This paper looks at one of the most popular teacher accountability systems in the USA, TAP: The System for Teacher and Student Advancement, which is a comprehensive program that meets the requirements of multiple large federal grants schemes. The paper shows that, after consortia in Arizona and Texas won multimillion-dollar grant awards, thousands of teachers in these states have become engrossed within a TAP circuit that shapes multiple domains of their professional identity and growth. TAP's ubiquitous presence helps build system alignment, but it also means that teachers are increasingly limited in their exposure to alternative philosophies, practices, or measurements of teaching. Therefore, I challenge the assumptions of alignment and illustrate how such alignment flattens and overly-simplifies the plurality and complexity of teaching, even though present times require adaptability within schools. What I ultimately argue is that the precise and comprehensive alignment of this system enforces and reinforces TAP as the orthodox reality of what it means to be and become a teacher.
This work was supported by the Australian Research Council [grant number DE190101140].
[1] American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. American Educational Research Association.
[3] Amrein-Beardsley, A., & Collins, C. (2012).
The SAS education value-added assessment system (SAS® EVAAS®) in the Houston Independent School District (HISD): Intended and unintended consequences. Education Policy Analysis Archives/Archivos Analíticos de Políticas Educativas, 20(1), 1–28.
https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v20n12.2012 |
DOI 10.14507/epaa.v20n12.2012
[5] Arendt, H. (1958). The human conditions. Doubleday.
[6] Arendt, H. (2009). The origins of totalitarianism (2nd ed.). Benediction Books.
[12] Bradbury, A., & Roberts-Holmes, G. (2017). The datafication of primary and early years education: Playing with numbers. Routledge.
[14] Collins, C., & Amrein-Beardsley, A. (2014). Putting growth and value-added models on the map: A national overview. Teachers College Record, 116(1), 1–32.
[15] Connolly, W. E. (2013) The fragility of things: Self-organizing processes, neoliberal fantasies and democratic activism. Duke University Press.
[16] Connolly, W. E. (2005). Pluralism. Duke University Press.
[17] Connolly, W. E. (2017). The challenge to pluralist theory. In W. E. Connolly (Ed.), Pluralism in political analysis (pp. 3–34). Routledge.
[21] Daley, G., & Kim, L. (2012). TAP research summary. National Institute for Excellence in Teaching.
[22] Danielson, C. (2007). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. ASCD.
[23] Davies, B., & Bansel, P. (2010). Governmentality and academic work: Shaping the hearts and minds of academic workers. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 26(3), 5–20.
[25] Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. Vintage.
[26] Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972–1977. Pantheon.
[27] Foucault, M. (2000). Truth and juridical forms. In J. D. Faubion (Ed.), Michel Foucault: Power (pp. 1–89). The New Press.
[28] Foucault, M. (2002). The order of things: An archaeology of the human sciences. Routledge.
[31] Hewitt, K. K., & Amrein-Beardsley, A. (Eds.). (2016). Student growth measures in policy and practice: Intended and unintended consequences of high-stakes teacher evaluations. Springer.
[32] Holloway, J. (2019).
Teacher evaluation as an onto-epistemic framework. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 40(2), 174–189. |
DOI 10.1080/01425692.2018.1514291
[33] Holloway, J., & Brass, J. (2018).
Making accountable teachers: The terrors and pleasures of performativity. Journal of Education Policy, 33(3), 361–382. |
DOI 10.1080/02680939.2017.1372636
[37] Lingard, B., & Rizvi, F. (2010). Globalizing education policy. Routledge.
[43] NIET. (2013c). TAP system prepares teachers for common core. National Institute for Excellence in Teaching.
[47] Saldaña, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.
[50] Scott, J. (1998). Seeing like a state: How certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. Yale University Press.
[53] Taubman, P. M. (2010). Teaching by numbers: Deconstructing the discourse of standards and accountability in education. Routledge.