SavedAdd your journal

Journals / International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education / 2026 / Volume: 8 Issue: 2

Views of Teachers on the Potential Negative Effects of High Stake Tests

Mustafa İlhan(DİCLE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-1804-002X
Neşe Güler(İZMİR DEMOKRASİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-2836-3132
Gülşen Taşdelen Teker(Hacettepe Üniversitesi)0000-0003-3434-4373
Pages
—
Publication Date
2021-06-10
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

As a result, it was found that teachers considered the stimulant “school assessments turn into secondary importance in the eyes of students and parents” as the foremost problem stemming from high stake exams.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study analyses teachers’ viewpoints on the potential undesirable influences of high stake exams.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Seven stimulants related to undesirable influences of high stake exams on education were given to 191 teachers in a pairwise comparisons format.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result, it was found that teachers considered the stimulant “school assessments turn into secondary importance in the eyes of students and parents” as the foremost problem stemming from high stake exams.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:High–stake tests · Paired comparisons · Many facet Rasch model

Abstract

This study analyses teachers’ viewpoints on the potential undesirable influences of high stake exams. Seven stimulants related to undesirable influences of high stake exams on education were given to 191 teachers in a pairwise comparisons format. The participating teachers in this study were asked to choose one undesirable influence by comparing the stimulants given to them in pairwise and to determine the more prominent problem stemming from high stake exams. Data were analyzed via many-facet Rasch model. As a result, it was found that teachers considered the stimulant “school assessments turn into secondary importance in the eyes of students and parents” as the foremost problem stemming from high stake exams. On the other hand, the stimulant “administors focus on policies for increasing exam scores instead of policies for improving the learning–teaching process” ranked the last in the undesirable influences of high stake exams.

Özet

This study analyses teachers’ viewpoints on the potential undesirable influences of high stake exams. Seven stimulants related to undesirable influences of high stake exams on education were given to 191 teachers in a pairwise comparisons format. The participating teachers in this study were asked to choose one undesirable influence by comparing the stimulants given to them in pairwise and to determine the more prominent problem stemming from high stake exams. Data were analyzed via many-facet Rasch model. As a result, it was found that teachers considered the stimulant “school assessments turn into secondary importance in the eyes of students and parents” as the foremost problem stemming from high stake exams. On the other hand, the stimulant “administors focus on policies for increasing exam scores instead of policies for improving the learning–teaching process” ranked the last in the undesirable influences of high stake exams.

🔖

Cite This Article

İlhan, M., Güler, N., Teker, G. T. (2021). Views of Teachers on the Potential Negative Effects of High Stake Tests. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, Volume: 8 Issue: 2. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.735232

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (76)

