High-Stakes Testing Strategies

The Department of Education concludes that high-stakes testing and statewide standards puts too strain on both the teacher and student. Multiple studies show evidence of miscalculation of scores, teachers being blamed for low test score, and too much time spent on preparation for the tests. The purpose of this policy brief is to elaborate on the non-beneficial components of high-stakes testing and statewide standards. Thus, peer-reviewed research articles and evidential articles are reviewed on high-stakes testing and statewide standards. In addition, the state of Florida has shown the greatest amount of dissatisfied outcomes. The information provided in this policy brief will precisely indicate why high-stakes testing and statewide standards should be abandoned from the school system. I request the action of Congress to outlaw high-stakes testing and statewide standards for the betterment of all National citizens by passing a new law to force states away from standardized testing.

This article, "What Do Test Scores In Texas Tell US?" by the Rand Corporation looks at the pros and cons to high stakes testing in Texas. High stakes testing was meant to improve academic scores and motivate teachers, but unintended concerns have risen. Professionals and the media question exactly how beneficial these test are, and if we should continue to use them. Texas was looked at because students had made huge strides in statewide testing. "Gains in Texas Assessment and Academic Skills (TAAS) reading and math scores for both majority and minority have been so dramatic that they have dubbed the 'Texas Miracle '" (Rand, 2000). The success was so great that Texas students were put through further test to validate that these impressive scores. Students tested on the National Assessment of Educational Process (NAEP) between 1994 and 1998. After comparing the scores for TAAS to the scores of NAEP many questions arose for the validity of statewide testing. Tables in the article show that the TAAS scores are differ greatly than those of the NAEP. Though the scores between the two test were much different Texas students who took the NAEP were higher than the U.S. average. Also, by 1998 the gap between the scores of white students and students of color got smaller. Questions about why the gap between the TAAS scores and the NAEP scores were so great were never directly answered. Suggestions were made that Texas teachers could more easily prepare students for the

The use of standardized examinations have long been debated in American society. In fact, the last several years have seen an immense shift from the prioritization of standardized testing to more holistic measurements of student achievement. Despite this shift, many school districts across the nation and college/university entrance requirements still place a significant, if not pivotal, emphasis on test-taking and standardized exam results. Throughout this paper, I will explore 1) the history of standardized testing, 2) arguments for and against its practice, as well as 3) situate the consequences of its use in one of the three philosophical goals of schooling. All of this will subsequently paint an investigation into the purpose of schooling in American society.

In the article, “high stakes of standardized testing”, Steve Kastenbaum express a unique way of writing that helps persuade the reader that standardized testing are not the most effective way to critique students or teachers. The main audience for his article are students, parents, teachers and school officials. The article starts off by discussing how testing has been a part of the American education for a long time. He then goes on to quote a variety of people who have opinions on this matter to elaborate more deeply on the effects of testing and pressure that is involved with testing. In his article it was obvious that each of these people ranging from teacher and students to school officials had their own view on the matter. The people

High Stakes Testing has been overly integrated in the education systems. High-stakes testing are used to determine grade retention, school curriculum, and whether or not students will receive a high school diploma (Myers, 2015). Since the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001, high stakes testing has become the norm and mandating that students must pass a standardized test before moving up in grade. As a special education director, the focus is to ensure the student’s accommodations are being followed. Accommodations help increase students’ academic performance. “Both the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) of 2004 and No Child Left Behind (NCLB) call for students with disabilities to participate in the general education curriculum and in testing programs to the maximum extent possible for each student (Luke and Schwartz, 2010).” Throughout the years, high stakes testing is becoming more common than ever before. The reality is high stakes testing is one indicator in evaluating children with specific needs. This paper will discuss, the violation of the statutory language regarding assessment based on IDEA, the strategies and goals of a remediation, staff training, common Core and PARCC assessment, and funding for the remediation plan under IDEA.

