Education is regarded as a significant investment in the modern-day. It provides the younger generation an opportunity to break the vicious cycle of poverty by imparting critical knowledge and skills required to perform proficiently in diverse areas of specialization. School accountability has become one of the top priorities of governments worldwide to ensure that societies benefit entirely from public-funded education. The term denotes a strategy used by governments to ensure that schools provide quality education to students ( Dizon-Ross, 2018 ). However, whether or not accountability is beneficial or detrimental is highly debatable. While some argue that the model has increased the efficacy of education, others posit that it negatively affects educational institutions and students’ academic performances.
The model of school accountability is highly ineffective. The policy has deterred meagerly performing schools’ from retaining qualified instructors. Since the implementation of this model, a lot of pressure is imposed on teachers, and they have to provide justifications for students’ low performance and their inability to improve and attain the set educational goals. Students differ in their own right, some only require to attend a single lecture to achieve an A in the exams, while others are unable to grasp anything despite their excellent class attendance, hard work, and the teacher's undying efforts ( Dizon-Ross, 2018 ). The model imposes a lot of stress on teachers because each of them is expected to yield great academic results, an impossible task, especially in schools comprising of average and below-average students.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The main impact of the model is the shortage of qualified instructors in low-performing schools. Majority of the students in private institutions are intelligent, and only a few of them are average performers. Teachers are more comfortable teaching such institutions because little efforts are required to attain high grades. Furthermore, these professionals are also motivated by the lucrative salaries offered by these institutions, increasing their willingness to tutor students on their weak areas during their free time. Teachers in publicly-funded schools have to teach vast numbers of students for meager pay. These instructors only provide lessons for the required period and cannot tutor after they are through because they are always exhausted and lowly motivated. Consequently, the majority of them prefer to work for well-paying and high-performing schools, due to the incentives that occasion the job and little pressure and stress that is imposed in these environments.
Furthermore, low-performing schools are highly susceptible to numerous changes and closure and guarantee no job security. Under the model of school accountability, institutions that retain an overall grade of an A enjoy vast rewards. However, those that maintain a grade of C or D have their leaders changed, are restructured, even closed if they display no significant progress, a significant threat to job security ( Dizon-Ross, 2018 ). Furthermore, low-performing schools are subjected to profound changes in a bid to improve the overall grades. Instructors display great reluctance to change, just like other human beings in different professions. Different management means new changes, and teachers are forced to transfer from class to the next and abandon students they are familiar with. Widodo, Oktarina, and Pramusinto (2018) suggest that these adverse conditions discourage teachers from seeking jobs in low-performing schools. In most cases, they only hold on to a position in such an institution while searching for another in a high-performing organization, hindering low-performing schools from retaining qualified personnel.
The school accountability model has dramatically affected the student’s academic performance. Learners perform differently based on the type of instructor they have. For instance, it is common for a student who performs typically weakly in mathematics to start attaining B’s, when they like the instructor for that subject. Similarly, there is a high probability for the same student’s grades to decline significantly, when that teacher transfers to another school, just because it guarantees a higher salary and little stress from accountability issues ( Everson, 2017 ). The students are academically affected when such changes occur. Several studies acknowledge the significance of retaining teachers in maintaining good grades and promoting significant academic improvements. The inability of low-performing organizations to retain the qualified instructors directly affects students and their academic grades.
Aside from this, the accountability model has also resulted in role confusion. For instance, for years now, the primary role of school counselors has been to counsel students to identify their problems, and help them to resolve them. However, their roles have diversified dramatically as a result of the school accountability model. According to Widodo et al. (2018), t hese professions have several responsibilities that do not relate to counseling. Furthermore, the frequent managerial changes that occur in low-performing schools leads to confusion as they receive conflicting messages from new administrators and organizational stakeholders who have no significant understanding of what counseling entails. According to Everson (2017), m ultiple job demands and role ambiguity create a stressing environment for these professionals. The model places so much emphasis on accountability and stresses the need for significant improvements such that professions who have no specialized training in teaching are forced to assume these duties.
The effectiveness of the accountability model is a highly controversial topic. Some scholars posit that the policy has increased the efficacy of education while others purport that it has inhibited low-performing institutions from retaining qualified instructors, fostered role ambiguity especially in the field of counseling, and adversely affects students’ performance. The model imposes a lot of stress on teachers, making high-performing schools preferable. Furthermore, it has also compelled counselors to assume tasks that they have not specialized in, leading to role ambiguity and confusion. Further studies should be conducted to ascertain the truth behind these claims.
References
Dizon-Ross, R. (2018). How Does School Accountability Affect Teachers? Evidence from New York City (No. w24658). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Everson, K. C. (2017). Value-added modeling and educational accountability: Are we
answering the real questions?. Review of Educational Research , 87 (1), 35-70.
Widodo, J., Oktarina, N., & Pramusinto, H. (2018). School Accountability Model Based on Performance. KnE Social Sciences , 238-248.
