main
community
contact staff ecs twitter facebook
No Child Left BehindSchool SupportWhat States Are Doing (Additional Resources)
 
  NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND
 SCHOOL SUPPORT
 
 What States Are Doing
 Selected Research & Readings
 


Accountability--School Improvement


Interventions in Low-Performing Schools and Districts: State Policies - (Kathy Christie, Education Commission of the States, January 2007)...

School Restructuring in Philadelphia: Management Lessons from 2002 to 2005 PDF - Hiring education management organizations (EMOs) to operate public schools is one of multiple options districts can pursue under the sanctions prescribed by No Child Left Behind. This ECS Policy Brief summarizes a case study of the Partnership School Model, providing examples of lessons learned regarding: (1) the application and contract process, (2) the transition to new management and (3) the management of multiple EMO contracts. Recurring themes and recommendations that emerged from this case study include: (1) transparency builds credibility, (2) managing contracts required planning, (3) a functional infrastructure is required to manage contracts and (4) explicit accountability must be built into contracts. Also available online is the case study. (Lauren Morando Rhim, Education Commission of the States, September 2005)...

Improving Low-Performing Schools: Lessons from Five Years of Studying School Restructuring Under No Child Left Behind - This report synthesizes five years of research on state and local efforts to improve persistently low-performing schools in accordance with the No Child Left Behind Act. CEP conducted this research in six states - California, Georgia, Maryland, Michigan, New York, and Ohio - and in 23 districts and 48 schools within those states. The report also makes recommendations for improving federal assistance in this area. (Center on Education Policy, December 2009)...

"Diverse Providers" in Action: School Restructuring in Hawaii - The state of Hawaii has chosen to partner with outside organizations in 44 of its 92 restructuring schools--a much greater level than mainland states. The unique procurement and accountability frameworks for managing these partnerships offer unique insights to states considering a similar approach. These partnerships are accompanied by efforts to build infrastructure and provide crucial support and monitoring. (Frederick Hess and Juliet Squire, American Enterprise Institute, August 2009)...

State Approaches to Improving Tennessee's High Priority Schools - The scope for this study was limited to four education policy areas that impact the quality of instruction and student achievement: goals and governance; teaching quality; student discipline, attendance and dropout; and instructional support. The report identifies areas for improvement, highlights exceptional and noteworthy practices and suggests recommendations for improvement. (State of Tennessee Comptroller of the Treasury, December 2006)...

Statewide System of Support Profiles - These profiles provide a one-page basic description of each state’s system of support for schools, including organizational structure, support teams and services provided to schools. The profiles were developed to highlight important elements of the state support systems under No Child Left Behind and to facilitate sharing of information across states. (Prepared for the U.S. Department of Education by WESTAT, April 18, 2006) ...

Corrective Action in Low-performing Schools: Lessons for NCLB Implementation from State and District Strategies in First-generation Accountability Systems - This report examines accountability systems initiated in seven states and two large districts prior to 2001 to learn what lessons apply to No Child Left Behind. Through the use of evaluative reports, policy documents and interviews with state officials and researchers, the authors identify eight key lessons: (1) sanctions are not the fallback solution; (2) no single strategy has been universally successful; (3) staging should be handled with flexibility; (4) intensive capacity building is necessary; (5) a comprehensive bundle of strategies is key; (6) relationship-building needs to complement powerful programs; (7) competence reduces conflict; and (8) strong state commitment is needed to create system capacity. (Heinrich Mintrop and Tina Trujillo, Graduate School of Education and Information Studies, University of California, Los Angeles, July 2005)...

Reaching Capacity: A Blueprint for the State Role in Improving Low-performing Schools and Districts - Schools and districts in Massachusetts – disproportionately those that serve low-income and non-white students – are struggling and need tools, resources and assistance to raise student achievement. Sections I, II and III of this report define the existing problem, and sections V, VI and VII provide guidance toward fulfilling the state’s commitment to all students. The report concludes that the state needs greater capacity to provide support in three domains: (1) curriculum and professional development, (2) assessment and data, and (3) leadership. Appendix A (starting on page 46) provides cost estimates for the major recommendations. (Rennie Center for Education Research & Policy at MassINC, 2005)...

External Support to Schools on Probation: Getting a Leg Up? - This report is based on a two-year study of the design and implementation of the school probation policy in Chicago's elementary schools. The authors found the external support provided to schools is too fragmentary and weak to change instruction, but this support may improve other aspects. The weaknesses appear attributable to both implementation and design issues. (Kara Finnigan and Jennifer O'Day, Consortium for Policy Research in Education, July 2003)...


What States Are Doing Current

Print Friendly and PDF

4

Thank you, Issue Site Sponsors
pearson

 
Home  |  About ECS  |  Education Issues A-Z  | Research Studies  |  Reports & Databases  |  State Legislation  |  State Profiles  |  Projects & Institutes  |  Newsroom  |  Website User's Guide


Information provided by ECS combines the best of the most recent and useful research available. Should you have questions, please contact our Information Clearinghouse at 303.299.3675.

700 Broadway, #810 Denver, CO 80203-3442
Phone: 303.299.3600 | Fax: 303.296.8332
 
©2014 Education Commission of the States
www.ecs.org | ecs@ecs.org
Read our privacy policy