Local Accountability: The Formative Enhancement

On Tuesday of this week, in Kentucky, the 2022-2023 accountability data was publicly released. Similar to many traditional accountability models, in 2023, it is still primarily driven by single-day metrics and based on achievement. These metrics, when combined with other components, are used to assess the quality of a school or school district. These annual data reporting events, which are widely discussed by news media, state legislators, governors, and community members, largely go unnoticed by most educators. Similarly, there is a growing majority of parents who also view these events as insignificant due to their children's fatigue with being labeled solely based on test scores.

Almost thirty years have passed since the inception of the first standardized assessments and traditional accountability models in public education. The students who were once subjected to these assessments have now become the parents of the current generation of students, who are, in turn, being labeled based on a single day's performance throughout the academic year. These parents, who were essentially the experimental subjects for the "new" assessment forms introduced in the early 1990s and 2000s, are now raising questions, vocally, about the effectiveness and outcomes of subjecting their own children to extensive testing.

Interestingly, as I write, the full scope of the magnitude of what is happening nationwide regarding standardized testing and traditional accountability models is being increasingly questioned for their effectiveness. The questions that educators and researchers have been raising for nearly thirty years are now resonating with a wider audience, particularly parents and guardians. These questions encompass the following: "Is it truly possible to gauge a student's readiness with just one test?", "If accountability is so crucial, why does it take months to report the effectiveness of my child's school?", "Isn't there a better way to evaluate a student's readiness while also keeping parents, guardians, and the public well-informed?”, and “How can educators use accountability data to improve teaching and learning for all students?”

The accountability system that was once celebrated as a "game changer for ensuring America's school children can read, write, and perform math better" as a means to address A Nation At Risk (1983) is increasingly viewed as more of an impediment to learning than a transformative tool. One could argue that the current accountability system's inability or unwillingness to adapt is actually hindering student learning rather than facilitating it. For years, dating back to the inception of the traditional accountability system, it has been argued that an accountability system that included a formative approach to testing and one that is more localized is the key to transforming schools, as states and federal agencies are ill-equipped to establish comprehensive accountability. While federal and state departments of education can assist schools and districts in implementing systems, lasting improvements are hard to come by until accountability becomes a priority at the local level.?

I mention all of this to reintroduce the concept of formative accountability. Formative assessments, evaluations, and accountability models are not new concepts; they have been in existence for many years. Regrettably, no state has extensively explored these systems as a means to fulfill federal accountability requirements. However, the United States Department of Education, thanks to the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), is encouraging states to request waivers in order to explore innovative approaches to accountability models. A couple of weeks ago, I discussed the elements of Next-Generation Accountability Models. These next-generation accountability systems, which include local accountability systems, are characterized as being highly simplified, inherently localized, unapologetically student-driven, aligned with community expectations, addressing workforce needs, and providing real-time (formative) transparency.

A local accountability system offers public schools and school districts the opportunity to ultimate formative assessments to provide a more accurate, real-time evaluation of student readiness in reading, math, and writing, as well as employability skills. This is achieved through higher expectations and increased transparency. These next-generation accountability systems are transformative for public education, benefitting students, teachers, parents, and community and business leaders. Formative accountability systems allow stakeholders to monitor students' progress at various points throughout the school year, eliminating the need to wait until the end of the year for results or endure lengthy delays in result releases, which is a common issue in many states, including Kentucky.

For decades, educators, school administrators, and researchers have emphasized the need for a more formative approach to standardized assessments, along with a formative type of accountability system. Imagine the transformation that could take place if schools and school districts could access accountability data throughout the school year, using that data to promptly make adjustments in interventions or accelerations, without having to wait for months to address issues. The main obstacle has always been the cost to states of transitioning from an annual accountability system to a formative one, primarily due to assessment expenses. However, in 2023, especially in Kentucky, there are multiple options available to address the formative assessment aspect. If the data were then incorporated into the local accountability system, provided it met state standards, it could not only save money but also effectively tackle real-time challenges in reading, math, and writing.

A formative approach to accountability opens up new possibilities for schools and school districts. Consider the advantage of assessing a school or district based on their progress throughout the year, as opposed to a single annual measurement. It's essential to recognize that local accountability and ongoing improvement are inherently intertwined. Local accountability, in turn, naturally supports schools and districts in their continuous improvement efforts. In Fleming County Schools, administrators utilize Cognia tools and system processes to work with real-time data, allowing for ongoing improvements to be made and self-evaluation based on the progress achieved from the beginning to the end of the year.

It's important to keep in mind that next-generation accountability models, such as local accountability models, are inherently local, driven by the expectations and needs of the community. As local accountability models adopt a formative approach to evaluating and reporting data, communities and stakeholders are empowered with improved information. Economically, local accountability systems provide local economic development agencies, chambers of commerce, and elected officials with real-time workforce readiness data. While Fleming County Schools has not yet launched the employability skills tab, we are in the final stages of preparation.

With real-time employability data available, communities can attract businesses and industries that create job opportunities. As data becomes more formative, the relationship and partnership between schools, school districts, and their communities continue to strengthen. In 2023, it's vital for school and district leaders to foster positive relationships and partnerships with their communities. Implementing a local accountability system won't instantly repair strained community relationships, but transparency, trust, and accountability can certainly help bridge the gap.

