|
Accountability in Public Education in Utah: A Three Step Plan The Herald Journal Richard P. West, Ph.D. Few issues result in spirited public debate like public education. Citizen legislators and educators are currently locked in a struggle for precious public resources. Teachers are threatening job action; legislators are expressing compassion but withholding support. Citizens demand greater accountability while educators plead poverty. In a previous commentary I presented five principles which I proposed be the foundation for a response to a mandate by the 1999 Utah State Legislature "to have an effective statewide standards and accountability program for public education" (HB 144). I believe these principles achieve a balance between public responsibility and educator accountability. I would now like to present a three-component plan for achieving this sought-after accountability in public education. 1. Invite local models for accountability and performance assessment. There is no evidence that a "one size fits all" model for accountability and performance assessment is appropriate for all districts in the state. Utahns are often critical of national initiatives that require lockstep compliance with all other states. The decision to create a statewide performance assessment system with identical measures across all geographic areas is equally difficult to defend. Such a decision should be made only after a careful analysis and comparison of locally-determined models. The first step in achieving a statewide system of standards and accountability should be to invite local districts or consortia of districts to develop their own systems. Evaluations of these models will indicate which models are likely to work once they are extended to regional or statewide implementation. Inviting the development of numerous local models will also provide an opportunity to scrutinize many more ideas for assessment and accountability under conditions that are more likely to occur throughout the state of Utah, rather than those common in other states. 2. Substantially increase basic education funding. The vast majority of Utah's citizens choose to live in a state where the federal government owns approximately 74% of the land area and provides little support for schools. We choose to live among people whose Utah values and lifestyle translate into more school children per wage earner/tax payer. Most of us recognize that these conditions are the price we pay to support our values and lifestyle. We recognize that we are not likely to have the resources many states have to support our publicly-supported initiatives such as education. However, the differential has become so great that our ability to provide even basic educational programs is now jeopardized. Per pupil funding in Utah is currently less than 70% of the national average. I call upon all state legislators to elevate basic education funding over the next several years to a level of 90% of parity with national averages. Only then will we be able to attract and keep high quality professional educators who will help us address and overcome the challenges of growing diversity among students and deteriorating values in our communities. We often hear the argument in Utah that we simply can't afford to pay for education what other states do. That is correct. But, we can't afford to pay as little as we are doing currently. Education professionals in Utah are among the lowest paid graduates of colleges and universities. The best and brightest are increasingly selecting careers in other professions that offer better financial rewards. We must plug the "brain drain" now and secure our future with an investment that will repair the damage to our personnel infrastructure and prepare us for the coming millennium and the challenges we will encounter there. Utahns readily accept excuses for low levels of education funding even though we dismiss similar arguments for other initiatives. We say we can't afford to pay what other states pay to educate children, but then we pay the national average for food, home construction and housing, transportation, and many other basic commodities and services. Why, then, are we willing to cut corners in education when we are unwilling to do so in other areas of our personal budgets? The time has come to provide a good faith indication of our state's willingness to cultivate our greatest future resource--our children. While it may be true that Utahns are among the more highly-taxed of US citizens, we also enjoy the lifestyle that living in Utah provides. Every citizen of this state benefits from better-educated students. Better education translates into a growing resource that will help us meet the challenges of the future and preserve the lifestyle we desire in Utah. Furthermore, a commitment to substantially increase education funding is a necessary foundation for an accountability effort in the state. Communicating our state's willingness to provide modest resources to support education is an expression of good faith and trust, and is an appropriate quid pro quo for increased cooperation and accountability. Utah's educators have accepted the challenge to accomplish more with less, but no one should be expected to accomplish everything with so little. 3. Increase opportunities for appraisal and professional development. All professionals, including educators, are entitled to frequent appraisals of their performance accomplished by credible judges, with attention being given to strengths as well as weaknesses. A variety of sources of information should be used. Recommendations for professional development should be arranged for any skills found to be deficient. The noted management consultant and author, Dr. Peter Drucker, recommends that appraisals focus more on strengths than on weaknesses (The Effective Executive, 1967, p.85). Doing so establishes a context for trust and superior performance. Appraisals of schools and districts should follow this same regimen for success. Furthermore, effective organizations are those where staff members are regarded as valued resources that must be cultivated and strengthened. Organizations are responsible to provide opportunities for personnel to develop professionally, and hold them accountable only after sufficient professional development opportunities have been provided (Drucker, Management: Tasks, Responsibilities, Practice, 1974). Establishing high standards of performance and frequently evaluating performance are important, but insufficient to guarantee success. Raising the high jump bar doesn't guarantee olympic-level performance any more than simply raising standards ensures improvements in schools. Only when careful guidance, coaching and mentoring are combined with encouragement and incentives can increased performance be expected. |