Search results

The purpose of this paper is to present the full range of choices that academic institutions presently have for attending to educational results.

The approach takes the form of a systematic comparison of the eight models currently available to colleges and universities for attending to educational results, relative to four necessary organizational purposes: individual student improvement, individual student accountability, organizational improvement, and organizational accountability.

This is a time of innovation, not of standardization. As new choices become available, the standard for accountability for educational results continues to rise.

The choices, ranging from established practices to expected alternatives to unexpected innovations, differ significantly in their capacities.

The prevailing theory of action underlying accountability is that holding schools and students accountable will increase educational output. While accountability's theory of action intuitively seemed plausible, at the point of No Child Left Behind's national implementation, little empirical research was available to either support or critique accountability claims or to predict the long‐term impact of accountability systems on the success of at‐risk students and the schools that served them. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the work and perceptions of school teachers and leaders as they seek to meet the requirements of educational accountability.

Interviews with 89 administrators, staff and teachers revealed a variety of methods utilized to manage risks associated with low test scores and accountability ratings.

The findings reported in this paper challenge the proposition that accountability improves the educational outcomes of at‐risk students and indicates that low‐performing Texas high schools, when faced with the press of accountability, tend to mirror corporate risk management processes, with unintended consequences for at‐risk students. Low‐scoring at‐risk students were often viewed as liabilities by school personnel who, in their scramble to meet testing thresholds and accountability goals, were at‐risk student averse – implementing practices designed to “force kids out of school.”

In this paper, the authors use theory and research on risk management to analyze the work and perceptions of school teachers and leaders as they seek to meet the requirements of educational accountability. This paper is among the first to use this particular perspective to conceptualize and understand the practices of educational organizations with regards to the treatment of at‐risk students attending low‐performing high schools in the midst of accountability.

Over the past decades, there has been an intensifying movement to privatize education in Western nations, with equal concern about the quality of education for all. This article adds to a global understanding of school inspections as a governance mechanism to promote educational quality in an entirely open K-12 educational marketplace.

The role of school inspections as a quality assurance device is examined from a market accountability perspective. The Emirate of Dubai is used as an illustrative example of market accountability, where the educational landscape constitutes primarily a private open market.

Dubai proves that market accountability can address the needs of all families, assuring the provision of a sufficient quality standard of education, while allowing for competition to drive improvement. There are two lessons that Dubai offers a global audience that has been debating the merits of privatizing education: a fully free unregulated market does not promote an education system that provides a minimum standard of education for all; and a private education system can address stakeholder concerns and operate successfully in parallel to a public sector.

The idiosyncratic United Arab Emirates (UAE) education sector calls for a balance between flexibility and quality assurance across semi-independent jurisdictions. Hosting a majority of non-Emirati resident families, Dubai has developed a public inspection system for a private education market for quality assurance across 17 curricula offered in 215 private schools with diverse profit models. That most Dubai school-aged children are in private schools demanded accommodating an atypical landscape for K-12 education that affords insights into how a free market can operate. The authors encourage future research that may build a more comprehensive framework for better understanding the public–private education debate.

Much has been written about student accountability, teacher accountability, and school accountability. More limited research is available on administrator accountability. Recently there have been substantial initiatives undertaken world‐wide to increase educational accountability. With increasing demands and changing expectations in the role of school administration, researchers, practitioners and policy makers and departments of education have become socially preoccupied with educational accountability. The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive literature review on accountability of school administrators over the last two decades to demonstrate how aspiring, new and practicing school administrators understand and meet the demands of accountability in a time of tumultuous change when the stakes are high.

The purpose of this paper, three-study research project, is to establish and validate a two-dimensional scale to measure teachers’ and school administrators’ accountability disposition.

The scale items were developed in focus groups, and the final measure was tested on various samples of Israeli teachers and principals. Real-life accountability scenarios, individual work characteristics and performance evaluation were used for the validation. Correlational as well as multi-level statistical procedures were employed.

Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the two-dimensional structure: external and internal. Study 1 confirmed the convergent validity of the scale vis-à-vis accountability scenarios in teachers’ work. Study 2 confirmed its construct validity vis-à-vis related individual work characteristics such as goal orientation, work ethic and conscientiousness, using school principals as participants. Study 3 confirmed the scale’s predictive validity vis-à-vis teacher work performance.

The scale developed in this study may be used to enhance research on the personal aspect of accountability, contributing to a better understanding of educational systems operating in an accountability environment.

