Standardized Testing and School Accountability

Educational Psychologist

Volumn 45, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 107-122

  Wiliam, Dylan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77950884004     PISSN: 00461520     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00461521003703060     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. Amrein, A. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2002a, March 28). High-stakes testing, uncertainty, and student learning. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(18). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n18
2. Amrein, A. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2002b). The impact of high-stakes tests on student academic performance: An analysis of NAEP results in states with high-stakes tests and ACT, SAT, and AP test results in states with high school graduation exams.Tempe, AZ: Educational Policy Studies Laboratory, Education Policy Research Unit. Retrieved from http://epicpolicy.org/files/EPSL-0211-126-EPRU.pdf
3. Bardach, E., & Lesser, C. (1996). Accountability in human services collaboratives-for what? And to whom? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 6, 197-224.
4. Bishop, J. H. (2001a). A steeper, better road to graduation. Education Next, 1(4),56-61.
5. Bishop, J. H. (2001b). Why do students learn more when achievement is examined externally? Stanford, CA: The Hoover Institution. Retrieved from http://media.hoover.org/documents/ednext20014unabridged_bishop.pdf
6. Black, P.,& Wiliam, D.(2005).Lessonsfromaroundtheworld:howpolicies, politics and cultures constrain and afford assessment practices. Curricu- lum Journal, 16, 249-261.
7. Braun, H. (2004, January 5). Reconsidering the impact of high-stakes testing. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12(1). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v12n1/
8. Braun, H. I. (2005). Using student progress to evaluate teachers: A primer on value-added models. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
9. Brown, M. L. (Ed.). (1992). Graded assessment in mathematics: Teacher's guide. Walton-on-Thames, England: Nelson.
10. Brown, M. L., Blondel, E., Simon, S. A., & Black, P. J. (1995). Progression in measuring. Research Papers in Education, 10, 143-170.
11. Campbell, D. T. (1976). Assessing the impact of planned social change (Vol. 8). Hanover, NH: The Public Affairs Center, Dartmouth College.
12. Cannell, J. J. (1988). Nationally normed elementary achievement testing in America's public schools: How all fifty states are above the national average. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 7(2), 5-9.
13. Carneiro, P., Crawford, C., & Goodman, A. (2007). Impact of early cognitive and non-cognitive skills on later outcomes. London, England: London School of Economics Centre for the Economics of Education.
14. Carnoy, M., & Loeb, S. (2002). Does external accountability affect student outcomes? A cross-state analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 305-331.
15. Chambers, J. G., Parrish, T. B., Levin, J. D., Smith, J. R., Guthrie, J. W., Seder, R. C., & Taylor, L. (2004). The New York adequacy study: Determining the cost of providing all children in New York an adequate education. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research/Management Analysis and Planning.
16. Cizek, G. J. (2005). High-stakes testing: Contexts, characteristics, critiques, and consequences. In R. P. Phelps (Ed.), Defending standardized testing (pp. 23-54). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
17. Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., Vigdor, J. L., & Diaz, R. A. (2003, January). Do school accountability systems make it more difficult for low performing schools to attract and retain high quality teachers? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Economic Association, Washington, DC.
18. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
19. Committee of Inquiry into the Teaching of Mathematics in Schools. (1982). Report: Mathematics counts. London, England: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
20. Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Standards, assessments, and educational policy: In pursuit of genuine accountability (Eighth annual William H. Angoff Memorial Lecture). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
21. Deary, I. J., Strand, S., Smith, P., & Fernandes, C. (2007). Intelligence and educational achievement. Intelligence, 35(1), 13-21.
22. Denvir, B., & Brown, M. L. (1986a). Understanding of number concepts in low-attaining 7-9 year olds: Part1.Development of descriptive framework and diagnostic instrument. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 17(1), 15-36.
23. Denvir, B., & Brown, M. L. (1986b). Understanding of number concepts in low-attaining 7-9 year olds: Part II. The teaching studies. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 17(2), 143-164.
24. Educational Testing Service Cooperative Test Division. (1957). Cooperative Sequential Tests of Educational Progress (Tech. Report). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
25. Feinstein, L., Budge, D., Vorhaus, J., & Duckworth, K. (2008). The social and personal benefits of learning: A summary of key research findings. London, England: Institute of Education, University of London.
