The Florida School Recognition Program (FSRP) was created by the Florida legislature in 1997 to provide an incentive to schools that achieve specific standards-based goals. Achievement is measured primarily through the state's high-stakes test, the Florida Comprehensive Achievement Test. Through analysis of FSRP awards, it is established that poverty and race influence these awards. This analysis considers the larger context and implications of this influence. Ultimately, it is asserted that such policies may act to legitimate and further entrench social stratification.
American Federation of Teachers. (1999). Making standards matter: An update on state activity. Washington, DC: Author.
2.
Anyon, J. (1995). Race, social class, and educational reform in an inner city school. Teachers College Record, 97(1), 69-94.
3.
Apple, M.W. (1996). The politics of official knowledge: Does a national curriculum make sense? In M. Apple, Cultural politics in education (pp. 22-42). New York: Teachers College Press.
4.
Apple, M.W. (2001a). Educating the “right” way: Markets, standards, God, and inequality. New York: Routledge.
5.
Apple, M.W. (2001b). Markets, standards, teaching, and teacher education . Journal of Teacher Education, 52(3), 182-196.
6.
Apple, M.W. (2001c). The rhetoric and reality of standards-based school reform. Educational Policy, 15, 601-610.
7.
Attanucci, J. (2004). Questioning honor: A parent-teacher conflict over excellence and diversity in a USA urban high school. Journal of Moral Education, 33(1), 57-69.
8.
Ball, S., Bowe, R., & Gewirtz, S. (1994). Market forces and parental choice. In S. Tomlinson (Ed.), Education reform and its consequences (pp. 13-25). London: IPPR/Rivers Oram Press.
9.
Barksdale-Ladd, M.A., & Thomas, K.F. (2000). What's at stake in high-stakes testing: Teachers and parents speak out. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(5), 384-397.
10.
Bernal, E.M., & Valencia, R.R. (2000). The TAAS case: A recapitulation and beyond. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 22(4), 540-556.
11.
Betts, J., & Costrell, R. (2001). Incentives and equity under standards-based reform . In Brookings papers on educational policy (pp. 9-74). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
12.
Blum, R.E. (2000). Standards-based reform: Can it make a difference for students? Peabody Journal of Education, 75(4), 90-113.
13.
Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. (1977). Reproduction in education, society and culture . Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
14.
Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (1976a). Education, inequality and the meritocracy. In S. Bowles & H. Gintis, Schooling in capitalist America: Educational reform and the contradictions of economic life (pp. 102-124). New York: Basic Books.
15.
Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (1976b). Schooling in capitalist America: Educational reform and the contradictions of economic life. New York : Basic Books.
16.
Czubaj, C.A. (1995). Standardized assessments used in American public schools are invalid and unreliable. Education, 116, 180-186.
17.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2004). Standards, accountability and school reform. Teachers College Record, 106(6), 1047-1085.
18.
Diamond, J., & Spillane, J. (2004). High-stakes accountability in urban elementary schools: Challenging or reproducing inequality? Teachers College Record, 106(6), 1145-1176.
19.
Florida Department of Education. (2003). 2003-2004 Assistance Plus overview. Retrieved January 11, 2005 , from http://schoolgrades.fldoe.org/pdf/assistplus-overview.pdf
20.
Florida Department of Education. (2004a). Florida School Recognition Program. Retrieved January 11, 2005 , from http://www.firn.edu/doe/evaluation/leg.htm
21.
Florida Department of Education. (2004b). Sunshine State standards. Retrieved January 11, 2005, from http://www.firn.edu/doe/menu/sss.htm
22.
Fusarelli, L.D. (2004). The potential impact of the No Child Left Behind Act on equity and diversity in American education. Educational Policy, 18, 71-94.
23.
Gillborn, D., & Youdell, D. (2000). Rationing education. Philadelphia : Open University Press.
24.
Goldthorpe, J. (2003). The myth of education-based meritocracy. New Economy, 10(4), 234-239.
25.
Gunzenhauser, M.G. (2003). High-stakes testing and the default philosophy of education. Theory Into Practice, 42(1), 51-58.
26.
Gusfield, J. (1996). Contested meanings: The construction of alcohol problems. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Haladyna, T.H., Haas, N.M., & Allison, J. (1998). Continuing tensions in standardized testing. Childhood Education, 74, 262-273.
29.
Herrnstein, R.J., & Murray, C.M. (1994). The bell curve: Intelligence and class structure in American life. New York: Free Press.
