Test-Based Accountability: The Promise and the Perils

Social Reporting in Italian Public Schools in Theory and Practice

“…In the second viewpoint, it is possible to distinguish between a "Standard based accountability" (Loveless et al, 2005;Figlio & Loeb, 2011) and an approach that combines standardized processes with voluntary processes called "Intelligent Accountability" (Sahlberg, 2010;O'Neill, 2013). The first system consists in some reporting and evaluating processes that schools should comply and defined at a central level (Paletta, 2007).…”

“…Among the mechanisms mentioned above, centralized tests aroused a great interest in policy makers and in the economic and education literature (Amrein & Berliner, 2002;Betebenner, 2005;Loveless et al, 2005). The usefulness of centralized tests, and their publication, aimed to show students' learning achievement and school quality and to meet stakeholders' requests, largely depends on the reliability of computation methods of learning performance and on the type of the educational system in which they are used (Betebenner et al, 2005;Loveless et al, 2005;Ryan & Shepard, 2008).…”

“…Among the mechanisms mentioned above, centralized tests aroused a great interest in policy makers and in the economic and education literature (Amrein & Berliner, 2002;Betebenner, 2005;Loveless et al, 2005). The usefulness of centralized tests, and their publication, aimed to show students' learning achievement and school quality and to meet stakeholders' requests, largely depends on the reliability of computation methods of learning performance and on the type of the educational system in which they are used (Betebenner et al, 2005;Loveless et al, 2005;Ryan & Shepard, 2008). Although several empirical studies show that centralized tests can be considered a synthetic and valid assessment and reporting tool of school management, as well as a useful tool to increase students' learning performance (Carnoy & Loeb, 2002;Hanushek & Raymond, 2006;Schütz et al, 2007), there are studies that highlight some problems with standardized testing.…”

Winston charter school: a case study involving the intersection of external and internal accountability mandates

“…Few studies have surveyed large numbers of schools on how accountability mandates shape the school curriculum (Loveless, 2005). Although accountability systems may be one of the most important levers for achieving charter school quality (Hill & Lake, 2005), there is little research on how oversight from the state and charter authorizer might contribute to higher quality schools that have chosen a particular curriculum.…”

“…As shown in Table 1, developed from various models of accountability (Cohen-Vogel, 2003;Darling-Hammond, 2004;Ebert & Hollenbeck, 2001;The Education Reform Act, 1993;Fuller, 2002;Harris & Herrington, 2006;Loveless, 2005;Massachusetts Charter Schools, 2005Schwartz, 2001;Vergari, 2002;Witte, 2005), Winston Academy Charter School has multiple accountability requirements. Although charter schools were originally envisioned as being free to establish and pursue their own goals (Manno, 1999), As exhibited, there are multiple accountability demands placed on Winston Academy Charter School, each with its own requirements and means of assessment.…”