Can high stakes testing leverage educational improvement? Prospects from the last decade of testing and accountability reform

Journal of Educational Change

Volumn 10, Issue 2-3, 2009, Pages 211-227

  Supovitz, Jonathan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Accountability; Assessment; Education reform; High stakes testing

Indexed keywords

EID: 67349085709     PISSN: 13892843     EISSN: 15731812     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10833-009-9105-2     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. Ablemann, C. H., Elmore, R. F., Even, J., Kenyon, S., & Marshall, J. (2004). When accountability knocks, will anyone answer? In R. F. Elmore (Ed.), School reform from the inside out (pp. 133-199). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
2. PW Airasian 1988 Symbolic validation: The case of state-mandated, high stakes testing Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 10 4 301 313
3. GP Baxter RJ Shavelson SR Goldman J Pine 1992 Evaluation of procedure-based scoring on hands-on science assessment Journal of Educational Measurement 29 1 1 17
4. Bernhardt, V. (1998). Data analysis for comprehensive school wide improvement. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
5. B Berry M Hoke E Hirsch 2004 The search for highly qualified teachers Phi Delta Kappan 85 9 684 689 (Pubitemid 38706604)
6. Bishop, J. H., Mane, F., Bishop, M., & Moriarty, J. (2001). The role of end-of-course exams and minimum competency exams in standards-based reforms. In D. Ravitch (Ed.), Brookings papers on education policy (pp. 267-345). Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.
7. PJ Black 1994 Performance assessment and accountability: The experience in England and Wales Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 16 2 191 203 (Pubitemid 24802796)
8. Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for learning. London: Open University Press.
9. H Borko R Elliott 1999 Hands-on pedagogy versus hands-off accountability. Tensions between competing commitments for exemplary mathematics teachers in Kentucky Phi Delta Kappan 80 5 394 400
10. Boudett, K. P., City, E. A., & Murnane, R. J. (2005). Data wise. Cambridge MA: Harvard Education Press.
11. J Cameron D Pierce 1994 Reinforcement, reward, and intrinsic motivation: A meta-analysis Review of Educational Research 64 3 363 423 (Pubitemid 24823328)
12. M Chatterji 2002 Models and methods for examining standards-based reforms and accountability initiatives: Have the tools of inquiry answered pressing questions on improving schools? Review of Educational Research 72 3 345 386 (Pubitemid 36116591)
13. Chudowsky, N., Kober, N., Gayler, K. S., & Hamilton, M. (2002). State high school exit exams: A baseline report. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.
14. Darling-Hammond, L., Ancess, J., & Falk, B. (1995). Authentic assessment in action. New York: Teachers College Press.
15. EL Deci R Koestner RM Ryan 1999 A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation Psychological Bulletin 125 627 668
16. Earl, L., & Katz, S. (2006). Leading schools in a data-rich world. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
17. Education Funding Research Council. (2002). Title I monitor. Washington, DC: Author.
18. Elmore, R. F., Ablemann, C. H., & Fuhrman, S. H. (1996). The new accountability in state education reform: From process to performance. In H. F. Ladd (Ed.), Holding schools accountable: Performance-based reform in education (pp. 65-98). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
19. Frontline. (2008). The testing industry's big four. Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/schools/testing/ companies.html .
20. Fuhrman, S. (1993). Designing coherent education policy. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
21. Fuhrman, S. H., & Elmore, R. F. (2004). Introduction. In Susan H. Fuhrman & Richard F. Elmore (Eds.), Redesigning accountability systems for education (pp. 3-14). New York: Teachers College Press.
22. Garcia, G. E., & Pearson, P. D. (1994). Assessment and diversity. In L. Darling-Hammond (Ed.), Review of research in education (Vol. 20, pp. 337-391). Washington DC: American Educational Research Association.
23. Gardner, H. (1992). Assessment in context: The alternative to standardized testing. In B. Gifford & M. C. O'Connor (Eds.), Changing assessments: Alternative views of aptitude, achievement, and instruction (pp. 77-119). Boston: Kluwer.
24. Gloria Ladson-Billings, G., & Tate, W. F. (2006). Education research in the public interest: Social justice, action, and policy. New York: Teachers College Press.
25. Grissmer, D., & Flanagan, A. (1998). Exploring rapid achievement gains in North Carolina and Texas. Washington, DC: National Education Goals Panel.
