A Multiple Measures Approach to Accountability: Incentivizing and Supporting Schools for Deeper Learning and Continuous Improvement

• In Event: Designing Systems of Support and Accountability for Meaningful Learning: Early Lessons From State Efforts

Abstract

It is clear that the needs of the 21st century workforce are rapidly changing amidst demographic shifts and technological advances. As a result, schools bear a greater responsibility to prepare students for the knowledge economy. In order to best meet that challenge, states, districts, and schools must be accountable for more than just testing and reporting on a narrow set of outcomes aimed at minimum levels of competency. Students must have engaging, high-quality learning opportunities that help them acquire 21st century content and skills.

Thus, scholars, educators, and reform advocates are calling for a more meaningful next phase of school accountability, one that promotes continuous support and improvement rather than mere compliance and efforts to avoid punishment (Center for American Progress & CCSSO, 2014; Darling-Hammond, Wihoit, & Pittenger, 2014). Specifically, a new accountability system must be grounded in the notion that schools must be reconfigured as learning organizations that are committed to continuous improvement and supportive of experimentation, ongoing evaluation, and self-reflection (Darling-Hammond & Plank, 2015). A new system of accountability must include the use of multiple measures that provides a holistic view of a student’s learning and progress that go beyond traditional education outcomes, the depth and breadth of meaningful learning opportunities for all students, and the school’s organizational strengths and resources (Darling-Hammond, Wihoit, & Pittenger, 2014; Mellor & Griffith, 2015).

This paper examines the work of seven states (i.e., CA, CO, MD, NH, SC, VA, WV) that are involved in the “51st State Accountability Strategies Working Group” and are committed to the redesign of state accountability systems that incorporate the concept of multiple measures to assess and support deeper learning and continuous improvement. We conducted systematic reviews of the states’ publicly available documents in order to create illustrative case summaries of how states are developing multiple measures of accountability, identify the types of indicators that are used to track and monitor student and school progress, and determine the key legislative mandates that support or inhibit the use of multiple measures in accountability systems. We conclude with guidance for policymakers and practitioners on the development of data dashboards that may be used to track and monitor the array of information garnered so that appropriate interventions and supports may be quickly dispensed to address specific needs within the system.

As the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act is being debated in Congress, the conceptualization of a multiple measures system of accountability must be considered in order to fulfill the law’s original intent – to ensure that students from disadvantaged groups receive a high quality education that prepares them to succeed in post-secondary institutions and life. The inclusion of a multiple measures system of accountability can incentivize and support states to develop systems of accountability that focus on developing a broader range of knowledge, skills, and dispositions in all students and providing transparency in the system so that all stakeholders are provided the information with which to make informed decisions about how to support deeper learning and continuous improvement.

Authors

• Soung Bae, Stanford University

• Linda Darling-Hammond, Stanford University