Do We Know How to Measure School Quality? (Opinion) – Education Week

Aligning School Evaluation with Sustainable Development Goals

The evaluation of public school quality is a critical challenge that directly impacts the achievement of global development objectives, most notably Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG 4), which aims to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education for all. Current methodologies for measuring school performance are often inadequate, relying on scattered information and poorly designed rating systems that fail to provide a comprehensive view of educational effectiveness. A robust evaluation framework is essential for parents, policymakers, and taxpayers to ensure educational institutions are fostering confident learners, preparing students for college and the workforce, and utilizing public funds effectively, all of which are cornerstones of SDG 4.

Current Evaluation Deficiencies and Their Impact on SDG Attainment

Inadequate Metrics for Quality Education (SDG 4)

Existing school rating systems present significant obstacles to achieving the targets of SDG 4. Their limitations include:

• An over-reliance on standardized, multiple-choice assessments administered at a single point in time, which provide an incomplete measure of student learning.
• A tendency for ratings to reflect the demographic and socioeconomic status of the student body rather than the educational value added by the school. This obscures the progress of schools serving vulnerable populations.
• The creation of incentives for schools to narrow the curriculum, focusing on tested subjects at the expense of arts, sciences, and social studies, which are vital for the holistic development envisioned in SDG 4.7.

Barriers to Equity and Inclusivity (SDG 10 & SDG 4.5)

The design of many evaluation systems inadvertently undermines SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and SDG 4.5 (Equal Access to Education). For example, a school with a majority of students from low-income families may receive a lower rating than an affluent school, even if its students are demonstrating faster academic growth. This approach can perpetuate inequality by mislabeling schools and failing to recognize true progress in disadvantaged communities. The current crisis in public education, marked by growing achievement gaps along income lines, underscores the urgent need for evaluation systems that promote equity rather than penalize vulnerability.

Misaligned Incentives and Punitive Measures

Many school rating systems are designed primarily for high-stakes accountability, intended to identify the lowest-performing schools for punitive action. This approach is counterproductive to fostering improvement and transparency. When educators fear that data will be used against them, it becomes more difficult to understand what is working, share best practices, and provide the targeted support necessary for schools to improve. This climate of fear hinders the collaborative effort required to build the effective learning environments described in SDG 4.a.

A New Framework for School Evaluation: A Pathway to Quality Education for All

In response to these challenges, a new report from the Keystone Policy Center and Georgetown University’s FutureEd, titled “Quality Check: The New, Best Way to Measure School Performance,” proposes a multidimensional system for evaluating schools. This framework is grounded in over 50 years of research into the characteristics of effective schools and aligns closely with the comprehensive vision of the Sustainable Development Goals. Research indicates that schools have a greater impact on long-term student outcomes when they measure and improve upon broader dimensions of school life beyond test scores, such as student engagement and school culture.

Key Focus Areas for a Reimagined Evaluation System

To better align school evaluation with the objectives of the SDGs, the report recommends focusing on five critical areas:

1. Growth in Student Achievement: This shifts the focus from static proficiency levels to the academic growth students achieve over time. Utilizing richer, computer-adaptive assessments provides a more accurate measure of the value a school adds to student learning, directly supporting the goal of achieving effective learning outcomes (SDG 4.1).
2. Access to a Rigorous, Rich Curriculum: Schools must be evaluated on their ability to provide a broad array of courses, including sciences, arts, physical and mental health, and history. At the secondary level, access to internships, job training, and advanced college-level courses is critical for preparing students with relevant skills for employment and entrepreneurship, as targeted by SDG 4.4 and SDG 8.
3. Effective Staff: Recognizing that effective teachers and principals are the most significant school-based factors in student learning, evaluation systems must include varied and reliable measures of educator effectiveness. This supports SDG 4.c, which calls for an increased supply of qualified teachers.
4. Supportive School Climate: An effective school fosters a culture where students feel welcomed, supported, and motivated. Measuring school climate through well-designed surveys provides insight into whether a school is providing the safe, inclusive, and effective learning environment for all that is mandated by SDG 4.a.
5. Postsecondary Outcomes: The ultimate goal of education is to prepare students for success in work, higher education, and life. Tracking student pathways after high school is a critical metric of a school’s long-term impact and its contribution to fostering decent work and economic growth (SDG 8).

