Over the past 30 years, accountability policies have become more prominent in public K-12 education and have changed how teaching and learning are organized. It is less clear the extent to which these policies have altered the politics of education. This article begins to address that question through the lens of policy feedback. It identifies shifts in interest group coalitions and strategies as one of several elements of a new politics that has emerged in response to accountability policies, and it argues that the Common Core State Standards are a primary example of the feedback cycle influencing future policy.
BushawW. J.ShaneJ. L. (2010, September). A time for change: The 42nd annual Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup Poll of the public’s attitudes toward the public schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(1), 9-26.
3.
CampbellA. L. (2011). Policy feedbacks and the impact of policy designs on public opinion. Journal of Health Politics, Policy, and Law, 36, 962-971.
4.
CarnoyM.LoebS. (2002). Does external accountability affect student outcomes? A cross-state analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 305-331.
CohenD. K.MoffittS. L. (2009). The ordeal of equality: Did federal regulation fix the schools?Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
7.
CohenD. K.SpillaneJ. P. (1992). Policy and practice: The relations between governance and instruction. Review of Research in Education, 18, 3-49.
8.
DeBray-PelotE.McGuinnP. (2009). The new politics of education: Analyzing the federal education policy landscape in the post-NCLB era. Educational Policy, 23(1), 15-42.
9.
DeeT. S.JacobB. (2011). The impact of No Child Left Behind on student achievement. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 30, 418-446.
10.
Forum on Educational Accountability. (2004). Joint organizational statement on No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act (updated December2011). Retrieved from www.edaccountability.org/joint_statement
11.
GoertzM. E. (2007, June). Standards-based reform: Lessons from the past, directions for the future. Paper presented at Clio at the Table: A Conference on the Uses of History to Inform and Improve Education Policy, Brown University, Providence, RI.
12.
GormleyW. T.WeimerD. L. (1999). Organizational report cards. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13.
HackerJ. S. (2002). The divided welfare state: The battle over public and private social benefits in the United States. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
14.
HanushekE. A.RaymondM. E. (2005). Does school accountability lead to improved student performance?Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 24, 297-327.
HuntJ. B.Jr.(2009, April29). Strengthening America’s competitiveness through common academic standards. Prepared testimony before the Committee on Education and Labor, U.S. House of Representatives.
17.
KamarckE. C. (2007). The end of government as we know it: Making public policy work. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
18.
LaddH. F.LauenD. L. (2010). Status versus growth: The distributional effects of school accountability policies. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 29, 426-450.
19.
MannaP. (2006). School’s in: Federalism and the national education agenda. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
McDermottK. A. (2011). High stakes reform: The politics of educational accountability. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
22.
McDonnellL. M. (2004). Politics, persuasion, and educational testing. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
23.
McDonnellL. M. (2008). The politics of educational accountability: Can the clock be turned-back? In RyanK. E.ShepardL. (Eds.), The future of test-based accountability (pp. 47-67). New York, NY: Routledge.
24.
McDonnellL. M. (2009). Repositioning politics in education’s circle of knowledge. Educational Researcher, 38, 417-427.
MettlerS.SossJ. (2004). The consequences of public policy for democratic citizenship: Bridging policy studies and mass politics. Perspectives on Politics, 2(1), 55-73.
27.
MettlerS.KochJ. (2012, February). Who says they have ever used a government social program? The role of policy visibility. Retrieved from government.arts.cornell.edu/assets/faculty
28.
MeyerJ. W. (1979). The impact of the centralization of educational funding and control on state and local organizational governance. Stanford, CA: Institute for Research and Educational Finance and Governance, Stanford University (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 202 139)
29.
MoffittS. L.CohenD. K. (2010, September). The politics of bad news: Politics, policy, and practice in K-12 education. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association. Washington, DC.
National Governors Association, Council of Chief State School Officers, & Achieve. (2008). Benchmarking for success: Ensuring U.S. students receive a world-class education. Washington, DC: Author.
32.
National Research Council. (2008). Common standards for K-12 education? Considering the evidence. Summary of a workshop series (Beatty, A., rapporteur. Committee on State Standards in Education). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
33.
National Research Council. (2011). Incentives and test-based accountability in education (Committee on Incentives and Test-Based Accountability in Public Education. M. Hout & S. W. Elliott [Eds.]). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
34.
PatashnikE. M.ZelizerJ. E. (2009, September). When policy does not remake politics: The limits of policy feedback. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
35.
PhillipsV.WongC. (2012). Teaching to the Common Core by design not accident. Phi Delta Kappan, 93, 31-37.
36.
PiersonP. (1993, July). When effect becomes cause: Policy feedback and political change. World Politics, 45, 595-628.
37.
RavitchD. (2010). The death and life of the great American school system. New York, NY: Basic Books.
38.
RhodesJ. H. (2011). Progressive policy making in a conservative age? Civil rights and the politics of federal education standards, testing, and accountability. Perspectives on Politics, 9, 519-544.
39.
RothmanR. (2011). Something in common: The common core standards and the next chapter in American education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
40.
RowanB. (2002). The ecology of school improvement: Notes on the school improvement industry in the United States. Journal of Educational Change, 3, 283-314.
41.
RudalevigeA. (2003). No Child Left Behind: Forging a congressional compromise. In WestM. R.PetersonP. E. (Eds.), No Child Left Behind? The politics and practice of school accountability (pp. 23-54). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
42.
SkocpolT. (1992). Protecting soldiers and mothers: The political origins of social policy in the United States. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.
WeingartenR. (2010, July8). Saving public education, not as we know it, but as we know it ought to be (Remarks at the AFT Convention). Retrieved from www.aft.org/pdfs/press/sp_weingarten070810.pdf
