Twitter Book Club: @alfiekohn (2004) What Does It Mean To Be Well Educated? - Four:14

Four: Moral, Social, and Psychological Questions
14. A Fresh Look at Abraham Maslow

"confronted with 'proof' that an instructional technique, or discipline system, in the classroom is effective, we m... http://tl.gd/9rqhbcless than a minute ago via Twittelator Favorite Retweet Replyanderscj
anderscj

"we can predict that more developmentally appropriate and constructive practices will follow when our first questio... http://tl.gd/9rqnb4less than a minute ago via Twittelator Favorite Retweet Replyanderscj
anderscj

"we can predict that more developmentally appropriate and constructive practices will follow when our first question is 'What do kids need, and how can we meet those needs?' as opposed to 'How can we get kids to do what we tell them?'" Kohn

I think we also need to involve kids in these discussions as well. The only learning objective that really matters is the objective internalized by the learner and therefore it only stands to reason that they should also be involved in the process of identifying what their needs are and how they will be met. For that matter, this is not only true of kids but all learners. It applies to adults as much as it applies to kids. The major difference is, with adults we largely expect this process to happen. In fact, in most adult learning situations the adults get pretty pissed off if their learning objectives are simply handed down to them. They usually find it demoralizing and outright belittling to have to undergo such treatment. Why should we expect any different feeling or response from children?

Twitter Book Club: @alfiekohn (2004) What Does It Mean To Be Well Educated? - Two:7

Two: Standards and Testing
7. Sacrificing Learning for Higher Scores

"For policy makers, it may seem reasonable to demand 'tougher standards' and to recite slogans such as 'accountabil... http://tl.gd/9osi3cless than a minute ago via Twittelator Favorite Retweet Replyanderscj
anderscj

"For policy makers, it may seem reasonable to demand 'tougher standards' and to recite slogans such as 'accountability.' But in real schools, things look quite different. We need to think carefully about the trade-offs the current school-reform movement entails. Indeed, the evidence suggests that higher scores in a given school or community may actually be cause for concern. Reports of rising test performance should lead us to ask, 'What was taken away from my children's education in order to make them better at taking standardized tests?'" Kohn

And then, when we answer that last question, who do we hold accountable for the loss of those things? Who do we hold accountable for the loss of arts, FACS, physical education, after-school enrichment programs, etc.?

Who is Accountable?

Three days ago I set a goal for myself. Every day for two weeks I am going to write about an education term or buzz word that I feel has become problematic. Call it my own war on words. So far I have addressed "best practices," "child-centered," and "value added." Today lets talk about accountability.

There is probably no other term we hear more today in conversations about education and school reform than the term accountability. To be clear, there is nothing inherently wrong with being accountable for something. In fact, it is a necessary part of being responsible for something and it is nothing we should shy away from. The problem, as with so many other terms in education, is that the term is ill defined. It is ill defined because that which we are to be accountable for has been ill defined. So, you would think that to solve this problem all we need to do is make clear what it is we need to be accountable for. Right? But I don't think it is that simple, schools have many different masters.

Today, when you hear about teacher or school accountability it is generally used to mean accountable for student test scores. This seems like it should makes sense, but in trying to be more clear with what schools and teachers are to be accountable for the focus has become too narrow. By focusing on data, after all accountable is derived from the word account and closely related to the word accounting. Therefore, to be accountable today means being able to own up to data or be responsible for the abstract measurements derived from the students in our care. Under this concept that which can be easily measured and that which does get measured are things that we can be held accountable for. So, this term accountability has now come to be associated with data and data primarily.

But, is data the only thing we should be held accountable for? This whole notion of accountability and data is derived from a mindset that views the purpose of school as serving the god of economic utility. This mindset leaves little room for valuing the child as they are today but insists in seeing them as "adults in the making." It looks not upon children as the product of the school, which would be bad enough, but rather the data they produce. Are we accountable for data or are we accountable for children? Are we accountable to data or are we accountable to children? What we are accountable for is determined by who we are accountable to. Who is asking us to be accountable for test score data? Is it our children? Parents? Politicians? Business people? If you asked each of those groups what they would hold schools accountable for I think they would each have a slightly different answer.

This era of accountability is, oddly enough, also the era of school choice. Families today have a lot of options for how to send their children through school. If you don't like your local public community school you can send your kid to a magnet school, or a charter school, or an online school, or if you have money you can send them to a private school, or you can unschool them. This element of choice complicates this matter and ought to define who schools are accountable to. Under a climate of school choice it becomes the families of children who decide where to send them that schools are accountable to and the reasons for their choice ought to define what schools are accountable for.

So, if choice makes the students' families the entity that schools are accountable to then the reasons for their choice will communicate what they are holding schools accountable for. If your students attend your school because their parents want their kids to have a year-round school calendar then you are accountable for providing a year-round education. If your students' families choose your school because of the exemplary fine arts offerings then your school is accountable for offering a quality fine arts program. If your students' families choose your school because of the exceptional athletic program then school athletics are what your school is accountable for. So, if the reasons our families choose to send their kids to our schools define what we are accountable for, and parents continue to choose to send their kids to schools with low or poor test scores in math and reading then are those schools making a good decision when they sacrifice programs their families have, through their choice, indicated they are holding the school accountable for in order to devote more resources to improving test scores?

When families choose a school for the fine arts offerings, who is accountable when the arts are cut to divert more attention to raising test scores?

When families choose a school because of the athletic program, who is accountable when school sports are cut to divert more attention to raising test scores?

When families choose a school because of the loving and caring atmosphere the school provides, who is accountable when a focus on test scores makes that place cold and unwelcoming?

When families choose a school because of the low class sizes, who is responsible when class sizes are increased in order to hire a data specialist to help them try to figure out how to raise test scores?

I could go on but what is the purpose? Accountability no longer means what it used to, at least not when you use it to talk about education. It's definition has been narrowed. Instead of allowing school choice to determine what it is we are accountable for it now simply means test scores, test scores, test scores. Test scores at the expense of all else. Test scores even when the focus on them degrades the qualities of our schools that families value.

Who will be held accountable?

I have fallen far far behind in keeping up with my RSS reader. My goal for the day is to catch up. In this attempt I came across this post Will Richardson published a week ago titled The Assessment Problem. Well worth a read if you missed it. What follows is my response to this post which echoes a theme that I will be dealing with for the next few weeks on this and other blogs:

How does one define “higher-order thinking?” If you define it too narrowly you may be able to assess it but then anyone engaged in critical thinking on the matter may produce responses that indeed are beyond the scope of the assessment’s definition and thus be considered wrong. Additionally, where in the traditional scope of the curriculum spectrum is the capacity for critical thinking nourished? In as far as I can tell it is in the areas of learning that are not well assessed through objective means, in subjects that are only truly measured via subjective assessments. Sure you can measure a painting, a song, a poem, or dance strictly by the objective elements used to produce it but to do so kills the essence of it. Typically students engaged in the fine arts, so long as they are engaged at a level that includes analysis, interpretation, and judgment, are developing this capacity for critical thought. However, since reducing these sorts of activities to their elements to measure them objectively kills what it is we value in them they are more and more being undervalued in this environment of “accountability.” Every year I see more and more of these programs cut, so much so that I was forced to make a career change three years ago to become a technology integration specialist instead of clamor after what remains of mostly part-time art teacher positions along with all the others displaced by this system of “accountability.” Who will be held accountable when our subjective values are lost, when what is valued in our schools is reduced to what can be objectified?