While accountability appealed in the abstract, its allure curdled pretty quickly once voters saw it in practice.
Hess called this Eat Your Vegetables education policy and goes on to explain how visible and immediate sacrifice tends to beat out invisible and long-term reward, and that's what happened to education reform ideas from the BO days.
I have an easier explanation (maybe two, actually).
The accountability systems of the BO era were not Eat Your Vegetables policy. They were Eat These Sharp Pieces Of Plastic That We Swear Will Be Good For You. Also, when you complain that the shards of plastic are hard to swallow and aren't much like vegetables, we are going to accuse you of being against vegetables because if you had to eat them everyone would see what awful teachers the unions are trying to protect.
Teachers are all about accountability; it is baked into the job, right down to the instant accountability of the classroom--deliver a crappy lesson and your class will punish you for it immediately (not by critiquing your pedagogy, but by making your life miserable for 45 minutes). Teachers are not opposed to accountability.
But the Big Standardized Tests foisted on us were not good accountability tools. They did not--and still do not--give a useful, accurate, fair, valid or reliable measure of student achievement or teacher quality. I cannot say this hard enough (and I've been saying it for decades). Watch students take these damn things. Read the questions. Look at the crazy-pants results (last year Mrs. Teachburger was distinguished and this year she's in need of remediation). Read books like The Testing Charade by test expert Daniel Koretz. Sift through the many kafkaesque tales of teachers evaluated by the results of a test on a subject they don't teach taken by students they don't have in class.
BS Tests were like examining elephant toe nail clippings and using them to assess the elephant's hearing.
You get my point. If not, reference the sixty gazillion posts I've already made on the topic. TLDR: the accountability systems created and nurtured back in the BO days did not actually provide accountability.
Also-- if we see the ed reform world as Team Burn It Down and Team Make It Work, with educators far more sympathetic to Team Make It Work, test-based accountability faced another problem because it harbored so many people who pretended to be Team Make It Work ("We'll use these accountability measures to locate weak areas and provide resources to strengthen") but turned out to be Team Burn It Down ("Your scores are too low, so we're going to charterize it and/or encourage everyone to flee").
The other problem with accountability vegetables is that opposition has emerged from the school choice crowd, which has largely resisted accountability and whose new allies, the culture panic crowd, doesn't care for accountability at all.
Hess posits that further discussion of the education menu benefits from "setting aside the main course of culture-infused policy fights" and just talk about the side dishes, which has a kind of "Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play" feel to it.
Hess consigns Career and Technical Education and teacher pay to the sugar-frosted stuff list. I'd argue that they're essential parts of making the system work well, but I think his point is that they are sugar-frosted because they (and some other items) are easy political sells (though teacher pay is a good example of an issue where politicians need only express support without ever actually delivering). He tosses some other items into the discussion (wisely sidestepping reading wars) including, of course, choice, which is complicated because the benefits and adverse consequences are both immediately evident (I'd argue that the benefits are both small and visible only to a small number of beneficiaries).
Hess ends by making his predictions for the years ahead (remember, he's bravely doing so before the election). First, there will be a tug of war between political promises and actual costs of things. Well, yes. And the sun will probably rise in the East as well.
Second, we might see budget cuts, but Hess argues there's "no obvious appetite for them." Now we know there's a huge appetite for them among billionaire unelected Presidential advisors, so we'll see how that plays out. Right now I like George Will's line-- "The world's richest man is about to get a free public education."
Third, he sees an uphill battle for accountability fans, and makes a last pitch Eat Your Vegetables ed policy. But here's the thing, over and above all my bitching about the accountability we were served in the BO days-- it was never, ever about eating vegetables.
Educational accountability is hard--desirable, but really really hard. The whole pitch in the Bad Old days was that it would be really, really easy. "We'll just give students a single standardized test. It'll be quick and simple and hardly interfere with the school year at all. And it will generate a bunch of data! In numbers! And that magical absolutely trustworthy and valid data will make it easy to see who's doing the right thing and who's doing the wrong thing, and that magical data will make it easy to design policies that will totally fix all our education system."
Accountability was never vegetables. It was pitched as a bucket full of sugar that would make the medicine go down, and it turned out to be those damned shards of plastic.
If accountability hawks really want to try this again, here's my advice. Rewind way, way, way back. Back to the point where some damn person apparently said, "Instead of talking about what we want to measure and discussing how we could possibly measure that, let's talk about what we can measure in ways that generate easy, sexy data points."
Then start over.
Answer some basic questions. What is the purpose of education? How can we tell whether that purpose has been achieved? How can we use instruments that are valid and which do not immediately trigger Campbell's Law? Who are the intended audience for the accountability system results, and what do we expect they'll do with those results? And how will we manage the inevitable shortcomings of whatever system we come up with (pro tip: pretending they don't exist won't help)?
Yes, these questions are incredibly complex and difficult, but we now have 25-ish years of demonstration that when you try to skip past them or shortcut your way to an answer, you end up with junk, a wheelbarrow full of Twinkies that have been left in the sun too long, a pile of stuff that neither nourishes nor delights.
I swear-- go after accountability that provides real, valid, reliable measures with actionable results, and educators will gladly snap it up like a hearty meal.
No comments:
Post a Comment