Assessment as a Context for Student Engagement



The purpose of this chapter is to examine the ways in which assessment-related instructional practices empirically and theoretically link to student motivation and engagement. We discuss these links in three sections. First, we briefly look at the history of standardized testing in America’s schools, drawing connections between the use of testing in practice and student motivation. Next, we look at research on classroom-based assessment practices to discuss how they connect to student motivation. We organize our discussion according to summative and formative distinctions, concluding that summative testing systems tend to connect with traditional motivation processes such as goals and efficacy-related beliefs, whereas formative systems tend to connect with engagement-related processes such as self-regulated learning and self-determination. In the last section, we extrapolate from lessons learned in previous sections to hypothesize on the ways in which high-stakes testing practices may undermine student motivation and engagement.


Goal Orientation Student Engagement Minority Student Performance Goal Student Motivation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Abrams, L., Pedulla, J. J., & Madaus, G. (2003). Views from the classroom: Teachers’ opinions of statewide testing programs. Theory into Practice, 42(1), 18–28.Google Scholar
  2. Allington, R., & McGill-Franzen, A. (1992). Unintended effects of educational reform in New York. Educational Policy, 6(4), 397–414.Google Scholar
  3. Ames, C. (1984). Competitive, cooperative, and individualistic goal structures: A cognitive-motivational analysis. In R. E. Ames & C. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education: Vol. I. Student motivation. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  4. Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261–271.Google Scholar
  5. Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students’ learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 260–267.Google Scholar
  6. Amrein, A., & Berliner, D. (2002). High-stakes testing, uncertainty, and student learning. Educational Policy and Analysis Archives, 10(8). Retrieved from
  7. Anderman, E. M., & Maehr, M. L. (1994). Motivation and schooling in the middle grades. Review of Educational Research, 64(2), 287–309.Google Scholar
  8. Anderman, E. (2007). The effects of personal, classroom, and school goal structures on academic cheating (pp. 87–106). In E. M. Anderman & T. B. Murdock (Eds.), Psychology of academic cheating. NY: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  9. Atkinson, J. W. (1974). Motivational determinants of intellective performance and cumulative achievement. In J. W. Atkinson & J. O. Raynor (Eds.), Motivation and achievement. Washington, DC: V. H. Winston.Google Scholar
  10. Atkinson, J. W. (1981a). Studying personality in the context of an advanced motivational psychology. American Psychologist, 36(2), 117–128.Google Scholar
  11. Atkinson, J. W. (1981b). Thematic apperceptive measurement of motivation in 1950 and 1980. In G. D’Ydewalle & W. Lens (Eds.), Cognition in human motivation and learning (pp. 159–198). Hillsdale, NH: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  12. Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, J. A., & Morgan, M. T. (1991). The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61, 213–238.Google Scholar
  13. Berliner, D. C. (1979). Tempus educare. In P. L. Peterson & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Research on teaching: Concepts, findings, and implications (pp. 120–135). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing.Google Scholar
  14. Berliner, D. C., & Biddle, B. J. (1995). The manufactured crisis: Myths, fraud, and the attack on America’s public schools. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  15. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5(1), 7–74.Google Scholar
  16. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2006). Developing a theory of formative assessment. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and learning (pp. 81–100). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  17. Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). A taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook I, the cognitive domain. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  18. Blumenfeld, P. C. (1992). Classroom learning and motivation: Clarifying and expanding goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 272–281.Google Scholar
  19. Boekaerts, M., & Corno, L. (2005). Self-regulation in the classroom: A perspective on assessment and intervention. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 54(2), 199–231.Google Scholar
  20. Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P. R., & Zeidner, M. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of self-regulation. San Diego, CA: Academic.Google Scholar
  21. Boohrer-Jennings, J. (2005). Below the bubble: ‘Educational triage’ and the Texas accountability system. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 231–268.Google Scholar
  22. Brookhart, S. M. (1997). A theoretical framework for the role of classroom assessment in motivating student effort and achievement. Applied Measurement in Education, 10, 161–180.Google Scholar
  23. Brookhart, S. M. (2004). Classroom assessment: Tensions and intersections in theory and practice. Teachers College Record, 106(3), 429–458.Google Scholar
  24. Brophy, J. (Ed.). (1998). Advances in research on teaching. Expectations in the classroom (Vol. 7, pp. 273–308). Greenwich, CT: JAI.Google Scholar
  25. Butler, R. (1988). Enhancing and undermining intrinsic motivation: The effects of task-involving and ­ego-involving evaluation on interest and performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 58, 1–14.Google Scholar
  26. Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (2005). Engagement, ­disengagement, coping, and catastrophe. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 527–547). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  27. Center on Education Policy. (2006). From the capital to the classroom: Year four of the No Child Left Behind Act. Washington DC: Author.
