The Expansion of State Policy Research1

Handbook of Education Policy Research

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 749-766

  McDermott, Kathryn A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85145841630     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203880968-65     Document Type: Chapter

References (225)

1. Abbott, A. (1992). What do cases do? Some notes on activity in sociological analysis. In C. C. Ragin & H. S. Becker (Eds.), What is a case? Exploring the foundations of social inquiry (pp.53-82). New York:Cambridge University Press.
2. Abedi, J. (2001). Assessment and accommodations for English language learners: Issues and recommendations (CRESST Policy Brief 4). Los Angeles: Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
3. Adams, E. K. (1982). A changing federalism: The condition of the states. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED220915)
4. Ahearn, E. M. (1995). State compliance monitoring practices: An update. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Directors of Special Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED304034)
5. Airasian, P. W. (1987). State mandated testing and educational reform:Context and consequences. American Journal of Education, 95, 393-412.
6. Airasian, P. W. (1988). Symbolic validation: The case of state-mandated, high-stakes testing. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 10, 301-313.
7. American Federation of Teachers. (2001). Making standards matter: A fifty-state report on efforts to implement a standards-based system. Retrieved March 17, 2008, from http://www.aft.org/pubs-reports/downloads/teachers/msm2001.pdf
8. Amrein, A. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2002). High-stakes testing, uncertainty, and student learning. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(18). Retrieved February 1, 2003, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n18/
9. Amrein-Beardsley, A., & Berliner, D. C. (2003, August 4). Re-analysis of NAEP math and reading scores in states with and without high-stakes tests: Response to Rosenshine. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(25). Retrieved Feburary 9, 2007, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v11n25/
10. Amselle, J. (1997). Bilingual education: A ten state report card. Washington, DC: Center for Equal Opportunity. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED421876)
11. Augenblick, J. (1986). The current status of school financing reform in the states. In V. D. Mueller & M. P. McKeown (Eds.), The fiscal, legal, and political aspects of state reform of elementary and secondary education: Sixth annual yearbook of the American Education Finance Association (pp.3-20). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
12. Augenblick, J. G., Sharp, J. A., Silverstein, J. R., & Palaich, R. M. (2004). Politics and the meaning of adequacy: States work to integrate the concept into K to 12 school finance. In K. DeMoss & K. K. Wong (Eds.), Money, politics, and law: intersections and conflicts in the provision of educational opportunity. American Education Finance Association 2004 Yearbook (pp.17-35). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
13. Bailey, S. K., Frost, R. T., Marsh, P. E., & Wood, R. C. (1962). Schoolmen and politics: A study of state aid to education in the Northeast. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
14. Beard, J., Bull, K. S., & Montgomery, D. (1991). State directors of special education transition programs: State definitions, and real and ideal teacher competencies. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 342543)
15. Berke, J. S. (1974a). Recent adventures in school finance: A saga of rocket ships and glider planes. School Review 82, 183-206.
16. Berke, J. S. (1974b). Answers to inequity: An analysis of the new school finance. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
17. Berke, J. S. (1979). Federal education policy on school finance after Proposition 13: Short-and long-run implications. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 1(5), 19-27.
18. Berke, J. S., Bailey, S. K., Campbell, A. K., & Sacks, S. (1971a, April). The pattern of allocation of federal aid to education. Paper presented at Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED056370)
19. Berke, J. S., Bailey, S. K., Campbell, A. K., & Sacks, S. (1971b). Federal aid to education: Who benefits? Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Research Corporation. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED 051441)
20. Berke, J. S., Shalala, D. E., & Williams, M. F. (1975). The politics of school finance reform: State referenda, state legislation, and federal incentives. Paper presented at 18th National Education Finance Conference. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED173901)
21. Birman, B. F., Orland, M. E., Jung, R. K., Anson, R. J., Garcia, G. N., Moore, M.T. et al. (1987) The current operation of the Chapter 1 program: Final report from the National Assessment of Chapter 1. Washington, DC: United States Department of Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 289935)
22. Box-Steffensmeier, J. M., & Jones, B. S. (2004). Event history modeling: A guide for social scientists. New York: Cambridge University Press.
23. Braun, H. I., Wang, A., Jenkins, F., & Weinbaum, E. (2006). The blackwhite achievement gap: Do state policies matter? Education Policy Analysis Archives, 14(8). Retrieved March 12, 2008, from http://epaa. asu.edu/epaa/v14n8/
24. Burlingame, M. & Geske, T. G. (1979). State politics and education:An examination of selected multiple-state case studies. Educational Administration Quarterly, 15(2), 50-75.
25. Bushouse, B. K. (2009). Universal preschool in the United States: Policy change, stability, and the Pew Charitable Trusts. Albany: State University of New York Press.
26. Callahan, J. J., & Wilken, W. H. (Eds.). (1976). School finance reform:A legislator’s handbook. Washington, DC: National Conference of State Legislators. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED122403)
27. Campbell, R. F., & Mazzoni, T. L., Jr. (1976). State policymaking for the public schools: A comparative analysis of policy making for the public schools in twelve states and a treatment of state governance models. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
28. Carnoy, M., & Loeb, S. (2002). Does external accountability affect student outcomes? A cross-state analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 305-331.
29. Catterall, J. S. (1989). Standards and school dropouts: A national study of tests required for high-school graduation. American Journal of Education, 98, 1-34.
30. Center for Education Reform (2008). 2008 Charter school laws at-aglance:Current rankings from first to worst. Retrieved May 7, 2008 from http://www.edreform.com/_upload/ranking_chart.pdf
31. Center on Education Policy. (2006). State high school exit exams: A challenging year. Retrieved March 17, 2008, from http://www.cep-dc.org/_data/n_0001/resources/live/HSEE2006FINAL.pdf
32. Center on Education Policy. (2007a). Educational architects: Do state education agencies have the tools necessary to implement NCLB? Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved March 17, 2008 from http://www.ecs.org/clearinghouse/74/03/7403.pdf.
33. Center on Education Policy. (2007b). State high school exit exams: Working to raise test scores. Retrieved March 17, 2008, from http://www.cep-dc.org/document/docWindow.cfm?fuseaction=document.viewDo cument&documentid=224&documentFormatId=3704
34. Cibulka, J. G., & Derlin, R. L. (1998a). Accountability policy adoption to policy sustainability: Reforms and systemic initiatives in Colorado and Maryland. Education and Urban Society, 30, 502-515.
35. Cibulka, J. G., & Derlin, R. L. (1998b). Authentic education accountability policies: Implementation of state initiatives in Colorado and Maryland. Educational Policy, 12, 84-97.
36. Citizens Commission on Civil Rights. (1998). Title I in midstream: State examples. Washington, DC: Author.
37. Clarke, M. (2007). State responses to the No Child Left Behind Act: The uncertain link between implementation and “proficiency for all.” In C. F. Kaestle & A. E. Lodewick (Eds.), To educate a nation: Federal and national strategies of school reform (pp.144-174). Lawrence:University Press of Kansas.
38. Clarke, M., Shore, A., Rhoades, K., Abrams, L., Miao, J., & Li, J. (2003). Perceived effects of state-mandated testing programs on teaching and learning: Findings from interviews with educators in low-, medium-, and high-stakes states. Chestnut Hill, MA: National Board on Educational Testing and Public Policy. Retrieved May 7, 2008 from http://escholarship.bc.edu/lynch_facp/20/.
39. Clune, W. H. (1994). The shift from equity to adequacy in school finance. Educational Policy, 8, 376-394.
40. Coates, R. D., & Wilson-Sadberry, K. R. (1994). Minimum-competency testing: Assessing the effects of assessment. Sociological Focus, 27, 173-185.
41. Cohen, D. K., & Ball, D. L. (1990). Policy and practice: An overview. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12, 233-239.
42. Cohen, M. (1987). State boards in an era of reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 69, 60-64.
43. Cohen, M. (2002). Unruly crew: Accountability lessons from the Clinton administration. Education Next, 2(3), 42-47.
44. Cohen, M. A., Levin, B., & Beaver, R. (1973). The political limits to school finance reform. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED078521)
45. Council of Chief State School Officers. (2007a). State content standards. Retrieved March 14, 2007, from http://www.ccsso.org/content/pdfs/2006-07%20Content%20Standards%20FINAL.pdf
46. Council of Chief State School Officers. (2007b). Statewide student assessment:By subject, 2006-07. Retrieved March 14, 2007, from http://www.ccsso.org/content/pdfs/2006-07%20Assessment%20 053007.pdf
47. Council of State Social Studies Specialists. (1986). Social studies education, kindergarten-grade 12: National survey. Richmond: Virginia Department of Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED289800)
48. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement:A review of state policy evidence. Education Policy Analysis Archives 8(1). Retrieved March 14, 2008, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n1/
49. DeBartolome, C. A. M. de (1997). What determines state aid to school districts? A positive model of foundation aid as redistribution. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 16, 32-47.
