Conference Program

In systems of school evaluation grounded in objective and comparable indicators, robust data are a necessary but insufficient condition to foster improvement, equity, inclusion and wellbeing. A recurrent issue is the diagnostic distance between “distal” indicators mainly used for reporting (e.g., final outcomes, dropout, early results in the subsequent pathway) and the school processes that generate them. In data-based governance settings, this distance is amplified by data infrastructures and performative pressures, leading schools to align, resist, or use indicators instrumentally, rather than as learning resources (Landri, 2021). When school self-evaluation reports (RAV) are interpreted mostly through distal outcomes, schools may produce simplistic causal attributions, under-specified priorities, and compliance-driven practices, ultimately weakening evidence-informed action (Falzetti, 2025).

This paper proposes a peer review framework as an intermediate device between external evaluation and internal self-evaluation, aimed at turning distal indicators into actionable questions and, crucially, at building the proximal evidence needed for sound interpretation. Distal RAV indicators are treated as signals for scoping and prioritizing, not as sufficient grounds for causal hypotheses. The core mechanism is an integrated evidence package where distal indicators are complemented by proximal, multi-source and process-sensitive data (e.g., school climate, wellbeing, engagement, classroom and organizational artefacts, structured observations, stakeholder feedback, and longitudinal trends; Freddano & Stringher, 2021), in line with European peer review approaches developed within VET quality assurance and coherent with the EQAVET perspective on quality cycles (ISFOL, 2012, CEDEFOP, 2015; Evangelista & Fonzo, 2023). This design is meant to mitigate tensions between autonomy, accountability and innovation within the Italian National Evaluation System and to protect teachers’ professional judgement under performance-based accountability (Mentini & Levatino, 2024; Mentini, 2024; Parcerisa et al., 2022).

A second pillar is a differentiated and competent peer review team. Beyond peers from other schools, the protocol includes reviewers with domain-specific expertise related to the focus area and actors located along the educational continuity chain, so that interpretations and recommendations are both rigorous and feasible. The approach also builds on Italian experimentation with school-to-school peer review and visiting as capacity-building devices for self-evaluation and improvement (Giampietro, Poliandri, & Pillera, 2023), and on work highlighting the need for structured reflection on monitoring and evaluation within improvement plans (Freddano & Mori, 2019; Freddano, 2024). The process is presented as a lightweight but structured protocol: (1) preparation of the evidence package and clarification of evaluation questions; (2) triangulation across sources during the peer visit; (3) joint interpretation of evidence and identification of priorities; (4) definition of improvement goals that are observable, time-bound and linked to local “sentinel” indicators; (5) redesign of actions and responsibilities; (6) longitudinal follow-up to document change and unintended effects, consistent with collaborative peer enquiry models (Godfrey, 2020; Ridge & Lavigne, 2020).

The expected output is not a judgement, but a concise set of priorities, redesigned actions and a verification plan aligned with improvement-oriented evaluation. As a brief illustration, the framework is applied to student guidance processes, where distal outcomes alone poorly represent the quality of underlying practices.

Education lies at the core of human societal evolution and is a fundamental field of study concerning any developmental process of our species. To date, the educational process has been a domain that is difficult to define and consequently even harder to evaluate with the aim of improvement. The approach for the present study was chosen because it aligns with the multi-factorial nature of education, grounding itself in systems theory. This framework allows the research questions to be placed within a web of interconnected systems and sub-systems (e.g., society, government, educational unit, educators, students, guardians) (Mavrofidis, 2018). In a democratic context, hearing the voices of those most affected by a system (the students/learners) is a fundamental democratic practice. Furthermore, this systemic perspective is crucial for understanding how education and democracy are intertwined in building "just, inclusive, and sustainable" societies.

Our qualitative research was based on this theoretical framework and focused on the students' views regarding the quality of the educational process (Sallis, 2002). For this purpose, ten in-depth personal interviews were conducted with graduates of Secondary Education in Greece (Creswell, 2019). The participants selected had all graduated from Secondary Education within the preceding 1-3 years and had completed their 18th year of age, thus being adults at the time of the interviews.

