Those anxious to reverse the aggressive federal role in education resulting from No Child Left Behind should not rush to simply push the pendulum as hard as possible in the other direction.
Recently in ESEA Category
July 16, 2015
June 25, 2015
In this final post in his series on annual accountability testing and students' civil rights, Marc Tucker turns his attention to the way this issue has divided the civil rights community and advocates for teachers and calls it destructive and unnecessary.
June 10, 2015
In this blog, Marc Tucker responds to two critics of his earlier blog on the question of whether annual testing helps or hurts poor and minority children.
May 28, 2015
Why are civil rights groups fighting so hard for annual accountability testing when there is no evidence that it helps poor and minority students?
March 05, 2015
In remarks from a Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education (SCOPE) panel discussion, I explain why NCLB was the result of a federal government too consumed with demanding accountablity for its investment and not sufficiently focused on improving student achievement.
February 05, 2015
How a new architecture for accountability would reset the state/federal balance, improve outcomes for all students, including the most disadvantaged, and avoid the unintended consequences of NCLB.
January 29, 2015
Why the record of achievement for test-based accountability in No Child Left Behind has been dismal and rife with unintended consequences.
September 23, 2013
Marc Tucker reflects on why our increasing access to education has decreased while the amount of money we pour into schools and colleges has only increased.
January 12, 2012
Marc Tucker reflects on how ESEA and NCLB treated the issue of accountability.