The ‘A’ Word: Margaret Spellings — ‘You Can’t Solve a Problem That You Don’t Diagnose Correctly, Fairly, Accurately, and Comparably’
This interview is a part of The ‘A’ Word series, produced in collaboration with the Bush Institute to analyze how the term "accountability" has garnered a negative reputation and what can be done to ensure its importance endures. The interviews were conducted over phone, transcribed, and edited for clarity and brevity. Each participant was asked the same or similar questions to gather individual and collective thoughts on accountability. Their responses provide insights into how schools operate, the complexities of education politics, and ways to improve student services. Explore the grid below to read other ‘A’ Word conversations.
Margaret Spellings served as the U.S. Secretary of Education from 2005 to 2009 and was responsible for implementing the No Child Left Behind Act. This bipartisan initiative, signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2002, aimed to enhance accountability in educating the 50 million U.S. public school students. Prior to this role, Spellings worked as the chief domestic policy advisor for President Bush from 2001 to 2005 after graduating from the University of Houston.
Over the years, Spellings has worked both before and after President Bush’s tenure in the White House. She served as a senior advisor when he was the Governor of Texas and became the president of the George W. Bush Presidential Center in 2013. In 2016, Spellings was appointed as the president of the University of North Carolina System.
During the ‘A’ Word interview, Spellings reflects on the significance of school accountability, highlighting how it exposed the academic performance of low-achieving students, particularly those from disadvantaged homes and minority families. She emphasizes the importance of all students reaching their potential, as it directly impacts the health of our democracy.
Spellings openly discusses the changes she would have made to the No Child Left Behind Act, including the timelier distribution of data to teachers, as well as the need for increased and aligned resources to address the challenges faced by American schools.
Anne Wicks & William McKenzie inquire about Spellings’ definition of accountability and whether it has evolved over time. She defines accountability as the process of objectively assessing achievement for all students and holding all stakeholders in the education system, such as adults, parents, and others, responsible for the outcomes. She notes that the definition has expanded to encompass a broader range of individuals compared to the past, where accountability primarily focused on schools, teachers, campuses, principals, superintendents, and districts. This shift is a response to the waning effectiveness of accountability measures.
The discussion then explores how Spellings applied accountability principles during her tenure at the Education Department, in her policymaker role at the White House, and when collaborating with Governor George W. Bush. She utilized these principles to make informed decisions based on facts and data, to drive necessary changes, and to defend those changes with evidence. Accountability served as a crucial tool for identifying and addressing problems accurately and effectively.
The conversation moves on to how these concepts were applicable during the revision of Texas’ education code when Governor George W. Bush was in office. Spellings highlights how the principles of accountability, akin to 99% pure Ivory soap, stood the test of time. They continue to be valuable management principles applicable to any organization. Although the mandate of accountability has become more decentralized, resulting in a broad scope of factors that can influence accountability, the core idea of measuring, diagnosing, and investing resources remains consistent.
As Spellings traveled throughout the country as Education Secretary, she witnessed firsthand how accountability principles brought attention to the underachievement and lack of resources for marginalized students, including those from low-income backgrounds, minority groups, and first-generation families, as well as special education students.
The News & Observer conducted a three-day series this year which detailed the unfortunate reality that gifted high-performing minority students in Raleigh and Charlotte often end up in lower-level courses. This report was made possible due to some degree of measurement and accountability. However, when there is a strategy of simply hoping for the best, it is inevitably the poor and minority children who will suffer the consequences. Even those who despise the No Child Left Behind policy and have reservations about accountability acknowledge that it did force us to focus on low-income, disadvantaged, and minority children like never before.
You mentioned earlier that accountability has become weak. Can you elaborate on that?
The entire framework of accountability at the federal level has disappeared. There is now a patchwork of accountability systems across the country, with considerable local flexibility when it comes to the fine details. To put it bluntly, there is no central authority to oversee and ensure honesty in these systems. Left to their own devices, educational institutions will naturally go easy on themselves. It’s just human nature.
