The purpose of this study is to explore high school students’ understandings of achievement and opportunity through their lived experiences which are constructed under a high-stakes testing environment in Korea. This study undertakes a critical analysis of high-stakes testing and its intersectional effects in terms of structure and culture, attending to students’ everyday experiences in testing practices as these are embedded in certain discourses. Recent scholarship reveals that high-stakes testing reinforces a correspondence between socioeconomic status and educational attainment under the neoliberal educational policies of school choice, privatization, and high-stakes testing. In the analysis of educational policies such as the accountability movement, some studies contend that the political and economic discourses underpinning high-stakes testing are effectively hidden behind educational practices ostensibly aimed at raising standards. To date, however, there has been little attention to how students internalize the logic of neoliberal competition and how they experience educational achievement and opportunity structure within a high-stakes testing environment. Drawing on in-depth interviews of high school students from varying economic and academic backgrounds, this study found that students’ experiences of the high-stakes testing environment are influenced by their social class and achievement levels. High-stakes testing does not contribute to reducing achievement gaps between classes but rather reinforces educational alienation as well as opportunity gaps. Furthermore, high-stakes testing, as a cultural practice which affects students’ daily lives and their experience of curriculum and instruction, contributes to the ideological construction of students’ understandings of achievement and opportunity structure. While students experience structural constraints in achievement, they believe in testing as being a fair and equal opportunity. Concealing students’ struggles within structural barriers as well as their contradictory experiences in relation to ideologies of achievement and success, high-stakes testing becomes the medium through which students’ social desires are reproduced. An intersectional analysis in terms of culture and structure of students’ experiences in relation to high-stakes testing can help us to understand how the achievement ideology responds to students’ aspirations and also how those aspirations help this ideology persist. This study urges educational policies to focus on opportunity gaps and to look at contradictions and struggles that students experience in high-stakes testing. / text

The intense focus on standards and accountability is rapidly altering the education environment. Often the gauge for measuring school effectiveness is performance on high- stake state tests. In this retrospective cohort comparison study, I observe the relation between the use of curriculum-based measures (CBMs) for reading and change on a state test for reading after implementation of systematic decision making (SDM). Over a span of three years, two student cohorts in two elementary schools were observed. In each two-year cohort, students began in third and then moved to fourth grade: Cohort One (2009 - 2011) and Cohort Two (2010 - 2012). Both cohorts participated in fall, winter, and spring [F-W-S] benchmark screening for Passage Reading Fluency (PRF) and took a state test. Additionally, during the 2011-2012 academic year, SDM was implemented for Cohort Two using reading CBMs. This study addressed three questions: (a) What is the affect on reading growth (OAKS-Reading) in the context of SDM with CBMs? (b) What is the correlation between [F-W-S] PRF and OAKS Reading? and (c) What is the relation between within-year growth rates for students at risk and not at risk in the context of SDM with CBMs? I used an independent samples t-test to examine the across year change in reading for both cohorts (OAKS-Reading) to determine whether the implementation of SDM resulted in a significant difference between cohorts. For Cohort Two (using a SDM model), I correlated benchmark screening within-year measures (easyCBM) and OAKS Reading. Finally, I calculated growth rates for at-risk and not-at-risk students within a SDM model to examine whether that model demonstrated evidence of accelerated growth in at-risk students relative to their not-at-risk peers. Results did not indicate a strong relation between SDM and the large-scale, outcome assessment (OAKS-Reading). A Pearson product-moment correlation indicated a strong positive correlation between the formative measure PRF and the large-scale, outcome assessment OAKS-Reading. Results showed both risk categories had accelerated growth in reading fluency between fall and winter compared to between winter and spring. Implications for school practice and research are discussed.

abstract: Much research has been conducted regarding the current state of public education within the United States. Very little of that research bodes well for the system’s current circumstances or for the direction our system is headed. The debate stems around two opposing ideologies. One believes that there needs to be more accountability via high-stakes testing and the continuum of the status quo that the country has maintained for centuries, regardless of the effect it may be having on the students’ well-being. While the opposing view sees high-stakes testing as a contributing factor to the seemingly unproductive, chaotic, and even harmful conundrum of bias and hegemony that shows a positive correlation of deleterious effects to student well-being. Although this paper references the research of highly esteemed scholars, it asserts that the voices of those that are most relegated to that of undervalued and ignored are precisely the voices that need to be gleaned most relevant. This paper’s purpose is to hear what the ‘experts’ in the field of education, the students themselves, have to say. / Dissertation/Thesis / Masters Thesis Social and Cultural Pedagogy 2018

abstract: This study examined the intended and unintended consequences associated with the Education Value-Added Assessment System (EVAAS) as perceived and experienced by teachers in the Houston Independent School District (HISD). To evaluate teacher effectiveness, HISD is using EVAAS for high-stakes consequences more than any other district or state in the country. A large-scale electronic survey was used to investigate the model's reliability and validity; to determine whether teachers used the EVAAS data in formative ways as intended; to gather teachers' opinions on EVAAS's claimed benefits and statements; and to understand the unintended consequences that occurred as a result of EVAAS use in HISD. Mixed methods data collection and analyses were used to present the findings in user-friendly ways, particularly when using the words and experiences of the teachers themselves. Results revealed that the reliability of the EVAAS model produced split and inconsistent results among teacher participants, and teachers indicated that students biased the EVAAS results. The majority of teachers did not report similar EVAAS and principal observation scores, reducing the criterion-related validity of both measures of teacher quality. Teachers revealed discrepancies in the distribution of EVAAS reports, the awareness of trainings offered, and among principals' understanding of EVAAS across the district. This resulted in an underwhelming number of teachers who reportedly used EVAAS data for formative purposes. Teachers disagreed with EVAAS marketing claims, implying the majority did not believe EVAAS worked as intended and promoted. Additionally, many unintended consequences associated with the high-stakes use of EVAAS emerged through teachers' responses, which revealed among others that teachers felt heightened pressure and competition, which reduced morale and collaboration, and encouraged cheating or teaching to the test in attempt to raise EVAAS scores. This study is one of the first to investigate how the EVAAS model works in practice and provides a glimpse of whether value-added models might produce desired outcomes and encourage best teacher practices. This is information of which policymakers, researchers, and districts should be aware and consider when implementing the EVAAS, or any value-added model for teacher evaluation, as many of the reported issues are not specific to the EVAAS model. / Dissertation/Thesis / Ph.D. Educational Leadership and Policy Studies 2012

This qualitative multi-method study investigates potential construct-related outcomes of using a high-stakes standardized literacy test that is based on a limited construct. This study presents comprehensive construct and outcomes analyses of the Ontario Secondary School Literacy Test (OSSLT), as one example of a high-stakes literacy testing program, focusing on critical literacies in particular. Critical literacies are shown to be underrepresented in the test’s construct sample despite being valued in the relevant educational domain being measured. The two central research questions shaping this study are as follows: (1) What are students learning about critical literacies in an educational context that includes the OSSLT?; (2) How do students perceive the OSSLT to be contributing to, and/or hindering, their development of critical literacy skills? This study is structured as an arts-informed multiple case study. Participants included ten Grade 11 and 12 students who contributed to the study through multiple research activities, including interviews and group conversations, questionnaires, activity handouts, as well as journaling, photography, and graffiti walls activities. The findings of the outcomes analysis (1) identify limitations with regards to students’ understandings of literacy, including being unfamiliar with a concept of critical literacies; (2) demonstrate that students align their understandings of literacies with the reading and writing skills that are valued on the high-stakes literacy test while also wondering what else might count as literacy; and (3) suggest that the OSSLT is perceived by students to be influencing their literate identities, their relationships with literacies, and their learning trajectories. As an original contribution to knowledge, this study demonstrates how an in-depth analysis of a test’s literacy construct can be performed, and this study presents a qualitative multi-method methodology for conducting research into the outcomes of literacy education in an educational context that includes a high-stakes literacy test.

Accountability in education has been expanding for the past twenty years. As standards for curricular areas continued to develop, educational shareholders desired a way to measure student achievement contextualized by the established standards. Since 1964, policies expanded federal involvement with education, and with the No Child Left Behind Act in 2001, high-stakes testing became a significant part of public education. In Texas, testing transitioned in 2003 to the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skill (TAKS) test, an assessment that determines grade advancement for students, ratings for school districts, and additional compensation for some teachers. Along with the increasing expectations for student achievement, the need for effective instruction also increases. This dissertation studies how English language arts (ELA) teachers in four North Texas suburban high schools perceive instructional change following the implementation of TAKS. One hundred twenty-one teachers (n=121) were surveyed using an instrument broken into seven categories: student-centered instruction, student interest, instructional communication, time, classroom environment, teacher knowledge, and assessment. Participants were separated into two groups, teachers with one to six years of experience with a district or seven or more years with a district. Using a rating scale for each statement on the survey instrument, participants indicated the direction and magnitude of change or indicated no change occurred. When comparing an overall average frequency percentage for each possible rating for each category, the two highest percentages for both surveyed groups indicated no instructional change since the implementation of TAKS. However, when considering specific statements about professional growth and instructor knowledge, both groups were likely to rate a change as positive. Whereas, if the statement suggested instructional areas constricted by time, participants for both groups were likely to rate a change as negative. Additionally, an ANOVA indicated no significant difference between either of the participating groups.

