P RESENTED BY J USTINA O. OSA P RESENTED AT THE UNIVERSITY OF ILORIN Accountability in the 21 st Century: Enhancing Personnel Effectiveness and Student Learning

Presented at the University of ilorin By Justina o. Osa A CCOUNTABILITY IN THE 21 ST C ENTURY : E NHANCING P ERSONNEL E FFECTIVENESS AND S TUDENT L EARNING

OUTLINE  Introduction  Need for Accountability  Expectations and Mandates  Stakeholders’ Reaction  Our response  Conclusion  Q & A (Comments)

Introduction The start of the twenty-first century finds a national spotlight shinning on our public education system and its leaders, with greater intensity than most times in our history. This scrutiny creates heightened pressure for result (Castallo, 2001).

AMERICAN SCHOOL SYSYEM: T HE SILENT EPIDEMIC  Low student academic achievement and  High dropout rates

S CHOOL SYSTEM FAILURE : ECONOMIC COSTS  Dropouts are more likely to be unemployed than high school graduates  Dropouts earn less money when they do secure work.  High school dropouts are also more likely to receive public assistance than high school graduates who do not go on to college  Females who drop out of school are more likely to have children at younger ages and to be single parents than their counterparts who do graduate. (Kaufman, P., Naomi Alt, M., & Chapman, 2004).

REACTION: STAKEHOLDERS Prepare students for:  Their world  The world of tomorrow  Jobs that do not yet exist Prepare students who can favorably compete with students in other nations

W HY ACCOUNTABILITY ?  Data on student achievement  The No Child Left Behind Mandate (2001)  No longer enough to say: “I taught it!”  Educators held responsible for student learning  Need to prepare students for the world of tomorrow and for jobs that do not yet exist

OUR REALITY Regrettably, time and time again, educators fall prey to the latest single answer solution only to be frustrated with the long term results. The silver bullet approach to improving achievement is misguided. No single solution can guarantee success. There are no quick fixes (Ackerman, 2007).

REACTION: PROFESSIONALS  Development of Professional Standards  Licensures  Evaluation  Collaboration  Standardized test  Research-based curriculum and instruction  Differentiated instruction  Accreditation  Use of data  Obsession with 21 st century skills

OUR REALITY A growing number of business leaders, politicians, and educators are united around the idea that students need "21st century skills" to be successful today (Rotherham and Willingham, 2009).

T WENTY -F IRST C ENTURY S KILLS Framework for 21st Century Learning: Presents a holistic view of 21st century teaching and learning that combines a discrete focus on 21st century student outcomes (a blending of specific skills, content knowledge, expertise and literacies) with innovative support systems to help students master the multi-dimensional abilities required of them in the 21 st. (Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2004).

21 st Century Skills Movement (Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2004).

Learning and Innovation Skills: Learning to Create Together Learning to Learn and Innovate  Critical Thinking and Problem Solving  Communication Skills  Collaboration/team building  Creativity and Innovation

Digital Literacy Skills  Information Literacy (Info-Savvy)  Media Literacy (Media fluent)   ICT Literacy (Tech-Tuned)

Career and Life Skills: Work- Ready, Prepared for Life  Flexibility and Adaptability  Initiative and Self-Direction  Social and Cross-Cultural Interaction  Productivity and Accountability  Leadership and Responsibility

21 ST CENTURY INTERDISCIPLINARY THEMES  Global awareness  Financial, economic, business and entrepreneurial literacy  Civic literacy  Health literacy  Environmental literacy

Framework for 21st Century Learning: Overarching Questions :  Why are the skills listed in the Framework for 21st Century Learning necessary?  Which skills are most important?  What can be done to help schools include these skills in their curriculum and instruction?

Our education system was never designed to deliver the kind of results we now need to equip students for today’s and tomorrow’s world. The system was originally created for a very different world. To respond appropriately, we need to rethink and redesign our education system Wagner and Kegan, 2006).

S OME ANSWERS  Need to get “out of the box”  Need to prepare global citizens with the required knowledge, skills and dispositions  Need to make learning meaningful  Need to review curriculum and instruction  Need to review teacher preparation programs  Need to review leaders and other school personnel preparation programs

STRATEGIES  Require higher level of competence in content knowledge  Help all instructors sharpen their pedagogical skills  Require hands-on learning  Integrate field experiences and internships into courses whenever possible  Promote varied forms of assessments  Provide student support services  Encourage the integration of instructional technology

To live, learn, and work successfully in an increasingly complex and information-rich society, students and teachers must use technology effectively (International Society for Technology in Education, 2000). We are teaching “sceenagers “

W HAT T ECHNOLOGIES DO I NSTRUCTORS U SE IN THEIR E DUCATION C LASSROOMS ? 23

W HAT T ECHNOLOGIES DO I NSTRUCTORS T EACH THEIR E DUCATION S TUDENTS TO USE ? 24

W HAT T ECHNOLOGIES DO I NSTRUCTORS T EACH THEIR E DUCATION S TUDENTS TO USE FOR THE P RE K-12 CLASSROOM ? 25

W HAT TECHNOLOGIES DO INSTRUCTORS FEEL THEIR E DUCATION STUDENTS ARE MOST COMFORTABLE USING ? 26

S TUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES

28 D ISTRICT - WIDE ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES SUPPORTED BY SUPERINTENDENTS

29 D ISTRICT - WIDE ACADEMIC COUNSELING ACTIVITIES SUPPORTED BY SUPERINTENDENTS

D ISTRICT - WIDE SOCIAL / EMOTIONAL OUTCOMES SUPPORTED BY SUPERINTENDENTS

EDUCATORS AS INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERS C ONNECTICUT C OMMUNITY C OLLEGES P ROFESSIONAL D AY, O CT

T EACHER EXODUS  14% of new teachers leave by the end of their 1 st year  33% leave within 3 years, and  50% (almost 50%) leave in five years (Ingersoll, 2003).

R ECOMMENDATIONS  Empowerment through mentoring and coaching  Professional learning communities  Attention to vocational education  Produce students who are sophisticated consumers and creators of information in all formats  Residency programs – teachers and leaders  Embedded professional development

D IFFERENTIATED I NSTRUCTION – A C ORE S TRATEGY The process of differentiation, offering students multiple ways of taking in and expressing information, begins with educators examining four areas: content, process, product, and environment (Sprenger, 2008).

D IFFERENTIATED I NSTRUCTION : C ONTENT Content is what we use to teach the standards. When we differentiate the path to the standards, we might include:  Choices in how students learn  Materials at different levels of difficulty  Different genres from which to choose  How quickly a child takes in information (pacing).

D IFFERENTIATED I NSTRUCTION : P ROCESS Process is how we teach the standards. When we differentiate process, we might:  Group students according to readiness, interest, or learning profile  Use whole class instruction  Work with some students individually  Offer instructional tools that honor individual learning profiles.

D IFFERENTIATED I NSTRUCTION : P RODUCT Product refers to the way students show us what they know. We might vary product by:  Offering students choice  Using ongoing formative assessment to determine how well the students are learning  Personally communicating with students in the form of conferences or simple conversations  Varying performance tasks (Sprenger, 2008).

Q UESTIONS, ANSWERS AND COMMENTS