School accountability framework 2002 (1)

THE SCHOOL
ACCOUNTABILITY
FRA ME WORK
D e p a r t m e n t o f E d u c a t i o n

TITLE: The School Accountability Framework
SCIS NO 1032456
ISBN 0 7307 3939 2
© Department of Education in Western Australia 2002
Reproduction of this work in whole or part for educational purposes, within an educational
institution and on condition that it is not offered for sale, is permitted by the Department of
Education in Western Australia.
This material is available on request in appropriate alternative formats including Braille, audio
tape and computer disk.
Further information please contact:
The Manager
School Accountability
School and System Performance
Department of Education in Western Australia
151 Royal Street
East Perth WA 6004
Telephone: (08) 9264 5874
Facsimile: (08) 9264 5344

T H E S C H O O L A C C O U N T A B I L I T Y F R A M E W O R K
PA G E
1
INTRODUCTION
Government schools occupy a special place in the Western Australian community because
they educate 70 per cent of the State’s young people, are distributed throughout an
enormous land mass, and the costs of their operations account for a quarter of the State
government’s budget.
It is essential that in return for the confidence placed in our schools and the resources
utilized, we demonstrate the quality of education we provide.
That is why accountability measures must be in place at all levels of the government schools
system.
Both government and the broader community must be assured that the system as a whole is
achieving high standards of educational outcomes that prepare children well for success in
the future.
Local communities must be confident that their schools are providing a quality education
that meets the needs of their children.
Individual parents must be given credible information about their children’s performance
and know that their school is using that information to help students to achieve their
potential.
The School Accountability Framework is built on five fundamental commitments:
1. We are committed to high standards. We strive to ensure that every student who
attends a government school achieves the highest standard of learning of which he or she
is capable. In today’s world with the demand for a highly educated workforce, high
standards are needed for everyone.
2. We are committed to every government school being effective. Every school is
required to set high standards for student performance, to assess the educational progress
of all its students and to establish targets for improvement. The extent to which these
objectives are achieved is a measure of the school’s effectiveness. And, through its
planning and accountability processes, every school must continually seek to improve its
effectiveness.
3. We are committed to quality teaching. All students are entitled to be taught by a
qualified, competent and caring teacher. Every teacher is expected to monitor students’
progress, to identify their strengths and weaknesses, and to provide an educational
program that is appropriate to their needs.

PA G E
2
4. We are committed to parents receiving quality information about the standards
being achieved by their schools. Not only must our schools be excellent but the
community must have confidence that they are. The quality of what schools do must be
apparent to those who have a stake in them, in particular the parents. They must have
confidence that appropriate standards are being achieved by their children and that
schools are working to maintain those standards.
5. We are committed to the wider community being better informed about the
standards being achieved across the government schools system. Education is an
essential community service and we must be open with the community about the
outcomes being achieved by our students. This is crucial to building community support
for and confidence in public schools.
As well as ensuring that every school’s performance is open to scrutiny, accountability
mechanisms should help the school to improve its performance. This occurs as schools
engage in a thorough self examination identifying their strengths and weaknesses as a basis
for their improvement planning.
Collective reflection, analysis and commitment to improvement will ensure that the effort
schools put into demonstrating accountability will add real value to their educational work.

PA G E
3
The School Accountability
Framework
This Framework sets out the requirements for all schools in relation to accountability and
review.
It replaces existing policies related to school development planning and school
accountability.
The Framework is to be interpreted in association with Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting:
Policy and Guidelines and Policy Framework for Performance Management.
It is a crucial part of the Department’s overall quality assurance framework, which includes
system-level mechanisms such as Monitoring Standards in Education (MSE) and internal
audit, and which is articulated in the Department’s Annual Report to the Minister and
Parliament.
The Framework integrates existing accountability measures into a coherent and easily-
understood accountability regime for schools.
It provides the government, the community and the Department with the information they
require to be confident about the high quality of government schooling in Western Australia
and it does this in a way that is manageable for schools.

PA G E
4
POLICY
1. All schools are required to produce, in partnership with
their school community, a school plan setting out their
objectives, priorities, major initiatives and evaluation
measures.
2. All schools are required to assess their performance in terms
of standards of student achievement and the effectiveness of
the school.
3. All schools are required to make available to the public and
to the District Director a School Report that describes the
school’s performance.
4. School staff are accountable to the principal and school
principals are accountable to the District Director for the
performance of the school.

