Study says education reforms may hurt students

By Emily Richmond (contact)

Friday, Jan. 3, 2003 | 11:08 a.m.

As schools in Nevada and the rest of the nation move toward more demanding exams to determine whether teachers, students and schools are rewarded or penalized, a new study claims such high-stakes testing may actually hinder academic achievement.

New federal education reforms intended to improve schools by tying test scores to funding may wind up having the reverse effect, said David Berliner, a professor at Arizona State University's College of Education and one of the study's lead researchers.

In the 28 states covered by the study -- including Nevada -- student performance on state and national exams had either dipped or remained unchanged after the implementation of high-stakes testing, Berliner said.

The study also found higher numbers of low-performing students were being suspended on test days in order to improve a school's overall score. Other strategies included "teaching to the test," where the general curriculum was forfeited in order to spend more time on material likely to be covered by the exam.

"The relative failure of high-stakes tests to achieve their intended purpose and their numerous negative consequences must be considered as America prepares to launch a massive program in the effort to improve our schools," Berliner said.

The study was partially funded by the National Education Association, the country's largest teachers union. The NEA, of which most of Nevada's teachers are members, has opposed the use of high-stakes testing as the sole measure of academic success.

The federal No Child Left Behind Act, signed into law last January, requires schools to show annual improvement on a series of proficiency exams. Schools that do not meet performance standards face penalties.

The findings for Nevada were unclear, said Audrey Amrein, a researcher at ASU and one of the report's authors.

Since the state implemented high-stakes testing in 1998, scores on the ACT exam have increased while SAT scores decreased. At the same time the number of students taking the ACT decreased while students taking the SAT increased.

"Where academic achievement went up or down, participation went the other way," Amrein said. "That makes it difficult to say whether the scores were affected by high-stakes testing or drastic changes in the number of students taking the test."

Nevada's fourth grade students showed a drop in performance in mathematics after the implementation of high-stakes testing, a finding mirrored in many other states, Amrein said.

The Clark County School District's teachers' union complained last year that Superintendent Carlos Garcia's annual evaluation included praise for boosting the number of students taking college-entrance exams. The increase in participation is meaningless unless students are actually scoring well and intending to attend college, union President Mary Ella Holloway said.

Jack McLaughlin, superintendent of Nevada's schools, said Tuesday he planned to review the study's findings. The use of high-stakes tests can be a valuable tool for educators provided there is enough money to implement the changes the results call for, McLaughlin said.

"We can look at the results of the tests and determine our benchmark," McLaughlin said. "It gives decision-makers an idea of where to send more resources. If students aren't achieving in math, we know that's where our focus should go. The tests plus the resources produce the results."

The Nevada Board of Education, along with the state's 18 school district superintendents, plans to seek $879 million in additional funding from lawmakers when the Legislature convenes in February.

Agustin Orci, deputy superintendent of instruction for the Clark County School District, said tests such as statewide proficiency exams are useful in measuring the effectiveness of curriculum but are not the sole indicator of student achievement.

"The best assessment of student needs is done by the teacher every day in the classroom," Orci said.

Orci said he also opposed using test results to determine whether students or staff receive incentives such as cash bonuses.