The study offers researchers a tool to measure accountability from an individual perspective. The two-dimensional scale developed in this study may help to point out individual differences in teacher accountability disposition.

The ability to assess personal accountability may contribute to society’s concern with school accountability and its effect on educators’ work.

Educational research in recent years is replete with studies on school accountability, but relatively little has been written on accountability at the individual level of analysis. Few scales exist that measure educators’ self-report accountability.

This AERI-NEPC eBrief, the fourth in a series titled “Understanding validity issues around the world”, looks closely at issues surrounding the validity of test-based actions in educational accountability and school improvement contexts. The specific discussions here focus testing issues in the US. However, the general principles underlying appropriate and inappropriate test use in school reform and high stakes public accountability settings are applicable in both domestic and international settings. This paper aims to present the issues.

This policy brief is based on a synthesis of conference proceedings and review of selected pieces of extant literature. It begins by summarizing perspectives of an invited expert panel on the topic. To that synthesis, the authors add their own analysis of key issues. They conclude by offering recommendations for test developers and test users.

The authors conclude that recurring validity issues arise with tests used in school reform and public accountability contexts, because the external tests tend to be employed as policy instruments to drive reforms in schools, with unrealistic timelines and inadequate resources. To reconcile the validity issues with respect to educational assessment and forge a coherent understanding of validity among multiple public users with different agendas, the authors offer several recommendations, such as: adopt an integrated approach to develop content and standards of proficiency that represent a range of cognitive processes; support studies to examine validity of assessments and the effects of decisions taken with assessment data before results are fed into high stakes accountability-related actions that affect teachers, leaders or schools; align standards, curricula, instruction, assessment, and professional development efforts in schools to maximize success; increase capacity-building efforts to help teachers, administrators, policy makers, and other groups of test users learn more about assessments, particularly, about appropriate interpretation and use of assessment data and reports.

Baker points out that in response to growing demands of reformers and policy-makers for more frequent and rigorous testing programs in US public education, results from a single test tend to get used to meet a variety of public education needs today (e.g. school accountability, school improvement, teacher evaluation, and measurement of student performance). While this may simply be a way to make things more cost-efficient and reduce the extent of student testing in schools, a consequence is inappropriate test use that threatens validity in practice settings. This policy brief confronts this recurring validity challenge and offers recommendations to address the issues.

The purpose of this paper is to examine changes in accountability as the provision and control of education moved from private nonprofit organisations to a public sector provider.

Analysis of nineteenth century archival documents from significant primary educational providers in a major early New Zealand settlement.

The nonprofit education provider utilised public meetings including public examinations, whose effect was to develop trust based on the education values it shared with its community of stakeholders. It also published financial reports which, along with inspections and statistical returns, were preferred once the government became the education provider. Such publications and inspections indicated bureaucracy and control. Nevertheless, government funding, rather than the nonprofit organisation’s dependence on its community, made education provision sustainable.

It has been suggested that the differences between public sector and private sector accounting and accountability are not always sharply defined (Carnegie and Napier, 2012). However, this case study shows that a change of education provider did lead to a marked difference in accountability. While theory suggests that public sector accountability should enhance democracy, the party best meeting this brief was the nonprofit provider, with the public sector provider preferring hierarchical accountability. It could be argued that funding dependence drove these different approaches as community accountability was traded for financial security.

Distinctive study of accountability practices to external stakeholders, in a mid-nineteenth century education context.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how robotics program developers perceived the role of emulation of human ethics when programming robots for use in educational settings. A purposive sampling of online robotics program developer professional sites which focused on the role of emulation of human ethics used when programming robots for use in educational settings was included in the study. Content related to robotics program developers’ perceptions on educational uses of robots and ethics were analyzed.

The design for this study was a qualitative summative content analysis. The researchers analyzed keywords related to a phenomenon. The phenomenon was the emulation of human ethics programmed in robots. Articles selected to be analyzed in this study were published by robotics program developers who focused on robots and ethics in the education. All articles analyzed in this study were posted online, and the public has complete access to the studies.

Robotics program developers viewed the importance of situational human ethics interpretations and implementations. To facilitate flexibility, robotics program developers programmed robots to search computer-based ethics related research, frameworks and case studies. Robotics program developers acknowledged the importance of human ethics, but they felt more flexibility was needed in the role of how classroom human ethical models were created, developed and used. Some robotic program developers expressed questions and concerns about the implementations of flexible robot ethical accountability levels and behaviors in the educational setting. Robotics program developers argued that educational robots were not designed or programmed to emulate human ethics.

