High Stakes Testing and Teaching to the Test

Perhaps no single educational policy change over the past fifty years has had as great an impact on the work lives of teachers in public schools in the United States and other developed nations as the movement to impose high stakes testing requirements. High stakes testing refers to the use of standardized student achievement tests as a primary mechanism to evaluate the performance of students, their teachers, and their schools. High stakes testing policies have long existed for special purposes such as admission to elite educational institutions, but such policies have spread in recent years to encompass greater proportions of the student population.

In the United States the spread of high stakes testing to encompass more students was part of the school reform movement designed to improve the quality of education by raising standards for student performance (Darling-Hammond, 2004; McNeil, 2000; Orfield & Kornhaber, 2001). High stakes testing policies began at the state level with a majority of states implementing some type of high stakes testing program. The spread of high stakes testing has been most recently spurred by federal legislation that requires all students, with few exceptions, to be tested as evidence of their accomplishments and those of their teachers and schools (Goertz & Duffy, 2003). Other developed nations appear to be moving in the same direction as testing programs increasingly involve more students and drive more important decisions regarding their educational careers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Buy Now

eBook EUR 715.83 Price includes VAT (France)

Softcover Book EUR 896.74 Price includes VAT (France)

Hardcover Book EUR 896.74 Price includes VAT (France)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Preview

Similar content being viewed by others

Large-scale assessments and their effects: The case of mid-stakes tests in Ontario

Are These Testing Times, or Is It a Time to Test? Considering the Place of Tests in Students’ Academic Development

