EPRUEducation Policy Research Unit
On March 21, 2008 this became an archive site. All documents published before this date are still available here. All documents published after this date are available at our new combined site (http://www.epicpolicy.org/), a joint effort of CERU, EPIC, and EPRU.
2005 - Non-EPRU Publications/Writing
These articles and/or reports are copyrighted material, the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of educational issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Document categories:
Dangerous Reading
Date:
November 3, 2005
Author:
Institution:
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Source:
Teachers College Record
In this article, Professor Apple considers a list of books that are perceived to be too dangerous to read and
why those books appear on the list.
PDFDate:
October 2005
Authors:
Patricia H. Hinchey and Karen Cadiero-Kaplan
Institution:
Penn State University and San Diego State University
Source:
Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies
Recent concerted efforts of government and business to privatize public education are well-documented. The authors
argue that these efforts will further undermine teaching as a highly-skilled profession with union support.
Date:
August 2, 2005
Author:
Institution:
Arizona State University
Source:
Teachers College Record
This article is an analysis of the role of poverty in school reform.
Date:
August 2005
Author:
Institution:
University of Colorado at Boulder
Source:
Equity & Excellence in Education
This article identifies two presuppositions underlying No Child Left Behind's (NCLB) system of adequate yearly
progress and demonstrates that they are unsupportable.
Date:
August 2005
Authors:
Kevin Welner and Don Weitzman
Institution:
University of Colorado at Boulder and University of California, Berkeley
Source:
Equity & Excellence in Education
This article identifies and examines different approaches for calculating necessary funding for NCLB.
Date:
May/June 2005
Author:
Institution:
Arizona State University
Source:
Journal of Teacher Education
In this article, EPRU Fellow David Berliner looks at testing for teacher quality and finds that some
current tests are inadequate.
In this article, EPRU Fellow Susan Ohanian writes about teaching challenging students and helping them
succeed.
Date:
April 2005
Authors:
Carol Corbett Burris and Kevin G. Welner
Institution:
Rockville Centre School District and University of Colorado-Boulder
Source:
Phi Delta Kappan
In the late 1990s, the Rockville Centre School District in New York embarked on a multi-year detracking
reform that increased learning expectations for all students. The evidence from the Rockville Centre
reform confirms common sense: closing the "curriculum gap" is an effective way to close the "achievement gap."
Date:
March 22, 2005
Source:
Southeast Center for Teaching Quality
Data from new studies in both North and South Carolina indicate that improving teacher working
conditions–time, empowerment, professional development, leadership, and facilities and
resources–significantly improves student achievement and helps stem teacher turnover.
Failing Our Children: How "No Child Left Behind" Undermines Quality and Equity in Education
Date:
May 2004
Authors:
Monty Neill, Lisa Guisbond and Bob Schaeffer
Source:
Fairtest: The National Center for Fair and Open Testing
According to this report, the first two years of implementation of the controversial
"No Child Left Behind" (NCLB) law have damaged education quality and equity because of the law's incorrect assumptions and arbitrary requirements.
In addition to critiquing NCLB, the authors outline a fundamentally different approach to assessment and accountability that would better promote needed school reforms.
Bush Education Law Shows Mixed Results in First Test
Date:
October 20, 2005
Author:
Sam Dillion
Source:
The New York Times
The first nationwide test to permit an appraisal
of President Bush's signature education law rendered mixed results, with even some supporters of the law expressing
disappointment.
Date:
June 12-18, 2005
Authors:
Alan J. Borsuk, Sarah Carr, and Leonard Sykes Jr.
Source:
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
In 1990, Milwaukee began a revolutionary
experiment in school choice for low-income students. How is it faring 15 years later? Over the past five
months, Journal Sentinel reporters visited 106 schools to find out. This series of seven articles describes
their findings.
For more information, visit JSOnline: Inside Choice Schools
Date:
April 13, 2005
Author:
Greg Winter
Institution:
Source:
The New York Times
The academic growth that students
experience in a given school year has apparently slowed since the passage of No Child Left Behind,
the education law that was intended to achieve just the opposite, a new study has found.
Date:
April 4, 2005
Author:
Susan Saulny
Source:
The New York Times
Propelled by the No Child Left Behind law,
the federally financed tutoring industry has doubled in size in each of the last two years, with the
potential to become a $2 billion-a-year enterprise, market analysts say.
For more information, visit: The Center on Education Policy: No Child Left Behind
The Impact of the No Child Left Behind Act on Student Achievement and Growth: 2005 Edition
Date:
April 2005
Author:
John Cronin, G. Gage Kingsbury, Martha S. McCall, and Branin Bowe
Source:
Northwest Evaluation Association
A national research project recently
released by the Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) indicates that student achievement has improved
since No Child Left Behind (NCLB) was implemented, but student growth has declined slightly.
From the Capital to the Classroom: Year Three of the No Child Left Behind Act
Date:
March 2005
Source:
Center on Education Policy
A majority of state and district education officials say that student achievement on state tests
is improving, but that they lack the capacity to reach all of the schools in need of improvement
under the No Child Left Behind Act, according to a report from the Washington, D.C.-based Center
on Education Policy tracking federal, state and local implementation of the law.
For more information, visit: The Center on Education Policy: No Child Left Behind