Introduction

The concept of high stakes testing has been in operation in the US for quite some time now. Students are required to partake in the tests before they progress to the next grades. Although the concept is largely applied, it has numerous ramifications for both students and educators. High-stakes testing affects both educators and students all across the United States. While the concept is not new in the education sector, its effects on students with disabilities is a source of concern (Needs, 2008). In particular, the requirement that all students including those with disabilities undertake high-stakes testing in their studies has far reaching impacts. There is a general consensus regarding the impacts of high-stakes test on students across the country. In addition, it is known that high stakes testing has profound impacts when administered on students with disabilities. However, the exact negative and positive impacts of the tests on students with disabilities need to be identified.

It is no doubt that high stake testing has serious ramifications for students with disabilities. Results from studies in the past point to a clear relationship between high-stakes testing and increased pressure on the students (Amrein & Berliner, 2002). There are links to the effect that high-stakes testing results in improved performance among students. It is not however clear whether these results are realized when students with disabilities are involved. There is an urgent need for information on the specific effects of high-stakes testing of students with disabilities. For instance policy makers and decision makes at different levels of administration require this information to evaluate the effectiveness of the policy. Moreover, the identification of both negative and positive impacts of high-stakes testing is significant in improving the concept in general. This study is therefore very significant in the development of education.

Purposes

The review study aims to evaluate and describe existing research results of the consequences of high-stakes testing for students with disabilities. In this undertaking, the paper will attempt to suggest the implications of these consequences on the educational development of both students and educators. Consequently, the review paper purposes to identify the specific impacts of high-stakes tests on students with disabilities. This paper focuses on both negative and positive consequences thus finding a balance in the concept’s application. In addition, the study aims to contribute to existing literature on the concept of high-stakes tests among students with disabilities. The paper also intends to raise awareness on the important factors to put into consideration before the application of high-stakes tests. Ultimately, the review purposes to identify areas of improvement in the administration of high-stakes tests.

Research Question

The review paper approaches the subject of discussion through one research question that is relevant to the topic. The criterion used in selecting the research question is dependent on the frequency of application in past literature. Moreover, the research question is guided by the objective of the review paper to ascertain the implications of high-stakes testing in children with disabilities. The selected research question is testable and forms the backbone of the study by influencing the methodology to be used. The review paper will be guided by the research question with an intention of providing answers to the question posed. The main objective of the review study is to, therefore, answer the research question:

• What are the consequences of high-stakes testing for students with disabilities?

Description, Comparison, and Evaluation

Description

The subject of high stakes testing dominates the seven papers under review with a focus on the consequences on students with disabilities. In Christenson et al. (2007), the consequences of high stakes assessment for students with and without disabilities is explored. The same was achieved through an examination of school professionals on their perspectives regarding the anticipated effects of high-stakes tests. A total of 249 participants drawn from 19 states and 99 schools were interviewed including school psychologists and educators. The survey was structured to include observations of the consequences of high stakes tests on students. The findings pointed to the existence of a range in the effects of the assessments with a number of the consequences having increased in frequency due to the implementation of high-stakes testing.

Ysseldyke et al (2004) take the test further by exploring the perceived consequences of high-stakes tests on students with disabilities. The paper studies the gap between the alleged consequences, both negative and positive, and the empirically proved impacts. The researchers integrated empirical and anecdotal evidence in surveying the different consequences as they have been advanced in the past. Some of the factors analyzed in the paper include changes in grade and promotion decisions as well as decisions in diploma and graduation options. In addition, the study explored the perceived consequences of test stress, increased class participation, and improvements in performance expectations. Moreover, the paper analyzes data that is necessary in deciding on the intended and unintended effects of high-stakes tests.

Needs (2008) evaluate the effects of high-stakes tests on students with disabilities including both positive and negative implications. The paper identifies with students with disabilities because they are more prone to the negative impacts of high-stakes assessments. The paper interviews education professionals in specials schools catering for the needs of children with disabilities. The combination of school psychologists and educators are interviewed regarding their perceived observations of consequences of high-stakes testing. The study finds that students with disabilities suffer from the negative implications of high-stakes testing. Also, data from the study implores that students with disabilities are more prone to the negative impacts of high-stakes testing compared to those that have no disabilities. Finally, the paper ascertains the reason for the difference in implication between students with and without disabilities.

In Katsiyannis et al (2007), the relationship between high-stakes tests and students with disabilities is further explored. The increasing popularity of these tests among most schools is worrying when used as a yardstick for individual performance of students. The challenges and problems associated with high-stakes tests in relation to students with disabilities are evaluated ion detail. The paper is a review of the recent literature in the field of high-stakes testing and the anticipated consequences on students with disabilities. The paper finds that high stakes testing has potentially negative implications for schools, parents and students with disabilities. Some of these impacts are associated with the labeling of schools as failing as well as withholding of certificates and diplomas for high school students.

