Essay The Rapid Increase of School Accountability during the Pandemic
Subtitle
An Essay for the Learning Curve
Josh Bleiberg
Display Date
File
File
Download essay
(299.97 KB)

The worsening of student outcomes during the pandemic has had unanticipated effects on states’ school accountability systems. The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) requires states to designate schools with the worst student outcomes for improvement activities, with states designating the lowest-performing 5 percent of all schools as needing Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI). States designated 31 percent more schools to receive intensive supports after the pandemic, and the number of schools designated for improvement will continue to rise unless ESSA and state accountability systems change.

The expansion of school accountability is a concern because research on its effects is not clearly positive. Data from 2019 show that the CSI designation did not influence prepandemic student outcomes. But evidence from Michigan shows that school accountability improves student outcomes for the lowest-achieving students. A postpandemic study in Michigan showed that school accountability may have mitigated the pandemic’s negative effects.

Key Findings

Analyzing the first two ESSA improvement cycles—the first between 2016 and 2020 and the second between 2020 and 2024—the data show the following: 

  • States designated significantly more CSI schools (31 percent) in the second cycle compared with the first cycle.
  • The number of CSI schools increased in the second cycle for 30 of the 46 states for which data were available.
  • The number of CSI schools increased modestly (between 8 and 57 percent) in 22 states, and in 8 states, the number of CSI schools more than doubled. Among the 13 states that identified fewer CSI schools, the magnitude of the decrease was small.

Implications

The number of CSI schools that cannot exit their designation is likely to increase, with pandemic-related changes having compounding effects on school accountability systems. To exit the first cycle, CSI schools must increase their achievement by the amount specified in the original state plan and reverse any decline in pandemic-related outcomes. But the number of CSI schools will continue to increase, as few first-cycle CSI schools can exit that designation. School improvement will only become more difficult, as ESSA’s procedure for identifying CSI schools will break down because of the pandemic’s unforeseen effects.

State policymakers could focus on designing accountability systems that minimize unintended harm and promote equity within specific state contexts. For example, states concerned about increases in the number of CSI schools can amend accountability plans, such as by adopting a relative accountability system that fixes the number of CSI designations. States can also amend their exit criteria to allow schools to exit if they move out of the bottom 5 percent. Federal policymakers also could play a role. Congress could base school improvement funding on the number of students enrolled in CSI schools, which would expand accountability systems without penalizing schools in need of support. Ultimately, without changes to the ESSA exit rules, there will be a steady increase in the number of CSI designations that will strain future school improvement efforts.

Get the Data

Additional Resources

Research Areas Education
Tags K-12 education
Policy Centers Center on Education Data and Policy