This study explores the influence high-stakes testing has on Latina/o student aspirations and subsequent college enrollment. It quantitatively examines the critical juncture of high school exit and college entry at a school district serving a predominately Latino population. Findings confirm a strong correlation between the math and English Language Arts exams. Furthermore, each subsequent attempt of the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) yields lower average scores. Considerations about policy and its implications at the high school level are also discussed.
AuW. (2007). High-stakes testing and curricular control: A qualitative metasynthesis. Educational Researcher, 36, 258-267.
2.
AuW. (2009). Unequal by design: High-stakes testing and the standardization of inequality. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
3.
AuW. (2013). Coring social studies within corporate education reform: The Common Core State Standards, social justice, and the politics of knowledge in U.S. schools. Critical Education, 4(5), 1-14.
4.
BakerO.LangK. (2013). The effect of high school exit exams on graduation, employment, wages and incarceration (No. w19182). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
5.
Booher-JenningsJ. (2005). Below the bubble: “Educational triage” and the Texas accountability system. American Educational Research Journal, 42, 231-268.
6.
Booher-JenningsJ. (2006). Rationing education in an era of accountability: The push for accountability was originally cast as a way to ensure that schools would leave no child behind. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(10), 756-761.
7.
BowenW. G.ChingosM. M.McPhersonM. S. (2009). Crossing the finish line: Completing college at America’s public universities. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
CastilloL. G.ConoleyC. W.CepedaL. M.IvyK. K.ArchuletaD. J. (2010). Mexican American adolescents’ perceptions of a pro-college culture. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 9, 61-72.
13.
CejaM. (2006). Understanding the role of parents and siblings as information sources in the college choice process of Chicana students. Journal of College Student Development, 47, 87-104.
ContrerasF. E. (2005). Access, achievement, and social capital: Standardized exams and the Latino college-bound population. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 4, 197-214.
16.
ContrerasF. E. (2011). Achieving equity for Latino students: Expanding the pathway to higher education through public policy. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
17.
CroizetJ.-C.ClaireT. (1998). Extending the concept of stereotype threat to social class: The intellectual underperformance of students from low socioeconomic backgrounds. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 588-594.
18.
Darling-HammondL. (1999). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Seattle: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington.
19.
DietzS. (2010). State high school tests: Exit exams and other assessments. Washington, D.C.: Center on Education Policy.
20.
EricksonA. S. G.Kleinhammer-TramillJ.ThurlowM. L. (2007). An analysis of the relationship between high school exit exams and diploma options and the impact on students with disabilities. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 18, 117-128.
21.
FiglioD. N.GetzerL. S. (2002). Accountability, ability, and disability: Gaming the system?Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
22.
GandaraP.ContrerasF. (2009). The Latino education crisis: The consequences of failed
23.
social policies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
24.
GarciaP. A.GopalM. (2003). The relationship to achievement on the California high school exit exam for language minority students. NABE Journal of Research and Practice, 1(1), 123-137.
25.
GI Forum et al. v. Texas Education Agency et al., 87 F. Supp. 2d 667. (W.D. Tex. 2000).
26.
GrantC. A. (2004). Oppression, privilege, and high-stakes testing. Multicultural Perspectives, 6, 3-11.
27.
HansonF. A. (1993). Testing testing: Social consequences of the examined life. Berkeley: University of California Press.
28.
HolmeJ. J.RichardsM. P.JimersonJ. B.CohenR. W. (2010). Assessing the effects of high school exit examinations. Review of Educational Research, 80, 476-526.
29.
HolmeJ. J.Vasquez HeiligJ. (2012). High stakes decisions: The legal landscape of gatekeeping exit exams and the implications for schools and leaders. Journal of School Leadership, 22, 1177-1197.
30.
KettlD. (1998). Reinventing government: A fifth-year report card. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
31.
