A striking wave of nostalgia is rippling through the education world these days.
A number of commentators and advocates have harkened back to the early aughts when test scores were rising and No Child Left Behind was the law of the land.
"This was an era when elected officials from both political parties came together around a reform agenda," Harvard University professor Marty West said at a U.S. Senate hearing earlier this year. "That approach had plenty of critics and, as implemented, some real flaws, but it produced results."
Federally imposed high-stakes testing kept the heat on schools, but after the repeal of No Child Left Behind, we've let them off the hook, say these accountability hawks. This is one reason, they argue, why test scores were stagnant before the pandemic and have fallen since.
Some policymakers are beginning to respond. More governors touted accountability in education in their state of the state speeches this year. Oregon recently enacted stricter oversight of schools after years of disappointing test scores.
It's because of this new fervor that I wanted to take a deep dive into the research evidence on school accountability. Should we really have a case of No Child Left Behind nostalgia? Would putting more pressure on schools improve learning?
Read the full story on Chalkbeat
