Oregon must choose excellence over mediocrity

In late 2023, Governor Kotek tasked the Oregon Department of Education (ODE) with facilitating an accountability task force to reimagine how we measure school success. This task force culminated in the recently released “Oregon Reimagined Accountability Framework” from the Oregon Department of Education. The new accountability framework is an opportunity to redefine how we support and evaluate our schools. Yet, much like our students’ recent test scores, the framework falls short of expectations. While it nods to shared values like equity and collaboration, it fails to deliver the clarity, boldness, and accountability that Oregon students deserve—and that our future demands.

The Stakes Are High

In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, Oregon has struggled with deepening inequities and slipping educational outcomes. Only 42% of our elementary and middle school students are proficient in reading, and math achievement continues to decline—making us the only state in the nation to see such a slide in 2023. This is not just a crisis for our schools; it is a crisis for Oregon’s future workforce, economy, and communities.

Despite this, the new accountability framework lacks the sense of urgency needed to address these glaring gaps. It calls for “reciprocal and shared accountability,” a concept that sounds good in theory but breaks down in practice. If everyone is responsible, then no one is. Oregon needs a clear entity—the Governor, the Oregon Department of Education, or superintendents—to take ownership of student outcomes. Accountability without leadership is just a bureaucratic exercise.

Moving From Transparency to Accountability

This isn’t rocket science. Some other states, like Maryland, Virginia, and Indiana, are successfully making cohesive, bold reforms to their school accountability models. If Oregon wants to follow suit, it requires us to confront a critical misconception: We confuse accountability with transparency in Oregon.

Here’s the distinction. In Oregon, we think accountability means spending money on what we say we’ll spend on. That’s not accountability—that’s accounting. Real accountability requires asking: Did our investments deliver the intended results? And when the answer is no, we must dig into the why.

Unfortunately, we’ve become so opposed to standardization in Oregon that we’ve thrown out the standards entirely, failing to balance the benefits of cohesive statewide expectations with the flexibility needed to address local contexts. It’s now unclear what we expect from students and schools statewide. That ambiguity is holding us back, and the lack of clarity means that students—especially those from historically marginalized communities—will suffer the most.

Virginia, for example, recently overhauled its school accountability system to provide parents and communities with honest, clear data about school performance. It eliminated systems that masked low performance and streamlined its processes to focus on meaningful metrics like student growth and early math achievement. These changes, while politically contentious, sent a strong message: The state is serious about raising the bar for all students.

Oregon can—and must—do the same. We don’t need to reinvent the wheel. Still, we must move past vague commitments to equity in schools and make a few big bets on what we know works for student well-being and academic achievement by radically centering children in every decision.

Accountability With Backbone

One glaring omission in Oregon’s new framework is the lack of focus on instructional quality. Research consistently shows that teachers are the single most important factor in a child’s learning. Yet the framework avoids any meaningful discussion about how to measure, evaluate, or support teacher effectiveness. This isn’t about blaming educators; it’s about ensuring they have the tools, training, and resources to succeed throughout their career as research-based practices evolve. If we’re not willing to address this, we’re not serious about improving student outcomes.

Equally concerning is the framework’s refusal to set clear, measurable goals. Vague aspirations, sidelined in small print, won’t close the literacy gap or ensure all students graduate ready for college and careers. By 2030, Oregon should aim for ambitious but achievable benchmarks, such as eliminating literacy disparities, increasing graduation rates for all subgroups, and decreasing chronic absenteeism and students at risk of dropping out.

A Call to Action

Accountability systems should be designed to deliver results, not galvanized rhetoric. Oregon must edit its framework with a critical eye and focus on a few transformative priorities:

• Set measurable goals. Every investment must be tied to clear, time-bound outcomes that prioritize closing achievement gaps.
• Simplify and unify processes. Streamline administrative requirements so district leaders and educators can focus on teaching and learning, not compliance.
• Center instructional quality. Hold schools accountable for teacher effectiveness while addressing systemic factors like outdated curricula, lack of cohesive support, and professional learning for educators.
• Appoint bold leadership. Responsibility for student outcomes must rest with clear, identifiable leaders who are willing to own the wins and the failures.

At its core, accountability is about creating the conditions for every child to succeed, regardless of their zip code. That requires centering students in every decision, resisting the temptation to appease all stakeholders equally, and prioritizing equity and excellence as intertwined goals, not mutually exclusive.

Conclusion

My reflections here are a broad critique. To achieve the bold, cohesive accountability model that Oregon needs to change the tides, we must engage in further deliberation, including discussions of innovative solutions from other states leading the way in accountability reform. For example, Indiana's new student success dashboard provides one cohesive model that shares actionable measures and data with families, caregivers, and businesses. The National Council on Teacher Quality explains that team-based accountability, currently used in 21 states, enhances instructional quality and supports teacher development and retention by permitting districts to attribute team outcomes to teacher effectiveness measures. Implementing similar policies in Oregon could drive systemic improvements and better serve our students. What innovative models or ideas have you seen that Oregon should consider adopting?

Oregon’s education system is at a crossroads. The “Reimagined Accountability Framework” offers a starting point but is far from enough. Without bold leadership, measurable goals, and a relentless focus on instructional quality, this framework will fail to deliver the transformative change our students need to succeed in future careers. Let’s demand a system that is honest, ambitious, and centered on the success of every Oregon child. The stakes are too high to settle for less.

?

?