Supplemental+Articles

The Effects of NCLB on School Resources and Practices Thomas S. Dee, Brian Jacob, and Nathaniel L. Schwartz Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, June 2013; vol. 35, 2: pp. 252-279., first published on December 28, 2012

Revisiting the Impact of NCLB High-Stakes School Accountability, Capacity, and Resources: State NAEP 1990–2009 Reading and Math Achievement Gaps and Trends Jaekyung Lee and Todd Reeves Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, June 2012; vol. 34, 2: pp. 209-231.

“Highly Qualified” to Do What? The Relationship Between NCLB Teacher Quality Mandates and the Use of Reform-Oriented Instruction in Middle School Mathematics Thomas M. Smith, Laura M. Desimone, and Koji Ueno Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, March 20, 2005; vol. 27, 1: pp. 75-109.

Shining a Light or Fumbling in the Dark? The Effects of NCLB’s Subgroup-Specific Accountability on Student Achievement Douglas Lee Lauen and S. Michael Gaddis Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, June 2012; vol. 34, 2: pp. 185-208., first published on February 28, 2012

Supplemental Educational Services and NCLB: Policy Assumptions, Market Practices, Emerging Issues Patricia Burch, Matthew Steinberg, and Joseph Donovan Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, June 2007; vol. 29, 2: pp. 115-133.

Supplemental Education Services Under No Child Left Behind: Who Signs Up, and What Do They Gain? Carolyn J. Heinrich, Robert H. Meyer, and Greg Whitten Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, June 2010; vol. 32, 2: pp. 273-298. first published on May 7, 2010.

Teacher Effectiveness in First Grade: The Importance of Background Qualifications, Attitudes, and Instructional Practices for Student Learning Gregory J. Palardy and Russell W. Rumberger Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, June 2008; vol. 30, 2: pp.111-140.

The Gap That Can’t Go Away: The Catch-22 of Reclassification in Monitoring the Progress of English Learners William M. Saunders andDavid J. Marcelletti Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, June 2013; vol. 35, 2: pp. 139-156., first published on November 1, 2012.

Teacher Value-Added at the High-School Level: Different Models, Different Answers? Dan D. Goldhaber, Pete Goldschmidt, and Fannie Tseng Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, June 2013; vol. 35, 2: pp. 220-236., first published on January 16, 2013.

Inquiry-Oriented Instruction in Science: Who Teaches That Way? Thomas M. Smith, Laura M. Desimone, Timothy L. Zeidner, Alfred C. Dunn, Monica Bhatt, and Nataliya L. Rumyantseva Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, September 2007; vol. 29, 3: pp. 169-199.

McDonnell, Lorraine and Elmore, Richard (1987). “Getting the Job Done: Alternative Policy Instruments,” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9 (2): 133-152.

Schneider, Anne and Ingram, Helen (1990). “Behavioral Assumptions of Policy Tools,” Journal of Politics, 52 (2): 510-529.

Shulman, Lee (1983). “Autonomy & Obligation: The remote control of teaching,” from Shulman & Sykes, Handbook of Teaching and Policy, pp. 484-504.

AddiRaccah, A & Arviv-Elyashiv, R (2008). Parent empowerment and teacher professionalism: Teacher's perspective. Urban Education, 43, 394-415.

Bell, C.A.(2009) All choices created equal? The role of choice sets in the selection of schools. Peabody Journal of Education, 84, 191-208.

Delpit,L.D. (1988) The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people's children. Harvard Educational Review, 58, 280-298.

Schneider, Anne and Ingram, Helen (1993). “Social Construction of Target Populations: Implications for Politics and Policy,” American Political Science Review, 87 (2): 334-347.