Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T19:47:28.176Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THE INTERSECTION OF TEST IMPACT, VALIDATION, AND EDUCATIONAL REFORM POLICY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2009

Micheline Chalhoub-Deville
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The article addresses the intersection of policy, validity, and impact within the context of educational reform in U.S. schools, looking in particular at the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act (2001). The discussion makes a case that it is important to reconsider the established views regarding the responsibility of test developers and users in investigating impact given the conflated roles of developers and users under NCLB. The article also introduces the concept of social impact analysis (SIA) to argue for an expansion of the traditional conceptualization of impact research. SIA promotes a proactive rather than a reactive approach to impact, in order to inform policy formulation upfront.

Type
Research Article
Information
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics , Volume 29 , March 2009 , pp. 118 - 131
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

ANNOTATED REFERENCES

Chalhoub-Deville, M., & Deville, C. (2006). Old, borrowed, and new thoughts in second language testing. In Brennan, R. L. (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed., pp. 516–530). Washington, DC: National Council on Measurement in Education & American Council on Education.Google Scholar
Cheng, L., (2008). Washback, impact and consequences. In Shohamy, E. & Hornberger, N. H. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education, Vol. 7: Language testing and assessment (2nd ed., pp. 349–364). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
Kane, M. T. (2006). Validation. In Brennan, R. L. (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed., pp. 17–64). Washington, DC: National Council on Measurement in Education & American Council on Education.Google Scholar
Shohamy, E. (2001). The power of tests: A critical perspective on the uses of language tests. Essex, England: Longman.Google Scholar

OTHER REFERENCES

Alderson, J. C., & Wall, D. (1993). Does washback exist? Applied Linguistics, 14, 115–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alderson, C., & Wall, D. (Eds.). (1996). Special issue. Language Testing, 13, 239–354.Google Scholar
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (AERA). (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Barrow, C. J. (2000). Social impact assessment: An introduction. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G. J., & van Heerden, J. (2004). The concept of validity. Psychological Review, 111, 1061–1071.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burdge, R. J. (2007). Retrieved March 9, 2009, from http://www.socialimpactassessment.net/Google Scholar
Chalhoub-Deville, M., & Deville, C. (2006). Old, borrowed, and new thoughts in second language testing. In Brennan, R. L. (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed., pp. 516–530). Washington, DC: National Council on Measurement in Education & American Council on Education.Google Scholar
Chalhoub-Deville, M., & Deville, C. (2008). National standardized English language assessments. In Spolsky, B. & Hult, F. (Eds.), Handbook of educational linguistics (pp. 510–522). Oxford, England: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheng, L. (2005). Changing language teaching through language testing: A washback study. Cambridge, England: University of Cambridge ESOL Examinations and Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cheng, L. (2008). Washback, impact and consequences. In Shohamy, E. & Hornberger, N. H. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education, Vol. 7: Language testing and assessment (2nd ed., pp. 349–64). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
Cheng, L., Watanabe, Y., & Curtis, A. (Eds.). (2004). Washback in language testing: Research contexts and methods. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronbach, L. J. (1971). Test validation. In Thorndike, R. L. (Ed.), Educational measurement (2nd ed., pp. 443–507). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.Google Scholar
Cronbach, L. J. (1988). Five perspectives on validity argument. In Wainer, H. & Braun, H. (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 3–17). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hamp-Lyons, L. (1997). Washback, impact and validity: Ethical concerns. Language Testing, 14, 295–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heck, R. (2004). Studying educational and social policy: Theoretical concepts and research methods. Mahwah: NJ: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kane, M. T. (2006). Validation. In Brennan, R. L. (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed., pp. 17–64). Washington, DC: National Council on Measurement in Education & American Council on Education.Google Scholar
Linn, R. L. (1997). Evaluating the validity of assessments: The consequences of use. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 16, 28–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGroarty, M. (2002). Evolving influences on educational language policies. In Tollefson, J. W. (Ed.), Language policies in education: Critical issues (pp. 17–36). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
McNamara, T. (2008) The social-political and power dimensions of tests. In Shohamy, E. & Hornberger, N. H. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education Vol. 7: Language testing and assessment (2nd ed., pp. 415–27). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
Messick, S. (1989a). Validity. In Linn, R. L. (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13–103). Washington, DC: American Council on Education & National Council on Measurement in Education.Google Scholar
Messick, S. (1989b). Meaning and values in test validation: The science and ethics of assessment. Educational Researcher, 18, 5–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messick, S. (1996). Validity and washback in language testing. Language Testing, 13, 241–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nichols, P., & Williams, N. (2008). Evidence of test score use in validity: Roles and responsibility. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. New York.Google Scholar
No Child Left Behind. (2001). Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107–110, 115 Stat. 1425.Google Scholar
Reckase, M. (1998). Consequential validity from the test developer's perspective. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 17, 13–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shepard, L. A. (1997). The centrality of test use and consequences for test validity. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 16, 5–8, 13, 24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shohamy, E. (1993). The power of tests: The impact of language tests on teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Foreign Language Center Occasional Papers.Google Scholar
Shohamy, E. (1996). Testing methods, testing consequences: Are they ethical? Are they fair? Language Testing, 13, 340–349.Google Scholar
Shohamy, E. (2001). The power of tests: A critical perspective on the uses of language tests. Essex, England: Longman.Google Scholar
Spolsky, B. (1997). The ethics of gatekeeping tests: What have we learned in a hundred years? Language Testing, 14, 242–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tollefson, J. W. (2002). Introduction: Critical issues in educational language policy. In Tollefson, J. W. (Ed.), Language policies in education: Critical issues (pp. 3–16). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Turner, C. (2001). The need for impact studies of L2 performance testing and rating: Identifying areas of potential consequences at all levels of the testing cycle. In Milanovic, M. & Weir, C. J. (Eds.), Studies in language testing: Vol. 11: Experimenting with uncertainty: Essays in honour of Alan Davies. (pp. 138–149). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wall, D. (1996). Introducing new tests into traditional systems: Insights from general education and from innovation theory. Language Testing, 13, 334–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wall, D. (2005). The impact of high-stakes examinations on classroom teaching: A case study using insights from testing and innovation theory. Cambridge, England: University of Cambridge ESOL Examinations and Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wall, D., & Alderson, J. C. (1993). Examining washback: The Sri Lankan impact study. Language Testing, 10, 41–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar