Should achievement tests be used to judge school quality?

Education Policy Analysis Archives

Volumn 8, Issue , 2000, Pages

  Bauer, Scott C ^a,b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW ORLEANS   (United States)

^b Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

^c Research   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 2942598554     PISSN: 10682341     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.14507/epaa.v8n46.2000     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Carnevale, A. & Kimmel, E. (1997). A national test: Balancing policy and technical issues. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
2. Cohen, D. (1995). What is the system in systemic reform? Educational researcher, 24, 11-17.
3. Corbett, H. and Wilson, B. (1991). Testing, reform and rebellion. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
4. Council of Chief State School Officers. (1998). Key state education policies on K-12 education: Standards, graduation, assessment, teacher licensure, time and attendance - a 50- state report. Washington, DC: Author.
5. Firestone, W., Mayrowetz, D., and Fairman, J. (1998). Performance-based assessment and instructional change: The effects of testing in Maine and Maryland. Educational evaluation and policy analysis, 20, 95-113.
6. Ginsberg, R. and Berry, B. (1998). The capability for enhancing accountability. In R. MacPherson (Ed.), The politics of accountability: Educative and international perspectives (pp. 43-61). Newbury Park, CA: Corwin.
7. Kelley, C. and Protsik, C. (1997). Risk and reward: Perspectives on the implementation of Kentucky's school- based performance award program. Educational Administration Quarterly, 33, 474-505.
8. Kirst, M. (1990). Accountability: Implications for state and local policymakers. Washington, DC: OERI.
9. Linn, R. (1999). Standards-based accountability: Ten suggestions (CRESST Policy Brief). Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards and Student Testing.
10. Mayer, D. (1998). Do new teaching standards undermine performance on old tests? Educational evaluation and policy analysis, 20, 53-74.
11. Mitchell, K. (1995). Reforming and conforming: NASDC principals talk about the impact of accountability systems on school reform (Technical Report 143). Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corp.
12. Popham, W. J. (1999, March). Why standardized tests don't measure educational quality. Educational Leadership, 57, 8-15.
13. Schmoker, M. (2000, February). The results we want. Educational Leadership, 58, 62-65.
14. Sheldon K. and Biddle, B. (1998). Standards, accountability and school reform: Perils and pitfalls. Teachers' College Record 100 (1): 164-180.
15. Stecher, B. & Barron, S. (1999). Test-Based Accountability: The perverse consequences of milepost testing. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada, April 1999.
16. Stevens, J. (1996). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
17. Wallace, D. (2000, February). Results, results, results? Educational Leadership, 58, 66-68.
18. Watts, J., Gaines, G. & Creech, J. (1998). Getting results: A fresh look at school accountability. Atlanta: Southern Regional Education Board.
19. Wolk, R. (1998). Education's high-stakes gamble. Education Week, 18 (15): 48.