This document discusses and compares high-stakes testing programs under No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and at the state level. By 2002, high-stakes testing programs had spread to all 50 states and DC. Similarly, NCLB was enacted in 2002 and many states used existing testing programs to meet NCLB requirements. Both NCLB and state programs require annual student assessments and issuing public report cards on school performance. The document outlines the history of high-stakes testing, including the development of academic standards, performance standards, and aligning tests to standards. It also discusses criticism of high-stakes testing but notes there is no clear evidence of widespread public backlash against testing.

1. Chapter 2:
High-Stakes Testing
By: Zenaida A. Halina

2. Comparing And Contrasting
NCLB And State High-stakes
Testing Program
• By 2002 HST programs had spread to
all 50 states and the District of
Columbia (Doherty, 2002).
• By contrast, NCLB did not exist until
2002.

3. • In many cases, states opted to use the same
measures they were already using for their
HST programs to meet NCLB accountability
requirements, effectively “killing two birds with
one stone”. As a result, when annual
assessments are discussed, they may be
referred to in the context of NCLB
requirements, state requirements, or both.

4. • Both NCLB and many state HST
programs require that public “report
cards” be issued annually that describe
the performance of students on the
annual assessment.

5. • Beyond the NCLB proficiency
criteria, states may establish
additional proficiency criteria that
drive other decisions not directly
related to NCLB.

6. High-stakes Testing: A
Nationwide Phenomenon
• there is no development during the last
decade that has generated more
controversy among educators than the
high-stakes testing movement, which
spread to every state in the nation by
2002 (Doherty, 2002).

7. • Depending on the source, you may
hear that high-stakes tests are the
greatest thing since sliced bread
or that high-stakes tests are the
work of the devil.

8. High-stakes Tests Are
Only Tools
• Like any other tests, high-stakes tests are
only tool, and the way a tool is
constructed can limit its usefulness.
• Furthermore, even well constructed tools
can be used effectively, ineffectively, or
abused.

9. • Test usefulness can vary depending on the
purpose of testing and the characteristics of
the persons the test is administered to.
• No test can be a “one size fits all” test that
is equally suitable for all purposes.

10. What Is High-stake Testing
And Why Does It Matter?
• We define high-stake testing as
“the use of the test or an
assessment to make decisions that
are of prominent educational,
financial, or social impact.”

11. • A student will be promoted to the next
grade,
• A student will receive a high school
diploma,
• Schools are classified as unacceptable,
acceptable, or exemplary in terms of
their educational performance,

12. • Schools, principals, or teachers receive
financial or other incentives, or
penalties, based on student performance
on high-stake test,
• A state educational agency or a private
corporation takes over the administrative
control of local schools, and

13. • Principals, teachers, or other
school staff are reassigned to
other schools or are offered
employment contract renewal.

14. The History Of High-
stakes Testing
• Academic Standards
• Performance Standards
• Alignment of High-Stakes Tests with
Academic Standards
• Criterion-Reference High-Stakes Tests
• Norm-Referenced High-Stakes Tests

15. Academic Standards
• As part of education reform movement
several states began to identify the
objectives of instruction for pupils in
each of their academic subjects across
the elementary, middle, and high school
years.

16. Academic Standards
• These statewide objectives are
specific, measurable outcomes of
learning that have been accepted by
committees of educators and others.

17. Academic Standards
• Over time, these instructional
objectives came to be known as
academic standards and formed
the basis of what came to be
known as standards-based
reform.

18. Performance
Standards
• Once a state’s academic standards were
established, committees then identified
appropriate levels of performance for
each standard that would indicate that
the objective, or academic standard, had
been met.

19. Performance
Standards
• Performance standards can vary
considerably from state to state, and even
within states over time. Thus, what
separates “acceptable, unacceptable,
proficient, and exceptional” performance
may vary both across states and within
states with the passage of time, and may
vary from the perspective of educators and
non-educators.

20. Performance
Standards
• The intention of performance standards
is to raise expectations enough to raise
achievement but not to raise expectations
so high that students, teachers, and
others fail to take them seriously because
they are unattainable.

21. Alignment of High-Stakes Tests
with Academic Standards
• After establishing academic
standards and performance
standards states had to decide on
ways to measure whether students
were achieving these standards.

22. Alignment of High-Stakes Tests
with Academic Standards
• Alignment is what measurement
specialists consider to be
evidence of an achievement test’s
content validity.

23. Criterion-reference High-
stakes Tests
• Criterion-reference tests are primarily
intended to measure student
performance against a criterion for
mastery so they are well-suited for
measuring state standards, all other
factors being equal.

24. Norm-Referenced High-
Stakes Tests
• National norm-referenced tests are
designed to focus on broad national
goals and objectives, which may
differ considerably from state
academic standards.

25. The High-stakes Testing
Backlash
• FairTest is a national
organization that advocates for
alternatives to standardized
tests as measures of learning.

26. • FairTest criticized high-stakes
tests as failing “to produce
evidence of sustained learning
improvement for all students.

27. • There was also an objection
of reconstitution of low
performing schools
• “High-Stakes Tests are for
Tomatoes”

28. • Popham (200) in a paper entitled
“Educational Mismeasurement: How
Stakes-Testing can Harm our Children”,
alleges that high-stakes testing are a
causing a decline in citizens’regard for
public education, and that the results for
students are devastating.

29. • news media have also brought
significant attention to the HST
concerns
• Even the courts have been
involved

30. Is There Really A High-
Stakes Testing Backlash?
• Several surveys were conducted showing
support for high-stakes tests.
• After reviewing these and other data,
Driesler (2001) concluded that intense
media coverage of HST was at least in
part responsible for the perception that
there is a public backlash against HST.

31. • He said “there is no evidence of a wide
spread public ‘backlash’against
testing.... The truth is these anti-testing
protests only reflect the views of a small,
vocal minority of parents and not those of
the much larger, assessment-supporting
public” (p.5).

32. • Several statements from the U.S.
Department of Education website also
reflect how strongly the current
administration believes in annual HST. “To
get truly useful information that allows
teachers to identify individuals students
who need help, we must test every child
every year”.

33. • “Another benefit of annual testing is that it
allows us to identify successful schools ...
and we can identify and reward schools
that are helping their students make the
most progress”. “Test score data allow
schools to make decisions based on facts
rather than guesses”

34. What Do National Organizations
Say About High-stakes Tests?
• AERA’s Twelve Conditions That High-Stakes
Testing Programs Should Meet
1. Protection against High-Stakes Decisions
based on a Single Test
2. Adequate resources and opportunity to learn.
3. Validation for each intended separate use.

35. 4. Full disclosure of likely negative
consequences of HST programs.
5. Alignment between the test and the
curriculum.

36. 6. Validity of passing scores and
achievement level.
7. Opportunities for meaningful
remediation for examinees who fail
high-stakes tests.
8. Appropriate attention to language
differences between examinees.

37. 9. Appropriate attention to students with
disabilities.
10. Careful adherence to explicit rules
for determining which students are to
be tested.

38. 11. Sufficient reliability for each
intended use.
12. Ongoing evaluation of intended
and unintended effects of HST.

39. Helping Students (And
Yourself) Prepare For High-
stakes Tests
• Focus on the task, not your feelings
about it.
• Inform students and parents about the
importance of the test.
• Teach test-taking skills as part of
regular instruction

40. • As the test day approaches
respond to student questions
openly and directly
• Take advantage of whatever
preparation materials are
available