Sentences with phrase «accountability upon students»

The powers that be continue to force high - stakes testing and accountability upon students, teachers, and parents.

Not exact matches

Critics of NCLB's testing and accountability requirements have a litany of complaints: The tests are inaccurate, schools and teachers should not be responsible for the test performance of unprepared or unmotivated students, the measure of school inadequacy used under NCLB is misleading, the tests narrow the curriculum to what is being tested, and burdens imposed upon teachers and administrators are excessively onerous.

The entire Common Core edifice — and the assessments, cut scores, and accountability arrangements built atop it — presupposes that «college - ready» has the same definition that it has long enjoyed: students prepared to succeed, upon arrival at the ivied gates, in credit - bearing college courses that they go right into without needing first to subject themselves to «remediation» (now sometimes euphemized as «developmental education»).

Upon taking office in 1999, the governor pursued a multipronged strategy of education reform: an emphasis on reading, standards and accountability for public schools, and new choice options for students.

If the new information surprises respondents by indicating the district is doing less well than previously thought, the public, upon learning the truth of the matter, is likely to 1) lower its evaluation of local schools; 2) become more supportive of educational alternatives for families; 3) alter thinking about current policies affecting teacher compensation and retention; and 4) reassess its thinking about school and student accountability policies.

Following the passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), the PED launched NMRISING, a statewide initiative to inform the development of New Mexico's state plan7 and build upon the momentum of recent student success.8 The plan reinforces the PED's commitment to robust CCR standards and assessments, meaningful school accountability, a commitment to ensure that all students are served by excellent educators, and dynamic strategies for turning around the state's struggling sStudent Succeeds Act (ESSA), the PED launched NMRISING, a statewide initiative to inform the development of New Mexico's state plan7 and build upon the momentum of recent student success.8 The plan reinforces the PED's commitment to robust CCR standards and assessments, meaningful school accountability, a commitment to ensure that all students are served by excellent educators, and dynamic strategies for turning around the state's struggling sstudent success.8 The plan reinforces the PED's commitment to robust CCR standards and assessments, meaningful school accountability, a commitment to ensure that all students are served by excellent educators, and dynamic strategies for turning around the state's struggling schools.

Where a school registered pursuant to this paragraph is in a district in which one or more schools have been designated as a school in improvement, corrective action or restructuring, the commissioner shall determine the accountability status of the newly registered school based upon his review of the proposed educational program, including but not limited to such factors as: school mission, school administration and staff, grade configurations and groupings of students, zoning patterns, curricula and instruction and facilities.

They have to respond to misguided efforts at accountability, and (Common Core) learning standards forced upon them without curricula designed to enable students to master the standards.

Upon reflecting on what each of these experts said, the good news is that the core principles of accountability that have guided progress in our schools are still widely agreed to: setting high standards, assessing regularly to those standards, measuring improvement, and providing supports for students and consequences for schools that don't improve.

The consortium is developing a new accountability model that offers a more dynamic picture of student learning and school quality and provides more meaningful and actionable information to teachers than can a model that relies largely upon a standardized test.

While ESSA required states to add in a couple of additional outcome measures of students and schools, the overwhelming weight of accountability is still upon a single standardized test by which to make important and often high - stakes judgments about students, schools, and districts.

However, upon close analysis, one can begin to detect deficiencies in the standards - and accountability - based model and problems for its future as the primary determinant of progress in student achievement.

Although state laws vary widely in terms of the policies governing charter school oversight and accountability, these publically funded institutions, which receive freedom from the rules and regulations of traditional district schools in exchange for meeting agreed - upon performance targets, now serve an estimated 2.9 million students in more than 6,700 schools around the country (National Alliance of Public Charter Schools [NAPCS], 2015).

Thus, it is no surprise that calls for accountability regarding the impact of these efforts upon student achievement continually echo throughout the country.

Dubbed the «51st State» Working Group, these 10 states — California, Colorado, Iowa, Kentucky, New Hampshire, Oregon, South Carolina, Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia — worked from a framework developed by Linda Darling - Hammond, Gene Wilhoit, and Linda Pittenger, which proposed a new paradigm for accountability and described how a hypothetical «51st state» might implement strategies to ensure all students were college, career, and life ready upon graduation.

According to them, effective school boards: focus on student achievement as the number one job; allocate resources to support students based upon their differing characteristics and needs; watch return on investment and report to the communities they serve with transparency and accountability; use good data to inform policymaking to support student success, and engage the communities they serve in providing real opportunities to give input into policymaking process (2006).

Insisting upon keeping annual testing of every student in every grade keeps an unnecessarily disruptive system in place as part of an accountability system that, in fifteen years, has not yielded sufficient results to justify the sacrifices in teacher autonomy over instruction and the sacrifices in non-tested subjects being shunted aside in favor of test preparation.

This accountability has to be based upon a shared commitment among teachers, students, parents, and administrators.

Second, even those supporters who are open to external forms of accountability, or at least reporting outside the boundaries of the classroom or school, often claim that standardized tests, state assessments, and other external measures of student accomplishment do not provide sensitive indicators of the goals of curricula based upon whole language principles.

If whole language advocates were willing to play by the rules of external accountability, to assert that students who experience good instruction based upon solid principles of progressive pedagogy will perform well on standardized tests and other standards of performance, they would stand a better chance of gaining a sympathetic ear with the public and with policymakers.

It is then incumbent upon the charter school community to redouble our efforts to make sure that proper accountability systems are in place which will ensure that charter schools generate significantly higher levels of student learning than has historically been available within the traditional public education system.