NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
PDF pending restoration PDF pending restoration
ERIC Number: ED163058
Record Type: RIE
Publication Date: 1974-Aug
Pages: 36
Abstractor: N/A
Reference Count: 0
ISBN: N/A
ISSN: N/A
A Response to the Michigan Education Department's Defense of Their Accountability System. Paper #1 in Occasional Paper Series.
Stufflebeam, Daniel L.
The Michigan accountability system, based on statewide objectives-referenced testing at two grade levels generated considerable controversy, including this response to criticisms of an evaluation of the program by a panel of three persons. The contract under which the evaluation was performed is quoted to show that the authors of the report were independent and not biased against the practice of accountability systems. The findings of the report are summarized, including the judgments that Michigan's six-step model was endorsed, but that the promise of the model had not been fulfilled. It judged that goals were unclear and somewhat redundant; that untenable claims had been made concerning the development of objectives; that the objectives should not be published in book form; that the scheme for tying state funding to test score results was potentially harmful; and that little had been done regarding two steps of the program--development of local evaluation systems and influence on state and local decision making. Criticisms are made of the state's response to the evaluation reports and to other criticisms. It is concluded that professional educators should participate in the accountability movement. (CTM)
Mary Anne Bunda, The Evaluation Center, College of Education, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, Michigan 49008 ($2.00)
Publication Type: Reports - Research
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: Carnegie Corp. of New York, NY.
Authoring Institution: Western Michigan Univ., Kalamazoo. School of Education.
Identifiers: Michigan; Michigan Accountability System; Michigan Educational Assessment Program