Standards, Assessment, and School Reform - Research Paper Example

 Focus Group It’s imperative to run focus groups of stakeholders in high schools in order to create a support base in the process of training and development of staff skills and general administration. Nonetheless it’s the focus group that acquires a very significant place among all else. It has more to do with marketing and advertising than with school administration though. Focus groups are used in order to identify such things as common concerns, wants, wishes and so on of a cross sample group of stakeholders in a High Schoool. Their attitudes and values would be taken into consideration by planners and strategists in articulating development plans, policies, programs and so on. Subsequently the allocation of resources will be carried out according to their opinions. This paper identifies parents, school administrators, past pupils, prefects and city councilors as the five stakeholder groups for the task in hand. There two different ways in which those participants in focus group are selected. Random selection can be adopted as a better method which would enable all sections of the society to participate in the process. Secondly non-random selection can be adopted in order to obtain a particular point of view of the participants. The following features are associated with focus groups. It has a clearly outlined agenda with a major few questions. Participants would share their opinions, insights and perceptions through well coordinated interaction and conversations. There will be no more than 15 participants the maximum. Every effort would be made to recognize and acknowledge divergent and convergent opinions and points of view. Material-based presentations would be reduced to a minimum so that free exchange of ideas and opinions could be facilitated. There is always emphasis on gathering opinions of participants and not influencing them. Subject to the above criteria the members of the focus group will be involved in informal and formal conversations, explorations and studies to find out ways and means to improve the existing educational standards at the school. In this respect the following reasons for the members’ participation must be noted (Chambers, 2006). Potential members of the focus group would be required to serve as either advisors on educational issues, facilitators, participants in discussions, designers or planners. Their contribution to the development of both the school curriculum and teaching would be of immense help in the future because there would be many positive outcomes. Focus group’s expertise could be used to enhance the existing resource base and stakeholders such as parents and city councilors could contribute to the process of improvement through participation in the focus group and then help in reducing costs. The school has a set of priorities ranging from adjustments and additions to the existing curriculum to the upgrading of test content at various levels. The above changes necessarily invite a corresponding shake-up of the library resources and the testing techniques. Thus technical assistance will be sought in this respect. The existing resource gap can only be bridged through a sizeable contribution from the stakeholders, particularly the focus group. Finally while there is the need for a strategic shift in admissions tests at various levels, the focus group would be required to devise a new strategy based on merits as the sole criterion for admission to higher grades. The rationale for stakeholders’ participation There are a number of reasons for the student performance enhancement. These reasons include net benefits to the community in the long run such as integration of the local community to the national grid of representation at each level of occupation. The current level of representation by the community in the top-most professions of the country is minimal and negligible. Despite a very high representation by many other communities in the region, this particular locality lacks adequate resource planning and program development at the school level vis-à-vis other similar schools to integrate a core curriculum-based set of activities. High-stake testing has not been adopted in the school so far and its implications have been made known to both the stakeholders and the focus group by me (Jones, Jones and Hargrove, (2003). The focus group in this instance will be required to perform some specific tasks that would involve all or more aspects of the currently planned and ongoing structural and contingency changes to the performance evaluation system in the school. While a greater number of hours have been planned for each week of meetings among the members of the focus group, there will be also a process of resource allocation to each task depending on the relative importance of them in the whole program. Focus group’s participation in the process of student performance enhancing programs will be based on the following phases of design, planning and implementation. Phase one: Discussions on the design process of student performance enhancing programs will take place as per schedule and would involve such aspects as time, duration, content and resource base. For instance times and durations of tests have technically been at fault in performance tests. This shortcoming has been highlighted by the focus group as one of the most negative in the whole process. The curriculum content design process too has been lacking in some respects too. Administrative back-up has been weaker for the desired changes thus leading to the current impasse. Thus the whole process of phase one would be focused on designing and developing the new time schedules, curriculum content