Standardized tests have become the gateway to higher education . . . but should they be? For more than seventy-five years, standardized tests have been considered a vital tool for gauging students' readiness for college. However, few people-including students, parents, teachers, and policy makers-understand how tests like the SAT or ACT are used in admissions decisions. Once touted as the best way to compare students from diverse backgrounds, these tests are now increasingly criticized as being biased in favor of traditionally privileged groups. A small but growing number of colleges have made such testing optional for applicants. Is this the right way to go? Measuring Success investigates the research and policy implications of test-optional practices, considering both sides of the debate. Does a test-optional policy result in a more diverse student body or improve attainment and retention rates? Drawing upon the expertise of higher education researchers, admissions officers, enrollment managers, and policy professionals, this volume is among the first to investigate the research and policy implications of test-optional practices. Although the test-optional movement has received ample attention, its claims have rarely been subjected to empirical scrutiny. This volume provides a much-needed evaluation of the use and value of standardized admissions tests in an era of widespread grade inflation. It will be of great value to those seeking to strike the proper balance between uniformity and fairness in higher education. Contributors: Andrew S. Belasco, A. Emiko Blalock, William G. Bowen, Jim Brooks, Matthew M. Chingos, James C. Hearn, Michael Hurwitz, Jonathan Jacobs, Nathan R. Kuncel, Jason Lee, Jerome A. Lucido, Eric Maguire, Krista Mattern, Michael S. McPherson, Kelly O. Rosinger, Paul R. Sackett, Edgar Sanchez, Dhruv B. Sharma, Emily J. Shaw, Kyle Sweitzer, Roger J. Thompson, Meredith Welch, Rebecca Zwick

Over the past several years, privately run, publicly funded charter schools have been sold to the American public as an education alternative promising better student achievement, greater parent satisfaction, and more vibrant school communities. But are charter schools delivering on their promise? Or are they just hype as critics contend, a costly experiment that is bleeding tax dollars from public schools? In this book, Jack Buckley and Mark Schneider tackle these questions about one of the thorniest policy reforms in the nation today.

Using an exceptionally rigorous research approach, the authors investigate charter schools in Washington, D.C., carefully examining school data going back more than a decade, interpreting scores of interviews with parents, students, and teachers, and meticulously measuring how charter schools perform compared to traditional public schools. Their conclusions are sobering.

Buckley and Schneider show that charter-school students are not outperforming students in traditional public schools, that the quality of charter-school education varies widely from school to school, and that parent enthusiasm for charter schools starts out strong but fades over time. And they argue that while charter schools may meet the most basic test of sound public policy--they do no harm--the evidence suggests they all too often fall short of advocates' claims.

With the future of charter schools--and perhaps public education as a whole--hanging in the balance, this book supports the case for holding charter schools more accountable and brings us considerably nearer to resolving this contentious debate.