Corrective Action in Low-Performing Schools: Lessons for NCLB Implementation from State and District Strategies in First-Generation Accountability Systems. CSE Report 657

Autor/inn/en	Mintrop, Heinrich; Trujillo, Tina
Institution	California Univ., Los Angeles. Center for the Study of Evaluation.
Titel	Corrective Action in Low-Performing Schools: Lessons for NCLB Implementation from State and District Strategies in First-Generation Accountability Systems. CSE Report 657
Quelle	(2005), (43 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Educational Policy; Compliance (Legal); State Officials; Federal Legislation; Sanctions; Accountability; State Programs; Interviews; Program Evaluation; Low Achievement; Educational Improvement; California; Florida; Kentucky; Maryland; New York; North Carolina; Texas + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Politics of education; Bildungspolitik; Member of the government; Regierungsmitglied; Bundesrecht; Sanction; Sanktion; Verantwortung; Regierungsprogramm; Interviewing; Interviewtechnik; Programme evaluation; Programmevaluation; Unterdurchschnittliche Leistung; Teaching improvement; Unterrichtsentwicklung; Kalifornien
Abstract	This paper explores what lessons can be learned from the experiences of states that instituted NCLB-like accountability systems prior to 2001 (here called first-generation accountability systems). It looks at the experiences of three smaller states (Kentucky, Maryland, North Carolina), four larger ones (California, Florida, New York, Texas), and two large districts (Chicago and Philadelphia). The paper analyzed evaluative reports and policy documents as well as interviews with state officials and researchers. It condensed the material into eight "lessons": (1) sanctions are not the fallback solution; (2) no single strategy has been universally successful; (3) staging should be handled with flexibility; (4) intensive capacity building is necessary; (5) a comprehensive bundle of strategies is key; (6) relationship-building needs to complement powerful programs; (7) competence reduces conflict; and (8) strong state commitment is needed to create system capacity. (ERIC).
Anmerkungen	Center for the Study of Evaluation (CSE)/National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), 300 Charles E. Young Drive North, GSE&IS Bldg., 3rd Flr./Mailbox 951522, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1522. Tel: 310-206-1532.
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10