Abstract
We sought to understand how teachers’ perspectives on standards-based instructional practices, classroom assessment, and external testing do or do not show coherence and alignment. Based on survey methods (n = 155) and interviews with a sample of secondary school teachers (n = 9) in a large urban district in the USA, we explored general trends and individual teachers’ viewpoints. Our results suggest that the teachers’ instructional use of standards, classroom assessment preferences, and beliefs about the test-driven system are moderately correlated. Interview data provide insight into reasons teachers hold beliefs that do or do not fit well into a coherent assessment system.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abrams, L. M., Pedulla, J. J., & Madaus, G. F. (2003). Views from the classroom: teachers’ opinions of statewide testing programs. Theory Into Practice, 42(1), 18–29.
Amrein, A., & Berliner, D. (2003). The testing divide: new research on the intended and unintended impact of high-stakes testing. Peer Review, 5(2), 31–32.
ASCD (2016). Elementary and Secondary Education Act: Comparison of the No Child Left Behind Act to the Every Student Succeeds Act. Retrieved from https://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/siteASCD/policy/ESEA_NCLB_ComparisonChart_2015.pdf
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2015). Measurement framework for schooling in Australia 2015. Retrieved from https://www.acara.edu.au/reporting/measurement-framework-for-schooling-2015.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: the exercise of self-control. New York: Freeman.
Bennett, R. E. (2016, April). Opt out: an examination of issues (Research Report No. RR-16-13). Princeton: Educational Testing Service. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12101.
Bonner, S. M., & Chen, P. P. (2009). Teacher candidates’ perceptions about grading and constructivist teaching. Educational Assessment, 14(2), 57–77.
Brookhart, S. M. (1994). Teachers’ grading: practice and theory. Applied Measurement in Education, 7(4), 279–301.
Brown, G. T. L., & Harris, L. R. (2009). Unintended consequences of using tests to improve learning: how improvement-oriented resources heighten conceptions of assessment as school accountability. Journal for Multidisciplinary Education, 6(12), 68–91.
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Cromey, A. (2000). Using student assessment data: what can we learn from schools? (brief no. 6). Oak Brook: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: human needs and the self determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Fowler Jr., F. J. (2013). Survey research methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Frary, R. B., Cross, L. H., & Weber, L. J. (1993). Testing and grading practices and opinions of secondary teachers of academic subjects: implications for instruction in measurement. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 12(3), 23–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.1993.tb00539.x.
Frederiksen, J. R., & Collins, A. (1989). A systems approach to educational testing. Educational Researcher, 18(9), 27–32.
Frey, B. B., & Schmitt, V. L. (2010). Teachers’ classroom assessment practices. Middle Grades Research Journal, 5(3), 107–117.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery grounded theory: strategies for qualitative inquiry. Chicago: Aldin.
Greene, J. C. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hahs-Vaughn, D. L. (2016). Applied multivariate statistical concepts. New York: Routledge.
Kerr, K. A., Marsh, J. A., Ikemoto, G. S., Darilek, H., & Barney, H. (2006). Strategies to promote data use for instructional improvement: actions, outcomes, and lessons from three urban districts. American Journal of Education, 112(4), 496–520.
Kitchen, H., Fordham, E., Henderson, K., Looney, A., & Maghnouj, S. (2017). Romania 2017. OECD reviews of evaluation and assessment in education. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264274051-en.
Milner, A. R., Sondergeld, T. A., Demir, A., Johnson, C. C., & Czerniak, C. M. (2012). Elementary teachers’ beliefs about teaching science and classroom practice: an examination of pre/post NCLB testing in science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23, 111–132.
Miranda, R. J., & Damico, J. B. (2015). Changes in teachers’ beliefs and classroom practices concerning inquiry-based instruction following a year-long RET-PLC program. Science Educator, 24(1), 23.
Muskin, J. A. (2015). From good ideas to good practice: putting teachers at the center of education improvement, where they belong. Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Accountability, 27(1), 93–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-015-9216-7.
Nisbett, R., & Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
OECD. (2015). Education policy outlook: making reforms happen. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264225442-en.
Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307–332.
Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., Glaser, R., & National Research Council (US) Committee on the Foundations of Assessment. (2001). Knowing what students know: the science and design of educational assessment. Washington: National Academy Press.
Polikoff, M. S. (2012). Instructional alignment under No Child Left Behind. American Journal of Education, 118(3), 341–368.
Polikoff, M. S., & Porter, A. C. (2014). Instructional alignment as a measure of teaching quality. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 36(4), 399–416.
Polly, D., McGee, J. R., Wang, C., Lambert, R. G., Pugalee, D. K., & Johnson, S. (2013). The association between teachers’ beliefs, enacted practices, and student learning in mathematics. Mathematics Educator, 22(2), 11–30.
Popham, W. J. (2009). Assessment literacy for teachers: faddish or fundamental? Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840802577536.
Porter, A. C., Smithson, J., Blank, R., & Zeidner, T. (2007). Alignment as a teacher variable. Applied Measurement in Education, 20(1), 27–51.
Schildkamp, K., Karbautzki, L., & Vanhoof, J. (2014). Exploring data use practices around Europe: identifying enablers and barriers. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 42, 15–24.
Scholastic & Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. (2012). Primary sources 2012: America’s teachers on the teaching profession. New York: Scholastic Retrieved from www.scholastic.com/primarysources/pdfs/Gates2012_full.pdf.
Shepard, L. A. (2002). The hazards of high-stakes testing. Issues in Science and Technology, 19, 53–58.
Swanson, C. B., & Stevenson, D. L. (2002). Standards-based reform in practice: evidence on state policy and classroom instruction from the NAEP state assessments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(1), 1–27.
Troia, G. A., & Graham, S. (2016). Common Core writing and language standards and aligned state assessments: a national survey of teacher beliefs and attitudes. Reading and Writing, 29(9), 1719–1743.
Ward, J., & Thomas, G. (2015). National standards: school sample monitoring & evaluation project, 2010–2014. New Zealand: Ministry of Education Retrieved from www.educationcounts.govt.nz/publications/series/National_Standards.
Wilson, M. (2004). Assessment, accountability and the classroom: a community of judgment. In M. Wilson (Ed.), Towards coherence between classroom assessment and accountability (pp. 1–19) 103rd Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bonner, S.M., Torres Rivera, C. & Chen, P.P. Standards and assessment: coherence from the teacher’s perspective. Educ Asse Eval Acc 30, 71–92 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-017-9272-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-017-9272-2