Stability and Change in Title I Testing Policy

REFERENCES

1. Advisory Committee on Testing in Chapter 1. 1993. Reinforcing the Promise, Reforming the Paradigm. Washington: U.S. Department of Education.
2. ↵
   American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education. 2014. Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington, D.C.: American Educational Research Association.
3. ↵
   Bailey, Stephen K., and Edith K. Mosher. 1968. ESEA: The Office of Education Administers a Law. Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University Press.
4. ↵
   Borman, Geoffrey D., and Jerome V. D'Agostino. 2001. “Title I and Student Achievement: A Quantitative Synthesis.” In Title I: Compensatory Education at the Crossroads, edited by Geoffrey D. Borman, Samuel C. Stringfield, and Robert E. Slavin. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
5. ↵
   Camera, Lauren. 2014. “AFT Backs Newest Proposal to Reduce Testing.” Education Week, September. Available at: http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-l-12/2014/09/aft_backs_n (accessed October 6, 2014).
6. ↵
   Cohen, Michael. 2002. “Implementing Title I Standards, Assessments, and Accountability: Lessons from the Past Challenges for the Future.” Paper prepared for the conference Will No Child Be Left Behind? The Challenges of Making This Law Work, Washington (February 13, 2002).
7. ↵
   Cohen, David K., and Susan L. Moffitt. 2009. The Ordeal of Equality. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
8. ↵
   DeBray, Elizabeth H. 2006. Politics, Ideology, and Education. New York: Teachers College Press.
9. ↵
   DeBray-Pelot, Elizabeth. 2007. “Dismantling Education's ‘Iron Triangle.’“ In To Educate a Nation, edited by Carl F. Kaestle and Alyssa E. Lodewick. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
10. ↵
    1. DeBray-Pelot, Elizabeth, and
    2. Patrick McGuinn

    . 2009. “The New Politics of Education: Analyzing the Federal Education Policy Landscape in the Post-NCLB Era.” Educational Policy, 23(1): 15–42.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
11. ↵
    1. Dee, Thomas S., and
    2. Brian Jacob

    . 2010. “The Impact of No Child Left Behind on Students, Teachers, and Schools.” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity Fall (2010): 149–94.
12. ↵
    1. Dee, Thomas S., and
    2. Brian Jacob

    . 2011. “The Impact of No Child Left Behind on Student Achievement.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 30(3): 418–46.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
13. ↵
    Fung, Archon, Mary Graham, and David Weil. 2007. Full Disclosure. New York: Cambridge University Press.
14. ↵
    Graham, Hugh David. 1984. The Uncertain Triumph. Chapel Hill, N.C.: University of North Carolina Press.
15. ↵
    Henig, Jeffrey, 2013. The End of Exceptionalism in American Education. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Education Press.
16. Hochschild, Jennifer. 2003. “Rethinking Accountability Politics.” In No Child Left Behind, edited by Paul E. Peterson and Martin R. West. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
17. 1. Ingram, Helen

    . 1977. “Policy Implementation Through Bargaining.” Public Policy 25(4): 499–526.

    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
18. ↵
    Jennings, John F. 2001. “Title I: Its Legislative History and Its Promise. In Title I: Compensatory Education at the Crossroads, edited by Geoffrey D. Borman, Samuel C. Stringfield, and Robert E. Slavin. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
19. 1. Kaestle, Carl F., and
    2. Marshall S. Smith

    . 1982. “The Federal Role in Elementary and Secondary Education, 1940–1980.” Harvard Educational Review 52(4): 384–408.

    OpenUrlWeb of Science
20. ↵
    1. Kane, Thomas J., and
    2. Douglas O. Staiger

    . 2002. “Volatility in School Test Scores: Implications for Test-Based Accountability Systems.” Brookings Papers on Education Policy 5: 235–83.

    OpenUrl
21. ↵
    Kirp, David L. 2013. Improbable Scholars. New York: Oxford University Press.
22. ↵
    Kirst, Michael, and Richard Jung. 1991. “The Utility of a Longitudinal Approach in Assessing Implementation: A Thirteen-Year View of Title I, ESEA.” In Education Policy Implementation, edited by Allan R. Odden. Albany: State University of New York Press.
23. ↵
    Klein, Alyson. 2013. “Ed. Dept.: Calif. Could Lose at Least $15 Million in Federal Funds Over Testing.” Education Week, October. Available at: http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2013/10/education (accessed September 30, 2004).
24. Linn, Robert L. 2008. “Educational Accountability Systems.” In The Future of Test-Based Educational Accountability, edited by Katherine E. Ryan and Lorrie A. Shepard. New York: Routledge.
25. ↵
    1. Linn, Robert L.,
    2. Eva L. Baker, , and
    3. Damian W. Betebenner

    . 2002. “Accountability Systems: Implications of Requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.” Educational Researcher 31(6): 3–16.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
26. ↵
    Manna, Paul. 2006. School's In. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
27. ↵
    McDermott, Kathryn A. 2011. High-Stakes Reform. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
28. ↵
    1. McDermott, Kathryn A., and
    2. Laura S. Jensen

    . 2005. “Dubious Sovereignty: Federal Conditions of Aid and the No Child Left Behind Act.” Peabody Journal of Education 80(2): 39–56.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
29. ↵
    McDonnell, Lorraine M. 2004. Politics, Persuasion, and Educational Testing. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
30. ↵
    1. McDonnell, Lorraine M