50. DeBray, E. H. (2006). Politics, ideology, and education: Federal policy during the Clinton and Bush administrations. New York: Teachers College Press.
51. DeMoss, K. (2003). Who’s accountable to the constitution? Thirty years of judicial politics in state education finance litigation. Peabody Journal of Education, 78(4), 44-65.
52. Desimone, L. M., Smith, T. M., Hayes, S. A., & Frisvold, D. (2005). Beyond accountability and average mathematics scores: Relating state education policy attributes to cognitive achievement domains. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 24(4), 5-18.
53. Education Commission of the States. (2004). ECS report to the nation:State implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act. Retrieved March 14, 2008, from http://www.ecs.org/html/Special/NCLB/ReportToTheNation/docs/Report_to_the_Nation.pdf
54. Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, P.L. 107-279 (2002).
55. Elazar, D. J. (1984). American federalism: A view from the states (3rd ed.). New York: Harper and Row.
56. Elmore, R. F. (1982). Differential treatment of states in federal education policy. Peabody Journal of Education, 60(1), 34-52.
57. Elmore, R. F. (1984). The political economy of state influence. Education and Urban Society, 16(2), 125-144.
58. Erpenbach, W. J., Forte-Fast, E., Potts, A. (2003). Statewide educational accountability under NCLB: Central issues arising from an examination of state accountability workbooks and US Department of Education reviews under the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED481838)
59. Evans, W. N., Murray, S. E., & Schwab, R. M. (1997). Schoolhouses, courthouses, and statehouses after Serrano? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 16, 10-31.
60. Farrar, E., Millsap, M. A., Nutt-Powell, B., Wilber, N. R., Greene, J. C., Turnbull, B. J., et al. (1986). State and local administration of the Chapter 1 program, Vol. 1(Report No. NIE-400-85-1017). Cambridge, MA: ABT Associates, Inc. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED285965)
61. Feistritzer, C. E. (2007). Alternative teacher certification: A state-bystate analysis 2007. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Information.
62. Finn, C. E., Jr. (2001). Selective reporting: Quality counts only sometimes in Education Week’s signature report. Education Next, 1(3),69-73.
63. Finn, C. E., Jr., Petrilli, M. J., & Vanourek, G. (1998). The state of state standards, Fordham Report, 2(5).
64. Firestone, W. A., Fuhrman, S. H., & Kirst, M. W. (1989). The progress of reform: An appraisal of state education initiatives. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Policy Research in Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED315901)
65. Firestone, W. A., Fuhrman, S. H., & Kirst, M. W. (1990). Implementation, effects of state education reform in the '80s. NASSP Bulletin, 74(523), 75-84.
66. Firestone, W. A., Fuhrman, S. H., & Kirst, M. W. (1991). State educational reform since 1983: Appraisal and the future. Educational Policy 5, 233-250.
67. Ford Foundation. (1976). Paying for schools and colleges: A Ford Foundation report. New York: Author. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED130436)
68. Ford Foundation. (1981). The political economy of education: A bibliography of Ford Foundation-supported publications, 1968-1980. New York: Author.
69. Fossey, R. (1992). School choice legislation: A survey of the states. New Brunswick, NJ: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
70. Fowler, F. C. (1994). Education reform comes to Ohio: An application of Mazzoni’s arena model. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 16, 335-350.
71. Fuhrman, S. H. (1989a). Diversity amidst standardization: State differential treatment of districts. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Policy Research in Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED315903)
72. Fuhrman, S. H. (1989b). State politics and education reform. In J. Hannaway & R. Crowson (Eds.), The politics of reforming school administration:The 1988 yearbook of the Politics of Education Association (pp.61-75). New York: Falmer.
73. Fuhrman, S. H. (1994). Challenges in systemic education reform. New Brunswick, NJ: Consortium for Policy Research in Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED377562)
74. Fuhrman, S. H., Berke, J., Kirst, M., & Usdan, M. (1979). State education politics: The case of school finance reform. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED185663)
75. Fuhrman, S. H., Clune, W. H., & Elmore, R. F. (1988). Research on education reform: Lessons on the implementation of policy. Teachers College Record, 90, 237-257.
76. Fuhrman, S. H., & Elmore, R. F. (1990). Understanding local control in the wake of state education reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 12, 82-96.
77. Fuhrman, S. H., & Elmore, R. F. (1992). Takeover and deregulation:Working models of new state and local regulatory relationships. New Brunswick, NJ: Consortium for Policy Research in Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED345368)
78. Fuhrman, S. H., & Elmore, R. F. (1995). Ruling out rules: The evolution of deregulation in state education policy. Teachers College Record 97, 279-309.
