A Policy Analysis of the Federal Growth Model Pilot Program's Measures of School Performance: The Florida Case
As test-based educational accountability has moved to the forefront of national and state education policy, so has the desire for better measures of school performance. No Child Left Behind's (NCLB) status and safe harbor measures have been criticized for being unfair and unreliable, respectively. In response to such criticism, in 2005 the federal government announced the Growth Model Pilot Program, which permits states to use projection models (a type of growth model) in their accountability systems. This article uses historical longitudinal data from a large school district to empirically show the inaccuracy of one state's projection model, to demonstrate how projection models are very similar to NCLB's original status measure, and to contrast projection models with value-added models. As policy makers debate the reauthorization of NCLB, this research can provide guidance on ways to improve the current measurement of school performance. © 2012 Association for Education Finance and Policy
Volume (Year): 7 (2012)
Issue (Month): 1 (January)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://mitpress.mit.edu/journals/|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/loi/edfp|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tpr:edfpol:v:7:y:2012:i:1:p:44-73. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Kristin Waites)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.