Microsoft Word - v23n14 fnl.docx Journal website: http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/ Manuscript received: 09/01/2014 Facebook: /EPAAA Revisions received: 11/01/2014 Twitter: @epaa_aape Accepted: 01/05/2015 SPECIAL SERIES A New Paradigm for Educational Accountability: Accountability for Professional Practice education policy analysis archives A peer-reviewed, independent, open access, multilingual journal Arizona State University Volume 23 Number 14 February 16th, 2015 ISSN 1068-2341 Professional Capacity and Accountability: An Introduction Linda Darling-Hammond Stanford University United States & Jon Snyder Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education United States Citation: Darling-Hammond, L., & Snyder, J. (2015). Professional capacity and accountability: An introduction. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 23(14). http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v23.2005. This article is part of EPAA/AAPE’s Special Series on A New Paradigm for Educational Accountability: Accountability for Professional Practice. Guest Series Edited by Dr. Linda Darling-Hammond. Abstract: This special issue furthers the conversation begun in the August 2014 of edition of Education Policy Analysis Archives in the article Accountability for College and Career Readiness: Developing a New Paradigm by Linda Darling-Hammond, Gene Wilhoit, and Linda Pittenger. That paper posits that as schools across the country take on the challenge of preparing all children for success in college, career, and life, states must in turn move toward creating more aligned systems of assessment and accountability. The authors recommend, “an accountability approach that focuses on meaningful learning, enabled by professionally skilled and committed educators, and supported by adequate and appropriate resources, so that all students regardless of background are prepared epaa aape E ducation P olicy A nalysis A rchives V ol. 23 N o. 14 2 for both college and career when they graduate from high school” (p. 1). In this, the second of three focused volumes of EPAA, we hope to further that discussion and debate by focusing, one issue at a time, on each of the three elements of a truly responsible accountability system: 1) meaningful learning, 2) professional capacity and accountability, and 3) equitable and wisely used resources. Keywords: professional capacity and accountability; meaningful learning; new paradigm; educational accountability; college readiness; professional readiness Capacidad profesional y responsabilidad educativa: Introducción Resumen: Este número especial continua la conversación iniciada en el 08 2014 de la edición de la Archivos Analíticos de Política Educativa (EPAA) Accountability for College and Career Readiness: Developing a New Paradigm by Linda Darling-Hammond, Gene Wilhoit and Linda Pittenger. Ese artículo planteaba que mientras las escuelas de todo el país asuman el reto de preparar a todos los estudiantes para ser exitosos tanto en los estudios universitarios, carreras profesionales, y la vida, los Estados deben a su vez avanzar hacia la creación de sistemas alineadoss de evaluación y de responsabilidad educativa Los autores recomiendan “un enfoque de responsabilidad educativa que se centra en aprendizajes significativos, apoyado por educadores profesionales cualificados y comprometidos, con el recursos adecuados y apropiados, de manera que todos los estudiantes independientemente de su origen se estén adecuadamente listos para completar los estudios universitarios, y carreras profesionales, cuando se gradúan de la escuela secundaria” (p. 1). Esta segunda parte de una serie de tres, quiere fomentar la discusión y el debate, centrándose en cada uno de los tres elementos de un sistema de responsabilidad educativa más autentico: 1) el aprendizaje significativo, 2) capacidad profesional y la responsabilidad educativa y 3) recursos equitativo y utilizados de maner a eficaz. Palabras clave: capacidad profesional y responsabilidad educativa; aprendizaje significativo; nuevo paradigma; responsabilidad educativa; preparación universitaria; preparación professional Aprendizagens significativas e um novo paradigma de responsabilidade educacional Resumo: Esta edição especial continua a conversa começada em agosto 2014 na Arquivos Análiticos de Política Educativa (EPAA) Accountability for College and Career Readiness: Developing a New Paradigm by Linda Darling-Hammond, Gene Wilhoit and Linda Pittenger. O artigo argumenta que, enquanto as escolas de todo o país assumem o desafio de preparar os alunos para ser bem sucedidos, tanto na universidade, as carreiras profssionais e a vida, os Estados devem virar-se para a criação de sistemas alineadoss avaliação e responsabilidade educativa Os autores recomendam “abordagem de responsabilidade educativa que se concentram em aprendizajes significativo,s apoiado por profissionais qualificados e educadores comprometidos, com recursos adequados e apropriados de modo que todos os alunos, independentemente da sua origem estejam devidamente preparados para completar os estudos universitários e carreiras profissionais quando se formarem no ensino médio” (p. 1). Esta segunda parte de uma série de três, se propõe a fomentar a discussão e o debate, centrando-se em cada um dos três elementos de responsabilidade educativa mais autêntico: 1) a aprendizagem significativa, 2) capacidade profissional e responsabilidade educativa, 3) financiamento distribuído de forma igualitária e utilizado de maneira eficaz. Palavras-chave: capacidade profissional e responsabilidade