IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/lan/wpaper/161114030.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Impact of Standardised Testing on Later High Stakes Test Outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph Regan-Stansfield

Abstract

Standardised tests are a common, yet contentious, feature of many countries’ schooling systems. In May 2010, over one-quarter of English primary schools boycotted that year’s mandatory age eleven standardised tests (colloquially known as SATs tests). This paper investigates the plausibly causal effect of participation in standardised testing on later end-of-schooling qualification (GCSE) attainment. After controlling for non-random boycott participation, and relying on a selection-on-observables argument, evidence is found of a statistically significant negative effect of boycott participation on various measures of GCSE attainment. Amongst other findings, pupils are estimated to be 0.7 per-cent less likely to achieve five or more GCSEs at grades A* to C due to not sitting their age eleven SATs tests. Thus, evidence is found that individual pupils’ subsequent attainment benefits from their own prior participation in standardised tests.

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph Regan-Stansfield, 2017. "The Impact of Standardised Testing on Later High Stakes Test Outcomes," Working Papers 161114030, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
  • Handle: RePEc:lan:wpaper:161114030
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/media/lancaster-university/content-assets/documents/lums/economics/working-papers/LancasterWP2017_009.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Erik Hanushek & Stephen Machin & Ludger Woessmann (ed.), 2011. "Handbook of the Economics of Education," Handbook of the Economics of Education, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 4, number 4, June.
    2. Burgess, Simon & Wilson, Deborah & Worth, Jack, 2013. "A natural experiment in school accountability: The impact of school performance information on pupil progress," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 57-67.
    3. Will Dobbie & Roland G. Fryer Jr., 2013. "Getting beneath the Veil of Effective Schools: Evidence from New York City," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(4), pages 28-60, October.
    4. Betts, Julian R., 2011. "The Economics of Tracking in Education," Handbook of the Economics of Education, in: Erik Hanushek & Stephen Machin & Ludger Woessmann (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Education, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 7, pages 341-381, Elsevier.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Burgess, Simon, 2016. "Human Capital and Education: The State of the Art in the Economics of Education," IZA Discussion Papers 9885, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Bonesrønning, Hans & Finseraas, Henning & Hardoy, Ines & Iversen, Jon Marius Vaag & Nyhus, Ole Henning & Opheim, Vibeke & Salvanes, Kari Vea & Sandsør, Astrid Marie Jorde & Schøne, Pål, 2022. "Small-group instruction to improve student performance in mathematics in early grades: Results from a randomized field experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    3. Adam M. Lavecchia & Philip Oreopoulos & Robert S. Brown, 2020. "Long-Run Effects from Comprehensive Student Support: Evidence from Pathways to Education," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 2(2), pages 209-224, June.
    4. John, Katrin & Thomsen, Stephan L., 2015. "School-track environment or endowment: What determines different other-regarding behavior across peer groups?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 122-141.
    5. Joshua D. Angrist & Sarah R. Cohodes & Susan M. Dynarski & Parag A. Pathak & Christopher R. Walters, 2016. "Stand and Deliver: Effects of Boston's Charter High Schools on College Preparation, Entry, and Choice," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 34(2), pages 275-318.
    6. Hinnerich, Björn Tyrefors & Vlachos, Jonas, 2017. "The impact of upper-secondary voucher school attendance on student achievement. Swedish evidence using external and internal evaluations," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 1-14.
    7. Zenou, Yves & Hahn, Youjin & Hassani-Mahmooei, behrooz & Islam, Asad & Patacchini, Eleonora, 2016. "Do Friends Improve Female Education? The Case of Bangladesh," CEPR Discussion Papers 11615, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Zenou, Yves & Patacchini, Eleonora & Liu, Xiaodong, 2013. "Peer Effects: Social Multiplier or Social Norms?," CEPR Discussion Papers 9366, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. Annabelle Krause & Simone Schüller, 2014. "Evidence and Persistence of Education Inequality in an Early-Tracking System - The German Case," FBK-IRVAPP Working Papers 2014-07, Research Institute for the Evaluation of Public Policies (IRVAPP), Bruno Kessler Foundation.
    10. Pamela Giustinelli, 2016. "Group Decision Making With Uncertain Outcomes: Unpacking Child–Parent Choice Of The High School Track," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 57(2), pages 573-602, May.
    11. Pierre Lefebvre & Philip Merrigan, 2020. "Les inégalités provinciales aux tests internationaux-nationaux de littéracie : Québec, Ontario et autres provinces canadiennes 1993-2018 (Version révisée et augmentée octobre 2020)," CIRANO Working Papers 2020s-29, CIRANO.
    12. Marc Piopiunik, 2021. "How Does Reducing the Intensity of Tracking Affect Student Achievement? Evidence from German State Reforms," CESifo Working Paper Series 9214, CESifo.
    13. Heisig, Jan Paul & Matthewes, Sönke Hendrik, 2021. "No evidence for positive effects of strict tracking and cognitive homogenization on student performance: A critical reanalysis of Esser and Seuring (2020)," SocArXiv x92mg, Center for Open Science.
    14. M. Caridad Araujo & Pedro Carneiro & Yyannú Cruz-Aguayo & Norbert Schady, 2016. "Teacher Quality and Learning Outcomes in Kindergarten," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 131(3), pages 1415-1453.
    15. Kiss, David, 2013. "The impact of peer achievement and peer heterogeneity on own achievement growth: Evidence from school transitions," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 58-65.
    16. Maria A. Cattaneo & Chantal Oggenfuss & Stefan C. Wolter, 2017. "The more, the better? The impact of instructional time on student performance," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(5), pages 433-445, September.
    17. Hofmarcher, Thomas, 2021. "The effect of education on poverty: A European perspective," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    18. Figlio, D. & Karbownik, K. & Salvanes, K.G., 2016. "Education Research and Administrative Data," Handbook of the Economics of Education,, Elsevier.
    19. Nguyen, Ha Trong & Connelly, Luke & Le, Huong Thu & Mitrou, Francis & Taylor, Catherine & Zubrick, Stephen, 2018. "Explaining the evolution of ethnicity differentials in academic achievements: The role of time investments," MPRA Paper 90534, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. David Card & Laura Giuliano, 2016. "Can Tracking Raise the Test Scores of High-Ability Minority Students?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(10), pages 2783-2816, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Education Policy; Standardised Testing; Secondary Education;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • I28 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Government Policy
    • J24 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:lan:wpaper:161114030. 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: Giorgio Motta (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/delanuk.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.