79. Fuhrman, S. H., & Rosenthal, A. (Eds.). (1981). Shaping education policy in the states. Washington, DC: Institute for Educational Leadership. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED208550)
80. Fuller, E. & Pearson, J. B. (Eds.) (1969). Education in the states, Vol. 2: Nationwide development since 1900. Washington, DC: National Education Association.
81. Furtwengler, C. B. (1995). State actions for personnel evaluation: Analysis of reform policies, 1983-1992. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 3(4). Retrieved March 14, 2008, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v3n4.html
82. Gimpel, J. G., & Schuknecht, J. E. (2003). Patchwork nation: Sectionalism and political change in American politics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
83. Goertz, M. E. (2001, April). The long march: School performance goals and progress measures in state accountability systems. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
84. Goertz, M. E., & Duffy, M. C. (2001). Assessment and accountability across the 50 states. Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED480401)
85. Graetz, M. J., & Shapiro, I. (2005). Death by a thousand cuts: The fight over taxing inherited wealth. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
86. Greene, J. P. (2000). The education freedom index. New York: The Manhattan Institute. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED 448246)
87. Grissmer, D., & Flanagan, A. (2001). Searching for indirect evidence for the effects of statewide reforms. In D. Ravitch (Ed.), Brookings Papers on Education Policy 2001 (pp.181-229). Washington, DC:Brookings.
88. Hamann, E. T. & Lane, B. (2004). The roles of state departments of education as policy intermediaries: Two cases. Educational Policy 18(3), 426-455.
89. Hanushek, E. A., & Raymond, M. E. (2005). Does school accountability lead to improved student performance? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 24, 297-327.
90. Harbin, G. L., Gallagher, J. J., & Lillie, T. (1989). States’ progress related to fourteen components of PL 99-457, Part H. Chapel Hill, NC:Carolina Policy Studies Program. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED319169)
91. Harbin, G. L., Gallagher, J. J., Lillie, T., & Eckland, J. (1990). Status of States’ progress in implementing Part H of P.L. 99-457: Report #2 and Executive Summary. Chapel Hill, NC: Carolina Policy Studies Program. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED328030)
92. Harbin, G. L., Gallagher, J. J., & Terry, D. (1991). Defining the eligible population: Policy issues and challenges. Journal of Early Intervention, 15, 13-20.
93. Harbin, G. L., Terry, D., & DaGuio, C. (1989). Status of the States’ progress toward developing a definition for developmentally delayed as required by P.L. 99-457, Part H. Chapel Hill, NC: Carolina Policy Studies Program. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED312865)
94. Henig, J. R. (2008). Spin cycle: How research is used in policy debates:the case of charter schools. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
95. Hess, F. M. (Ed.). (2008). When research matters: How scholarship influences education policy. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.
96. Hoff, D. J. (2006, May 10). ECS resignations raise questions of fiscal health: Leader of state policy group says problems can be fixed. Education Week, 25(36), 1, 24.
97. Iannaccone, L. (1967). Politics in education. New York: Center for Applied Research in Education.
98. Jacob, B. A. (2001). Getting tough? The impact of high school graduation exams. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23, 99-121.
99. Joftus, S., & Berman, I. (1998). Great expectation?: Defining and assessing rigor in state standards for mathematics and English language arts. Washington, DC: Council for Basic Education.
100. King, G., Keohane, R. O., & Verba, S. (1994). Designing social inquiry:Scientific inference in qualitative research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
101. Kim, J. (2003, April). The initial response to the accountability requirements in the No Child Left Behind Act: A case study of Virginia and Georgia. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
102. Kirst, M. W. (1979). The new politics of state education finance. Phi Delta Kappan, 60, 427-432.
103. Kirst, M. W. (1981). The state role in education policy innovation. Stanford, CA: California Institute for Research on Educational Finance and Governance. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED207160)
104. Kirst, M. W. (1984a). State policy in an era of transition. Education and Urban Society 16, 225-237.
105. Kirst, M. W. (1984b). The changing balance in state and local power to control education. Phi Delta Kappan, 66, 189-191.
106. Kirst, M. W. (1988). Recent state education reform in the United States:Looking backward and forward. Educational Administration Quarterly, 24, 319-328.
107. Kohl, F. L., McLaughlin, M. J., & Nagle, K. (2006). Alternate achievement standards and assessments: A descriptive investigation of 16 states. Exceptional Children, 73, 107-123.
