Can high stakes testing leverage educational improvement? Prospects from the last decade of testing and accountability reform

Abstract

This article examines major trends in testing and accountability reform in the United States over the past decade. The review covers the apex and decline of the national experimentation with a range of alternative assessments and the rise of test-based accountability as a central policy initiative. These trends signify that testing has become a widely utilized instrument for educational reform in America. Research on these trends indicates that high stakes testing does motivate teachers and administrators to change their practices, yet the changes they motivate tend to be more superficial adjustments in content coverage and test preparation activities rather than promoting deeper improvements in instructional practice. Further, the information provided by large scale assessments is primarily useful to measure school and system progress, but of more limited utility for instructional guidance. Most problematic is that the high stakes testing system in America has been repeatedly promoted as a substantive reform in itself. However, high stakes testing is a relatively weak intervention because, while it reveals shortcomings, it does not contain the guidance and expertise to inform response. The article concludes with suggestions on how to capitalize on the strengths of high stakes testing while minimizing its shortcomings.

Redesigning systems of school accountability: A multiple measures approach to accountability and support

“…In addition, the availability of independent, quality information regarding how well schools and districts are performing is thought to help educational stakeholders make informed decisions about their educational options (Figlio & Loeb, 2011;Rothstein, Jacobsen, & Wilder, 2008). Therefore, schoolbased accountability operates on the notion that incentives and public pressure from publicly reported information will result in improved student outcomes (Supovitz, 2009).…”

Teacher work motivation in the era of extrinsic incentives: Performance goals and pro-social commitments in the service of equity

“…This prevailing view in the literature (see for exceptions Miskel et al 1980) changes in the nineties when teacher motivation is examined in the context of strong, sharp, and high-stakes incentive systems (Kreps, 1997) based, for example, on accountability or pay for performance (Anagnostopoulos, 2003;Elmore, 2004;Finnigan & Gross, 2007;Firestone & Pennell, 1993;Kelley, Heneman, & Milanowski, 2002;Kelley & Protsik, 1997;Leithwood, Steinbach, & Jantzi, 2002;Malen, 1999;Marsh et al, 2011;Milanowski, 2000;Mintrop, 2004;Odden & Kelley, 2001;Supovitz, 2009;Yuan et al, 2012). This body of literature suggests that incentives and goal setting can become motivational forces.…”

“…According to Frey & Osterloh (2001), demoralization can be interpreted as a typical symptom of intrinsic motivation being crowded out by extrinsic motives. "Crowding-out" does not mean that intrinsic or extrinsic work motives are mutually exclusive (see a discussion in Supovitz, 2009), but that at a certain point the strength of one can diminish or overpower the other. Alternatively, the new extrinsic motives could become synergistic with (Milanowski, 2000;Supovitz, 2009), or perhaps internalized into (Skrla & Scheurich, 2003) traditional intrinsic service commitments.…”

Slowing Entropy: Instructional Policy Design in New York City, 2011-12

“…Standardized tests have a long tradition as a policy lever that can change classroom practices (Linn, 2000Hamilton, 2003Koretz, 2008). We might not always get the changes we hope for, but there is strong evidence that teachers respond to the signals of testing (Supovitz, 2009). But the team of policy architects also rejected standardized testing because they felt that the results of summative tests provided insufficient data to reveal the richness of student thinking necessary to catalyze the discussions that they hoped would help teachers to better understand the kinds of teaching and learning experiences they would have to create to help students meet the expectations of the CCLS.…”