Do high stakes standardized tests improve education outcomes?

Introduction

High-stakes standardized testing has been a central tool in educational reform, particularly in the United States and the United Kingdom. These tests are designed to hold schools, teachers, and students accountable by tying significant consequences to test performance. The effectiveness of high-stakes testing in improving educational outcomes has been a subject of extensive debate and research.

Key Insights

Lack of Evidence for Improved Student Achievement:
- There is no substantial evidence that high-stakes standardized testing improves student achievement. The focus on testing detracts from the importance of quality teaching, which is a more significant factor in student success .
Impact on Low-Stakes Subjects:
- High-stakes testing policies can lead to gains in high-stakes subjects like math and reading without negatively impacting low-stakes subjects such as science.
Distortion of Test Results:
- High-stakes tests do not necessarily distort information about the general performance levels of students. However, the accuracy of year-to-year score changes can vary significantly across different school systems.
Social Reproduction and Inequality:
- High-stakes tests contribute to the reproduction of social inequalities by standardizing knowledge and regulating student identities. This process often marginalizes students from diverse cultural backgrounds and exacerbates educational inequalities related to race and class .
Unintended Negative Outcomes:
- High-stakes testing can lead to several unintended negative outcomes, including increased pressure on students and teachers, narrowed curriculum, and reduced motivation, particularly among at-risk students.
Mixed Results on Long-Term Achievement:
- Studies show mixed results regarding the long-term impact of high-stakes testing on student achievement. Some analyses suggest that high-stakes testing states show relative gains in certain subjects, while others indicate no significant improvement or even slight disadvantages .

Conclusion

The research on high-stakes standardized testing presents a complex picture. While these tests can lead to improvements in specific high-stakes subjects, they do not consistently enhance overall student achievement and can contribute to social inequalities and unintended negative outcomes. The evidence suggests that focusing on improving the quality of teaching and addressing broader educational inequalities may be more effective strategies for enhancing educational outcomes.

Do high stakes standardized tests improve education outcomes?

Summary

Introduction

Key Insights

Conclusion

Sources and full results

Excellence in Education Versus High-Stakes Standardized Testing

High-stakes standardized testing is insufficient as a reform tool, and focusing solely on testing risks overlooking the importance of quality teaching in student achievement.

Devising inequality: a Bernsteinian analysis of high‐stakes testing and social reproduction in education

High-stakes testing actively selects and regulates student identities, contributing to the reproduction of dominant social relations in education.

The Impact of High-Stakes Testing on Student Proficiency in Low-Stakes Subjects: Evidence from Florida's Elementary Science Exam.

High-stakes testing policies in Florida lead to substantial gains in high-stakes subjects like math and reading, but also substantial gains in low-stakes subjects like science.

Testing High-Stakes Tests: Can We Believe the Results of Accountability Tests?

High-stakes standardized tests do not distort information about student performance or school influence, and in Florida they provide accurate information about school influence over student progress.

Reconsidering the Impact of High-stakes Testing

High-stakes testing states show stronger gains in NAEP mathematics scores compared to low-stakes testing states, suggesting that high-stakes testing policies may improve student achievement.

High-stakes testing and student achievement: Does accountability pressure increase student learning?

Higher high-stakes testing pressure in 25 states did not show a significant relationship with student achievement in math at the fourth- and eighth-grade levels on the NAEP tests.

The Unintended Outcomes of High-Stakes Testing

High-stakes testing can have both positive and negative unintended outcomes, impacting instruction, student motivation, and at-risk students.

High-Stakes Testing, Standardization, and Inequality in the United States

High-stakes standardized tests reproduce educational inequalities associated with race and class in the United States by standardizing curriculum content, teaching, and learning, leading to more pressure on students of color and less rich educational experiences.

High-Stakes Assessment in Undergraduate and Postgraduate Studies

High-stakes assessment in higher education can measure learning and performance outcomes, but each method has advantages and disadvantages, and standardized tests are more reliable than in-depth assessments.

Relying on High-Stakes Standardized Tests to Evaluate Schools and Teachers: A Bad Idea

High-stakes standardized tests are a bad idea for evaluating schools and teachers, leading to issues like misleading information, lower-level instruction, cheating, and unfair treatment.

Try another search