IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/23463.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

School Performance, Accountability and Waiver Reforms: Evidence from Louisiana

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Dee
  • Elise Dizon-Ross

Abstract

States that received federal waivers to the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act were required to implement reforms in designated "Focus Schools" that contribute to achievement gaps. In this study, we examine the performance effects of such "differentiated accountability" reforms in the state of Louisiana. The Focus School reforms in Louisiana emphasized school-needs assessments and aligned technical assistance. These state reforms may have also been uniquely high-powered because they were linked to a new letter-based school-rating system. We examine the impact of these reforms in a sharp regression discontinuity (RD) design based on the assignment of schools to Focus status. We find that, over each of three years, Louisiana's Focus School reforms had no measurable impact on school performance. We discuss evidence that these findings may reflect policy uncertainty and implementation fidelity at the state and local level.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Dee & Elise Dizon-Ross, 2017. "School Performance, Accountability and Waiver Reforms: Evidence from Louisiana," NBER Working Papers 23463, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:23463
    Note: ED
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w23463.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rajashri Chakrabarti, 2013. "Vouchers, Public School Response, And The Role Of Incentives: Evidence From Florida," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 51(1), pages 500-526, January.
    2. Sebastian Calonico & Matias D. Cattaneo & Rocio Titiunik, 2014. "Robust Nonparametric Confidence Intervals for Regression‐Discontinuity Designs," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82, pages 2295-2326, November.
    3. Thomas S. Dee & Brian Jacob, 2011. "The impact of no Child Left Behind on student achievement," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(3), pages 418-446, June.
    4. Sade Bonilla & Thomas S. Dee, 2020. "The Effects of School Reform under NCLB Waivers: Evidence from Focus Schools in Kentucky," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 15(1), pages 75-103, Winter.
    5. Thomas Dee, 2012. "School Turnarounds: Evidence from the 2009 Stimulus," NBER Working Papers 17990, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Hanley Chiang, "undated". "How Accountability Pressure on Failing Schools Affects Student Achievement," Mathematica Policy Research Reports c58a3b537e324447b94a2bd41, Mathematica Policy Research.
    7. repec:mpr:mprres:6364 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Chiang, Hanley, 2009. "How accountability pressure on failing schools affects student achievement," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(9-10), pages 1045-1057, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sade Bonilla & Thomas S. Dee, 2020. "The Effects of School Reform under NCLB Waivers: Evidence from Focus Schools in Kentucky," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 15(1), pages 75-103, Winter.
    2. Steven W. Hemelt & Brian Jacob, 2017. "Differentiated Accountability and Education Production: Evidence from NCLB Waivers," NBER Working Papers 23461, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Steven W. Hemelt & Brian A. Jacob, 2020. "How Does an Accountability Program that Targets Achievement Gaps Affect Student Performance?," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 15(1), pages 45-74, Winter.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Steven W. Hemelt & Brian Jacob, 2017. "Differentiated Accountability and Education Production: Evidence from NCLB Waivers," NBER Working Papers 23461, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Craig, Steven G. & Imberman, Scott A. & Perdue, Adam, 2015. "Do administrators respond to their accountability ratings? The response of school budgets to accountability grades," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 55-68.
    3. Feng, Li & Figlio, David & Sass, Tim, 2018. "School accountability and teacher mobility," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 1-17.
    4. Benedikt Siegler, 2015. "Microeconometric Evaluations of Education Policies," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 57.
    5. Chakrabarti, Rajashri, 2014. "Incentives and responses under No Child Left Behind: Credible threats and the role of competition," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 124-146.
    6. Steven W. Hemelt & Brian A. Jacob, 2020. "How Does an Accountability Program that Targets Achievement Gaps Affect Student Performance?," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 15(1), pages 45-74, Winter.
    7. Filer, Randall K. & Münich, Daniel, 2013. "Responses of private and public schools to voucher funding," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 269-285.
    8. Benedikt Siegler, 2013. "What triggers school improvement? Evidence from a court induced change in Florida's A+ accountability plan," Working Papers 135, Bavarian Graduate Program in Economics (BGPE).
    9. David J. Deming & Sarah Cohodes & Jennifer Jennings & Christopher Jencks, 2016. "School Accountability, Postsecondary Attainment, and Earnings," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 98(5), pages 848-862, December.
    10. Jonah Rockoff & Lesley J. Turner, 2010. "Short-Run Impacts of Accountability on School Quality," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 2(4), pages 119-147, November.
    11. David Figlio & Cassandra M. D. Hart, 2014. "Competitive Effects of Means-Tested School Vouchers," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 6(1), pages 133-156, January.
    12. Iftikhar Hussain, 2015. "Subjective Performance Evaluation in the Public Sector: Evidence from School Inspections," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 50(1), pages 189-221.
    13. Patricia M. Anderson & Kristin F. Butcher & Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach, 2017. "Adequate (or Adipose?) Yearly Progress: Assessing the Effect of “No Child Left Behind” on Children's Obesity," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 12(1), pages 54-76, Winter.
    14. Pierre Koning & Karen Wiel, 2012. "School Responsiveness to Quality Rankings: An Empirical Analysis of Secondary Education in the Netherlands," De Economist, Springer, vol. 160(4), pages 339-355, December.
    15. Craig, Steven G. & Imberman, Scott A. & Perdue, Adam, 2013. "Does it pay to get an A? School resource allocations in response to accountability ratings," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 30-42.
    16. Michael Coelli & Gigi Foster & Andrew Leigh, 2018. "Do School Principals Respond to Increased Public Scrutiny? New Survey Evidence from Australia," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 94(S1), pages 73-101, June.
    17. Woo, Seokjin & Lee, Soohyung & Kim, Kyunghee, 2015. "Carrot and stick?: Impact of a low-stakes school accountability program on student achievement," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 195-199.
    18. Seunghoon Han & Hosung Sohn, 2020. "Impact of the Simultaneous Use of the Stigmatization and Categorical School Funding Policy on the Test and Post-Secondary Outcomes of Lower-Achieving Students," Korean Economic Review, Korean Economic Association, vol. 36, pages 319-352.
    19. Richardson, J.T., 2015. "Accountability incentives and academic achievement: Distributional impacts of accountability when standards are set low," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 1-16.
    20. Holbein, John B. & Ladd, Helen F., 2017. "Accountability pressure: Regression discontinuity estimates of how No Child Left Behind influenced student behavior," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 55-67.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H70 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - General
    • I2 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:23463. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.