Controversies of standardized assessment in school accountability reform: A critical synthesis of multidisciplinary research evidence

Applied Measurement in Education

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 305-328

  Lihshing, Wang ^a   Beckett, Gulbahar H ^a   Brown, Lionel ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33751529714     PISSN: 08957347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15324818ame1904_5     Document Type: Article

References (114)

1. Abrams, L. M., Pedulla, J. J., & Madaus, G. F. (2003). Views from the classroom: Teachers' opinions of statewide testing programs. Theory Into Practice, 42(1), 18-29.
2. Airasian, P. W. (1988). Measurement-driven instruction: A closer look. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 7(4), 6-11.
3. American College Testing. (2004). Crisis at the core: Preparing all students for college and work. Iowa City, IA: Author.
4. Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological testing (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
5. Barton, P. E. (2004). Unfinished business: More measured approaches to standards-based reform. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
6. Bauer-Sanders, K. (2000). Voices from a native American classroom in Nebraska. In A. A. Glatthorn & J. Fontana (Eds.), Coping with standards, tests, and accountability: Voices from the classroom (pp. 37-50). Annapolis Junction, MD: National Education Association Teaching and Learning Division.
7. Berliner, D. C., & Biddle, B. J. (1995). The manufactured crisis: Myths, fraud, and the attack on America public schools. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
8. Bishop, J. H. (1998). The effect of curriculum-based external exit exam systems on student achievement. Journal of Economic Education, 29, 171-182.
9. Bracey, G. W. (2003). On the death of childhood and the destruction of public schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
10. Business Roundtable. (2001). Assessing and addressing the "testing backlash." Washington, DC: Author.
11. Camara, W., Kimmel, E., Scheuneman, J., & Sawtell, E. A. (2003). Whose grades are inflated? (Research Rep. No. 2003-4). New York: College Entrance Examination Board.
12. Campbell, J. C., Hombo, C. M., & Mazzeo, J. (2000). NAEP 1999 trends in academic progress: Three decades of student performance. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
13. Carnoy, M., & Leob, S. (2002). Does external accountability affect student outcomes? A cross-state analysis, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 305-331.
14. Center on Education Policy. (2004). From the capital to the classroom: Year 2 of the No Child Left Behind Act. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved February 1, 2005, from http://www.ctredpol.org/pubs/nclby2/cep_nclb_y2_full.pdf
15. Cizek, G. J. (1993). Rethinking psychometricians' beliefs about learning. Educational Researcher, 22(4), 4-9.
16. Cizek, G. J. (2001a). More unintended consequences of high-stakes testing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 20(4), 19-27.
17. Cizek, G. J. (2001b). Setting performance standards. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
18. Cohen, J., & Rogers, J. (Eds.). (2000). Will standards save public education? Boston: Beacon.
19. Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E., Hobson, C., McPartland, J., Mood, A., Weinfeld, F., et al. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
20. College Entrance Examination Board. (1993). News from the College Board. New York: Author.
21. College Entrance Examination Board. (2003). SAT verbal and math scores up significantly as a record-number students take the test. New York: Author. Retrieved January 25, 2005, from http://www.collegeboard.com/press/article/0, 26858,00.html
22. Crocker, L. (2003). Teaching for the test: Validity, fairness, and moral action. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22(3), 5-11.
23. Darling-Hammond, L. (1995). Equity issues in performance-based assessment. In M. T. Nettles & A. L. Nettles (Eds.), Equity and excellence in educational testing and assessment (pp. 89-114). Boston: Kluwer.
24. Elford, G. W. (2002). Beyond standardized testing: Better information for school accountability and management. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.
25. Frary, R. B., Cross, L. H., & Weber, L. J. (1993). Testing and grading practices and opinions of secondary school teachers of academic subjects: Implications for instruction in measurement. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 12(3), 23-30.
26. Frederiksen, J. R., & Collins, A. (1989). A systems approach to educational testing. Educational Researcher, 18(9), 27-32.
27. Gandal, M., & McGiffert, L. (2003). The power of testing. Educational Leadership, 60(5), 39-42.
28. Goertz, M., & Duffy, D. (2003). Mapping the landscape of high-stakes testing and accountability programs. Theory Into Practice, 41(1), 4-11.
29. Gonzales, P., Guzman, J. C., Partelow, L., Pahlke, E., Jocelyn, L., Kastberg, D., et al. (2004). Highlights from the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 2003. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
30. Haertel, E. H. (1999). Validity arguments for high-stakes testing: In search of the evidence. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 78(4), 5-9.
31. Haertel, E. H. (2002). Standard setting as a participatory process: Implications for validation of standards-based accountability programs. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 21 (1), 16-22.
32. Hamilton, L. S., Stecher, B. M., & Klein, S. P. (Eds.). (2002). Making sense of test-based accountability in education. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
33. Haney, W. M. (2000). The myth of the Texas miracle in education. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(41). Retrieved January 30, 2005, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n41/
34. Hensch, T. K. (2004). Critical period regulation. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 27, 549-579.
35. Heubert, J. P., & Hauser, R. M. (Eds.). (1999). High stakes: Testing for tracking, promotion and graduation. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
36. Hibpshman, T. (2004). A review of value-added models. Frankfort: Kentucky Education Professional Standards Board.
37. Hillocks, G., Jr. (2002). The testing trap: How state writing assessments control learning. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.
38. Horn, R. A., Jr. (2002). Understanding educational reform. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
39. Jones, M. G., Jones, B. D., & Hargrove, T. Y. (2003). The unintended consequences of high-stakes testing. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
40. Kifer, E. (2001). Large-scale assessment: Dimensions, dilemmas, and policy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
41. Klein, S. P., Hamilton, L. S., McCaffrey, D. F., & Stecher, B. M. (2000). What do test scores in Texas tell us? (IP-202). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
42. Kohn, A. (1993). Punished by rewards: The trouble with gold stars, incentive plans, A's, raises, and other bribes. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
43. Kohn, A. (2000). The case against standardized testing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
44. Kolb, B., Gibb, R., & Robinson, T. E. (2003). Brain plasticity and behavior. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12(1), 1-5.
45. Koretz, D. M. (1995). Sometimes a cigar is only a cigar, and often a test is only a test. In D. Ravitch (Ed.), Debating the future of American education: Do we need national standards and assessment? (pp. 154-166). Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.
46. Koretz, D. M., & Barron, S. I. (1998). The validity of gains on the Kentucky Instructional Results Information System (KIRIS) (MR-1014-EDU). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
47. Kubow, P. K., & DeBard, R. (2000). Teacher perceptions of proficiency testing: A winning Ohio suburban school district expresses itself. American Secondary Education, 29(2), 16-25
48. Lemann, N. (1999). The big test: The secret history of the American meritocracy. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.
49. Lemke, M., Sen, A., Pahlke, E., Partelow, L., Miller, D., Williams, T., et al. (2004). Outcomes of learning in mathematics literacy and problem solving: PISA 2003 results from the U.S. perspective. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
50. Leonardo, Z. (2003). The agony of school reform: Race, class, and the elusive search for social justice. Educational Researcher, 32(3), 37-43.
51. Linn, R. L. (1994). Performance assessment: Policy promises and technical measurement standards. Educational Researcher, 23(9), 4-14.
52. Linn, R. L. (2000). Assessment and accountability. Educational Researcher, 29(2), 4-14.
53. Linn, R. L. (2001). A century of standardized testing: Controversies and pendulum swings. Educational Assessment, 7, 29-38.
54. Linn, R. L., Baker, E. L., & Betebenner, D. W. (2002). Accountability system: Implications of requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Educational Researcher, 31(6), 3-16.
55. Linn, R. L., Baker, E. L., & Dunbar, S. B. (1991). Complex, performance-based assessment: Expectations and validation criteria, Educational Researcher, 20(8), 15-21.
56. Madaus, G. (1995). Technological and historic consideration of equity issues associated with proposals to change our nation testing policy. In M. T. Nettles & A. L. Nettles (Eds.), Equity and excellence in educational testing and assessment (pp. 23-68). Boston: Kluwer.
57. Maehr, M. L., & Midgley, C. (1996). Transforming school cultures. Bolder, CO: Westview.
58. McGill-Franzen, A., & Allington, R. L. (1993). Flunk 'em or get them classified: The contamination of primary grade accountability data. Educational Researcher, 22(1), 19-22.
