SD52 - Interim Report of the Commission on Educational Accountability


Executive Summary:
Adopted by the 1999 Session of the General Assembly, SJR 498 established the 20-member Commission on Educational Accountability, comprised of legislative, citizen, and ex officio members. The mission of the SJR 498 Commission is a comprehensive one. Charged with coordinating with a number groups involved with recent and new study initiatives, the Commission is to review the Standards of Accreditation (SOA) and any included accountability mechanisms; monitor the implementation of the Standards of Learning (SOL) and revised assessments; consider the work and recommendations of other recent as well as specific ongoing study committees; develop recommendations for ways to increase the capacity of schools, teachers, and students; examine the effects on the Commonwealths young people of failure to obtain a diploma; evaluate the efficacy, appropriateness, and application of the Commonwealths statutes, regulations, and policies governing the academic assessment of transfer students; determine the feasibility and appropriateness of establishing a certificate of completion for certain high school vocational programs; determine the efficacy and appropriateness of the funding the Standards of Quality (SOQ); study the instructional needs of students and teachers in the public schools; examine the impact of the SOL and the SOA on teachers, urban and small rural school divisions, and educationally at-risk students, including remediation, teacher preparation and SOL instructional time, the ability of urban and small rural school divisions to meet and maintain accreditation requirements, the effect of the SOL tests on promotion, retention, and the awarding of high school diplomas; collaborate, coordinate, and receive regular reports of the HJR 566 special task force studying the integration of the SOL with the secondary school level curricula and workforce development skills; collaborate, coordinate, and receive regular reports of the HJR 586 and HJR 723 special task force studying the impact of the SOA on local school division budgets; and consider such other issues as it deems appropriate.

Complementing the work of the Commission were two task forces. Incorporated into the work of SJR 498 was HJR 723, which directed the creation of a special seven-member task force of the SJR 498 Commission to examine the impact of the Standards of Accreditation on local school division budgets. Similarly, HJR 566 created a 15-member task force to explore, among other things, the integration of the SOL in secondary school curricula and programs focusing on workforce development skills; the adequacy of current curricula, program resources, and technology in Virginia public schools; and staffing and state and local funding levels for secondary school workforce development programs.

INTRODUCTION TO ACCOUNTABILITY: STANDARDS, ASSESSMENTS, AND CONSEQUENCES

In recent years, most states have initiated or renewed their education reform efforts with new or revised academic content standards, setting forth clearly what students must learn and what teachers must teach. Rigorous, well-defined, measurable standards are seen by some education experts as the most critical component of any accountability model. Academic standards or expectations are now seemingly the norm across the United States, the achievement of which increasingly forms the basis for school and division approval or accreditation. Linked to these content or academic standards are performance standards, or proficiency levels, the attainment of which must be appropriately and accurately assessed. Experts contend, as high-stakes testing becomes increasingly popular, that assessments must be valid, reliable, and without bias.

Although assessments remain by far the most popular performance indicator among the states, dropout and attendance rates, discipline, post-graduate tracking, and expenditures also appear in a number of state accountability models. Indicators relating directly to students may include not only state assessment and SAT scores but also advanced placement offerings, truancy rates, expulsions, diversity, and pupil-teacher and pupil-administrator ratios. Attendance, diversity, evaluation, experience, and salary levels may be included in ratings addressing professional staff. Also measured are parental or community involvement and school curriculum.

The third leg of the accountability tripod-consequences may incorporate incentives and rewards as well as sanctions for academic performance. Some states incorporate state standards and assessments in determining grade promotions for elementary school students, while others have or expect to have high school graduation exams aligned with standards. Consequences for poor performance may include required remediation, school closures, and staff removal, while excellence or improvement may be rewarded with cash incentives or increased flexibility in operations. The concept of "academic bankruptcy" has been employed in 20 states to permit some form of intervention-from technical assistance to a state "takeover."

Increasing the capacity of school divisions, schools, and personnel to provide students with the instruction necessary to meet higher educational standards is also seen as an integral part of the accountability movement. Teachers will require professional development and training opportunities aligned with curriculum standards and assessments, while administrators must be effectively trained to implement new accountability requirements.

EDUCATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY IN OTHER STATES

The California legislature adopted several major education reform initiatives in March 1999, incorporating an academic performance index for schools and providing financial incentives for school improvement as well as high performance. California also empowers the state superintendent to reassign principals, to close schools, and also to assume the rights and duties reserved to the local school board. In Florida, consequences for poor school performance will soon include vouchers as part of a comprehensive "A+ Plan for Education." These vouchers, or "Opportunity Scholarships," will be available to students attending public schools that have obtained a failing grade, as determined by pupil performance on certain tests, for two years, for education in a private school; the initiative also permits students to attend another public school.

The Illinois General Assembly has adopted legislation addressing the unique needs of the Chicago public schools. Schools failing to make adequate progress after one year of probation may be subject to removal of the principal, replacement of instructors, reconstitution and re-assignment of all employees, closing, or intervention. In contrast, successful schools may be designated as "Learning Zones"-referred to in the statute as "the educational version of enterprise zones"-and granted certain flexibility. North Carolina's School-Based Management and Accountability Program incorporates accountability, recognition, assistance, and intervention processes. The Program provides school boards with increased budget flexibility and authorizes the grant of waivers from certain regulations that may inhibit reaching local accountability goals. Personnel in schools exceeding performance growth goals may receive financial rewards; these awards may be applied to other purposes upon a vote by school personnel and approval by the school board. Texas' educational accountability system makes receipt of a high school diploma contingent upon passage of exit-level assessments in English and mathematics.

THE STATE OF EDUCATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY IN VIRGINIA

Consistent with this nationwide movement, the Commonwealth's efforts to improve public education in recent years have largely focused on accountability measures that seek to ensure educational excellence and opportunity for all students. The standards, assessments, and consequences integral to any accountability initiative are primarily found in the Standards of Quality (SOQ), mandated by the Virginia Constitution and set forth in the Code of Virginia. Setting forth broad policies and minimum educational requirements for Virginia's public schools, the SOQ also provide for the establishment of the Standards of Learning (SOL) and the Standards of Accreditation (SOA). The Board of Education's 1995 revisions of the SOL for the four core subject areas of English, mathematics, science, and history and social sciences and the subsequent revision of the SOA foreshadowed and shaped a number of initiatives addressing educational standards and accountability.

Accountability for Students: Assessments and Remediation

Student academic progress is measured through a battery of assessments, including the Virginia State Assessment Program, the Virginia Literacy Testing Program, the Standards of Learning Assessments, and the National Assessment of Educational Progress state-by- state assessment. The revised Standards of Learning in the core subjects of English, mathematics, science, and history and social science prompted the development of new assessment materials and tests to measure skills and competencies in these four subject areas at grades three, five, eight, and 11. Students who fail to pass all of the SOL tests in grades three, five and eight must attend summer school or participate in another form of remediation. Further reinforcing the consequences of SOL assessments for students are the Standards of Accreditation, which state that these scores are to be considered in local school board promotion/retention policies.

On October 30, 1998, the Board of Education set passing scores for the SOL assessments in the four core subject areas. Results of the first SOL test administration, released in January 1999, indicated that only 39 of Virginia's 1,800-plus schools would have achieved passing scores in all four core subject areas. Scores on all 27 SOL test statewide subsequently improved in 1999. Large gains were noted in Algebra I and 11, as well as in fifth grade writing and in third and fifth grade history/social science.

While sample SOL test items were made available in late summer 1999, the release of test items and prior tests remains under consideration by the Board, as a sufficient "bank" of tests and questions accumulates. Other ongoing concerns include the timing of test administration (particularly in schools using block scheduling); the viability of computer testing and related test security, validity, and reliability issues; the release of an itemized test result analysis to facilitate summer remediation efforts; and the current 14-day turnaround time in test results negotiated by Virginia with vendor Harcourt Brace.

