The Reference Desk, using available evidence and research, provides quick-turnaround responses to questions submitted by education stakeholders around the Northeast and Islands Region. Every Friday, REL-NEI highlights one or two questions submitted to its Reference Desk.
What Are the Effects of Standardized Testing on Instructional Practice and Student Achievement?
Last month, the Reference Desk Digest featured a question about the impact of formative-assessment practices on student achievement. This week’s entry addresses a related issue: how state-mandated standardized testing (high-stakes assessments) may affect teachers’ instructional practice and student achievement.
Question
What are the effects of state-mandated standardized testing on teachers’ instructional practice and student achievement?
Research Synopsis
Reference Desk Researchers found that teachers in states with high-stakes testing for students “…tend to invest more time on instruction in tested areas and less on instruction in non-core subject areas (e.g., fine arts, physical education, foreign languages, industrial/vocational education),” and that “the impact of testing programs is generally stronger in elementary and middle schools than in high schools” (Pedulla, 2003; p. 4; see below). Data from a teacher survey confirms that teachers believe “…state standards have impacted teachers’ instruction, particularly with regard to the content focus of daily lessons” (Abrams 2003; p. 19; see below).
Publicly Available Resources
- Perceived Effects of State-Mandated Testing Programs on Teaching and Learning: Findings from a National Survey of Teachers. Pedulla, J. J., Abrams, L. M., Madaus, G. F., Russell, M. K., Ramos, M. A., and Miao, J.; 2003; Chestnut Hill, MA: National Board on Educational Testing and Public Policy; ERIC Document #ED481836; 151 pages.
From the abstract, “Results from a national survey of teachers are reported for five types of state testing programs…. At least two themes emerged from these survey data. In several areas, teachers’ responses differ significantly when analyzed by the severity of the stakes attached to test results. Pressure on teachers, emphasis on test preparation, time devoted to test content, and views on accountability are such areas. The second theme is that views of elementary, middle, and high school teachers regarding the effects of their state’s test differed from each other in areas such as school climate and classroom use of test results.”
- Views from the Classroom: Teachers’ Opinions of Statewide Testing Programs. Abrams, L. M., Pedulla, J. J., and Madaus, G. F.; 2003; Theory Into Practice; Vol. 42, No. 1; ISSN #00405841; pp. 18-29.
From the abstract: “This article discusses teachers’ views on state-mandated testing programs. An overview of the literature is presented, as well as results from a nationwide survey of teachers. Findings from both suggest that high-stakes state-mandated testing programs can lead to instruction that contradicts teachers’ views of sound educational practice. In particular, teachers frequently report that the pressure to raise test scores encourages them to emphasize instructional and assessment strategies that mirror the content and format of the state test, and to devote large amounts of classroom time to test preparation activities. The article concludes that serious reconsideration must be given to the use of high-stakes consequences in current statewide testing programs.”
- The Testing Culture and the Persistence of High Stakes Testing Reforms. Moses, M. S., and Nanna, M. J.; 2007; Education and Culture; Vol. 23, No. 1; ISSN #10854908; pp. 55-72.
From the abstract: “The article outlines the policy context for high stakes examinations, as well as the ideas of testing and accountability as major tenets of current education reform and policy. In partial explanation of the widespread acceptance and use of standardized tests in the United States, [the authors argue] that there is a pervasive testing culture, in addition to other contributing factors such as administrative utility, profit motives, and political ideology.”
The Reference Desk also found these resources and organizations to be helpful in learning more about standardized testing and student assessment in general:
- Assessment and Accountability Comprehensive Center (AACC)
The AACC is a federally funded Comprehensive Center which, according to its website, “implements, evaluates, and improves assessment and accountability systems so that states and districts can reach the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) goal of academic proficiency for all students.”
- National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, & Student Testing (CRESST)
According to the CRESST website, this federally funded project has “contributed to the development of scientifically based evaluation and testing techniques, vigorously encouraged the development, validation and use of sound data for improved accountability and decision-making, and aggressively explored technological applications to improve assessment and evaluation practice.”
Download the Full Response
If this material brings up questions of your own, please submit a new request here. If you’re interested in learning more about the Reference Desk, read about us here. And finally, share thoughts, experiences, and resources of your own by clicking on the Feedback link below.
© 2010 EDC, Inc. | Home | Newsletter | Disclaimer | Feedback | | Back to top