59. McNabb, M., Cradler, J., Freeman, M., & Cradler, R. (2002). On the horizon: Electronic student performance assessments for higher-order thinking [Electronic version]. Learning and Leading with Technology, 30(3), 50-59.
60. McNeil, L. M. (2000). Contradictions of school reform: Educational costs of standardized testing. New York: Routledge.
61. Mehrens, W. A. (2002). Consequences of assessment: What is the evidence? In G. Tindal & T. M. Haladyna (Eds.), Large-scale assessment programs for all students (pp. 149-177). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
62. Meisels, S. J., Dorfman, A., & Steele, D. (1995). Equity and excellence in group-administered and performance-based assessment. In M. T. Nettles & A. L. Nettles (Eds.), Equity and excellence in educational testing and assessment (pp. 243-261). Boston: Kluwer.
63. Moss, P. A. (1992). Shifting conceptions of validity in educational measurement: Implications for performance assessment. Review of Educational Research, 62, 229-258.
64. Moss, P. A., & Schutz, A. (2001). Educational standards, assessment, and the search for consensus. American Educational Research Journal, 38(1), 37-70.
65. National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperatives for education reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
66. National Education Association. (2005). Pontiac vs. Spellings lawsuit. Retrieved July 18, 2005, from http://www.nea.org/lawsuit/images/nclbcomplaint. pdf
67. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).
68. Northwest Evaluation Association. (2003). Computerized testing and NCLB. The Assessment Standard, 2(1), 1. Retrieved July 16, 2005, from http://www.nwea.org/assets/newsletter/newsletter_sp03.pdf
69. Nye, B., Konstantopoulos, S., & Hedges, L. V. (2004). How large are teacher effects? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26, 237-257.
70. Ohanian, S. (1999). One size fits few: The folly of educational standards. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
71. Orfield, G., & Kornhaber, M. L. (Eds.). (2001). Raising standards or raising barriers? Inequality and high-stakes testing in public education. Washington, DC: The Century Foundation Press.
72. Parkes, J., & Stevens, J. J. (2003). Legal issues in school accountability systems. Applied Measurement in Education, 16, 141-158.
73. Phelps, R. P. (2000). Trends in large-scale, external testing outside the United States. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 19(1), 11-21.
74. Phelps, R. P. (2001). That "backlash " that testing opponents so desperately crave. Retrieved August 8, 2005, from EducationNews.org
75. Phelps, R. P. (2003). Kill the messenger: The war on standardized testing. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
76. Phelps, R. P. (Ed.). (2005). Defending standardized testing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
77. Popham, W. J. (1999). Why standardized test scores don't measure educational quality. Educational Leadership, 56(6), 8-15.
78. Popham, W. J. (2000). Testing! Testing! What every parent should know about school tests. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
79. Popham, W. J. (2001). The truth about testing: An educator's call to action. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
80. Popham, W. J., Cruse, K. L., Rankin, S. C., Sandifer, P. D., & Williams, R. L. (1985). Measurement-driven instruction: It's on the road. Phi Delta Kappan, 66, 628-634.
81. Ptashne, M., & Gann, A. (2002). Genes and signals. New York: Cold Spring Harbor.
82. Public Agenda. (2001). Reality check 2001. New York: Author. Retrieved January 31, 2005, from http://www.publicagenda.org/specials/rc2001/reality.htm
83. Ravitch, D. (Ed.). (1995). Debating the future of American education: Do we need national standards and assessments? Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.
84. Ravitch, D. (2002). Testing and accountability, historically considered. In W. M. Evers & H. J. Walberg (Eds.). School accountability: An assessment by the Koret task force on K-12 education (pp. 9-22). Palo Alto, CA: Hoover Institution, Stanford University.
85. Reckase, M. D., & Welch, C. (1999). Advances in portfolio assessment with applications to urban school populations. In A. L. Nettles & M. T. Nettles (Eds.), Measuring up: Challenges minorities face in educational assessment (pp. 71-96). Boston: Kluwer.