108. Koyanagi, C., & Gaines, S. (1993). All systems failure: An examination of the results of neglecting the needs of children with severe emotional disturbance. A guide for advocates. Alexandria, VA: National Mental Health Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED366146)
109. Kurtz, M. (2003, January 9). Study questions benefit of high-stakes testing. Boston Globe, p. A14.
110. Lacireno-Paquet, N., & Holyoke, T. T. (2007). Moving forward or sliding backward: The evolution of charter schools in Michigan and the District of Columbia. Educational Policy, 21, 185-214.
111. Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. (1974). A study of state legal standards for the provision of public education. Washington, DC: Author.
112. Linehan, P. (2000). Statewide behavior initiatives. Alexandria, VA:National Association of State Directors of Special Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED440505)
113. Linehan, P., & Markowitz, J. (2002). Special education data reporting to the public. Revised. Quick turn around (QTA). Alexandria, VA:National Association of State Directors of Special Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED471796)
114. Linn, R. L. (2005). Conflicting demands of No Child Left Behind and state systems: Mixed messages about school performance. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(33). Retrieved March 12, 2008, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v13n33/
115. Lipsky, M. (1980). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
116. Lusi, S. F. (1997). The role of state departments of education in complex school reform. New York: Teachers College Press.
117. Madsen, J. (1994). Education reform at the state level: The politics and problems of implementation. Washington, DC: Falmer Press.
118. Malen, B. (2003). Tightening the grip? The impact of state activism on local school systems. Educational Policy, 17, 195-216.
119. Malen, B., Croninger, R., Muncey, D., & Redmond-Jones, D. (2002). Reconstituting schools: “Testing” the “theory of action.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 113-132.
120. Manna, P. (2006). School’s in: Federalism and the national education agenda. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
121. Marchant, G. J., Paulson, S. E., & Shunk, A. (2006). Relationships between high-stake testing policies and student achievement after controlling for demographic factors in aggregated data. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 14(30). Retrieved March 12, 2008, from http://epaa.asu. edu/epaa/v14n30/
122. Marshall, C., Mitchell, D., & Wirt, F. (1989). Culture and education policy in the American states. Bristol, PA: Falmer Press.
123. Marshall, J. C., Serow, R. C., & McCarthy, M. M. (1987). State initiatives in minimum competency testing for students. Bloomington, IN: Consortium on Educational Policy Studies. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED292205)
124. Massell, D. (1998). State strategies for building local capacity: Addressing the needs of standards-based reform. Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED424697)
125. Massell, D. (2000). Special education in an era of school reform: Building the capacity for standards-based reform. Washington, DC: Federal Resource Center for Special Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED448571)
126. Massell, D., Kirst, M., & Hoppe, M. (1997). Persistence and change:Standards-based reform in nine states. Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED407718)
127. Masters, N. A., Salisbury, R. H., & Eliot, T. H. (1964). State politics and the public schools: An exploratory analysis. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
128. Mazzoni, T. L. (1991). Analyzing state school policymaking: An arena model. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 13(2), 115-138.
129. McCarthy, M. M. & Deignan, P. T. (1992). What legally constitutes an adequate public education? Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.
130. McDermott, K. A. (2003). What causes variation in states’ accountability policies? Peabody Journal of Education, 78(4), 153-176.
131. McDermott, K. A. (2007). ‘Expanding the moral community’ or ‘blaming the victim?': The politics of state accountability policy. American Educational Research Journal, 44, 77-111.
132. McDermott, K. A., & DeBray-Pelot, E. H. (in press). Accidental revolution:State policy influences on the No Child Left Behind Act. In L. D. Fusarelli, B. C. Fusarelli, & B. S. Cooper (Eds.), The rising state:How state power is transforming our nation’s schools. Albany: State University of New York Press.
133. McDonnell, L. M. (2004). Politics, persuasion, and educational testing. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
134. McDonnell, L. M. (2005). No Child Left Behind and the federal role in education: Evolution or revolution? Peabody Journal of Education, 80(2), 19-38.
135. McDonnell, L. M., & Elmore, R. F. (1987). Getting the job done: Alternative policy instruments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9(2), 133-152.
136. McDonnell, L. M., & Fuhrman, S. H. (1986). The political context of reform. In V. D. Mueller & M. P. McKeown (Eds.), The fiscal, legal, and political aspects of state reform of elementary and secondary education: Sixth annual yearbook of the American Education Finance Association (pp.43-64). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
137. McDonnell, L. M., & McLaughlin, M. W. (1980). Program consolidation and the state role in ESEA Title IV. Santa Monica, CA: Rand. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED192464)
138. McDonnell, L. M., & McLaughlin, M. W. (1982). Education policy and the role of the states. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
139. Meisels, S. J., Harbin, G., Modigliani, K., & Olson, K. (1988). Formulating optimal state early childhood intervention policies. Exceptional Children, 55, 159-165.
