Raising the Bar and Equity? Effects of State High School Graduation Requirements and Accountability Policies on Students' Mathematics Course Taking

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis

Volumn 25, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 299-318

  Schiller, Kathryn S ^a   Muller, Chandra ^b  

^a STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

Accountability; Educational stratification; Equity; Graduation requirements; Mathematics achievement; Opportunities to learn; Race and ethnicity; Social class; Sociology of education

Indexed keywords

EID: 0344685234     PISSN: 01623737     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/01623737025003299     Document Type: Review

References (37)

1. Bryk, A. S., Raudenbush, S., & Congdon, R. (1996). HLM: Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling with the HLM/2L and HLM/3L programs. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International.
2. Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models; Applications and data analysis methods (Vol. 1). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
3. Campbell, J. R., Hombo, C. M., & Mazzeo, J. (2000). Trends in academic progress: Three decades of student performance. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
4. Catterall, J. S. (1989). Standards and school dropouts: A national study of tests required for high school graduation. American Journal of Education, 98(1), 1-34.
5. Chaney, B., Burgdorf, K., & Atash, N. (1997). Influencing achievement through high school graduation requirements. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19(3), 229-244.
6. Clune, W. H., & White, P. A. (1992). Education reform in the trenches: Increased academic course taking in high schools with lower achieving students in states with higher graduation requirements. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14(1), 2-20.
7. Elmore, R. F., Abelman, C. H., & Fuhrman, S. H. (1996). The new accountability in state education reform: From process to performance. In H. F. Ladd (Ed.), Holding schools accountable: Performance-based reform in education (pp. 65-98). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
8. Gamoran, A. (1987). The stratification of high school learning opportunities. Sociology of Education, 60, 61-77.
9. Heubert, J. P., & Hauser, R. M. (Eds.). (1999). High stakes: Testing for tracking, promotion, and graduation. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
10. Ingles, S. J., Dowd, K. L., Taylor, J. R., Bartot, V. H., Frankel, M. R., & Pulliam, P. S. (1995). National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 second follow-up: Transcript component data file user's manual. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
11. Ingles, S. J., Scott, L., Lindmark, J., Frankel, M. R., & Myers, S. (1992). National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 first follow-up: Student component data file user's manual. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
12. Jacob, B. (2001). Getting tough? The impact of high school graduation exams. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(2), 99-121.
13. Lee, J. (1997). State activism in education reform: Applying the Rasch model to measure trends and examine policy coherence. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19(1), 29-43.
14. Lee, J. (1998). State policy correlates of the achievement gap among racial and social groups. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 24(2), 137-152.
15. Levine, R., & Stevenson, D. L. (1997). Changes in America's high schools, 1980-1993: The National Longitudinal Study of Schools. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
16. Lucas, S. R. (1999). Tracking inequality: Stratification and mobility in American high schools. New York: Teachers College Press.
17. McDonnell, L. M. (1994). Assessment policy as persuasion and regulation. American Journal of Education, 102(4), 394-120.
18. Muller, C. (1998). The minimum competency exam requirement, teachers' and students' expectations and academic performance. Social Psychology of Education, 2(2), 199-216.
19. Muller, C., & Schiller, K. S. (2000). Leveling the playing field? Students' educational attainment and states' performance testing. Sociology of Education, 73(3), 196-218.
20. National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
21. Oakes, J. (1985). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
22. Oakes, J., & Guiton, G. (1995). Matchmaking: The dynamics of high school tracking decisions. American Educational Research Journal, 32(1), 3-33.
23. Raudenbush, S., & Bryk, A. S. (1986). A hierarchical model for studying school effects. Sociology of Education, 59, 1-17.
24. Roderick, M., & Engel, M. (2001). The grasshopper and the ant: Motivational responses of low-achieving students to high stakes testing. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(3), 197-227.
25. Rosenholtz, S. J. (1987). Education reform strategies: Will they increase teacher commitment? American Journal of Education, 95(4), 534-562.
26. Schiller, K. S., & Hunt, D. (2001, April). Leading up or out: Paths through high school mathematics. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
27. Schiller, K. S., & Muller, C. (2000). External examinations and accountability, educational expectations, and high school graduation. American Journal of Education, 108(2), 73-102.
28. Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., Houang, R. T., Wang, H., Wiley, D., Cogan, L. S., et al. (Eds.). (2002). Why schools Matter: A cross-national comparison of curriculum and learning: New York: Jossey-Bass.
29. Schneider, B., & Coleman, J. S. (Eds.). (1993). Parents, their children, and schools. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
30. Schneider, B., Swanson, C. B., & Riegle-Crumb, C. (1998). Opportunities for learning: Course sequences and positional advantages. Social Psychology of Education, 2, 25-53.
31. Stedman, L. C. (1997). International achievement differences: An assessment of a New Perspective. Educational Researcher, 26(3), 4-15.
32. Stevenson, D. L., & Schiller, K. S. (1999). State education policies and changing school practices: Evidence from the National Longitudinal Study of School, 1980-1993. American Journal of Education, 107, 261-288.
33. Stevenson, D. L., Schiller, K. S., & Schneider, B. (1994). Sequences of opportunities for learning. Sociology of Education, 67, 184-198.
34. Timar, T. B. (1997). The institutional role of state education departments: A historical perspective. American Journal of Education, 105(3), 231-260.
35. Useem, E. L. (1991). Student selection into course sequences in mathematics: The impact of parental involvement and school policies. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 1, 231-250.
36. Wells, A. S., & Oakes, J. (1996). Potential pitfalls of systemic reform: Early lessons from research on detracting. Sociology of Education, 135-143.
37. Willms, J. D., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1989). A longitudinal hierarchical linear model for estimating school effects and their stability. Journal of Educational Measurement, 26(3), 209-232.