin spoluprce
Na Po 1035/4
110 00 Praha 1
Contribuia unitii: Petra Prchlkov, Radka Topinkov, Petr
Drbek
DANEMARCA
Unitatea Eurydice
Agenia pentru nvmnt Superior
Bredgade 43
1260 Kbenhavn K
Contribuia unitii: Responsabilitate comun cu Agenia
Naional pentru Calitate i Supraveghere, Ministerul Danez
al Educaiei
ESTONIA
Unitatea Eurydice
Departamentul de Analiz
Ministerul Educaiei i Cercetrii
Munga 18
50088 Tartu
Contribuia unitii: Kersti Kaldma (coordonare); experi: Maie
Kitsing i Hille Voolaid (Ministerul Educaiei i Cercetrii)
FINLANDA
Unitatea Eurydice
Consiliul Naional Finlandez al Educaiei
P.O. Box 380
00531 Helsinki
Contribuia unitii: Hanna Laakso i Petra Packalen, n
cooperare cu Centrul Finlandez de Evaluare n domeniul
Educaiei i Ministerul Educaiei i Culturii
FRANA
Unit franaise dEurydice
Ministre de l'ducation nationale, de lEnseignement
suprieur et de la Recherche
Direction de lvaluation, de la prospective et de la
performance
Mission aux relations europennes et internationales
61-65, rue Dutot
75732 Paris Cedex 15
Contribuia unitii: experi: Philippe Claus i Didier VinDatiche (Inspector general n domeniul Educaiei Naionale)
202
Mulumiri
GERMANIA
LETONIA
Unitatea Eurydice
Agenia de Stat pentru Dezvoltarea Educaiei
Vau sstrada 3
1050 Riga
Contribuia unitii: Responsabilitate comun; expert: Sarmte
De (Serviciul de Stat al Calitii Educaiei)
GRECIA
Unitatea Eurydice
Ministerul Educaiei i Afacerilor Religioase
Direcia pentru Afacerile Uniunii Europene
37 Andrea Papandreou Str. (Office 2172)
15180 Maroussi (Attiki)
Contribuia unitii: Responsabilitate comun
UNGARIA
Unitatea Naional Eurydice
Institutul Ungar pentru Cercetare Educaional i Dezvoltare
Szalay u. 10-14
1055 Budapesta
Contribuia unitii: Responsabilitate comun
ISLANDA
Unitatea Eurydice
Institutul de Testare a Educaiei
Borgartni 7a
105 Reykjavik
Contribuia unitii: Responsabilitate comun
IRLANDA
Unitatea Eurydice
Departamentul pentru Educaie i Competene
Seciunea Internaional
Strada Marlborough
Dublin 1
Contribuia unitii: Suzanne Dillon (Inspector ef adjunct,
Departamentul pentru Educaie i Competene)
ITALIA
Unit italiana di Eurydice
Istituto Nazionale di Documentazione, Innovazione e Ricerca
Educativa (INDIRE)
Agenzia Erasmus+
Via C. Lombroso 6/15
50134 Firenze
Contribuia unitii: Erica Cim;
experi: Antonietta D'Amato (Dirigente, Direzione generale per
gli ordinamenti scolastici e la valutazione del sistema
nazionale di istruzione, Ministero dell'Istruzione,
dell'Universit e della Ricerca), Sara Mori (Istituto Nazionale
di Documentazione, Innovazione e Ricerca Educativa,
INDIRE)
LIECHTENSTEIN
Informationsstelle Eurydice
Schulamt des Frstentums Liechtenstein
Austrasse 79
Postfach 684
9490 Vaduz
LITUANIA
Unitatea Eurydice
Agenia Naional pentru Evaluare colar
Didlaukio 82
08303 Vilnius
Contribuia unitii: Jolanta Jevsejevien,
Snieguol Vaiekauskien, Jelizaveta Tumlovskaja (Agenia
Naional pentru Evaluare colar a Republicii Lituania)
LUXEMBURG
Unit nationale d'Eurydice
ANEFORE ASBL
58, boulevard Grande-Duchesse Charlotte
1330 Luxembourg
Contribuia unitii: Amina Kafai (Ministerul Educaiei, Copiilor
i Tineretului)
MALTA
Unitatea Eurydice
Departamentul de Cercetare i Dezvoltare
Ministerul Educaiei i Ocuprii Forei de Munc
Great Siege Rd.
