1.) Ginsberg, R., et. al., “The Culture of Fear and the Politics of Education.” Educational Policy v. 22 no. 1 (January 2008) p. 10-27. |
This article explores fear in the educational systems and how fear of failure is affecting students. Government and the politics of education have profound effects on the quality of education as well as the quality of the student these educational systems are producing. Schools are subject to the public and to the government, making them less confident in their ability to flourish on their own, staying stagnant or decreasing in quality. |
2.) Baird, Katherine. “Assessing Why Some Students Learn Math in High School: How Useful Are Student-Level Test Results?” Educational Policy 31 December 2010. doi:10.1177/0895904810386595. |
This article is useful in addressing what true learning is and how the learning can be analyzed. Student-level test results are, in theory, a good predictor of student performance and gain in achievement. However, when one if trying to test the exact level of gain in achievement based off these tests, it is difficult to get a true picture of how much positive performance is increasing. Numerous factors influence performance gain and achievement level, including personal motivations, parental involvement, future plans, curriculum, advising, and school atmosphere, but these are all very difficult to quantify. In reality, student-level tests are neither the best, nor the most accurate predictors of student performance. |
3.) Pinxten, M., et. al., Causal ordering of academic self-concept and achievement: Effects of type of achievement measure. The British Journal of Educational Psychology v. 80 no. pt4 (December 2010) p. 689-709. |
This article tested whether or not the type of achievement indicator affected one’s academic self-concept. Various indicators of achievement, such as grades, teacher ratings, and tests held different effects on the patterns of students’ achievements. Overall, the measure of achievement affects the patterns between self-perception and one’s academic achievements. |
4.) Kohn, Alfie. "Standardized Testing and Its Victims." Education Week. 27 September 2000. |
Kohn looks at the numerous ways in which standardized testing in schools is no longer as effective and useful as it once was. He examines the increased frequency of high stakes testing, the type of thinking they require, the contradiction between various organizations who say they do not condone standardized testing, yet continue to implement it, as well as the ways in which it is affecting administators and teachers. |
5.) Noddings, Nel. “High Stakes Testing: Why?” Sage Publications v. 3 no. 2 (November 2004) p. 263-269. |
This article discusses what high stakes test attempt to accomplish and how they do not accurately reflect what they are trying to test. It explores and proposes different ways to test what students are learning and if they are successful in completing the learning process. In this article, Harvey Siegel points out that high stakes standardized testing inherently diminishes critical thinking and thus one’s ability to think critically. He admits that standardized testing is necessary and in some cases desired, to a certain extent. However, too much of it leads to an inability to expand one’s creative mind. |
6.) U.S. Department of Education. "No Child Left Behind: Legislation and Policies." http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/states/index.html. 12 October 2010. |
This website was very helpful in educating me about the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. It provided insight as to why it was enacted, what it attempts to do for education, and how it has been modified over the years. |