Measure for Measure: How Proficiency-based Accountability Systems Affect Inequality in Academic Achievement

Jennifer Jennings, Heeju Sohn

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    How do proficiency-based accountability systems affect inequality in academic achievement? This article reconciles mixed findings in the literature by demonstrating that three factors jointly determine accountability's impact. First, by analyzing student-level data from a large urban school district, we find that when educators face accountability pressure, they focus attention on students closest to proficiency. We refer to this practice as educational triage and show that the difficulty of the proficiency standard affects whether lower or higher performing students gain most on high-stakes tests used to evaluate schools. Less difficult proficiency standards decrease inequality in high-stakes achievement, while more difficult standards increase it. Second, we show that educators emphasize test-specific skills with students near proficiency, a practice we refer to as instructional triage. As a result, the effects of accountability pressure differ across high- and low-stakes tests; we find no effects on inequality in low-stakes reading and math tests of similar skills. Finally, we provide suggestive evidence that instructional triage is most pronounced in the lowest performing schools. We conclude by discussing how these findings shape our understanding of accountability's effects on educational inequality.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)125-141
    Number of pages17
    JournalSociology of Education
    Volume87
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    StatePublished - 2014

    Fingerprint

    academic achievement
    responsibility
    student
    educator
    school
    educational inequality
    district
    evidence

    Keywords

    • accountability
    • inequality
    • policy
    • stratification
    • testing

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Education
    • Sociology and Political Science

    Cite this

    Measure for Measure : How Proficiency-based Accountability Systems Affect Inequality in Academic Achievement. / Jennings, Jennifer; Sohn, Heeju.

    In: Sociology of Education, Vol. 87, No. 2, 2014, p. 125-141.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    @article{bba3a805260d436fa10562d8b85d6814,
    title = "Measure for Measure: How Proficiency-based Accountability Systems Affect Inequality in Academic Achievement",
    abstract = "How do proficiency-based accountability systems affect inequality in academic achievement? This article reconciles mixed findings in the literature by demonstrating that three factors jointly determine accountability's impact. First, by analyzing student-level data from a large urban school district, we find that when educators face accountability pressure, they focus attention on students closest to proficiency. We refer to this practice as educational triage and show that the difficulty of the proficiency standard affects whether lower or higher performing students gain most on high-stakes tests used to evaluate schools. Less difficult proficiency standards decrease inequality in high-stakes achievement, while more difficult standards increase it. Second, we show that educators emphasize test-specific skills with students near proficiency, a practice we refer to as instructional triage. As a result, the effects of accountability pressure differ across high- and low-stakes tests; we find no effects on inequality in low-stakes reading and math tests of similar skills. Finally, we provide suggestive evidence that instructional triage is most pronounced in the lowest performing schools. We conclude by discussing how these findings shape our understanding of accountability's effects on educational inequality.",
    keywords = "accountability, inequality, policy, stratification, testing",
    author = "Jennifer Jennings and Heeju Sohn",
    year = "2014",
    doi = "10.1177/0038040714525787",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "87",
    pages = "125--141",
    journal = "Sociology of Education",
    issn = "0038-0407",
    publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
    number = "2",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Measure for Measure

    T2 - How Proficiency-based Accountability Systems Affect Inequality in Academic Achievement

    AU - Jennings, Jennifer

    AU - Sohn, Heeju

    PY - 2014

    Y1 - 2014

    N2 - How do proficiency-based accountability systems affect inequality in academic achievement? This article reconciles mixed findings in the literature by demonstrating that three factors jointly determine accountability's impact. First, by analyzing student-level data from a large urban school district, we find that when educators face accountability pressure, they focus attention on students closest to proficiency. We refer to this practice as educational triage and show that the difficulty of the proficiency standard affects whether lower or higher performing students gain most on high-stakes tests used to evaluate schools. Less difficult proficiency standards decrease inequality in high-stakes achievement, while more difficult standards increase it. Second, we show that educators emphasize test-specific skills with students near proficiency, a practice we refer to as instructional triage. As a result, the effects of accountability pressure differ across high- and low-stakes tests; we find no effects on inequality in low-stakes reading and math tests of similar skills. Finally, we provide suggestive evidence that instructional triage is most pronounced in the lowest performing schools. We conclude by discussing how these findings shape our understanding of accountability's effects on educational inequality.

    AB - How do proficiency-based accountability systems affect inequality in academic achievement? This article reconciles mixed findings in the literature by demonstrating that three factors jointly determine accountability's impact. First, by analyzing student-level data from a large urban school district, we find that when educators face accountability pressure, they focus attention on students closest to proficiency. We refer to this practice as educational triage and show that the difficulty of the proficiency standard affects whether lower or higher performing students gain most on high-stakes tests used to evaluate schools. Less difficult proficiency standards decrease inequality in high-stakes achievement, while more difficult standards increase it. Second, we show that educators emphasize test-specific skills with students near proficiency, a practice we refer to as instructional triage. As a result, the effects of accountability pressure differ across high- and low-stakes tests; we find no effects on inequality in low-stakes reading and math tests of similar skills. Finally, we provide suggestive evidence that instructional triage is most pronounced in the lowest performing schools. We conclude by discussing how these findings shape our understanding of accountability's effects on educational inequality.

    KW - accountability

    KW - inequality

    KW - policy

    KW - stratification

    KW - testing

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84898872808&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84898872808&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1177/0038040714525787

    DO - 10.1177/0038040714525787

    M3 - Article

    VL - 87

    SP - 125

    EP - 141

    JO - Sociology of Education

    JF - Sociology of Education

    SN - 0038-0407

    IS - 2

    ER -