Not available / text

Throughout the 1970's many "accountability systems" were developed and offered as panaceas for curing the ills of education. The purpose of this study was to develop a method by which the wide variety of accountability designs could themselves be held accountable, and then to apply the methodology of these evaluation criteria to develop an accountability system that would, in fact, accomplish the basic ends of accountability and thus place the entire process of education on a deliberate basis. The design and effectiveness of accountability systems, at the application level, presuppose the rules of the more fundamental target, sequence, and relational models that provide the rules and categories for the development of all manner of accountability systems. As part of this study's investigation, the purposes and goals, objectives and activities, support conditions and evaluations of selected accountability evaluation systems were reviewed and placed into a design. The bases for the categories of accountability and the ways in which definitional types were used by those systems of accountability clearly set conditions for the performance of the accountability system. An examination of some of the accountability criteria used by evaluation designs resulted in the identification of three levels of evaluation associated with accountability. These criteria judged the ability of systems to (1) measure the data or material involved in the system, (2) provide a format or structure for collecting and classifying the information generated by the system, and (3) a statement of the mission goal or objective which provides the purposes for the system. Using these criteria as guidelines, selected literature related to accountability systems was reviewed and critiqued. The literature represented a variety of systems ranging from the use of standardized tests, to performance contracting, to the systems approach. The criteria for evaluating the systems presented in the literature were used as guiding standards for the development of a model for a comprehensive accountability system. The system developed in this study, the Parallel Pairs model, is derived from the more generic concepts developed through the use of relational models. This model permits the interrelationship of two categorical systems within the same framework. Thus, the accountability categories are capable of being interrelated with and subsumed under the categories of education. Moreover, the hierarchical structure of the model provides for placing the evaluation categories and criteria into levels. The use of the Parallel Pairs accountability model should provide a means for separating and isolating, continuing and phasing the complex variables that will emerge in the future expansion of science and technology in our daily lives. The model is based upon five evaluation types with the same system. These evaluations make it possible to evaluate individual activity accomplishments, accomplishments by categories, management of specific projects, the effective management of projects, and a comprehensive evaluation of the overall results of an educational system in a district. The accountability model proposed by this study was predicated upon the articulation and application of the criteria that produce a "good" accountability system. The foundation of this study was based upon the exploration of those model bases that give rise to the variety of accountability systems. The criteria and model presented by this investigation should contribute substantially to the understanding of models accountability and evaluation by the general public as well as to offer specialists in evaluation an in-depth perspective on the internal, technical, and methodological issues in forming an evaluation of any kind. The criteria for accountability for models of evaluation offer a clear insight into accounting for accountability and effective evaluation.

The study was designed to facilitate the development of a set of guidelines which might be used by administrative personnel of a school system to plan and implement a program of teacher evaluation. A review of literature and research relative to teacher evaluation programs was made to identify principles and desirable practice relative to the development of evaluation philosophy, approaches and activities. The review of literature was intended to also focus upon purposes of evaluation, responsibilities for making evaluations, criteria for evaluation and acceptance of evaluation procedures and techniques by professional faculty.The study also included a review and analysis of evaluation programs conducted within the seventeen member school systems of the Northwest Indiana Public School Study Council as of September 1973. Written descriptive materials and all directions, forms and regulations relative to the teacher evaluation programs were provided by the superintendents of the member school systems. All materials were analyzed in order to determine the nature, scope and procedural characteristics of practical. on-going evaluation programs.From the analysis of literature in the field and from the analysis of the selected number on on-going evaluation programs actually being used in school settings, it was intended that guidelines and suggestions could be developed which could be of vague to school officials and administrative personnel desirous of planning and implementing a program of teacher evaluation.Review and analysis of teacher evaluation literature and on going programs utilized by the member school corporations of the Northwest Indiana Public School Study Council were used in formulating and recommendations. The recommendations focus on procedures deemed necessary for the development of an effective teacher evaluation program and include recommendations relative to responsibilities of school organization personnel, developmental procedures, evaluation program content, and implementation and follow-up procedure.The findings from a review of literature and on-going programs of teacher evaluation made it possible to draw certain conclusions. Conclusions were also based in part on the unreported reading done, conversations held with professional educators, personal experiences as an educational administrator as well as personal observations and reflections. Sixteen separate conclusions were drawn. A few of the most important ones are: Teaching performance can and must be evaluated by administrators and/or supervisory personnel within the public school setting. The board of School Trustees must specify the purpose of a teacher evaluation programas it relates to the goals of the local system, and the implementation of an evaluation program is the responsibility of the administrative staff of the corporation.The guideline recommendations for planning and implementing a teacher evaluation program touches on the following considerations. These are the responsibilities of the board of school trustees, the superintendent of schools, and the evaluation committee which has been established by the superintendent of schools. The content of the teacher evaluation program should include purposes of the program, operational considerations, a development of assessment guide, and the development of report forms to be used in addition to assessment guide. Implementation and follow-up recommendations are also a part of the guideline recommendation3 made as a result of the study.

