Corrective Action in Low Performing Schools: Lessons for NCLB Implementation from First-generation Accountability Systems. Vol. 13 No. 48

Heinrich Mintrop; Tina Trujillo

Journal Help

Article Tools

Indexing metadata

How to cite item

Email this article (Login required)

Email the author (Login required)

Font Size

About The Authors

Heinrich Mintrop
University of California, Berkeley

Heinrich Mintrop taught middle school and high school for over a decade in both the United States and Germany before he entered into his academic career. He received a Ph.D. in Education from Stanford University (1996). He is currently an associate professor of Education at the University of California, Berkeley. As a researcher, he explores issues of school improvement and accountability in both their academic and civic dimensions. He has recently published the book Schools on Probation: How Accountability Works (and Doesn’t Work), at Teachers College Press. At UC Berkeley, he is involved in the Principal Leadership Institute that aims to prepare strong leaders for high-need urban schools.

Tina Trujillo
University of California, Los Angeles

Tina Trujillo is a doctoral student in Urban Schooling at the University of California, Los Angeles, Graduate School of Education and Information Studies. Her current research interests include systemic district instructional reforms and low-performing schools’ responses to high-stakes accountability policies.

Notifications

View
Subscribe / Unsubscribe

Corrective Action in Low Performing Schools: Lessons for NCLB Implementation from First-generation Accountability Systems. Vol. 13 No. 48

Heinrich Mintrop, Tina Trujillo

Abstract

This paper explores what lessons we can learn from the experiences of states that instituted NCLB-like accountability systems prior to 2001 (here called first-generation accountability systems). We looked at the experiences of three smaller states (Kentucky, Maryland, North Carolina), four larger ones (California, Florida, New York, Texas), and two large districts (Chicago and Philadelphia). We analyzed evaluative reports and policy documents as well as interviews with state officials and researchers. We condensed the material into eight lessons: sanctions are not the fallback solution; no single strategy has been universally successful; staging should be handled with flexibility; intensive capacity building is necessary; a comprehensive set of strategies seems promising; relationship-building needs to complement powerful programs; competence reduces conflict; and strong state commitment is needed to create system capacity.