This retrospective cross-case analysis compares two fourth-grade language arts teachers' beliefs and practices as they respond to an influx of high-stakes tests, including district-mandated benchmark testing systems. One teacher works in a suburban school, the other in an urban school. Results from the study show that the teachers' beliefs about literacy instruction are somewhat similar. Both teachers believed that creating a text-rich atmosphere engages students' interests, social interactions around texts aid comprehension, and “best practices” such as guided reading and literature discussions are useful methods. Both teachers harshly criticized the continuous barrage of tests in their district (between 10 and 17 district-mandated benchmark assessments per nine-month school year). However, their practices differed dramatically and created inequitable educational opportunities. Students in the suburban setting spent more time socially constructing knowledge about texts, themes, and topics while students in the urban school spent more time individually practicing the skills necessary to achieve understanding of a text's inherent meaning. Results from the study suggest that research on the influence of high-stakes assessments should go beyond surveys or interview statements of knowledge and should investigate teachers' practices in contexts where evidence of inequity may present itself.
References
1.
AdamsM. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2.
AgeeJ. (2004). Negotiating a teaching identity: An African American teacher's struggle to teach in test-driven contexts. Teacher College Record,106, 747–774.
3.
AlexanderP.SchallertD. L.HareV. C. (1991). Coming to terms: How researchers in learning and literacy talk about knowledge. Review of Educational Research,3, 315–343.
4.
AnyonJ. (2005). What counts as education policy? Notes toward a new paradigm. Harvard Educational Review,75, 65–88.
5.
AssafL. C. (2006). One reading specialist's response to high-stakes testing pressures. The Reading Teacher,60, 158–167.
6.
Barksdale-LaddM. A.ThomasK. F. (2000). What's at stake in high-stakes testing: Teachers and parents speak out. Journal of Teacher Education,51, 384–397.
7.
BomerK. (2005). Missing the children: When politics and programs impede our teaching. Language Arts,82, 168–176.
8.
Booher-JenningsJ. (2005). Below the bubble: “Educational triage” and the Texas accountability system. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 231–268.
9.
BrandM. (2004). Word savvy: Integrating vocabulary, spelling, and word study, grades 3–6. New York: Stenhouse.
10.
CalkinsL.MontgomeryK.FalksB.SantmanD. (1998). A teacher's guide to standardized reading tests: Knowledge is power. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
11.
CambourneB. (1988). The whole story: Natural reading and the acquisition of literacy. New York: Scholastic.
12.
CarlgrenI. (1999). Professionalism and teachers as designers. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(1), 43–57.
13.
CharmazK. C. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14.
ColeM. (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
15.
ColesG. (2003). Reading the naked truth: Literacy legislation, and lies. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
16.
DanielsH. (1994). Literature circles: Voice and choice in the student-centered classroom. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
17.
DanielsH. (2002). Literature circles. New York: Stenhouse.
18.
Darling-HammondL. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1). Retrieved June 25, 2006, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n1.
19.
DelpitL. (1995). Other people's children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. New York: The New Press.
20.
DiamondJ. B.SpillaneJ. (2004). High-stakes accountability in urban elementary schools: Challenging or reproducing inequality?Teacher College Record,106, 1145–1176.
21.
DooleyC. M. (2005). One teacher's resistance to the pressures of test mentality. Language Arts, 82, 177–185.
22.
EmersonR. M.FretzR. I.ShawL. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic field notes. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
23.
ErlandsonD. A.HarrisE. L.SkipperB. L.AllenS. D. (1993). Doing naturalistic inquiry: A guide to methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
24.
FooteM. (2007). Keeping accountability systems accountable. Phi Delta Kappan,88, 359–364.
25.
GoughP. B.HillingerM. L. (1980). Learning to read: An unnatural act. Bulletin of the Orton Society,20, 179–196.
26.
GrantS. G. (2000). Teachers and tests: Exploring teachers' perceptions of changes in the New York State testing program. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(14). Retrieved June 25, 2006, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n3/ExcellenceEducation.
27.
GrishamD. (2000). Connecting theoretical conceptions of reading to practice: A longitudinal study of elementary school teachers. Reading Psychology,21, 145–170.
28.
GuthrieJ. T.WigfieldA. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In KamilM. L.MosenthalP. B.PearsonP. D.BarrR. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research, vol. III (pp. 403–424). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
29.
HabermanM. (1996). The pedagogy of poverty versus good teaching. In AyersW.FordP. (Eds.), City kids, city teachers: Reports from the front row (pp. 118–130). New York: The New Press.
30.
HaneyW. (2000). The myth of the Texas miracle in education. Education Policy Analysis and Archives, 8(41). Retrieved February 9, 2005, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n41.
31.
HannawayJ.TalbertJ. E. (1993). Bringing context into effective schools research: Urban-suburban differences. Educational Administration Quarterly,29, 164–186.
32.
HarveyS.GoudvisA. (2000). Strategies that work: Teaching comprehension to enhance understanding. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
33.
HoffmanJ. V.AssafL. C.ParisS. G. (2001). High-stakes testing in reading: Today in Texas, tomorrow?The Reading Teacher,54, 482–492.
34.
International Reading Association. (2005). Mixed reactions to NCLB. Reading Today,22(4), 1.
35.
International Reading Association. (2007). IRA members speak out on NCLB. Reading Today,24(4), 1.
36.
JonesM. G.JonesB. D.HargroveT. (2003). The unintended consequences of high-stakes testing. Landham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
37.
KimJ. S.SundermanG. L. (2005). Measuring academic proficiency under the No Child Left Behind Act: Implications for educational equity. Educational Researcher, 38(8), 3–13.
38.
KincheloeJ. L.McLarenP. (2000). Rethinking critical theory and qualitative research. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 279–313). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39.
KozolJ. (2005). The shame of the nation. New York: Harper.
40.
Ladson-BillingsG. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal,32, 465–491.
41.
LangerJ. A. (2001). Beating the odds: Teaching middle and high school students to read and write well. American Educational Research Journal,38, 837–880.
42.
LeeJ. (2002). Racial and ethnic achievement gap trends: Reversing the progress toward equity?Educational Researcher, 31(1), 3–12.
43.
LeeJ. (2006). Tracking achievement gaps and assessing the impact of No Child Left Behind: An in-depth look at national and state reading and math outcome trends. Boston, MA: President and Fellows of Harvard College. Retrieved June 25, 2006, from http://www.civilrightsproject.harvard.edu/research/esea/nclb_naep_lee.pdf.
ManganoN.AllenJ. (1986). Teaches' beliefs about language arts and their effect on student beliefs and instruction. National Reading Conference Yearbook,35, 135–142.
46.
McNeilL. (2000). Creating new inequalities: Contradictions of reform. Phi Delta Kappan,81, 729–734.
47.
MorrowL.GambrellL.PressleyM. (2003). Best practices for literacy instruction. New York: Guilford.
48.
NicholsS. L.GlassG. V.BerlinerD. C. (2006). High-stakes testing and student achievement: Does accountability pressure increase student learning?Education Policy Analysis Archives, 14(1). Retrieved January 16, 2006, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v14n1.
49.
NogueraP. A. (2003). City schools and the American dream: Fulfilling the promise of public education. New York: Teachers College.
50.
OrfieldG.KornhaberM. L. (Eds.). (2001). Rising standards or rising barriers. New York: The Century Foundation Press.
51.
PressleyM.YokoiL.RankinJ.Wharton-McDonaldR.MistrellaJ. (1997). A survey of the instructional practices of Grade 5 teachers nominated as effective in promoting literacy. Scientific Studies of Reading,1, 145–160.
52.
ReberP. J.KnowltonB. J.SquireL. R. (1996). Dissociable properties of memory systems: Differences in the flexibility of declarative and nondeclarative knowledge. Behavioral Neuroscience,110, 861–871.
53.
RichardsonV.AndersP.TidwellD.LloydC. (1991). The relationship between teachers' beliefs and practices in reading comprehension instruction. American Educational Research Journal,28, 559–586.
54.
RoseM. (1996). Possible lives. New York: Penguin.
55.
RosenblattL. (1938/1994). The reader the text the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
56.
RoserN. L.MartinezM. G. (1995). Book talk and beyond: Children and teachers respond to literature. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
57.
RothsteinR. (2004). Class and schools: Using social, economic, and educational reform to close the black-white achievement gap. New York: Teachers College Press.
58.
SacharL. (1978). Sideways stories from Wayside School. New York: Harper Trophy.
59.
SanderW. (2001). Chicago public schools and student achievement. Urban Education,36, 27–38.
60.
SchneiderB. L. (1985). Further evidence of school effects. The Journal of Educational Research,78, 351–356.
61.
SheldonS. B. (2003). Linking school-family-community partnerships in urban elementary schools to student achievement on state tests. Urban Review,35, 149–166.
62.
SmithF. (1982). The unspeakable habit. Language Arts, 59(6), 550–600.
63.
SmithM. L.FeyP. (2000). Validity and accountability in high-stakes testing. Journal of Teacher Education,51, 334–344.
TillemaH. H. (1997). Promoting conceptual change in learning to teach. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education,25, 7–17.
66.
ValenzuelaA. (1999). Subtractive schooling. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
67.
ValenzuelaA. (2004). Leaving children behind: How Texas-style accountability fails Latino youth.Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
68.
VuP. (2006, June 23). States work to narrow teacher equity gap. Stateline. Retrieved June 27, 2006, from http://www.Stateline.org.
69.
VygotskyL. S. (1934/1962). Thought and languageHanfmannE.VakarG., Eds./Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
70.
WertschJ. V. (1991). A sociocultual approach to socially shared cognition. In ResnickL. B.LevineJ. M.TeasleyS. D. (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 85–100). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
71.
WertschJ. V. (1998). Mind as action. New York: Oxford University Press.
72.
WhiteC. S.StrutevantE. G.DunlapK. L. (2003). Preservice and beginning teachers' perceptions of the influence of high-stakes tests on their literacy-related instructional beliefs and decisions. Reading Research and Instruction,42(2), 39–62.
73.
YouY.SchallertD. L. (1992). Examining how prospective teachers come to understand two science constructs, evaporation and condensation, as a result of a class discussion and textbook reading. Retrieved June 20, 2003, from ERIC online. (ERIC document no. ED354151).
74.
ZhouM. (2003). Urban education: Challenges in educating culturally diverse children. Teachers College Record,105, 208–225.
