Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Developing an Indicator System for Schools of Choice: A Balanced Scorecard Approach

2009; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 2; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/15582150802618659

1558-2167

Richard S. Brown, Priscilla Wohlstetter, Sunny Liu,

Parental Involvement in Education

ABSTRACT This article describes the process of developing an indicator system that goes beyond a single indicator of school progress or performance. The system relies on a set of school indicators that uses data that public schools routinely report to state agencies for compliance purposes. The framework for the indicator system is based on the idea of "the balanced scorecard." This indicator system offers multiple measures of school performance, combining both academic and financial data, to assess student learning, program effectiveness, and school operations. Lessons learned in the development and reporting of these indicators of school performance are discussed. KEYWORDS: Indicator systemaccountablitycharter schools Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank the following researchers at the Center on Educational Governance for their valuable contributions to this article: Guilbert C. Hentschke, Jennifer H. Hirman, and Deborah Santiago. We also are appreciative of the organizations and individuals who have provided financial support to the research reported here, including The Ahmanson Foundation, The John Randolph Haynes and Dora Haynes Foundation, The Leon Lowenstein Foundation, William E. B. Siart, and the Weingart Foundation. Notes 1. Lorraine M. McDonnell, "No Child Left Behind and the Federal Role in Education: Evolution or Revolution?" Peabody Journal of Education 80, no. 2 (2005): 19–38. 2. Elizabeth H. Debray, Kathryn A. McDermott, and Priscilla Wohlstetter, "Introduction to the Special Issue on Federalism Reconsidered: The Case of the No Child Left Behind Act." Peabody Journal of Education 80, no. 2 (2005): 1–18. 3. Education Commission of the States, "Recent State Policies/Activities: Accountability (Postsecondary)" (Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States), http://www.ecs.org/ecs/ecscat.nsf/WebTopicView?OpenView&count=-1&RestrictToCategory=Accountability+(Postsecondary) (accessed April 7, 2008). 4. Amanda Datnow, Vicki Park, and Priscilla Wohlstetter, Achieving with Data: How High-Performing School Systems Use Data to Improve Instruction for Elementary Students (San Francisco: NewSchools Venture Fund, 2007). 5. Susanna Loeb, Tara Beteille, and Maria Perez, "Building an Information System to Support Continuous Improvement in California Public Schools," Policy Brief (Berkeley, CA: Policy Analysis for California Education, February 2008), http://pace.berkeley.edu/reports/PB.08-2.pdf. 6. Thomas J. Kane and Douglas O. Staiger, "The Promise and Pitfalls of Using Imprecise School Accountability Measures," The Journal of Economic Perspectives 16, no. 4 (2002): 91–114. 7. Rodney T. Ogawa and Ed Collom, "Using Performance Indicators to Hold Schools Accountable: Implicit Assumptions and Inherent Tensions," Peabody Journal of Education 75, no. 4 (2000): 200–215. 8. Harvey Goldstein, "Using Pupil Performance Data for Judging Schools and Teachers: Scope and Limitations," British Educational Research Journal 27, no. 4 (2001): 433–442; Kane and Staiger, "The Promise and Pitfalls of Using Imprecise School Accountability Measures"; Leanna Stiefel, Ross Rubenstein, and Amy Schwartz, "Using Adjusted Performance Measures for Evaluating Resource Use," Public Budgeting & Finance 19, no. 3 (1999): 67–87. 9. James S. Kim and Gail L. Sunderman, "Measuring Academic Proficiency Under the No Child Left Behind Act: Implications for Educational Equity," Educational Researcher 34, no. 8 (2005): 3–13. 10. Gerald A. Feltham and Jim Xie, "Performance Measure Congruity and Diversity in Multi-Task Principal/Agent Relations," The Accounting Review 69, no. 3 (1994): 429–453; Stiefel, Rubenstein, and Schwartz, "Using Adjusted Performance Measures for Evaluating Resource Use." 11. Ogawa and Collom, "Using Performance Indicators to Hold Schools Accountable." 