30.
Hilliard, A.G., III. (2000). Excellence in education versus high stakes standardized testing. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(4), 293-304.
31.
Hunter, R., & Bartee, R. (2003). The achievement gap: Issues of competition, class and race. Education and Urban Society, 35(2), 151-160.
32.
Kannapel, P.J., Aagaard, L., Coe, P., & Reeves, C.A. (2002). The impact of standards and accountability. Educational Administration Abstracts, 37(3), 279-412.
33.
Kohn, A. (2000). The case against standardized testing: Raising the scores, ruining the schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
34.
Lauder, H., & Hughes, D. (1999). Trading in futures: Why markets in education don't work. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
35.
Lipman, P. (2002). Making the global city, making inequality: The political economy and cultural politics of Chicago school policy. American Educational Research Journal, 39(2), 379-419.
36.
Lipman, P., & Gustein, E. (2001). Undermining the struggle for equity: A case study of Chicago school policy in a Latino/a school. Race, Gender and Class, 8(1), 57-80.
37.
Malen, B. (2003). Tightening the grip? The impact of state activism on local school systems. Educational Policy, 17, 195-216.
38.
Marguerite, M.C., George, F.M., Catherine, L.H., & Miguel, A.R. (2000). Retrospective on educational testing and assessment in the 20th century. Curriculum Studies, 32(2), 159.
39.
Massell, D. (2002). Standards-based reform in the states: Progress and challenges. In L. Joseph (Ed.), Challenges and opportunities in standard-based reform (pp. 415-568). Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
40.
McNeil, L. (Ed.). (2000). Contradictions of school reform: Educational costs of standardized testing. New York: Routledge.
41.
Meier, D. (2000). Will standards save public education? Boston: Beacon.
42.
Murillo, E., & Flores, S. (2002). Reform by shame: Managing the stigma of labels in high stakes testing. Educational Foundations, 16(2), 93-108.
43.
Neill, M., Guisbond, L., Schaeffer, B., Madden, J., & Legeros, L. (2004). Failing our children: How “No Child Left Behind” undermines quality and equity in education. Cambridge, MA: FairTest: The National Center for Fair and Open Testing.
44.
Ohanian, S. (2000). One size fits few: The folly of educational standards . Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
45.
Orfield, G., & Kornhaber, M. (Eds.). (2001). Raising scores or raising barriers: Inequality and high stakes testing in public education. New York: Century Foundation.
Sacks, P. (1999). Standardized minds: The high price of America's testing culture and what we can do to change it. Cambridge, MA: Perseus.
50.
Sandholtz, J.H., Ogawa, R.T., & Scribner, S.P. (2004). Standards gaps: Unintended consequences of local standards-based reform. Teachers College Record, 106(6), 1177-1202.
51.
Scheurich, J., Skrla, L., & Johnson, J. (2000). Thinking carefully about equity and accountability . Phi Delta Kappan, 82(4), 300.
52.
Schneider, A., & Ingram, H. (1993). Social construction of target populations: Implications for politics and policy. American Political Science Review , 87(2), 334-346.
53.
Scully, M. (2002). Confronting errors in meritocracy. Organization, 9(3), 396-401.
54.
Sheldon, K.M., & Biddle, B.J. (1998). Standards, accountability, and school reform: Perils and pitfalls. Teachers College Record, 100, 164-180.
55.
Slavin, R.E., & Madden, N.A. (2000). Roots & wings: Effects of whole-school reform on student achievement. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 5(1&2), 109-136.
56.
Smith, M.L., & Fey, P. (2000). Validity and accountability in high-stakes testing . Journal of Teacher Education, 51(5), 334-344.
57.
Smith, M.L., Heinecke, W., & Noble, A.J. (2000). Assessment policy and political spectacle. Teachers College Record, 101(2), 157-191.
58.
Stake, R.E. (1999). The goods on American education. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 668-670.
59.
Steele, C. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52(6), 613-630.
60.
Steele, C., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 69(5), 797-792.
61.
Torres, M. (2004). Best interests of students left behind? Exploring the ethical and legal dimensions of United States federal involvement in public school improvement. Journal of Educational Administration , 42(2), 249-269.
62.
Townsend, B. (2002). Testing while Black: Standards-based reform and African American learners. Remedial and Special Education , 23(4), 222-230.
63.
Whitty, G. (1997). Creating quasi-markets in education. In M. W. Apple (Ed.), Review of research in education (pp. 3-47). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association .
