Abstract
The author contends that disputes within the measurement community about what constitutes legitimate test preparation and whether “teaching to the test” is good or bad for student learning can be explained by differences in measurement specialists beliefs about learning. Qualitative analysis of interview data from a nationally representative sample of 50 district testing directors revealed that approximately half of the measurement specialists operate from implicit learning theories that advocate, first, close alignment of tests with curriculum and, second, judicious teaching of tested content. Historical quotations are used to show that these beliefs, associated with criterion-referenced testing, derive from behaviorist learning theory, which requires sequential mastery of constituent skills and explicit testing of each learning step. The sequential, facts-before-thinking model of learning is contradicted, however, by a substantial body of evidence from cognitive psychology. Implicit beliefs should be made explicit because an understanding of learning theory assumptions is fundamental to evaluating evidence of testing effects and therfore to framing validity investigations.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.