The impact of no child left behind on teachers' writing instruction

Written Communication

Volumn 25, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 462-505

  McCarthey, Sarah J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

Assessment; Elementary teachers; Foucault; Language arts; policy; Teachers' practices

Indexed keywords

EID: 51549107093     PISSN: 07410883     EISSN: 15528472     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0741088308322554     Document Type: Article

References (78)

1. Afflerbach, P. (2005). National Reading Conference Policy Brief: High stakes testing and reading assessment. Journal of Literacy Research, 37, 151-162.
2. Allen, J., Altwerger, B., Edelsky, C., Larson, J., Rios-Aguilar, C., Shannon, P., et al. (2007). Taking a stand on NCLB. Language Arts, 84(5), 456-464.
3. Allington, R. (2003). High stakes testing does not improve the teaching or learning of reading. NERA Journal, 39(1), 31-36.
4. Anyon, J. (2005). Radical possibilities: Public policy, urban education, and a new social movement. New York: Routledge.
5. Armbruster, B., McCarthey, S.J., & Cummins, S. (2005). Writing to learn in elementary classrooms. In R. Indrisano & J. Paratore (Eds.), Learning to write, writing to learn: Theory and research in practice (pp. 71-96). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
6. Bad marks for Utah's schools. (2006, September 29). The Salt Lake Tribune, p. A1.
7. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
8. Best, S., & Kellner, D. (1991). Postmodern theory: Critical interrogations. New York: Guilford.
9. Boscolo, P. (2008). Writing in primary school. In C. Bazerman (Ed.), Handbook of research on writing: History, society, school, individual, text (pp. 293-309). New York: Erlbaum.
10. Calkins, L.M. (1994). The art of teaching writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
11. Calkins, L.M., and Colleagues. (2006). Units of study for primary writing: A yearlong curriculum, K-2. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
12. Calkins, L.M., and Colleagues. (2006). Units of study for teaching writing, 3-5. Portsmouth, NH: Firsthand, Heinemann.
13. Cawthon, S.W. (2007). Hidden benefits and unintended consequences of No Child Left Behind policies for students who are deaf or hard of hearing. American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 460-492.
14. Center on Education Policy. (2007). Choices, changes, and challenges: Curriculum and instruction in the NCLB era. Washington, DC: Author.
15. Chapman, M. (1994). The emergence of genres: Some findings from an examination of first grade writing. Written Communication, 11, 348-380.
16. Chapman, M. (1995). The sociocognitive construction of written genres in first grade. Research in the Teaching of English, 29, 164-192.
17. Chapman, M. (2006). Preschool through elementary writing. In P. Smagorinsky (Ed.), Research on composition: Multiple perspectives on two decades of change (pp 15-47). New York: Teachers College Press.
18. Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (1993). The powers of literacy. London: Falmer.
19. Darling-Hammond, L. (2007). Race, inequality and educational accountability: The irony of 'No Child Left Behind. Race Ethnicity and Education, 10(3), 245-260.
20. Dean, M. (1999). Governmentality: Power and rule in modern society. London: Sage.
21. Defying No Child law could cost Utah. (2005, April 19). The Salt Lake Tribune, p. A1.
22. Delpit, L. (1988). The Silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people's children. Harvard Educational Review, 58(3), 280-298.
23. Drake, E., & Steer, D. (Eds.). (2003). Dragonology. Cambridge, MA: Candlewick Press.
24. Dressman, M. (1997). Literacy in the library: Negotiating the spaces between order and desire. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.
25. Dressman, M. (2008). Using social theory in educational research. New York: Routledge.
26. Edelsky, C. (2007). Taking a stand on NCLB. Language Arts, 84(5), 457-458.
27. Elmore, R. (2003). A plea for strong practice. Educational Leadership, 61(3), 6-10.
28. Englert, C., Raphael, T., Anderson, L., Anthony, H., & Stevens, D. (1991). Making strategies and self-talk visible: Writing instruction in regular and special education classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 337-372.
29. Fakuda, K. (2007). Test development, test taking, and the right to learn. Language Arts, 84(5), 431-440.
30. Finnigan, K.S., & Gross, B. (2007). Do accountability sanctions influence teacher motivation? Lessons from Chicago's low-performing schools. American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 594-629.
31. Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. New York: Vintage.
32. Foucault, M. (1988). Technologies of the self. In L. M. Martin et al. (Eds.), Technologies of the self (pp. 16-49). Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
33. Foucault, M. (1991). Governmentality. In G. Burchell et al. (Eds.), The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality (pp. 87-104). London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
34. Fuller, B., Wright, J., Gesiski, K., & Kang, E. (2007). Gauging growth: How to judge No Child Left Behind. Educational Researcher, 36(5), 268-278.
35. Gay, G. (2007). The rhetoric and reality of NCLB. Race Ethnicity and Education, 10(3), 279-293.
36. Goldstein, A., & Carr, P. (1996). Can students benefit from process writing? (NAEP Facts No. 1). Washington, DC: Department of Education, National Center for Statistics.
37. Graham, S. (2006). Strategy instruction and the teaching of writing: A Meta-analysis. In C. A. MacArthur et al. (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 187-207). New York: Guilford.
38. Graham, S., & Harris, K.R. (1993). Self-regulated strategy development: Helping students with learning problems develop as writers. Elementary School Journal, 94, 169-181.
39. Graves, D. (1994). A fresh look at writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
40. Gutierrez, K. (1992). A comparison of instructional contexts in writing: Process classrooms with Latino children. Education and Urban Society, 24, 244 - 252.
41. Harper, C., Platt, E., Naranjo, C., & Boynton, S. (2007). Marching in unison: Florida ESL Teachers and No Child Left Behind. TESOL Quarterly, pp. 642-651.
42. Hillocks, G. (2002). The testing trap: How state writing assessments control learning. New York: Teachers College Press.
43. Hursh, D. (2007 a). Exacerbating inequality: The failed promise of the No Child Left Behind Act. Race Ethnicity and Education, 10(3), 295-308.
44. Hursh, D. (2007b). Assessing No Child Left Behind and the rise of Neoliberal polities. American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 493-518.
45. Ketter, J., & Pool, J. (2001). Exploring the impact of a high-stakes direct writing assessment in two high school classrooms. Research in the Teaching of English, 35, 345-387.
46. Krashen, S. (2006). Did reading first work? Retrieved July 16, 2008, from http://www.elladvocates.org/issuebriefs/Krashen_reading_first.pdf
47. Kozol, J. (2005). The shame of the nation. New York: Crown.
48. Lemke, T. (2002). Foucault, governmentality and critique. Rethinking Marxism, 14(3), 49-64.
49. Lensmire, T. (2000). Powerful writing, responsible teaching. New York: Teachers College Press.
50. Lipson, M., Mosenthal, J., Daniels, P., & Woodside-Jiron, H. (2000). Process writing in the classrooms of eleven fifth-grade teachers with different orientations to teaching and learning. Elementary School Journal, 101(2), 209-232.
51. Marx, R.W., & Harris, C. (2006). No Child Left Behind and science education: Opportunities, challenges, and risks. Elementary School Journal, 106, 467-478.
52. McCaslin, M. (2006). Student motivational dynamics in the era of school reform. Elementary School Journal, 106, 479-490.
53. Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
54. Murphy, S. (2007). Some consequences of writing assessment. In A. Havnes & L. McDowell (Eds.), Balancing dilemmas in assessment and learning in contemporary education (pp. 47-68). New York: Routledge.
55. National Writing Project, & Nagin, C. (2003). Because writing matters. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
56. NCTE Executive Committee. (2006). NCLB recommendations. Language Arts, 84(5), 486.
57. Newkirk, T., & Tobin, L. (Eds.). (1994). Taking stock: The writing process movement in the '90s. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
58. Nichols, S.L., & Berliner, D.C. (2007). Collateral damage: How high stakes testing corrupts America's schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
59. Office of Inspector General. (2006). The Reading First Program's grant application process: Final inspection report, September 2006 (No. ED-OIG/ I13-F0017). Retrieved July 16, 2008, from http://www.ed.gov/about/ offices/list/oig/aireports/i13f0017.pdf
60. Olson, C.B., & Land, R. (2007). Cognitive strategies approach to reading and writing instruction for English language learners in secondary school. Research in the Teaching of English, 41(3), 269-303.
61. Poglinco, S., Bach, A.J., Hovde, K., Rosenblum, S., Saunders, M., & Supvitz, J. (2003). The heart of the matter: The coaching model in America's Choice schools. University of Pennsylvania: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
62. Quinn, J. (2006). How well do you understand Utah's school accountability systems? In, Issues and Action (p. 6). Salt Lake City: Utah Education Association Action.
63. Mixed reactions to NCLB. (2005, February). Reading Today, 22(4), pp. 1, 4.
64. Reyes, M. (1992). Challenging venerable assumptions: Literacy instruction for linguistically different students. Harvard Educational Review, 62, 427-446.
65. Sadoski, M., Wilson, V., & Norton, D. (1997). The relative contributions of research-based composition activities to writing improvement in the lower and middle grades. Research in the Teaching of English, 31, 120-150.
66. Shanahan, T. (2006). Where does writing fit in reading? In C. Cummins (Ed.), Understanding and implementing reading first initiatives: The changing role of administrators (pp. 106-126). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
67. Should No Child Left Behind be left behind? (2006, June 22). The Salt Lake Tribune, p. B1.
68. Skindrud, K., & Gersten, R. (2006). An evaluation of two contrasting approaches for improving reading achievement in a large urban district. Elementary School Journal, 106(5), 389-408.
69. Slavin, R.E., & Madden, N. (2001). One million children: Success for all. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
70. Spandel, V. (2005). Creating writers through 6-trait writing assessment and instruction (4th edition). Boston: Pearson.
71. Spellings, M. (2005). Interview: U. S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings. Harvard Educational Review, 75(4), 364-382.
72. Strickland, D.S., Bodino, A., Buchan, K., Jones, K.M., Nelson, A., & Rosen, M. (2001). Teaching writing in a time of reform. Elementary School Journal, 101(4), 385-397.
73. Sunderman, G.L. (2006). The unraveling of No Child Left Behind: How negotiated changes transform the law. Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University.
74. U.S. Department of Education. (2002). Reading first. Retrieved June 12, 2008, from http://www.ed.gov/programs/readingfirst/index.html
75. U.S. Department of Education. (2007). Standards and assessments peer review guidance: Information and examples for Meeting the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Washington, DC: Author.
76. Valdés, G. (1999). Incipient bilingualism and the development of English language writing abilities in the secondary school. In C. J. Faltis & P. M. Wolfe (Eds.), So much to say: Adolescents, bilingualism, and ESL in the secondary school (pp. 138-175). New York: Teachers College Press.
77. Valli, L., & Buese, D. (2007). The changing roles of teachers in an era of high-stakes accountability. American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 519-558.
78. Wollman, J. (2007). "Are we on the same book and page?" The value of shared theory and vision. Language Arts, 84(5), 410-418.