Publication Date
In 2025 | 0 |
Since 2024 | 0 |
Since 2021 (last 5 years) | 0 |
Since 2016 (last 10 years) | 2 |
Since 2006 (last 20 years) | 2 |
Descriptor
Accountability | 2 |
Achievement Gap | 2 |
Grades (Scholastic) | 2 |
Grading | 2 |
Lunch Programs | 2 |
Minority Group Students | 2 |
Scores | 2 |
Academic Achievement | 1 |
Computation | 1 |
Disadvantaged | 1 |
Educational Indicators | 1 |
More ▼ |
Author
Adams, Curt M. | 2 |
Forsyth, Patrick B. | 2 |
Mwavita, Mwarumba | 2 |
Ware, Jordan | 2 |
Barnes, Laura L. | 1 |
Khojasteb, Jam | 1 |
Publication Type
Journal Articles | 2 |
Reports - Research | 2 |
Education Level
Elementary Education | 2 |
Junior High Schools | 2 |
Middle Schools | 2 |
Secondary Education | 2 |
Audience
Location
Oklahoma | 2 |
Laws, Policies, & Programs
No Child Left Behind Act 2001 | 1 |
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Adams, Curt M.; Forsyth, Patrick B.; Ware, Jordan; Mwavita, Mwarumba; Barnes, Laura L.; Khojasteb, Jam – Education Policy Analysis Archives, 2016
Oklahoma is one of 16 states electing to use an A-F letter grade as an indicator of school quality. On the surface, letter grades are an attractive policy instrument for school improvement; they are seemingly clear, simple, and easy to interpret. Evidence, however, on the use of letter grades as an instrument to rank and improve schools is scant…
Descriptors: Grading, Grades (Scholastic), Educational Quality, Educational Indicators
Adams, Curt M.; Forsyth, Patrick B.; Ware, Jordan; Mwavita, Mwarumba – Teachers College Record, 2016
Background/Context: Despite problems with accountability systems under No Child Left Behind, the policy has been widely commended for exposing the depth and breadth of educational inequality in the United States. As states implement new accountability systems, there is growing concern that attention to achievement gaps and the performance of…
Descriptors: Accountability, Grades (Scholastic), Grading, Scoring Formulas