Search

When establishing statewide and nationally comparable educational evaluation and assessment systems, state education agencies (SEAs) must consider factors affecting policy in at least four areas. First, the full range of purposes for establishing such a system should be clarified. It must be decided whether the system exists to provide data for reporting or for decision-making, whether comparisons should be made within educational units or between them, and what emphasis is to be placed on various forms of learning. Second, the evaluation tools selected must be compatible with the purposes identified. The range of evaluation information gathered and the contextual data collected must be appropriate, and attention should be paid to whether the tools used are suitably diagnostic and reveal significant facts. The third area of concern is the potential for misusing or misinterpreting the data. Full disclosure of a broad range of data, coupled with thorough explanation of how to understand it, is vital. Fourth, careful consideration must be given to the degree of collaboration that is desired with other agencies, and the extent to which other decisions affect the achievement of the desired cooperation. (PGD)

State education agencies are in increasing agreement regarding the basic principles that should underlie state educational assessment programs, though some areas of divergent opinion remain. The agencies generally accept the ideas that comparisons between states will be made, that assessment programs should serve multiple purposes, that meaningful comparisons cannot be made without knowledge of the contextual factors affecting the provision of education, that a large number of indicators must be employed to fully display an educational system's status, and that assessment programs are bound to be costly. The agencies disagree over the uses to which assessments should be put, the educational outcomes that should be measured, the extent to which various contextual factors affect education, the specific indicators that should be used, and how the costs of assessment are to be controlled and allocated. Agencies need to develop policies for assessment that will resolve all of these questions in ways that are appropriate both to the individual characteristics of the state and to the demand for data that will allow meaningful assessment and comparison on a national level. (PGD)

State Education Agencies (SEAs), in their pivotal role of representing the interests of both the public and the education establishment, must make constant reassessment of the directions which may be taken to improve education, and of the policy issues and options to be examined. These policy-level considerations can be brought into focus by reviewing the contexts in which the improvement of teaching must take place. SEA education policies concerning the improvement of teaching need to be at once sensitive to, and isolated from, political considerations. Other contextual factors in education reform are contradicatory trends, e.g., demands to make things tougher for students and simultaneously to have more concern for their individual needs. Established law and entrenched interests in education must be of concern in policy formation as well as the complex problems inherent in reasonable and sufficient state funding. SEA action for improvement of education must be concerned with what is crucial to real educational reform, what is amenable to change, and most clearly with what is in the area of state-level authority. Factors to be considered are: (1) political realities; (2) organizational and institutional power balances and alignments; (3) patterns of school organization; (4) current and projected fiscal resources; and (5) state level priorities. (JD)

The educational "excellence" movement is hindered by inconsistencies between goals and action and by difficulties in translating national and state goals into local policy; nonetheless, progress has occurred. Examples of "voodoo excellence," in which proposed policies will likely work against their stated objectives, are widespread. While advocating excellence for all students, states raise standards beyond the reach of many. Likewise, broad humanistic studies are advocated, yet in practice schools increasingly emphasize rote learning. States are lengthening time in school without considering the use of time; they propose to make teaching a more attractive profession but use inadequate, demeaning, and divisive means to do so. Promises of equity contrast with increasing gaps between advantaged and disadvantaged students, and endorsements of community involvement contrast with increasing centralization. Moreover, certain "anomalies" arise as state programs filter down to the grassroots. These include endemic complacency in school districts, reform proposals that stress structural and programmatic change but overlook instructional change, and widely varying viewpoints. Despite these obstacles, the public's awareness of and confidence in education have increased, as have aspirations for and expectations of children; finally, belief in the importance of thorough student assessment has spread, and the social status of teaching has risen. (MCG)

The capabilities of a distance education system to enhance instructional programs of small schools by providing equity and increasing quality of educational opportunity, providing access to subject matter and subject matter experts, and providing interaction and joint activities with students in other schools are of sufficient merit to formulate and adopt educational policies which will give positive direction as small schools move forward. The educational policy options from among which educational decision makers may choose include preserving the small school as a conscious educational choice, capitalizing on delivery systems, preparing teachers to use distance education, allocating instructional resources, assigning responsibilities for material/media selection, simplifying logistics, and nurturing partnerships. Although most policies must be determined by local school boards, state educational units play a crucial role in influencing these policies by the way they meet responsibilities in determining state patterns of fiscal support, employment of statewide curriculum standards, regulations governing teacher certification/recertification, accreditation policies, provision of technical assistance to local districts, and ability to be a persuasive leadership force in articulating state educational goals. Thus the productive use of distance education will require not only sound and informed policy choices at each level independently but also joint and cooperative policy determinations. (NEC)