140. Milne, A. M., & Moskowitz, J. (1983). Implications of state programs:The case of special needs pupils. Education and Urban Society, 15, 500-524.
141. Miller, L. L. (2007). The representational biases of federalism: Scope and bias in the political process, revisited. Perspectives on Politics, 5, 305-321.
142. Milstein, M. (1976). Impact and response: Federal aid and state education agencies. New York: Teachers’ College Press.
143. Mintrom, M. (2000). Policy entrepreneurs and school choice. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
144. Mintrom, M., & Vergari, S. (1998). Policy networks and innovation diffusion:The case of state education reforms. Journal of Politics, 60, 126-148.
145. Mintrop, H. (2003, January 15). The limits of sanctions in low-performing schools: A study of Maryland and Kentucky schools on probation. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(3). Retrieved March 12, 2008, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v11n3.html
146. Mintrop. H., & Trujillo, T. M. (2005). Corrective action in low-performing schools: Lessons for NCLB implementation from first-generation accountability systems. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(48). Retrieved March 12, 2008, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v13n48/
147. Mitchell, D. E., & Encarnation, D. J. (1984). Alternative state policy mechanisms for influencing school performance. Educational Researcher, 13(5), 4-11.
148. Moore, M. T., Goertz, M. E., & Hartle, T. W. (1983). Interaction of federal and state programs. Education and Urban Society, 15, 452-478.
149. Muller, C., & Schiller, K. S. (2000). Leveling the playing field? Students’ educational attainment and states’ performance testing. Sociology of Education, 73, 196-218.
150. Murphy, J. T. (1971). Title I of ESEA: The politics of implementing federal education reform. Harvard Educational Review, 41, 35-63.
151. Murphy, J. T. (1973). Title V of ESEA: The impact of discretionary funds on state education bureaucracies. Harvard Educational Review, 43, 362-385.
152. Murphy, J. T. (1974). State education agencies and discretionary funds:Grease the squeaky wheel. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
153. Murphy, J. T. (1982). Progress and problems: The paradox of state reform. In A. Lieberman & M. W. McLaughlin (Eds.), Policy making in education:Eighty-first yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (pp.195-214). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
154. National Association of State Directors of Special Education. (1998a). Involvement of general education teachers in the IEP process. Alexandria, VA: Author. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED426542)
155. National Association of State Directors of Special Education (1998b). Performance goals and indicators. Quick turn around (QTA) Forum. Alexandria, VA: Author. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED428491)
156. O’Day, J., & Gross, B. (1999). One system or two? Title I accountability in the context of high stakes for schools in local districts and states. Paper presented at American Educational Research Association annual meeting, Seattle, WA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED434388)
157. Odden, A. (1998). Creating school finance policies that facilitate new goals. Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED424696)
158. Odden, A. (1999). Improving state school finance systems: New realities create need to re-engineer school finance structures. Philadelphia:Consortium for Policy Research in Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED428462)
159. Palaich, R., Kloss, J., & Williams, M. F. (1980). The politics of tax and expenditure limitations: An analysis of public opinion, voting behavior, and the campaigns in four states. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED189694)
160. Palaich, R., Wendling, W., & Flakus-Mosqueda, P. (1983). State legislative voting and leadership: The political economy of school finance. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED238094)
161. Pearson, J. B., & Fuller, E. (Eds.). (1969). Education in the states: historical development and outlook. Washington, DC: National Education Association.
162. Pedulla, J. J., Abrams, L. M., Madaus, G. F., Russell, M. K., Ramos, M. A., & Miao, J. (2003). Perceived effects of state-mandated testing programs on teaching and learning: Findings from a national survey of teachers. Chestnut Hill, MA: National Board on Educational Testing and Public Policy. Retrieved May 7, 2008, from http://escholarship. bc.edu/lynch_facp/51/.
163. Peterson, P. E., & Hess, F. M. (2005). Johnny can read…in some states:Assessing the rigor of state assessment systems. Education Next, 5(3), 52-53.
164. Peterson, P. E., & Hess, F. M. (2006). Keeping an eye on state standards:A race to the bottom? Education Next, 6(3), 28-29.