Aside from human nature, what concerns you about states taking on this level of responsibility?
Many superintendents and state chiefs like to shift the blame onto the federal government and individuals like Margaret Spellings for making them accountable and keeping them honest. It’s a case of "the devil made me do it" because the local politics demand that everyone appears to be doing great and all is well. This is due to a variety of factors.
That is why having a check at the federal level is crucial. When that check is absent, it becomes easy for the situation to worsen.
Were you constantly advocating for these principles when implementing accountability reforms in Texas and No Child Left Behind in Washington? Or was it easier to reach a consensus back then?
There was more consensus because people didn’t fully understand just how challenging accountability would become. Initially, people would say, "Okay, that makes sense. Let’s evaluate the students. Let’s see how they’re performing. Let’s allocate resources accordingly, and things will improve."
Things did improve, but then the reality of accountability started to bite. We discovered that the best teachers were in the easiest positions. This revelation made people uncomfortable.
In the early days, accountability was relatively simple because it was an entirely new concept. This was particularly true when No Child Left Behind was enacted.
I will never forget the day when John Boehner, the then-GOP House Education and the Workforce Committee Chairman, and George Miller, the then-ranking Democrat on the House Education and the Workforce Committee, both of whom had no experience with accountability like we had in Texas, included special education students in the bill. They wanted everyone to be subject to the system. When George Bush, the one pushing accountability, and others were raising the bar, we bought into it.
The bar was set high, making the system difficult to sustain. Even Jeb Bush, the president’s own brother, criticized it.
When did the resistance start gaining momentum and lead to a different consensus?
I would say, and I say this with no ill will, it happened when the Obama administration made it more personal for teachers and their salaries. Opponents of accountability didn’t mind when it was just about the students and labeling schools. However, when it came to teachers’ own pay, especially with limited experience of performance-based salaries, that’s when things fell apart.
You may disagree with this, but I genuinely believe that is when accountability began to unravel.
Where else do you think we went wrong in gaining broad support for accountability?
The information provided was not useful enough for administrators. The data was too slow to arrive, which meant it didn’t help them improve the education system sufficiently. If we had a chance to do it all over, we would ensure that the information is readily available to teachers and principals in real-time so that they can take action.
The second thing we would do differently is provide better training for school leaders on how to utilize accountability data to their advantage.
The complaints about excessive testing, which ultimately filtered down to the local level, also derailed accountability. As you may be aware, No Child Left Behind requires testing in two subjects once a year from grade three to eight, and once in high school. However, schools, states, and localities exceeded these requirements, leading to unfavorable outcomes.
So, moving forward, how do we regain lost ground in terms of accountability?
To put it frankly, President Bush led his fellow Republicans down a path they did not wish to go and have since strayed from. The once strong coalition between the civil rights and business communities has weakened. Meanwhile, the unions and the far right have gained influence and oppose this approach for their own reasons.
If we want to regain our footing, we must reestablish the moral imperative. There was once a genuine concern for the education of black and brown children, but I’m not sure that remains true. So, what narrative will resonate this time? Is it about economic development? Human capital? The idea of doing what’s right seems to have lost its priority.
You mentioned the need to improve communication with principals and teachers. As technology evolves rapidly, how do you envision using these advancements to provide real-time data, unlike when No Child Left Behind was introduced 15 years ago?
Yes, that would be helpful. Common Core is also beneficial because it allows for comparisons that were not possible before. The landscape is more fertile now.
No Child Left Behind made a significant contribution by establishing an infrastructure that was previously nonexistent. When we took office in 2001, only a handful of states had annual assessments, if any.
We are entering a new era where states have more authority over accountability systems. What should we expect from state leaders, district leaders, and school board members to ensure all students have equal opportunities for learning at their appropriate grade level?
Our expectations and the reality might not align. Ideally, we should expect them to have a strong grasp of the technical aspects, such as defining the school year and size, exemptions, confidence intervals, and so on. However, it would be unrealistic to assume that level of understanding is already in place, but it is necessary for this to succeed.
