Negotiating theTerrain of High-Stakes Accountability in Science Teaching
MetadataShow full item record
Teachers interact with their students on behalf of the entire educational system. The aim of this study is to explore how biology teachers understand and construct their practice in a high-stakes accountability environment that is likely to be riddled with tensions. By critically questioning the technical paradigms of accountability this study challenges the fundamental assumptions of accountability. Such a critical approach may help teachers develop empowerment strategies that can free them from the de-skilling effects of the educational accountability system. This interpretive case study of a high-school in Maryland is grounded in three streams of research literature: quality science instruction based on scientific inquiry, the effects of educational accountability on the curriculum, and the influence of policy on classroom practice with a specific focus on how teachers balance competing tensions. This study theoretically occurs at the intersection of educational accountability and pedagogy. In terms of data collection, I conduct two interviews with all six biology teachers in the school. I observe each teacher for at least fifteen class periods. I review high-stakes accountability policy documents from the federal, state, and district levels of the education system. Three themes emerge from the research. The first theme, "re-defining science teaching," captures how deeply accountability structures have penetrated the science curriculum. The second theme, "the pressure mounts," explores how high-stakes accountability in science has increased the stress placed on teachers. The third theme, "teaching-in-between," explores how teachers compromise between accountability mandates and their own understandings of quality teaching. Together, the three themes shed light on the current high-stakes climate in which teachers currently work. This study's findings inform the myriad paradoxes at all levels of the educational system. As Congress and advocacy groups battle over the reauthorization of No Child Left Behind, they may not pay adequate attention to all the inconsistencies. Educators and researchers must take a critical look at accountability policies. Accountability should promote optimism, responsibility, job satisfaction, avenues for developing pedagogical expertise, and collaboration between teachers and administrators. Only then is it likely to improve educational opportunities for all students.