Testing vs. Teaching: The Perceived Impact of Assessment Demands on Middle Grades Instructional Practices

RMLE Online

Volumn 29, Issue 7, 2006, Pages 1-13

  Faulkner, Shawn A ^a   Cook, Christopher M ^a  

^a NORTHERN KENTUCKY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84890584731     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19404476     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/19404476.2006.11462030     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Amrein, A., & Berliner, D., (2003). The testing divide: New research on the intended and unintended impact of high-stakes testing. Peer Review, 5(2), 31–32.
2. Anfara, V. A., Jr., Andrews, P. G., Hough, D. L., Mertens, S. B., Mizelle, N. B., & White, G. P., (2003). Research and resources in support of This We Believe. Westerville, OH: National Middle School Association.
3. Clark, S. N., & Clark, D. C., (1993). Middle level school reform: The rhetoric and the reality. The Elementary School Journal, 93(5), 447–460.
4. Daniels, H., & Bizar, M., (1998). Methods that matter: Six structures for best practice classrooms. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
5. Eggen, P., & Kauchak, D., (2001). Educational psychology: Windows on classrooms (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
6. George, P., (2002). No child left behind: Implications for middle level leaders. Westerville, OH: National Middle School Association.
7. Glaser, R., & Silver, E., (1994). Assessment, testing and instruction: Retrospect and prospect. Review of Research in Education, 20, 393–419.
8. Goertz, M., & Duffy, M., (2003). Mapping the landscape of high-stakes testing and accountability programs. Theory into Practice, 42(1), 4–12.
9. Gredler, M. E., (1999). Classroom assessment and learning. New York: Longman.
10. Jackson, A. W., & Davis, G. A., (2000). Turning points 2000: Educating adolescents in the 21st century. New York: Teachers College Press.
11. Kentucky Department of Education. (2004). Commonwealth accountability testing system. Retrieved September 7, 2005, from www.education.ky.gov
12. Kirby, P. C., & Anfara, V. A., Jr., (2000). Reconstructing the middle school. In V. A., Anfara Jr., & P. C., Kirby (Eds.), Voices from the middle: Decrying what is, imploring what could be (pp. 207–217). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
13. Leonard, G., (1968). Education and ecstasy. New York: Delacorte Press.
14. Lipsitz, J., (1984). Successful schools for young adolescents. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
15. Manning, M., & Bucher, K., (2005). Teaching in the middle school (2nd edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.
16. McEwin, K., Dickinson, T., & Jenkins, D., (2003). America’s middle schools in the new century: Status and progress. Westerville, OH: National Middle School Association.
17. Messick, R., & Reynolds, K., (1992). Middle level curriculum in action. New York: Longman.
18. National Middle School Association. (2003). This we believe: Successful schools for young adolescents. Westerville, OH: Author.
19. Needels, M., & Knapp, M., (1994). Teaching writing to children who are underserved. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(3), 339–349.
20. Nichols, S., & Berliner, D., (2005). The inevitable corruption of indicators and educators through high-stakes testing. Arizona State University: Education Policy Studies Laboratory. Retrieved September 7, 2005, from http://www.asu.edu/educ/epsl/EPRU/documents/EPSL-0503-101-EPRL.pdf
21. Sloane, F., & Kelly, A., (2003). Issues in high-stakes testing programs. Theory into Practice, 42(1), 12–18.
22. University of Kentucky. (2004). The Kentucky education reform act (KERA). Retrieved September 7, 2005, from www.uky.edu/Education/IER/kerabkgd.htm
23. Wiersma, W., (2000). Research methods in education: An introduction. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
24. Zemelman, S., Daniels, H., & Hyde, A., (1998). Best practice: New standards for teaching and learning in America’s schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.