PA G E
5
KEY CONCEPTS
School accountability policy is based on five key concepts.
1. Accountability involves responding to information about performance.
Central to the notion of accountability - at the level of the individual teacher, the school or
the system as a whole - is an acceptance of responsibility for the achievement of outcomes
and the taking of appropriate action to improve performance.
Demonstrating accountability includes describing the outcomes sought, collecting
information about the extent to which they have been achieved and taking action to improve
them.
Stated in their simplest form, the key accountability questions are:
• What are we trying to achieve?
• How well are we achieving it?
• How can we improve?
Staff in schools are very familiar with these questions, because for some time they have been
addressing them through their school development planning processes.
When fully implemented, the Outcomes and Standards Framework will be central to the way in
which the questions are answered.
It will provide the vehicle for teachers to monitor the achievement of their students and to
demonstrate their accountability, through their School Report and school planning processes.
Accountability involves more than reporting. Collecting and reporting information about
performance is only part of demonstrating accountability. The other part is determining
what the information means and what action should be taken in response to it.
2. Accountability is linked to outcomes.
The core purpose of schools is to enable the success of each and every student.
Schools therefore, must be able to demonstrate to themselves and to the communities they
serve that what they do makes a difference to student learning.
While information about the achievement levels of the students provides an important basis
for determining how well a school is performing, it cannot on its own indicate whether a
school has done its job well.

PA G E
6
As well as the school demonstrating the levels of achievement of its students, judgements
about the effectiveness of the school must also involve how well the school takes action to
raise those achievement levels.
A proper picture of a school’s effectiveness must therefore embody both the outcomes being
achieved by the students and the school’s response to the information about student
achievement.
This position is based on the important principle that teachers and principals can only be
held accountable for factors over which they have control.
Since they do not have control over all the variables that impact upon student achievement,
they cannot be held accountable for it in an absolute sense. However, because the school
can make a difference to the level of achievement of the students, schools are accountable for
maximising the difference they make in terms of student outcomes.
3. Demonstrating accountability is a professional responsibility
of school staff.
The school development planning policy introduced in 1990 signalled a shift away from an
inspectorial approach to accountability toward one of schools taking responsibility for
demonstrating their effectiveness to others.
This position locates accountability within the professional responsibility of the school staff,
by creating an expectation that staff demonstrate the quality of their work as part of the
expression of their professionalism.
The line manager acts both to ensure that this responsibility is accepted and to support staff
in doing so.
Reporting information for accountability purposes should be a by-product of collecting
information that the school needs to have for its own purposes. Having good information
about the school’s performance is an important part of the ongoing improvement planning
by school staff.
4. Rigorous self-assessment is at the heart of effective accountability.
Rigorous self-assessment requires a willingness and confidence to interrogate one’s own
performance information.
While schools and systems vary in the approach they take to school accountability, the
success of any approach ultimately depends on how well the school reviews its own
performance.

PA G E
7
Effective internal review involves the school gathering information about the levels of student
achievement, analysing and judging the adequacy of those levels, identifying strengths and
weaknesses in its overall performance, and assessing which aspects of the school’s operation
should be changed to generate improved performance.
5. Schools are accountable to their communities and to the Director-General.
The School Accountability Framework acknowledges the two-way accountability of schools.
Schools listen and respond to their local community’s needs and provide information about
the school’s performance. They also respond to systemic priorities and requirements and
provide an assurance that every government school is meeting accountability requirements.
COMPONENTS OF THE SCHOOL
ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORK
This section explains each of the four components of the School Accountability Framework.
1. Schools plan
2. Schools self-assess
3. Schools produce a School Report
4. District Directors review schools
1. SCHOOLS PLAN
Schools adopt a planning framework that enables them to both meet the requirements for
annual reporting and provide a useful framework for improvement.
However, it is no longer necessary for school plans to be constructed according to the School
Development Planning framework.
This is a recognition that the planning model used by a school should reflect the needs of the
school. That is, so long as the plan enables the school to respond to the community’s needs,
accommodate Departmental initiatives, and demonstrate its accountability, schools have
flexibility in terms of the planning model they adopt.

