High-Stakes Testing and Mathematics Performance of Fourth Graders in North Cyprus

Journal of Educational Research

Volumn 98, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 234-244

  Cankoy, Osman ^a   Tut, Mehmet Ali ^b  

^a Ataturk Teacher Training Academy   (Cyprus)

^b EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

High stakes standardized tests; Routine and nonroutine mathematics items; Test taking skills

Indexed keywords

EID: 15744402558     PISSN: 00220671     EISSN: 19400675     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3200/JOER.98.4.234-244     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. America 2000. (1991). An educational strategy to move the American educational system ahead to meet the needs of the 21st century. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
2. Amrein, A. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2002). High-stakes testing, uncertainty, and student learning. Education Policy Archives, 10(18), 1-70.
3. Bowers, B. C. (1989). Alternatives to standardized educational assessment. Eugene, OR: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED312773)
4. Cai, J. (1995). A cognitive analysis of U.S. and Chinese students’ mathematical performance on tasks involving computation, simple problem solving, and complex problem solving. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education (Monograph Series 7). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
5. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
6. Corono, L. (1992). Encouraging students to take responsibility for learning and performance. Elementary School Journal, 93, 69-83.
7. Dais, T A. (1993). An analysis of transition assessment practices: Do they recognize cultural differences? Washington, DC: Vol. 2, pp. 1-19. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED372519)
8. Davidson, E., Deuser, R., & Sternberg, R. J. (1994). The role of metacognition in problem solving. In J. Metcalfe & A. P. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition (pp. 207-226). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9. Fennema, F., Carpenter, T P., Jacobs, V. R., Franke, M. L., & Levi, L. W. (1998). A longitudinal study of gender differences in young children’s mathematical thinking. Educational Researcher, 27, 6-11.
10. Firestone, W. A., Monfil, L., Mayrowetz, D., & Camilli, G. (2001, April). The ambiguity of teaching to the test: A multiple method analysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
11. Gallagher, A. M., & De Lisi, R. (1994). Gender differences in scholastic aptitude test—mathematics problem solving among high-ability students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 204-211.
12. Haney, W., Madaus, G., & Lyons, R. (1993). The fractured marketplace for standardized testing. Boston: Kluwer.
13. Hyde, J. S., Fennema, E., & Lamon, S. J. (1990). Gender differences in mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 139-155.
14. Kantowski, M. G. (1981). Problem solving. In E. Fennema (Ed.), Mathematics education research (pp. 111-126). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
15. Kenney, P. A., & Silver, E. A. (1997). Results from the seventh mathematics assessment of the NAEP. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
16. Kober, N. (2002). Teaching to the test: The good, the bad, and who’s responsible. Test talk for leaders, no. 1. Center on Education Policy. Retrieved January 20, 2003, from http://www.ctredpol.org/pubs/testtalkjune2002.html
17. Lindquist, M. M. (1989). Results from the fourth mathematics assessment of the NAEP. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
18. Marcus, E. (1994). Rite of passage: French teachers demand reasoning. Educational Vision, 2(2), 18-19.
19. Mestre, J. P. (1991). Learning and instruction in pre-college physical science. Physics Today, 44(9), 56-62.
20. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
21. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1991). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
22. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
23. Pape, S. T., & Tchoshanov, M. A. (2001). The role of representation(s) in developing mathematical understanding. Theory Into Practice, 40(2), 118-127.
24. Paris, S. G. (1995). Why learner-centered assessment is better than highstakes testing. In N. M. Lambert & B. L. McComb (Eds.), How students learn: Reforming schools through learner-centered education (pp. 189-210). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
25. Popham, W. J. (1999). Why standardized tests don’t measure educational quality. Educational Leadership, 56(6), 8-15.
26. Popham, W. J. (2001). The truth about testing. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
27. Quality Counts. (2001). A better balance. Education Week, 20(17), 36.
28. Reys, B. J., & Reys, R. E. (1998). Computation in the elementary curriculum: Shifting the emphasis. Teaching Children Mathematics, 5, 236-241.
29. Reys, R. E., & Nohda, N. (1992). Computational alternatives for the twenty-first century. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
30. Sacks, P. (2000). Standardized minds: The high price of America's testing culture and what we can do to enhance it. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books.
31. Sowder, J. T. (1992). Estimation and number sense. In D. C. Grouws (Eds.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 371-389). New York: Macmillan.
32. Thurlow, M., Quenemoen, R., Thompson, S., & Lehr, C. (2001). Principles and characteristics of inclusive assessment and accountability systems (Synthesis Rep. No. 40). Minneapolis, MN: National Center on Educational Outcomes.