educativa; aprendizagem significativa; novo paradigma; responsabilidade educativa; preparação universitária; preparação profissional Professional C apacity and A ccountability: A n Introduction 3 Professional Capacity and Accountability: An Introduction In August 2014, the Education Policy Analysis Archives (EPAA) published Accountability for College and Career Readiness: Developing a New Paradigm by Linda Darling-Hammond, Gene Wilhoit and Linda Pittenger (2014). That paper posits that as schools across the country take on the challenge of preparing all children for success in college, career, and life, states must in turn move toward creating more aligned systems of assessment and accountability. The authors recommend “an accountability approach that focuses on meaningful learning, enabled by professionally skilled and committed educators, and supported by adequate and appropriate resources, so that all students regardless of background are prepared for both college and career when they graduate from high school” (p. 1). For an accountability approach to be truly responsible for the outcomes our children deserve and our communities require, it must support a system that is cohesive, integrative and continuously renewing. It should enable schools to offer high-quality education, reduce the likelihood of harmful or inequitable practices, and have means to identify and correct problems that may occur. The authors suggest that, “While considerable discussion and debate will be needed before a new approach can take shape, this paper’s objective is to get the conversation started so the nation can meet its aspirations for preparing college- and career-ready students” (p. 1). In this, the second of three focused volumes of EPAA, we hope to further that discussion and debate by focusing, one issue at a time, on each of the three elements of a truly responsible accountability system: 1) meaningful learning, 2) professional capacity and accountability, and 3) equitable and wisely used resources. In this issue we focus on Professional Capacity and Accountability. The issue opens with an article by Fullan, Rincon-Gallardo, and Hargreaves that makes the distinction between internal accountability and external accountability. The authors argue that policy makers must go beyond external accountability, where often they currently start and stop, and focus on investing “in conditions essential for increasing ‘internal accountability,’ that is a collective comment and responsibility to improve student learning and strengthen the teaching profession. (p. 4). From the premise that internal accountability requires professional capital, the authors lay out five components that have enriched the growth and development of each and every child and include specific policy actions related to each of those components. The next two articles add to the conversation from two different perspectives. Snyder and Bristol offer provide a conceptual framework for a model of professional accountability for improvement. The authors explicate the model in three ways: describing particular slices of the work of four organizations that show what such a model can look like in particular contexts; suggesting an overview of what a complete system of professional accountability for improvement would require; and offering the career of a teacher in an imagined future where school, district, state, and federal contexts are designed and provide resources for a cohesive constellation of policies, programs, and practices that increase learning for children, adults and the entire system. The third article was written by a team of California-based teacher leaders who were part of the Accomplished California Teacher (ACT) network operating under the auspices of the National Board Resource Center at Stanford University. The ACT members were widely recognized as accomplished teachers who were deeply committed to growing a profession of teaching that served each and every child well. In this article, they lay out their conception of an accountability system for teaching that can develop highly qualified teachers and bring them into the classrooms of our most challenged students. E ducation P olicy A nalysis A rchives V ol. 23 N o. 14 4 The issue also includes five brief videos to bring both different perspectives and a different medium to add to the conversation. In alphabetical order: Richard Carranza, Superintendent of the San Francisco Unified School District provides the perspective of both the Superintendent of a large urban district that is part of a consortium of districts to revamp their systems of accountability and of a student who entered the public schools as an English language learner. He explains how San Francisco and the other districts in the California Office to Reform Education (CORE) consortium are using capacity as the driver for school improvement. Michael Cohen, President of Achieve, brings the perspective of working at the state level focusing particularly on the nature, and appropriate roles, of assessments in supporting the learning of children and the adults who work with them daily. Lily Eskelsen García, president of the National Education Association takes an equity perspective, arguing that all of our children need to the kind of educational opportunities that currently only some of our children have. Equity, she argues, will require great teachers. She then describes a system that would assure that teachers have the preparation, support, and resources needed to be great. Becky Pittard is a Fourth- and Fifth-Grade Math Teacher at Pine Trail Elementary School in Ormond Beach, F. She brings the perspective of a teacher leader who while continuing to work with children has also been involved in the creation of standards and the professional development of fellow educators. She emphasizes how important it is to provide the time that is needed for educators to think about and learn together about the content, the craft, and especially the students who are in the care of our teachers. Marc Tucker, President & CEO, National Center on Education and the Economy, argues that the U.S. needs to build a system to support educators rather than to blame educators. To do so, will require focusing simultaneously on equity and excellence, take time, and can be supported by learning from other countries that have done so. Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers (interviewed by Linda Darling-Hammond) addresses what schools should be responsible for and how to help schools meet those responsibilities. She argues that it is essential to support schools to grow the capacity of educators always in the service of children succeeding in life, college, and career. Together this set of articles and commentaries offers perspectives from policymakers and practitioners working at the federal, state, and local levels to transform the narrow test-and-punish accountability of the NCLB era into an accountability system that develops and supports a teaching profession that is truly responsible for the growth and development of each and every one of our children. We look forward to continuing this essential set of conversations with you in these three issues of EPAA. Professional C apacity and A ccountability: A n Introduction 5 About the Authors and the Guest Series Editor Dr. Linda Darling-Hammond Guest Series Editor Stanford University ldh@stanford.edu Dr. Linda Darling-Hammond is Charles E. Ducommun Professor of Education at Stanford University where she is Faculty Director of the Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education. Her latest book is Beyond the Bubble Test: How Performance Assessments Support 21st Century Learning (Wiley, 2014). Dr. Jon Snyder Stanford University jdsnyder@stanford.edu Dr. Jon Snyder is the Executive Director of the Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education. Prior to joining SCOPE, he had worked as a researcher and a teacher/educator at Teachers College; the National Center for the Restructuring of Education, Schools, and Teaching; the National Commission on Teaching and America's Future; the University of California, Santa Barbara; and as chief academic officer/dean of the College at Bank Street College of Education. He remains engaged in researching teacher learning, conditions that support teacher learning, and the relationships between teacher and student learning. E ducation P olicy A nalysis A rchives V ol. 23 N o. 14 6 SPECIAL SERIES A New Paradigm for Educational Accountability: Accountability for Professional Practice education policy analysis archives Volume 23 Number 14 February 16th, 2015 ISSN 1068-2341 Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Education Policy Analysis Archives, it is distributed for non- commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. More details of this Creative Commons license are available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/. All other uses must be approved by the author(s) or EPAA. EPAA is published by the Mary Lou Fulton Institute and Graduate School of Education at Arizona State University Articles are indexed in CIRC (Clasificación Integrada de Revistas Científicas, Spain), DIALNET (Spain), Directory of Open Access Journals, EBSCO Education Research Complete, ERIC, Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson), QUALIS A2 (Brazil), SCImago Journal Rank; SCOPUS, SOCOLAR (China). Please contribute commentaries at http://epaa.info/wordpress/ and send errata notes to Gustavo E. Fischman fischman@asu.edu Join EPAA’s Facebook community at https://www.facebook.com/EPAAAAPE and Twitter feed @epaa_aape. Professional C apacity and A ccountability: A n Introduction 7 education policy analysis archives editorial board Editor Gustavo E. Fischman (Arizona State University) Associate Editors: Audrey Amrein-Beardsley (Arizona State University), Kevin Kinser (University of Albany) Jeanne M. Powers (Arizona State University) Jessica Allen University of Colorado, Boulder Jaekyung Lee SUNY Buffalo Gary Anderson New York University Christopher Lubienski University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Michael W. Apple University of Wisconsin, Madison Sarah Lubienski University of Illinois, Urbana- Champaign Angela Arzubiaga Arizona State University Samuel R. Lucas University of California, Berkeley David C. Berliner Arizona State University Maria Martinez-Coslo University of Texas, Arlington Robert Bickel Marshall University William Mathis University of Colorado, Boulder Henry Braun Boston College Tristan McCowan Institute of Education, London Eric Camburn University of Wisconsin, Madison Michele S. Moses University of Colorado, Boulder Wendy C. Chi Jefferson County Public Schools in Golden, Colorado Julianne Moss Deakin University Casey Cobb University of Connecticut Sharon Nichols University of Texas, San Antonio Arnold Danzig California State University, San Jose Noga O'Connor University of Iowa Antonia Darder Loyola Marymount University João Paraskveva University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth Linda Darling-Hammond Stanford University Laurence Parker University of Utah Chad d'Entremont Rennie Center for Education Research