Now that you are involved in higher education, what actions should universities take to prepare teachers and principals?
Here in North Carolina, we are implementing several initiatives. First, we are ensuring that our colleges of education teach teachers to deliver the best possible instruction using evidence-based reading and research methods.
Secondly, we need to align the K-12 curriculum with what is being taught in colleges of education. Currently, we do a poor job of achieving this important connection. Additionally, we must establish consequences for colleges of education that fail to make this alignment. Presently, there are no incentives for them to do so, aside from doing what is right.
In growing states like North Carolina and Texas, individuals with a 98.6 temperature would have an easier time finding employment. The fact that they are ill-prepared upon entering the classroom is somewhat irrelevant. These states simply need more teachers to fill their classrooms.
In terms of having a solid accountability system, what factors do you consider important for states to possess?
A comprehensive checklist for sound accountability includes high standards, valid and reliable measurement systems, reasonable exemption rates, aligned professional development, and timely data. Additionally, it would be beneficial to have a yardstick that evaluates state accountability systems against these criteria.
We should strive to make the accountability system as simple as possible, such as assigning grades to states. I believe it would be valuable to have a report card that assesses the presence and effectiveness of accountability measures. Transparency is crucial.
On a related note, what concerns you the most about states having increased authority under ESSA?
My biggest concern is that we will witness a significant decline in academic achievement for economically disadvantaged and minority students. We are already seeing signs of this in Texas.
What uncomfortable truths about education have we been unwilling to address?
The issue of resource allocation is a pressing concern. The least effective teachers are often found in the most challenging schools, while the best teachers tend to gravitate towards well-funded suburban schools. We have schools in affluent areas with ample college-level curriculum offerings, but our disadvantaged communities lack similar opportunities.
During my time in Washington, I used to share the story of how a student at Langley High School in McLean, Virginia could enroll in 27 AP classes, but a student attending an inner-city D.C. high school might only have access to 2 or 3. And then we wonder why these students are not ready for college. We have not invested our resources where they are needed the most.
What is at stake for our country in getting education right?
The stakes are high. Our nation’s success depends on it. Education is the key to unlocking opportunities and breaking the cycle of poverty. We must ensure that every student has access to a high-quality education, regardless of their background or circumstances. It is our duty to equip the next generation with the knowledge and skills they need to thrive and contribute meaningfully to society.
Why is it so challenging to effectively communicate the principles of accountability to the general public when there is so much at stake?
One reason is that this issue is not immediately apparent or easy to detect. It is a problem that slowly develops and can be easily hidden. Additionally, the soft discrimination of having low expectations for poor and minority children still exists. People do not expect these children to achieve high levels of success, and this low standard persists.
If half of the school lunches served in the cafeteria were contaminated, there would be an outcry. Similarly, if these lunches contained trans fats, people would be up in arms. However, no one seems to care that half of the children struggle to read.
Can the achievement gaps and resource gaps be resolved? What will it require?
Absolutely, these gaps can be addressed and resolved. However, the issue lies in our lack of genuine commitment to solving this problem. If we were truly serious about it, we would take the necessary steps to make a difference.
What measures need to be taken?
It would require implementing obvious measures, such as assigning our best individuals to tackle the most challenging tasks and providing them with appropriate compensation for their efforts.
Is there anything we have not asked you that you would like to highlight?
While this may seem unnecessary and he would not appreciate it if I were to say this, President Bush deserves considerable credit for generating support and enacting a law that impacted over 50 million schoolchildren for more than a decade.
The fundamental principles of this law are still in effect, including annual assessments and the use of disaggregated data. If there is any reason for hope, it is that Lamar Alexander, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, managed to preserve these aspects within the Every Student Succeeds Act. Additionally, the act accounts for the inclusion of special education students and English language learners in a meaningful way within accountability systems. These factors provide us with the necessary tools to reinvent education for a new era when we are ready.
Sign up for Newsletter to receive stories like this directly in your inbox.