Education-based intervention and prevention play a crucial role in influencing young children from at-risk communities. Many researchers have concluded that early interventions improve the child’s academic performance, behaviours and learning abilities in the short and long term (McMahon, Washburn, Felix, Yakin & Childrey, 2000). Based on developmental and social theories, the child’s experiences in the earlier years have great impact on their future achievement. In turn, the foundation of a child’s academic success is formed at a very young age, before they enter the school system (Ansari & Gershoff, 2015). Intervention strategies that target young children, have a greater impact for future development since they provide them with guidance,

The Washington Post published the story “2015 Superintendent of the Year: High-stakes testing is the ‘fool’s gold’ of accountability” by Valerie Strauss on August 27 about one superintendent’s discontent with constant “high stakes testing”. Strauss was covering the story of man who was named the “2015 American Association of School Administrators National Superintendent of the Year”, Philip D. Lanoue who is the superintendent of the Clarke County School District in Georgia, which is one of the most impecunious districts in the state. Lanoue believes that the constant pattern of standardized testing in schools is completely different from what he refers to as actual “meaningful assessment” and considers the tests to be unbeneficial for students.

(2011). Rational responses to high stakes testing: The case of curriculum narrowing and the harm that follows. Cambridge Journal of Education, 41(3), 287-302.

Education keeps evolving through time. However, it has been stagnant lately. We are in the period where high-stakes tests are one of the largest aspects in education. It has been like that for a few decades now. A large group of people seem to think that this is the perfect time for change. There are a lot of arguments going around opposing the implementation of high-stakes testing and vice versa. While doing the synthesis paper and proposal, I have noticed that most sources tend to talk about the collateral damage of high-stakes testing instead of its perks. As a result, I decided to interview an admissions officer, because I needed to hear from someone that should support the use of high-stakes testing. I needed to be able to understand both

Despite of the policymakers’ efforts to implement strategies in order to evaluate and enhance special education effectiveness, the high stakes testing system has several negative consequences to students, as shown at Pazey et. al. study “The More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same: Comparing Special Education Students’ Experiences of Accountability Reform Across Two Decades”. This qualitative case study interviewed 12 especial education students, half in 1995 and the other half 2012, after the introduction of the testing system and, later on, following two decades of implementation. According to this research, exceptional students felt marginalized when assigned to separated test preparation classes, when they failed the exams. In addition,

I believe that one of the most pressing issues facing educators today would be high stakes testing. Many educators, as well as students, face test anxiety when it comes to testing. In order to combat this, educators can find assurance in the fact that they are teaching to the standards. The tests are constructed in such a way that aligns with grade level standards. Teachers can address test anxiety with students through incorporating technology with weekly tests and formatting those tests based on the standardized tests. Through this, students are familiar with the testing format and enter testing season with more confidence.

Standardized testing is not a new concept; it has been in use since the mid to late 1990’s. However the “high stakes” focus on standardized testing is. The practices that accompany standardized testing have long been in debate. Those in favor of standardized testing will argue that the testing creates a system that increases grades and accountability among teachers, students and school districts across the country. On the other hand those that oppose standardized testing will argue the ill effects that standardized testing can have on students, teachers, and schools. There are numerous ways in which standardized testing has gravely impacted education, some of which are high stress levels of students and teachers, the hindrance on

Eliminate the answer choices you know are wrong, and then reread the question before choosing one.

Popham (2001) questioned the ethics of teachers overly concerned with students’ performance on high-stakes tests by providing instruction that cloned test questions or by teaching the same items that were expected to dominate tests. Popham also firmly stated that test prep, inappropriate test preparation and questionable teaching practices should be stopped. Even when teachers recognized a lack of integrity, the score-boosting pressure that teachers experienced pushed them toward practices that, without such pressure, they would regard as a disservice to students.

When implemented and data gathered correctly, in the best circumstance, standardized tests can reflect the teacher’s ability to teach. Their knowledge and ability to relate said knowledge can be effectively measured, by the scores of their students. As written by Grant Wiggins, about the proper use of standardized test, “reform of testing depends, however, on teachers’ recognizing that standardized testing evolved and proliferated because the school transcript became untrustworthy,“ (Wiggins 354). In this Wiggins describes how the modern tests developed because of a lack of trust. Teacher dishonestly turned in altered grades, for students, to fake successful teaching and learning. Because of this, these tests depict the students’ true knowledge learned. Another factor that promotes standardized test, is, as written by Wiggins “rather than seeing tests as after-the-fact devices for checking up on what students have learned, we should see them as instructional,” (Wiggins 354). By this Wiggins suggests that such