The subject of high-stakes testing and its impacts on students undertaking the courses is further evaluated in Jones et al (2003). In particular, the paper dwells on the unintended consequences of high-stakes testing on the students. The study employs a descriptive research design in discussing the unintended implications on both students with and without disabilities. By concentrating on the unintended consequences of high-stakes assessments, the study delves into an area that is rarely explored. The results of the study conclude that most of the unintended implications of high-stakes testing are most pronounced in students with disabilities. Consequently, unintended effects are far worse that intended consequences as they are mostly negative and contribute to the slow development of a student’s educational capabilities.

Amrein & Berliner (2002) embark on an analysis of the negative unintended consequences of high-stakes testing in schools. The mandatory nature of the tests exposes students to the negative implications associated with high-stakes tests. The implication of the policy calling for the mandatory application of high-stakes tests in schools is explored in relation to increased negative consequences. The paper evaluates the states that require the implementation of high-stakes assessments and compares the dropout and graduation rates of students within the schools. The paper is a descriptive analysis of the relationship between the implementation of high-stakes tests and the negative implications that are normally unintended. The study finds that high-stakes tests are associated with negative and unintended implications arising from such factors as stress and denied opportunities.

Comparisons

The basic architecture of all the six papers under review is similar and is based on the consequences of high-stakes assessments on students with disabilities. The methodology used is largely influenced by the nature of research questions. Most of the papers employ a descriptive approach with only a few of the studies employing quantitative research designs. In Amrein & Berliner (2002), the research questions call for the descriptive analysis of the study. Indeed, the nature of the study prompts the researchers to employ review of the current literature in expounding the problem of high-stakes testing. In similar fashion, Katsiyannis et al (2007) embark on a descriptive review of the consequences of high-stakes testing on students with disabilities. Also, a similar approach is employed in the study of positive and negative implications of high-stakes testing in students with disabilities (Ysseldyke et al, 2004). Ultimately, the research designs used in most of these papers is descriptive and is influenced by the nature of the research questions.

Similarly, the studies seem to agree on the results as they all point to a positive relationship between high-stakes assessments and negative implications on students with disabilities. Christenson et al (2007) reports a significant range on the effects of high-stakes assessments. Also, the study found that there has been an increase in the frequency of these implications owing to the implementation of high-stakes tests. Moreover, the items reported as having increased were related to the improvement of student as well as school performance. Similar findings are replicated in Jones et al (2003) where the study reports unintended consequences of high-stakes testing affect both students with and without disabilities. The items reported in this study are similar to the ones reported in Needs (2008) and relate to the decrease of students’ esteem. Also, the incidence of stress among students with disabilities and a delayed development are attributed to the negative impacts of high-stakes testing. In essence, therefore, the studies have almost similar results largely focused on the negative implications of high-stakes testing and especially on students with disabilities.

The homogenous nature of the studies and their descriptive research designs encourage the use of related methodologies. Consequently, a large percentage of the studies are reviews and do not involve actual participants. That notwithstanding, Christenson et al (2007) interviewed a total of 249 participants in examining the observed implications of high-stakes testing on students. In the study, both students with and without disabilities are explored thus providing a much-needed balance. In Ysseldyke et al (2004), a review of the positive and negative effects of high-stakes testing is achieved through dissection of past literature. In this undertaking, both anecdotal and empirical evidence are implored upon to provide a range of different outcomes. Amrein & Berliner (2003) categorize the implications of high-stakes testing according to the respective states in which the policy is implemented. The objective of the study is then attained through a comparison of the different outcomes in the selected states. The similarity in research architecture in all the studies dictates a similar approach in methodology and results. It is not shocking, therefore, that most of these studies replicate similar findings.

Evaluation

Children with disabilities are more prone to the negative implications of high-stakes testing thus affecting their educational development. Students with disability continue to face challenges in education performance as high-stakes tests are used as a yardstick for individual and school performance. It is in this view that the concept is analyzed in the six studies under review. In the end, all the studies were highly efficient in attaining their respective aims and especially the answering of research questions. Regardless, each of the papers had its fair share of strengths and weaknesses based on their choice of methodology and research instruments. The objective of analyzing some unintended and negative implications of high-stakes testing is attained through the comparison of different states in Amrein & Berliner (2002). In fact, the grouping of schools according to their respective states is a plus as it allows for a smooth analysis of the repercussions of high-stakes tests. Also, the study explores the unintended consequences by clustering the characteristics of states with high-stakes assessments. That notwithstanding, the lack of participants in the paper provides a weakness as the narration of students and educators was not captured. In contrast, Christenson et al (2007) attain the research objective through an interview of 249 participants. The use of a large number of participants is a source of strength as well as the use of a wide range of states. However, the study did not include the perceptions of students with regard to the tests thus forming a weakness.