PA G E
8
The School Education Act 1999 encourages the participation and involvement of parents and
local community members in planning for the school’s future. This should be undertaken by
working with the School Council.
The primary function of the School Council is to take part in establishing and reviewing the
school’s objectives, priorities and general policy directions and the financial arrangements
required to fund them. Principals will need to work with their School Council to ensure that
Council members are informed and sufficiently skilled to take an active and meaningful role
in this process.
Whilst a School Council has no role in the day to day management of the school, it is the
forum for the school community to have input into the direction of the school. A successful
school plan will have the support of the School Council and be the end result of a process of
consultation and discussion with the school community.
Appropriate School Council involvement in school planning requires that a clear
differentiation be made between high-level direction setting planning (which involves the
School Council and finds expression in the school plan) and operational planning (which is
the responsibility of the principal and staff of the school).
A failure to acknowledge the different levels of school planning could both confuse the
involvement of the School Council and also result in an unwieldy school plan.
For school accountability purposes, the school plan must contain the school’s objectives,
priorities and major initiatives, and the measures to be used to evaluate progress.
Evaluation measures must be able to provide members of the school community with
relevant and meaningful information and enable the School Council to regularly review the
progress towards achievement of the school’s objectives.
The information gathered using the measures is reported in the School Report.
Other internal operational planning is documented according to the school’s own
requirements.
While central office will require principals to demonstrate that central initiatives have been
responded to appropriately, the school plan is not necessarily the vehicle for such
demonstration. It is through the line management relationship between the principal and
the District Director where such compliance monitoring and reporting occurs.
There are also many ways that line management accountability can be effected that do not
involve documentation in plans or formal agreements. A conversation between a principal
and a District Director may be sufficient in many cases.
As a result of their experience with school development planning, many schools have moved
away from using a single year time frame for their school plans.

PA G E
9
Some have found it important to set some long-term directions to provide a context for their
annual plans. These schools might have a five-year planning horizon, with a particular set of
initiatives planned for the first year. The five-year plan is then reviewed and updated
annually in consultation with the School Council.
While planning timeframes may differ, reporting is required annually. Other schools have
continued with annual plans, but with different planning horizons for different priorities.
Some priorities may need to be addressed over a three-year time scale, while others may
require only one year to implement.
2. SCHOOLS SELF-ASSESS
Student achievement
Principals and teachers need to assess the levels of achievement of all students.
Teachers have always made judgements about what students know and can do as
demonstrated in their everyday learning in the classroom. On the basis of these judgements,
they have designed appropriate learning programs and reported to parents.
However, they have not used a common set of outcomes on which to base their judgements.
When the Outcomes and Standards Framework is fully implemented, parents can have
confidence that the judgements made by one teacher about the child’s levels of achievement
are comparable to the judgements of another teacher at that school, or to the judgements of
teachers at any other government school.
Establishing the comparability of teachers’ judgements against the Outcomes and Standards
Framework will require a great deal of moderation activity within and across schools.
Teachers will need to have opportunities to discuss and share examples of what constitutes a
particular level of achievement by a student.
Many schools already use Monitoring Standards in Education (MSE) test materials as part of
a process of moderating teachers’ judgements about levels of student achievement.
The process of fine-tuning teachers’ judgements will also be assisted by annual literacy and
numeracy benchmark testing for year 3, year 5 and year 7 students.
In time teachers will use the Outcomes and Standards Framework to form a judgement about
the level of, say, a year 3 student’s achievement in reading, and will then consider the
student’s result on the benchmark test to inform their judgement.
In order to provide a complete picture of the school’s performance in terms of student
achievement, it is important to include the social and personal outcomes desired as well as
academic outcomes. These are represented in the Overarching Learning Outcomes of the
Curriculum Framework as well as the Learning Area Outcomes.

