Review of &quot;High Stakes for High Achievers&quot; and &quot;High Stakes for High Schoolers&quot;
Author: Rubin, Beth C.
Date: 2017-01-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Educational Legislation,Federal Legislation,Standardized Tests,High Stakes Tests,Scores,Achievement Gap,Public Education,Program Effectiveness,State Government,Government Role,Academic Achievement,High Achievement,Student Needs,Accountability,State Standards,Summative Evaluation,High School Students,Advanced Placement,Incentives,Growth Models

The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) was signed into law in 2001, fueled by bipartisan concern about the standardized test scores of U.S. students in comparison with their international cohort and dissatisfaction with gaps in achievement between certain student groups--low income, English-language learners, special education, and students of color--and their peers. Passage of NCLB resulted in the development and application of standardized performance measures intended to both identify and incentivize school systems to address those gaps. The law has been widely criticized for expanding federal influence over public education, narrowing the curriculum with its focus on reading and math, and encouraging an overreliance on standardized testing as the sole measure of achievement. By its own measures, NCLB has been largely unsuccessful; while there has been some increase in fourth grade math scores of U.S. students, reading scores have not increased, and no state has reached the required 100% proficiency bar. Under the Obama administration, NCLB has been revised and renamed as the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), with the intention of giving more control to states. While this control is still primarily test-based, the Fordham Institute contends the door is now open to construct approaches toward what they view as the unmet needs of high-scoring students. The ESSA will be fully in place in the 2017-18 school year. These two closely related reports from the Thomas B. Fordham Institute--&quot;High Stakes for High Achievers: State Accountability in the Age of ESSA,&quot; written by Michel J. Petrilli, David Griffith, Brandon L. Wright, and Audrey Kim, and &quot;High Stakes for High Schoolers: State Accountability in the Age of ESSA&quot;--assert that states are not adequately attending to the needs of high-achieving students, and that state accountability systems under ESSA should be adjusted in order to incent districts to address those needs. This is, they argue, not only a question of &quot;fairness,&quot; but also an issue of national importance. &quot;We must also remember,&quot; states the foreword of the first report, &quot;that the country's future economic competitiveness, scientific leadership, and national security depend on how successfully we maximize the learning of our ablest children.&quot; Similar in tone to the much-critiqued 1983 A Nation at Risk, these reports link the security and success of the United States to the educational attainment of its highest achieving students. This review will examine the claims and implications of the reports. A list of notes and references is included. [For &quot;High Stakes for High Achievers: State Accountability in the Age of ESSA,&quot; see ED570126 and &quot;High Stakes for High Schoolers: State Accountability in the Age of ESSA,&quot; see ED579520.]