High Stakes Testing Case Study
High Stakes Testing Law and Litigation[1]
Paul T. O’Neill*
The exams are coming – exams with consequences for takers and givers alike. The new high stakes exam in Massachusetts and Texas kick in as of spring 2003;[2] those in California and Virginia take effect in 2004.[3] New York is phasing in its new testing program now, one new subject a year, until students must pass all five to graduate.[4] Many states are already at least as far along; by current count, eighteen states are in some stage of requiring students to pass a uniform, large-scale assessment in order to receive a high school diploma (often called an “exit exam”), and another six plan to do so in the near future.[5] That figure has consistently risen over the last …show more content…
High stakes tests can also have a huge impact on teachers, schools, and districts. Teacher bonuses, state funds for schools, and even the control of a particular school or school district can all be affected by the results of standardized tests. A test that does not affect individual students but does affect how much money a school receives is not a high stakes test for the students (often referred to as individual accountability); rather, these tests carry high stakes for the school and are often referred to as instruments of systemic accountability. The recently enacted federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB),[12] for example, does not focus on individual accountability, but holds schools and districts accountable for the academic progress of their …show more content…
As mentioned previously, the law establishes a state-based annual testing requirement for students in grades three through eight and at least once in grades ten through twelve to gauge student proficiency in reading and math starting in the 2005-2006 school year.[52] It requires testing in science at least once in elementary, middle and high school as well. States must show academic proficiency, as defined by each state, within twelve years. NCLB allows states to utilize at least some of the assessments they already have in place – there are no federally required tests under the Act – as part of a statewide plan to ensure students are learning. Whatever measures a state utilizes, NCLB requires that its tests align with state standards so that it will be apparent whether children are truly learning and making real improvement where performance has been inadequate. If not, schools will be held accountable. NCLB does not require that high stakes be imposed on students (nor does it forbid this), but it does hold the system’s feet to the fire where students fail to show adequate yearly progress (AYP). Each school must disaggregate data for students with disabilities, as well as other groups such as economically disadvantaged students, English Language Learners, and those from major ethnic and
Paul T. O’Neill*
The exams are coming – exams with consequences for takers and givers alike. The new high stakes exam in Massachusetts and Texas kick in as of spring 2003;[2] those in California and Virginia take effect in 2004.[3] New York is phasing in its new testing program now, one new subject a year, until students must pass all five to graduate.[4] Many states are already at least as far along; by current count, eighteen states are in some stage of requiring students to pass a uniform, large-scale assessment in order to receive a high school diploma (often called an “exit exam”), and another six plan to do so in the near future.[5] That figure has consistently risen over the last …show more content…
High stakes tests can also have a huge impact on teachers, schools, and districts. Teacher bonuses, state funds for schools, and even the control of a particular school or school district can all be affected by the results of standardized tests. A test that does not affect individual students but does affect how much money a school receives is not a high stakes test for the students (often referred to as individual accountability); rather, these tests carry high stakes for the school and are often referred to as instruments of systemic accountability. The recently enacted federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB),[12] for example, does not focus on individual accountability, but holds schools and districts accountable for the academic progress of their …show more content…
As mentioned previously, the law establishes a state-based annual testing requirement for students in grades three through eight and at least once in grades ten through twelve to gauge student proficiency in reading and math starting in the 2005-2006 school year.[52] It requires testing in science at least once in elementary, middle and high school as well. States must show academic proficiency, as defined by each state, within twelve years. NCLB allows states to utilize at least some of the assessments they already have in place – there are no federally required tests under the Act – as part of a statewide plan to ensure students are learning. Whatever measures a state utilizes, NCLB requires that its tests align with state standards so that it will be apparent whether children are truly learning and making real improvement where performance has been inadequate. If not, schools will be held accountable. NCLB does not require that high stakes be imposed on students (nor does it forbid this), but it does hold the system’s feet to the fire where students fail to show adequate yearly progress (AYP). Each school must disaggregate data for students with disabilities, as well as other groups such as economically disadvantaged students, English Language Learners, and those from major ethnic and