Assessment and accountability make poor bedfellows 

The drumbeat for national accountability measures in higher education grows louder every year. The Spellings Commission on the Future of Higher Education made accountability a central focus of its work and asked for greater transparency on the part of colleges. The report it issued in September 2006 put colleges on notice that the federal government and consumers expect colleges to be more open about student outcomes and other indicators that can show how an institution's performance compares with others'.

This past fall, the Department of Education announced that it would fund a pilot assessment project involving a consortium of three national higher education associations-the Association of American Colleges and Universities, the American Association of State Colleges and Universities, and the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges. They have received a $2.4 million grant from the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE) to explore different approaches to measuring student learning (see box). The project, which draws on work already under way, must be concluded in 18 months.

By funding the associations, the department hopes to deflect criticisms that the Spellings Commission's push for more information on student outcomes was really a veiled attempt to impose the testing agenda of NCLB on higher education. The idea of standardized exit exams superseding the judgment of faculty working within varied disciplines is anathema to many.

In the current climate, many institutions seem to assume that if they don't take control of the accountability train, they will be run over by it. Yet at a recent Washington, D.C., panel discussion on the "Promises and Pitfalls of Accountability in Higher Education," some assessment experts voiced concern over the dangers of mixing assessment for accountability and assessment for improvement. "They can't live in the same house," says Catherine Finnegan, director of assessment and public information for the University System of Georgia. "It's hard to balance the two because our focus is on the students in front of us."

Steve Crow, president of the Higher Learning Commission, North Central Association of Colleges and Schools, noted that, through accreditation, institutions have been improving their assessment function for 20 years, but the process has been internally directed for self-improvement. Now, policymakers seem little interested in improvement. They want to capture student performance as a set of numbers, and they want the numbers to be comparable. "It's a misconception of higher education to say you can reduce what we do to five numbers," he said.