Reimagining Accountability in K–12 Education

  • Gill B
  • Lerner J
  • Meosky P
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
12Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Since the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) in 2002, American policymakers have relied primarily on outcome-based accountability in the form of high-stakes testing to improve public school performance. With NCLB supplanted in 2015 by the Every Student Succeeds Act—which gives states far greater discretion in the design of accountability systems—the time is ripe for policymakers to consider extensive behavioral science literature that shows outcome-based accountability is only one of multiple forms of accountability, each invoking distinct motivational mechanisms. We review rule-based, market-based, and professional accountability alongside outcome-based accountability, using evidence from the laboratory and the field to describe how each can produce favorable or unfavorable effects. We conclude that policymakers should (a) make greater use of professional accountability, which has historically been underutilized in education; (b) use transparency to promote professional accountability; and (c) use multiple, complementary forms of accountability, creating a complete system that encourages and supports the continuous improvement of educational practice.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Gill, B. P., Lerner, J. S., & Meosky, P. (2016). Reimagining Accountability in K–12 Education. Behavioral Science & Policy, 2(1), 57–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/237946151600200108

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free