26. Hambleton, R. K., Impara, J., Mehrens, W., & Plake, B. S. (2000). Psychometric review of the Maryland school performance assessment program (MSPAP). Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http://www.abell.org/pubsitems/ed- psychometric-review-1000.pdf .
27. Hamilton, L. S., Stecher, B. M., & Klein, S. P. (2002). Making sense of test-based accountability in education. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
28. W Haney G Madaus 1989 Searching for alternatives to standardized tests: Whys, whats, and whithers Phi Delta Kappan 70 9 683 687
29. Hanushek, E. A., & Raymond, M. E. (2004). Does school accountability lead to improved student performance? National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. W10591. Cambridge, MA: Author.
30. Hart, P. D., & Teeter, R. M. (2004). Equity and adequacy: Americans speak on public school funding: A national opinion survey conducted for the educational testing service. Retrieved January 5, 2009, from http://www.ets.org/portal/site/ets/menuitem.22f30af61d34e9c39a77b13bc3921509/? vgnextoid=8b5a253b164f4010VgnVCM10000022f95190RCRD .
31. Herman, J. L. (2004). The effects of testing on instruction. In Susan H. Fuhrman & Richard F. Elmore (Eds.), Redesigning accountability systems for education (pp. 141-166). New York: Teachers College Press.
32. JL Herman EL Baker 2005 Making benchmark testing work Educational Leadership 63 3 48 54 (Pubitemid 41687662)
33. Holcomb, E. (1999). Getting excited about data: How to combine people, passion, and proof. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
34. D Ingram K Seashore Louis RG Schroeder 2004 Accountability policies and teacher decision making: Barriers to the use of data to improve practice Teachers College Record 106 6 1258 1287 (Pubitemid 38939474)
35. Jovanovic, J., Solano-Flores, G., & Shavelson, R. J. (1994). Performance-based assessments: Will gender differences in science be eliminated? Education and Urban Society, 26(4), 352-366.
36. RA Katzell DE Thompson 1990 Work motivation: Theory and practice American Psychologist 45 2 144 153
37. AN Kluger A DeNisi 1996 The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory Psychological Bulletin 119 2 254 284 (Pubitemid 126042646)
38. Kober, N., Chudowsky, N., & Chudowsky, V. (2008). Has student achievement increased since 2002? State test score trends through 2006-07. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.
39. D Koretz B Stecher S Klein D McCaffrey 1994 The Vermont portfolio assessment program: Findings and implications Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 13 3 5 16
40. Lane, S., Ventrice, J., Cerillo, T. L., Parke, C. S., & Stone, C. A. (1999). Impact of the Maryland school performance assessment program (MSPAP): Evidence from the principal, teacher and student questionnaires (reading, writing, and science). Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Montreal, Canada.
41. RL Linn 2000 Assessment and accountability Educational Researcher 29 2 4 16
42. Linn, R. L., & Baker, E. L. (1996). Can performance-based student assessments be psychometrically sound? In J. B. Baron & D. P. Wolf (Eds.), Performance-based student assessment: Challenges and possibilities (pp. 84-103). Ninety-fifth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. Illinois: University of Chicago Press.
43. McCaffrey, D. F., Lockwood, J. R., Koretz, D. M., & Hamilton, L. S. (2003). Evaluating value-added models for teacher accountability. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
44. McDonnell, L. M. (2005). Assessment and accountability from the policymaker's perspective. In J. L. Herman & E. H. Haertel (Eds.), Uses and misuses of data for educational accountability and improvement (pp. 35-54). One hundred and fourth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
45. A McGill-Franzen RL Allington 1993 Flunk'em or get them classified: The contamination of primary grade accountability data Educational Researcher 22 1 19 22
46. McNeil, L. M. (2000). Contradictions of school reform: Educational costs of standardized testing. New York: Routledge/Falmer.
47. Mendro, R., Jordan, H., Gomez, E., Anderson, M., & Bembry, K. (1998). An application of multiple linear regression in determining longitudinal teacher effectiveness. Paper presented at the 1998 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
48. Moore, E. G. J. (1989). Ethnic group differences in the armed services vocational aptitude battery (ASVAB) performance of American youth: Implications for career prospects. In B. Gifford (Ed.), Test policy and test performance: Education, language, culture (pp. 183-229). Boston: Kluwer.
49. Mullis, I. V. S., & Jenkins, L. B. (1990). The reading report card 1971 - 1988: Trends from the nation's report card. Princeton, NJ: National Assessment of Educational Progress, Educational Testing Service.