Testing in Mathematics Education in the Netherlands

References

• Amrein, A., & Berliner, D. (2002a). An analysis of some unintended and negative consequences of high-stakes testing. East Lansing, MI: The Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice. Google Scholar
• Amrein, A., & Berliner, D. (2002b, March 28). High-stakes testing, uncertainty, and student learning. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(18). Available at: http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n18/
• Amrein-Beardsley, A., & Berliner, D. (2003, August 4). Re-analysis of NAEP math and reading scores in states with and without high-stakes tests: Response to Rosenshine. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(25). Available at: http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v11n25/ .
• Avanesov, V. (2006). Consequences of the EGE in Russia. Kedi Journal of Educational Policy, 3(1), 89–99. Google Scholar
• Barksdale-Ladd, M., & Thomas, K. (2000). What's at stake in high-stakes testing? Journal of Teacher Education, 51(5), 384–397. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Beatty, A., Neisser, U., Trent, W., & Heubert, J. (Eds.). (2001). Effects of high-stakes testing and standards. In Understanding dropouts: Statistics, strategies, and high-stakes testing (pp. 38–49). Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Google Scholar
• Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar
• Braman, S. (2006). Change of state: Information, policy, and power. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar
• Broadfoot, P. (1996). Education, assessment and society: A sociological analysis. London: Open University Press. Google Scholar
• Bushweller, K. (1997). Teaching to the test: Increasingly, schools are finding it just makes sense to align curriculum and assessment. American School Board Journal, 84(9), 20–25. Google Scholar
• Carr, P., Dogan, E., Tirre, W., & Walton, E. (2007). Large-scale indicator assessments: What every educational policymaker should know. Evidence and Decision Making. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 106(1), 321–339. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Darling-Hammond, L. (2004). Standards, accountability, and school reform. Teachers College Record, 106(6), 1047–1085. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Fuhrman, S., & Elmore, R. (Eds.) (2004). Redesigning accountability systems for education. New York: Teachers College Press. Google Scholar
• Goertz, M., & Duffy, M. (2003). Mapping the landscape of high-stakes testing and accountability programs. Theory into Practice, 42(1), 4–11. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Goodnough, A. (2001, June 14). Strains of fourth-grade tests drives off veteran teachers. New York Times. Available from http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/14/nyregion/14GRAD.html Google Scholar
• Grant, A. (2001). Cheaters. Scholastic Choices, 16(4), 6. Google Scholar
• Hansen, F. A. (1994). Testing, testing: Social consequences of the examined life. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Google Scholar
• Heubert, J. P., & Hauser, R. M. (Eds.) (1999). High takes testing for tracking, promotion, and graduation. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Google Scholar
• Hill, C. (2004). Failing to meet the standards: The English language arts test for fourth graders in New York State. Teachers College Record, 106(6), 1086–1123. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Jacob, B. (2001). Getting tough? The impact of high school graduation exams. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(2), 99–121. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Jacob, B., & Levitt, S. (2003). Rotten apples: An investigation of the prevalence and predictors of teacher cheating. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(3), 843–877. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Kim, K. (2005). Learning from each other: Creativity in East Asian and American education. Creativity Research Journal, 17(4), 337–347. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Ladd, H. (Ed.) (1996). Holding schools accountable: Performance-based reform in education. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Google Scholar
• Lang, S. C., Kumke, P., Ray, C., Cowell, E., Elliott, S., Kratochwill, T., et al. (2005). Consequences of using testing accommodations: Student, teacher, and parent perceptions of and reactions to testing accommodations. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 31(1), 49–62. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Madaus, G. (1988). The distortion of teaching and testing: High-stakes testing and instruction. Peabody Journal of Education, 65(3), 29–46. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Marshak, D. (2004). No Child Left Behind: A foolish race into the past. Phi Delta Kappan. Available at: http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/k0311ma2.htm Google Scholar
• McNeil, L. M. (2000). Contradictions of school reform. New York: Routledge. Google Scholar
• Moss, P., & Piety, P. (2007). Introduction. Evidence and Decision Making. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 106(1), 1–14. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Natriello, G., & Pallas, A. (2001). The development and impact of high stakes testing. In G. Orfield & M. Kornhaber (Eds.), Raising standards and raising barriers: Inequality and high stakes testing in public education (pp. 19–38). New York: The Century Foundation Press. Google Scholar
• Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2007). Collateral damage: How high stakes testing corrupts America's schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press. Google Scholar
• Orfield, G., & Kornhaber, M. L. (Eds.) (2001). Raising standards or raising barriers? Inequality and high-stakes testing in public education. New York: Century Foundation Press. Google Scholar
• Raymond, M., & Hanushek, E. (2003). High-stakes research. Education Next, 3, 48–55. Google Scholar
• Romanowski, M. (2006). A changing nation: Issues facing Chinese teachers. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 42(2), 76–81. Google Scholar
• Roderick, M., Jacob, B., & Bryk, A. (2002). The impact of high-stakes testing in Chicago on student achievement in promotional gate grades. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(4), 333–357. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Rosenshine, B. (2003, August 4). High-stakes testing: Another analysis. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(24). Available at http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v11n24/ Google Scholar
• Runte, R. (1998). The impact of centralized examinations on teacher professionalism. Canadian Journal of Education, 23(2), 166–181. Google Scholar
• Saito, Y. (2006). Consequences of high-stakes testing on the family and schools in Japan. Kedi Journal of Educational Policy, 3(1), 101–102. Google Scholar
• Shohamy, E. (2001). Democratic assessment as an alternative. Language Testing, 18(4), 373–391. Google Scholar
• Starrett, R. (2003). Opportunity to learn and the accountability agenda. Phi Delta Kappan, 85(4), 298–303. Google Scholar
• Suen, H. K., & Yu, L. (2006). Chronic consequences of high-stakes testing? Lessons from the Chinese civil service exam. Comparative Education Review, 50(1), 46–65. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Sunderman, G., & Kim, J. (2007). The expansion of federal power and the politics of implementing the No Child Left Behind Act. Teachers College Record, 109(5), 1057–1085. Google Scholar
• Thompson, P., Blackmore, J., Sachs, J., & Tregenza, K. (2003). High stakes principalship — Sleepless nights, heart attacks and sudden death accountabilities: Reading media representations of the United States principal shortage. Australian Journal of Education, 47(2), 118–132. Google Scholar
• Tollefson, J. (1995). Power and inequality in language education. London: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
• Valencia, R., & Villareal, B. (2003). Improving students' reading performance via standards-based school reform: A critique. Reading Teacher, 56(7), 612–621. Google Scholar
• Wenning, R., Herdman, P., Smith, N., McMahon, N., & Washington, K. (2003, August). No Child Left Behind: Testing, reporting, and accountability. ERIC Digest, ED480994. Google Scholar
• Wong, K., & Shen, F. (2003). Big city mayors and school governance reform: The case of school district takeover. Peabody Journal of Education, 78(1), 5–32. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Zwick, R. (2002). Fair game?: The use of standardized admissions tests in higher education. New York: RoutledgeFalmer. Google Scholar

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. Teachers College, Columbia University, NY, 10027 Gary Natriello

1. Gary Natriello