The main objective of the research was to investigate and compare the students' views on school infrastructure and teaching staff in order to assess the extent to which these influence the overall perception that students formed about school, particularly during the last three years of their attendance. To answer the main research question, a thematic analysis was performed on the data collected from the interviews, which also highlighted additional areas for study concerning the development of social skills within the school environment.

In a period where the central strategic choice for improving education places greater emphasis on strengthening infrastructure and less on strengthening human capital, it is useful to hear the perspective of the students on the impact these interventions have on their daily educational reality.

Over the last years, the Autonomous Province of Trento (Italy) has institutionalised the use of data from an annual upper-secondary “student customer survey” (around 5,000 respondents per year) as part of its broader school evaluation and improvement infrastructure. Originally designed to capture students’ overall satisfaction, the survey includes a specific section on teaching quality, inspired by the Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) framework, aimed at eliciting students’ perceptions of key instructional dimensions such as clarity, classroom climate, support, and engagement (Kane & Staiger, 2012; Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, 2013). Results are routinely returned to schools in aggregated form and can inform professional discussion, self-evaluation processes, and school improvement priorities.

This paper discusses the educational potential and governance implications of these data through two complementary analytical levels.

First, at the provincial level, we analyse repeated cross-sectional survey data collected since 2018. We examine (i) the internal coherence of the teaching-quality items, (ii) differences across schools, and (iii) recurring patterns in students’ perceptions of instruction. The aim is not ranking schools, but documenting how student voice (when framed as formative feedback) can support improvement-oriented evaluation practices and strengthen a shared evidence base for decision-making (Datnow & Hubbard, 2015; Coburn & Turner, 2011).

Second, we develop a school-level case study focusing on the Istituto Tecnico Tecnologico “G. Marconi” (Rovereto), which experimented with a more articulated approach to feedback and data use. Beyond the provincial aggregated reports, the school adopted procedures for teacher-level feedback reporting based on a survey instrument largely aligned with the provincial item battery, and complemented these quantitative data with qualitative documentation produced internally to justify, communicate, and support the practice. The case is examined as an instance of “boundary work” between accountability and professional learning, where data use is embedded in collegial discussion and transparency-oriented routines designed to enhance legitimacy and reduce defensive uses of evidence (Earl & Katz, 2006; Schildkamp, 2019). The school’s documents and routines are analysed to highlight how local leadership mediates between evidence, interpretation, and decision-making, and how this mediation affects the perceived fairness and sustainability of evaluation processes (Paletta, 2014).

Overall, findings suggest that student survey data can contribute to improvement, equity, and well-being goals only when they are translated into shared interpretive practices, supported by validated tools, and combined with qualitative evidence that contextualises results. The paper concludes by discussing conditions under which evaluation data may operate as a democratic resource for school communities (supporting professional responsibility and collective learning) rather than as a purely managerial device.

Priority question of the survey still in progress: between high schools, technical institutes and vocational institutes in the Liguria region are there substantial differences in the evaluation of area 2.5 of the Self-Assessment Report (RAV) with regard to the dimension "Outcomes in terms of well-being at school"?

Strategies currently adopted: comparative analysis of the RAV of Technical and Professional Institutes and High Schools with regard to strengths and weaknesses in relation to the "Student Well-being" dimension.

Lines of action envisaged: focus groups with a significant number of members of the schools' internal evaluation units; focus groups with groups of students in the three-year period of secondary schools; interviews with parents elected to collegiate bodies; interviews with territorial partners of the various institutes.

From an initial analysis of the schools' strategic documents, conducted on the UNICA platform (Ministry of Education and Merit), the following scenario emerges:

- Most schools in the evaluation of the "Student Well-being" dimension assign themselves a score of 5, without however disclosing the motivation for the chosen level.

- Few upper secondary education institutions (with a prevalence of the professional address) are evaluated with level 3, reporting the presence of conflicts between students, lack of internalization of social interaction guidelines, difficulty in generating concrete inclusion processes. Paradoxically, however, these institutes do not develop priorities and goals with reference to the critical framework described and, consequently, do not indicate any strategy for possible improvement.