Increasing capacity for students to meet the enhanced standards are measures boosting educational opportunities for at-risk four-year-olds and other student populations and codifying the educational technology initiative, the voluntary primary class size reduction initiative, the at-risk four-year-old preschool program, and an at-risk block grant. Pupil discipline is also seen as a critical aspect of accountability; a number of truancy laws have been strengthened in recent years, reducing the number of unexplained consecutive absences for a child to be reported to the attendance officer and increasing penalties for inducing, or attempting to induce, a child to be absent from school, violating compulsory school attendance laws, and permitting a child to be habitually absent from school.

Accountability for Schools: The Standards of Accreditation

The accreditation status of each public school is subject to annual review by the Board. Revisions to SOA adopted in 1997 set forth new criteria and processes for individual school accreditation, clearly stating that schools shall be accredited primarily based on pupil achievement, as evidenced by scores on the SOL tests and other assessments. The Standards of Accreditation for public schools also include student outcome measures, requirements and guidelines for instructional programs, staffing levels, pupil personnel services, special education program standards, auxiliary programs such as library and media services, community relations, and graduation requirements.

Accreditation will be denied when a school fails to achieve full accreditation and, after three years of warning status and despite corrective action, fails to meet specified achievement levels. The SOA are silent, however, as to the ramifications and effect of denial of accreditation. The Board is currently considering various accountability measures in other states as well as potential rewards and consequences within the school accreditation process.

Addressing student achievement, assistance and incentives for schools, and incentives for educators, additional SOA revisions were the focus of public hearings across the Commonwealth in late 1999. Included among the amendments are provisions permitting the substitution of alternate assessments, such as the Advanced Placement (AP) or International Baccalaureate (IB), for the verified units required for a high school diploma and additional incentives and rewards for successfully performing schools. Repeatedly suggested in Board public hearings and in Commission meeting testimony was the use of "multiple criteria" in making determinations involving school accreditation and student promotion, retention, and graduation requirements, rather than sole or primary reliance on SOL assessment results to make these determinations.

Accountability for Teachers and Administrators

Accountability for professional personnel is primarily addressed through training, licensure, and employment laws and regulations. A variety of recent legislative measures have sought to equip teachers with the skills necessary to provide the highest quality instruction. The Education Accountability and Quality Enhancement Act of 1999 made changes to the statutes governing teacher preparation, evaluation, and employment, and established the National Teacher Certification Reward Program to provide annual monetary awards to teachers achieving and maintaining national certification.

Accountability for Families and Communities: Increasing Involvement

Numerous Virginia statutes already acknowledge the need for parental and family involvement in public education. School board policy manuals are to be developed with consideration of teacher, parent, and citizen input; school uniforms guidelines are also to reflect parental and community involvement. Grants for alternative programs are to be awarded to initiatives that include community outreach and promote parental involvement. Parental and community participation is also a component of school health advisory boards, school safety audits, and remediation program standards committees.

CONCLUSION: ISSUES FOR THE YEAR 2000

To meet the challenge of its comprehensive mission, the Commission gathered information on a myriad of educational accountability concerns in its first year of study. Testimony offered by state agency representatives, local school divisions, and education organizations provided invaluable perspectives regarding current state accountability initiatives, local implementation, and fiscal concerns. The Commission's two task forces also shared critical testimony; additional efforts by these task forces in the year 2000 will undoubtedly further aid the Commission in its work.

Having already assessed a wide variety of issues, the Commission is poised to delve more deeply into those accountability concerns identified as particularly pressing in the upcoming year. The Commission expects to continue to fulfill its directives to monitor ongoing developments within the Standards of Accreditation and the Standards of Learning and to examine the adequacy of the current system of funding the Standards of Quality. Other issues that may merit Commission review include:

• The efficacy of the Commonwealth's current accountability initiatives in addressing the particular accountability objectives for which they were designed;

• Ways in which General Assembly, as the entity constitutionally vested with the "ultimate authority" over public education, effectively coordinate with the Board of Education, constitutionally charged to "effectuate the education policy," to help ensure the development of accountability measures that help promote educational excellence in Virginia;

• Additional assistance for schools in need of improvement; and

• Possible factors to be considered in establishing performance expectations, goals, and accreditation standards for schools and school divisions (such as local fiscal effort, student and local demographics, and gains made in reaching performance expectations appropriate factors).