Floriana VLT 2000
Contribuia unitii: Robert Lewis Grech
MUNTENEGRU
Unitatea Eurydice
Rimski trg bb
81000 Podgorica
OLANDA
Eurydice Olanda
Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschap
Directie Internationaal Beleid
Etage 4 Kamer 08.022
Rijnstraat 50
2500 BJ Den Haag
Contribuia unitii: Marian Hulshof (Inspectoratul Educaiei)
NORVEGIA
Unitatea Eurydice
Ministerul Educaiei i Cercetrii
AIK-avd., Kunnskapsdepartementet
Kirkegata 18
P.O. Box 8119 Dep.
0032 Oslo
Contribuia unitii: Responsabilitate comun
203
A s i g u r a r e a c a l i t i i n e d u c a i e : p o l i t i c i i a b o r d ri l a e v a l u a re a c o l a r n E u ro p a
POLONIA
SPANIA
Unitatea Eurydice
Fundaia pentru Dezvoltarea Sistemului de nvmnt
Mokotowska 43
00-551 Warsaw
Contribuia unitii: Beata Patos; expert naional: Aleksander
Pawlicki
Eurydice Espaa-REDIE
Centro Nacional de Innovacin e Investigacin Educativa
(CNIIE)
Ministerio de Educacin, Cultura y Deporte
c/General Oraa 55
28006 Madrid
Contribuia unitii: Flora Gil Traver, Ana I. Martn Ramos;
expert: Angel Ariza Cobos
PORTUGALIA
Unidade Portuguesa da Rede Eurydice (UPRE)
Ministrio da Educao e Cincia
Direo-Geral de Estatsticas da Educao e Cincia
(DGEEC)
Av. 24 de Julho, 134
1399-054 Lisboa
Contribuia unitii: Isabel Almeida; experi: Leonor Duarte i
Helder Guerreiro
ROMNIA
Unitatea Eurydice
Agenia Naional pentru Programme Comunitare n
Domeniul Educaiei i Pregtirii Profesionale
Universitatea Politehnic Bucureti
Biblioteca Central
Splaiul Independenei, nr. 313
Sector 6
060042 Bucureti
Contribuia unitii: Veronica Gabriela Chirea; expert:
Constantin erban Iosifescu (Preedinte, Agenia Romn
pentru Asigurarea Calitii n nvmntul Preuniversitar
ARACIP)
SERBIA
Ministarstvo prosvete i nauke
Nemanjina 22-26
11000 Belgrade
SLOVACIA
Unitatea Eurydice
Asociaia Academic Slovac pentru Cooperare
Internaional
Svoradova 1
811 03 Bratislava
Contribuia unitii: Responsabilitate comun
SUEDIA
Unitatea Eurydice
Universitets- och hgskolerdet/Consiliul Suedez pentru
nvmnt Superior
Universitets- och hgskolerdet
Box 45093
104 30 Stockholm
Contribuia unitii: Responsabilitate comun
TURCIA
Unitatea Eurydice
MEB, Strateji Gelitirme Bakanl (SGB)
Eurydice Trkiye Birimi, Merkez Bina 4. Kat
B-Blok Bakanlklar
06648 Ankara
Contribuia unitii: Responsabilitate comun
REGATUL UNIT
Unitatea Eurydice pentru Anglia, ara Galilor i Irlanda de
Nord
Centrul pentru Informaii i Evaluri
Fundaia Naional pentru Cercetare Educaional (NFER)
The Mere, Parcul Upton
Slough, Berkshire, SL1 2DQ
Contribuia unitii: Maureen Heron i Robert Smith
Unitatea Eurydice Scoia
c/o Unitate de Informaii
Servicii Analitice n nvmnt
Guvernul Scoian
Zona 2D Sud, Punctul de coresponden 28
Victoria Quay
Edinburgh EH6 6QQ
Contribuia unitii: Pamela Semple i Jane Renton
SLOVENIA
Unitatea Eurydice
Ministerul Educaiei, tiinei i Sportului
Biroul de Dezvoltare a nvmntului
Masarykova 16
1000 Ljubljana
Contribuia unitii: Tanja Tatanoska i Barbara Kresal
Sternia; experi: Andreja Barle Lakota (Ministerul Educaiei,
tiinei i Sportului), Toma Rozman i Mateja Kozlevar
(Inspectoratul pentru Educaie i Sport al Republicii Slovenia)
204
EC0414939RON