PRINT ARTICLE

by Chris Kenning

The Kentucky Department of Education on Friday will unveil public schools' high-stakes accountability testing results, showing how schools stack up on everything from reading and math proficiency to college readiness.

This year, the third since Kentucky began testing on the tougher Common Core education standards, the still-evolving system of judging schools will include a new element that, unlike most others, isn't based on standardized tests.

For the first time, 23 percent of a school's overall accountability score will be constituted by its own judgment of the quality of its instruction in writing, arts, humanities and practical living — rather than relying on a test showing what students learned.

Ken Draut, associate state commissioner for accountability, said the new "program reviews," mandated by the legislature and conducted by school committees including teachers, are designed to improve instruction in areas such as music or art, which don't lend themselves well to paper and pencil testing.

But some worry that — although guided by state scoring rules and subject to spot audits — the more subjective, self-scored measure could be a tempting way for schools to inflate overall scores.

"No school should grade themselves," said Richard Innes, an education analyst for the Bluegrass Institute, a free-market think tank, who argued the reviews have been given too much weight. "It's going to further obscure the most important thing — the performance of students."

The state will still report data Friday showing proficiency rates in core subjects such as reading, math and science.

But in some ways, the changes highlight a broader question in education — how to accurately reflect student progress but also create an accountability system that encourages better teaching instead of drill-style test preparation.

Brent McKim, president of the Jefferson County Teachers Association, said while it might seem like schools are getting a pass on accountability with program reviews, standardized tests are far from a perfect measure of teaching and learning. He said standardized tests can reflect a student's family socioeconomic background, linked to vocabulary or reading skills that help decode test questions, as much as what they learned in the classroom that year.

"Is program review imperfect? Yes," he said. "But I do think it really does get at a more well-rounded way of teaching. ... It gets beyond just standardized test scores."

It's all part of the new "Unbridled Learning" accountability system adopted after Senate Bill 1, enacted in 2009, eliminated the Commonwealth Accountability Testing System and called for a new academic standards and testing system. Kentucky adopted the Common Core in reading and math in 2010, with students first tested on them in spring 2012.

Unbridled Learning measures roughly 400,000 students in grades three through 12 in reading, math, science, social studies and writing.

It uses a formula based on factors such as test results, graduation rates, participation rates, career- and college-readiness, progress in closing achievement gaps and program reviews.
Weighted points determine an overall accountability score. Schools are ranked in percentiles and deemed as distinguished, proficient or needs improvement.

Some additional changes are coming next year, when world languages and kindergarten-though-third-grade instruction will be added to program review scores.

And by the fall of 2016, a still-developing teacher quality measure will be added, based on factors such as meeting professional growth goals that include a component of gains in student performance.

For now, the new element to a school's accountability results is the program review.

To complete the review, schools convene a committee including teachers and school leaders, and it could include district officials or others but it's not required. They answer questions on a scoring guide about curriculum and instruction, classroom assessments and professional development. They're to offer evidence for their findings, and districts then sign off on the results.

Draut said one of its rationales was that, for years, testing in the arts and humanities led teachers to focus on terms that would be tested, rather than playing music or making art, for example.

But Innes said he worries the reviews may not account for how different teachers interpret or execute the instructional standards.

Bob Schaeffer, education director of FairTest, a national advocacy group that studies standardized testing, said such program reviews aren't common nationally. He said "it's good to have a rating system that includes more than standardized tests" but "you need some form of external check."

The state plans to closely examine the reviews and conduct audits, and plans are in the works for better training of teachers who conduct the reviews.

Bob Rodosky, head of the Data Management, Planning, and Program Evaluation Division for Jefferson County Public Schools, said schools that gave themselves top scores this year won't be able to rely on program reviews for a bump again next year. Then, they will have to rely on academics to provide overall gains.