Accountability Systems: Implications of Requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001

By R. Linn, Eva L. Baker, Damian W. Betebenner. 2002

491 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/873bfe00e529c84ba249acd56d33f094057c148f

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

Authentic assessment, student and teacher perceptions: the practical value of the five‐dimensional framework (2006, background): “To foster authentic learning and to improve student achievement it is imperative that authentic assessment is aligned to authentic instruction as well as to real‐world expectations (Biggs, 1996 ; Linn et al , 2002 ; Achieve, 2006 ).”
Estimating Critical Values for Strength of Alignment Among Curriculum, Assessments, and Instruction (2011, background): “Prior to the passage of NCLB, states and territories varied in the grade level, content areas, cognitive demands, and stringency of passing requirements (Linn et al., 2002).”
Professional Development in the Accountability Context: Building Capacity to Achieve Standards (2010, background): “Second, states are required to align standards for what students are expected to know and be able to do with assessments in reading and language arts, math, and science ( Elmore et al, 1996 ; Linn, Baker, & Betebenner, 2002 ).”
The Problem With “Proficiency”: Limitations of Statistics and Policy Under No Child Left Behind (2008, unknown): “The national assessment has, with few exceptions and for some time, reported lower percentages of proficient students than states for matched subjects and grades, implying higher cut scores and thereby higher standards (Braun & Qian, 2007; Linn, Baker, & Betebenner, 2002; McLaughlin & Bandeira de ”
Achievement Gaps and Correlates of Early Mathematics Achievement: Evidence from the ECLS K-First Grade Sample (2005, background): “The lack of comparability in state standards and current practices for monitoring achievement gaps have raised concerns among researchers and policy-analysts (Linn, 2003; Linn, Baker & Betebenner, 2002 ).”
Social Capital and Organizational Performance: Evidence from Urban Public Schools (2006, background): “…subject matters will be tested in the future under the law, the focus on mathematics and reading test scores as the primary means to evaluate school performance is prevalent nationwide in policy debates, as well as in scholarly analyses of school performance (cf. Leitner 1994, Linn et al. 2002).”
Norm- and Criterion-Referenced Student Growth. (2009, background): “Current discussions often differentiate between accountability models/systems based upon status (i.e., achievement) and those based upon growth (Braun, 2005; Linn et al., 2002; Hill, 2002; Hill & DePascale, 2002; Carlson, 2001).”
Making Sense of the Links: Professional Development, Teacher Practices, and Student Achievement (2009, unknown): “Although student gain scores have been criticized because of the many influences besides teaching that can affect student scores over the course of a single year (Linn et al., 2002), gains over 3 years have been successfully employed as a barometer of growth in Tennessee (Sanders & Horn, 1998).”
The Impact of a State Performance-Based Assessment and Accountability Program on Mathematics Instruction and Student Learning: Evidence From Survey Data and School Performance (2002, result): “However, results from a recent study conducted by Linn, Baker, and Betebenner (2002) may suggest otherwise.”