Conceptualizing Teaching to the Test Under Standards-Based Reform

Teacher and school accountability systems based on high-stakes tests are ubiquitous throughout the United States and appear to be growing as a catalyst for reform. As a result, educators have increased the proportion of instructional time devoted to test preparation. Although guidelines for what constitutes appropriate and inappropriate test preparation exist, they are outdated and need revision. The current article proposes new guidelines within the framework of standards-based assessment. It also examines the test preparation practices in 32 third- and fifth-grade classrooms and examines the relationship between student test performance and test preparation activities using a two-level Hierarchical Linear Model. Instruction on tested objectives using items like those presented on the state test, decontextualized practice, and teaching test taking skills offered no student achievement benefit relative to general instruction on the state standards leading us to conclude that test preparation was not beneficial.     

Television and the Developing Imagination of the Child

The paper examines whether television enriches a child's imagination, leads to distortions of reality, and whether adult mediation while a child views a program or immediately after can evoke constructive changes or stimulate make‐believe play.     

Improving Science and Literacy Learning for English Language Learners: Evidence from a Pre-service Teacher Preparation Intervention

This paper present findings from a pre-service teacher development project that prepared novice teachers to promote English language and literacy development with inquiry-based science through a modified elementary science methods course and professional development for cooperating teachers. To study the project’s impact on student learning, we administered a pre and post assessment to students (N = 191) of nine first year elementary teachers (grades 3 through 6) who experienced the intervention and who taught a common science unit. Preliminary results indicate that (1) student learning improved across all categories (science concepts, writing, and vocabulary)—although the effect varied by category, and (2) English Language Learner (ELL) learning gains were on par with non-ELLs, with differences across proficiency levels for vocabulary gain scores. These results warrant further analyses to understand the extent to which the intervention improved teacher practice and student learning. This study confirms the findings of previous research that the integration of science language and literacy practices can improve ELL achievement in science concepts, writing and vocabulary. In addition, the study indicates that it is possible to begin to link the practices taught in pre-service teacher preparation to novice teacher practice and student learning outcomes.     

An Examination of the Replicability of Angoff Standard Setting Results Within a Generalizability Theory Framework

Evidence of stable standard setting results over panels or occasions is an important part of the validity argument for an established cut score. Unfortunately, due to the high cost of convening multiple panels of content experts, standards often are based on the recommendation from a single panel of judges. This approach implicitly assumes that the variability across panels will be modest, but little evidence is available to support this assertion. This article examines the stability of Angoff standard setting results across panels. Data were collected for six independent standard setting exercises, with three panels participating in each exercise. The results show that although in some cases the panel effect is negligible, for four of the six data sets the panel facet represented a large portion of the overall error variance. Ignoring the often hidden panel/occasion facet can result in artificially optimistic estimates of the cut score stability. Results based on a single panel should not be viewed as a reasonable estimate of the results that would be found over multiple panels. Instead, the variability seen in a single panel can best be viewed as a lower bound of the expected variability when the exercise is replicated.