This State-specific summary report serves as an assessment of Ohio's annual Race to the Top implementation. The Year 3 report for Phase 1 and 2 grantees highlights successes and accomplishments, identifies challenges, and provides lessons learned from implementation from approximately September 2012 through September 2013. The Ohio Department of…

This State-specific summary report serves as an assessment of Hawaii's Year 3 Race to the Top implementation. The Year 3 report for Phase 1 and 2 grantees highlights successes and accomplishments, identifies challenges, and provides lessons learned from implementation from approximately September 2012 through September 2013; the Year 2 report for…

The State-Specific Summary report serves as an assessment of Georgia's annual Race to the Top implementation. This year 3 report for Phase 1 and 2 grantees in Georgia highlights successes and accomplishments, identifies challenges, and provides lessons learned from implementation from approximately September 2012 through September 2013. Among…

This State-specific summary report serves as an assessment of Rhode Island's Year 3 Race to the Top implementation, highlighting successes and accomplishments, identifying challenges, and providing lessons learned from implementation from approximately September 2012 through September 2013. In Year 3, many initiatives that were in the development…

The State-specific summary report serves as an assessment of Delaware's annual Race to the Top implementation. The Year 3 report for Phase 1 and 2 grantees highlights successes and accomplishments, identifies challenges, and provides lessons learned from implementation from approximately September 2012 through September 2013. Delaware made…

This State-specific summary report serves as an assessment of the New York's annual Race to the Top implementation. The Year 3 report for Phase 1 and 2 grantees highlights successes and accomplishments, identifies challenges, and provides lessons learned from implementation from approximately September 2012 through September 2013. In Year 3, the…

This State-specific summary report serves as an assessment of Maryland's Year 3 Race to the Top implementation, highlighting successes and accomplishments, identifying challenges, and providing lessons learned from the implementation process. During Year 3 Maryland continued to prepare educators to fully implement the Common Core State Standards…

This State-specific summary report serves as an assessment of Massachusetts' Year 3 Race to the Top implementation. The Year 3 report for Phase 1 and Phase 2 grantees highlights successes and accomplishments, identifies challenges, and provides lessons learned from implementation from approximately September 2012 through September 2013. In School…

This State-specific summary report serves as an assessment of North Carolina's annual Race to the Top implementation. The Year 3 report for Phase 1 and 2 grantees highlights successes and accomplishments, identifies challenges, and provides lessons learned from implementation from approximately September 2012 through September 2013. In Year 3,…

This State-specific summary report serves as an assessment of Tennessee's annual Race to the Top implementation. The Year 3 report for Phase 1 and 2 grantees highlights successes and accomplishments, identifies challenges, and provides lessons learned from implementation from approximately September 2012 through September 2013. In Year 3,…

The implications of the concept of fairness, to the level of the day-to-day business of the educational evaluator is explored. Section 2 presents a brief critical examination of the notion of objectivity in evaluation, and introduces the concept of fairness as an alternative focus for qualitative evaluation. In Section 3, there is a discussion of…

A review of the implementation efforts of the Accountability Act of 1971 is presented with guidelines for judging the effectiveness or potential of any accountability plan. (HMD)

A reply to the preceding article in this issue. (IRT) Aspect of National Assessment (NAEP) dealt with in this document: Procedures (Evaluation).

The source of most of the opposition to educational assessment is fear on the part of administrators and teachers that assessment will be used as an instrument of evaluation. Assessment plans make it impossible to identify individual teachers or schools. Thus, the fear that someone may be penalized because of a bad assessment is not realistic.…

The author argues that Elliot Eisner's assumptions underpinning his theory of educational evaluation are problematic. Nevertheless, if the role of artistic thinking in the genesis of educational concept were developed more fully, his approach could bear considerable fruit. (MT)