The issue of teacher accountability has been a part of the educational conversation for three decades, but only recently has this conversation been translated into policy as states begin directly tying teacher evaluation scores in part to student achievement on standardized tests. This qualitative study focuses on a group of teachers who are participating in this new form of evaluation (containing both qualitative and quantitative elements including test scores and lesson observations) and examines how they perceived the process. In particular, the study looks at how their personal reactions to a high-stakes evaluation impacted their instructional decision making in their literacy classrooms. Findings demonstrate that teachers had varying levels of change in instructional practice and that these changes were impacted by a variety of factors including personal beliefs and contextual issues. Additionally, findings demonstrated that participants found the qualitative portion of the model to be highly subjective which was considered especially problematic because of the high stakes nature of the evaluation.

The purpose of my study is to explore the stories of the ethical tensions K-12 educational administrators navigate when implementing high-stakes assessment policy in a culture of measurement during testing season. Some educational leaders, in particular K-12 school and district administrators, struggle with the tensions existing between their own personal belief systems, organizational dilemmas, and the requirements of enacting high-stakes assessment policies. Using narrative inquiry as method, I collected and analyzed four school administrators selected who expressed frustration with enacting high-stakes assessment policies. The participants include a middle principal, a middle school assistant principal, a high school assistant principal, and a middle school testing administrator. Through their stories, I raise questions about the purpose of high-stakes assessment and the impact of policies at the implementation level and the impact of policies on the daily practices of school administrators. I illustrate how school administrators negotiate these tensions or have resigned themselves to accept what they cannot change. The findings include the reallocation of capital and human resources during testing season and the abundant loss of instructional time. Additional findings comprise of the juxtaposition between compliance and agency school administrators’ experience, and the nuanced ways schools and districts work to game the system of accountability. Findings also involve how educational leaders work within the boundaries of high-stakes assessment, and at times, find small spaces to resist high-stakes assessment implementation. The study shines light on how they accept the differences between their own personal ethics and the requirements of their jobs. Implications include the need for more scholarship surrounding the allocation and reallocation of resources in public schools during testing season, and the impact high-stakes assessment implementation has on vulnerable populations of students, especially students with disabilities, and students who are English language learners. The participants' stories revealed aspects of high-stakes assessment policy implementation, which impact the lives of students and educators that have not been explored in great depth. I argue for centering ethical leadership and the need for training and socializing school leaders to be social justice advocates for their students even while they are also implicated in systems of accountability. Finally, I also present the inquiry as a pilgrimage metaphor as journey toward not only understanding how school leaders grappled with ethical dilemmas associated with implementing high-stakes assessment in a culture of measurement during testing season, but also a journey to understand my place, as a school administrator, in this ethical conundrum.

National and state-based assessments have been a common practice for the past several decades. These assessments often come with high-stake consequences for students and schools, which tends towards the creation of a test-centric environment where educators prioritize test-based instruction to prepare students to be successful on those assessments. The over-arching purpose of this qualitative study was to explore how mandated high-stakes testing influences educators specifically within a complex system by first seeking to identify ways educators at different levels within the system—the classroom, campus, and district levels—perceive these testing influences. This study is based on complexity theory with a particular focus on complex adaptive systems (CAS) and frameworks from human systems dynamics (HSD), which helped to identify key tensions within a complex learning ecology. This study used thematic analysis of interview data from the classroom, campus, and district levels. Analysis also included mapping the emergent themes and patterns onto a CAS model for each level. Findings revealed a tension between a complicated, linear approach and a complex approach to curricular and instructional decisions that is moving those decisions ever closer to standardization. This study includes implications and recommendations for balancing these tensions for a healthy, complex learning ecology.

The problem addressed by this study was the relationship created by mandated English language curricula and state standardized tests and students' perceived levels of self-efficacy. Vygotsky's theories on thought and language development and Bandura's theories on self-efficacy were used as a theoretical lens for this study. The research question concerned the relationships between students' perceived levels of self-efficacy, gender, age, and grade point average (GPA) and language development when learning within a standards-based test-driven environment. The ELA portion of the State High School Exit Exam (SHEE) generated language development scores. The General Self Efficacy (GSE) scale was the survey instrument used for this study. The GSE is a 10-item scale, and each item is ranked on a 4-point scale (1-Not at All True, 4- Exactly True). The scores for each item are then added together for a total score between 10-40. Cumulative GPA, student age, gender, and language proficiency scores from the ELA portion of the SHEE were used as variables in this study. Language proficiency scores were used as a progress indicator for students' language development. Language proficiency (ELA SHEE scores) was measured an interval scale between 275-450 (350 = passing, 382 = proficient, 405 = advanced). A multiway ANOVA was conducted. According to study results, there was not a statistically significant relationship between students' perceived levels of self-efficacy, gender, age, and GPA and language development when learning within a standards-based test-driven environment. There are aspects of recent curriculum trends that seem to be helping students reach state proficiency goals while also building personal levels of self-efficacy.