Despite its imperfections the standards movement is already proving its value. Therefore, educators must critically exam the case against standards and accountability. Ironically, an analysis of the case against standards reveals its potential importance, especially for helping educators address profound gaps in the typical curriculum found in most schools.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anderson, R. C., P. T. Wilson, and L. G. Fielding. 1988. Growth in reading and how children spend their time outside of school. Reading Research Quarterly23 (3): 285-303.
2.
Barth, P., K. Haycock, H. Jackson, K. Mora, P. Ruiz, S. Robinson, and A. Wilkins, eds. 1999. Dispelling the myth: High poverty schools exceeding expectations. Washington, D.C.: The Education Trust.
3.
Berliner, D. C.1979. Tempus educare. In Research on teaching, edited by P. L. Peterson and H. J. Walberg. Berkeley, Calif.: McCutchan.
4.
Berliner, D. C.1984. The half-full glass: A review of research on teaching. In Using what we know about teaching, edited by P. L. Hosford. Alexandria, Va.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
5.
Bradley, A.2000. Put to the test. In Middle grades: Feeling the squeeze; An Education Week special report. Bethesda, Md.: Editorial Projects in Education.
6.
Chase, B.2000. In “Do your homework Governor!” [electronic bulletin board]. Message from Bob Chase, President, National Education Association [cited 29 September 2000]. Available from listserv Cyber-lobbyist-feedback@list.nea.org.
7.
Darling-Hammond, L.1997. The right to learn: A blueprint for creating schools that work. New York: Jossey-Bass.
Elmore, R. F.2000. Building a new structure for school leadership. Washington, D.C: The Albert Shanker Institute.
10.
Feldman, S.2000. Civil union (letter to the editor). The New Republic4 (474): 10–11.
11.
Goodlad, J. I., M. F. Klein, and associates. 1970. Behind the classroom door. Worthington, Ohio: C. A. Jones.
12.
Gough, P. B.2000. First do no harm. Phi Delta Kappan81 (10): 722-722.
13.
Haycock, K. 1999. Achievement in America: Can we close the gap?Speech given at the 54th annual conference of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 6–8 March, San Francisco.
14.
Helfand, D.2000. Researchers cast doubt on Texas school ‘miracle.’Los Angeles Times, 25 October.
15.
Jago, C.2000. When nothing is new. Phi Delta Kappan82 (1): 90-90.
16.
Johnston, R.C.2000. Boosters call Houston's chief ‘A good thing, and we know it.’Education Week20 (5): 1-1, 14–15.
17.
Kohn, A.2000. Standardized testing and its victims. Education Week20 (4): 60-60, 46–47.
18.
Krashen, S.1993. The power of reading. Englewood, Colo.: Libraries Unlimited.
Little, J. W.1987. Teachers as colleagues. In Educator's handbook, edited by V. Richardson-Koehler. White Plains, N.Y.: Longman.
21.
Little, J. W.1990. The persistence of privacy: Autonomy and initiative in teacher's professional relations. Teachers College Record91 (4): 509–536.
22.
Livingston, C., S. Castle, and J. Nations. 1989. Testing and curriculum reform: One school's experience. Educational Leadership46 (7):23–25.
23.
Lortie, D. C.1975. Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
24.
Marzano, R. J., and J. S. Kendall. 1996. A comprehensive guide to designing standards-based districts, schools and classrooms. Alexandria, Va.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
25.
McNeil, L., and A. Valenzuela. In Press. The harmful impact of the TAAS system of testing in Texas: Beneath the accountability rhetoric. In Raising standards or raising barriers? Inequality and high-stakes testing in public education edited by Gary Orfield and Mindy Kornhaber. New York: The Century Foundation.
26.
McNeil, L. M.2000. Creating new inequalities: Contradictions of reform. Phi Delta Kappan81 (10): 728–735.
27.
McQuillan, J.1998. The literacy crisis: False claims, real solutions. Porstsmouth, N.H.: Heinemann.
28.
Morse, J.2000. Does Texas make the grade?Time, 11 September, 11-11.
29.
Musick, M.2000. ‘Show us the tests.’Education Week20 (1): 84-84.
30.
Neil, M.2000. Testing and cheating: The real correlation (letter to the editor). Education Week19 (43): 48–49.
Ragland, M. A., R. Asera, and J. F. Johnson. 1999. Urgency, responsibility, efficacy: Preliminary findings of high-performing Texas school districts. Austin, Tex.: The Charles A. Dana Center, University of Texas at Austin.
34.
Reeves, D.2000. Standards are not enough: Essential transformations for school success. NASSP Bulletin84 (620): 5–9.
35.
Resnick, L.; V. Bill; S. Lesgold; and M. Leer. 1991. Thinking in arithmetic class. In Teaching advanced skills to at-risk students, edited by B. Means, C. Chelemer, and M. Knapp. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
36.
Rosenholtz, S. J.1991. Teacher's workplace: The social organization of schools. New York: Teachers College Press.
37.
Schmoker, M.1999. Results: The key to continuous school improvement. 2d ed.Alexandria, Va.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
38.
Schmoker, M.2000. The results we want. Educational Leadership57 (5): 62–65.
39.
Schmoker, M. In press. The RESULTS fieldbook. Alexandria, Va.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
40.
Schmoker, M., and R. J. Marzano. 1999. Realizing the promise of standards-based education. Educational Leadership56 (6): 17–21.
41.
Texas Education Agency (TEA). 1999. Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS): Educator's guide to TEKS-based assessment: Exit-level TAAS 1999-2000. Austin, Tex.: Student Assessment Division, TEA.
42.
Wiggins, G.1998. Educative assessment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
