1. Instructional Change in the Science Classroom Brought about from Curriculum Alignment due to Standardized Testing Kerry M. Fergason University of Texas at Dallas November 23, 2004

2. Introduction Most U.S. states have instituted a high-stakes or standardized test. Tests are used to make instructional decisions and guide instructional practice.

3. The Controversy: Critics Denies students of experiences Teachers “teach to the test” Performance does not transfer to other measures Increased pressure on students and teachers

4. The Controversy: Supporters More focus on state curriculum Even distribution of education Accountability – higher expectations Support for low performing schools Allows parents/students to make informed decisions

5. Short-Term Strategies Purchased preparation workbooks and software Emphasis on test taking skills Assessments that mimic standardized testing styles Administration of practice tests Individual student conferences Professional development workshops

6. Long-term Strategies Developing clear instructional goals from the analysis of existing standards documents Restructuring and re-focusing curriculum Increased collaboration to promote improved learning Understanding how assessment promotes high quality learning environments

7. How does the relate to Texas? The Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS), aligned with the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS), has replaced the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS). How will this change instruction?

8. Research Design Hypothesis: If students apply biology concepts in chemistry situations, then TAKS scores will increase. Compare 2 student groups. One with biology concepts and one without.

9. References Abrams, L.M., Pedulla, J.J., & Madaus, G.F. (2003). Views from the classroom: Teachers’ opinions of statewide testing programs. Theory into Practice, 42(1), 18-29. McColskey, W., & McNunn, N. (2000). Strategies for dealing with high-stakes state tests. Phi Delta Kappan, 82(2), 115-126. McGehee J.J., & Griffith, L.K. (2001). Large-scale assessments combined with curriculum alignment: Agents of change. Theory into Practice, 40(2), 137-144. Schmoker, Mike. (2000, February). The results we want. Educational Leadership, 57(1), 62-65. Texas Education Agency. (n.d.). Aiming higher: Meeting the challenges of education reform in Texas. Retrieved November 14, 2004, http://www.tea.state.tx.us/curriculum/aimhitexas.pdf http://www.tea.state.tx.us/curriculum/aimhitexas.pdf Texas Education Agency. (n.d.). Information booklet: Science grade 11 exit level. Retrieved October 23, 2004, http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/taks/booklets/science/g11.pdf http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/taks/booklets/science/g11.pdf Texas Education Agency. (n.d.). Technical digest chapter 1: Background. Retrieved October 23, 2004, http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/resources/techdig/chap1.pdf http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/resources/techdig/chap1.pdf Vogler, K.E. (2002). The impact of high-stakes, state-mandated student performance assessment on teacher’s instructional practices. Education, 123(1), 39-55. Woessmann, L. (2001). Why students in some countries do better: International evidence on the importance of educational policy. Education Matters, 1(2), 67-74.