The Cost of Accountability
AbstractDiscussions of school accountability focus on two issues: poor test administration and the expense of accountability. Up to this point, researchers have focused on test quality and simply assumed that the programs are expensive enough to crowd out other policies, such as class size reduction or higher teacher salaries. Researchers have also assumed that it is so expensive to have a good accountability program (which includes good comprehensive tests, well-defined standards, an effective report card system, and safeguards that prevent cheating and teaching the test) that only poor accountability systems will be affordable. In this paper, I present the facts about how much accountability costs. The facts are, fortunately, highly knowable because costs show up both as expenditures on government budgets and as revenues on companies' (mainly test makers') accounts. Moreover, it turns out that worrying about measurement error in the cost data is pointless. The costs of accountability programs are so tiny that even the most generous accounting could not make them appear large, relative to the cost of other education programs. The 'most expensive' programs in the United States generally cost less than one quarter of 1 percent of per pupil spending, and most of these are only as costly as they are because a state is in the 'expensive' and temporary phase of developing its own comprehensive tests.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc in its series NBER Working Papers with number 8855.
Date of creation: Mar 2002
Date of revision:
Publication status: published as Evers, Williamson M. and Herbert J. Walberg (eds.) School Accountability. Stanford University, Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press, 2002.
Note: CH LE PE ED
Contact details of provider:
Postal: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.
Web page: http://www.nber.org
More information through EDIRC
Find related papers by JEL classification:
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Wößmann, Ludger, 2006.
"Bildungspolitische Lehren aus den internationalen Schülertests: Wettbewerb, Autonomie und externe Leistungsüberprüfung,"
Munich Reprints in Economics, University of Munich, Department of Economics
19653, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
- Ludger Wö�mann, 2006. "Bildungspolitische Lehren aus den internationalen Schülertests: Wettbewerb, Autonomie und externe Leistungsüberprüfung," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 7(3), pages 417-444, 08.
- Edward P. Lazear, 2004. "Speeding, Tax Fraud, and Teaching to the Test," NBER Working Papers, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc 10932, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Maria Marta Ferreyra, 2010. "Information Asymmetry and Equilibrium Monitoring in Education," 2010 Meeting Papers, Society for Economic Dynamics 1215, Society for Economic Dynamics.
- Alvarez, Jesus & Moreno, Vicente Garcia & Patrinos, Harry Anthony, 2007. "Institutional effects as determinants of learning outcomes : exploring state variations in Mexico," Policy Research Working Paper Series, The World Bank 4286, The World Bank.
- Brian A. Jacob, 2002. "Accountability, Incentives and Behavior: The Impact of High-Stakes Testing in the Chicago Public Schools," NBER Working Papers, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc 8968, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.