  28. Corno, L. (2001). Volitional aspects of self-regulated learning. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 191–226). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  29. Corno, L., & Mandinach, E. B. (1983). The role of cognitive engagement in classroom learning and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 18(2), 88–108.Google Scholar
  30. Corno, L., & Mandinach, E. B. (2004). What we have learned about student engagement in the past twenty years. In D. M. McInerney & S. V. Etten (Eds.), Big theories revisited (pp. 299–328). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  31. Crooks, T. J. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research, 58, 438–481.Google Scholar
  32. Crooks, T. J., & Mahalski, P. A. (1986). Relationships among assessment practices, study methods, and grades obtained. In J. Jones & M. Horsburgh (Eds.), Research and development in higher education (Vol. 8). Sydney, Australia: Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia.Google Scholar
  33. Csikszentmihalyi, M., Abuhamdeh, S., & Nakamura, J. (2005). Flow. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 598–608). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  34. Cuban, L. (1988). Constancy and change in schools (1880s to the present). In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Contributing to educational change: Perspectives on research and practice. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing.Google Scholar
  35. Darling-Hammond, L. (2007). Race, inequality, and educational accountability: The irony of ‘No Child Left Behind’. Race Ethnicity and Education, 10(3), 245–260.Google Scholar
  36. Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 627–668.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1995). Human autonomy: The basis for true self-esteem. In M. Kernis (Ed.), Efficacy, agency, and self-esteem (pp. 31–49). New York: Plenum Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  38. Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M., & Koestner, R. (2001). The pervasive negative effects of rewards on intrinsic motivation: Response to Cameron (2001). Review of Educational Research, 71(1), 43–51.Google Scholar
  39. Deci, E. L., Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26(3&4), 325–346.Google Scholar
  40. Dougherty, M. L. (1913). Report on the Binet-Simon tests given to four hundred and eighty-three children in the public schools of Kansas City, Kansas. Journal of Educational Psychology, 4, 338–352.Google Scholar
  41. Eccles, J. S. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behavior. In J. T. Spencer (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motivation (pp. 75–146). San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
  42. Eccles, J. S., & Midgley, C. (1989). Stage/environment fit: Developmentally appropriate classrooms for early adolescents. In R. E. Ames & C. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education (Vol. 3, pp. 139–186). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  43. Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational belief, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109–132.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A., Flanagan, G., Miller, G., Reuman, D., & Yee, D. (1989). Self-concepts, domain values, and self-esteem: Relations and changes at early adolescence. Journal of Personality, 57, 283–310.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Elliot, A. (1999). Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals. Educational Psychologist, 34(3), 169–189.Google Scholar
  46. Elliot, A. J., & Church, M. A. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 218–232.Google Scholar
  47. Elliot, A. J., & Dweck, C. S. (Eds.). (2005). Handbook of competence and motivation. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  48. Elliot, A. J., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1996). Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 461–475.Google Scholar
  49. Elliott, E. S., & Dweck, C. S. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 5–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Entwistle, N. J., & Kozeski, B. (1985). Relationship between school motivation, approaches to studying, and attainment, among British and Hungarian adolescents. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 55, 124–137.Google Scholar
  51. Feather, N. T. (Ed.). (1982). Expectations and actions: Expectancy-value models in psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  52. Foster, S. (2006). How Latino students negotiate the demands of high-stakes testing: A case study of one school in Texas. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ.Google Scholar
  53. Fredericksen, N. (1984). The real test bias: Influences of testing on teaching and learning. American Psychologist, 39, 193–202.Google Scholar
