This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Balfanz, R. Articles by Weber, L. M. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Are NCLB’s Measures, Incentives, and Improvement Strategies the Right Ones for the Nation’s Low-Performing High Schools?

Johns Hopkins University

This article examines the extent to which adequate yearly progress (AYP) is a valid and reliable indicator of improvement in low-performing high schools. For a random subsample of 202 high schools, the authors investigate the school characteristics and the federal and state policy contexts that influence their AYP status. Logistic regression models reveal that the strongest predictors of AYP status in low-performing high schools are the number of student subgroups for which schools are accountable and their No Child Left Behind improvement status. Analysis of state report card data further paints a confusing landscape in which improving low-performing high schools are sanctioned whereas similar schools showing less improvement are not.

Key Words: high schools • adequate yearly progress • graduation rates • No Child Left Behind

American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 44, No. 3, 559-593 (2007)
DOI: 10.3102/0002831207306768


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?