12. Patria de Lancer Julnes and Marc Holzer, "Promoting the Utilization of Performance Measures in Public Organizations: An Empirical Study of Factors Affecting Adoption and Implementation," Public Administration Review 61, no. 6 (2001): 693–708. 13. Xiao Hu Wang, "Assessing Performance Measurement Impact: A Study of U.S. Local Governments," Public Performance & Management Review 26, no. 1 (2002): 26–43. 14. E. Gerald Hurst Jr., "Attributes of Performance Measures," Public Productivity Review 4, no. 1 (1980): 43–49. 15. Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton, "Putting the Balanced Scorecard to Work." Harvard Business Review 71 (1993): 74–87; Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton, "The Balanced Scorecard: Measures that Drive Performance," Harvard Business Review 70 (1992): 64–72; Christopher Meyer, "How The Right Measures Help Teams Excel," Harvard Business Review 72 (1994): 45–54. 16. Jeff Archer, "Districts Tracking Goals with Balanced Scorecards: Business-Oriented Tool Weighs Operations and Outcomes for Schools," Education Week, February (2007): 10. 17. George H. Pink and others, "Creating a Balanced Scorecard for a Hospital System," Journal of Health Care Finance, Spring (2001): 1–20. 18. Ignacio Urrutia and Scott D. Eriksen, "Application of the Balanced Scorecard in Spanish Private Health-Care Management," Measuring Business Excellence 9, no. 4 (2005): 16–26. 19. Dale Quinlivan, "Rescaling the Balanced Scorecard for Local Government," Australian Journal of Public Administration 59, no. 4 (2000): 36–41. 20. Alice C. Stewart and Julie Carpenter-Hubin, "The Balanced Scorecard: Beyond Reports and Rankings," Planning for Higher Education, Winter (2001): 27–42; Anne Storey, "Performance Management in Schools: Could the Balanced Scorecard Help?" School Leadership & Management 22, no. 3 (2002): 321–338. 21. Estela Mara Bensimon, "The Diversity Scorecard: A Learning Approach to Institutional Change," Change, January-February (2004): 44–52; Estela Mara Bensimon, "Closing the Achievement Gap in Higher Education: An Organizational Learning Perspective," New Directions for Higher Education 131 (2005): 99–111. 22. Archer, "Districts Tracking Goals with Balanced Scorecards." 23. Richard S. Brown, "Creating School Accountability Reports," The School Administrator, November, (1999): 12–17. 24. "California's Charter Schools: Measuring Their Performance," (Mountain View, CA: EdSource, June 2007), http://www.edsource.org/pub_CharterPerf6-07_report.html. 25. www.edfordemocracy.org Ken Futernick, "TQI: A Teacher Qualification Index for California's Schools" (2003), http://www.edfordemocracy.org/TQI/index.htm. 26. Center on Educational Governance, Charter School Indicators: A Report from the Center on Educational Governance (Los Angeles: University of Southern California, 2007). 27. Michael Podgursky and Dale Ballou, Personnel Policy in Charter Schools (Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, 2001); Courtney L. Malloy and Priscilla Wohlstetter, "Working Conditions in Charter Schools: What's the Appeal for Teachers?" Education and Urban Society 35, no. 2 (2003): 219–241; Dominic J. Brewer and June Ahn, "What Do We Know About Teachers in Charter Schools?" (In Press). 28. Pink and others, "Creating a Balanced Scorecard for a Hospital System." 29. California Charter School Association, Charter Journal Online, http://www.uscharterschools.org (accessed October 30, 2006). 30. Ohio Code Revised, Section 3301.0714: Guidelines for Statewide Education Management Information System, 2006. 31. Todd Hanes, "Balanced Scorecards: A Comprehensive View of School Performance," Presentation at the annual meeting of the National Association of Charter School Authorizers,, La Jolla, California, October 23–24, (2006). 32. Priscilla Wohlstetter, Michelle B. Nayfack, and Eugenia Mora-Flores, "Charter Schools and 'Customer' Satisfaction: Lessons from Field Testing a Parent Survey," Journal of School Choice 2, no. 1 (2008): 66–84.