  54. Frederiksen, J. R., & White, B. J. (1997). Reflective assessment of students’ research within an inquiry-based middle school science curriculum. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
  55. Gamson, D. (2007). Historical perspectives on democratic decision making in education: Paradigms, paradoxes, and promises. In P. Moss (Ed.), Evidence and decision making: 106th yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part I (pp. 15–45). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  56. Gayler, K., Chudowsky, N., Hamilton, M., Kober, N., & Yeager, M. (2004). State high school exit exams: A maturing reform. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy. Retrieved June 5, 2007, from
  57. Giordano, G. (2005). How testing came to dominate American schools: The history of educational assessment. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  58. Glass, G. V. (2008). Fertilizers, pills, and magnetic strips: The fate of public education in America. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  59. Good, T. L. (1981). Teacher expectations and student perceptions: A decade of research. Educational Leadership, 38, 415–423.Google Scholar
  60. Good, T. L. (1987). Two decades of research on teacher expectations: Findings and future directions. Journal of Teacher Education, 38(4), 32–47.Google Scholar
  61. Good, T. L. (1996). Educational researchers comment on the educational summit and other policy proclamations from 1983–1997. Educational Researcher, 25(8), 4–6.Google Scholar
  62. Good, T. L., & Brophy, J. E. (1972). Behavioral expression of teacher attitudes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 617–624.Google Scholar
  63. Good, T. L., & Brophy, J. E. (1974). Changing teacher and student behavior: An empirical investigation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 390–405.Google Scholar
  64. Good, T. L., & Brophy, J. E. (2008). Looking in classrooms (10th ed.). Boston: Pearson.Google Scholar
  65. Good, T. L., & Thompson, E. K. (1998). Research on the communication of performance expectations: A review of recent perspectives. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching: Expectations in the classroom (Vol. 7, pp. 273–308). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  66. Grolnick, W. S., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). Autonomy in children’s learning: An experimental and individual different investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 890–898.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Haney, W. (2008). Evidence on education under NCLB (and How Florida boosted NAEP scores and reduced the race gap). In G. L. Sunderman (Ed.), Holding NCLB accountable: Achieving accountability, equity, and school reform (pp. 91–102). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  68. Henderlong, J., & Lepper, M. R. (2002). The effects of praise on children’s intrinsic motivation: A review and synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 128(5), 774–795.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Herman, J. L., & Haertel, E. H. (Eds.). (2005). Uses and misuses of data for educational accountability and improvement: The 104th yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, part II. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  70. Hull, C. (1943). Principles of behavior. New York: Appleton.Google Scholar
  71. Hull, C. (1952). A behavior system. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  72. Jacob, B. (2001). Getting tough? The impact of high school graduation exams. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(2), 99–121.Google Scholar
  73. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1985). Motivational processes in cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning situation. In C. Ames & R. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education: Vol. 2. The classroom milieu. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  74. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  75. Jones, B. D., & Egley, R. J. (2004, August 9). Voices from the frontlines: Teachers’ perceptions of high-stakes testing. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12(39). Retrieved December 2, 2004, from
  76. Jones, M. G., Jones, B. D., Hardin, B., Chapman, L., Yarbrough, T., & Davis, M. (1999). The impact of high-stakes testing on teachers and students in North Carolina. The Phi Delta Kappan, 81(3), 199–203.Google Scholar
  77. Jones, M. G., Jones, B. D., & Hargrove, T. (2003). The unintended consequences of high-stakes testing. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  78. Kaplan, A. (2004). Achievement goals and intergroup relations. In P. R. Pintrich & M. L. Maehr (Eds.), Advances in research on motivation and achievement: Vol. 13: Motivating students, improving schools: The legacy of Carol Midgley (pp. 97–136). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  79. Kaplan, A., & Flum, H. (Guest Eds.). (2009). Motivation and identity [Special issue]. Educational Psychologist, 44(2).Google Scholar
