Title: Alignment, High Stakes, and the Inflation of Test Scores
Abstract: Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of EducationVolume 104, Issue 2 p. 99-118 Alignment, High Stakes, and the Inflation of Test Scores† Daniel Koretz, Daniel Koretz Harvard's Graduate School of Education and Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).Search for more papers by this author Daniel Koretz, Daniel Koretz Harvard's Graduate School of Education and Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).Search for more papers by this author First published: 07 June 2005 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7984.2005.00027.xCitations: 28 † The work reported herein was supported under the Educational Research and Development Centers Program, PR/Award Number R305B960002, as administered by the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) and the U.S. Department of Education. The findings and opinions expressed in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions or policies of the National Center for Education Research, the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), or the U.S. Department of Education. The material in the section with the heading “Inappropriate Test Preparation and ‘Tests Worth Teaching To’ ” (pp. 100–104) is copyrighted by the author and is reprinted here with his permission. AboutPDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL References Biemiller, A. (2001). Teaching vocabulary: Early, direct, and sequential. American Educator, 25(1), 24–28, 47. Cannell, J.J. (1987). Nationally normed elementary achievement testing in America's public schools: How all fifty states are above the national average. Daniels, WV: Friends for Education. Jacob, B. (2002, May). Accountability, incentives and behavior: The impact of high-stakes testing in the Chicago public schools. Working paper W8968. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Klein, S.P., Hamilton, L.S., McCaffrey, D.F., & Stecher, B.M. (2000). What do test scores in Texas tell us? Issue Paper IP-202. Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Available at http://www.rand.org/publications/IP/IP202/ Koretz, D.M. (1988). Arriving in Lake Wobegon: Are standardized tests exaggerating achievement and distorting instruction? American Educator, 12(2), 8– 15, 46–52. Koretz, D. (2003). Using multiple measures to address perverse incentives and score inflation. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22(2), 18– 26. Koretz, D., & Barron, S.I. (1998). The validity of gains on the Kentucky Instructional Results Information System (KIRIS). Report No. MR-1014-EDU. Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Koretz, D., Barron, S., Mitchell, K., & Stecher, B. (1996). The perceived effects of the Kentucky Instructional Results Information System (KIRIS) (Report NO. MR-792-PCT/FF). Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Koretz, D., Linn, R.L., Dunbar, S.B., & Shepard, L.A. (1991, April). The effects of high-stakes testing: Preliminary evidence about generalization across tests. In R.L. Linn (Chair) (Ed.), The effects of high stakes testing, symposium presented at the annual meetings of the American Educational Research Association and the National Council on Measurement in Education, Chicago. Koretz, D., McCaffrey, D., & Hamilton, L. (2001). Toward a framework for validating gains under high-stakes conditions. CSE Technical Report 551. Los Angeles: Center for the Study of Evaluation, University of California. Linn, R.L. (2000). Assessments and accountability. Educational Researcher, 29(2), 4– 16. Linn, R.L., & Dunbar, S.B. (1990). The nation's report card goes home: Good news and bad about trends in achievement. Phi Delta Kappan, 72(2), 127– 133. Linn, R.L., Graue, M.E., & Sanders, N.M. (1990). Comparing state and district test results to national norms: The validity of the claims that “Everyone is above average.” Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 9(3), 5– 14. Madaus, G. (1988). The influence of testing on the curriculum. In L. Tanner (Ed.), Critical issues in curriculum. The eighty-seventh yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part I (pp. 83– 121). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education. Massachusetts Department of Education. (2000). Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System: Release of spring 2000 test items. Malden, MA: Author. Retrieved January 15, 2005, from http://www.doe.mass.edu/mcas/2000/release_na/98math_na.pdf Neal, D. (2002). How would vouchers change the market for education? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16(4), 25– 44. Shepard, L.A. (1988, April). The harm of measurement-driven instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC. Shepard, L.A., & Dougherty, K.C. (1991, April). Effects of high-stakes testing on instruction. In R.L. Linn (Chair) (Ed.), The effects of high-stakes testing, symposium presented at the annual meetings of the American Educational Research Association and the National Council on Measurement in Education, Chicago. Stecher, B.M. (2002). Consequences of large-scale, high-stakes testing on school and classroom practices. In L.S. Hamilton, B.M. Stecher, & S.P. Klein (Eds.), Making sense of test-based accountability in education (pp. 79– 100). Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Strauss, V. (2001, July 10). Review tests go too far, critics say. The Washington Post, p. A09. Citing Literature Volume104, Issue2June 2005Pages 99-118 ReferencesRelatedInformation
Publication Year: 2005
Publication Date: 2005-06-01
Language: en
Type: article
Indexed In: ['crossref']
Access and Citation
Cited By Count: 86
AI Researcher Chatbot
Get quick answers to your questions about the article from our AI researcher chatbot