IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/oec/eduaab/54-en.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Using Student Test Results for Accountability and Improvement: A Literature Review

Author

Listed:
  • Morten Anstorp Rosenkvist

    (Ministry of Education and Research, Norway)

Abstract

This report discusses the most relevant issues concerning using student test results in OECD countries. Initially the report provides an overview of how student test results are reported in OECD countries and how stakeholders in these countries use and perceive of the results. The report then reviews the literature relating to using student test results for accountability and improvement purposes. Two general findings can be drawn from the literature: (1) accountability based on student test results can be a powerful tool for changing teacher and school behaviour, but it often creates unintended strategic behaviour, and (2) no test can be a perfect indicator of student performance. Drawing from these findings the report discusses the advantages and disadvantages of using student test results for accountability and improvement. The discussion touches upon four themes: (1) assessment design, (2) the use of test results, (3) stakeholder involvement, and (4) implementation. Ce rapport analyse les questions essentielles sur l’utilisation des résultats de tests standardisés aux élèves dans les pays de l’OCDE. Premièrement, le rapport offre un aperçu sur comment les résultats de tests standardisés sont communiqués dans les pays de l’OCDE et comment les différentes parties prenantes utilisent et perçoivent les résultats. Ensuite le rapport fait une révision de la littérature académique sur l’utilisation des résultats de tests standardisés pour l’amélioration et le rendement de comptes. Deux résultats plus généraux émergent de la littérature : (1) Le rendement de comptes basé sur les résultats de tests standardisés peut avoir un fort effet sur le comportement de l’enseignant et de l’école mais peut aussi créer du comportement stratégique non souhaité, et (2) aucun test ne peut être un indicateur parfait des résultats scolaires d’un élève. En se fondant sur ces résultats, le rapport analyse les avantages et inconvénients de l’utilisation des résultats de tests standardisés pour l’amélioration et le rendement de comptes. L’analyse aborde quatre thèmes : (1) la conception de l’évaluation, (2) l’utilisation des résultats des tests, (3) l’implication des parties prenantes, et (4) l’implémentation.

Suggested Citation

  • Morten Anstorp Rosenkvist, 2010. "Using Student Test Results for Accountability and Improvement: A Literature Review," OECD Education Working Papers 54, OECD Publishing.
    • Handle: RePEc:oec:eduaab:54-en
    DOI: 10.1787/5km4htwzbv30-en
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1787/5km4htwzbv30-en
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1787/5km4htwzbv30-en?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bracci, Enrico, 2009. "Autonomy, responsibility and accountability in the Italian school system," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 293-312.
    2. Chakrabarti Rajashri, 2013. "Impact of Voucher Design on Public School Performance: Evidence from Florida and Milwaukee Voucher Programs," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 14(1), pages 349-394, July.
    3. repec:mpr:mprres:6364 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Chiang, Hanley, 2009. "How accountability pressure on failing schools affects student achievement," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(9-10), pages 1045-1057, October.
    5. Hanley Chiang, "undated". "How Accountability Pressure on Failing Schools Affects Student Achievement," Mathematica Policy Research Reports c58a3b537e324447b94a2bd41, Mathematica Policy Research.
    6. William Duncombe & Anna Lukemeyer & John Yinger, 2008. "The No Child Left Behind Act," Public Finance Review, , vol. 36(4), pages 381-407, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Stefanie Dufaux, 2012. "Assessment for Qualification and Certification in Upper Secondary Education: A Review of Country Practices and Research Evidence," OECD Education Working Papers 83, OECD Publishing.
    2. Morozumi, Atsuyoshi & Tanaka, Ryuichi, 2020. "Should School-Level Results of National Assessments Be Made Public?," IZA Discussion Papers 13450, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Benedikt Siegler, 2013. "What triggers school improvement? Evidence from a court induced change in Florida's A+ accountability plan," Working Papers 135, Bavarian Graduate Program in Economics (BGPE).
    2. Jonah Rockoff & Lesley J. Turner, 2010. "Short-Run Impacts of Accountability on School Quality," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 2(4), pages 119-147, November.
    3. Ferreyra, Maria Marta & Liang, Pierre Jinghong, 2012. "Information asymmetry and equilibrium monitoring in education," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 237-254.
    4. Craig, Steven G. & Imberman, Scott A. & Perdue, Adam, 2015. "Do administrators respond to their accountability ratings? The response of school budgets to accountability grades," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 55-68.
    5. Craig, Steven G. & Imberman, Scott A. & Perdue, Adam, 2013. "Does it pay to get an A? School resource allocations in response to accountability ratings," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 30-42.
    6. Akyol, Metin, 2016. "Do educational vouchers reduce inequality and inefficiency in education?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 149-167.
    7. Seunghoon Han & Hosung Sohn, 2020. "Impact of the Simultaneous Use of the Stigmatization and Categorical School Funding Policy on the Test and Post-Secondary Outcomes of Lower-Achieving Students," Korean Economic Review, Korean Economic Association, vol. 36, pages 319-352.
    8. Hemelt, Steven W., 2011. "Performance effects of failure to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP): Evidence from a regression discontinuity framework," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 702-723, August.
    9. Craig, Steven G. & Imberman, Scott A. & Perdue, Adam, 2013. "Does it pay to get an A? School resource allocations in response to accountability ratings," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 30-42.
    10. Benedikt Siegler, 2015. "Microeconometric Evaluations of Education Policies," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 57.
    11. Ana Balcao Reis & Carmo Seabra & Luis C. Nunes, 2012. "Ranking schools: a step toward increased accountability or a mere discriminatory practice?," Nova SBE Working Paper Series wp567, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Nova School of Business and Economics.
    12. Rajashri Chakrabarti, 2013. "Accountability with Voucher Threats, Responses, and the Test-Taking Population: Regression Discontinuity Evidence from Florida," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 8(2), pages 121-167, April.
    13. Chakrabarti, Rajashri, 2014. "Incentives and responses under No Child Left Behind: Credible threats and the role of competition," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 124-146.
    14. Tahir Andrabi & Jishnu Das & Asim Ijaz Khwaja, 2017. "Report Cards: The Impact of Providing School and Child Test Scores on Educational Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(6), pages 1535-1563, June.
    15. Friesen, Jane & Harris, Benjamin Cerf & Woodcock, Simon, 2013. "Open Enrolment and Student Achievement," CLSSRN working papers clsrn_admin-2013-46, Vancouver School of Economics, revised 22 Mar 2014.
    16. Figlio, D. & Karbownik, K. & Salvanes, K.G., 2016. "Education Research and Administrative Data," Handbook of the Economics of Education,, Elsevier.
    17. Filer, Randall K. & Münich, Daniel, 2013. "Responses of private and public schools to voucher funding," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 269-285.
    18. Jacobus Cilliers & Isaac M. Mbiti & Andrew Zeitlin, 2021. "Can Public Rankings Improve School Performance?: Evidence from a Nationwide Reform in Tanzania," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 56(3), pages 655-685.
    19. David J. Deming & Sarah Cohodes & Jennifer Jennings & Christopher Jencks, 2016. "School Accountability, Postsecondary Attainment, and Earnings," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 98(5), pages 848-862, December.
    20. Koohyun Kwon & Soonwoo Kwon, 2020. "Inference in Regression Discontinuity Designs under Monotonicity," Papers 2011.14216, arXiv.org.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oec:eduaab:54-en. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deoecfr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.