Sentences with phrase «of school accountability policies»

A number of studies have examined the impact of school accountability policies, including No Child Left Behind (NCLB), on student achievement.

The effect of school accountability policies on children's health.

For one, they have implications for the design and implementation of school accountability policies.

Would the proponents of school accountability policies such as standardized testing come out on top, or would the findings support the opinions of the critics?

As we'll see, the possible reasons our results differed so dramatically from one time period to the next hold important implications for the design of school accountability policies.

Not exact matches

Additional Accountability Requirements: The Statewide School Wellness Policy (2005) adopted by the State Board of Education requires school districts to report annually to the state on the implementation of their local wellness policies at the district and individual school School Wellness Policy (2005) adopted by the State Board of Education requires school districts to report annually to the state on the implementation of their local wellness policies at the district and individual school school districts to report annually to the state on the implementation of their local wellness policies at the district and individual school school level.

Additional Accountability Requirements: None Additional Content Requirements: None Guidance Materials: A collaborative between the Commissioner of Education and the state school boards association that created the Nutrition and Fitness Policy Guidelines (2004), a model school fitness and nutrition policy consistent with the 16 V.S.A. 216 (Policy Guidelines (2004), a model school fitness and nutrition policy consistent with the 16 V.S.A. 216 (policy consistent with the 16 V.S.A. 216 (2004).

Additional Accountability Requirements: School Nutrition Policy, revised in 2005, requires «each school conduct evaluations [of the school health environment] using a nationally recognized, validated survey to identify strengths and weaknesses and prioritize changes as an action plan for improving student hSchool Nutrition Policy, revised in 2005, requires «each school conduct evaluations [of the school health environment] using a nationally recognized, validated survey to identify strengths and weaknesses and prioritize changes as an action plan for improving student hschool conduct evaluations [of the school health environment] using a nationally recognized, validated survey to identify strengths and weaknesses and prioritize changes as an action plan for improving student hschool health environment] using a nationally recognized, validated survey to identify strengths and weaknesses and prioritize changes as an action plan for improving student health.

Additional Accountability Requirements: The Tennessee State Board of Education Physical Activity Policy 4.206 (2005) requires each school district's School Health Advisory Council to annually administer CDC's SHI: A Self - Assessment and Planning Guide and report a summary to the school district's School Health Advisory Council to annually administer CDC's SHI: A Self - Assessment and Planning Guide and report a summary to the School Health Advisory Council to annually administer CDC's SHI: A Self - Assessment and Planning Guide and report a summary to the state.

Additional accountability requirements: State Nutrition Consultants review local wellness policies as part of the School Meal Initiative Review.

Additional Accountability Requirements: Statute 16 -2-9 (a)(25)(2005), Statute 16-21-28 (2005) and Statute 16 -7.1-2 (h)(2005) require the school committee of each district to establish a district - wide coordinated school health and wellness subcommittee, chaired by a member of the full school committee, to implement policies and plans to meet Section 204 requirements.

Additional Accountability Requirements: None Additional Content Requirements: None Guidance Materials: The state Department of Education produced the Local School Wellness Policy Guide for Development (2005), which advocates a three - step approach to developing local school wellness policies that involve School Health CouSchool Wellness Policy Guide for Development (2005), which advocates a three - step approach to developing local school wellness policies that involve School Health Couschool wellness policies that involve School Health CouSchool Health Councils.

Additional Accountability Requirements: The state requires LEAs to annually complete the online Wellness Policy Builder assessment tool to document their consideration of the state's School Wellness Policy Guidelines (2010) as required by Senate Bill 154.

Additional Accountability requirements: None Additional Content Requirements: None Guidance Materials: The Department of Education produced a comprehensive Action Guide for School Nutrition and Physical Activity Policies (2009).

Additional accountability requirements: N.J.S.A. 18A: 33 - 15 to 18 (2007) requires new school districts participating in any of the federally funded Child Nutrition Programs to submit their local policies to the state Department of Agriculture for a compliance check with the state's NJ School Nutrition / Wellness Policy (2005), which contains policy content requirements that go beyond Sectioschool districts participating in any of the federally funded Child Nutrition Programs to submit their local policies to the state Department of Agriculture for a compliance check with the state's NJ School Nutrition / Wellness Policy (2005), which contains policy content requirements that go beyond SectioSchool Nutrition / Wellness Policy (2005), which contains policy content requirements that go beyond SectioPolicy (2005), which contains policy content requirements that go beyond Sectiopolicy content requirements that go beyond Section 204.

Additional Accountability Requirements: Statute Title 70, Section 24 - 100b (2005) requires each school district to report to the state Department of Education on the district's wellness policy, goals, guidelines, and progress in implementing the policy and attaining the goals.

A joint project of Corporate Accountability International and Dr. Nicholas Freudenberg and Monica Gagnon of The City University of New York, the guide focuses on four local policy approaches: school policy, «healthy» zoning, curbing kid - focused marketing, and redirecting subsidies to healthier businesses.

The Chairman of the Public Interest Accountability Committee (PIAC), Joseph Winful, has expressed doubts about the capacity of the Heritage Fund in its present stage, to meet the needs of the Free Senior High School policy.

The report also addresses a second, widely used accountability policy: high - school exit exams that hold students responsible for meeting a set of content standards.

