Examining Testing Policy in the United States: a Comparative Historical Analysis of National Testing for Accountability Debates and Intelligence Testing Debates
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Examining Testing Policy in the United States: A Comparative Historical Analysis of National Testing for Accountability Debates and Intelligence Testing Debates By Gordon Thomas Way University of Kansas Submitted to the graduate degree program in Education Leadership and Policy Studies and the Graduate Faculty of the University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education. ________________________________ Chairperson Dr. John Rury, Ph.D. ________________________________ Dr. Rick Ginsberg, Ph.D. _____________________________ Dr. Mickey Imber, Ph.D. ________________________________ Dr. Argun Saatcioglu, Ph. D. ______________________________ Dr. Marc Mahlios, Ph.D. Date Defended: August 28, 2014 ii The Dissertation Committee for Gordon Thomas Way certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Examining Testing Policy in the United States: A Comparative Historical Analysis of National Testing for Accountability Debates and Intelligence Testing Debates ________________________________ Chairperson Dr. John Rury, Ph.D. Date approved: iii Abstract Educational testing policies influence the type of education provided to school children, and communicate what society values. These policies originate from and promote a set of assumptions, beliefs, and values orientations. They are also designed to advance certain social and educational outcomes, and preferred types of educational experiences for school children. As lawmakers deliberate future testing policies in the United States, it is important that they understand the motivations and values behind testing policy proposals. This study explores the beliefs that drove accountability testing policy proposals. It employed a historical/ comparative analysis to compare the arguments from the accountability testing debates of the 1980s, 1990s, and early 2000s with the arguments from the intelligence testing debates of the early 1920s, the 1970s, and mid-1990s in order to tease out the beliefs that drove these arguments. Issues around which the arguments revolved were examined to identify enduring themes that can inform future educational testing policy proposals. Six such themes emerged from this analysis. These included the following: 1) merit; 2) “race,” class and educational equity; 3) the meaning of democracy; 4) the fundamental purpose of public education and desired educational experiences in the United States; 5) the role of science and ideology in policy making; and 6) the tendency to oversimplify. These themes and their implications for policy were discussed. iv Acknowledgements I would like to thank Dr. John Rury, Ph.D., for consistently guiding me to write the kind of dissertation I wanted to write. In addition, I would like to thank my committee members Dr. Rick Ginsberg, Ph.D., Dr. Mickey Imber, Ph.D., Dr. Argun Saatcioglu, Ph.D., and Dr. Marc Mahlios, Ph.D., for holding me to a rigorous standard. Their feedback has made this a better dissertation. Finally, I must acknowledge my wife Beatriz, and my children Isabella and Thomas for their patience and support in this process. v Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introduction and research design .................................................................................. 1 Chapter 2: Testing debates in context ........................................................................................... 12 Chapter 3: The Intelligence Testing Debates ................................................................................ 46 Chapter 4: The Resurgence of the Intelligence Testing Debates .................................................. 79 Chapter 5: Standards, Testing and Accountability ..................................................................... 117 Chapter 6: Enduring Themes and Recommendations ................................................................. 148 References ................................................................................................................................... 176 1 Chapter 1: Introduction and research design Introduction With its warning that “the educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a nation and a people,” A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform (Commission for Excellence in Education, 1983, p. 7) launched a wave of public school criticism that included increased calls for holding educators and educational systems accountable for student test scores (Baker & Stites, 1991; Darling-Hammond & Berry 1988). This use of testing for accountability as a means to reform public education was codified into law with the 2002 reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Schools Act, commonly known as The No Child Left Behind Act (No Child Left Behind [NCLB], 2002). NCLB (2002) mandated that students be tested annually, and that educators, schools, districts, and states be held accountable for the aggregate and disaggregated performance of students on these tests. The purpose was to use a system of support, rewards and sanctions to improve education for all students, including historically underserved poor, minority, disabled students, and limited English proficient students. Although the stated purpose of NCLB (2002) was to raise achievement for all American students, the law was controversial. Critics claimed that the combination of standardized tests and high stakes for educators, and sometimes students, had serious unintended consequences. Among others, these consequences included a narrowing of the curriculum and educational experiences for students (Madaus, Russell & Higgins, 2009; Rothstein, 2008; Rothstein, Jacobson & Wilder, 2008; Wood, 2004), inflated test scores (Koretz, 2008; Madaus, Russell & 2 Higgins, 2009), the undermining of schools serving the neediest students (Madaus, Russell, & Higgins, 2009; Rothstein, 2008; Rothstein, Jacobson & Wilder, 2008; Wood, 2004), motivating states to lower proficiency standards (Cawelti, 2006; Fusarelli, 2004; Lewis, 2002; Peterson & Hess, 2007), and placing the impossibly high objective of reaching 100 percent student proficiency in reading and math by 2014 (Darling-Hammond, 2006; Haas, Wilson, Cobb, Rallis, 2005; Kohn, 2004a, 2004b; Ravitch, 2011). Although it was originally due for reauthorization in 2007, congress has yet to pass an NCLB (2002) reauthorization bill (Duncan, July 19, 2013). As lawmakers deliberate how best to revise or replace this law, it is important that they consider the implications of a nationwide mandate of an educational practice, such as testing. Any educational practice, including different types of testing, originates from a vision of society and education. Each particular vision is grounded in certain assumptions, beliefs, and values orientations that reflect what the segment of the population that holds this vision believes to be the desired social and educational outcomes and preferred types of educational experiences for school children. Such practices are developed or selected because they align with this belief system, and because they are believed to contribute toward achieving the desired social and educational outcomes, and to provide the preferred type of educational experience for students. For the purposes of this dissertation, a belief is an opinion or conviction. An assumption is something that is taken for granted. A values orientation is defined as a set or framework of beliefs, or world view, which tend to be accepted and adopted as a whole. It is important to note that beliefs, assumptions, and values orientations are all based upon opinion, and not necessarily evidence from tested hypotheses. Because all three are based on opinions, convictions, or 3 “beliefs,” unless stated otherwise, the words “belief” or “beliefs” will refer to “assumptions, beliefs, and values orientations.” In addition, “social outcomes” refers to a beliefs about the kind of society that is desired. An example might be a society in which each individual achieves success based primarily on his or her merit. Similarly, “educational outcomes” refers to beliefs about the purpose of public education. An example of an educational outcome is that future workers will have a skill set required by business. Finally, the phrase “educational experiences” refers to the kinds of experiences that are desired for students in schools. An example of a preferred educational experience might be that students learn by solving problems. For the sake of simplicity of language, these will be referred to as “outcomes and experiences,” unless otherwise stated. By mandating a practice as part of federal law, lawmakers effectively endorse the specific set of beliefs from which the practice originated. In addition, they may be moving toward institutionalizing the corresponding outcomes and experiences associated with that practice. Therefore, lawmakers need to be aware of the beliefs that drive the practices that they incorporate into federal or state law. Furthermore, they need to be aware of the outcomes and experiences that practices such as testing are designed to advance. In this way, they will be able to pass education laws that support the beliefs, outcomes, and experiences that they intend to promote. This dissertation focuses on the practice of mandated accountability testing. Its purpose is to explore and illuminate the beliefs that led to accountability testing proposals, as well as the outcomes and experiences that accountability testing proposals