Advertisement

Educational Leadership in the Context of Low-Stakes Accountability: The Canadian Perspective

  • Don A. KlingerEmail author
  • Hana Saab
Chapter
Part of the Studies in Educational Leadership book series (SIEL, volume 16)

Abstract

Educational accountability models throughout Canada commonly use low-stakes, large-scale assessment programs to support and inform school improvement efforts. These models provide school board and school administrators with the autonomy to direct their improvement efforts to meet their students’ educational needs, with no direct threat of sanctions or negative consequences. Overviews are provided for the large-scale assessment programs across Canada along with the current accountability programs that use these assessment programs. A thorough review of the Ontario context is provided, highlighting the ministry, school board, and school initiatives and practices intended to develop leadership capacity and increase student achievement. Ontario illustrates the model of distributed leadership commonly found in Canada, in which school leadership has evolved from a managerial role to one of creating shared leadership and professional learning communities to improve students’ educational outcomes. The existing challenges are identified along with the need for directed research to better understand the role of educational leadership to lead school improvement efforts in various Canadian contexts.

Keywords

Student Achievement School Board School Improvement Professional Learning Community Improve Student Achievement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Alberta Education. (2011a). About the accountability pillar. www.education.alberta.ca/admin/funding/accountability/about.aspx. Accessed 12 March 2012.Google Scholar
  2. Alberta Education. (2011b). General information bulletin: Achievement testing programs grades 3, 6, and 9. www.education.alberta.ca/admin/testing/achievement/achievementbulletin.aspx. Accessed 12 March 2012.Google Scholar
  3. Alberta Learning. (1999). Framework for the Alberta initiative for school improvement. Edmonton: School Improvement Branch, Alberta Learning. www.assembly.ab.ca/lao/library/egovdocs/alle/1999/75881.pdf. Accessed 12 March 2012.Google Scholar
  4. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 139–148.Google Scholar
  5. British Columbia Ministry of Education. (2010). Foundation skills assessment (FSA). www.bced.gov.bc.ca/assessment/fsa/. Accessed 12 March 2012.Google Scholar
  6. British Columbia Ministry of Education. (2011a). Policy document: Accountability framework. www.bced.gov.bc.ca/policy/policies/accountability_framework.htm. Accessed 12 March 2012.Google Scholar
  7. British Columbia Ministry of Education. (2011b). School planning councils. www.bced.gov.bc.ca/spc/. Accessed 12 March 2012.Google Scholar
  8. Bush, T. (2008). From management to leadership: Semantic or meaningful change? Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 36, 271–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Canadian Language and Literacy Research Network. (2008a). The impact of the literacy and numeracy secretariat: Phase 1 evaluation. London: University of Western Ontario.Google Scholar
  10. Canadian Language and Literacy Research Network. (2008b). The impact of the literacy and numeracy secretariat: Phase 2 evaluation. London: University of Western Ontario.Google Scholar
  11. Cowley, P., Easton, S., & Thomas, M. (2010). Report card on Alberta’s elementary schools 2010. Vancouver: Fraser Institute.Google Scholar
  12. Creighton, T. (2007). Schools and data: The educator’s guide for using data to improve decision making (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Corwin.Google Scholar
  13. Dimmock, C. (1999). Principals and school restructuring: Conceptualising challenges as dilemmas. Journal of Educational Administration, 37, 441–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dinham, S., Aubusson, P., & Brady, L. (2008). Distributed leadership as a factor in and outcome of teacher action learning. International Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning, 12(4), 1–19.Google Scholar
  15. Dufour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”? Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6–11.Google Scholar
  16. Dunleavy, J. (2007). Public education in Canada: Facts, trends and attitudes 2007. Toronto: Canadian Education Association.Google Scholar
  17. Earl, L., & Katz, S. (2006). Leading in a data rich world: Harnessing data for school improvement. Thousand Oaks: Corwin.Google Scholar