  80. Kaplan, A., & Maehr, M. L. (2007). The contributions and prospects of goal orientation theory. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 141–184.Google Scholar
  81. Kaplan, A., Middleton, M. J., Urdan, T., & Midgley, C. (2002). Achievement goals and goal structures. In C. Midgley (Ed.), Goals, goal structures, and patterns of adaptive learning (pp. 21–53). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  82. Kellaghan, T., Madaus, G. F., & Airasian, P. W. (1982). The effects of standardized testing. Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  83. Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212–218.Google Scholar
  84. Lepper, M. R., Corpus, J. H., & Iyengar, S. S. (2005). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations in the classroom: Age differences and academic correlates. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(2), 184–196.Google Scholar
  85. Madaus, G., Russell, M., & Higgins, J. (2009). The paradoxes of high-stakes testing: How they affect students, their parents, teachers, principals, schools, and society. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  86. Marchant, G. J., & Paulson, S. E. (2005, January 21). The relationship of high school graduation exams to graduation rates and SAT scores. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(6). Retrieved June 30, 2006, from
  87. Martin, E., & Ramsden, P. (1987). Learning skills and skill in learning. In J. T. E. Richardson, M. W. Eysenck, & D. W. Piper (Eds.), Student learning: Research in education and cognitive psychology. Milton Keynes, England: Open University Press & Society for Research into Higher Education.Google Scholar
  88. McCaslin, M. (2009). Co-regulation of student motivation and emergent identity. Educational Psychologist, 44(2), 137–146.Google Scholar
  89. McCaslin, M., & DiMarino-Linnen, E. (2000). Motivation and learning in school: Societal contexts, psychological constructs, and educational practices. In T. Good (Ed.), Schooling in America: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. 100th yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (pp. 84–151). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  90. McClelland, D. C. (1980). Motive disposition: The merits of operant and respondent measures. In L. Wheeler (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology (Vol. 1). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  91. McClelland, D. C. (1985). How motives, skills, and values determine what people do. American Psychologist, 40(7), 812–825.Google Scholar
  92. McDonnell, L. (2005). Assessment and accountability from the policymaker’s perspective. In J. L. Herman & E. H. Haertel (Eds.), Uses and misuses of data for educational accountability and improvement: The 104th yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part II. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  93. McInerney, D. M., Brown, G. T. L., & Liem, G. A. D. (Eds.). (2009). Student perspectives on assessment: What students can tell us about assessment for learning. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  94. McMillan, J. H. (2001). Classroom assessment: Principles and practice for effective instruction (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  95. McNeil, L. M., Coppola, E., Radigan, J., & Vasquez Heilig, J. (2008). Avoidable losses: High-stakes accountability and the dropout crisis. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 16(3). Retrieved March 16, 2009, from
  96. Meichenbaum, D. H., & Smart, T. (1971). Use of direct expectancy to modify academic performance and attitudes of college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 18, 531–535.Google Scholar
  97. Midgley, C., Kaplan, A., & Middleton, M. J. (2001). Performance-approach goals: Good for what, for whom, under what circumstances, and at what cost? Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 77–86.Google Scholar
  98. Miller, A. D., & Murdock, T. B. (2007). Modeling latent true scores to determine the utility of aggregate student perceptions as classroom indicators in HLM: The case of classroom goal structures. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 83–104.Google Scholar
  99. Miller, C. M. L., & Parlett, M. (1974). Up to the mark: A study of the examination game. London: Society for Research into Higher Education.Google Scholar
  100. Mishel, L., & Roy, J. (2006). Rethinking high school graduation rates and trends. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.Google Scholar
  101. Moss, P. (Ed.). (2007). Evidence and decision making. The 106th yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part 1. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  102. Murdock, T. B., & Miller, A. D. (2009). Specification issues in the use of multilevel modeling to examine the effects of classroom context. In M. Wosnitza, S. A. Karabenick, A. Efklides, & P. Nenniger (Eds.), Contemporary motivation research: From global to local perspectives (pp. 249–264). Cambridge, MA: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
