Using state school accountability data to evaluate federal programs: A long uphill road

Peabody Journal of Education

Volumn 77, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 122-145

  Kirby, Sheila Nataraj ^a   McCaffrey, Daniel F ^a   Lockwood, J R ^a   McCombs, Jennifer Sloan ^a   Naftel, Scott ^a   Barney, Heather ^a  

^a RAND   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33744455006     PISSN: 0161956X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/S15327930PJE7704_6     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Achieve, Inc. (2002). Aiming higher: The next decade of education reform in Maryland. Washington DC: Author.
2. American Institutes for Research. (2000). Summary and implications from a conference on student achievement and the evaluation of federal education programs: A working paper. Washington DC: Author.
3. Bloom, H. S. (1999). Estimating program impacts on student achievement using “short” interrupted time series. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
4. Borman, G. D., Hewes, G. M., Rachuba, L. T., & Brown, S. (n.d.). Comprehensive school reform and student achievement: A meta-analysis. Unpublished manuscript.
5. Bryk, A. S., Thum, Y. M., Easton, J. Q., & Luppescu, S. (1998). Academic productivity of Chicago public elementary schools. Chicago: The Consortium on Chicago School Research.
6. Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). The right to learn: A blueprint for creating schools that work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
7. Feuer, M. J., Holland, P. W., Green, B. F., Bertenthal, M. W., & Hemphill, F. C. (Eds.). (1999). Uncommon measures: Equivalence and linkage among educational tests. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
8. Garet, M. S. (2002). Thoughts on the analysis of school-aggregate achievement data. Unpublished manuscript.
9. Hamilton, L. S., & Koretz, D. M. (2002). About tests and their use in test-based account-ability systems. In L. S. Hamilton, B. M. Stecher, & S. P. Klein (Eds.), Making sense of test-based accountability in education (pp. 10–35). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
10. Jennings, J. F. (2000). Title I: Its legislative history and its promise. Phi Delta Kappan, 81, 516–522.
11. Kane, T. J., & Staiger, D. O. (2002). Volatility in school test scores: Implications for test-based accountability systems. In D. Ravitch (Ed.), Brookings papers on education policy, 2002 (pp. 235–283). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
12. Kane, T. J., Staiger, D. O., & Geppert, J. (2002). Randomly accountable. Education Next, 2, 56–61.
13. Koretz, D. M. (in press). Limitations in the use of achievement tests as measures of educators’ productivity. Journal of Human Resources.
14. Koretz, D. M., & Barron, S. I. (1998). The validity of gains on the Kentucky Instructional Results Informational System (KIRIS). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
15. Koretz, D. M., McCaffrey, D., & Hamilton, L. (2001). Toward a framework for validating gains under high-stakes conditions (CSE Technical Report No. 551). Los Angeles: Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
16. Le, V., & Klein, S. P. (2002). Technical criteria for evaluating tests. In L. S. Hamilton, B. M. Stecher, & S. P. Klein (Eds.), Making sense of test-based accountability in education (pp. 36–55). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
17. Levin, H. M. (1991). Learning from accelerated schools (Pew Higher Education Research Program, Policy Perspectives). Philadelphia: Pew Charitable Trusts.
18. Linn, R. L. (2000). Assessments and accountability. Educational Researcher, 29(2), 4–16.
19. Linn, R. L. (2001). The design and evaluation of educational assessment and accountability systems. Los Angeles: Center for the Study of Evaluation, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing, University of California at Los Angeles Graduate School of Education & Information Studies.
20. Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
21. Lockwood J. R., Louis T. A., & McCaffrey, D. (in press). Uncertainty in rank estimation: Implications for value added modeling accountability systems. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics.
22. McLaughlin, D. (2001, September 27). Use of school-level assessment data in evaluations of federal education programs: Analysis plan. Unpublished manuscript.
23. Meyer, R. H. (2000). Value-added indicators: A powerful tool for evaluating science and mathematics programs and policies. NISE Brief, 3(3), 1–7.
24. Sizer, T. R. (1984). Horace’s compromise: The dilemma of the American high school. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
25. Sizer, T. R. (1992). Horace’s school: Redesigning the American high school. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
26. Weiss, C. H. (1972). Evaluation research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
27. Williams, W. (1976). Implementation analysis and assessment. In W. Williams & R. F. Elmore (Ed), Social program implementation. New York: Academic Press.