Maine’s Worst Schools Dilemma
The article was written by F.C Fowler in 2013 tackles the issue of questionable evaluation being used to grade the performance of 10 high schools in Maine. Being classified as persistently low-achievement schools in the state had severely undermined their reputation as educational facilities, and even though the status was changed to “improvement schools,” their grounds remain shaky at best.
The newest accountability reform involves grading the performance of schools using SAT math test grades. Although the accountability program is aimed to improve the quality of education, which is severely lagging in the current state of the educational system in the USA, there are many critics to using SAT scores as a screening tool, as those were never meant to be used in a system upon which a school’s individual performance could be graded. To improve the situation and receive funding, these schools are expected to adhere to several standards, which involve firing the principal, cutting down half the staff, or turning the school into a charter school.
Changes that occurred in Maine schools afterward could not be considered positive because they were taken under the premise of a faulty evaluation. According to Fowler (2013), in Ellsworth, the school was forced to replace its principal to apply for funds, while at Fort Kent, the school opted to apply for the funds but redefine the role of the principal rather than outright dismiss him. Some schools rejected additional funding to not comply with the restrictive and harmful policies proposed to reform the schools. The author of the article suggests that in some cases, “inaction is the best course of action,” motivating it with the fact that reforms based upon inadequate evaluation may bring inadequate results (Fowler, 2013).
New York’s Educational Accountability System
Redesigning the accountability system currently in place is a monumental and rather pointless exercise. As it stands, the system is doing its job to the extent of its capabilities, covering accountability, policy, administration, district and school reviews, metrics, and community services (“Office of accountability,” n.d.).
However, the unsound choices, such as the incident with Maine’s schools that is talked about earlier in this paper, indicates that the system is lacking proper evaluation tools, upon which adequate strategies of improvement could be developed. The greatest flaw of using the SAT grading system to evaluate a school’s performance is because only math scores are taken into account while ignoring other relevant subjects.
Also, the SAT was created to predict future college grades rather than evaluate current knowledge and progress. Instead, a cohesive and all-encompassing evaluation tool should be created that would take into account the current knowledge and skills of the student, not just in math, but in other vital areas such as biology, chemistry, physics, etcetera. It could be tested in New York, on a smaller scale, before being applied countrywide. This system would help generate more conclusive and accurate evaluations and recommendations for schools, which they would have no grounds to refuse or go against. Also, it would help the schools improve in areas they are lagging behind while avoiding interventions in areas where everything is alright. For example, a school may receive high grades in math but be lagging back in everything else.
While using the current SAT system, this school would have been graded the best, with the proposed system, it would be graded more accurately. To summarize, there is no reason to change the entire accountability system, as it would require immense costs, development time, and present many logistical challenges. Instead, we should focus on fixing the parts that are not working as intended and keep the system as it is at the moment.
References
Fowler, F.C. (2013). Policy studies for educational teachers: An introduction. (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Web.
Office of accountability. (n.d.). Web.