You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Accountability Systems: Implications of Requirements of the No Child Left behind Act of 2001
Robert L. Linn, Eva L. Baker and Damian W. Betebenner
Vol. 31, No. 6 (Aug. - Sep., 2002), pp. 3-16
Published by: American Educational Research Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3594432
Page Count: 14
You can always find the topics here!Topics: No Child Left Behind Act, Mathematics, Grade 8, Educational research, Job performance standards, Students, Grade 4, Meetings, Fall lines, Law schools
Were these topics helpful?See somethings inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 substantially increases the testing requirements for states and sets demanding accountability standards for schools, districts, and states with measurable adequate yearly progress (AYP) objectives for all students and subgroups of students defined by socioeconomic background, race-ethnicity, English language proficiency, and disability. However, states' content standards, the rigor of their tests, and the stringency of their performance standards vary greatly. Consequently, the percentage of students who score at the proficient level or higher on the state assessments varies radically from state to state. Some states have farther to go than others to meet the mandated target of 100% proficient within 12 years. These differences are illustrated and the implications for achieving AYP targets are discussed. Also addressed are possible uses of results from the biennial state-level administrations of the National Assessment of Educational Progress as a means of leveling the playing field. Factors contributing to the volatility of gains in achievement from year to year for individual schools are discussed.
Educational Researcher © 2002 American Educational Research Association