Proposals for the adoption of programs to improve the quality of education frequently emphasize the importance of concentrating on the individual school building as the center of the change process. This emphasis has led to increasing support for moving the locus of decision making downward to bring about what is called "school based instructional management." This idea is analyzed in the broader context of the decentralization of education decision making. The policy options available are derived from an array of policy issues. This booklet discusses these issues under three group headings: (1) clarifying the concept; (2) responding to conditions and restraints; and (3) relating to the total school program. (SI)

This essay reviews current policy issues regarding statewide educational databases. It begins by defining the major characteristics of a database and raising two questions: (1) Is it really necessary to have a statewide educational database? (2) What is the primary rationale for creating one? The limitations of databases in formulating educational policy are then assessed to consider how they may be linked to policy formation and decision-making processes. This linkage appears to operate on two levels: the rational/ideal level, in which management information in statewide databases is used to determine what is rationally true and ideally desired; and the pragmatic level, which takes into account social, political, economic, and emotional constraints. On account of the proliferation of special programs, the growing demand for research data, and the growth of electronic data processing capabilities, state education agencies should adopt the following policy criteria for including information in a database: (1) clearly established needs; (2) clearly established definitions; (3) clearly established limits; (4) coordination of multiple databases; (5) a means for incorporating outside data, (6) a balance between technological and educational interests; and (7) proper regard for confidentiality and ownership, coupled with availability. Carefully planned, appropriately used, and constantly revised and upgraded databases can become the foundation of sound educational policy. (TE)

Many strategy options are open to state education agencies interested in developing statewide programs to support and guide local school improvement efforts. Agencies can focus on instructional improvement, more general school improvement, improvement of the curricular program, or changes in educational structures. Factors influencing which of these foci to select include the political, fiscal, developmental, and aspirational contexts in which the state agency is operating. Once a strategy is selected, the agency must still determine what aspects of the strategy to stress, how to limit the range of efforts for greatest impact, how to maximize cooperation, how to ensure public support, how to develop adequate background data for assessing needs and measuring change, and what kinds of results to seek and to expect. (PGD)

The problem of student abuse of drugs and alcohol demands immediate action at the state level to ensure the taking of suitable action at the local level. It is inappropriate for state agencies to refuse to act, to delegate full authority to local agencies, or to try to take an equivocal position; the most reasonable response appears to be to share with local districts the responsibility for formulating clear policies and programs. Developing policy concerning substance abuse is complicated by several serious factors that are not normally associated with educational policy: (1) the activities with which the policy is concerned are clearly illegal; (2) these activities can be life-threatening; (3) the problem is rooted in community conditions and mores; (4) policy opposing intrusion into students' family lives may have to be set aside; and (5) effective action may challenge students' rights and freedoms. One option that states should consider is providing guidance to local agencies concerning policy issues affecting prevention, detection, and treatment of substance abuse. States must also decide whether to make their policies mandatory, whether to assist local districts in policy development, and whether to fund staff training, curriculum development, and the creation of program evaluation methods. (PGD)

Policy issues in the area of early childhood education are discussed in this document prepared for the Chief State School Officers of the Northwest and Pacific. Particular attention is given to: (1) the scope of early childhood education; (2) academic, developmental, economic, and political purposes of early childhood education; (3) targeted groups; (4) shared responsibilities of stakeholders; (5) certification and credentialing; and (6) determination of who does and does not benefit from programs. It is concluded that even though the dichotomy between education and care is probably necessary for policy purposes, the dichotomy does not reflect the intrinsic interconnection of care and education. Because education and care are unified in the child, services should be child-centered, and the viewpoints of families, agencies, and institutions that impinge on the child must be understood and respected. (RH)

Academic and scientific misconduct is coming to public attention. Issues to be resolved include definitions of misconduct, provision for anonymity, role of whistleblowers, burden of proof, statute of limitations, due process, nature and application of sanctions, and potential for rehabilitation. (SK)