The in-service evaluation instrument, The Criteria for Evaluating Teacher In-service Programs, was based on a review of research in in-service education and drew heavily on work done by Donn V. Kaupke. The four major items of this evaluation instrument include: (1) Knowledge of the field of group dynamics is necessary to create changes in a school via a teacher in-service education program; (2) Planning is an essential ingredient of a successful teacher in-service education program; (3) Seven operational techniques facilitate group decision-making; and, (4) Adhering to four administrative policies governing the operation of a teacher in-service education program is prerequisite to a successful program.During the in-service program, the author behaved in an observer-consultant role. He met with the principal to suggest agenda for each meeting and to present data from previous meetings. The observer-consultant was present to observe and record the activities of the Instructional Improvement Committee as it worked with the recommendations. The observer-consultant also helped with the operational processes of the meetings.The principal, after consulting with the observer-consultant, decided that the Instructional Improvement Committee would become the first group to deal with the recommendations. Working with the recommendations became the major part of the weekly Instructional Improvement Committee meetings. The principal chaired the Instructional Improvement Committee and directed its attention towards the objectives he judged it needed to attain.The data used to describe the execution of the Instructional Improvement Committee in-service program were collected by tape recording the ten in-service sessions and analyzing the recordings later, and by interviews and questionnaires completed by the Instructional Improvement Committee members following the completion of the ten meetings. The data were organized under the four major items of the Criteria for Evaluating Teacher In-service Education Programs. They led to the following conclusions:1. The Instructional Improvement Committee, with the leadership of the principal, can work toward curricular improvements of its school.2. The group digressed when the leadership function was not performed by a memberof the Instructional Improvement Committee.3. A curricular evaluator acting as an observer-consultant can facilitate the efforts of the Instructional Improvement Committee of an Individually Guided Education school.4. In-service training provided for personnel of Individually Guided Education schools does not prepare adequately the Instructional Improvement Committee in group processes.5. A curriculum evaluation can provide adequate data on which to base an in-service education program for the Instructional Improvement Committee of an Individually Guided Education school.

The purpose of the study was to secure and compare stated judgments of public school superintendents, business managers, and curriculum directors relative to the operational development of Educational Resources Management Systems used in public schools in the United States. School officials with four or more years experience in the development and operation of ERM Systems were regarded as qualified to participate in the study. Four-hundredfive participants were identified from 135 school districts. Responses were received from 254 school officials employed in 115 school districts.Data were secured by means of the ERMS Operational Development Questionnaire developed for use in the study. Respondents provided judgments regarding operational development of ERM Systems used in public schools. Such judgments were submitted to a single factor analysis of variance. The analysis revealed judgments relative to all nine components of ERM Systems members of all three groups as denoting sameness and reported by coming from a single larger "parent" population of which respondents from the three groups were members.Additional findings derived from the study included:The higher the mean average reported district average daily membership, the lower mean average reported ERMS operational developmentNo consistent relationship was discovered between mean average reported ERMS operational development and mean average number of years qualified reporting officials had been employed in current positionsPPBS and PPBES conceptualizations of ERM Systems were most often reported as systems being used in public schoolsWhen combinations of ERM Systems were reported in use, PPBS/MBO and PPBES/MBO were most often reportedThe addition of MBO as a system supporting PPBS resulted in higher reported levels of ERMS operational developmentIndividual components of ERM Systems were not judged with like levels of operational developmentOver-all, ERM Systems were judged as having been developed and being used for some educational program developmentConclusions developed from the study included the following:1. Operationally developed ERM Systems are not in wide spread use by public school officials in the United States2. ERM Systems used by officials in public school districts in the United States have been operationally developed to the extent that some educational program decisions are being made by school officials on the basis of data generated by the ERM System3. School officials working with ERM Systems view operational development of ERM Systems in a uniform way4. School officials developing ERM Systems can expect operational development of individual components of ERM Systems to develop in the following order: adoption of goals; program identification; program budget; needs assessment; objectives; program alternatives; program selection; program evaluation and multi-year projection5. School officials selectively develop individual components of ERM Systems rather than developing the total system all at once6. More than six years is needed to realize fully operational ERM Systems7. ERM Systems become operationally developed more quickly in school districts with average daily membership of less than 5,000 pupils8. PPBS or PPBES used in combination with MBO yields higher levels of ERMS operational development than when used alone9. School officials generally are not prepared to develop and operationalize ERM Systems10. Effectiveness of ERM Systems has not been established and documented through researchRecommendations based on findings and conclusions in the study included:1. Models should be developed to provide a simple ERM System that can be implemented by school officials using in-house expertise2. A model should be developed that integrates the conceptualizations of Management by Objectives with Planning-Programming-Budgeting Systems3. Members of State Legislatures should re-evaluate mandates for implementation of total ERM Systems in light of small numbers of operational systems and the lack of research related to effectiveness of total ERM Systems or individual components of ERM Systems

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Toronto, 2006. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 67-07, Section: A, page: 2484. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 445-456).

Thesis (M.A.) - Carleton University, 2002. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 160-164). Also available in electronic format on the Internet.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Georgia State University, 2006. / Deron Boyles, committee chair; Philo Henderson, Douglas Davis, Timothy Renick, committee members. Description based on contents viewed June 6, 2007. Includes bibliographical references (p. 180-191).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Illinois State University, 2007. / Title from title page screen, viewed on July 16, 2008. Dissertation Committee: Paul Baker (chair), Patricia H. Klass, Joseph Pacha, Neil Sappington. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 164-174) and abstract. Also available in print.

Thesis (PhD) -- AUT University, 2009. / Includes bibliographical references. Also held in print (324 leaves : charts ; 30 cm.) in the Archive at the City Campus (T 378.93 SMA)