- Among the various fields of study, particularly in the area of Genoa, the institutes that have adopted the recent technological-professional chain (4+2) are the schools that interpret the data (deriving from the teachers' questionnaire and school questionnaire) with greater accuracy, completeness and consistency and present, more frequently than high schools, the definition of priorities and goals on the "student well-being" dimension.

- In particular, it is noted that these institutions, being part of a significant perspective of complexity, intervene on four paths, closely connected and related to "feeling good at school" by students:

1. Modes of production of the psychophysical and social well-being of each student within the class and in the peer group of the whole institution (first-level well-being or well-being as a result).
2. Preparation of formal situations and enhancement of informal experiences (surveyed by students in the Digital Portfolio on the UNICA ministerial platform) that allow the integrated acquisition of social-emotional and cognitive skills (Law 22/2025) and the experimentation of second-level well-being (well-being as an enabling factor of other dimensions of the subject: self-esteem and self-determination, motivation, resilience, self-efficacy, imagination of the future, reduction of states of anxiety and stress).
3. Implementation of forms of distributed leadership and hybrid governance (by school-business-territory networks) of school-work training of students (third-level or system well-being, characterized by the co-presence of the following elements: open-mindedness, performativity, relationship with others, collaboration, emotional regulation).
4. Generation and supervision of training effectiveness (authentic co-learning, personalization, direction of widespread reflexivity and proactive orientation).

Technological development has impacted both the private and public sectors, presenting citizens and the administration with a revolution in language, communication and ways of operating (Schwab, 2017; Lamberti, 2018). The digital transition has brought about significant changes in the conduct of public life, making administrative procedures more streamlined and large amounts of data available for decision-making processes (Zawacki-Richter et al., 2019). Digitalisation has enabled the automation of processes, the creation of integrated information systems and the evolution of Artificial Intelligence also in education (Molinari, 2025).

In public administration, the introduction of the principles of new public management and new public governance was aimed at making the public system more efficient, effective and sustainable, as well as ensuring greater transparency of processes and results for citizens, in line with the principle of accountability (Bovens, 2007).

In this context, citizens’ access to public services has increasingly been mediated by the use of digital platforms dedicated to the collection, production and dissemination of large quantities of data and information. This shift has also been observed with its implication in education and training policies (European Commission, 2020, 2021).

In particular, this article focuses on “Scuola in Chiaro” (in English language “Open School”, the portal of the Italian Ministry of Education and Merit, available at https://unica.istruzione.gov.it/portale/it/scuola-in-chiaro, containing detailed information on state and state-recognised schools. It had been launched in 2012 with the aim of helping families and students with guidance and the choice of school. Scuola in Chiaro is also the platform where strategic documents – such as the Self-Evaluation Report, the Three-Year Educational Programme and the Social Accountability Report – are published (Freddano, 2025), thereby bridging the gap between the National Evaluation System and students, families and, more broadly, the public.

Our research focuses on users’ perceptions of Scuola in Chiaro portal and, in particular, the quality of the data they perceive it to offer. To this end, an evaluative study was conducted involving a group of first-year undergraduate students enrolled on the Communication Sciences degree programme, who were asked to analyse the Scuola in Chiaro portal, either in groups or individually, according to specific criteria, and to present their findings using SWOT analysis. The students’ reports were analysed qualitatively using MAXQDA software.

The findings provide an original description of the self-evaluation tools of schools on Scuola in Chiaro portal, highlighting opportunities, constraints, strengths and weaknesses from the students’ perspective, and offering useful suggestions for improving the services offered by the portal, with a view to making them increasingly accessible to its potential users, particularly the most direct ones, such as students and families.

The results of this study also highlight that, in the evaluation of public policies, whilst methodological and scientific rigor is indispensable, participation represents a fundamental research tool for gathering evidence useful for guiding improvements to public services that are increasingly aligned with the real needs of their users.