PDF (Español)
FLIP
Publication Date: 2012-01-01
How to Cite
Martínez, L., & Prada, S. . (2012). Consequences of assessing educational progress through standardized testing: the United States case. Revista De Antropología Y Sociología : Virajes, 14(1), 47–63. Retrieved from https://revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co/index.php/virajes/article/view/871
More Citation Formats
Authors
Abstract
2012 marked the 10th anniversary of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) policy implementation. NCLB is the United States of America law that defines the educational policy for children attending public schools. Grounded on economic theory, this law established clear quantitative criteria in order to assess achievement and set-backs in the public educational system. This article summarizes main findings gathered from a literature review on intended and unintended consequences of the law. The US experience shows that tying standardized test scores to penalties for teachers and schools is an insufficient strategy to motivate positive change in the educational system.
Keywords:
References
AUDREY Amrein-Beardsley (2009) “The Unintended, Pernicious Consequences of ‘Staying the Course’ on the United States’ No Child Left Behind Policy,”International Journal of Education Policy and Leadership.
BORMAN, K., y COTNER, B. (2000). No Child Left Behind: The Federal Government Gets Serious About Accountability. The Structure of Schooling: Readings in the Sociology of Education. In Richard Arum y Irenee R. Beattie (Eds.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
BIFULCO, R. y LADD, H. (2006). The impacts of Charter Schools on student achievement: Evidence from North Carolina. American Education Finance Association. Vol. 1.
ELMORE, Richard. (2002) Unwarranted Intrusion. Education Next. Vol. 2 no. 1.
GAMORAN, A. (2007). Introduction: Can Standards-Based Reform Help Reduced the Poverty.
Gap in Education.Standards-Based Reform and the Poverty Gap: Lessons for No Child Left Behind. In Adam Gamoran (Ed). Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
GONZALES, P., Williams, T., JOCELYN, L., ROEY, S., KASTBERG, D., y BRENWALD, S. (2008). Highlights from TIMSS 2007: Mathematics and science achievement of U.S. fourth- and eighth-grade students in an international context (NCES 2009–001 Revised). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC. (Disponible en: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009001.pdf).
HAMILTON, L. (2003). Assessment as a policy tool. Review of research in education. Vol 27.
HEINRICH, C. J. (2007). Evidence-based policy and performance management: Challenges and prospects in two parallel movements. American Review of Public Administration, Vol. 37.
HENIG, J. (2008). Spin cycle: How research is used in policy debates : the case of Charter Schools. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
JACOB, B. y LEVITT, S. (2003). Rotten apples: An investigation of the prevalance and predictors of teacher cheating. The Quarterly Journal of Economics.
JEYNES, W. (2012) A Meta-Analysis on the effects and contributions of public, public charter, and religious schools on student outcomes. Peabody Journal of Education No. 87.
JENKS y PHILLIPS (1998). The black-white test score gap: An introduction. The black-white test score gap. In Jenks and Phillips (Eds). Washington, DC.: Brooking Institute Press.
KIM, J., y SUNDERMAN, G. L. (2005). Measuring academic proficiency under the No Child LeftBehind Act: Implications for Educational Equity. Educational Researcher, Vol. 34, No. 8.
KIM, J. y SUNDERMAN, G.L. (2007). The expansion of federal power and the politics of implementing the No Child Left Behind Act. Teachers College. Vol. 109, No. 5.
Koretz, D. (2002). Limitations in the use of achievement tests as a measure of educators’ productivity. Jurnal of Human Resources, No. 37.
MIRON, G. y HORN, J. (2003). Evaluation of Connecticut Charter Schools and the Charter School Initiative. Evaluation center, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI
NELSON, J., STUART P., y MCCARTHY, M. (2007). Standards-based reform: Real change or political smoke screen. Critical issues in education: Dialogs and Dialectics. 6th Edition. NewYork, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies.