LeeJ. M.ContrerasF.McGuireK. M.Flores-RagadeA.RawlsA.EdwardsK.MensonR. (2011). The college completion agenda: 2011 progress report (Latino ed.). New York, NY: College Board Advocacy & Policy Center.
32.
LemannN. (1999). The big test: The secret history of the American meritocracy. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
MartinezM. A. (2012). Wealth, stereotypes, and issues of prestige: The college choice experience of Mexican American students within their community context. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 11, 67-81.
35.
McIntoshS. (2012). State high school exit exams: A policy in transition. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy, Graduate School of Education and Human Development, The George Washington University.
36.
McNeilL. M. (2000). Contradictions of school reform: Educational costs of standardized testing. New York, NY: Routledge.
37.
McNeilL. M. (2005). Faking equity: High-stakes testing and the education of Latino youth. In ValenzuelaA. (Ed.), Leaving children behind: How “Texas-style” accountability fails Latino youth (pp. 57-111). Albany: State University of New York Press.
38.
MenkenK. (2010). NCLB and English language learners: Challenges and consequences. Theory Into Practice, 49, 121-128.
39.
NicholsS. L.ValenzuelaA. (2013). Education policy and youth: Effects of policy on practice. Theory Into Practice, 52, 152-159.
40.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, P.L. 107-110, 20 U.S.C. § 6319 (2002).
41.
OrfieldG.LeeC. (2007). Historic reversals, accelerating resegregation, and the need for new integration strategies. Los Angeles: Civil Rights Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles, University of California, Los Angeles.
42.
PérezP. A.McDonoughP. M. (2008). Understanding Latina and Latino college choice: A social capital and chain migration analysis. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 7, 249-265.
43.
Pérez HuberL.HuidorO.MalagónM. C.SánchezG.SolórzanoD. G. (2006). Falling through the cracks: Critical transitions in the Latina/o educational pipeline (CSRC Research Report No. 7). Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles Chicano Studies Research Center.
44.
RavitchD. (2010). The death and life of the great American school system: How testing and choice are undermining education. New York, NY: Basic Books.
45.
RavitchD. (2015). 2014 John Dewey Lecture: Does evidence matter?Education and Culture, 31(1), 3-15.
46.
ReardonS. F.AtteberryA.ArshanN.KurlaenderM. (2009). Effects of the California High School Exit Exam on student persistence, achievement, and graduation (Working Paper 2009-12). Stanford, CA: Institute for Research on Education Policy & Practice, Stanford University.
47.
ReardonS. F.GalindoC. (2002, April). Do high-stakes tests affect students’ decisions to drop out of school? Evidence from NELS.Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
48.
RodriguezL. F. (2014). The time is now: Understanding and responding to the Black and Latina/o dropout crisis in the U.S. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
49.
SmithC. D. (2009). Deconstructing the pipeline: Evaluating school-to-prison pipeline equal protection cases through astructural racism framework. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 36(5), 1009-1049.
50.
SolórzanoD.VillalpandoO.OsegueraL. (2005). Educational inequities and Latina/o undergraduate students in the United States: A critical race analysis of their educational progress. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 4, 272-294.
51.
SolórzanoR. W. (2008). High stakes testing: Issues, implications, and remedies for English language learners. Review of Educational Research, 78, 260-329.
52.
SteeleC. M. (1997). How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613-629.
53.
ValenzuelaA. (2005). Leaving children behind: How “Texas-style” accountability fails Latino youth. Albany: State University of New York Press.
54.
Vasquez HeiligJ.Darling-HammondL. (2008). Accountability Texas-style: The progress and learning of urban minority students in a high-stakes testing context. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30, 75-110.
55.
WaldJ.LosenD. J. (2003). Defining and redirecting a school-to-prison pipeline. New Directions for Youth Development, 99, 9-15.
56.
YossoT. J.SolórzanoD. (2006). Leaks in the Chicana and Chicano educational pipeline (Latino Policy and Issues Brief No. 13). Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles Chicano Studies Research Center.