Ysseldyke et al (2004) takes on a review of the existing literature to support negative and positive implications of high-stakes tests. Particularly, evidence of these ramifications on the students with disabilities is explored thus attaining a balance in both positive and negative effects. The incorporation of both anecdotal and empirical evidence in the study provides a source of strength as it gives a broader image of the consequences. The reliance on a review is also helpful as it explores different topics within the wider realms of high-stakes tests. Consequently, the paper provides an important basis for future studies by exploring both positive and negative implications. In Needs (2008), the effects of high-stakes testing are explored with regard to students with disabilities. The focus on students with disabilities is important as it narrows down the scope of study allowing for a better concentration on the topic. However, the paper fails to compare the implications on students with disabilities and those without disabilities thus losing out on an important task.

The relationship between high stakes testing and students with disabilities is further explored in Katsiyannis et al (2007). In the paper, the researchers explore the possibility of negative implications of high-stakes tests on students with disabilities. The results of the study validate the hypothesis that students with disabilities suffer more negative consequences from the implementation of high-stakes assessments. By using a review to answer the research questions, the paper is effective because it avails a wider scope of the subject. The study is based on past literature on the topic of relevance thus providing more insights into the consequences, both alleged and proved. However, the study is limited in its analysis by avoiding the implications of the tests on students without disabilities. In this regard, it misses out on the opportunity to compare the two sets of consequences before making a conclusion. Jones et al (2003) are also efficient in the conclusion that high-stakes testing have unintended negative consequences. Accordingly, the implementation has negative implications besides the intended consequences. The paper focuses on the unintended effects thus allowing for better and thorough analysis of the topic.

Findings and Implications

The purpose of describing and evaluating the research findings on high-stakes testing and the resultant consequences on students with disabilities is attained. The paper finds considerable evidence in support of the negative and positive implications of the tests on students with disabilities. Following the ratification of the No Child Left Behind Act in 2002, every student including those with disabilities must take high-stakes test (Amrein & Berliner, 2003). In the past, students with disabilities were exempted from this requirement. While the tests have been attributed to improved performance in school, there is concern regarding the negative effects they have on students with disabilities. Indeed, questions have been raised across the country pertaining to the effectiveness of the tests in improving the performance of students with disabilities (Jones et al, 2003). Today, the standardized high-stakes tests have the potential of representing some studies as failures owing to the high level of importance they are assigned (Christenson et al, 2007). The use of test results cannot be used as the only yardstick in the measure of students’ knowledge in a particular subject. More specifically, the tests are detrimental to the success of students with disabilities.

The review points out to the fact that students with disabilities continue to underperform as compared to other students (Ysseldyke et al, 2004). The review study has implications on the consequences of high-stakes tests on students with and without disabilities. This review study has been effective in attaining the desired purpose through a review and subsequent discussion of the findings. The study papers under review aver that students with disabilities are likely to suffer negative implications from the implementation of high-stakes tests. Although there are perceived advantages of the tests, the negative implications are worrying due to their long term repercussions. The paper finds significance in the comparison of different aspects of the subject. Ultimately, the paper concludes that high-stakes tests have both positive and negative implication s on students with disabilities.

References

Christenson, S. L., Decker, D. M., Triezenberg, H. L., Ysseldyke, J. E., & Reschly, A. (2007). Consequences of high-stakes assessment for students with and without disabilities. Educational Policy, 21(4), 662-690.

Ysseldyke, J., Nelson, J. R., Christenson, S., Johnson, D. R., Dennison, A., Triezenberg, H., … & Hawes, M. (2004). What we know and need to know about the consequences of high-stakes testing for students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 71(1), 75-95.

Needs, W. F. P. (2008). High Stakes Testing and Students With Disabilities. Educating Individuals with Disabilities: IDEIA 2004 and Beyond, 319.

Katsiyannis, A., Zhang, D., Ryan, J. B., & Jones, J. (2007). High-stakes testing and students with disabilities challenges and promises. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 18(3), 160-167.

Jones, G. M., Jones, B. D., & Hargrove, T. (2003). The unintended consequences of high-stakes testing. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Amrein, A. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2002). An analysis of some unintended and negative consequences of high-stakes testing. Education Policy Research Unit, Education Policy Studies Laboratory, College of Education, Division of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies, Arizona State University.

Amrein, A. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2003). The Effects of High-Stakes Testing on Student Motivation and Learning. Educational leadership, 60(5), 32-38.

 
Do you need an Original High Quality Academic Custom Essay?