January 2003 — Features
Print this articleClick here to receive your FREE subscription to T.H.E. Journal
Facts and Assumptions of Assessment:Technology, The Missing Link
A research report by Khattri, Kane and Reeve (1995) visited 16 schools across the United States that were developing and implementing performance assessments. They interviewed school personnel, students, parents and school board members; collected student work; and conducted observations. The authors concluded that, in general, \ldblquote our findings show that the effect of assessments on the curriculum teachers use in their classrooms has been marginal, although the impact on instruction and on teacher roles in some cases has been substantial\rdblquote (Khattri, Kane and Reeve 1995). Furthermore, when teachers are involved in the changing of curriculum and assessment, they tend to be more detailed in the planning and dissemination of learning. \par\par Chudowsky and Behuniak (1997) used teacher focus groups from seven schools representing a cross section of schools in Connecticut. These focus groups discussed their perceptions of the impact of the Connecticut Academic Performance Test (CAPT), which includes multiple-choice, grid-in, short answer and extended response items. Of all the teachers, 99% reported that preparing students and aligning their instruction to the test \ldblquote resulted in a narrowing of the curriculum.\rdblquote
\par\par Teaching to the test has been a major disadvantage to standardized testing. Content that is not a critical part of the standardized test tends to be given less importance since the educational goal is to improve test scores. Traditional (standardized) testing is limited in measuring both cognitive and psychomotor skills. Although standardized tests are somewhat limited in measuring skill development, they are also ineffective in ascertaining student attitudes and behavior changes (Travis 1996). As long as schools use traditional tests to determine student outcomes, true measurement of abilities will be incomplete.
\par\par Mertler (1999) completed a descriptive study of classroom assessment practices of Ohio teachers. He found some significant differences between assessment methods of teachers based on the different school levels and length of teaching experience. Traditional assessment techniques were used more by middle and high school teachers than by elementary teachers. Subsequently, teachers at the elementary level used alternative assessment techniques more frequently than secondary level teachers. The demographics of the study showed that teachers in suburban settings used alternative assessment methods more frequently than teachers in rural settings. Finally, the study showed teachers with fewer years of experience used alternative assessment more than teachers with 30 or more years of experience.
\par\par Koretz et al. (1996) surveyed teachers and principals in Kentucky regarding the Kentucky Instructional Results Information System (KIRIS) and found that 90% of the teachers agreed that KIRIS caused them to de-emphasize or neglect untested material. Teaching to prepare students for a standardized test has always been one of the major cons in combining test results with variables such as additional funding, special grants and comparable statistics of similar school districts.
\par \par\par Assessment Perspectives