    . 2005. “No Child Left Behind and the Federal Role in Education: Evolution or Revolution?” Peabody Journal of Education 80(2): 19–38.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
31. ↵
    McDonnell, Lorraine M. 2008. “The Politics of Educational Accountability: Can the Clock Be Turned Back?” In The Future of Test-Based Educational Accountability, edited by Katherine E. Ryan and Lorrie A. Shepard. New York: Routledge.
32. ↵
    McGuinn, Patrick J. 2006. No Child Left Behind and the Transformation of Federal Education Policy, 1965–2005. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
33. ↵
    McLaughlin, Milbrey Wallin. 1975. Evaluation and Reform. Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger.
34. ↵
    McNeil, Michele. 2014. “California Wins Prized NCLB Testing Waiver.” Education Week, March 7. Available at: http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2014/03/california (accessed September 30, 2014).
35. ↵
    1. Mehta, Jal

    . 2013. “How Paradigms Create Politics: The Transformation of American Educational Policy, 1980–2001.” American Educational Research Journal 50(2): 285–324.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
36. ↵
    Murphy, Jerome T. 1991. “Title I of ESEA: The Politics of Implementing Federal Education Reform.” In Education Policy Implementation, edited by Allan R. Odden. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
37. ↵
    National Center for Education Statistics. 2007. Mapping 2005 State Proficiency Standards onto the NAEP Scales. Washington: U.S. Department of Education.
38. ↵
    National Research Council. 1997. Educating One and All. Committee on Goals 2000 and the Inclusion of Students with Disabilities. Edited by Lorraine M. McDonnell, Margaret J. McLaughlin, and Patricia Morison. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
39. ↵
    National Research Council. 1999a. High Stakes. Committee on Appropriate Test Use. Edited by Jay P. Heubert and Robert M. Hauser. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
40. ↵
    National Research Council. 1999b. Testing, Teaching and Learning. Committee on Title I Testing and Assessment. Edited by Richard F. Elmore and Robert Rothman. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
41. ↵
    National Research Council. 2008. Common Standards for K-12 Education? Considering the Evidence. Summary of a Workshop Series. Alexandria Beatty, rapporteur. Committee on State Standards in Education. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
42. ↵
    National Research Council. 2011. Incentives and Test-Based Accountability in Education. Committee on Incentives and Test-Based Accountability in Public Education. Edited by Michael Hout and Stuart W. Elliott. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
43. ↵
    O'Day, Jennifer A., and Marshall S. Smith. 1993. “Systemic Reform and Educational Opportunity.” In Designing Coherent Education Policy, edited by Susan Fuhrman. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
44. ↵
    Ravitch, Diane. 2010. The Death and Life of the Great American School System. New York: Basic Books.
45. ↵
    Rhodes, Jesse H. 2012. An Education in Politics. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
46. ↵
    Rich, Motoko. 2015a. “White House Still Backs Annual Testing in Schools.” New York Times, January 12. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/13/education/arne-duncan-says-administration-is-committed-to-testing.html (accessed July 29, 2015).
47. ↵
    Rich, Motoko. 2015b. “Reviewing Federal Education Law, Senator Seeks More Local Control.” New York Times, January 14. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/14/us/reviewing-federal-education-law-senator-seeks-more-local-control.html (accessed July 29, 2015).
48. ↵
    Rudalevige, Andrew. 2003. “No Child Left Behind: Forging a Congressional Compromise.” In No Child Left Behind, edited by Paul E. Peterson and Martin R. West. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
49. ↵
    Shepard, Lorrie. 2008. “A Brief History of Accountability Testing.” In The Future of Test-Based Educational Accountability, edited by Katherine E. Ryan and Lorrie A. Shepard. New York: Routledge.
50. Skocpol, Theda. 1991. “Targeting Within Universalism: Politically Viable Policies to Combat Poverty in the United States.” In The Urban Underclass, edited by Christopher Jencks and Paul E. Peterson. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
51. ↵
    Smith, Marshall, and Jennifer O'Day. 1991. “Systemic School Reform.” In The Politics of Curriculum and Testing, edited by Susan Fuhrman and Betty Malen. Philadelphia, Pa.: Falmer.
52. ↵
    Stone, Deborah. 2012. Policy Paradox. New York: W. W. Norton.
53. ↵
    U.S. Congress. Office of Technology Assessment. 1992. Testing in American Schools. OTA-SET-519. Washington: Government Printing Office.
54. ↵
    U.S. General Accounting Office. 2003. “Title I: Characteristics of Tests Will Influence Expenses; Information Sharing May Help States Realize Efficiencies.” GAO-03-389. Washington: Government Printing Office. Available at: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d03389.pdf (accessed July 30, 2015).
55. U.S. Government Accountability Office. 2009. “No Child Left Behind: Enhancements in the Department of Education's Review Process Could Improve State Academic Assessments.” GAO 09-911. Washington: Government Printing Office. Available at: http://www.gao.gov/assets/300/295827.pdf (accessed July 30, 2015).
56. ↵
    1. Vinovskis, Maris A

    . 1999. “Do Federal Compensatory Education Programs Really Work? A Brief Historical Analysis of Title I and Head Start.” American Journal of Education 107: 187–209.

    OpenUrl
57. ↵
    Wilson, James Q. 1989. Bureaucracy. New York: Basic Books.
58. ↵
    1. Wolbrecht, Christina, and
    2. Michael T. Hartney

    . 2014. “‘Ideas about Interests:’ Explaining the Changing Partisan Politics of Education.” Perspectives on Politics 12(3): 603–30.

    OpenUrlCrossRef