PIE Network Guest

With uncertainty over renewal of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, states have new opportunities and challenges to improve their accountability systems. This session couldn’t have been timelier with President Obama announcing the waiver process for No Child Left Behind the previous week, but moderator Bill Tucker of Education Sector asked the audience to think beyond waivers when it comes to improving accountability.

Tennessee, Colorado, and California look for NCLB waivers

Emily Barton is Chief of Staff to Tennessee Education Commissioner Kevin Huffman. Tennessee submitted a waiver application in August which predated the formal waiver process. Barton said the state is trying to accomplish the following through its waiver request:

1. Align around common, attainable goals.
2. Limit interventions to ones that are manageable and appropriate for a state agency.
3. Give more power to district leaders, increasing their autonomy.
4. Shoehorn all reforms into the waiver process.

Barton said Tennessee is still grappling with metrics and goals.

Colorado Succeeds President Tim Taylor said Colorado, which will be applying for a waiver, has established an academic growth model (along with 13 other states) as the cornerstone of its evaluation process. Colorado wants to use the SB 191 win from 2010 as its basis for the waiver, but only six districts are piloting its reforms right now.

“The state adopted the plan of college readiness as a major goal,” Taylor said. “But how can we hold the state accountable if kids aren’t getting there? Are these strategies providing enough accountability to get the waiver?”

Arun Ramanathan of Education Trust—West said his advocacy group is strongly encouraging California to apply for the waiver. “So far the feedback is that they’re willing to, but it will cost too much,” he said.

California’s accountability system

Ramanathan pointed out that California has six million students (twice as many as the second largest state, Texas), and 75% are students of color which makes it a “majority minority” state. He said the California system of accountability predates NCLB (it began in 1999), so the state has had two different accountability systems running in parallel at the same time.

Ramanathan said NCLB has done the following for California:

1. Provided disaggregation of data which allowed a look at subgroups and brought in the perspective of “what gets measured gets done.”
2. NCLB focuses on proficiency, which can be both a positive and a negative.
3. NCLB came with an accountability system attached to it- there are systemic responses for not reaching the targets.

He added that the state accountability system differs from NCLB in the following ways:

1. The California system looks at growth; every time a kid moves up the scale, the schools get credit. Schools move up as students do. Every school is ranked on a 1-10 scale.
2. The negative is that it looks at subgroups without setting targets and it doesn’t have a system of accountability.

Ramanathan said one California principal characterized her teachers in two ways: “look in the mirror” and “look out the window”—people who look to themselves for solutions and those that look for excuses. “An accountability system provides a backstop for the ‘look in the mirror’ people, to ensure that the focus is still on marginalized students,” he said. “It also highlights what people should be doing for kids; it sometimes provides the backbone to turn these people into ‘look in the mirror’ teachers.

Going forward, he asked, “Now that states have been given this flexibility over dollars and sanctions, what are you going to do with that money and how is it going to translate into a system of supports and interventions?”

Waivers first, legislation second

When asked about how the waiver process will work, Barton explained that following any approval of its waiver application, Tennessee law would need to be changed. “Mandated in this process must be a description of how we consulted with others,” she said. “This is backwards from Race to the Top because the legislation comes after, not first. You don’t get a competitive edge for having some laws in place, and it seems that the U.S. DOE is supportive of waivers if they prove they have met a high bar of rigor.”

Taylor asked for a show of hands by the audience of those hopeful that their states would use the waiver process to improve state accountability. Less than a third of the audience raised their hands. “I am concerned that states not focused on reform will view waivers as an opportunity for relief instead of a chance to ratchet up accountability,” said Taylor

Importance of coherence

Tucker mentioned that each of the panelists touched on the importance of “coherence,” aligning reforms in a comprehensive way as part of the process of accountability.

“Reasonable, rational, accountability does matter and does dictate a lot of what people do,” agreed Barton. “We are also working in consultation with our districts and what works for them.”

Taylor said Colorado had the right goal, which is tremendously important. “So now, it’s down to aligning a lot of the work,” he said. “There is a challenge around reform fatigue on legislators. This is the foundation we did in 2010, but what’s the blueprint look like for a new school system in ten years? Some people think we’re building a skyscraper, some a bungalow. There are lots of people on the bus, but perhaps not in the right seats and no one knows where the bus is going.”

Moving forward on accountability

Ramanathan said ESEA should be viewed as an opportunity rather than a barrier. “If our state can’t apply, we should be finding a bottom-up way to do reform,” he said. “We should put groups of people together and brainstorm new ways to have an accountability system.”

When asked about the best approach for state departments of education when it comes to waivers, Barton replied, “First, do no harm. I’m concerned that without leadership, the waiver doesn’t give you a vision, even though it does bring people together. States can align common goals and share best practices.” Barton also said state education agencies can provide political cover and take on legislative battles that are difficult for districts.

Taylor pointed to success of the Rodel Foundation of Delaware’s Vision 2015 project, which demonstrates strategizing ten years into the future can be more effective than working towards a shorter timeline. He said, “You’ll have greater consensus and accountability to get people moving in the right direction than if you ask them to strategize for the next three years, because they’re already wrapped up in their own strategic plans.”