[NIFL-ASSESSMENT:577] RE: Accountability in Adult Education (Long but not technical)

From: Crawford, June (jcrawford@nifl.gov)
Date: Wed May 26 2004 - 11:31:55 EDT


Return-Path: <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov>
Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id i4QFVtm05357; Wed, 26 May 2004 11:31:55 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 11:31:55 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <9B35BF1886881547B5DFF88364AF31A30118E257@wdcrobe2m03.ed.gov>
Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov
Reply-To: nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov
Originator: nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov
Sender: nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov
Precedence: bulk
From: "Crawford, June" <jcrawford@nifl.gov>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:577] RE: Accountability in Adult Education (Long but not technical)
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Status: O
Content-Length: 8003
Lines: 206

Eileen,
Do you have a date for this?  I'd like to use it but would want to give the
full reference.  Thanks.
June Crawford

-----Original Message-----
From: nifl-assessment@nifl.gov [mailto:nifl-assessment@nifl.gov]On
Behalf Of Eileen Eckert
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 2:57 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:576] Accountability in Adult Education (Long
but not technical)


This was recently posted in a Chronicle of Higher Education colloquy; it 
seems to me to address what Andrea wants:

Accountability measures:
My dentist is great! He sends me reminders so I don't forget checkups. He 
uses the latest techniques based on research. He never hurts me, and I've 
got all my teeth, so when I ran into him the other day, I was eager to see 
if he'd heard about the new state program. I knew he'd think it was great.

"Did you hear about the new state program to measure effectiveness of 
dentists with their young patients?" I said.

"No," he said. He didn't seem too thrilled. "How will they do that?"

"It's quite simple," I said. "They will just count the number of cavities 
each patient has at age 10, 14, and 18 and average that to determine a 
dentist's rating. Dentists will be rated as Excellent, Good, Average, Below 
Average, and Unsatisfactory. That way parents will know which are the best 
dentists. It will also encourage the less effective dentists to get better,"

I said. "Poor dentists who don't improve could lose their licenses to 
practice."

"That's terrible," he said.

"What? That's not a good attitude," I said. "Don't you think we should try 
to improve children's dental health in this state?"

"Sure I do," he said, "but that's not a fair way to determine who is 
practicing good dentistry."

"Why not?" I said. "It makes perfect sense to me."

"Well, it's so obvious," he said. "Don't you see that dentists don't all 
work with the same clientele; so much depends on things we can't control? 
For example," he said, "I work in a rural area with a high percentage of 
patients from deprived homes, while some of my colleagues work in upper 
middle class neighborhoods. Many of the parents I work with don't bring 
their children to see me until there is some kind of problem and I don't get

to do much preventive work.

"Also," he said, "many of the parents I serve let their kids eat way too 
much candy from an early age, unlike more educated parents who understand 
the relationship between sugar and decay. To top it all off," he added, "so 
many of my clients have well water which is untreated and has no fluoride in

it. Do you have any idea how much difference early use of fluoride can 
make?"

"It sounds like you're making excuses," I said. I couldn't believe my 
dentist would be so defensive. He does a great job.

"I am not!" he said. "My best patients are as good as anyone's, my work is 
as good as anyone's, but my average cavity count is going to be higher than 
a lot of other dentists because I chose to work where I am needed most."

"Don't' get touchy," I said.

"Touchy?" he said. His face had turned red and from the way he was clenching

and unclenching his jaws, I was afraid he was going to damage his teeth. 
"Try furious. In a system like this, I will end up being rated average, 
below average, or worse. My more educated patients who see these ratings may

believe this so-called rating actually is a measure of my ability and 
proficiency as a dentist. They may leave me, and I'll be left with only the 
most needy patients. And my cavity average score will get even worse. On top

of that, how will I attract good dental hygienists and other excellent 
dentists to my practice if it is labeled below average?"

"I think you are overreacting," I said. "Complaining, excuse making and 
stonewalling won't improve dental health'...I am quoting from a leading 
member of the DOC," I noted.

"What's the DOC?" he asked.

"It's the Dental Oversight Committee," I said, "a group made up of
mostly laypersons to make sure dentistry in this state gets improved."

"Spare me," he said, "I can't believe this. Reasonable people won't buy it,"

he said hopefully.

The program sounded reasonable to me, so I asked, "How else would you 
measure good dentistry?"

"Come watch me work," he said. "Observe my processes."

"That's too complicated and time consuming," I said. "Cavities are the 
bottom line, and you can't argue with the bottom line. It's an absolute 
measure."

"That's what I'm afraid my parents and prospective patients will think. This

can't be happening," he said despairingly.

"Now, now," I said, "don't despair. The state will help you some."

"How?" he said.

"If you're rated poorly, they'll send a dentist who is rated excellent to 
help straighten you out," I said brightly.

"You mean," he said, "they'll send a dentist with a wealthy clientele to 
show me how to work on severe juvenile dental problems with which I have 
probably had much more experience? Big help."

"There you go again," I said. "You aren't acting professionally at all."

"You don't get it," he said. "Doing this would be like grading schools and 
teachers on an average score on a test of children's progress without regard

to influences outside the school, the home, the community served and stuff 
like that. Why would they do something so unfair to dentists? No one would 
ever think of doing that to schools."

I just shook my head sadly, but he had brightened.

"I'm going to write my representatives and senator," he said. "I'll use the 
school analogy- surely they will see the point." He walked off with that 
look of hope mixed with fear and suppressed anger that I see in the mirror 
so often lately.



From: "Marie Cora" <marie.cora@hotspurpartners.com>
Reply-To: nifl-assessment@nifl.gov
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:575] Forward from:  [AAACE-NLA] Delusion of 
Accountability in Adult Education
Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 13:38:07 -0400 (EDT)

Hello all,

As promised, I'm forwarding a reply of interest to you regarding this
recent discussion.

marie cora
NIFL Assessment List Moderator

-----Original Message-----
From: aaace-nla-bounces@lists.literacytent.org
[mailto:aaace-nla-bounces@lists.literacytent.org] On Behalf Of
AWilder106@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 10:29 AM
To: National Literacy Advocacy List sponsored by AAACE
Subject: [AAACE-NLA] Delusion of Accountability in Adult Education
(longer)

Colleagues,

A couple  of points--in my opinion--

1)  The same valid and reliable measures should be given as part  of the
AELS--across all states.  These measures should be designed to catch
measurable learning gains in literacy.

Do different types of programs require different types of assessments?
Then comparable programs should have comparable assessments--but
something measurable, showing gains.

2)  Students with diagnosed learning disabilities should be given
accommodations.

The report that Tom cites sounds obnoxious: condescending and faulty in
reasoning.

I buy the taxpayer argument.  I am a  taxpayer, too, and I want to  know
that  my money is actually helping students  make adult literacy gains.
The crux of the problem is how literacy gains are to be measured. Do
higher  levels translate  into jobs?  More  income?  Better housing?
Health care?

Or is advancement through levels the gain that will insure the other
outcomes?  What should I subsidize?  What should I push for?  (I have
also observed teachers "coach" students into filling in test sheets.)

About self-esteem--I see that as an outcome of measurable skill growth.
In general I toss that out as a measure, as something that can be
measured directly.

I think that VALUE plus educators should give a wack at solving the
problems, maybe on this list serv.  As a taxpayer I want to know that my
money makes a measurable difference in increasing adult literacy.  What
would this take in program design and redesign?  Who wants to go first?

Andrea



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Dec 23 2004 - 09:46:17 EST