and durations of tests to align the existing practices with new ones. Phase two: During the second phase the focus group would be involved in designing and developing performance criteria and metrics. The group would consult a core group of experts within the focus group to enunciate a system of performance criteria and metrics which would assign value parameters to different skills of students in tests. For instance performance can be enhanced when the core skills in the curriculum are subject to a progressive testing system in which the techniques would be upgraded according to metrics (Rothman, 1995). Metrics need to be the basis of performance testing in a school and they need not be necessarily those connected with a score Z-score as is the case now. Such simple metrics ignore a variety of skills that can be of critical importance in testing intelligence. Current metrics to measure intelligence are basically determined by quotients which do not comply with specific requirements or skills tests. This general approach has effectively prevented the school administration from developing and implementing essential tests to measure those skills which really matter in the overall performance before and in university admission. Metrics such as IQ tests and their scores are basically determined by specific spheres of skills such math, general knowledge, science and so on. This criterion has effectively precluded school authorities from developing and implementing a program of activity that would identify and address the key skills requirements (Frankland, Editor, 2007). Right now the authorities expect to consult the core group of experts in the focus group to devise a strategic policy alternative to the existing one so that there can be a qualitative and quantitative change in the performance of students in school tests. Phase three: This phase involves such areas as resource planning, procurement and utilization. For instance the focus group would be required to identify when and where resource gaps exist within the school and develop ways and means to solve those problems. As at present there is a considerable shortage of resources such as in human resources, materials and contingency supplies. Human resources such as teachers, instructors and tutors need to be trained with the school environment on the job to enable them to respond to the complex and diverse needs of their pupils. Similarly there is a sizeable shortage in material resources as well. Performance enhancing test have to be held regularly and such tests need a lot of physical resources scum as laboratories and equipment. The current time schedules have crammed up the use of these resources and therefore a liberal policy of making available the necessary resources would definitely enhance the performance capabilities of students. The following survey has been designed as a corollary to determine the focus group’s performance by participants. Survey 100 participants who represent various stakeholders of the school were enlisted in this survey in order to obtain their opinions on some key questions concerning the activities and their impact on the development of performance by students of the school. The survey was designed with a view to establishing or rejecting some existing outcomes associated with focus groups in general in schools. While responses of participants were measured according to a site of weighting the overall learning outcomes were given a priority weighting depending on the relative importance of each activity. Q.1. How do you rate the current performance of the focus group in determining the student performance within the school on a scale of 1% to 100%? (a). 1% to 25%; (b). 26% to 50%; (c). 51% to 75%; (d). 76% to 100%. Q.2. Does the focus group adequately represent a broader spectrum of opinion and skills? (a). Yes (b). No (c). To a certain extent. (d). I am not sure. Q.3. On a scale of 1 to 10 how do you rate the degree of freedom enjoyed by the members of the focus group in performing their duties within the school? (a). 1 to 3 (b). 4 to 6 (c). 7 to 9 (d). 10 This is just an example of a survey and all the questions cannot be included. However it adequately captures the essentials of a survey I this partial instance and tells us how best identify various shades of opinion of participants. Stakeholders often tend to underrate focus groups’ performance in schools when the latter are faced with extreme situations. Thus I would seek to reciprocate on par with both the focus group members and other stakeholders with a view to juxtaposing the development efforts with individual and group contributions. While many members in the focus group feel the need for a qualitative shift in the right direction so that the existing parameters of skills measurement can be changed for better, there is a lack of will power on some of them to imitate revolutionary changes. This aspect would receive a greater amount of attention by me in the days to come. I would pursue the current agenda of actions to its logical conclusion with the overall help of the stakeholders whose contribution to the final outcomes has been very immense. REFRENCES 1. Chambers, S. (2006). Mayors and Schools: Minority Voices and Democratic Tensions in Urban Education. PA: Temple University Press 2. Frankland, S. Editor, (2007) Enhancing Teaching and Learning through Assessment: Deriving an Appropriate Model. Dordrecht: Springer 3. Jones, M. G, Jones, B. D. & Hargrove, T. (2003). The Unintended Consequences of High-Stakes Testing. Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers 4. Rothman, R. (1995). Measuring Up: Standards, Assessment, and School Reform (Jossey Bass Education Series). California: Jossey-Bass Read More