Self-Policing or Self-Improving?: Analysing Peer Reviews Between Schools in England Through the Lens of Isomorphism

Toby Greany

7 citations0/0 files storedAccountability and educational improvement

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Educational Assessment and Improvement Global Educational Policies and Reforms Educational Leadership and Practices

Abstract

Peer reviews are not compulsory for schools in England, but they have become increasingly common in recent years. There is no single model for how peer reviews operate, but they generally involve staff from at least one other school in reviewing practice in the host school and feeding back their findings. This chapter reviews case study examples and data drawn from two recent studies led by the author (Greany T, Higham R. Hierarchy, markets and networks: analysing the ‘self-improving school-led system’ agenda in England and the implications for schools. IOE Press, London, 2018; Greany T. Sustainable improvement in multi-school groups. Department for Education, London, 2018). It analyses this evidence to assess whether and how peer review reflects the three forms of isomorphism (coercive, mimetic and normative) identified by DiMaggio and Powell (The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48:147–160, 1983). It finds evidence for all three forms of isomorphism, although levels of normative isomorphism vary and depend on the values and interests of different leaders. This analysis supports Greany and Higham’s argument that peer review reflects a level of self-policing by schools in response to England’s hierarchical and panoptic accountability system. The more recent study (Greany T. Sustainable improvement in multi-school groups. Department for Education, London, 2018) indicates that many Multi-Academy Trusts (MATs) are moving away from pure peer review models towards more hierarchically controlled approaches to assessing school quality. The chapter concludes by discussing these findings in relation to wider developments in the English school system as well as debates around quality, innovation and homogenisation in contemporary school systems.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 7 citations exist upstream.

References

1983The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields 2004The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields 1983The Iron Caged Revisited : Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields 2009Governing education through data in England: from regulation to self‐evaluation 2013PISA 2012 Results: What Makes Schools Successful (Volume IV)2018Equity in Education 2008Rethinking accountability in a knowledge society 2014School and system improvement: a narrative state-of-the-art review

Cited by

2020Place-based governance and leadership in decentralised school systems: evidence from England 2024School improvement and peer learning partnerships: building organizational resilience in primary schools in England

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.