One limitation of the study was 32 online, public articles written by robotics program designers analyzed through qualitative content analysis to find themes and patterns. In qualitative content analysis studies, findings may not be as generalizable as in quantitative studies. Another limitation was only a limited number of articles written by robotics programs existed which addressed robotics and emulation of human ethics in the educational setting.

The significance of this study is the need for a renewed global initiative in education to promote debates, research and on-going collaboration with scientific leaders on ethics and programming robots. The implication for education leaders is to provide ongoing professional development on the role of ethics in education and to create best practices for using robots in education to promote increased student learning and enhance the teaching process.

The implications of this study are global. All cultures will be affected by the robotics’ shift in how students are taught ethical decision making in the educational setting. Robotics program developers will create computational educational moral models which will replace archetypal educational ethics frameworks. Because robotics program developers do not classify robots as human, educators, parents and communities will continue to question the use of robots in educational settings, and they will challenge robotics ethical dilemmas, moral standards and computational findings. The examination of robotics program developers’ perspectives through different lens may help close the gap and establish a new understanding among all stakeholders.

Four university doctoral faculty members conducted this content analysis study. After discussions on robotics and educational ethics, the researchers discovered a gap in the literature on the use of robots in the educational setting and the emulation of human ethics in robots. Therefore, to explore the implications for educators, the researchers formed a group to research the topic to learn more about the topic. No personal gains resulted from the study. All research was original. All cultures will be affected by the robotics’ shift in how students are taught ethical decision making in the educational setting. Robotics program developers will create computational educational moral models which will replace archetypal educational ethics frameworks. Because robotics program developers do not classify robots as human, educators, parents and communities will continue to question the use of robots in educational settings, and they will challenge robotics ethical dilemmas, moral standards, and computational findings. The examination of robotics program developers’ perspectives through different lens may help close the gap and establish a new understanding among all stakeholders.

In an era of increased autonomy and accountability in education, school principals have been given the responsibility for many tasks that used to be centralized, such as hiring and managing personnel, ensuring that the curriculum is followed and that the development of the school is on the right path. In this study an exploration is attempted into the associations among institutional context, school leadership, school climate and student outcomes.

The authors analyze data from the Programme of International Student Assessment study 2015 to identify variations in institutional context (autonomy and accountability) among education systems to determine whether and how institutional context is associated with leadership and whether education systems, in turn, are associated with school climate and students' achievement in reading. To account for the hierarchical structure of the education systems under investigation, a three-level structural equation modeling (SEM) approach was employed to analyze the data gathered on the institutions, schools and students.

No association was found between the degree of autonomy of an education system and leadership behavior; however, accountability and leadership seemed to go together. Achievement in reading competencies was greater in school systems in which principals had more autonomy. At the school level, a relationship was found between leadership and opportunities for parental involvement.

The results of this study indicate the need of strong leadership in order to have better results when there is more accountability. In this sense, the authors' findings also point to the increased importance of context-sensitive leadership skills.

Principals face shifting accountability pressures from many sources. The most notable recent change in the USA has been the growing pressure from state and federal government. The purpose of this study is to explore the extent to which the accountability pressures experienced by principals in one American state were the same as those reported in research documenting “objective” changes in those pressures.

This qualitative study uses interviews with New Jersey middle school principals. The purposeful sample includes principals who had been in their buildings at least three years and enhances variation on socioeconomic status (as measured by New Jersey's rating of “district factor groups”) and school achievement. The authors averaged three years of achievement data and controlled for variation in poverty, ethnicity, language proficiency, and enrollment. A total of 37 principals were contacted; 25 were interviewed. Principals first rank ordered seven sources of accountability. They were then interviewed to learn why the one they ranked highest was most important.

The most frequent top source of accountability was “your own conscience.” Principals who selected this option highlighted a sense of personal responsibility, responsibility to the children in their charge, and how conscience mediates among competing accountabilities. Accountability to one's conscience was most prevalent in high achieving schools.

Frequent reference to internal responsibility among leaders suggests that they continue to feel a strong sense of internal accountability in spite of increasing external pressures. It also illustrates the range of external, often conflicting pressures that principals face which include pressures from the public and the district office as well as state and federal government. In this increasingly prescriptive and contradictory environment the principal's moral code is important to her or his school.