In 2013, Deming was named a William T. Grant Scholar for his project, The Long - Run Influence of School Accountability: Impacts, Mechanisms and Policy Implications, which explores the impact of test - based school accountability on post-secondary attainment and earnings, how high - stakes accountability impacts outcomes, and how test - based accountability in high school can complement college preparSchool Accountability: Impacts, Mechanisms and Policy Implications, which explores the impact of test - based school accountability on post-secondary attainment and earnings, how high - stakes accountability impacts outcomes, and how test - based accountability in high school can complement collegAccountability: Impacts, Mechanisms and Policy Implications, which explores the impact of test - based school accountability on post-secondary attainment and earnings, how high - stakes accountability impacts outcomes, and how test - based accountability in high school can complement college preparschool accountability on post-secondary attainment and earnings, how high - stakes accountability impacts outcomes, and how test - based accountability in high school can complement collegaccountability on post-secondary attainment and earnings, how high - stakes accountability impacts outcomes, and how test - based accountability in high school can complement collegaccountability impacts outcomes, and how test - based accountability in high school can complement collegaccountability in high school can complement college preparschool can complement college preparation.

A handful of states, such as Texas and North Carolina, began implementing «consequential» school accountability policies in the early 1990s.

«Accountability for student performance is one of the two or three - if not the most - prominent issues in policy at the state and local levels right now,» says Richard F. Elmore, a professor at Harvard University's Graduate School of Education (Quality Counts, 1999)

Quality Counts 2006, like the nine previous editions of the report, tracks key education information and grades states on their policies related to student achievement, standards and accountability, efforts to improve teacher quality, school climate, and resources.

But «just right» policies — strong accountability, lots of operational autonomy, fair funding, no micromanaging — tend to be embraced by charter school realists in the center of the political spectrum.

Education reformers who are reflexively critical of DeVos are framing a narrow set of policies — the ones they prefer — as the very definition of «school choice,» «justice,» «morality,» or «accountability.»

The Republican candidates all stress accountability and favor school choice, though they prefer leaving the federal government out of education policy decisions.

Along those lines, it is interesting to note that our evidence of differential effects by grade and subject is broadly similar to the results from evaluations of earlier state - level school - accountability policies.

The intuition behind this approach is that NCLB represented less of a «treatment» in states that had already adopted NCLB - like school - accountability policies prior to 2002.

To the extent that one believes that states that expected to gain the most from accountability policies adopted them prior to NCLB, one might view the results we present as an underestimate of the average effect of school accountability.

Paul Peterson interviews Robert Shapiro, an expert on public opinion, about how the partisan divide in education policy is shifting, as issues of school quality and accountability have produced «conflicted liberals,» at the same time that the presidential election is creating «conflicted conservatives.»

These annual volumes make assertions about empirical facts («students» scores on the state tests used for NCLB are rising»; or «lack of capacity is a serious problem that could undermine the success of NCLB») and provide policy recommendations («some requirements of NCLB are overly stringent, unworkable, or unrealistic»; «the need for funding will grow, not shrink, as more schools are affected by the law's accountability requirements»).

It also appeals to the yearning of some GOP lawmakers and libertarian policy wonks to get Uncle Sam completely out of the school - accountability business (though they'll gag on Rothstein's demand for buckets more in federal dollars for those unaccountable schools and sundry other services to kids).

We address this issue by comparing trends in student achievement across states that had varying degrees of prior experience with state school - accountability policies similar to those brought about by NCLB.

Knowing this, Duncan designed Race to the Top, an ingenious program that gave states the chance to dip into a $ 4.35 billion pot of federal money if they adopted certain accountability and school choice policies.

Another study, by Eric Hanushek and Margaret Raymond, both also at Stanford, evaluated the impact of school - accountability policies on state - level NAEP math and reading achievement measured by the difference between the performance of a state's 8th graders and that of 4th graders in the same state four years earlier.

Additionally, our estimates will identify the impact of NCLB - induced school - accountability provisions on states without prior accountability policies.

This strategy relies on the assertion that pre-NCLB school - accountability policies were comparable to NCLB — that is, that the two types of accountability regimes are similar in the most relevant respects.

On both sides of the sea, standards, assessments, accountability, and school choice were surfacing as ideas, and becoming policies and programs.

Modernizing state accountability systems is not only good policy for district or multi-district online schools, but all of public education would greatly benefit from the next generation of school accountability frameworks.

No matter how much energy and money we spend working on systemic issues — school choice, funding, assessments, accountability, and the like — not one of these policies educates children.

Moreover, summative assessment sat at the core of many of the policy reforms that the leaders described: additional accountability levers such as teacher evaluation systems and statewide school report cards draw on data coming out of these summative tests to make determinations and comparisons regarding teacher and school - level performance.

The two most important changes in American education policy over the past several decades have been the expansion of school choice and changes to school accountability.

In his work on accountability policy, HGSE Professor Richard Elmore has found this development of internal accountability to be a critical component of improving schools.

One of the most significant changes in educational policy of the past two decades is the movement toward test - based accountability in the schools.

Ed schools presently benefit from a lack of public accountability, low political visibility, public policy inertia, and iron triangle protectionism provided by self - interested coalitions of executive branch credentialing managers, teacher union officials attempting to restrain labor market entry, and a few aligned legislators.

As he explains; «probably the most robust finding to date from research on accountability policies is that the strongest initial predictors of the impact of policy on student performance are the attributes of schools rather than the attributes of the policies themselves.»

DeVos has a long history of supporting the kinds of accountability and school - choice policies that a broad swath of the education - reform community has championed over the last two decades.

In 2013, he was named a William T. Grant Scholar, a prestigious five - year award for early career researchers for his proposed project, The Long - Run Influence of School Accountability: Impacts, Mechanisms and Policy Implications.

Because course - choice policies have the potential for an elegant accountability mechanism tied to the financing of outcomes, once students take courses back within the traditional district schools, that accountability mechanism would go away.

Accountability systems have worked well with other reforms — such as effective choice policies, the expansion of early - childhood - education and other school - readiness programs, and efforts to improve the teaching force through evaluation and tenure reform — to improve education for children around the country.