"The purpose of this report is to summarize the work that has been done to date on developing a set of standards for accountability and inform those not familiar or well experienced in accountability about essential elements of a good/valid accountability system. In addition, [the authors] wanted to create a tool that states could use in developing a new accountability system or in evaluating a current one. The audience is intended to be state or district policymakers who are designing, redesigning, or reviewing their accountability system. This report expands accountability beyond the federal definition under NCLB" (p 1).
State educational accountability models are in transition. Whether modifying the present accountability system to comply with existing state and federal requirements or anticipating new ones--such as the U.S. Department of Education's (ED) Race to the Top competition--recording the experiences of state education agencies (SEAs) that are currently undergoing transitions is both informative and important. Despite varied contexts, demands, and priorities, states charged with implementing transitions in their accountability models may find the experiences of the Accountability Systems and Reporting (ASR) collaborative member states useful in their own planning. Defining "accountability" has become more complex as individuals' understanding of it has grown. In the past, definitions have focused primarily on the interaction of goals, indicators, decision rules, and consequences. Although those components are still central to any accountability model, more recently the focus has expanded to include building capacity and providing appropriate supports. The state experiences described herein reflect the changing purpose of accountability from identifying and punishing ineffective schools and districts to providing appropriate supports and cultivating effectiveness. The audience for this paper is educational leaders responsible for the development, implementation, and evaluation of large-scale, school- and district-based state accountability systems. Using the "Key Elements" paper as a starting point for identifying possible topics, the authors asked state education leaders from participating states to share their experiences of an accountability transition in their state. Each member was asked the following: (1) State event producing transition: What was the accountability transition in your state?; (2) Context of transition: What triggered this transition? What was the event or policy decision?; (3) Effects of transition: What components of the state accountability system were or will be affected by the transition?; (4) Lessons learned: What lessons were learned from the transition in your state?; (5) Changes in goals: How have the goals of your state accountability system changed due to this transition?; (6) Communication, training, and support: What were or will be your plans for communication, training, and support?; and (7) Evaluation and system monitoring: What were or will be your plans for evaluation and system monitoring? To help the reader locate the information that is most useful to them, the content is organized in two ways: (1) Components of accountability; and (2) Individual state case studies. (Contains 1 footnote.) [This paper was prepared with William Auty and Pat Roschewski.].
"The purpose of this report is to summarize the work that has been done to date on developing a set of standards for accountability and inform those not familiar or well experienced in accountability about essential elements of a good/valid accountability system. In addition, [the authors] wanted to create a tool that states could use in developing a new accountability system or in evaluating a current one. The audience is intended to be state or district policymakers who are designing, redesigning, or reviewing their accountability system. This report expands accountability beyond the federal definition under NCLB" (p 1).
State education departments and school districts face an important challenge in implementing a new law that requires disadvantaged students to be held to the same standards as other students. The new requirements come from provisions of the 1994 reauthorization of Title I, the largest federal effort in precollegiate education, which provides aid to "level the field" for disadvantaged students. Testing, Teaching, and Learning is written to help states and school districts comply with the new law, offering guidance for designing and implementing assessment and accountability systems. This book examines standards-based education reform and reviews the research on student assessment, focusing on the needs of disadvantaged students covered by Title I. With examples of states and districts that have track records in new systems, the committee develops a practical "decision framework" for education officials. The book explores how best to design assessment and accountability systems that support high levels of student learning and to work toward continuous improvement. Testing, Teaching, and Learning will be an important tool for all involved in educating disadvantaged studentsâ€"state and local administrators and classroom teachers.
In recent decades testing has become a much more visible and high-stakes accountability mechanism that is now seen as a powerful tool that can be used to drive school improvement. The purpose of this book is to identify and analyze the key issues associated with test-based educational accountability and to chart the future of educational accountability research. Chapter contributions are intended to be forward looking rather than a compendium of what has happened in the past. The book provides an accessible discussion of issues such as validity, test equating, growth modeling, fairness for special populations, causal inferences, and misuses of accountability data.
Examines five accountability models--two from the manufacturing sector; a performance incentive model used in the evaluation of job training programs for the poor; accountability in the legal sector; and accountability in health care as shown by clinical practice guidelines, use of statistical risk-adjustment methods, and the public reporting of health performance measures. The authors summarize the models' effectiveness and draw lessons for implementing the No Child Left Behind Act.
Test-based accountability systems that attach high stakes to standardized test results have raised a number of issues on educational assessment and accountability. Do these high-stakes tests measure student achievement accurately? How can policymakers and educators attach the right consequences to the results of these tests? And what kinds of tradeoffs do these testing policies introduce? This book responds to the growing emphasis on high-stakes testing and offers recommendations for more-effective test-based accountability systems.
Does value-added modeling (VAM) demonstrate the importance of teachers to student outcomes? The authors clarify the primary questions raised by VAM for measuring teacher effects, review the most important recent applications of VAM, and discuss a variety of statistical and measurement issues that might affect the validity of VAM inferences. The authors identify numerous possible sources of error and bias in teacher effects and recommend a number of steps for future research into these potential errors.
Scholars from history, economics, political science, and psychology describe the present state of school accountability, how it evolved, how it succeeded and failed, and how it can be improved. They review the history behind the ongoing conflict between educators and policymakers over accountability and testing, describe various accountability schemes, and analyze the costs of accountability. Case studies of three states with strong school systems compare how accountability works in practice. Evers is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution. Annotation (c)2003 Book News, Inc., Portland, OR (booknews.com).