  1. Abrams, L. M. (2004). Teachers’ views on high–stakes testing: Implications for the classroom. Arizona: Policy Brief: Education Policy Studies Laboratory. Arizona State University College of Education. http://epsl.asu.edu/epru/documents/EPSL-0401-104-EPRU.pdf
  2. Acar Güvendir, M. (2014). Student and school characteristics' relation to Turkish achievement in student achievement determination exam. Education and Science, 39(172), 163–180. http://egitimvebilim.ted.org.tr/index.php/EB/article/view/2839
  3. Adedoyin, O. O (2013). Public examinations and its influence on the Botswana educational system: Views of undergraduate education students at the University of Botswana. Asian Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 1(2), 124–134. https://ajhss.org/pdfs-1/Public%20Examinations%20and%20its..pdf
  4. Almus, K. (2010). The beliefs of principals and assistant principals regarding high–stakes testing. [Doctoral dissertation, University of Houston, Houston, United States]. https://uh-ir.tdl.org/handle/10657/ETD-UH-2010-12-78
  5. Amoako, I. (2019). What’s at stake in high–stakes testing in Ghana: Implication for curriculum ımplementation in basic schools. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies, 5(3), 72–82. https://doi.org/10.23918/ijsses.v5i3p72
  6. Amrein, A. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2003). The effects of high-stake testing on student motivation and learning. Educational Leadership, 60(5), 32 38. http://www.wou.edu/~girodm/611/testing_and_motivation.pdf
  7. Anıl, D., & Güler, N. (2006). An example of the scaling study by pair–wise comparison method. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 30, 30 36. http://www.efdergi.hacettepe.edu.tr/yonetim/icerik/makaleler/722-published.pdf
  8. Assaf, L. Z. (2008) Professional identity of a reading teacher: Responding to high–stakes testing pressures. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 14(3), 239 252. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540600802006137
  9. Atılgan, H. (2018). Transition among education levels in Turkey: Past–present and a recommended model. Ege Journal of Education, 19(1), 1 18. https://doi.org/10.12984/egeefd.363268
  10. Banks, J., & Smyth, E. (2015). Your whole life depends on it’: academic stress and high–stakes testing in Ireland. Journal of Youth Studies, 18(5), 598 616. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2014.992317
  11. Baykal, A. (2014). Sınavlardan sınav beğen. Eğitim sisteminde kademeler arası geçiş ve sınavlar [Like the exam from the exams. Transition between stages and exams in the education system]. Ege’den Eğitime Bakış Paneli, Ege Üniversitesi, İzmir. https://www.academia.edu/11610273/SINAVLARDAN_SINAV_BE%C4%9EEN
  12. Behizadeha, N., & Engelhard, G. (2014). Development and validation of a scale to measure perceived authenticity in writing. Assessing Writing, 21, 18 36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2014.02.001
  13. Board of Education and Training. (2017). Our renewal and change studies in curriculum. https://ttkb.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2017_07/18160003_basin_aciklamasi-program.pdf
  14. Brady, A. L. (2008). Effects of standardized testing on teachers' emotions, pedagogy and professional interactions with others. [Doctoral dissertation, Cleveland State University, Cleveland, United States]. https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1038&context=etdarchive
  15. Brockmeier, L. L, Green, R. B., Pate, J. L., Tsemunhu, R. T., & Bochenko, M. J. (2014). Teachers’ beliefs about the effects of high stakes testing. Journal of Education and Human Development, 3(4), 91-104. http://dx.doi.org/10.15640/jehd.v3n4a9
  16. Brooke, N. (2016). High–stakes accountability using teacher salary incentives in Brazil: An update. Profesorado, Revista de Currículum y Formación del Profesorado, 20(3), 207–250. https://recyt.fecyt.es/index.php/profesorado/article/view/54598
  17. Bülbül, T., & Acar, M (2012). A pair–wise scaling study on the missions of education supervisors in Turkey. International Journal of Human Sciences, 9(2), 623–640. https://www.j-humansciences.com/ojs/index.php/IJHS/article/viewFile/2327/941
  18. Buyruk, H. (2014). Standardized examinations as a teacher performance ındicator and performance evaluation in education. Trakya University Journal of Education, 4(2), 28–42. http://dergipark.gov.tr/trkefd/issue/21480/230201
  19. Can, E. (2017). Determination of the effects of central exams according to the view of students. The journal of Academic Social Science, 5(58), 108 122. http://dx.doi.org/10.16992/ASOS.12842
  20. Çetin, A., & Ünsal, S. (2018). Social, psychological effects of central examinations on teachers and their reflections on teachers' curriculum implementations. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 34(2), 304-323. http://dx.doi.org/10.16986/HUJE.2018040672
  21. Christian, S. C. (2010). High–stakes testing and its relationship to stress levels of secondary teachers. [Doctoral dissertation, The University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, United States]. https://aquila.usm.edu/dissertations/932/
  22. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research Methods in Education (6th ed.). Routledge Falmer.
  23. Coniam D., & Falvey P. (2007) High–stakes testing and assessment. In J. Cummins J., & C. Davison (Eds.), International handbook of English language teaching (pp. 456-471). Springer.
  24. Davis, M. F. (2011). The influence of high–stakes testing on science teacher perceptions and practices. [Doctoral dissertation, Walden University, Minneapolis, United States]. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED528115
