This Article Free Full Text Free Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal 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 Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Mintrop, H. Articles by Sunderman, G. L. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Predictable Failure of Federal Sanctions-Driven Accountability for School Improvement—And Why We May Retain It Anyway

HEINRICH MINTROP is an associate professor in the Graduate School of Education at the University of California, Berkeley, 3647 Tolman Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720; mintrop{at}berkeley.edu. As a researcher, he explores issues of school improvement and accountability in both their academic and civic dimensions.

GAIL L. SUNDERMAN is a senior research scientist and director of the Mid-Atlantic Equity Center at the George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education, 1555 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 515, Arlington, VA 22209; gsunderman{at}ceee.gwu.edu. Her research focuses on educational policy and politics and urban school reform, including the development and implementation of education policy and the impact of policy on the educational opportunities of at-risk students.

The federal accountability system, made universal through the No Child Left Behind Act of 2002, is a system driven by quotas and sanctions, stipulating the progression of underperforming schools through sanctions based on meeting performance quotas for specific demographic groups. The authors examine whether the current federal accountability system is likely to succeed or fail, by asking, Does the sanctions-driven accountability system work? Is it practical? And is it legitimate among those who must implement it? The authors argue that even though sanctions-driven accountability may fail on practical outcomes, it may be retained for its secondary benefits and because there is a sense that credible policy alternatives are lacking. They conclude by proposing alternative policies and approaches to the current system.

Key Words: accountability • educational policy • educational reform • policy

Educational Researcher, Vol. 38, No. 5, 353-364 (2009)
DOI: 10.3102/0013189X09339055


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