  103. National Commission for Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperatives for educational reform. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  104. Natriello, G. (1987). The impact of evaluation processes on students. Educational Psychologist, 22(2), 155–175.Google Scholar
  105. Natriello, G., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1984). Teacher evaluative standards and student effort. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  106. Nichols, S. L. (2007). High-stakes testing: Does it increase achievement? Journal of Applied School Psychology, 23(2), 47–64.Google Scholar
  107. Nichols, S., & Berliner, D. C. (2007). Collateral damage: How high-stakes testing corrupts America’s schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
  108. Nichols, S. L., Glass, G. V., & Berliner, D. C. (2006). High-stakes testing and student achievement: Does accountability pressure increase student learning? Education Policy Analysis Archives, 14(1). Retrieved July 20, 2009, from
  109. No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, 20 U.S.C.A. § 6301 et seq. (2002).Google Scholar
  110. Orfield, G. (Ed.). (2004). Dropouts in America: Confronting the graduation rate crisis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
  111. Orfield, G., & Kornhaber, M. L. (Eds.). (2001). Raising standards or raising barriers? Inequality and high stakes testing in public education. New York: The Century Foundation Press.Google Scholar
  112. Orfield, G., Losen, D., Wald, D., & Swanson, C. (2004). Losing our future: How minority youth are being left behind by the graduation rate crisis. Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University.Google Scholar
  113. Paris, S. G., Lawton, T. A., Turner, J. C., & Roth, J. L. (1991). A developmental perspective on standardized achievement testing. Educational Researcher, 20, 12–20.Google Scholar
  114. Paris, S. G., Roth, J. L., & Turner, J. C. (2000). Developing disillusionment: Students’ perceptions of academic achievement tests. Issues in Education, 6(1/2), 17–46.Google Scholar
  115. Paris, S. G., Turner, J. C., & Lawton, T. A. (1990, April). Students’ views of standardized achievement tests. Paper presented at Educational Research Association, Boston.Google Scholar
  116. Paris, S. G., & Urdan, T. (2000). Policies and practices of high-stakes testing that influence teachers and schools. Issues in Education, 6(1/2), 83–108.Google Scholar
  117. Pedulla, J. J., Abrams, L. M., Madaus, G. F., Russell, M. K., Ramos, M. A., & Miao, J. (2003, March). Perceived effects of state-mandated testing programs on teaching and learning: Findings from a national survey of teachers. Boston: Boston College, National Board on Educational Testing and Public Policy. Retrieved January 7, 2004, from
  118. Perlstein, L. (2007). Tested: One American school struggles to make the grade. New York: Henry Holt & Co.Google Scholar
  119. Peterson, P. L., & Walberg, H. J. (Eds.). (1979). Research on teaching: Concepts, findings, and implications. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing.Google Scholar
  120. Peterson, P. E., & West, M. R. (Eds.). (2003). No Child Left Behind? The politics and practice of school accountability. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.Google Scholar
  121. Phelps, R. P. (Ed.). (2005). Defending standardized testing. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  122. Raymond, M. E., & Hanushek, E. A. (2003, Summer). High-stakes research. Education Next, 3(3), 48–55. Retrieved from Google Scholar
  123. Rodriguez, M. C. (2004). The role of classroom assessment in student performance on TIMSS. Applied Measurement in Education, 17(1), 1–24.Google Scholar
  124. Rogers, E. M. (1969). Examinations: Powerful agents for good or ill in teaching. American Journal of Physics, 37, 954–962.Google Scholar
  125. Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
  126. Ryan, J. (2004). The perverse incentives of the No Child Left Behind Act. New York University Law Review, 79, 932–989.Google Scholar
  127. Sacks, P. (1999). Standardized minds: The high price of America’s testing culture and what we can do to change it. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing.Google Scholar
  128. San Antonio Express-News (2007, March 9). Teen talk: Tackling TAKS. San Antonio Express-News, p. 1F.Google Scholar
  129. Schunk, D. H. (1996). Goal and self-evaluative influences during children’s cognitive skill learning. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 359–382.Google Scholar
  130. Snyder, B. R. (1971). The hidden curriculum. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
