The unequal effect of adequate yearly progress: Evidence from school visits

American Educational Research Journal

Volumn 47, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 774-798

  Brown, Abigail B ^a   Clift, Jack W ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY SYDNEY   (Australia)

^b Pardee RAND Graduate School   (United States)

Author keywords

accountability; incentives; No Child Left Behind

Indexed keywords

EID: 78649943174     PISSN: 00028312     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/0002831210374644     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Alexander, K.L., Entwisle, D.R., & Dauber, S.L. (1996). Children in motion: School transfers and elementary school performance. Journal of Educational Research, 90(1), 3-12.
2. Babad, E. (1993). Teachers' differential behavior. Educational Psychology Review, 5(4), 347-376.
3. Baker, G.P. (1992). Incentive contracts and performance measurement. Journal of Political Economy, 100(3), 598-614.
4. Baker, G.P., Jensen, M.C., & Murphy, K.J. (1988). Compensation and incentives: Practice vs. theory. Journal of Finance, 43(3), 593-616.
5. Booher-Jennings, J. (2005). Below the bubble: "Educational triage" and the Texas accountability system. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 231-268.
6. Center on Educational Policy. (2008). Has student achievement increased since 2002? State test score trends through 2006-07. Washington, DC: Author.
7. Center on Educational Policy. (2009a). Is the emphasis on "proficiency" shortchanging higher- and lower-achieving students? Washington, DC: Author.
8. Center on Educational Policy. (2009b). Top down, bottom up: California districts in corrective action and schools in restructuring under NCLB. Washington, DC: Author.
9. Costrell, R.M. (1994). A simple model of educational standards. American Economic Review, 84(4), 956-971.
10. Cronin, J., Kingsbury, G.G., McCall, M.S., & Bowe, B. (2005). The impact of the No Child Left Behind Act on student achievement and growth: 2005 edition (Tech. rep. from NWEA Growth Research Database). Retrieved August 10, 2008, from http://www.nwea.org/sites/www.nwea.org/files/NCLBImpact_2005_Study_0.pdf.
11. Deci, E. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Scribner's.
12. Elmore, R.F. (2003). Knowing the right thing to do: School improvement and performance-based accountability (Working paper). Washington, DC: NGA Center for Best Practices. Retrieved July 18, 2008, from http://www.nga.org/cda/files/0803KNOWING.PDF.
13. Fuller, B., Wright, J., Gesicki, K., & Kang, E. (2007). Gauging growth: How to judge No Child Left Behind. Educational Researcher, 36(5), 268-278.
14. Gneezy, U., & Rustichini, A. (2000). A fine is a price. Journal of Legal Studies, 29(1), 1-17.
15. Goldhaber, D. (2002, February). What might go wrong with the accountability measures of the "No Child Left Behind Act"? Paper presented at Will No Child Truly Be Left Behind? The Challenges of Making This Law Work conference, Washington, DC.
16. Government Accountability Office. (1994). Elementary school children: Many change schools frequently, harming their education (No. GAO/HEHS-94-45). Washington, DC: Author.
17. Hamilton, L.S. (2003). Assessment as a policy tool. Review of Research in Education, 27(1), 25-68.
18. Hamilton, L.S., Stecher, B.M., Marsh, J.A., McCombs, J.S., Robyn, A., Russell, J.L.,et al.(2007). Standards-based accountability under No Child Left Behind: Experiences of teachers and administrators in three states (No. MG-589). Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.
19. Hamilton, L.S., Stecher, B.M., & Yuan, K. (2008). Standards-based reform in the United States: History, research, and future directions (No. RP-1384). Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.
20. Holmstrom, B., & Milgrom, P. (1991). Multi-task principal-agent analysis: Incentive contracts, asset ownership, and job design. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 7(special ed.), 24-52.
21. Kerbow, D. (1996). Patterns of urban student mobility and local school reform. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 1(2), 147-168.
22. Koretz, D.M. (2008). The pending reauthorization of NCLB: An opportunity to rethink the basic strategy. In G. L. Sunderman (Ed.), Holding NCLB accountable: Achieving accountability, equity, and school reform. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
23. Kreps, D.M. (1997). Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic incentives. American Economic Review, 87(2), 359-364.
24. Krieg, J.M. (2008). Are students left behind? The distributional effects of the No Child Left Behind Act. Education Finance and Policy, 3(2), 250-281.
25. Kruglanski, A., Friedman, I., & Zeevi, G. (1971). The effect of extrinsic incentives on some qualitative aspects of task performance. Journal of Personality, 39(4), 608-617.
26. Lazear, E.P. (2006). Speeding, terrorism and teaching to the test. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121(3), 1029-1061.
27. Lee, J. (2006). Tracking achievement gaps and assessing the impact of NCLB on the gaps: An in-depth look into national and state reading and math outcome trends. Cambridge, MA: Civil Rights Project at Harvard University.
28. Linn, R.L. (2000). Assessments and accountability. Educational Researcher, 29(2), 4-16.
29. Milgrom, P., & Roberts, J. (1988). An economic approach to influence activities in organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S154-S179.
30. Milnor, J. (1985). On the concept of attractor. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 99, 177-195.
31. Neal, D., & Schanzenbach, D.W. (2007). Left behind by design: Proficiency counts and test-based accountability (NBER Working Paper No. W13293). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved March 26, 2008, from http://papers.nber.org/papers/w13293.
32. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 20 U.S.C. § 6311 et seq.
33. Papay, J.P., Murnane, R.J., & Willett, J.B. (2010, January). The high-stakes effects of "low-stakes" testing: Performance labels matter to vulnerable students. Paper resented at the 2010 American Economics Association Meetings, Atlanta, GA.
34. Peterson, P.E., & Hess, F.M. (2006). Education: Keeping an eye on state standards. Hoover Digest, 6(3).
35. Peterson, P.E., & Hess, F.M. (2008). Few states set world standards. Education Next, 8(3), 70-73.
36. Reback, R. (2008). Teaching to the rating: School accountability and the distribution of student achievement. Journal of Public Economics, 92, 1394-1415.
37. Rosenthal, R. (1994). Interpersonal expectancy effects: A 30-year perspective. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 3(6), 176-179.
38. Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
39. Rumberger, R.W., & Larson, K.A. (1998). Student mobility and the increased risk of high school dropout. American Journal of Education, 107(1), 1-35.
40. Springer, M.G. (in press). The influence of an NCLB accountability plan on the distribution of student test score gains. Economics of Education Review.
41. Stecher, B.M., Epstein, S., Hamilton, L.S., Marsh, J., Robyn, A., McCombs, J.S.,et al.(2008). Pain and gain: Implementing No Child Left Behind in California, Georgia, and Pennsylvania, 2004-2006 (No. DRR4591-NSF). Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.