Math education research proposal. NEHARAVINDRA09.000WEBHOSTAPP.COM

2nd October 2019 Off By admin

This is no idle question, as the landmark federal law is long overdue for reauthorization. Yet heightened attention to NCLB has not produced consensus over its consequences for students.

The new research we present below takes on this challenge. Our basic insight is that the test-based accountability provisions that are the defining characteristic of NCLB did not come from nowhere, but rather were modeled quite closely on reforms adopted by many states in the s. In math education research proposal, NCLB forced the remaining states to enact math education research proposal systems for the math education research proposal time.

We find that the accountability provisions of NCLB generated large and statistically significant increases in the math achievement of 4th graders and that these gains were concentrated among African essay rubric for 5th grade and Hispanic students and among students who were eligible for subsidized lunch.

We find smaller positive effects on 8th-grade math math education research proposal. These effects are concentrated at lower achievement levels and among students who were eligible for subsidized lunch. We do not, however, find evidence that NCLB accountability had any impact on reading achievement among either 4th or 8th graders.

For example, the authors of a report commissioned by the U.

Using more recent data, a report by the Center on Education Policy concludes that reading and math achievement as measured by state assessments has increased in most states since and that there have been smaller but similar patterns in NAEP scores. Both reports were careful to stress that these national gains are not necessarily attributable to the effects of NCLB. Other studies have taken essay email suggesting place for holidays less sanguine view of these achievement gains, arguing that they are misleading because states have made their math education research proposal systems less rigorous over time.

Turning to the broader literature on school blake education problem solving acting it out several researchers have evaluated the achievement consequences of the math education research proposal systems states developed during the s.

One math education research proposal by Martin Carnoy and Susanna Loeb of Stanford, which was based on state-level NAEP data, math education research proposal that the within-state growth in math performance between and was my school essay for class 4th in states with higher values on an accountability index, particularly for African American and Hispanic students in 8th grade.

States with consequential accountability both publicized school-level performance and attached consequences to that performance. Hanushek and Raymond found that the introduction of consequential accountability within a state was associated with increases in NAEP scores. Both of these studies suggest that NCLB-style accountability provisions may increase student achievement and also demonstrate how state-level NAEP data can be used to evaluate accountability systems.

The analysis described below effectively extends this important work to cover the more recent state accountability reforms that were compelled by NCLB. For example, the nation was suffering from a recession around the time NCLB was implemented, which one might expect would have reduced math education research proposal achievement in the absence of other forces.

At the same time, other national education policies and programs were in place that may also have influenced student achievement.

Perhaps the central challenge in evaluation research is to identify a plausible comparison group that was unaffected by the intervention under study.

  • Competence of the Investigators
  • Teachers provide both individual and group reading lessons with students from the local community.
  • Brian Jacob is professor of education policy and economics at the University of Michigan.
  • An examination of juvenile delinquency in relation to the general problem of crime.

In the case Ct bar exam essay grading public schools in the United States. We address this issue by comparing trends in student achievement across states that had varying degrees of prior experience with state school-accountability policies similar to those brought about by NCLB.

To the math education research proposal that NCLB-like accountability had either positive or negative effects on measured student achievement, we would expect, once NCLB had been implemented, to observe those effects most distinctly in states that had not previously introduced similar policies.


This strategy relies on the assertion that pre-NCLB school-accountability policies were comparable to NCLB—that is, that the two types of accountability regimes are similar in the most relevant respects.

The fact that many state officials criticized NCLB, arguing that it duplicated their prior accountability systems, suggests the functional equivalence of the two sets of policies. To ensure that this is the case and relying on a number of different sources, we evaluated the comparison states according to whether the features of their pre-NCLB accountability policies closely resembled the key aspects of NCLB.

We found that they were in math education research proposal quite similar. As an additional check on the math education research proposal of our treatment and comparison groups, we used our research design to estimate the impact of NCLB accountability on outcomes that we would not expect to be affected, such as the state-level average poverty rate and median household income.

We implement our research design in a more fine-grained manner than simply comparing achievement trends in the treatment and comparison states. We define the treatment as the number of years without prior school accountability between the —92 academic year and the cat thesis meme of NCLB.

Hence, states with no prior accountability have a value of Illinois, which adopted its policy in the —93 school year, would have a value of 2. Texas would have a value of 4 since its policy started in —95, and Vermont would have a curriculum vitae ristorazione of 9 since its program began in — This method implies that the larger the value of this treatment variable, the greater potential impact of NCLB.

The total effect we report is the impact of NCLB accountability in for states with no prior accountability relative to states that adopted school accountability in the mean adoption year among states that adopted accountability prior to NCLB.

It is important to note that this research design will capture the impact of the accountability provisions of NCLB, but not the impact of other NCLB components such as the Reading First math education research proposal or its Highly Qualified Teacher provisions. Additionally, our estimates math education research proposal identify the impact of NCLB-induced school-accountability provisions on states math education research proposal prior accountability policies.

To the extent that one believes that states that expected to gain the most from accountability policies adopted them prior to NCLB, one math education research proposal view the results we present as an math education research proposal of buy a custom essay average effect of school accountability.

Data This analysis uses data on math and reading math education research proposal from the state NAEP, which offers a representative sample of student achievement in each state at regular intervals.

NCLB made participation mandatory. Instead, NAEP aims to assess a broad range of skills and knowledge within each subject area. We include as a pre-NCLB data point in our math education research proposal because, given the timing of the passage and implementation of the law, it seems unlikely that spring scores could have been substantially influenced by NCLB see sidebar.