  131. Starch, D., & Elliott, E. C. (1912). Reliability of the grading of high-school work in English. School Review, 20, 442–457.Google Scholar
  132. Stiggins, R. J. (2001). The unfulfilled promise of classroom assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 20(3), 5–15.Google Scholar
  133. Stiggins, R. J., & Bridgeford, N. J. (1985). The ecology of classroom assessment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 22(4), 271–286.Google Scholar
  134. Stiggins, R. J., & Conklin, N. F. (1992). In teachers’ hands: Investigating the practices of classroom assessment. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  135. Taylor, G., Shepard, L., Kinner, F., & Rosenthal, J. (2003). A survey of teachers’ perspectives on high-stakes testing in Colorado: What gets taught, what gets lost (CSE Technical Report 588). Los Angeles: University of California.Google Scholar
  136. Thomas, J. W. (1993). Promoting independent learning in the middle grades: The role of instructional support practices. The Elementary School Journal, 93, 575–591.Google Scholar
  137. Thorndike, E. L. (1923). Education: A first book. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  138. Toy, V. (2006, January 1). Elmont’s school success is a lesson to others. New York Times, p. 14L.Google Scholar
  139. Tyack, D. (1974). The one best system: A history of American urban education. Cambridge, UK: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  140. Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1997). Tinkering toward utopia: A century of public school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  141. Urdan, T. (1997). Achievement goal theory: Past results, future directions. In M. L. Maehr & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 10, pp. 99–141). Greenwich, CT: JAI.Google Scholar
  142. Valenzuela, A. (Ed.). (2005). Leaving children behind: How “Texas-style” accountability fails Latino youth. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  143. Vasquez Heilig, J., Cole, H., & Aguilar, A. (2010). From Dewey to No Child Left Behind: The evolution and devolution of public arts education. Arts Education Policy Review, 111, 136–145.Google Scholar
  144. Vasquez Heilig, J., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2008). Accountability Texas-style: The progress and learning of urban minority students in a high-stakes testing context. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(2), 75–110.Google Scholar
  145. Warren, J. R., Jenkins, K. N., & Kulick, R. B. (2006). High school exit examinations and state-level completion and GED Rates, 1975 through 2002. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 28(20), 131–152.Google Scholar
  146. Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  147. Weinstein, R. S. (2002). Reaching higher: The power of expectations in schooling. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  148. Whipple, G. M. (1921). The national intelligence tests. The Journal of Educational Research, 4, 16–31.Google Scholar
  149. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. (1992). The development of achievement task values: A theoretical analysis. Developmental Review, 12, 265–310.Google Scholar
  150. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. (2000). Expectancy x value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  151. Wigfield, A., Eccles, J., MacIver, D., Reuman, D., & Midgley, C. (1991). Transitions at early adolescence: Changes in children’s domain-specific self-perceptions and general self-esteem across the transition to junior high school. Developmental Psychology, 27, 552–565.Google Scholar
  152. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2002). The development of competence beliefs, expectancies for success, and achievement values from childhood through adolescence. In A. Wigfield & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Development of achievement motivation (pp. 91–120). San Diego, CA: Academic.Google Scholar
  153. Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (1997). Relations of children’s motivation for reading to the amount and breadth of their reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 420–432.Google Scholar
  154. Wigfield, A., & Wagner, A. L. (2005). Competence and motivation during adolescence. In A. J. Elliott & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 222–239). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  155. Winne, P. H. (1995). Inherent details in self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 30, 173–187.Google Scholar
  156. Wong, C. A., & Paris, S. G. (2000). Students’ beliefs about classroom tests and standardized tests. Issues in Education, 6(1/2), 47–6677.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Educational PsychologyUniversity of TexasSan AntonioUSA
  2. 2.Department of Educational Policy and LeadershipThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations