Search results

Standardized tests comparing nations, schools and students have become a focus of public interest and a basis for educational reform efforts around the world. High stakes testing (HST) is a specific approach to reform based on applying rewards and sanctions contingent on attained performance on such tests. HST thus represents a motivational strategy to improve educational outcomes. Herein we discuss the relations of HST to the theoretical positions of behaviorism, achievement goal theories, and, most centrally, self-determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985). We examine the degree to which each perspective would endorse HST as an approach to motivating teachers and students, and what the theories predict in terms of consequences. We then review recent empirical studies of the effects of HST-based interventions in the United States, where that type of reform strategy is flourishing, and compare these emerging results with theoretical predictions. We conclude that HST, because it is a Controlling, extrinsicform of motivating teachers and students, offen raises targeted test scores while producing a number of unintended negative consequences. These include narrowing of curricula, excessive focus on test preparation, increasing dropout rates and poor generalization of test score gains to other measures of learning and achievement. We conclude by discussing how motivation theory can better inform educational policy, with an emphasis on the self-determination theory viewpoint. (DIPF/Orig.) ; Der Einsatz standardisierter Tests zur vergleichenden Erhebung von Schulleistungen auf Länder-, Schul- und Schülerebene steht zunehmend im Zentrum des öffentlichen Interesses und liefert die Grundlage für pädagogische Reformbemühungen in der gesamten Welt. High Stakes Testing (HST) ist ein spezifischer Reformansatz, der die Vergabe von Belohnungen und Sanktionen an die Ergebnisse in solchen Vergleichstests bindet. HST ist somit eine Motivationsstrategie zur Verbesserung pädagogischer Zielvariablen. In dieser Arbeit wird das Verhältnis von HST zu behavioristisch orientierten Theorien, Theorien motivationaler Zielorientierungen und insbesondere der Selbstbestimmungstheorie (Deci und Ryan, 1985) untersucht. Es wird herausgearbeitet, welche Konsequenzen HST aus Sicht der verschiedenen Theorien haben sollte. Anschließend wird ein Überblick über empirische Studien aus Amerika (wo HST zurzeit äußerst populär ist) gegeben, die die Wirkung von HST überprüft haben. Aus dem Vergleich der Ergebnisse mit den theoretischen Vorhersagen werden die folgenden Schlüsse gezogen: HST ist eine stark kontrollierende, extrinsische Motivierungsstrategie, die zwar oft die gewünschten Wirkungen hat, gleichzeitig aber auch eine Reihe unerwünschter Nebenwirkungen zeigt. Hierzu zählen die Einengung der Lehrpläne, eine übertriebene Fokussierung auf das Einüben der Testinhalte, zunehmende Dropout-Raten und die unzureichende Generalisierbarkeit der Effekte auf andere Lern- und Leistungsmaße. Vor diesem Hintergrund werden abschließend Möglichkeiten der Einbeziehung von Motivationstheorien - insbesondere der Selbstbestimmungstheorie - in bildungspolitische Reformbemühungen diskutiert. (ZPID)

Baker expresses concern that Passing Muster is an example of "…technicians working within the political arena…deferring judgment on important technical concerns that have real ethical implications." Although the authors of Passing Muster claim no preference for specific types of evaluation systems, their rating system effectively suggests that value-added measures should be the benchmark for evaluating teacher evaluation systems, simply because they are available and not because they are good measures. Baker calls on the authors to admit their bias: "When a technician knows that one choice is better (or worse) than another, one measure or model better than another, and that these technical choices affect real lives, the technician should – MUST – be up front/honest about these preferences."

The positive and negative effects of high-stakes testing are well-documented (Gratz, 2000; Heubertand Hauser, 1999). The development of an accountability system that is based on the results ofstudents' tests has intensified the pressure to perform for students and schools (Gratz). Many policydecisions and often the promotion of students are determined by these test results – hence the term"high-stakes testing" (Heubert and Hauser). Because of the high stakes involved, pressure forimproving scores has an impact on teachers and their practices (Heubert and Hauser; Merrow, 2002).

Episode 488 of the Cyberlaw Podcast

Dramatic Action, Dramatic Improvement: The Research on School Turnaroundadvocates for implementing the most effective, research-based methods for turning around low-performing schools through the federal School Improvement Grant (SIG) program. It argues that the available body of research points to five dramatic actions that are necessary to bring about dramatic school improvement. Unfortunately, the rationale for its assertions is narrow, incoherent, and misleading. This limitation stems from the report's unsystematic review of literature, resulting in its failure to incorporate lessons from large bodies of research on high-stakes accountability, school improvement, and the emerging evidence on school closures and federally funded turnarounds—all of which reveal that the federal SIG program's turnaround policies are based on unwarranted claims and are contradicted by the empirical evidence. Consequently, the report's recommendations are unsupported by rigorous research. Like the SIG program itself, the report promotes seemingly bold school changes that appear seductive on the surface. But when compared to the real evidence on school turnarounds, their evidence-based foundation vanishes. In the end, schools, districts, and states that follow the report's advice stand to reproduce the unequal conditions that have led, in part, to their need for dramatic turnaround in the first place.

So it has happened: Marine Le Pen's Rassemblement National (RN) received more than twice the votes of Macron's Renaissance list in the European elections (31.4% vs. 14.6%). Following the results, Macron announced to dissolve parliament and call an early election. Judging by the immediate reactions on social media, Macron's announcement shocked several commentators and the public. Yet, from the perspective of the 2027 presidential elections, the reasoning may not be as reckless as it seems. Macron's calculation is based on the consideration that three more years of the current situation would make a Le Pen presidency highly likely in 2027.