Michael Petrilli argues for continued commitment to the now familiar combination of standards, assessment, and accountability in his article, “Stay the course on standards and accountability.” Although Petrilli acknowledges many of the problems associated with narrowly defining student success based on achievement scores on annual standardized tests — such as limiting the curriculum, teaching to the test, and even cheating — he does not question the focus on these outcomes. In doing so, he fails to recognize the real promise of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), which marks an important shift toward a more comprehensive approach to accountability by encouraging multiple measures of school and student success. Notably, the requirements under ESSA represent a minimum standard, and it is up to states to take up the challenging work of designing systems that capture more information about the factors that matter most for student success and school improvement (Darling-Hammond et al., 2016).
States that have taken the lead in redesigning their systems of accountability and assessment to move toward more balanced systems of support and accountability based their innovative approaches to policy design on existing policies and local practices (Bae & Stosich, 2018). Further, their efforts to enact more innovative approaches to accountability began with broad stakeholder engagement during the policy design process (Stosich & Bae, 2018). The articles in the October issue of Kappan highlight three of the innovative states from whom we have had the opportunity to learn: California, New Hampshire, and Vermont. Our findings suggest taking advantage of the opportunities for flexibility allowed under ESSA requires long-term investments, attention to capacity building, prioritization of local control, and ongoing stakeholder engagement.
As Patrick McGuinn describes, most state ESSA plans are “not very innovative or ambitious.” However, states are taking important steps in developing more comprehensive and balanced accountability systems, even if this process may look a bit like baby steps in some states. Adam Edgerton’s research suggests that states are moving away from a narrow focus on a single measure of student proficiency to using multiple measures of student progress, such as student growth, chronic absenteeism, and measures of English language proficiency for English learners. Further, state plans are focused “much less on compliance and more on district-level capacity building.” This broader view of accountability focuses resources and efforts on promoting improvement rather than sanctioning schools. Shifting the way we define, design, and enact accountability policies represents a challenging yet worthwhile process. We acknowledge that states that have taken fuller advantage of the opportunities to redesign their systems to support deeper and more equitable learning opportunities are still in the minority, but we remain optimistic that ESSA is encouraging states to move in a promising direction.
References
Bae, S. & Stosich, E.L. (2018). Redesigning state policy for meaningful and equitable learning: Lessons from California, Iowa, New Hampshire, and Vermont. Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education.
Darling-Hammond, L., Bae, S., Cook- Harvey, C.M., Lam, L., Mercer, C., Podolsky, A., & Leisy Stosich, E. (2016). Pathways to new accountability through the Every Student Succeeds Act. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute.
Stosich, E.L. & Bae, S. (2018). Engaging diverse stakeholders to strengthen policy. Phi Delta Kappan, 99 (8), 8-12.
This is an invited response to “Stay the Course on Standards and Accountability” by Michael Petrilli.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Soung Bae
SOUNG BAE is a senior learning specialist at Schwab Learning Center at Stanford University in Stanford, Calif.
