Abstract

In Chile and a number of other nations, there is an increasing emphasis on standardized evaluations of teachers. The effects of such policies are often deeply problematic in terms of teachers’ work, the curriculum, and the supposedly “legitimate” social relations within classrooms. But the policies have also generated resistance and forms of solidarity. This chapter addresses two main tendencies surrounding such standardized policies. The first tendency deals with “Teacher Evaluation and Resistance”. Even teachers who are classified as “excellent” in state-imposed evaluations show resistance to the standards used to assess them. They justifiably consider these standards artificial. Such a policy creates a situation in which in order to meet these criteria during video-taped evaluations teachers feel the need to develop artificial practices that do not recognize the context and realities that they face. Faced with such an evaluation, teachers engage in planning and executing an “ideal class” that aligns with the required ideal standards, often with the collaboration of colleagues. However, as the second theme illuminates, these pressures have hidden effects involving student agency. The chapter’s detailed analysis of this in “Student Solidarity during Evaluation” documents that during a teacher’s evaluation, there is not only collaboration among teachers but also inclusion of students in this process. For example, students in class dress up especially for the day of their teacher’s class recording, demonstrating solidarity and support for the teacher being evaluated. They do this on their own initiative, expressing a sense of defense for their teacher. Both ideas reflect the complex dynamics between teacher evaluation practices and the reaction of both teachers and students to these processes, highlighting concerns with authenticity and mutual support within the school environment. This can provide a site for further collective politics in education. © 2026 selection and editorial matter, Michael W. Apple, Iana Gomes de Lima, and Luis Armando Gandin; individual chapters, the contributors.