Through a three-part series, EduDream explores the extent to which Standards-Based Reform (SBR) addressed structural inequities in education and the unintended consequences and equity challenges that emerged. The series includes a snapshot of districts demonstrating positive academic shifts for students of color and students experiencing poverty, and their efforts to address unintended consequences and educational inequities.
RQ 1: How and In What Ways Did Standards-Based Reform Address Structural Inequities in Education?
The Standards-Based Reform (SBR) movement has shaped current debates in the United States about public education, educators’ practices, and student outcomes. Past research on SBR assessed what worked well and the lessons learned over time. This evidence synthesis is the first in a three-part series that builds upon previous research by examining SBR successes and challenges, evaluating progress in addressing educational inequities, and outlining bright spots. As policymakers and education leaders consider the future direction of federal accountability policy, they will need to closely examine the unintended consequences and pushbacks presented in this synthesis and think through policy implementation scenarios from multiple frameworks including systems change, human behavior, and anti-racism. Systems do not change unless incentives are sufficiently motivating and potential consequences do not disproportionately impact schools that serve majority low-income students and/or students of color.
RQ 2: What Were the Unintended Consequences of Standards-Based Reform, Particularly on Students of Color?
For decades, the Standards-Based Reform (SBR) movement informed education policy in the United States. But the hyper-focus on assessments and accountability had negative and unintended consequences on schools and districts, particularly those serving primarily Black, Latinx, and low-income students. As a result, SBR faced pushback from families, communities, teachers, and policymakers. This second synthesis provides additional relevant evidence-based insights on the equity challenges highlighted in the first synthesis. As policymakers and education leaders consider the future direction of federal accountability policy, they will need to closely examine the unintended consequences and pushbacks presented in this synthesis and think through policy implementation scenarios from multiple frameworks including systems change, human behavior, and anti-racism. Systems do not change unless incentives are sufficiently motivating and potential consequences do not disproportionately impact schools that serve majority low-income students and/or students of color
RQ 3: What Equitable Approaches Have Been Taken To Address The Unintended Consequences of SBR?
Whereas the first two syntheses relied on systematic literature review and meta-analysis methods, the third report is a landscape scan of districts that were previously identified by their states as low-performing, but are now showing positive academic shifts for students of color and students experiencing poverty. Moreover, these districts are engaging in intentional equity work to address the unintended consequences or equity challenges that emerged during SBR. This landscape scan of equity drivers is valuable because it demonstrates that there are districts actively communicating to the school community that equity is a priority. It is a snapshot of districts that are planning, if not actively, working to address educational inequities. The National Academies Press educational equity indicators were used to frame and organize the findings.
Fact Sheets
The Fact Sheets are part of a suite of resources on the lessons learned from 30 years of SBR, and the need to explore how best to advance the next generation of education policies to eliminate structural barriers that stagnate educational outcomes for Black, Latinx, and low-income students – either within the SBR framework or through an alternate policy paradigm.
