Harming not helping: The impact of a Canadian standardized writing assessment on curriculum and pedagogy

Assessing Writing

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 180-200

  Slomp, David H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Case study; Consequential validity evidence; Construct validity; Pedagogy; Standardized assessment; Writing assessment

Indexed keywords

EID: 57149113708     PISSN: 10752935     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2008.10.004     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Alberta Education. (2004). Diploma examinations program. Retrieved March 29, 2004, from http://www.learning.gov.ab.ca/k_12/testing/diploma/dib_gib/examinationpr ogram.asp
2. Alberta Education. (2005). English language arts 30-1 June 2005 writing assignments. Retrieved December 15, 2006, from http://www.education.gov.ab.ca/k%5F12/testing/diploma/bulletins/ examples_stand/default.asp
3. Brenan A.L. Perspectives on the evolution and future of educational measurement. In: Brennan R.L. (Ed). Educational measurement. 4th ed. (2006), Praeger Publishers, Westport, CT 1-16
4. Britton, J. N., Burgess, T., Martin, N., McLeod, A., & Rosen, H. (1975). The development of writing abilities (pp. 11-18). London: McMillan.
5. Cheng L., Fox J., and Zheng Y. Student accounts of the Ontario Secondary School Literacy Test: A case for validation. The Canadian Modern Language Review 64 1 (2007) 69-98
6. Crawford L., and Smolkowski K. When a "sloppy copy" is good enough: Results of a state writing assessment. Assessing Writing 13 1 (2008) 61-77
7. Denzin N.K., and Lincoln Y.S. Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In: Denzin N.K., and Lincoln Y.S. (Eds). The Sage handbook of qualitative research. 3rd ed. (2005), Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks 1-32
8. In: Denzin N.K., and Lincoln Y.S. (Eds). The Sage handbook of qualitative research. 3rd ed. (2005), Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks
9. Fox J., and Cheng L. Did we take the same literacy test? Differing accounts of the Ontario Secondary School Literacy Test by first and second language test-takers. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 14 1 (2007) 9-26
10. Green D.R. Consequential aspects of the validity of achievement tests: A publisher's point of view. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 17 16-19 (1998) 34
11. Green J.C. The generative potential of mixed methods inquiry. International Journal of Research & Method in Education 28 2 (2005) 207-211
12. Hamp-Lyons L. The scope of writing assessment. Assessing Writing 8 (2002) 5-16
13. Hillocks Jr. G. The testing trap: How state writing assessments control learning (2002), Teachers' College Press, New York
14. Howard P. "Walking the talk" in assessment: Deconstructing standardized tests in the English language arts. English Quarterly 35 3-4 (2003) 24-28 Retrieved October 14, 2008, from CBCA Education database (Document ID: 620748211)
15. Huot B. (Re)Articulating writing assessment: Writing assessment for teaching and learning (2002), Utah State University Press, Logan, Utah
16. Kane M.T. Validating high-stakes testing programs. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 21 1 (2002) 31-41
17. Klinger D.A., Deluca C., and Miller T. The evolving culture of large scale assessments in Canada. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy 76 (2008). https://www.umanitoba.ca/publications/cjeap/articles/klinger.html Retrieved September 4, 2008 from https://www.umanitoba.ca/publications/cjeap/articles/klinger.html
18. Koretz D., and Hamilton L.S. Testing for accountability in K-12. In: Brennan R.L. (Ed). Educational measurement. 4th ed. (2006), American Council on Education/Praeger, Westport, CT 531-578
19. Lane S., Parke C.S., and Stone C.A. A framework for evaluating the consequences of assessment programs. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 17 (1998) 24-28
20. Linn R.L. Partitioning the responsibility for the evaluation of the consequences of assessment programs. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 17 (1998) 28-30
21. Luce-Kapler R., and Klinger D. Uneasy writing: The defining moments of high-stakes literacy testing. Assessing Writing 10 (2005) 157-173
22. Mabry L. Writing to the rubric. Phi Delta Kappan 80 (1999) 673-680
23. Mason J. Mixing methods in a qualitatively driven way. Qualitative Research 6 1 (2006) 9-25
24. Meaghan D.E., and Casas F.R. On standardized achievement testing: Response to Freedman and Wilson and a last word [Electronic Version]. Interchange 26 1 (1995) 81-96
25. Moss P.A. The role of consequences in validity theory. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 17 (1998) 6-12
26. Murphy S., and Yancey K.B. Construct and consequence: Validity in writing assessment. In: Bazerman C. (Ed). Handbook of research on writing: History, society, school, individual, text (2008), Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, New York 365-385
27. Pinto L., Boler M., and Norris T. Literacy is just reading and writing, isn't it? The Ontario Secondary School Literacy Test and its press coverage. Policy Futures in Education 5 1 (2007) 84-99. http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/pfie.2007.5.1.84
28. Popham W.J. Consequential validity: Right concern-wrong concept. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 16 (1997) 9-13
29. Popham W.J. Where large scale educational assessment is heading and why it shouldn't. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 18 (1999) 13-17
30. Resnick L., and Resnick D. Assessing the thinking curriculum: New tools for educational reform. In: Gifford B.R., and O'Connor M.C. (Eds). Changing assessments: Alternative views of aptitude, achievement and instruction (1992), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston 35-75
31. Rex L.A., and Nelson M.C. How teachers' professional identities position high-stakes test preparation in their classrooms. Teachers College Record 106 6 (2004) 1288-1331
32. Robinson S. "Miles to go...": Assessment and secondary English. In: Barrell B.R.C., and Hammett R.F. (Eds). Advocating change: Contemporary issues in subject English (2000), Irwin Publishing, Toronto 254-280
33. Scott T. "Happy to comply": Writing assessment, fast-capitalism, and the cultural logic of control. Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies 30 2 (2008) 140-161
34. Shepard L.A. The centrality of use and consequences for test validity. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 6 (1997) 5-8
35. Shepard L.A. The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher 29 7 (2000) 4-14
36. Shepard L.A. Classroom assessment. In: Brennan R.L. (Ed). Educational measurement. 4th ed. (2006), Praeger Publishers, Westport, CT 623-646
37. Slomp, D. H. (2007). Trapped between paradigms: Composition pedagogy in the context of a twelfth grade standardized writing assessment. Unpublished dissertation, University of Alberta.
38. Smith M.L., and Fey P. Validity and accountability in high-stakes testing. Journal of Teacher Education 51 5 (2000) 334-344
39. Stiggins R.J. Assessment, student confidence, and school success. Phi Delta Kappan 81 3 (1999) 191-198
40. In: Tashakkori A., and Teddlie C. (Eds). Handbook of mixed methods in the social and behavioral sciences (2003), Sage, Thousand Oaks CA
41. Volante, L. (2006, May) Assessment, accountability, and educational reform in Ontario. Paper presented at the annual meeting of Canadian Society for Studies in Education, Toronto, ON.
42. Wolf, S. A., & McIver, M. C. (1998). Writing whirligigs: The art and assessments of writing in Kentucy state reform (CSE Technical Report 496). Retrieved on October 14, 2008, http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/detailmin i.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED428128&ERIC ExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED428128
43. Yancey K.B. Looking back as we look forward: Historicizing writing assessment. College Composition and Communication 50 (1999) 483-503
44. Yen W.M. Investigating the consequential aspects of validity: Who is responsible and what should they do?. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 17 (1998) 5