Test-Based Promotion and Student Performance in Florida and Arizona. Issue Brief / Paul Perrault and Marcus Winters.
Most studies of test-based promotion policies focus on measuring the effect of retention (being left back) on later student outcomes, and the evidence is fairly mixed. However, test-based promotion policies do not only affect the students who are retained. Presumably, they also affect students and s...
Saved in:
| Online Access: |
Full Text (via ERIC) |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , |
| Corporate Author: | |
| Format: | eBook |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
[Place of publication not identified] :
Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse,
2020.
|
| Subjects: |
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a22000002u 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | b11775515 | ||
| 003 | CoU | ||
| 005 | 20210325115204.3 | ||
| 006 | m o d f | ||
| 007 | cr ||||||||||| | ||
| 008 | 200701s2020 xx |||| ot ||| | eng d | ||
| 035 | |a (ERIC)ed608422 | ||
| 035 | |a (MvI) 3T000000587405 | ||
| 040 | |a ericd |b eng |c MvI |d MvI | ||
| 099 | |a ED608422 | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Perrault, Paul. | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Test-Based Promotion and Student Performance in Florida and Arizona. Issue Brief / |c Paul Perrault and Marcus Winters. |
| 264 | 1 | |a [Place of publication not identified] : |b Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse, |c 2020. | |
| 300 | |a 1 online resource (13 pages) | ||
| 336 | |a text |b txt |2 rdacontent. | ||
| 337 | |a computer |b c |2 rdamedia. | ||
| 338 | |a online resource |b cr |2 rdacarrier. | ||
| 500 | |a Availability: Manhattan Institute for Policy Research. 52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017. Tel: 212-599-7000; Fax: 212-599-3494; Web site: http://www.manhattan-institute.org. |5 ericd. | ||
| 500 | |a Abstractor: ERIC. |5 ericd. | ||
| 500 | |a Educational level discussed: Early Childhood Education. | ||
| 500 | |a Educational level discussed: Elementary Education. | ||
| 500 | |a Educational level discussed: Grade 3. | ||
| 500 | |a Educational level discussed: Primary Education. | ||
| 500 | |a Educational level discussed: Grade 4. | ||
| 500 | |a Educational level discussed: Intermediate Grades. | ||
| 500 | |a Educational level discussed: Grade 5. | ||
| 500 | |a Educational level discussed: Middle Schools. | ||
| 516 | |a Text (Reports, Research) | ||
| 520 | |a Most studies of test-based promotion policies focus on measuring the effect of retention (being left back) on later student outcomes, and the evidence is fairly mixed. However, test-based promotion policies do not only affect the students who are retained. Presumably, they also affect students and schools as they try to improve reading performance in order to avoid being retained or having to retain students. The threat of retention could plausibly have either positive or negative effects on students within the gateway grade. On the one hand, the pressure to score above a particular threshold on a standardized test might backfire by overwhelming both students and schools. On the other hand, test-based promotion policies might incentivize students and schools to make academic improvements within the targeted grade in order to avoid retention. The effect of test-based promotion policies on student performance prior to the retention decision has not been studied enough. Filling this hole in the literature is important in order to understand the full impact that these policies have on students within a given jurisdiction. Even if relatively few students are actually retained under these policies, many students are in danger of scoring below the benchmark when they enter the gateway grade in the fall, and thus might be motivated by the policy to do better during the year than they would have otherwise. Therefore, even a small effect on students within the gateway grade could have a larger overall effect on student learning in a school system. This study applies a difference-in-difference design to statewide longitudinal school-by-grade data from two states (Florida and Arizona) and to longitudinal student-level data from a large public school district (Hillsborough County, Florida) to investigate the effect of introducing a third-grade test-based promotion requirement on third-grade test scores. It measures whether there was an increase in third-grade test scores that occurred in the policy's first year relative to scores in other grades within the school that were not directly targeted by the policy. It finds evidence that enacting the policy led to a statistically significant and meaningful increase in average third-grade test scores in both states. The magnitude of the effect is very similar across the two states, despite their being enacted nearly a decade apart, as are the differences in the policy details. | ||
| 524 | |a Manhattan Institute for Policy Research. |2 ericd. | ||
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Student Promotion. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Student Evaluation. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Tests. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Grade Repetition. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Educational Policy. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Grade 3. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Scores. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Program Effectiveness. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Elementary School Students. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a State Policy. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Reading Achievement. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Mathematics Achievement. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Grade 4. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Grade 5. |2 ericd. |
| 700 | 1 | |a Winters, Marcus, |e author. | |
| 710 | 2 | |a Manhattan Institute for Policy Research. | |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED608422.pdf |z Full Text (via ERIC) |
| 907 | |a .b117755151 |b 04-01-21 |c 04-01-21 | ||
| 998 | |a web |b 04-01-21 |c f |d m |e - |f eng |g xx |h 0 |i 0 | ||
| 956 | |a ERIC | ||
| 999 | f | f | |i 5cdeed65-55de-59ca-ba12-579723f21959 |s cc84632c-e516-5f96-8920-7d20b38f7558 |