Educational values and accountability in Tennessee : ethical dilemmas and moral imperatives

This case study focused on selected stakeholders' perceptions of the appropriateness and effectiveness of the accountability policy system in Tennessee and how they perceive that accountability has affected them as differential groups. Standpoint Theory and policy literature provided the conceptual framework for the study. Sixty participants from six schools in three school districts, state level educators, and state level politicians were interviewed for this study. The Findings revealed that the state level educators and politicians perceive that the current accountability policy system is an appropriate and effective way to measure student achievement. However, the majority of educators perceive that they have been marginalized by the current accountability policy system. They do not perceive that relying solely on one standardized test is an appropriate and effective way of measuring student achievement. Teachers perceive that students do not take the tests seriously, and tensions exist among educators over the perceived inequities of not testing all students and not requiring value added gain scores for all teachers. Except on the high school Gateway and End of Course Exams, educators perceive that the tests are not closely aligned with the curriculum. Teachers and district level educators acknowledge unethical behaviors such as cheating to inflate scores and teaching to the tests.