How to Decide When a School Measures Up

How can parents and the public tell if schools are good--or at least getting better? Current proposals from the White House and the nation’s governors call for holding schools more accountable. But most accountability schemes promise little more than publicizing how students measure up on the Scholastic Aptitude Test or on state tests like the California Assessment Program.

Such tests do measure some of what children are supposed to learn. So, for example, from its high scores we can tell that Los Angeles’ Garfield High School has been doing a good job for many students in mathematics.

However, the threatened resignation of Garfield’s celebrated mathematics teacher, Jaime Escalante, demonstrates how little these simplistic accountability measures actually tell about schools. Tests, by themselves, can’t indicate whether a school is doing all it can to educate children or signal its prospects for improvement or decline.

The conditions at a particular school that determine its quality are complex, so the process of holding the school accountable must be equally complex. Schools, together with the communities they serve, must be held accountable for all the conditions that are necessary for children to learn well.

Surprisingly, looking at schools in greater detail actually results in a more easily understood picture of whether the school is doing a good job. And this picture is definitely more credible and useful than the lists of school-comparing test scores that now hit the papers two or three times a year. Such lists tell little about what is wrong with a school, even less about how to improve it. What we need is information that will hold schools accountable, in a way that points toward improvement while it reports on results.

What might suggest whether a school is likely to encourage and nurture outstanding programs and teachers, rather than frustrate them or drive them out? We think the public needs to know about the learning opportunities a school provides, the expectations it holds for students and the professional conditions it provides teachers.

Opportunities to learn. If the school has no French class, few will learn French at school. No music? No computers? Then no one learns much about music or computers at school. These are obvious examples of lack of opportunity. Most are more subtle. For example, all third-graders receive reading instruction, but the quantity and quality of that instruction varies from class to class and school to school. Likewise, every high school teaches math, English and science; but tracking (assigning students to high- or low-ability classes) keeps many children from coming in contact with rich knowledge and engaging teaching. The public needs to know what subjects are taught, and how and why students are assigned to particular classes.

Children need classrooms and libraries full of books, science equipment and laboratory space. You don’t need statistics to find out if your school has enough materials, equipment and facilities. Just ask the teachers what they have and what they need to do a good job. Few long for exotic luxuries.

School accountability might inform the public about class size and the impact that size has on children’s opportunities. Lowering class size is often perceived as a teacher issue--and a self-serving one at that. But class size not only affects the time teachers have available to spend with individual children, it also influences teachers’ flexibility in experimenting with teaching strategies.

Higher expectations. All schools say that learning tops their list of priorities. But, in response to pressures to raise test scores, many schools try to motivate students mainly through such hoopla as pep talks and prizes. Parents and policy-makers can look for authentic signs of high expectations by asking a few questions:

Is learning recognized and rewarded above all else, or do sports, clubs and social events always get the attention?

Which students get recognition at school assemblies and over the loudspeaker? Athletes? Contest winners? Academic achievers?

Does the school insist on a calm and orderly atmosphere so that learning is not disrupted?

Does the principal spend time with paper work, meetings and building maintenance, or with communicating the rich learning experiences going on in classrooms?

Do class work and homework include long-term projects, papers and research activities? Or can children simply get by doing work sheets, without extending themselves?

Do schools encourage parents to match these expectations? Escalante at Garfield reports the painful experience--well known to so many teachers--of parents encouraging their children to leave rigorous academic studies, often in favor of sports. When schools integrate parents into the school, parents gain confidence and competence. This home-school linkage translates into high expectations and promotes children’s success.

Does the school staff believe that all children of whatever ethnic or national background can become outstanding students? Even those from low-income families? Even those who have learning problems? Even non-English speakers? Schools must be held accountable for expecting all students to learn well. And communities must hold themselves accountable for providing resources for schools to act on their expectations.

Professional environment. To enhance children’s learning and retain highly qualified teachers, schools must provide teachers with professional working conditions. Only then can educators themselves--particularly educators like Escalante--create and sustain revitalized schools with ample opportunities and high expectations for all children.

Do teachers have time to prepare and think?

Do they help establish goals, select programs, influence curriculum, set staff development priorities, devise processes for teacher evaluation? Are teachers trusted to make professional decisions about their classroom teaching?

We also must hold schools accountable for buffering teachers from distracting non-teaching tasks. Schools must keep paper work and bureaucratic requirements to a minimum. Non-teaching personnel should supervise playgrounds, lunch rooms, bus lines. Like all professionals, teachers need easy access to private work space, phones and secretarial services--including copying machines. And, lest we forget, they also need professional salaries.

At schools that enjoy professional working conditions, teachers have energy and enthusiasm. They have permission to teach well, and they are eager to develop their skills. Effective in their work, they believe--and rightly so--that their efforts result in their students’ learning more. Working hard makes sense.

The current direction of school accountability--test students and publish the results--may raise scores a bit. But it does little to create or reward schools that nurture the kind of teaching and learning that we so desperately need--the teaching and learning those like Jaime Escalante at Garfield have proved is possible.