IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/edfpol/v8y2013i2p251-270.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When is 100% not 100%? The Use of Safe Harbor to Make Adequate Yearly Progress

Author

Listed:
  • Morgan S. Polikoff

    (Rossier School of Education, University of Southern California Los Angeles)

  • Stephani L. Wrabel

    (Rossier School of Education, University of Southern California Los Angeles)

Abstract

Debate over the design of state and federal accountability systems is an important ongoing issue for policy makers. As we move toward next-generation accountability through No Child Left Behind's (NCLB) waivers and reauthorization drafts, it is important to understand the implementation and effects of key elements of prior accountability systems. In this policy brief, we investigate an under-researched feature of NCLB accountability—the use of safe harbor to meet proficiency rate objectives. We use school-level data on California schools between 2005 and 2011 to investigate the prevalence of safe harbor over time. We find dramatic increases in recent years, primarily for the objectives for historically disadvantaged groups. Furthermore, we find no evidence that schools using safe harbor meaningfully outperform schools failing Adequate Yearly Progress in the short or long run, casting doubt on the utility of the measure. We conclude with recommendations to policy makers, including state assessment and accountability coordinators, regarding accountability policy design in future laws. © 2013 Association for Education Finance and Policy

Suggested Citation

  • Morgan S. Polikoff & Stephani L. Wrabel, 2013. "When is 100% not 100%? The Use of Safe Harbor to Make Adequate Yearly Progress," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 8(2), pages 251-270, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:tpr:edfpol:v:8:y:2013:i:2:p:251-270
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/EDFP_a_00091
    Download Restriction: Access to PDF is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephen W. Raudenbush, 2004. "What Are Value-Added Models Estimating and What Does This Imply for Statistical Practice?," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 29(1), pages 121-129, March.
    2. Thomas J. Kane & Douglas O. Staiger, 2002. "The Promise and Pitfalls of Using Imprecise School Accountability Measures," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(4), pages 91-114, Fall.
    3. John M. Krieg & Paul Storer, 2006. "How Much Do Students Matter? Applying The Oaxaca Decomposition To Explain Determinants Of Adequate Yearly Progress," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 24(4), pages 563-581, October.
    4. Reback, Randall, 2008. "Teaching to the rating: School accountability and the distribution of student achievement," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(5-6), pages 1394-1415, June.
    5. Thomas S. Dee & Brian Jacob, 2011. "The impact of no Child Left Behind on student achievement," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(3), pages 418-446, June.
    6. Michael J. Weiss & Henry May, 2012. "A Policy Analysis of the Federal Growth Model Pilot Program's Measures of School Performance: The Florida Case," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 7(1), pages 44-73, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Seth Gershenson, 2016. "Performance Standards and Employee Effort: Evidence From Teacher Absences," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 35(3), pages 615-638, June.
    2. Seth Gershenson & Stephen B. Holt & Nicholas Papageorge, 2015. "Who Believes in Me? The Effect of Student-Teacher Demographic Match on Teacher Expectations," Upjohn Working Papers 15-231, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Evan Riehl & Meredith Welch, 2023. "Accountability, Test Prep Incentives, and the Design of Math and English Exams," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(1), pages 60-96, January.
    2. Allen, Rebecca & Burgess, Simon, 2013. "Evaluating the provision of school performance information for school choice," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 175-190.
    3. Figlio, D. & Karbownik, K. & Salvanes, K.G., 2016. "Education Research and Administrative Data," Handbook of the Economics of Education,, Elsevier.
    4. Eric Isenberg & Heinrich Hock, 2010. "Measuring School and Teacher Value Added for IMPACT and TEAM in DC Public Schools," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 42dd1ff2d7eb46948f98d8e9c, Mathematica Policy Research.
    5. Alexandra Resch & Jonah Deutsch, "undated". "Measuring School and Teacher Value Added in Charleston County School District, 2013-2014 School Year," Mathematica Policy Research Reports eec5dbb671ab46f09c1dfb85a, Mathematica Policy Research.
    6. Douglas O. Staiger & Jonah E. Rockoff, 2010. "Searching for Effective Teachers with Imperfect Information," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 24(3), pages 97-118, Summer.
    7. Glenn Ellison & Ashley Swanson, 2012. "Heterogeneity in High Math Achievement Across Schools: Evidence from the American Mathematics Competitions," NBER Working Papers 18277, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Craig, Steven G. & Imberman, Scott A. & Perdue, Adam, 2015. "Do administrators respond to their accountability ratings? The response of school budgets to accountability grades," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 55-68.
    9. Patricia M. Anderson & Kristin F. Butcher & Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach, 2017. "Adequate (or Adipose?) Yearly Progress: Assessing the Effect of “No Child Left Behind” on Children's Obesity," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 12(1), pages 54-76, Winter.
    10. Gregg, John J. & Lavertu, Stéphane, 2023. "Test-based accountability and educational equity: Breaking through local district politics?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    11. Bokhari, Farasat A.S. & Schneider, Helen, 2011. "School accountability laws and the consumption of psychostimulants," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 355-372, March.
    12. Erwin Ooghe & Erik Schokkaert, 2016. "School accountability: can we reward schools and avoid pupil selection?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(2), pages 359-387, February.
    13. Nunes, Luis C. & Reis, Ana Balcão & Seabra, Carmo, 2015. "The publication of school rankings: A step toward increased accountability?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 15-23.
    14. Derek Neal, 2010. "Aiming for Efficiency Rather Than Proficency," Working Papers 2010-007, Becker Friedman Institute for Research In Economics.
    15. repec:mpr:mprres:7019 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Chiang, Hanley, 2009. "How accountability pressure on failing schools affects student achievement," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(9-10), pages 1045-1057, October.
    17. Richardson, J.T., 2015. "Accountability incentives and academic achievement: Distributional impacts of accountability when standards are set low," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 1-16.
    18. Feng, Li & Figlio, David & Sass, Tim, 2018. "School accountability and teacher mobility," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 1-17.
    19. repec:mpr:mprres:8135 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Sims, David P., 2013. "Can failure succeed? Using racial subgroup rules to analyze the effect of school accountability failure on student performance," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 262-274.
    21. repec:umc:wpaper:1308 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach, 2015. "Current themes in education policy in the United States," Chapters, in: John Karl Scholz & Hyungypo Moon & Sang-Hyup Lee (ed.), Social Policies in an Age of Austerity, chapter 7, pages 165-180, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    23. Burgess, Simon & Wilson, Deborah & Worth, Jack, 2013. "A natural experiment in school accountability: The impact of school performance information on pupil progress," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 57-67.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    safe harbor; No Child Left Behind; accountability; proficiency rates; student progress;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • I22 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Educational Finance; Financial Aid
    • I28 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tpr:edfpol:v:8:y:2013:i:2:p:251-270. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: The MIT Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://direct.mit.edu/journals .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.