165. Piché, D. M. (2001). Closing the deal: A preliminary report on state compliance with final assessment and accountability requirements under the Improving America’s Schools Act of 1994. Washington, DC:Citizens’ Commission on Civil Rights. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED460200)
166. Pipho, C. (1980a). State minimum competency testing programs: Resource guide. Legislation and state policy authorizing state minimum competency testing (NIE-G-79-0033). Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED190656)
167. Pipho, C. (1980b). Analysis of state minimum competency testing programs (NIE-G-79-0033). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED190675)
168. Place, P., Gallagher, J. J., & Harbin, G. (1989). State Progress in Policy Development for the Individualized Family Service Plan (P.L. 99-457, Part H). Chapel Hill, NC: Carolina Policy Studies Program. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 312864)
169. Placier, M. L. (1993). The semantics of state policy making: The case of ‘at risk.' Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15, 380-395.
170. Plunkett, V. R. L. (1991). The states’ role in improving compensatory education: Analysis of current trends and suggestions for the future. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 13, 339-344.
171. Radin, B. A. (2002). The accountable juggler: The art of leadership in a federal agency. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
172. Radin, B. A. (2006). Challenging the performance movement: Accountability, complexity, and democratic values. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
173. Ramsbotham, A. (1980). The status of minimum competency programs in twelve southern states. Jackson, MS: Southeastern Public Education Program.
174. Reed, D. S. (2001). On equal terms: The constitutional politics of equal opportunity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
175. Reform bilingual ed; Non-English speakers penalized by status quo. (1997, June 5). Telegram & Gazette, p. A14.
176. Renzulli, L. A., & Roscigno, V. J. (2005). Charter school policy, implementation, and diffusion across the United States. Sociology of Education, 78, 344-366.
177. Rich, A. (2004). Think tanks, public policy, and the politics of expertise. New York: Cambridge University Press.
178. Ritter, G. W., & Lucas, C. J. (2003). Puzzled states. Education Next, 3(4), 55-61.
179. Rivera, C., Stansfield, C. W., Scialdone, L., & Sharkey, M. (2000). An analysis of state policies for the inclusion and accommodation of English language learners in state assessment programs during 1998-1999. Final Report. Arlington, VA: George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education.
180. Rosenshine, B. (2003). High-stakes testing: Another analysis. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(24). Retrieved February 9, 2007, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v11n24/
181. Rosenthal, A., & Fuhrman, S. (1981a). Legislative education leadership in the states. Washington, DC: Institute for Educational Leadership. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED208549)
182. Rosenthal, A. & Fuhrman, S. (1981b). Legislative education staffing in the states. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 3(4), 5-16.
183. Sacken, D. M., & Medina, M., Jr. (1990). Investigating the context of state-level policy formation: A case study of Arizona’s bilingual education legislation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12, 389-402.
184. Schattschneider, E. E. (1960). The semisovereign people: A realist’s view of democracy in America. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
185. Schiller, K. S., & Muller, C. (2003). 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, 25, 299-318.
186. Scott, J. T., & Barber, M. E. (2002). Charter schools in California, Michigan, and Arizona: An alternative framework for policy analysis (National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education Occasional Paper #40). Retrieved March 12, 2008, from http://www.ncspe.org/publications_files/468_OP40_v7.pdf
187. Shavelson, R. J., & Towne, L. (Eds.). (2002). Scientific research in education. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
188. Smith, M., & O’Day, J. (1990). Systemic school reform. In S. Fuhrman & B. Malen (Eds.), The politics of curriculum and testing (pp.233-267). Philadelphia: The Falmer Press.
189. Song, M., & Miskel, C. G. (2007). Exploring the structural properties of the state reading policy domain using network visualization technique. Educational Policy, 21, 589-614.
190. Spillane, J. P. (2005). Standards deviation: How schools misunderstand education policy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
191. Spillane, J. P., & Zeuli, J. S. (1999). Reform and teaching: Exploring patterns of practice in the context of national and state mathematics reforms. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21, 1-27.
192. Sunderman, G. (2006). The unraveling of No Child Left Behind: How negotiated changes transform the law. Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University.
193. Swanson, C. B., & Stevenson, D. L. (2002). Standards-based reform in practice: Evidence on state policy and classroom instruction from the NAEP state assessments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 1-27.
194. Sykes, G. (1990). Organizing policy into practice: Reactions to the cases. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12, 349-353.
195. Syracuse University Research Corporation. (1977). A study of the administration of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Title I in eight states and thirty-two school districts (Executive Summary). Syracuse, NY: Author. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED147984)
196. Thompson, S., Erickson, R., Thurlow, M., Ysseldyke, J., & Callender, S. (1999). Status of the states in the development of alternate assessments. Minneapolis, MN: National Center on Educational Outcomes.
