5 REASONS WHY MOST ACCOUNTABILITY POLICIES DON'T WORK

Article Analysis

http://proquest.umi.com.proxy.library.brocku.ca/pqdlink?index=0&did=688960471&SrchMode=3&sid=1&Fmt=3&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1309652636&clientId=17280&aid=3

Leithwood, K. (2001). 5 reasons why most accountability policies don’t work (and what

            you can do about it). Orbit, 32(1), 1-5.

            I have decided to include an article entitled, 5 reasons why most accountability policies don’t work (and what you can do about it) as my final reflection because we’ve thoroughly examined various accountability policies in order to determine which are the most or least effective. Over the duration of the course, I have made my decision that certain systems of accountability such as No Child Left Behind in the U.S. do not work because they harm children, whereas the Fourth Way in Finland which may be termed as a system of collective responsibility enhances student learning (Shirley, 2011).  Although I have acquired a good personal understanding of why certain accountability policies are doomed to fail by taking this course, I found that this article by Leithwood summarizes the reasons in a succinct and clear manner. According to Leithwood, certain accountability policies do not work because “some of them are just plain unethical.” Some policies fail because they “don’t accomplish the purposes intended by policy makers.” They “distract students from doing their best learning” and “teachers from doing their best teaching”. Lastly, policies fail because “they are poorly introduced by policy makers.”

            My views toward accountability have drastically changed since taking this course. I initially entered the course with a view of accountability as a form of policy and discourse that has both harmed student learning and contributed to the de-professionalization of the teaching profession.  I now view accountability as a generally “good” thing and a necessary component to education.  Although I am no longer opposed to the notion of accountability, I am opposed to those policies which are unethical, hinder students form doing their best learning, and prevent teachers from performing their best.  I believe that certain test-driven systems of accountability, which we’ve examined this semester, do not work for the same reasons which I’ve mentioned above. In examining the Ontario system, I do notice an unethical component in EQAO testing. Its policy that allows for and encourages the ranking of school is unethical because it disregards socio-economic factors which influence test scores.  With respect to more test-driven systems such as those found in the U.S., the learning of students is hindered as rote-learning and memorization are encouraged, and there is no room for teacher creativity. One can argue that U.S. test-driven policies have failed because they were poorly introduced by policy makers and politicians; policy makers and politicians looked for quick and short-term results as opposed to considering more long-term approaches (Harris, 2011).  I find Liethwood’s five reasons to be invaluable because I can apply them to all education systems for the purpose of assessing their accountability policies.

Works Referenced

Harris, A. (2011). Reforming systems: Realizing the Fourth Way. Journal of Educational

            Change. (12), 159-171.  DOI: 10.007/s10883-011-9156-z

Shirley, D. (2011). The Fourth Way of technology and change.  Journal of Educational

             Change.  (12), 187-209.