86. Resnick, D. P. (1982). History of educational testing. In A. K. Wigdor & W. R. Garner (Eds.), Ability testing: Uses, consequences, and controversies. Part II: Documentation section (pp. 173-194). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
87. Restak, R. (2003). The new brain: How the modern age is rewiring your mind. New York: Rodale.
88. Ridley, M. (2003). Nature via nurture: Genes, experience, and what makes us human. New York: HarperCollins.
89. Roeber, E. D. (1995). Using new forms of assessment to assist in achieving student equity: Experiences of the CCSSO State Collaborative on Assessment and Student Standards. In M. T. Nettles & A. L. Nettles (Eds.), Equity and excellence in educational testing and assessment (pp. 265-288). Boston: Kluwer.
90. Rosenshine, B. (2003). High stakes testing: Another analysis. Retrieved January 30, 2005, from http://faculty.ed.uiuc.edu/rosenshi/
91. Rothman, R. (1995). Measuring up: Standards, assessment, and school reform. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
92. Ryan, K. E. (2004). Serving public interests in educational accountability: Alternative approaches to democratic evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 25, 443-460
93. Sacks, P. (1999). Standardized minds: The high price of America's testing culture and what we can do to change it. Cambridge, MA: Perseus.
94. Sanders, W. L., & Horn, S. P. (1998). Research findings from the Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System (TVAAS) database: Implications for educational evaluation and research. Journal of Personnel Evaluation In Education, 12, 247-256.
95. Schafer, W. D. (2002). How can assessment contribute to an educational utopia? In R. W. Lissitz & W. D. Schafer (Eds.), Assessments in educational reform: Both means and ends (pp. 80-91). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
96. Schiller, L. (2000). Politics, pedagogy, and professional development in Michigan. In A. A. Glatthorn & J. Fontana (Eds.), Coping with standards, tests, and accountability: Voices from the classroom (pp. 95-107). Washington, DC: National Education Association.
97. Schwartz, J. M., & Begley, S. (2002). The mind and the brain: Neuroplasticity and the power of mental force. New York: Regan.
98. Shanker, A. (1995). The case for high stakes and real consequences. In D. Ravitch (Ed.), Debating the future of American education: Do we need national standards and assessment? (pp. 145-153). Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.
99. Shepard, L. A. (1989). Why we need better assessments. Educational Leadership, 46(1), 4-9.
100. Sizer, T. R. (1995). Will national standards and assessments make a difference? In D. Ravitch (Ed.), Debating the future of American education: Do we need national standards and assessment? (pp. 33-39). Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.
101. Smith, M. S. (1995). Education reform in America public schools: The Clinton agenda. In D. Ravitch (Ed.), Debating the future of American education: Do we need national standards and assessment? (pp. 9-32). Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.
102. Stecher, B. M., & Barron, S. (2001). Unintended consequences of test-based accountability when testing in "milepost" grades. Educational Assessment, 7, 259-281.
103. Stewart, D. M. (1995). Holding onto norms in a sea of criteria. In D. Ravitch (Ed.), Debating the future of American education: Do we need national standards and assessment? (pp. 83-93). Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.
104. Stone, C. A., & Lane, S. (2003). Consequences of a state accountability program: Examining relationships between school performance gains and teacher, student, and school variables. Applied Measurement in Education, 16, 1-26.
105. Strickland, K., & Strickland, J. (1998). Reflections on assessment: Its purposes, methods, and effects: on learning. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
106. Sunderman, G. L., & Kim, J. (2004). Inspiring vision, disappointing results: Four studies on implementing the No Child Left Behind Act. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, The Civil Rights Project.
107. Sunderman, G. L., Tracey, C. A., Kim, J., & Orfield, G. (2004). Listening to teachers: Classroom realities and No Child Left Behind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, The Civil Rights Project.
108. Sykes, C. J. (1995). Dumbing down our kids: Why American children feel good about themselves but can't read, write, or add. New York: St. Martin Griffin.
109. Thernstrom, A., & Thernstrom, S. (2003). No excuse: Closing the racial gap in learning. New York: Simon & Schuster.
110. U.S. Department of Education. (2004). The condition of education 2004. Washington, DC: Author.
111. Valenzuela, A. (2004, April). The struggle for valid assessment in Texas. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
112. Wainer, H. (Ed.).(2000). Computer adaptive testing: A primer (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
113. Wiggins, G. (1990). The case for authentic assessment. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 2(2). Retrieved January 26, 2005, from http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=2&n=2
114. Zenisky, A. L., & Sireci, S. G. (2002). Technological innovations in large-scale assessment. Applied Measurement in Education, 15, 337-362.