  18. Education Quality and Accountability Office. (2010). What parents need to know about province-wide testing. Toronto: EQAO. www.eqao.com/pdf_E/10/WhatParentsNeedtoKnow.pdf. Accessed 12 March 2012.Google Scholar
  19. Fallon, G., & Paquette, J. (2008). Devolution, choice, and accountability in the provision of public education in British Columbia: A critical analysis of the school amendment act of 2002 (Bill 34). Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 75. http://umanitoba.ca/publications/cjeap/articles/fallonpaquette.html. Accessed 12 March 2012.Google Scholar
  20. Foster, R., Wright, L., & McRae, P. (2010, February 10). Reflecting on innovative practices and partnerships. International Symposium on School and System Improvement, Edmonton, AB.Google Scholar
  21. Fullan, M. (2005a). Professional learning communities writ large. In R. DuFour, R. Eaker, & R. DuFour (Eds.), On common ground: The power of professional learning communities (pp. 135–153). Bloomington: Solution Tree.Google Scholar
  22. Fullan, M. (2005b, Winter). The tri-level solution: School/district/state synergy. Education Analyst. www.michaelfullan.ca/Articles_04/2004-Tri-Level_soln/2004_Tri-Level.html. Accessed 12 March 2012.Google Scholar
  23. Glaze, A., & Campbell, C. (2007, April). Putting literacy and numeracy first: Using research and evidence to support improved student achievement. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, 9–13 April, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  24. Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (2010). Leadership for learning: Does collaborative leadership make a difference in school improvement? Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 38, 654–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jackson, M. (2007). Large-scale assessment: Supporting the everyday work of schools. www.eqao.com/Publications/ArticleReader.aspx?Lang=E&article=b07A001&section. Accessed 12 March 2012.Google Scholar
  26. Kasian, M., Klinger, D. A., Maggi, S. & D’Angiulli, A. (2010). Building roads for students’ success: MISA research capacity building pilot project. Kingston: Ontario Eastern Staff Development Network.Google Scholar
  27. Klinger, D. A, & DeLuca, C. (2009). The history of large-scale achievement testing in Ontario’s education system. Toronto: Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario.Google Scholar
  28. Klinger, D. A., & Rogers, W. T. (2011). Teachers’ perceptions of large-scale assessment programs within low-stakes accountability frameworks. International Journal of Testing, 11, 122–143.Google Scholar
  29. Klinger, D. A., DeLuca, C., & Miller, T. (2008). The evolving culture of large-scale assessments in Canadian education. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 76. www.umanitoba.ca/publications/cjeap/articles/klinger.html. Accessed 12 March 2012.Google Scholar
  30. Klinger, D. A., Maggi, S., & D’Angiulli, A. (2011). School accountability and assessment: Should we put the roof up first. The Educational Forum., 75(2), 114-128.Google Scholar
  31. Knighton, T., Brochu, P., & Gluszynski, T. (2010). Measuring up: Canadian results of the OECD PISA study: The performance of Canada’s youth in reading, mathematics and science—2009: First results for Canadians aged 15. www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/81-590-x/81-590-x2010001-eng.pdf. Accessed 12 March 2012.Google Scholar
  32. Leithwood, K., Fullan, M., & Watson, N. (2003). The schools we need: Recent education policy in Ontario and recommendations for moving forward. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
  33. Leithwood, K., Seashore Louis, K., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership influences student learning. New York: Wallace Foundation. www.wallacefoundation.org/WF/KnowledgeCenter/KnowledgeTopics/EducationLeadership/HowLeadershipInfluencesStudentLearning.htm. Accessed 12 March 2012.Google Scholar
  34. Linn, R. L. (2000). Assessments and accountability. Educational Researcher, 23(9), 4–14.Google Scholar
  35. Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat (LNS). (2007). The school effectiveness framework: A collegial process for continued growth in the effectiveness of Ontario elementary schools. Implementation pilot: September 2007--June 2008. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  36. Manitoba Education. (2010). Assessment and evaluation: Provincial assessment program. www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/assess/assess_program.html. Accessed 12 March 2012.Google Scholar