  25. Dawson, H. S. (2012). Teachers’ motivation and beliefs in a high–stakes testing context. [Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, Ohio, United States]. https://etd.ohiolink.edu/apexprod/rws_etd/send_file/send?accession=osu1338399669&disposition=inline
  26. Ekinci, A., Bindak, R., & Yıldırım, M. C. (2012). A research regarding the empathic approaches of school managers about professional problems of teachers by pair–wise comparisons method. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 11(3), 759–776. http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/223316
  27. Erkuş, A. (2011). Scientific research process for behavioral sciences. Seçkin.
  28. Finkeldei, J. (2016). The influence of high stakes testing on elementary classroom instruction. [Doctoral dissertation, Wichita State University, United States]. https://soar.wichita.edu/bitstream/handle/10057/12632/d16008_Finkeldei.pdf?sequence=1
  29. Finn, B. (2015). Measuring motivation in low-stakes assessments. ETS Research Report Series, 2(2), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12067
  30. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E. & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education. McGraw–Hill.
  31. Güler, N., & Anıl, D. (2009). Scaling through pair–wise comparison method in required characteristics of students applying for post graduate programs. International Journal of Human Sciences, 6(1), 627 639. https://www.j humansciences.com/ojs/index.php/IJHS/article/view/673
  32. Güler, N., & İlhan, M. (2017, October). Comparision of the results obtained from t-test and ANOVA, and many facet Rasch analysis for difference based statistics. Paper presented at the 13th International Conference on Social Sciences, Vienna.
  33. Güzeller, C. O., & Eser, M. T., & Aksu, G. (2016). Pair–wise comparison method application via R project and Microsoft Excel. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 7(1), 96–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.21031/epod.80072
  34. Hirsch, P. J. (2016). High stakes testing and its effect on teacher methodologies. [Master’s thesis, Caldwell University].
  35. İlhan, M. (2016). An analysis of researchers' difficulties in quantitative data analysis with the use of pairwise comparisons. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 7(1), 73–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.21031/epod.28154
  36. İlhan, M., & Güler, M. (2017). The use of Rasch model in Likert types scales: An application on the fear of negative evaluation scale-Student form (FNE-SF). Trakya Journal of Education, 8(4), 756–775. http://dx.doi.org/10.24315/trkefd.357367
  37. Johnson, P. (2007). High stakes testing and No Child Left Behind: Conceptual and empirical considerations. Long Island Economic & Social Policy Institute, Dowling College School of Education, Long Island, NY. http://martincantor.com/files/High%20Stakes_LIESPWhitepaperMay4.pdf
  38. Kane, G. (2014). Accelerating sustainability using the 80/20 rule. Oxford: Do Sustaniablity.
  39. Knapp, D. (2010). A guide to service desk concepts. Course Technology, Cengage Learning.
  40. Kornhauser, Z. G. C., Minahan, J., Siedlecki, K. L., & Steedle, J. T. (2014, April). A strategy for İncreasing student motivation on low-stakes assessments. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Philadelphia. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED582123.pdf
  41. Kruger, L. J., Wandle, C., & Struzziero, J. (2007). Coping with the stress of high stakes testing. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 23(2), 109 128, https://doi.org/10.1300/J370v23n02_07
  42. Kumandaş, H., & Kutlu, Ö. (2015). High stake tests. Journal of Educational Science Research, 5(2), 63–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.12973/jesr. 2015.52.4
  43. Linacre, J. M. (2012). Many facet Rasch measurement: Facets tutorial2. http://www.winsteps.com/a/ftutorial2.pdf
  44. Linacre, J. M. (2014). A user's guide to FACETS Rasch–model computer programs. https://www.winsteps.com/facetman/pairedcomparisons.htm
  45. Marchant, G. J. (2004). What is at stake with high stakes testing? A discussion of issues and research. The Ohio Journal of Science, 104(2), 2 7. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/ca83/c29a37b1389c737a35b3454808bacaf97128.pdf
  46. Minarechová, M. (2012). Negative impacts of high–stakes testing. Journal of Pedagogy, 3(1), 82–100. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10159-012-0004-x
  47. Moses, M. S., & Nanna, M. J. (2007). The testing culture and the persistence of highstakes testing reforms. Education and Culture, 23(1), 55 72. https://doi.org/10.1353/eac.2007.0010
  48. Nalbantoğlu Yılmaz, F. (2017). Investigation of the factors affecting occupation choices of high school students with paired comparison method. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 8(2), 224–236. http://dx.doi.org/10.21031/epod.303882
  49. Nartgün, Z. (2006). Öğretmenlik meslek bilgisi derslerinin önem düzeyinin ikili karşılaştırmalarla ölçeklenmesi [Scaling the importance level of teaching profession courses using paired comparisons]. Abant İzzet Baysal University Journal of Faculty of Education, 6(2), 161–176. http://efdergi.ibu.edu.tr/index.php/efdergi/article/view/964
  50. Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2005). The inevitable corruption of indicators and educators through high–stakes testing. Education Policy Research Unit (EPRU), Education Policy Studies Laboratory, Arizona State University. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED508483.pdf
  51. Pbrreault, G. (2000). The classroom impact of high-stress testing. Education, 120(4), 705-710.
