Skip to main content

Mobile Navigation

  • National
    • Policy
      • High Expectations
      • Quality Choices
      • Personalized Pathways
    • Research
    • Commentary
      • Gadfly Newsletter
      • Flypaper Blog
    • Events
    • Scholars Program
  • Ohio
    • Policy
      • Priorities
      • Media & Testimony
    • Research
    • Commentary
      • Ohio Education Gadfly Biweekly
      • Ohio Gadfly Daily
  • Charter Authorizing
    • Application
    • Sponsored Schools
    • Resources
  • About
    • Mission
    • Board
    • Staff
    • Career
Home
Home
Advancing Educational Excellence

Main Navigation

  • National
  • Ohio
  • Charter Authorizing
  • About

National Menu

  • Topics
    • Accountability & Testing
    • Advanced Education
    • Career & Technical Education
    • Charter Schools
    • Curriculum & Instruction
    • ESSA
    • Evidence-Based Learning
    • Facilities
    • Governance
    • Personalized Learning
    • Private School Choice
    • School Finance
    • Standards
    • Teachers & School Leaders
    • Think Again
  • Research
  • Commentary
    • Gadfly Newsletter
    • Flypaper Blog
    • Gadfly Podcast
  • Events
  • Scholars Program
Flypaper

Defining Strong State Accountability Systems

Tyson Eberhardt
4.4.2012

Rigorous standards and aligned assessments are vital tools for boosting education outcomes but they have little traction without strong accountability systems that attach consequences to performance. Today, Fordham is releasing a new pilot study, "Defining Strong State Accountability Systems: How Can Better Standards Gain Traction?," laying out the essential features of such accountability systems, intended to add oomph to new common standards and aligned assessments. Specifically, the study identifies six essential elements of effective systems:

  • Adoption of demanding, clear, and specific standards in all core content areas, and rigorous assessment of those standards;

  • Reporting of accessible and actionable data to all stakeholders, including summative outcome data and other formative data to drive continuous improvement;

  • Annual determinations and designations for each school and district that meaningfully differentiate their performance;

  • A system of rewards and consequences to drive improvement at the school and district levels;

  • A system of rewards and consequences to drive improvement at the individual student level; and

  • A system of rewards and consequences to drive improvement at the individual teacher and administrator level.

What distinguishes the report from previous work on this subject is that it insists that individuals—both students and adults—must be held accountable along with institutions. These elements were developed from in-depth analyses of the strengths and weaknesses of seven states’ accountability systems and provide a framework for Fordham’s future analyses of state accountability systems during the early years of Common Core's implementation. Download the study to learn more.

Tags: Common Core

Tyson Eberhardt is online editor and external relations manager at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute. A 2008 graduate of Princeton University, Tyson completed the university’s Teacher Preparation Program as a student-teacher in Trenton, New Jersey. Tyson received a M.S.Ed from the University of Pennsylvania’s Graduate School of Education in 2010, focusing his studies on variance among charter schools. Tyson…

View Full Bio
Fordham Logo

© 2026 The Thomas B. Fordham Institute
Privacy Policy
Usage Agreement

National

P.O. Box 110
Burke, VA 22009

202.223.5452

[email protected]

Ohio

P.O. Box 82291
Columbus, OH 43202

614.223.1580

[email protected]

Sponsorship

130 West Second Street, Suite 410
Dayton, Ohio 45402

937.227.3368

[email protected]