AmreinA.L., and BerlinerD.C. (2002). “High-stakes Testing, Uncertainty, and Student Learning.”Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(18).
2.
BylsmaPeter, and HarmonRobert. 2003. “2003 Adequate Yearly Progress Results.” Research presented to the Washington State A+ Commission, Olympia, WA.
3.
CarterL.F. (1984). “The Sustaining Effects of Compensatory and Elementary Education.”Educational Researcher, 13(7), 4–13.
4.
Center on Educational Policy. (2003). From the Capital to the Classroom: State and Federal Efforts to Implement the No Child Left Behind Act. Available at http://www.cep-dc.org.
5.
CohenJoshua, and RogersJoel, eds. 2000. Will Standards Save Public Education?Boston: Beacon Press.
6.
ColemanJames. 1968. “The Concept of Equality of Educational Opportunity.”Harvard Educational Review38: 7–22.
7.
Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.2001. Digest of Education Statistics.Washington, D.C. Available at http://nces.ed.gov.
ElmoreR.F.2003. “Change and Improvement in Educational Reform.” In A Nation Reformed?: American Education 20 Years after A Nation at Risk, ed. GordonD.T.Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard Education Press.
10.
FletcherMichael A.2003. “States Worry New School Law Sets Schools Up To Fail.”The Washington Post, 3 January.
11.
HardyL.2002. “A New Federal Role.”American School Board Journal189(9): 20–24.
HoffD.2003. “Federal Law Bolsters Case for Ed Suits.”Education Week, 1 October.
14.
JohnsonL.B.1966. Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: Lyndon B. Johnson, 1965.Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
15.
KaneT.J., and StaigerD.O.2002. “Racial Sub-Group Rules in School Accountability Systems.” Paper presented at the conference, Taking Account fo Accountability: Assessing Politics and Policy, at Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
16.
KaneT.J.StaigerD.O., and GeppertJ.2002. “Randomly Accountable.”Education Next2:1: 56–61.
17.
LinnR.L.BakerE.L., and BetebennerD.W.2002. “Accountability Systems: Implications of Requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.”Educational Researcher31(6): 3–16.
18.
LinnR.L., and HaugC.2002. “Stability of School Building Accountability Scores and Gains: CSE Technical Report 561.”Los Angeles: Center for the Study of Evaluation/National Center for Research on Evaluation Standards, and Student Testing.
19.
MadausG., and ClarkeM.2001. “The Adverse Impact of High-Stakes Testing on Minority Students: Evidence from One Hundred Years of Test Data.” In Raising Standards or Raising Barriers?, ed. OrfieldG., and KornhaberM.L.New York: The Century Foundation, Inc.
20.
MathisW.J.2003. “No Child Left Behind: Costs and Benefits.”Phi Delta Kappan84(9): 679–686.
21.
McNeilL., and ValenzuelaA.2001. “The Harmful Impact of the TAAS System of Testing in Texas: Beneath the Accountability Rhetoric.” In Raising Standards or Raising Barriers?, ed. OrfieldG., and KornhaberM.L.New York: The Century Foundation, Inc.
22.
NaveB.MiechE., and MostellerF.2000. “A Lapse in Standards: Linking Standards-Based Reform with Student Achievement.”Phi Delta Kappan82(2): 128–132.
23.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110 (2002).
OrfieldG., and KornhaberM.L.2001. High Stakes Testing Policies: Examining Their Assumptions and Consequences.” In Raising Standards or Raising Barriers?, ed. OrfieldG., and KornhaberM.L.New York: The Century Foundation, Inc.
26.
RotherhamA.2002. “A New Partnership.”Education Next2(1).
27.
SlavinR.E.2001. “How Title One Can Become the Engine of Reform in America's Schools.” In Title I: Compensatory Education at the Crossroads, ed. BormanG.D.StringfieldS.C., and SlavinR.E.Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
28.
VinovskisM.A.2003. “Missed Opportunities: Why the Federal Response to A Nation at Risk Was Inadequate.” In A Nation Reformed?: American Education 20 Years after A Nation at Risk, ed. GordonD.T.Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard Education Press.