  37. Marzano, R. (2005). School leadership that works: From research to results. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  38. McEwen, N. (1995). Accountability in education in Canada. Canadian Journal of Education, 20, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. McEwen, N. (2008, March). AISI-seven years of enthusiasm: Improving learning and schools-innovation, renewal, sustainability. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, March 24–28, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  40. McTighe, J., & Thomas, R. S. (2003). Backward design for forward action. Educational Leadership, 60(5), 52–55.Google Scholar
  41. Nagy, P. (2000). The three roles of assessment: Gatekeeping, accountability, and instructional diagnosis. Canadian Journal of Education, 25, 262–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. New Brunswick Department of Education. (2009). Framework for provincial assessment. Fredericton: New Brunswick Department of Education.Google Scholar
  43. Noonan, B., & Renihan, P. (2006). Demystifying assessment leadership. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 56, 1–21.Google Scholar
  44. Nova Scotia Department of Education. (2009). Nova Scotia department of education annual accountability report: Fiscal year 2008–2009. www.ednet.ns.ca/pdfdocs/businessplan/accountability-report-2008-2009.pdf. Accessed 12 March 2012.Google Scholar
  45. Nova Scotia Department of Education. (2010). Elementary literacy assessment (ELA). www.plans.ednet.ns.ca/ela. Accessed 12 March 2012.Google Scholar
  46. Nova Scotia Department of Education. (2011). Nova Scotia department of education annual accountability report: Fiscal year 2009–2010. www.ednet.ns.ca/pdfdocs/businessplan/accountability-report-2009-2010.pdf. Accessed 12 March 2012.Google Scholar
  47. Ontario Department of Education. (1968). Living and learning: The report of the provincial committee on aims and objectives of education in the schools of Ontario. Toronto: Ontario Department of Education.Google Scholar
  48. Ontario Ministry of Education. (2009). Literacy and numeracy strategy.Google Scholar
  49. Ontario Ministry of Education. (2010). School effectiveness framework: A support for school improvement and student success. Toronto: Queen’s Printer for Ontario.Google Scholar
  50. Ontario Ministry of Education. (2011). Technical paper, 2011–12: Education funding http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/fre/policyfunding/funding.html. Accessed 12 March 2012.Google Scholar
  51. Prince Edward Island Department of Education and Early Childhood Development. (2010). Provincial assessment program. www.gov.pe.ca/eecd/provincialassessment. Accessed 12 March 2012.Google Scholar
  52. Raphael, D. (1993). Accountability and educational philosophy: Paradigms and conflict in Ontario education. Canadian Journal of Education, 18, 29–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Report of the Royal Commission on Learning. (1994). For the love of learning. Toronto: Queen’s Printer for Ontario.Google Scholar
  54. Romuald, N. (2008). School effectiveness or the horizon of the world as a laboratory. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 29, 665–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Saskatchewan Ministry of Education. (2007). Assessment for learning conceptual framework. www.education.gov.sk.ca/Default.aspx?DN=5467d649-fc3b-42f9-a165-acb56da2ef16. Accessed 12 March 2012.Google Scholar
  56. Schmoker, M. J. 1999. Results: The key to continuous school improvement (2nd ed.). Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  57. Stoll, L., Bolam, R., McMahon, A., Wallace, M., & Thomas, S. (2006). Professional learning communities: A review of the literature. Journal of Educational Change, 7(4), 221–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Taylor, A. R., & Tubianosa, T. (2001). Student assessment in Canada: Improving the learning environment through effective evaluation. Kelowna: Society for the Advancement of Excellence in Education.Google Scholar
  59. Volante, L., & Ben Jaafar, S. (2008). Profiles of educational assessment systems worldwide: Educational assessment in Canada. Assessment in Education, 15, 201–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Volante, L., & Cherubini, L. (2007). Connecting educational leadership with multi-level assessment reform. International Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning, 11(12).Google Scholar
  61. Welsh Assembly Government. (2006). School effectiveness framework: Building effective learning communities together. Cardiff: Cathay Park.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Queen’s UniversityKingstonCanada
  2. 2.Ontario Ministry of EducationTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations