Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A National Survey of Middle and High School Science Teachers’ Responses to Standardized Testing: Is Science Being Devalued in Schools?

  • Published:
Journal of Science Teacher Education

Abstract

This study explored American high school and middle school science teachers’ attitudes toward the use of standardized testing for accountability purposes, their justification for the attitudes they hold and the impact of standardized testing on their instructional and assessment practices. A total of 161 science teachers participated in the study. Analyses were based on teachers’ responses to a questionnaire including nine-item likert-scale questions and two-item open-ended questions. The analyses revealed that science teachers have mixed reactions to the administration of standardized tests and its use for accountability purposes. The findings also reveal that standardized testing has a significant influence on science teachers’ instructional and assessment practices in ways that are counter to the learning goals promoted by science education reformists. Our discussion focuses on the implicit and explicit influences of the NCLB Act on science curriculum, teaching and assessment, and how the NCLB driven policies undermine the goals of science education reform.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abell, S. K., & Volkmann, J. M. (2006). Seamless assessment in science: A guide for elementary and middle school teachers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abrams, L. M., Pedulla, J. J., & Madaus, G. F. (2003). Views from the classroom: Teachers’ opinions of statewide testing programs. Theory into Practice, 42(1), 18–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abrams, E., Southerland, S. A., & Silva, P. (2008). Inquiry in the classroom: Challenges and possibilities. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS]. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy: A Project 2061 report. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Aydeniz, M. (2007). Understanding challenges to the implementation of assessment reform in science classrooms: A case study of science teachers’ conceptions and practices of assessment. Unpublished Dissertation. Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL.

  • Bell, B., & Cowie, B. (2001). Formative assessment and science education. Boston: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berliner, D. C. (2005). Our impoverished view of educational reform. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 949–995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bianchini, J. A., & Kelly, G. J. (2003). Challenges of standards-based reform: The example of California’s science content standards and textbook adoption process. Science Education, 87, 378–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., & William, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 139–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brickhouse, N. W. (2006). Celebrating 90 years of science education: Reflections on the gold standard and ways of promoting good research. Science Education, 90(1), 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brookhart, S. M. (2006). Formative assessment strategies for every classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, B. (2004). Discursive identity: Assimilation into the culture of science and its implications for minority students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(8), 810–834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calabrese-Barton, A., & Tan, E. (2009). Funds of knowledge and discourses and hybrid space. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(1), 50–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbett, H. D., & Wilson, B. L. (1991). Testing, reform and rebellion. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2004). Standards, accountability, and school reform. Teachers College Record, 106(6), 1047–1085.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L., & Adamson, F. (2010). Beyond basic skills: The role of performance assessment in achieving 21st century standards of learning. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, N., Genc-Kumtepe, E., & Aydeniz, M. (2007). Fostering continuous improvement and learning through peer assessment: Part of an integral model of assessment. Educational Assessment, 12(2), 113–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeBoer, G. E. (2002). Student-centered teaching in a standards-based world: Finding a sensible balance. Science & Education, 11, 405–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delandshere, G. (2002). Assessment as inquiry. Teachers College Record, 104(7), 1461–1484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duschl, R. A., & Gitomer, D. H. (1997). Strategies and challenges to changing the focus of assessment and instruction in science classrooms. Educational Assessment, 4(1), 37–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. W. (Eds.). (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnigan, K. S., & Gross, B. (2007). Do accountability policy sanctions influence teacher motivation? Lessons from Chicago’s low-performing schools. American Educational Research Journal, 44, 594–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Firestone, W., Mayrowetz, D., & Fairman, J. (1998). Performance-based assessment and instructional change: The effects of testing in Maine and Maryland. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 20(2), 95–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Firestone, W. A., Monfils, L., & Camalli, G. (2001, April). Pressure, support, and instructional change in the context of a state testing program. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.

  • Fu, A. C., Raizen, S. A., & Shavelson, R. J. (2009). The nation’s report card: A vision of large-scale science assessment. Science, 326(5960), 1637–1638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, S. G. (2000). Teachers and tests: Exploring teachers’ perceptions of changes in the New York state-mandated testing program. Education Policy Analysis Archives [On-line serial], 8(14). Available: http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n14.html.

  • Greene, J. P., & Winters, M. A. (2003). Testing high stakes tests: Can we believe the results of accountability tests? (Report 33). New York: Manhattan Institute, Center for Civic Innovation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingersoll, R. M., & Perda, D. (2010). Is the supply of mathematics and science teachers sufficient? American Educational Research Journal, 47(3), 563–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, M. G., Jones, B. D., & Hargrove, T. Y. (2003). The unintended consequences of high-stakes testing. Lanham, MD: Rowan & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keigher, A. (2010). Teacher attrition and mobility: Results from the 2008–09 teacher follow-up survey (NCES 2010-353). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved [October 10, 2010] from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch.

  • Kim, J. S., & Sunderman, G. L. (2005). Measuring academic proficiency under the No Child Left Behind Act: Implications for educational equity. Educational Researcher, 34(8), 2–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klassen, S. (2006). Contextual assessment in science education: Background, issues, and policy. Science Education, 90(5), 820–851.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, O. (2005). Science education with english language learners: Synthesis and research agenda. Review of Educational Research, 75(4), 491–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linn, R. (2000). Assessment and accountability. Educational Researcher, 29(2), 4–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linn, R. (2003). Accountability: Responsibility and reasonable expectations. Educational Researcher, 32(7), 3–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, S., Kuipers, J., Pyke, C., & Szesze, M. (2005). Examining the effects of a highly rated science curriculum unit on diverse populations: Results from a planning grant. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(8), 912–946.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madden, D. B. (2008). Middle school educators’ perspectives of changes in teaching practices caused by implementation of the FCAT Science. Unpublished Masters Thesis, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL.

  • McMillan, J. H. (2001). Classroom assessment: Principles and practice for effective instruction (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehrens, W. A., & Kaminski, J. (1989). Methods for improving standardized test scores: Fruitful, fruitless or fraudulent? Educational Measurement: Issues and Practices, 8(1), 14–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Academy of Sciences [NAS]. (2006). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council [NRC]. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

  • National Research Council [NRC]. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.

  • National Research Council [NRC]. (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council [NRC]. (2005). Systems for state science sssessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noblit, G., Hwang, S., Seiler, G., & Elmesky, R. (2007). Forum: Toward culturally responsive discourses in science education. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 2(1), 105–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popham, W. J. (2006). Branded by a test. Educational Leadership, 63, 86–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popkewitz, T. S. (2000). The denial of change in educational change: Systems of ideas in the construction of national policy and evaluation. Educational Researcher, 29(1), 17–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pringle, R. M., & Carrier, S. M. (2005). The potential impacts of upcoming high-stakes testing on the teaching of science in elementary classrooms. Research in Science Education, 35, 347–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaver, A., Cuevas, P., Lee, O., & Avalos, M. (2007). Teachers’ perceptions of policy influences on science instruction with culturally and linguistically diverse elementary students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(5), 725–746.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shepard, L. A. (2000). The role of classroom assessment in teaching and learning. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. L., & Rottenberg, C. (1991). Unintended consequences of external testing in elementary schools. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 10(4), 7–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiggins, R. J. (2004). New assessment beliefs for a new school mission. Phi Delta, 86(1), 22–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitford, B. L., & Jones, K. (2000). Kentucky lesson: How high stakes school accountability undermines a performance-based curriculum vision. In B. L. Whitford & K. Jones (Eds.), Accountability, assessment, and teacher commitment: Lessons from Kentucky’s reform efforts (pp. 9–24). Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yore, L., Henriques, L., Crawford, B., Smith, L. K., Zwiep, S., & Tillotson, J. (2008). Selecting and using inquiry approaches to teach science: The influence of context in elementary, middle & secondary schools. In E. Abrams, S. A. Southerland, & P. Silva (Eds.), Inquiry in the classrooms: Challenges and opportunities (pp. 39–87). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Theory and Practice in Teacher Education, College of Education, Health and Human Sciences, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA

    Mehmet Aydeniz

  2. FSU-Teach, School of Teacher Education, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA

    Sherry A. Southerland

Authors
  1. Mehmet Aydeniz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sherry A. Southerland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mehmet Aydeniz.

About this article

Cite this article

Aydeniz, M., Southerland, S.A. A National Survey of Middle and High School Science Teachers’ Responses to Standardized Testing: Is Science Being Devalued in Schools?. J Sci Teacher Educ 23, 233–257 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-012-9266-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-012-9266-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation