The aim of the Leeds Beckett Repository is to provide open access to our research, as required by funder policies and permitted by publishers and copyright law. The Leeds Beckett repository holds a wide range of publications, each of which has been checked for copyright and the relevant embargo period has been applied by the Research Services team. We operate on a standard take-down policy. If you are the author or publisher of an output and you would like it removed from the repository, please contact us and we will investigate on a case-by-case basis.

Schools are risky places: the risk of a poor Ofsted report, the risk of sliding down league tables, the risk of teachers abusing children, the risk of teachers being falsely accused of abuse. As a result of risk anxiety and the ever increasing sophistication of technology, the surveillance of teachers has proliferated, becoming a future-oriented pursuit to manage this risk. Drawing on the surveillance studies literature, this article attempts to theorise the surveillance of teachers. Firstly it argues that there are three types of teacher surveillance: the vertical perpetuated by Ofsted and senior schools leaders such as teaching observations and learning walks, but also students recording their teachers on mobile phones; horizontal surveillance enacted by peers in terms of concertive control but also parental surveillance via online and offline networks; finally, intrapersonal surveillance embracing reflective practice, data reporting and self-policing proximity from children. The article concludes by arguing that while surveillance in schools embraces the themes of modern surveillance in general, by doggedly retaining the proximal and the interpersonal, it should be considered a hybrid form between traditional and modern forms of surveillance.

Just as surveillance in general has become more sophisticated, penetrative and ubiquitous, so has the surveillance of teachers. Enacted through an assemblage of strategies such as learning walks, parental networks, student voice and management information systems, the surveillance of teachers has proliferated as a means of managing the risks of school life, driven forward by neoliberal notions of quality and competition. However, where once the surveillance of teachers was panoptic, a means of detecting the truth of teaching behind fabrications, this article argues that surveillance within schools has become a simulation in Baudrillard's terms, using models and codes such as the Teachers' Standards and the Schools Inspection Handbook as predictors of future outcomes, simulating practice as a means of managing risk. And if surveillance in schools has become a simulation then so perhaps has teaching itself, moving beyond a preoccupation with an essentialist truth of teaching to the hyperreality of normalised visibility and the simulation of teaching. This article argues that surveillance -including external agencies such as Ofsted -no longer exists to find the truth of teaching, the surveillance of teachers exists only to test the accuracy of the models and codes upon which the simulation is based. IntroductionA teacher arrives at school, swipes into the staffroom with her keycard and settles down at her desk within the open plan office as her colleagues -who arrived earlier -smile at her then look at the clock. She logs in to her PC, clicking 'OK' on the statement of permitted internet use reminding her that her activity is monitored and accesses the files containing her lesson plans for the morning lesson, entered onto the standardised lesson plan proforma that was designed by the Director of Teaching and Learning after consultation from an external inspector. After a quick check of the curriculum requirements for the topic, she prints off her last entry to the performance monitoring of her class, noting the patterns of attendance, behaviour and achievement. She walks down the glass corridor, waving at her colleagues who are already ensconced within their glass classrooms, and settles at the teacher-desk within the open plan learning space where she will facilitate learning next to the class facilitated by her Head of Department. The learning outcomes projected onto the interactive whiteboard, she begins the lesson, only marginally disturbed by the late arrival of two students who say sorry Miss but they were with the Deputy Head who was conducting a student voice session. The class settle down to student-directed learning (an external inspector in a partner school told their Executive Headteacher this was the way forward), the teacher takes pictures of each students' work and uploads it on her mobile phone to the classes' achievement website for their parents' viewing. Halfway through reviewing and recording student progress, the Headteacher arrives on a learning walk, briefly questioning her about the ...

This article presents findings from a study of performance management in 10 schools, five primary and five secondary. The aim was to gain a snapshot of how headteachers are interpreting and implementing the reforms to the performance and capability procedures for teachers introduced in September 2013. The findings suggest that the evaluation of teachers is conducted within a context of normalised visibility with evidence of competence collected via observations, learning walks, electronic data, organisational and architectural structures.However, this normalised visibility is contrasted with the normalised invisibility of the actual processes of judgement such as appraisal. Invisibility also frames the management of incompetence, with poorly performing teachers routinely offered 'compromise agreements' to avoid the official capability procedures. The article concludes by highlighting the limits of the panoptic metaphor in a consideration of teacher evaluation and discusses an alternative metaphor, that of glass, with which to view the performance management of teachers.

In an increasingly competitive environment that positions students as consumers, universities have become ever more marketised, responding to policy contexts that foreground value for money, consumer choice and competition. The intensity of marketisation is argued to have profoundly affected the nature of academic work and scholars themselves, recreating academics as commodities to be weighed and measured, becoming corporatised, alienated and inauthentic in their practice. Yet with the majority of accounts of the commodification of higher education focusing on students, the actual process of how academics become consumed is under-theorised. This article therefore begins with a discussion of the historical context, providing evidence of the familiar indices of marketisation such as rampant selfpromotion, the scramble for external funding and intense competition. It argues that this commodified DNA of the university provides the context for the seduction of the modern academic within the consumer society, a movement from the gratification of needs to the perpetual frustration of desires through the 'Diderot Effect' of policy shifts. It concludes with an examination of how contemporary academic work can be viewed through the lens of consumerism and how academics themselves have become consumers.