NI, Y. y RORRER. A. (2012) Twice Considered: Charter Schools and Student Achievement in Utah. Economics of Education Review.
RAVITCH, D. (2009). The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice Are Undermining Education, New York: Basic Books.
Sass, T. (2006). Charter schools and student achievement in Florida. American education finance association. Vol. 1
SCHMITT y WHITSETT, 2008. Using evaluation data to strike a balance between stakeholders and accountability systems. New Directions for Evaluation. Special Issue: Consequences of No Child Left Behind for Educational Evaluation. No. 117.
BORMAN, K., y COTNER, B. (2000). No Child Left Behind: The Federal Government Gets Serious About Accountability. The Structure of Schooling: Readings in the Sociology of Education. In Richard Arum y Irenee R. Beattie (Eds.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
BIFULCO, R. y LADD, H. (2006). The impacts of Charter Schools on student achievement: Evidence from North Carolina. American Education Finance Association. Vol. 1.
ELMORE, Richard. (2002) Unwarranted Intrusion. Education Next. Vol. 2 no. 1.
GAMORAN, A. (2007). Introduction: Can Standards-Based Reform Help Reduced the Poverty.
Gap in Education.Standards-Based Reform and the Poverty Gap: Lessons for No Child Left Behind. In Adam Gamoran (Ed). Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
GONZALES, P., Williams, T., JOCELYN, L., ROEY, S., KASTBERG, D., y BRENWALD, S. (2008). Highlights from TIMSS 2007: Mathematics and science achievement of U.S. fourth- and eighth-grade students in an international context (NCES 2009–001 Revised). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC. (Disponible en: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009001.pdf).
HAMILTON, L. (2003). Assessment as a policy tool. Review of research in education. Vol 27.
HEINRICH, C. J. (2007). Evidence-based policy and performance management: Challenges and prospects in two parallel movements. American Review of Public Administration, Vol. 37.
HENIG, J. (2008). Spin cycle: How research is used in policy debates : the case of Charter Schools. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
JACOB, B. y LEVITT, S. (2003). Rotten apples: An investigation of the prevalance and predictors of teacher cheating. The Quarterly Journal of Economics.
JEYNES, W. (2012) A Meta-Analysis on the effects and contributions of public, public charter, and religious schools on student outcomes. Peabody Journal of Education No. 87.
JENKS y PHILLIPS (1998). The black-white test score gap: An introduction. The black-white test score gap. In Jenks and Phillips (Eds). Washington, DC.: Brooking Institute Press.
KIM, J., y SUNDERMAN, G. L. (2005). Measuring academic proficiency under the No Child LeftBehind Act: Implications for Educational Equity. Educational Researcher, Vol. 34, No. 8.
KIM, J. y SUNDERMAN, G.L. (2007). The expansion of federal power and the politics of implementing the No Child Left Behind Act. Teachers College. Vol. 109, No. 5.
Koretz, D. (2002). Limitations in the use of achievement tests as a measure of educators’ productivity. Jurnal of Human Resources, No. 37.
MIRON, G. y HORN, J. (2003). Evaluation of Connecticut Charter Schools and the Charter School Initiative. Evaluation center, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI
NELSON, J., STUART P., y MCCARTHY, M. (2007). Standards-based reform: Real change or political smoke screen. Critical issues in education: Dialogs and Dialectics. 6th Edition. NewYork, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies.
NI, Y. y RORRER. A. (2012) Twice Considered: Charter Schools and Student Achievement in Utah. Economics of Education Review.
RAVITCH, D. (2009). The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice Are Undermining Education, New York: Basic Books.
Sass, T. (2006). Charter schools and student achievement in Florida. American education finance association. Vol. 1
SCHMITT y WHITSETT, 2008. Using evaluation data to strike a balance between stakeholders and accountability systems. New Directions for Evaluation. Special Issue: Consequences of No Child Left Behind for Educational Evaluation. No. 117.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