  52. Phelps, R. P. (2003). Kill the messenger: The war on standardized testing. New Brunswick, Transaction.
  53. Polesel, J., Dulfer N., & Turnbull, M. (2012). The experience of education: The impacts of high stakes testing on school students and their families. Sydney: Whitlam Institute Report, University of Western Sydney, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265752469_The_Experience_of_Education_The_impacts_of_high_stakes_testing_on_school_students_and_their_families_Literature_Review
  54. Ricketts, S.N., Engelhard, G., & Chang, M.L. (2015). Development and validation of a scale to measure academic resilience in mathematics. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 33(2), 79–86. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000274
  55. Ritt, M. (2016). The impact of high–stakes testing on the learning environment. [Masters’ thesis, St. Catherine University/University of St. Thomas, United States of America]. https://sophia.stkate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1660&context=msw_papers
  56. Saito, Y. (2006). Consequences of high stakes testing on the family and schools in Japan. KEDI Journal of Educational Policy (KJEP), 3(1), 101–102.
  57. Segool, N. K., Carlson, J. S., Goforth, A. N., von der Embse, N., & Barterian, J. A. (2013). Heightened test anxiety among young children: Elementary school students’ anxious responses to hig stakes testing. Psychology in Schools, 50(5), 489 499. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21689
  58. Shepard, L., & Dougherty, K. C. (1991, April). Effects of high–stakes testing on instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED337468.pdf
  59. Simpson, C. (2016). Effects of standardized testing on students’ well-being. https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/eap/files/c._simpson_effects_of_testing_on_well_being_5_16.pdf
  60. Spann, P., & Kaufman, D. (2015). The negative effects of high–stakes testing. https://www.luc.edu/media/lucedu/law/centers/childlaw/childed/pdfs/2015studentpapers/Spann.pdf
  61. Stanley, G. K. (2004). High stakes hustle: Public schools and the new billion dollar accountability. The Educational Forum, 69(1), 8 16. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131720408984660
  62. Stecher, B. M. (2002). Consequences of large-scale, high-stakes testing on school and classroom practice. In L. S. Hamilton, B. M. Stecher, & S. P. Klein (Eds.). Making sense of test-based accountability in education (pp. 79-100). RAND Corporation. https://larrycuban.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/mr1554-ch4.pdf
  63. Stobart, G., & Eggen, T. (2012). High-stakes testing – value, fairness and consequences. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 19(1), 1 6. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2012.639191
  64. Taylor, G., Sheppard, L., Kinner, F., & Rosenthal, J. (2003). A survey of teachers' perspectives on high-stakes testing in Colorado: Wwhat gets taught, what gets lost. (CSE Tech. Rep. 588). Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED475139.pdf
  65. Togut, T. D. (2004). High stakes testing: Educational barometer for success, or false prognosticator for failure. https://www.harborhouselaw.com/articles/highstakes.togut.htm
  66. Turgut, M. F., & Baykul, Y. (1992). Ölçekleme Teknikleri [Scaling techniques]. ÖSYM.
  67. Vogler, K. E., & Virtue, D. (2007). “Just the Facts, Ma’am”: Teaching social studies in the era of standards and high–stakes. Testing, The Social Studies, 98(2), 54–58. https://doi.org/10.3200/TSSS.98.2.54-58
  68. Westfall, D. M. (2010). Parental perceptions of the effects of the high–stakes TAKS test on the home lives of at–risk fifth grade students. [Doctoral dissertation, University of Houston, Houston, Texas]. https://uh-ir.tdl.org/handle/10657/170
  69. Winters, M. A., Trivitt, J. R., & Greene, J. P. (2010). The impact of high–stakes testing on student proficiency in low–stakes subjects: Evidence from Florida’s elementary science exam. Economics of Education Review, 29(1), 138 146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2009.07.004
  70. Wise, S. L., & DeMars, C. E. (2005). Low examinee effort in low-stakes assessment: Problems and potential solutions. Educational Assessment, 10(1), 1 17. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326977ea1001_1
  71. Wright, B. D., & Linacre, J. M. (1994). Reasonable mean–square fit values. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 8, 370. http://www.rasch.org/rmt/rmt83b.htm
  72. Wright, W. E. (2002). The effects of high stakes testing in an inner–city elementary school: The curriculum, the teachers, and the English language learners. Current Issues in Education, 5(5). https://cie.asu.edu/ojs/index.php/cieatasu/article/view/1622/663
  73. Yaşar, M. (2018). Scaling of ideal teachers characteristics with pairwise comparison judgments according to pre–service teachers’ opinions. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 5(1), 130–145. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.369233
  74. Yeh, S. S. (2005). Limiting the unintended consequences of high-stakes testing. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(43). http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v13n43.2005
  75. Yılmaz, S. (2017). Evaluating the reflections of high stakes tests on school culture. [Master’s thesis, Trakya University].
  76. Adedoyin, O. O (2013). Public examinations and its influence on the Botswana educational system: Views of undergraduate education students at the University of Botswana. Asian Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 1(2), 124–134. https://ajhss.org/pdfs-1/Public%20Examinations%20and%20its.pdf