State policymakers credit North Carolina's school reform program, the ABCs of Public Education, with raising test scores and improving the quality of public education in the state. Policymakers don't tell the public, however, about the negative impacts of the high stakes ABCs program. This report examines the effects of the ABCs program - both intended and unintended - on teachers, students, and instruction generally. We found that the ABCs have contributed to the lowering of teacher morale, the narrowing of instruction, and the tracking of students into remedial classes. Although state officials are aware of the negative consequences of the ABCs, the State Board of Education (SBE) and the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) have not systematically evaluated the ABCs program to make sure that it is effective and fair. While policymakers have pushed teachers and now students to be accountable for academic performance, they have failed to be accountable to students, parents, and citizens by neglecting their responsibility to ensure that all students receive a quality public education.

  • State policymakers implemented the ABCs to satisfy business lobbyists and stave off right-wing attacks on the public schools.
  • The need for political expediency meant that the ABCs program was implemented hastily without adequate consideration of its potential impacts.
  • Although test scores have improved, negative consequences of the ABCs include:
    • Lower teacher morale and increased job stress
    • Teachers leaving low-performing schools or the classroom altogether
    • More emphasis on test-taking skills and rote memorization rather than critical and creative thinking skills
    • Less emphasis on non-tested subjects like art, physical education, and social studies
    • Tracking of students - often minority and poor - into remedial and special education classes
  • Most significantly, the ABCs program penalizes poor and minority schools.
    • An analysis of testing data illustrates that, as the percentage of needy and minority students in a school increases, the school's ABCs score (which is the percentage of students performing at or above grade level) decreases.
    • Elementary and middle schools with large percentages of poor and minority students have made smaller gains in test scores from the first year to the second year of the ABCs compared to schools with smaller percentages of poor and minority students.
    • Even though the ABCs results illustrate the persistent achievement gap among students of different races and economic circumstances, the ABCs program does not have a component to address or close this gap.
  • In the push for teacher and student accountability, the SBE and DPI have failed to be accountable to students, parents, and the general public. Given the potential for negative, unintended effects, the State has a responsibility to monitor and evaluate the ABCs. The State has shirked that responsibility by:
    • Having no systematic plan to evaluate the effectiveness and fairness of the ABCs
    • Failing to track statistical information that would indicate unintended consequences
    • Not allowing exceptions to the ABCs guidelines for special cases
    • Permitting inconsistencies and inequities in the statistical models to determine expected growth levels
    • Rewriting the state's Testing Code of Ethics to fit the ABCs
    • Ignoring the recommendations of the 1996 Standards and Accountability Commission to supplement the ABCs program with multiple, performance-based assessments
    • Creating a new Committee on Standards and Accountability that recommended the use of the ABCs tests for student promotion decisions
    • Using tests for student classification purposes - a use for which they have not been validated
    • Excluding educators, parents, and other citizens from the reform process by not allowing opportunities for input and not making information available or intelligible to the general public

    1. Replace the ABCs with a more comprehensive model of accountability that includes performance-based assessments of students in a diverse range of subjects including art, physical education, and other currently non-evaluated subjects. Assessments should be age-appropriate, culturally unbiased, and content-related.
    2. Include other indices of a school's success in an accountability model, such as school safety, parents' and students' satisfaction with school services, and community involvement.
    3. Have in place a plan for evaluation of the accountability model before it is implemented.
    4. Provide regular monitoring of students' progress and give feedback to students and parents throughout the grading periods and the year.
    5. Develop remediation practices that do not stigmatize students. Minimize tracking, particularly in the early grades. Limit the use of retention as a remediation strategy.
    6. Address the achievement gap among students of different races and social classes. Reward schools that successfully educate students of all races and economic circumstances.
    7. Provide incentives for teachers to work at low wealth and low performing schools.
    8. Equalize funding of schools so that all students have access to the latest technology, text books, and a safe and comfortable physical environment.
    9. Change the SBE leadership so that a career educator rather than a business lobbyist directs education policy.
    10. Involve teachers, parents, and community leaders in educational decisions and policies. Create community outreach committees in every school to provide input and get information out into the community about educational policies. After their failure to be accountable to NC's schoolchildren and their parents, officials from the SBE and DPI now have an opportunity to restore their accountability by making significant changes in how they assess teacher and student performance. Also, they have a chance to change how educational decisions are made and who makes them: educators who have spent years in the classroom, or politicians and lobbyists. State bureaucrats from the SBE and DPI are not the only ones who have a duty to provide children in NC with a quality education and a positive learning environment. Ultimately, elected officials have an obligation to constituents and taxpayers to develop sound educational policy. It is time that the public held them accountable to do so.
    << Previous Page - Next Page >>
    Contents Page


    • Common Sense Foundation Home Page