Outcome-based and competition-based policies of school evaluation: a comparison of school performance (and perverse effects) in two mid-sized Hungarian towns - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 13
About This Presentation
Title:

Outcome-based and competition-based policies of school evaluation: a comparison of school performance (and perverse effects) in two mid-sized Hungarian towns

Description:

OUTCOME-BASED AND COMPETITION-BASED POLICIES OF SCHOOL EVALUATION: a comparison of school performance (and perverse effects) in two mid-sized Hungarian towns – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:63
Avg rating:3.0/5.0

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Outcome-based and competition-based policies of school evaluation: a comparison of school performance (and perverse effects) in two mid-sized Hungarian towns


1
Outcome-based and competition-based policies of
school evaluationa comparison of school
performance (and perverse effects) in two
mid-sized Hungarian towns
  • HORN, Daniel BODIS, Lajos
  • EUI, Florence Corvinus, Budapest
  • daniel.horn_at_eui.eu bodis_at_uni-corvinus.hu
  • Presentation at the INVALSI-APPAM Improving
    Education through Accountability and Evaluation
    Lessons from Around the World conference
  • Rome, Italy, October 3-5, 2012.

2
Outline
  • National background
  • Parktown and Birdtown
  • outcome-based and competition-based policies of
    school evaluation
  • Quantitative results (empirics not presented)
  • Qualitative speculations
  • Conclusion

3
National Background
  • (practically) Free school choice
  • Per-student lump-sum grant
  • Demographic decline
  • Teachers are public servants (hard to fire, fixed
    salary scale)
  • Result segregated school system
  • (both student and teacher)
  • (empirics for Hungary Kertesi-Kezdi 2010, Varga
    2011)
  • Gradual adaptation competition-based policy
    (Birdtown)
  • National Assessment of Basic Competencies (NABC)
    since 2001
  • School assessment system (individual panel since
    2010)
  • Reform outcome-based policy (Parktown)

4
The two towns
  • Birdtown
  • 75,000 inhabitants (county capital)
  • 2004 14 schools 7500 students
  • 2008 11 schools 6200 students (7,5 drop)
  • Parktown
  • 50,000 inhabitants (not a county capital)
  • 2004 10 schools 4100 students
  • 2008 5 schools 3500 students (4,7 drop)

5
Reform in Parktown
  • On the 1st July 2007.
  • Restructuring the whole system
  • Closing all 10 schools and opening 5 new
  • (2 closed, 2 merged into 2 other, and 1 handed
    over to the Church)
  • Firing all and hiring 70 of teachers
    (performance based)
  • Redrawing (and starting to use) catchment-areas
  • NABC was a tool in the reform (see below)

6
School performance - Birdtown
  • Focus on quality
  • Any school can be good in one (or more) aspects.
  • Testing is important (but not that much)
  • School evaluations are based on constructive way
    of life, local patriotism and continuous
    professional development
  • It was around 2005 when the politicians and
    administrators here in Birdtown started to say
    that the parents are voting with their feet. So
    we didnt try to stop it. We said that if you
    cant add a Chinese gymnastic course on top of
    hottentot language course, and you cant make
    them stay, were sorry.
  • (an administrator at the local government,
    Birdtown)

7
School performance - Parktown
  • Focus on standardized test-scores
  • Schools are compared on level scores annually
  • No-high stakes
  • Depends much on the (politically well imbedded
    and charismatic) mayor, who used the testing to
    hammer through his reform in 2006
  • Then we went through each school one-by-one,
    which created the first smaller turbulence. They
    the General Assembly did not like it. They did
    not like to face the fact that there was
    practically no school that showed above national
    average performance. Thus we had no good schools.
    We had no exceptional primary schools.
  • (the mayor of Parktown)

8
Quantitative results
  • National Assessment of Basic Competencies (NABC)
  • School assessment based on standardized student
    test scores
  • Covering 6th, 8th and 10th grade
  • Math and reading
  • Since 2001, but panel since 2008-2010
  • Detailed background questionnaire
  • Administrative dataset on all students
  • Panel data on 22 mid-sized towns between
    2004-2006, 6th and 8th grade
  • Results (diff-in-diff)
  • Parktown does not differ from the other towns in
    level. (For Birdtown it is lower)
  • Value-added (VA) for Birdtown is
    non-significantly different from the other 20
    towns
  • VA for Parktown is lower(!) after the reform

9
Qualitative speculations
  • Why have the VA dropped?
  • Bad (?) outcome measure focus on level results
  • Teachers can play the system
  • Teach to the test (we saw that)
  • Reallocate resources (this too)
  • Selective testing (have not documented)
  • But no increase in level either! (not presented
    here)
  • And the question is still valid Why has VA
    dropped?

10
Qualitative speculations
  • Why has the VA dropped?
  • We are too early to judge (cf. Elmore 2003).
  • Well, yes.
  • There are important missing pieces in the reform
    in Parktown.

11
Missing pieces
  • Introducing outcome regulation, inevitably puts a
    limit on the input as well as the process
    regulation (cf. Milgrom and Roberts 1992).
  • Parktown has changed input regulation.
  • but have not dealt with process measures
  • Lack of expert teachers
  • Lack of forums for deliberation and feedback
  • Lack of (uniformly) good teacher training
    (participation)

12
Concluding thoughts
  • Doing a full-scale reform in a decentralized
    system has its benefits
  • decrease between school segregation
  • fame within the country
  • but its effects on performance are questionable

13
Thank you for the attention!
  • daniel.horn_at_eui.eu
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com