标准化测验对美国社会的影响——以美国国家教育进展评估（NAEP）为例

本文以美国国家教育进展评估（NAEP）为例,探讨标准化测验对美国社会的影响。作者认为,当前标准化测验在美国占据统治地位,国家教育进展评估（NAEP）克服长期以来的教育地方自治的传统,有效地反映了全美各州学生的学习进步状况,受到社会的关注。2001年,《不让一个孩子掉队法案》（The No Child Left Behind Act）出台后,标准化测验的作用进一步强化,对美国教育及教师的行为产生了深远的影响。     

NAEP美国公民教育进步评估

全国教育进步评估组织(NAEP)是美国测试学生学业的权威机构。1998年和2006年NAEP美国公民教育进步评估发现,美国中小学学生的公民课程成绩不理想,经过研究发现,主要原因在于政策支持不够、课程要求不充分、评价项目不够、师资准备不足、教学缺乏等。     

Commentary: Accountability Policy and Scholarly Research

Since 2001, considerations of school reform have been dominated by performance-based accountability. No Child Left Behind (NCLB) has changed the way policymakers and educators talk about education, look at educational performance, and think about educational challenges. Nonetheless, NCLB and the state accountability systems it has spawned have been subjected to little careful scrutiny. This article discusses four recent research contributions and considers how they might inform policymaking on accountability. While scholarly scrutiny will not necessarily settle debates, it can help yield more constructive and informed decisions. In particular, research can clarify the actual consequences of policy decisions; highlight and refine approaches that may be more reliable, stable, and effective than those in use; flag the unanticipated or overlooked effects of design decisions; and ensure that both policymakers and the public are aware of the costs and benefits of accountability.     

Relying on High-Stakes Standardized Tests to Evaluate Schools and Teachers: A Bad Idea

In the twenty-first century, the use of standardized tests as the primary means to evaluate schools and teachers in the United States has contributed to severe dilemmas, including misleading information on what students know, lower-level instruction, cheating, less collaboration, unfair treatment of teachers, and biased teaching. This article provides reasons for the increased use in high-stakes testing and detail on the problems it causes. Also included are possible solutions to alleviate the concerns associated with high-stakes testing.     

Instructional Tools in Educational Measurement and Statistics (ITEMS) for School Personnel: Evaluation of Three Web-Based Training Modules

In the current No Child Left Behind era, K‐12 teachers and principals are expected to have a sophisticated understanding of standardized test results, use them to improve instruction, and communicate them to others. The goal of our project, funded by the National Science Foundation, was to develop and evaluate three Web‐based instructional modules in educational measurement and statistics to help school personnel acquire the “assessment literacy” required for these roles. Our first module, “What's the Score?” was administered in 2005 to 113 educators who also completed an assessment literacy quiz. Viewing the module had a small but statistically significant positive effect on quiz scores. Our second module, “What Test Scores Do and Don't Tell Us,” administered in 2006 to 104 educators, was even more effective, primarily among teacher education students. In evaluating our third module, “What's the Difference?” we were able to recruit only 33 participants. Although those who saw the module before taking the quiz outperformed those who did not, results were not statistically significant. Now that the research phase is complete, all ITEMS instructional materials are freely available on our Website.     

从美国各州执行《不让一个孩子掉队法》和《障碍者教育法》看特殊教育教师培养

美国特殊教育教师的职前和在职培训一向较受重视,在历次教育改革中多有涉及。美国各州在执行《不让一个孩子掉队法》、《障碍者教育法》时,对特殊教育教师的职前和在职培训方面的具体做法既有共同之处,又略有差异,其中不乏我国特殊教育教师培养可以借鉴的经验。     

Reliability and Validity of Bookmark‐Based Methods for Standard Setting: Comparisons to Angoff‐Based Methods in the National Assessment of Educational Progress

Historically, Angoff‐based methods were used to establish cut scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). In 2005, the National Assessment Governing Board oversaw multiple studies aimed at evaluating the reliability and validity of Bookmark‐based methods via a comparison to Angoff‐based methods. As the Board considered adoption of Bookmark‐based methods, it considered several criteria, including reliability of the cut scores, validity of the cut scores as evidenced by comparability of results to those from Angoff, and procedural validity as evidenced by panelist understanding of the method tasks and instructions and confidence in the results. As a result of their review, a Bookmark‐based method was adopted for NAEP, and has been used since that time. This article goes beyond the Governing Board's initial evaluations to conduct a systematic review of 27 studies in NAEP research conducted over 15 years. This research is used to evaluate Bookmark‐based methods on key criteria originally considered by the Governing Board. Findings suggest that Bookmark‐based methods have comparable reliability, resulting cut scores, and panelist evaluations to Angoff. Given that Bookmark‐based methods are shorter in duration and less costly, Bookmark‐based methods may be preferable to Angoff for NAEP standard setting.     

晚清科举的制度危机与考试改革的应对失措——以“区分度/文体”互动关系为视角的考察

晚清科举的制度危机除了内容方面饱受责难的"所用非所学"之外,还突出体现在清廷对区分度与考试文体这一关系互动的长期应对以及由此造成的积重难返。八股文体中"大结"的祛除使得清前中期科举考试面临严重的考试区分度下降问题,清廷通过引入试帖诗来提高考试区分度,但随着士子文体方面调适的完成,区分度问题再度凸显。随后科场关注点后移至相对繁复二、三场,在经、策"满卷获隽"暨区分度提升的同时,"公羊"与"杂学"亦羼入考试并使得文体变得驳杂。而清季朝廷进行的科举改革并未将这种文体驳杂情形视为一种改革决策时必要的考量出发点与客观存在,而是采取基于八股文体窄化的"普通学"改章取向,与原有的文体驳杂一道开启了一个更大规模的科场驳杂与意识形态的驳杂之局,这在客观上因应了当时"革命初潮"的形成并在考试与体制内部不同程度销解了士子阶层对于清廷的向心力。