The Texas Institute for Education Reform Asks Questions About the Possible Replacement of the TAKS System

The Texas Institute for Education Reform (TIER) has issued its list of questions regarding the replacement of the State's current accountability system.  While TIER was against the provisions of Senate Bill 1031 that could radically reform the current system, the questions it poses below are good questions to consider in replacing the current TAKS system.

____________________________________________________________________________

TEXAS PUBLIC SCHOOL ACCOUNTABILITY—A QUESTIONNAIRE

One of the more contentious issues in the recent session of the Texas Legislature was public school accountability, specifically the questions surrounding the future of the State's high stakes standardized assessment-based accountability system that has been in place since the mid-1990's.Almost everyone agrees that the system should be overhauled, for a variety of reasons depending on each point of view—it has become cumbersome and overly complicated, it is inconsistent and overlapping with the federal No Child Left Behind Act, it doesn't properly reflect the true expectations we should have for our students or our educators, it produces perverse incentives, it doesn't properly measure student achievement growth,it produces an undue burden of preoccupation of testing on teachers and students, or it unduly pressures and stigmatizes educators.

In response to this critique, the Legislature passed Senate Bill 1031, which, among key changes in high school assessments, creates a Select Committee on Public School Accountability to perform a comprehensive review of the current school accountability system and report its findings by December 1, 2008, along with recommendations to the Legislature on its redesign.In anticipation of this process, the Texas Institute for Education Reform (TIER) has carefully considered the relevant questions that should be answered by this Committee, as well as those advocates who would propose significant revisions in the current accountability system, and suggests the following questionnaire.

1. At what grade levels should assessment of student achievement be conducted?
2. What subjects should be examined at each grade level?
3. To what grade levels and subjects should the following "stakes" be applicable?
   1. The data are available to the public in the form of aggregate statistics, and the media and other analysts are free to compare schools in whatever way they choose.
   2. Student-level data are available to researchers under appropriate FERPA protections, and those researchers are free to publish school performance reports and lists of higher performing schools based on that research (example – the Just for the Kids School Reports).
   3. Schools and districts are assigned state accountability ratings based in part on the test results.
   4. The ratings assigned in c. are used by the State to determine school and campus accreditation.
   5. The test results are taken into account in grade-by-grade student promotion decisions.
   6. The test results are taken into account in students' eligibility to receive a high school diploma.
   7. School districts are encouraged to take the results into account in teacher performance evaluations.
   8. School districts are encouraged to take the results into account in performance evaluations for principals and other administrators.
4. Assuming that a much simpler system is desirable, to which of the following achievement standards should schools and districts be held accountable?
   1. High school graduation rate for each student group.
   2. An average passing rate on state assessments for each student group.
   3. Preparation of students for work and college on the basis of national measures, disaggregated for all student groups.
   4. A State minimum standard for student participation in assessments.
   5. Meeting financial standards for productivity in spending and allocation of funds.
   6. Meeting requirements for minimum class size in elementary grades.
   7. Providing supplemental academic assistance for students who do not pass state assessments at the standards set for proficiency.
   8. Providing full disclosure of campus and district spending by publishing check registers.
   9. Again assuming the desirability of a simpler system, to which of the following achievement standards should students be held accountable?
      1. Passing state assessments at key grade levels in elementary and middle school to qualify for promotion.
      2. Passing state high school end of course exams to qualify for graduation.
      3. Meeting standards for reading and math proficiency that are equal to or higher than proficiency standards set by the National Assessment of Educational Progress.
      4. Meeting state standards for work and college on the basis of national measures.
      5. Completing supplemental academic programs if they fail to pass state assessments at the standard set for proficiency.
   10. Are the current TAKS passing standards sufficient to indicate that students are on track to readiness for college and a skilled career? (If the answer varies by grades and subjects, be specific)
   11. If the answer to #6 is that some or all standards are not sufficient, should the state focus on raising these standards?
   12. What strategies or methods should be used to shift this focus to higher standards?
   13. Should the state proceed with the development and implementation of academic growth measures that could be used to identify whether students are on a trajectory to college and workplace readiness?
   14. Should the state proceed with the development and implementation of value-added methodologies that could be used to identify above-predicted annual gains in individual student performance?
   15. Should measures of academic growth and value-added gains be used as standards for the performance of educators and/or the accountability ratings of schools and districts?
   16. Are annual increases in student assessment scores exaggerating the extent to which schools are improving because of an undue preoccupation with strategies designed solely to raise these scores, i. e., "teaching to the test"?
   17. If the answer to #12 is Yes, what should be done to identify the extent of this problem in specific schools and districts?
   18. If the answer to #12 is Yes, what measures or strategies should be used to minimize assessment score inflation and improve the public's information on the true performance status of our schools?
   19. How should lower-performing districts and schools and those in need of intervention be identified?
   20. What intervention strategies for underperforming campuses should be used and how should these vary based on the length of time that the school has been underperforming?
   21. If a school fails to meet the minimum standards for academic and financial performance, when, if ever, should state funding and accreditation be withdrawn?One year? Two years?Three years?Longer?
   22. Given the answers to the questions above, what specific changes should be made to the current accountability system?

   This is not simply a rhetorical exercise.The accountability review and reform process created by SB 1031 will be critical to the future of the standards and accountability based education reform that has propelled Texas to national leadership of public education innovation over the past twenty years.It is vitally important that this process be properly managed and that our answers to these questions are the right ones for our children and our state.

   This essay was written by JimWindham, President, Texas Institute for Education Reform (www.texaseducationreform.org) and Chris Patterson, a Senior Fellow at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, with significant assistance from Chrys Dougherty, Director of Research with the National Center for Educational Accountability.
   
   Published July 9, 2007

Comments

[Sonja Braddock]

I have only been in the teaching profession for four years and of those four years I have taugh fifth grade math and science, both TAKS accountable subjects. I can attest to the fact that we are put under tremendous pressure to perform at high level. It has come to the point where it seems like if a child comes into the classroom and has difficulty learning that we want to find some way of testing them so that they can take a modified version on THE TEST. I have grown increasingly discouraged by the limitations set on teaching because we are so focused on teaching to THE TEST. I have heard teachers many time use the test as a threat to try and make students perform well on an assignment, because in fifth grade students can be retained for not passing a mandated test. I read in a book once that threats of failure can only impede a students learning. And that many of the students who are identified as learning disabled are students who have a fear of failure therefore withdraw and become very unsuccessful in the classroom.