The Impact of No Child Left Behind on Student Achievement.

By Thomas S. Dee, Brian A. Jacob. 2011

500 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6acd52adc9f8667c04254a1d1f719f82cfe5818d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

Citations in the corpus

Estimating the Effects of No Child Left Behind on Teachers’ Work Environments and Job Attitudes (2014, unknown): “In contrast, our estimation strategy takes advantage of the fact that some states had accountability systems of differing strength in place prior to the implementation of NCLB to arrive at arguably causal estimates of the impact of that implementation on teacher attitudes (Dee & Jacob, 2011).”
Do 'Capitalization Effects' for Public Goods Reveal the Public's Willingness to Pay? (2014, unknown): “For example, Dee and Jacob (2011) identify the impact of NCLB on test scores from the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP).”
High-Stakes Testing and Student Achievement: Updated Analyses with NAEP Data. (2012, background): “…designs to compare achievement patterns in states with accountability practices versus those without such practices, or in states with a long history of accountability versus those with shorter histories (Amrein & Berliner, 2002a; Amrein-Beardsley & Berliner, 2003; Braun, 2004; Dee & Jacob, 2009).”
Education and Poverty: Confronting the Evidence. Working Papers Series. SAN11-01. (2011, background): “The evidence suggests that NCLB has not succeeded in raising student test scores, as measured by the nation’s report card, the National Assessment of Educational Progress, by anywhere near the desired amounts (Dee and Jacobs, 2011).”
Aiming High and Falling Short (2015, unknown): “This vote required eighth graders to demonstrate proficiency on the state’s end-ofcourse Algebra standards exam to satisfy accountability expectations under the No Child Left Behind Act and California’s Public Schools Accountability Act (Rosin et al., 2009).”
The Effects of NCLB on School Resources and Practices (2013, methodology): “Based on prior estimates that a 1-standard-deviation increase in elementary math scores is associated with an 8% increase in adult earnings (Krueger, 2003), the 0.23-standard-deviation impact of NCLB (Dee & Jacob, 2011) would translate into an earnings boost of 1.8%.”
Revisiting the Impact of NCLB High-Stakes School Accountability, Capacity, and Resources (2012, methodology): “…NCLB did not make a significant difference in improving reading and mathematics achievement or achievement gaps across the states.1 In contrast, Dee and Jacob (2009) reported significantly positive effects in Grade 4 math.2 Both Lee (2006) and Dee and Jacob (2009) employed a comparative…”
Getting Beneath the Veil of Effective Schools: Evidence from New York City (2013, unknown): “There is evidence that increased accountability via the No Child Left Behind Act had a positive impact on math test scores, but not reading test scores (Dee and Jacob 2011).”