Let's not overlook one of the significant benefits of local accountability. Teachers consistently express their desire to focus on teaching rather than administering assessments that may turn students off from school. However, in grades where standardized assessments are mandated, teachers conduct the tests and then endure a lengthy waiting period before receiving results, often after students have already begun their summer break. Traditional accountability models with standardized testing have been a source of frustration for teachers for almost three decades. Local accountability provides the opportunity for schools and districts to be evaluated for their effectiveness in using formative data to enhance student growth and the efficiency of personalizing interventions and accelerations.

With local accountability, students may or may not undergo more assessments. However, the crucial difference is that teachers have access to data that enables them to assist students, whether through interventions or accelerations. What formative assessments offer educators is the opportunity to address students' specific needs, as well as interventions and accelerations. Likewise, these more frequent formative assessments offer the opportunity for schools and districts to adopt a more formative approach to school and district accountability. This approach targets growth and improvement over the course of the year, student movement from Tier 3 interventions to Tier 1 interventions (increase or decrease in the number of students per Tier), and evaluates the school's ability to meet each student's needs. Traditional accountability models have long suffered from the issue of delayed data reporting, missing valuable calendar days that could have been used to address students' reading, math, and writing needs. Furthermore, legacy accountability models fail to prioritize or strengthen a personalized approach to student learning. Instead, these dated models cling to arbitrary and one-size-fits-all expectations and insist on relying on single-day metrics. This approach hinders the development of personalized learning, favoring reporting over what is truly best for students.

Traditional accountability models have often left educators and educational leaders feeling that something was amiss. Whether it was the geographical separation between local school districts and state capitals or Washington, D.C. that caused this disconnect, it's hard to say. Distant accountability has proven ineffective at any level. However, with local accountability and its formative approach to assessment and reporting, there is no such disconnect; accountability is embedded within the local community. The close proximity between students, teachers, principals, parents, and the community strengthens accountability.

A significant transformation in public education involves shifting the focus to the individual student level. The traditional accountability system, which has been in place for the past three decades, places excessive emphasis on one-time, high-stakes metrics. Most of the accountability for schools and districts hinges on students' performance on a single day at the end of the school year, primarily through standardized reading, math, and writing tests. In this setup, the test and its data take precedence over the needs of the students.

However, with the integration of formative assessments and the adoption of a next-generation accountability model that prioritizes formative approaches, each student's growth and success become the primary focal points. In a local accountability model, the emphasis shifts significantly from school or district performance and ratings to the growth of individual students. Traditional accountability models tend to prioritize testing above all else for accountability purposes, often to the detriment of the students.Improve the sentences and correct the grammar, punctuation, and spelling:? Frequently, there is a concern raised about whether school accountability is too singularly focused, prompting the question: Is it still primarily focused on student readiness or has it become solely about a student's test score? Is traditional accountability in public education about making improvements to learning environments, experiences, opportunities, services, and supports for students or has it been reduced to merely reporting a test score one time per year??

In contrast, a formative approach to accountability, facilitated by next-generation accountability models, empowers educators and educational leaders to achieve the following objectives: 1) Report students' readiness at their grade level in reading, math, and writing; 2)?Identify necessary interventions and accelerations and assess the effectiveness of each; 3) Align systems and continuously make real-time improvements to support the overall growth and development of student; and 4) Inform parents/guardians in real-time of student progress toward standard mastery and core readiness, as well as, other school or district expectations.?

Society is undergoing rapid changes, yet, for the most part, school and district accountability has remained stagnant over the past thirty years. Public education and society have grown so accustomed to the yearly accountability reporting, to the extent that they often become desensitized to the annual release of school report cards, frequently overlooking or dismissing annual school ratings. Local accountability, which employs a formative approach to assessment and accountability, delivers real-time data on student reading, math, and writing, as well as the foundational elements of teaching and learning. This approach also addresses the behind-the-scenes operations that are crucial but often undervalued in traditional accountability models.

As mentioned before in several previous blogs and now this week’s blog, transparency, especially in real-time is indeed an outcome from next-generation accountability models, that traditional accountability lack. A formative approach to evaluations and the accountability system provides all stakeholders with critical data and information in real-time so that educators, educational leaders, parents, and guardians can address specific areas throughout the teaching and learning process, including the effectiveness of a school’s tiered interventions. Again, traditional accountability models, that rely heavily on summative standardized assessments, from a single day, delays reporting and sharing data about students and quality of learning, experiences, opportunities, outcomes, services, and supports. Even when data and information are shared with stakeholders, often, the information is sorely lacking in clarity and often, the students are in a nother grade level or have transiitoned to a new school, such as last fifth grade students have transitioned to sixth grade in a middle school.?

Formative assessments and next-generation accountability models harmonize to orchestrate a symphony of progress within the ever-evolving landscape of education. They prioritize each student's learning, realize their potential, and transform the continuous improvement processes of schools and districts permanently. Formative assessments are the compass that guides the educational journey, and next-generation accountability models serve as the roadmap to ensure that every student's potential is realized.?

Together, formative assessments and next-generation accountability models create a harmonious dance of personalized learning and holistic evaluation. They shape the educational landscape into a vibrant mosaic of opportunities, where every student's potential is not just recognized but celebrated. When accountability aligns with next-generation principles, emphasizing student-driven, localized, and real-time transparency, and assessments become more formative, the processes of learning, assessing, and evaluation reinforce the idea that education is not a destination, but indeed a journey.

Great journeys inspire, are personalized, seek the next horizon, remain relevant, are transformative, and commence with... the first step.