Accountability: Threat or Target? - questioning tough approaches that emphasize accountability and higher test scores

School Administrator, June, 2001 by Rosemarye T. Taylor, Robert D. Williams

Heavy-handed measures to improve student performance breed dissension, mistrust and embarrassment

The Chamber of Commerce in our large metropolitan community sponsored a 2 1/2-day retreat on how to improve the public schools. About 50 CEOs from area businesses and one educator attended the event where most of the presentations focused on the sad state of leadership and management of the local school districts.

The business community was urged to take a stand to improve school district management and raise student achievement. One speaker, a former superintendent with a national reputation, described his accountability system that involved removing any principal whose test scores did not improve at a rate he deemed satisfactory. He was proud that nearly half of his district's principals had retired, resigned or been fired at the end of his first year as superintendent.

The single educator in the audience, a deputy superintendent in a large, urban school district, was shocked when the business leaders gave a standing ovation with roaring applause to these strong-armed tactics. He wondered, "Is the bottom line to accountability removing principals (when we have a dire shortage), or is it to focus our efforts on systemic change improving the skills of teachers, administrators and students ?"

During the break that followed, the educator was asked what he thought about an accountability system that resulted in the firing of building principals. As a former elementary and high school principal, he didn't hesitate with a response. "I'm a middle-aged man with two children in college and another on the way. I'd say my test scores would go up rapidly. Although I may not be proud of the strategies I'd have to use, they would go up!"

As teachers and administrators see colleagues lose their jobs because of lagging test scores in their schools, they most likely echo this educator's admission: Student test scores would go up at any cost.

Tough Tactics

Unfortunately, many states and districts are using accountability as a threat rather than as a process for setting targets for student achievement.

According to Quality Counts 2001, 27 states, including California, Texas, New York and North Carolina, grade or rank schools as a way to try to force improvements to student achievement. While test scores have increased in Texas, academicians and school-based educators question whether learning truly has improved or whether strategies for raising scores have just gotten better. In these states, doubters are quietly wondering whether educators are assigning more students to special education classes to avoid reporting low scores.

School districts in Georgia, another state working hard to raise student achievement, are pressuring teachers and principals to implement an in-depth teacher assessment system that includes a performance portfolio. A frustrated elementary principal recently confessed, "My teachers have worried and worked so hard on these portfolios and they really don't matter. I think about how much of their time and my time this has taken away from doing something that could really make a difference."

Educators are putting into action ideas that are time-consuming and divert energies from what is most important--student learning. They are also subjected to public embarrassment, all in the name of accountability.

In the past, Florida students' test results were released first to the school districts, then to the news media. Today, they are released simultaneously, but the media usually receives the data before the districts, forcing school leaders to respond to critical questions from reporters before they have had a chance to review the results. No educators who have worked hard to improve student achievement want to learn about their school's ranking from a newspaper reporter.

Principals who take their jobs seriously grow weary of the pressure and negative messages that bombard them. One excellent principal who was leading a low-performing school in an urban area accepted a position in a neighboring suburban district when given the opportunity to escape the untenable pressures of accountability and student achievement test scores.

A Team Approach

Although principals may believe that the instructional programs and strategies they are implementing are improving the school culture and student learning, they may be toiling under the perception that they should be looking for a quick fix.

The best principals work on long-term cultural goals while at the same time developing test improvement strategies that can work in the short term.

Why not consider a process of accountability that improves learning by setting student achievement targets and creating a system in which all stakeholders--including those in the community--are part of a team? Commitment to the accountability system is as vital for community members as it is for school board members, superintendents, teachers and principals.

The accountability system should affect the conditions of learning rather than simply mandating higher test scores. Many factors shape learning, including funding, personnel recruitment and retention, facilities, transportation, procurement of learning materials and technology. By holding accountable the people who are responsible for these aspects of learning, school districts free principals to focus on student achievement and teacher growth.