Return-Path: <nifl-fobasics@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.9.0.Beta5/8.9.0.Beta5/980425bjb) with SMTP id LAA00580; Wed, 15 Sep 1999 11:22:28 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 11:22:28 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <SIMEON.9909151024.G@comingjo.harvard.edu> Errors-To: lmann@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-fobasics@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-fobasics@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-fobasics@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: John Comings <John_Comings@harvard.edu> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-fobasics@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-FOBASICS:134] Re: accountability balance X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII X-Mailer: Simeon for Win32 Version 4.1.5 Build (43) Status: OR Ralph Silva wrote: > When we think about all the accountability scenarios presented in Juliet > Merrifield's piece; is there a hierarchy of accountabilities? On page 10 she > says, "Reforming accountability requires moving from one-way, top-down lines > of accountability to a mutual web of accountability > relationships...(changes) will require federal and state government > departments to consult with the field and with stakeholders." > How can these goals be implemented in a way that both honors the mission (of > ABE) and satisfies funders and legislators? Funders may want a lot less than we think. It seems to me that our field has interpreted the call for accountability to mean that we must measure increases in skill and improvements in the lives of every adult student. In fact, I believe that funders are asking a simple question: "What do we get for our investment in ABE/ESL/GED programs?" We can answer this question by looking at a small number of our students, but looking at them in-depth with assessment and evaluation tools that could uncover a wide range of impacts and outcomes. Rather than collecting a little bit of data on all students, we would collect a lot of data on a few students. I think this could be done well with the existing resources being put into accountability systems. The results might not make us look very good to our funders, but if it was done right it would also identify ways to improve performance. Funders, in Juliet's way of thinking, would then be responsible for providing the resources needed to make those changes. We still need to be responsible to our students and that requires a different set of assessment tools to help them identify their strengths and weaknesses and measure their own progress. I see this as a much more difficult assessment task than the accountability for funders. ---------------------------------------- John Comings Phone: 617.496.0516 NCSALL -- Nichols House Fax: 617.495.4811 7 Appian Way Email: John_Comings@harvard.edu Graduate School of Education Web: http://gseweb.harvard.edu/~ncsall Harvard University Cambridge MA 02138
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Sep 21 2000 - 11:03:58 EDT