Publication Date
| In 2026 | 0 |
| Since 2025 | 0 |
| Since 2022 (last 5 years) | 0 |
| Since 2017 (last 10 years) | 0 |
| Since 2007 (last 20 years) | 1 |
Descriptor
Source
| Thomas B. Fordham Institute | 1 |
Author
| Adkins, Deborah | 1 |
| Cronin, John | 1 |
| Dahlin, Michael | 1 |
| Kingsbury, G. Gage | 1 |
| Lovell, Ned B. | 1 |
| Riegel, Rodney P. | 1 |
Publication Type
| Information Analyses | 1 |
| Numerical/Quantitative Data | 1 |
| Reports - Research | 1 |
Education Level
| Elementary Secondary Education | 1 |
Audience
Location
| Colorado | 2 |
| Arizona | 1 |
| California | 1 |
| Delaware | 1 |
| Florida | 1 |
| Idaho | 1 |
| Illinois | 1 |
| Indiana | 1 |
| Kansas | 1 |
| Maine | 1 |
| Maryland | 1 |
| More ▼ | |
Laws, Policies, & Programs
| No Child Left Behind Act 2001 | 1 |
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Download full textRiegel, Rodney P.; Lovell, Ned B. – 1980
The phenomenon of minimum competency testing (MCT) is explored, beginning with its origins in public concern for educational accountability. Three major themes appearing in the states enacting prescriptive legislation are described: state standards/state test (Florida); state standards/local test (Oregon); and local standards/local test…
Descriptors: Academic Standards, Accountability, Administrative Problems, Community Attitudes
Cronin, John; Dahlin, Michael; Adkins, Deborah; Kingsbury, G. Gage – Thomas B. Fordham Institute, 2007
At the heart of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) is the call for all students to be "proficient" in reading and mathematics by 2014. Yet the law expects each state to define proficiency as it sees fit and design its own tests. This study investigated three research questions related to this policy: (1) How consistent are various…
Descriptors: Federal Legislation, Mathematics Tests, Test Validity, Reading Tests