and Policy Susan L. Robertson Bristol University John Diamond Harvard University John Rogers University of California, Los Angeles Tara Donahue McREL International A. G. Rud Washington State University Sherman Dorn Arizona State University Felicia C. Sanders Institute of Education Sciences Christopher Joseph Frey Bowling Green State University Janelle Scott University of California, Berkeley Melissa Lynn Freeman Adams State College Kimberly Scott Arizona State University Amy Garrett Dikkers University of North Carolina Wilmington Dorothy Shipps Baruch College/CUNY Gene V Glass Arizona State University Maria Teresa Tatto Michigan State University Ronald Glass University of California, Santa Cruz Larisa Warhol Arizona State University Harvey Goldstein University of Bristol Cally Waite Social Science Research Council Jacob P. K. Gross University of Louisville John Weathers University of Colorado, Colorado Springs Eric M. Haas WestEd Kevin Welner University of Colorado, Boulder Kimberly Joy Howard University of Southern California Ed Wiley University of Colorado, Boulder Aimee Howley Ohio University Terrence G. Wiley Center for Applied Linguistics Craig Howley Ohio University John Willinsky Stanford University Steve Klees University of Maryland Kyo Yamashiro Los Angeles Education Research Institute E ducation P olicy A nalysis A rchives V ol. 23 N o. 14 8 archivos analíticos de políticas educativas consejo editorial Editores: Gustavo E. Fischman (Arizona State University), Jason Beech (Universidad de San Andrés), Alejandro Canales (UNAM) y Jesús Romero Morante (Universidad de Cantabria) Armando Alcántara Santuario IISUE, UNAM México Fanni Muñoz Pontificia Universidad Católica de Perú, Claudio Almonacid University of Santiago, Chile Imanol Ordorika Instituto de Investigaciones Economicas – UNAM, México Pilar Arnaiz Sánchez Universidad de Murcia, España Maria Cristina Parra Sandoval Universidad de Zulia, Venezuela Xavier Besalú Costa Universitat de Girona, España Miguel A. Pereyra Universidad de Granada, España Jose Joaquin Brunner Universidad Diego Portales, Chile Monica Pini Universidad Nacional de San Martín, Argentina Damián Canales Sánchez Instituto Nacional para la Evaluación de la Educación, México Paula Razquin Universidad de San Andrés, Argentina María Caridad García Universidad Católica del Norte, Chile Ignacio Rivas Flores Universidad de Málaga, España Raimundo Cuesta Fernández IES Fray Luis de León, España Daniel Schugurensky Arizona State University, Estados Unidos Marco Antonio Delgado Fuentes Universidad Iberoamericana, México Orlando Pulido Chaves Instituto para la Investigacion Educativa y el Desarrollo Pedagogico IDEP Inés Dussel DIE-CINVESTAV, Mexico José Gregorio Rodríguez Universidad Nacional de Colombia Rafael Feito Alonso Universidad Complutense de Madrid. España Miriam Rodríguez Vargas Universidad Autónoma de Tamaulipas, México Pedro Flores Crespo Universidad Iberoamericana, México Mario Rueda Beltrán IISUE, UNAM México Verónica García Martínez Universidad Juárez Autónoma de Tabasco, México José Luis San Fabián Maroto Universidad de Oviedo, España Francisco F. García Pérez Universidad de Sevilla, España Yengny Marisol Silva Laya Universidad Iberoamericana, México Edna Luna Serrano Universidad Autónoma de Baja California, México Aida Terrón Bañuelos Universidad de Oviedo, España Alma Maldonado DIE-CINVESTAV México Jurjo Torres Santomé Universidad de la Coruña, España Alejandro Márquez Jiménez IISUE, UNAM México Antoni Verger Planells University of Barcelona, España Jaume Martínez Bonafé, Universitat de València, España José Felipe Martínez Fernández University of California Los Angeles, Estados Unidos Mario Yapu Universidad Para la Investigación Estratégica, Bolivia Professional C apacity and A ccountability: A n Introduction 9 arquivos analíticos de políticas educativas conselho editorial Editor: Gustavo E. Fischman (Arizona State University) Editores Associados: Rosa Maria Bueno Fisher e Luis A. Gandin (Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul) Dalila Andrade de Oliveira Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Brasil Jefferson Mainardes Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Brasil Paulo Carrano Universidade Federal Fluminense, Brasil Luciano Mendes de Faria Filho Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Brasil Alicia Maria Catalano de Bonamino Pontificia Universidade Católica-Rio, Brasil Lia Raquel Moreira Oliveira Universidade do Minho, Portugal Fabiana de Amorim Marcello Universidade Luterana do Brasil, Canoas, Brasil Belmira Oliveira Bueno Universidade de São Paulo, Brasil Alexandre Fernandez Vaz Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Brasil António Teodoro Universidade Lusófona, Portugal Gaudêncio Frigotto Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Brasil Pia L. Wong California State University Sacramento, U.S.A Alfredo M Gomes Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Brasil Sandra Regina Sales Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro, Brasil Petronilha Beatriz Gonçalves e Silva Universidade Federal de São Carlos, Brasil Elba Siqueira Sá Barreto Fundação Carlos Chagas, Brasil Nadja Herman Pontificia Universidade Católica – Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil Manuela Terrasêca Universidade do Porto, Portugal José Machado Pais Instituto de Ciências Sociais da Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal Robert Verhine Universidade Federal da Bahia, Brasil Wenceslao Machado de Oliveira Jr. Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Brasil Antônio A. S. Zuin University of York