26. Foxman, D. D., Cresswell, M. J., Ward, M., Badger, M. E., Tuson, J. A., & Bloomfield, B. A. (1980). Mathematical development: Primary survey report no 1. London, England: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
27. Foxman, D. D., Martini, R. M., Tuson, J. A., & Cresswell, M. J. (1980). Mathematical development: Secondary survey report no 1. London, England: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
28. st Century: Meeting the challenges of achanging world (pp. 25-35). Boston, MA: Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.
29. Haertel, E. H., & Herman, J. L. (2005). A historical perspective on validity arguments for accountability testing. In J. L. Herman & E. H. Haertel (Eds.), Uses and misuses of data for educational accountability and improvement: 104th Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (Part 2, pp. 1-34). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
30. Hanushek,E.A.(Ed.).(2006).Courting failure:How school finance law suits exploit judges' good intentions and harm our children. Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution.
31. Hanushek, E. A., & Raymond, M. E. (2005). Does school accountability lead to improved student performance? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 24, 297-327.
32. Harlen, W., & Deakin-Crick, R. (2002). A systematic review of the impact of summative assessment and tests on students' motivation for learning. In EPPI-Centre (Ed.), Research evidence in education library (1.1 ed., p. 153). London, England: Institute of Education Social Science Research Unit.
33. Hart, K. M. (Ed.). (1981). Children's understanding of mathematics: 11-16. London, England: John Murray.
34. Heritage, M. (2008). Learning progressions: Supporting instruction and formative assessment. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
35. Herman, J. L., Abedi, J., & Golan, S. (1994). Assessing the effects of stan- dardized testing on teaching in schools. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 471-482.
36. Hieronymous, A. N., & Lindquist, E. F. (1974). Manual for administrators, supervisors and counselors-Levels edition (forms 5 & 6): Iowa Tests of Basic Skills. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
37. Hodgen, J., Küchemann, D. A., Brown, M. L., & Coe, R. (2009). Secondary students' understanding of mathematics 30 years on. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the British Educational Research Association.
38. Manchester, England.
39. Hurt, J. (1971). Education in evolution: Church, state, society and popular education 1800-1870. London, England: Rupert Hart-Davis.
40. Jesson, D., & Crossley, D. (2007). Educational outcomes and value added by specialist schools: 2006 analysis. London, England: Specialist Schools and Academies Trust.
41. Kellner, P. (1997, September 19). Hit-and-miss affair. Times Educational Supplement, p. 23.
42. Kent, P., & Blows, D. (2009). Understanding the CVA model (Vol. 58). Leicester, England: Association of School and College Leaders.
43. Koretz, D. M., Linn, R. L., Dunbar, S. B., & Shepard, L. A. (1991, April). The effects of high-stakes testing: Preliminary evidence about generalization across tests. Paper presented at the annual meetings of the American Edu- cational Research Association and the National Council on Measurement in Education held at Chicago, IL.
44. Koretz, D. M., Stecher, B. M., Klein, S. P., McCaffrey, D., & Deibert, E. (1994). Can portfolios assess student performance and influence instruction? The 1991-92 Vermont experience (Vol. RP-259). Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
45. Lee, J. (2008). Is test-driven external accountability effective? Synthesiz- ing the evidence from cross-state causal-comparative and correlational studies. Review of Research in Education, 78, 608-644.
46. Levin, H. M., Belfield, C., Muennig, P., & Rouse, C. (2007). The costs and benefits of an excellent education for all of America's children. New York, NY: Teachers College.
47. Mackintosh, N. J. (2000). IQ and human intelligence. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
48. Madaus, G. F. (Ed.). (1983). The courts, validity and minimum competency testing. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic.
49. McGaw, B. (2008). The role of the OECD in international comparative studies of achievement. Assessment in Education: Principles Policy and Practice, 15, 223-243.
50. Mencken, H. L. (1949). The divine afflatus. In H. L. Mencken (Ed.), A Mencken chrestomathy (p. 443). New York, NY: Knopf. (Reprinted from New York Evening Mail, 1917, November 16).
51. Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13-103). Washington, DC: American Council on Education/Macmillan.
52. Mitch, D. (1999, November 12). Social accountability and educational outcomes: interpreting the episode of payment by results in Victorian England. Paper presented at a meeting of the Social Science History Association, Fort Worth, TX.
53. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Ruddock, G. J., O'Sullivan, C. Y., Arora, A., & Erberber, E. (2005). TIMSS 2007 assessment frameworks. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College Lynch School of Education.
54. National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2006). The nation's report card: Mathematics 2005 (Vol. NCES 2006-453). Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences.
55. Newmann, F. M., Bryk, A. S., & Nagaoka, J. K. (2001). Authentic intellectual work and standardized tests: conflict or coexistence? Chicago, IL: Consortium on Chicago School Research.
56. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2000). Measuring student knowledge and skills: The PISA 2000 assessment of reading, mathematical and scientific literacy. Paris, France: Author.
57. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.(2004). Learning for tomorrow's world: First results from PISA 2003. Paris, France: Author.
58. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2007). Science competencies for tomorrow's world, volume 1: Analysis. Paris, France: Author.
59. rd ed., pp. 147-200). Washington, DC: American Council on Education/Macmillan.
60. Phelps, R. P. (2005). The rich, robust research literature on testing's achievement benefits. In R. P. Phelps (Ed.), Defending standardized testing (pp. 55-90). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
61. Pipho, C. (2002). Seven lessons learned from minimum competency testing. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
62. Popham, W. J., Keller, T., Moulding, B., Pellegrino, J. W., & Sandifer, P. (2005). Instructionally supportive accountability tests in science: A viable assessment option? Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 3, 121-179.
63. Rapple, B. A. (1994). Payment by results: An example of assessment in elementary education from nineteenth century Britain. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 2(1). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v2n1/
64. Ray, A. (2006). School value added measures in England: A paper for the OECD project on the development of value-added models in education systems. London, England: Department for Education and Skills.
65. Resnick, L. B. (1987). Education and learning to think. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
66. Rodriguez, M. C. (2004). The role of classroom assessment in student performance on TIMSS. Applied Measurement in Education, 17(1), 1-24.
67. Rosenshine, B. V. (2003). High-stakes testing: Another analysis. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(24).
68. Royal Commission. (1861). Report (Newcastle Report, Vol. HC 1861 xxi). London, England: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
69. Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Shavelson, R. J., Hamilton, L., & Klein, S. (2002). On the evaluation of systemic science education reform: Searching for instructional sensitivity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 369-393.
70. Spearman, C. (1904). "General Intelligence" objectively determined and measured. American Journal of Psychology, 15, 201-293.
71. Sylvester, D. W. (1974). Robert Lowe and education. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
72. Wescott, J. P. (1972, February). Accountability: For whom, to whom, for what? Paper presented at the 104th annual meeting of the American Association of School Administrators, Atlantic City, NJ. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov:80/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/3b/0f/cc.pdf
73. White, E. E. (1886). The elements of pedagogy. New York, NY: American Book Company.
74. Wibowo, A., Hendrawan, I., & Deville, C. (2009, 16 April). Design of the vertical scale: Test development, data collection design, linking design. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
75. Wiliam, D. (1992). Value-added attacks? Technical issues in publishing national curriculum assessments. British Educational Research Journal, 18,329-341.
76. Wiliam, D. (2007). Once you know what they've learned, what do you do next? Designing curriculum and assessment for growth. In R. W. Lissitz (Ed.), Assessing and modeling cognitive development in school (pp. 241-270). Maple Grove, MN: JAM.
77. Wiliam, D. (2010). What counts as evidence of educational achievement? The role of constructs in the pursuit of equity in assessment. In A. Luke, G. Kelly, & J. Green (Eds.), What counts as evidence in educational settings? Rethinking equity, diversity and reform in the 21st century (Vol. 34, pp. 254-284). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
78. Willms, J. D. (1992). Monitoring school performance: a guide for educators. London, England: Falmer.
79. Wood, R. (1991). Assessment and testing: A survey of research. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.