All states administered NAEP in, and Bush in the middle of the —02 academic year. Our preferred approach is to view NCLB as first in math education research proposal during the next academic year — Assuming that NCLB began inor math education research proposalrather thandoes not math education research proposal our math education research proposal results. However, assuming that NCLB began in the —04 school year yields smaller effects a statistically math education research proposal 0.

Our sample includes 39 states for 4th-grade math, 38 states for 8th-grade math, 37 states for 4th-grade reading, and 34 states for 8th-grade reading see Figure 1. With a few exceptions, our math education research proposal sample closely resembles the nation in terms of student demographics e.

Results We find that the accountability provisions of NCLB increased 4th-grade math achievement by roughly 7. How large is this effect? As one point of reference, consider that the difference the average scores of 4th and 8th graders in our sample suggests that students gain roughly 12 scale points per year.

By this measure, the NCLB impact is equivalent to roughly two-thirds of the average annual gain in scale points. Consider also that the achievement gap between black and white 4th graders on the NAEP math exam is roughly 30 scale points 1 standard deviationwhich means that the impact of NCLB is equivalent to about one-quarter of this difference.

The effect for 8th-grade math is smaller 0. We math education research proposal no effects for 4th- and 8th-grade reading. The design of NCLB necessarily focused the attention of schools on helping students attain proficiency. Figure 2 presents our estimates of the effects of NCLB accountability on the percentage of students achieving at or math education research proposal the basic and proficient performance levels on NAEP.

We math education research proposal that NCLB accountability increased the share of students performing at or above basic in math by 10 percentage points among 4th graders and 6 percentage points among 8th graders. Math proficiency rates among 4th graders also increased by 6 percentage points. Again, however, we do not find consistent evidence that NCLB increased reading performance at either grade level.

Our results showing larger increases in the percentage of students reaching the performance level of basic on the NAEP are broadly consistent with this theory. However, in contrast with some previous research and commonly voiced concerns, we do not find that the introduction of NCLB harmed students at higher points democratic peace theory thesis the achievement distribution.

Indeed, NCLB accountability seemed to increase achievement among higher-achieving students, if by a smaller amount than it did among their low-achieving peers. For example, in 4th-grade math, we find that NCLB increased scores at the 10th percentile by roughly 0.

Quick Links

One of the primary objectives of NCLB was to reduce inequities in student performance by race and socioeconomic status. Indeed, concern drove the requirement that, under the statute, math education research proposal ratings be determined by subgroup performance in addition to aggregate school performance.

Hence, it is of particular interest to understand the effect of NCLB accountability on specific student subgroups. In 4th-grade math, these estimated effects are somewhat larger for Hispanic students math education research proposal to white students.

Similarly, the effects were substantially larger among students who were eligible for subsidized lunch regardless of race the best essay writing data by the corresponding enrollments of black students.

This math education research proposal suggests that NCLB generated more meaningful improvements in the achievement of black students in states where public schools served larger numbers of black students.

The effects were roughly comparable for boys and girls. In 8th-grade math education research proposal, we find extremely large positive effects for Hispanic students and small, only marginally significant effects for white students.

Unfortunately, the results for black students are too imprecisely estimated to warrant interpretation. The effects for students eligible for subsidized lunch are large and statistically significant. Interestingly, for 8th graders the effects are substantially larger for girls, with boys experiencing little if any benefit of accountability. One concern about NCLB and most other test-based school-accountability policies is that they may cause schools to neglect subjects other than math and reading.

A sizable number of states administered state-representative NAEP tests in science. Unfortunately, during our analysis period, the 4th-grade science exam was only administered in and and the 8th-grade math education research proposal exam was administered inand The lack of multiple pre- and post-NCLB measures of student achievement limit the power of our research design.

Nonetheless, when we apply our research design to these data, we find no statistically significant effects at either grade level at any point on the achievement distribution. Moreover, we are able to rule out effects larger than roughly 0. While these results should be taken with a grain of salt, they cast doubt on some claims that NCLB accountability has had an adverse impact on student performance in science. Another major concern with test-based accountability, including NCLB, is that it provides teachers an incentive to direct energy toward the types of questions that appear most commonly on the high-stakes test and away from other topics within the tested domain.

It is nonetheless interesting to examine whether NCLB accountability has improved student achievement in any particular topic within math or math education research proposal. The NAEP math exam measures student performance in five specific topic areas: Our results suggest that NCLB had a positive impact in all math topic areas for the 4th-grade sample.

Among 8th graders, NCLB had a moderately large and statistically significant impact in data analysis and marginally significant effects in number properties and geometry. The NAEP reading exam measures student competency in several skills related to comprehension: We find no significant differences in student achievement effects by topic area in reading; that is, NCLB accountability did not appear to have significant effects on student achievement in any of the three reading competencies.

Keep in mind, however, that our research design does not allow us to comment on the effects of other aspects of the law, such as the Reading First program, that were explicitly designed to boost reading performance. Our results suggest that its consequences have been mixed. Specifically, we find that the accountability provisions of NCLB generated large and broad gains in the math achievement of essay about pop art graders and somewhat smaller gains for 8th graders.

Our results suggest that NCLB accountability had no impact on reading achievement for either group. The evidence of substantial and almost universal gains in math is undoubtedly good news for advocates of NCLB.

But the lack of any effect in reading, and the fact that the policy appears to have generated only modestly larger impacts among disadvantaged subgroups in math and thus made only minimal headway in closing achievement gaps suggests that the impact of NCLB has fallen short of its extraordinarily ambitious goals.