197. Timar, T. B. (1997). The institutional role of state education departments:A historical perspective. American Journal of Education, 105, 231-260.
198. Toch, T. (1991). In the name of excellence: The struggle to reform the nation’s schools, why it’s failing, and what should be done. New York:Oxford University Press.
199. Turnbull, B. J. (1984). States propose, schools dispose: Prospects for state initiatives in quality improvements. Education and Urban Society, 16, 207-224.
200. Tyack, D., & James, T. (1986). State government and American public education: Exploring the ‘primeval forest.' History of Education Quarterly, 26, 39-69.
201. Tyree, A. K., Jr. (1991, April). Examining the evidence: Have states eliminated local control of the curriculum? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED335753)
202. Tyree, A. K., Jr. (1993). Examining the evidence: Have states reduced local control of curriculum? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15, 34-50.
203. United States Department of Education. (1996). Mapping out the national assessment of Title I: The interim report. Washington, DC: Author. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED401284)
204. United States Department of Education. (1999). Promising results, continuing challenges: The final report of the National Assessment of Title I. Washington, DC: Author. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED434418)
205. United States Department of Education. (2001). High standards for all students: A report from the National Assessment of Title I on progress and challenges since the 1994 reauthorization. Washington, DC:author. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED457280)
206. United States Department of Education. (2007). National Assessment of Title I Final Report: Key Findings. Washington, DC: Author. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED499016)
207. Usdan, M. D. (1963). The political power of education in New York State. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University, Institute of Administrative Research.
208. Verstegen, D. A., & Whitney, T. (1997). From courthouses to schoolhouses:Emerging judicial theories of adequacy and equity. Educational Policy, 11, 330-352.
209. Vold, D. J., & DeVitis, J. L. (1991). Introduction. In D. J. Vold & J. L. DeVitis (Eds.), School reform in the Deep South: A critical appraisal (pp.1-15). Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
210. Wanker, W. P., & Christie, K. (2005). State implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act. Peabody Journal of Education, 80(2), 57-72.
211. Warren, J. R., Jenkins, K. N., & Kulick, R. B. (2006). High school exit examinations and state-level completion and GED rates, 1975 through 2002. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 28, 131-152.
212. Warren, J. R., & Edwards, M. R. (2005). High school exit examinations and high school completion: Evidence from the early 1990s. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 27, 53-74.
213. West, M. R., & Peterson, P. E. (2007). The adequacy lawsuit: A critical appraisal. In M. R. West & P. E. Peterson (Eds.), School money trials:The legal pursuit of educational adequacy (pp.1-22). Washington, DC: Brookings.
214. Willms, J. D. (1999). Basic concepts in hierarchical linear modeling with applications for policy analysis. In G. Cizek (Ed.), Handbook of educational policy (pp.473-493). New York: Academic Press.
215. Winter, G. (2002, December 28). Make-or-break exams grow, but big study doubts value. New York Times, p. A3.
216. Wirt, F. M. (1977). School policy culture and state decentralization. In J. Scribner (Ed.), The politics of education: The seventy-sixth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (pp.164-187). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
217. Wirt, F. M. (1978). What state laws say about local control. Phi Delta Kappan 59, 517-520.
218. Wirt, F. M., & Kirst, M. W. (1997). The political dynamics of American education. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
219. Wohlstetter, P. (1989). Oversight of state education reforms: The motivations and methods of program ‘fixers.' New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Policy Research in Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED336861)
220. Wohlstetter, P. (1991). Accountability mechanisms for state education reform: Some organizational alternatives. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 13, 31-48.
221. Wohlstetter, P., Wenning, R., & Briggs, K. L. (1995). Charter schools in the United States: The question of autonomy. Educational Policy 9, 331-358.
222. Wong, K. K. (1999). Funding public schools: politics and policies. Lawrence:University Press of Kansas.
223. Wong, K. K., & Shen, F. X. (2002). Politics of state-led reform in education:Market competition and electoral dynamics. Educational Policy, 16, 161-192.
224. Wong, K. K., & Shen, F. X. (2004). Political economy of charter school funding formulas: Exploring state-to-state variations. In K. DeMoss & K. K. Wong (Eds.), Money, politics, and law: intersections and conflicts in the provision of educational opportunity: 2004 Yearbook of the American Education Finance Association (pp.169-196). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
225. Yu, C. M., & Taylor, W. L. (Eds.). (1999). Title I in midstream: The fight to improve schools for poor kids. Washington, DC: Citizens’ Commission on Civil Rights. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED438372)