Conclusion: Advancing Educational Objectives through Comprehensive Evaluation

It is imperative to move beyond simplistic, test-score-driven approaches to measuring school quality. By adopting a fuller, more nuanced evaluation system that reflects the many ways schools support student development, stakeholders can gain a more accurate understanding of school performance. Encouraging progress is already visible in systems from Chicago to California and Tennessee, which are beginning to integrate these multidimensional indicators. Implementing such comprehensive evaluation and reporting systems is essential to guide improvement, promote equity, and ultimately meet the ambitious educational objectives set forth in the Sustainable Development Goals.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 4: Quality Education

  The entire article is centered on defining, measuring, and improving the quality of public school education. It critiques current evaluation systems and proposes a more holistic approach to ensure schools provide “quality” education that leads to “effective learning outcomes.” It discusses curriculum, teaching effectiveness, and learning environments, all of which are core components of SDG 4.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  The article directly addresses educational inequality. It points out that current rating systems can be biased against schools serving a majority of students from “low-income families” and notes that “achievement gaps are growing along income lines.” The call for a fairer, more nuanced evaluation system is a call to reduce these inequalities of opportunity and outcome within the education system.

• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

  The article links the quality of education directly to future economic opportunities for students. It emphasizes that a key function of schools is to prepare students “for college and the workforce” and proposes tracking “postsecondary outcomes” such as whether students “directly enter the workforce” or “pursue other postsecondary pathways” as a critical metric of school performance. This aligns with the goal of promoting productive employment for youth.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 4.1: Ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education leading to relevant and effective learning outcomes.

   The article’s main argument is about how to measure and ensure “quality” education and “effective learning outcomes.” It critiques judging schools on “standardized-test scores” alone and advocates for measuring “growth in student achievement” over time to understand the value a school adds.

2. Target 4.4: Substantially increase the number of youth and adults who have relevant skills, including technical and vocational skills, for employment, decent jobs and entrepreneurship.

   The article highlights the need for schools to prepare students for a “changing labor marketplace” and “new workforce demands.” It suggests measuring school quality by its ability to provide “access to high-quality opportunities such as internships, job training,” which are crucial for developing relevant employment skills.

3. Target 4.5: Eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable.

   The article discusses how current rating systems can misrepresent the quality of schools with a “majority of students from low-income families,” who are a vulnerable group. It notes that “our most vulnerable students are performing at the lowest achievement levels in more than two decades,” underscoring the need for evaluation systems that ensure equal opportunity.

4. Target 4.a: Build and upgrade education facilities and provide safe, non-violent, inclusive and effective learning environments for all.

   The article identifies a “supportive school climate” as a key area of focus for evaluation. It states that effective schools “build a culture where students feel welcomed, supported, and motivated to attend” and create a “safe environment with high expectations,” which directly corresponds to this target.

5. Target 4.c: Substantially increase the supply of qualified teachers.

   The article asserts that “effective teachers and principals have more of an impact on student learning than any other school-based factors.” It calls for having “a variety of measures for knowing how effective educators are in a school,” linking school quality directly to the effectiveness and quality of its teaching staff.

6. Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome.

   By criticizing school rating systems that penalize schools serving low-income students and highlighting “growing achievement gaps,” the article advocates for new evaluation methods that promote equal opportunity. The goal is to create a system that provides “meaningful targeted support to any school wanting or needing to improve,” thereby helping to reduce inequalities of outcome.

7. Target 8.6: Substantially reduce the proportion of youth not in employment, education or training (NEET).

   The article proposes that a critical measure of a school’s long-term impact is its “Postsecondary outcomes.” This involves “Tracking whether students directly enter the workforce, enroll in higher education, or pursue other postsecondary pathways.” This data directly measures a school’s success in preventing its students from becoming part of the NEET population.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article mentions or implies several indicators for measuring progress:

• Measures of student learning growth: The article advocates for focusing on “how much students are learning over time” and using “computer-adaptive assessments that explore students’ skills and knowledge more deeply” instead of simple point-in-time test scores.
• Data on curriculum access: An indicator would be tracking student access to a “broad and deep array of courses and programs,” including “the sciences, the arts, physical and mental health development, and history,” as well as “internships, job training, Advanced Placement courses, [and] International Baccalaureate curricula.”
• Measures of school climate: The article suggests using tools like “surveys that when well-designed can yield valid, reliable insights into a school’s culture and its impact on students” to measure if a school is “welcomed, supported, and motivated.”
• Metrics for educator effectiveness: It is stated that it is “critical to have a variety of measures for knowing how effective educators are in a school.” This implies indicators related to teacher and principal performance and impact. Data on “teacher morale” is also mentioned as a concern.
• Data on achievement gaps: The article explicitly mentions “achievement gaps… growing along income lines” as a critical problem, implying that tracking this gap is a key indicator of inequality.
• Postsecondary outcome tracking: A key indicator proposed is “Tracking whether students directly enter the workforce, enroll in higher education, or pursue other postsecondary pathways” to measure the long-term impact of a school.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: edweek.org