50. National Center for Fair and Open Testing. (1992). K-12 testing fact sheet. Cambridge, MA: Author.
51. G Natriello 1987 The impact of evaluation processes on students Educational Psychologist 22 155 175
52. Pennock-Roman, M. (1992). Interpreting test performance in selective admissions for Hispanic students. In K. F. Geisinger (Ed.), Psychological testing of Hispanics (pp. 99-135). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
53. RP Phelps 2000 Trends in large-scale testing outside the United States Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 19 1 11 21
54. Preskill, H., & Torres, R. T. (1999). Evaluative inquiry for learning in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
55. Quality Counts. (2008). Retrieved December 29, 2008, from http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/ National%20Highlights%20Report.pdf .
56. Rentner, D. S., Scott, C., Kober, N., Chudowsky, N., Chudowsky, V., Joftus, S., et al. (2006). From the capital to the classroom: Year 4 of the no child left behind act. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.
57. LB Resnick MW Hall 1998 Learning organizations for sustainable education reform Daedalus 27 4 89 118 (Pubitemid 128749867)
58. Rodriguez, O. (1992). Introduction to technical and societal issues in the psychological testing of Hispanics. In K. F. Geisinger (Ed.), Psychological testing of Hispanics (pp. 11-15). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
59. Rogosa, D. (2005). Statistical misunderstandings of the properties of school scores and school accountability. In J. L. Herman & E. H. Haertel (Eds.), Uses and misuses of data for educational accountability and improvement (pp. 147-174). One hundred and fourth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
60. LC Rose AM Gallup 2006 The 38th annual Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup poll of the public's attitudes toward the public schools Phi Delta Kappan 88 1 41 50
61. Sanders, W., & Rivers, J. (1996). Cumulative and residual effects of teachers on future academic achievement. Technical report, University of Tennessee Value-Added Research and Assessment Center.
62. Seligman, D. (1989). A look at student achievement from the school dimension: Demythologizing standardized tests. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 317 562).
63. W Simmons L Resnick 1993 Assessment as the catalyst for school reform Educational Leadership 50 5 11 15
64. Smith, M. S., & O'Day, J. (1991). Systemic school reform. In S. Fuhrman & B. Malen (Eds.), The politics of curriculum and testing (pp. 233-267). New York: Falmer.
65. 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.
66. Stecher, B. M., & Barron, S. I. (1999). Quadrennial milepost accountability testing in Kentucky. CSE Technical Report 505. Los Angeles, CA: National Center for Research on Evaluation Standards, and Student Testing.
67. BM Stecher SP Klein 1997 The cost of science performance assessments in large-scale testing programs Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 19 1 1 14 (Pubitemid 127043549)
68. Stringfield, S., Wayman, J. C., & Yakimowski-Srebnick, M. E. (2005). Scaling up data use in classrooms, schools, and districts. In C. Dede, J. P. Honan, & L. C. Peters (Eds.), Scaling up success: Lessons learned from technology-based educational improvement (pp. 133-152). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
69. Sunderman, G. (2008). Holding NCLB accountable: Achieving accountability, equity, & school reform. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
70. JA Supovitz RT Brennan 1997 Mirror, mirror on the wall, which is the fairest test of all? An examination of the equitability of portfolio assessment relative to standardized tests Harvard Educational Review 67 3 472 506 (Pubitemid 127122262)
71. Supovitz, J. A., & Klein, V. (2003). Mapping a course for improved student learning: How innovative schools systematically use student performance data to guide improvement. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
72. Wayman, J. C., Stringfield, S., & Yakimowski, M. (2004). Software enabling school improvement through the analysis of student data (Report No. 67). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University, Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk.
73. G Wiggins 1992 Creating tests worth taking Educational Leadership 49 8 26 33
74. Wiliam, D., & Leahy, S. (2006, April). A theoretical foundation for formative assessment. Paper presented at the National Council on Measurement in Education, San Francisco.
75. C Willie 1985 The problem of standardized testing in a free and pluralistic society Phi Delta Kappan 66 626 628