This study is aimed to unpack the ‘black box’ that connects the grade-3 test-based retention policy with students’ academic outcomes. I theorized that the policy effects on teaching and learning may be modified by instructional capacity, but are unlikely to occur through enhancing teachers’ capability to teach. Analyzing the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study Kindergarten cohort (ECLS-K) dataset, I first explored the relationship between the test-based retention policy and instructional capacity as indicated by teacher expectations of students’ learning capability and then investigated whether and how the expectations moderated the policy effects on instructional time reallocation, student academic performance, and student self-perceived academic competence and interests. To remove the selection bias associated with the non-experimental data, I applied a novel propensity score-based causal inference method, the marginal mean weighting through stratification (MMW-S) method and extended it to a causal analysis that approximates a randomization of schools to the test-based retention policy followed by a randomization of classes to teachers with different levels of expectations. Consistent with my theory, I found that the test-based retention policy had no effects on teacher expectations. Although the policy uniformly increased the time allocated to math instruction, it produced no significant changes in students’ overall performance and overall self-perception in math. In addition, I found that students responded differently to the test-based retention policy depending on the expectations they received from the grade-3 teachers. The results suggested some benefits of positive expectations over negative and indifferent expectations in moderating the policy effects, including more access to advanced content, higher learning gains of average-ability students, and more resilient student learning over a long term. However, the results also showed that having positive expectations alone is not sufficient for academic improvement under the high-stakes policy. If implemented by a positive-expectation teacher, the policy could be detrimental to students’ learning in the nontested subject or to their learning of basic reading/math skills. It would as well place the bottom-ability students at a disadvantage. The findings have significant implications for the ongoing high-stakes testing debate, for school improvement under the current accountability reform, and for research of teacher effectiveness.

This study is aimed to unpack the ‘black box’ that connects the grade-3 test-based retention policy with students’ academic outcomes. I theorized that the policy effects on teaching and learning may be modified by instructional capacity, but are unlikely to occur through enhancing teachers’ capability to teach. Analyzing the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study Kindergarten cohort (ECLS-K) dataset, I first explored the relationship between the test-based retention policy and instructional capacity as indicated by teacher expectations of students’ learning capability and then investigated whether and how the expectations moderated the policy effects on instructional time reallocation, student academic performance, and student self-perceived academic competence and interests. To remove the selection bias associated with the non-experimental data, I applied a novel propensity score-based causal inference method, the marginal mean weighting through stratification (MMW-S) method and extended it to a causal analysis that approximates a randomization of schools to the test-based retention policy followed by a randomization of classes to teachers with different levels of expectations. Consistent with my theory, I found that the test-based retention policy had no effects on teacher expectations. Although the policy uniformly increased the time allocated to math instruction, it produced no significant changes in students’ overall performance and overall self-perception in math. In addition, I found that students responded differently to the test-based retention policy depending on the expectations they received from the grade-3 teachers. The results suggested some benefits of positive expectations over negative and indifferent expectations in moderating the policy effects, including more access to advanced content, higher learning gains of average-ability students, and more resilient student learning over a long term. However, the results also showed that having positive expectations alone is not sufficient for academic improvement under the high-stakes policy. If implemented by a positive-expectation teacher, the policy could be detrimental to students’ learning in the nontested subject or to their learning of basic reading/math skills. It would as well place the bottom-ability students at a disadvantage. The findings have significant implications for the ongoing high-stakes testing debate, for school improvement under the current accountability reform, and for research of teacher effectiveness.

As increasing emphasis is being placed on student college and career readiness, instructional approaches seek to develop content and skill proficiency. I gathered student perspectives on teacher expectations and instructional opportunities in core content classes in order to determine if expectation bias influences college readiness preparation in the classroom. Student academic self-concept and college readiness were examined alongside beliefs about teacher expectations and instructional opportunities in a conceptual framework for student perceptions. In this qualitative study, I utilized four focus groups of high school students from two cohorts to analyze perceptions across students from mostly on-level core classes and those from mostly advanced core classes. Findings showed students held high expectations of their own current and future performance, as well as perceived teachers generally hold high expectations, though this was shown through the development of relational capacity rather than instructional opportunities to develop college readiness skills or connect to students' future ambitions. The results of the study provide insight to educators seeking to create stronger connections for students between current educational experiences and future postsecondary opportunities.