PA G E
10
Skills such as critical thinking and problem solving are also important outcomes for students’
future success, but are often not monitored and reported because of the difficulty of doing so
in a reliable and valid way. This requirement presents a particular challenge for schools, and
assistance will be provided by the Department.
As well as monitoring the performance of students across the school and at particular year
levels, school staff also need to know about the performance of particular groups of students:
perhaps the girls are doing better than the boys or the performance of the Aboriginal
students is different from that of the other students. This is important information for school
staff to have to inform their improvement planning, rather than public reporting.
Analysing the school’s performance to answer questions like this assists the school to target
its improvement efforts at the points where it is most needed. This is fundamental to the
Students at Educational Risk initiative.
Having gathered some information about student achievement levels, a key question in any
self-assessment is whether that level of performance is up to expectations. How does one
know whether the standards being achieved in the school are acceptable or not?
Reaching an answer involves comparing the school’s performance with a standard of some
kind.
The standard might be a State average; it might be based on other schools with similar
student populations: it might be a national benchmark; or it might be the school’s own
performance in previous years.
Schools will be assisted in this process as the standards component of the Outcomes and
Standards Framework is developed.
They will also be provided with information about the performance of “like” schools on
national literacy and numeracy benchmark testing.
Effectiveness of the school
Having reviewed their performance in terms of student achievement, school staff also need to
assess whether the school is operating as effectively as it could so that the maximum value is
added to the students’ learning.
This involves reviewing such aspects as the learning environment, relationships with the
community and the management of staff.
School Performance: A Framework for Improving and Reporting has been used by many schools
as a framework for reflecting on how the various aspects of the school are functioning.
While the use of School Performance is not an essential part of the school accountability
process, it is anticipated that many schools will continue to use it as a support document to
structure their internal review processes.

PA G E
11
3. SCHOOLS PUBLISH SCHOOL REPORTS
The School Report is the key vehicle for providing the community with information about a
school’s performance.
While there is a long tradition of schools reporting to parents on the performance of
individual children, reporting to parents and the local community on the performance of the
school is relatively new.
In recent years, this has occurred through reporting to the School Decision-Making Group
on progress with the school development plan.
Many schools have already instituted some form of annual reporting to their community on
their progress. Others report their performance progressively throughout the year via
newsletters and meetings.
This needs to continue and become more rigorous.
All schools will produce a School Report that gives parents and members of local
communities a clear sense of the standards being achieved and the schools’ effectiveness in
reaching the objectives set out in their school plans. Parents need to have information
reported to them that shows the progress being made in the agreed priority areas of the
school plan.
Any information that could identify individual students must not be published in School
Reports. In general, information about school performance should be communicated in
such a way as to ensure that the maximum amount of information is placed in the public
domain while avoiding simplistic league tables based on narrow measures of school
performance.
Three kinds of information are to be included in the School Report.
1. Information about the school and its context
• Ethos of the school - a statement of the values and guiding principles that underpin the
school’s operation.
• Outcomes sought for students - the Outcomes in the Curriculum Framework and other
outcomes identified by the school.
• Nature of the community the school serves - the characteristics of the school’s local
environment.
• Programs offered - including any specialist programs.
2. Information about student outcomes
• Eventually, this will be reported in terms of the Outcomes and Standards Framework. All
schools will include appropriate measures of student success. In primary schools this will
include the results of literacy and numeracy benchmark testing.
• Destination of students.

PA G E
12
3. Information about school management
• Progress report on priorities
• School budget
• Student participation data
• Enrolment trends
• Retention rates
In addition to reporting this mandated information, schools may also wish to include a range
of other information, such as measures of the school environment that would strengthen the
confidence of parents in the school their children attend.
Some schools will use the School Report to celebrate the achievements and highlights of the
school year.
While the School Report will be tabled and discussed with the School Council to assist it to
play its review role, it will also be a public document available to any interested members of
the community.
4. DISTRICT DIRECTORS REVIEW SCHOOLS
Reviews of schools by District Directors provide assurance to all stakeholders that schools
have conducted rigorous and comprehensive self-assessments, reported the required
outcomes in their School Reports and responded with appropriate improvement plans.
This validation enables those with an interest in a school to have confidence in the quality of
the school’s review and reporting processes. It also provides schools with valuable feedback
about their performance and directions for improvement.
RELEVANT LEGISLATION/AUTHORITY
School Education Act 1999
Sections 63 (1) (e), 128 (a), 232 and 233.

School accountability framework 2002 (1)

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to School accountability framework 2002 (1) (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

School accountability framework 2002 (1)