How can a useful performance monitoring system be designed? Gary T. Henry and Kent C. Dickey describe the use of a research and development model to develop an effective performance monitoring system as part of the State of Virginia's efforts in educational reform. They provide details on how the approach was implemented and discuss both the limits and risks involved. A combination of public interest, political pressure, and increased technical capacity has thrust public accountability, and with it the concept of performance monitoring, once again into the fore. When the U.S. Department of Education sounded an alarm with A Nation at Risk in 1983, the nation renewed its concern for public education. The presidential Educational Summit in Charlottesville, Virginia, the advent of significant community and parental control of Chicago's public schools, and the court-ordered complete overhaul of the public school system in Kentucky amplified the alarm. Dissatisfaction with public education services in many quarters has led to a variety of proposals ranging from dismantling educational bureaucracies by allowing school choice to increasing the accountability of the schools to the public.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 19 citations exist upstream.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.