Daniel Koretz is Henry Lee Shattuck Professor of Education at Harvard University. His research focuses on educational assessment and education policy, particularly the effects of high-stakes testing on educational practice and the problem of score inflation. His research has also investigated the assessment of students with disabilities, international differences in the variability of student performance, alternatives to traditional college-admissions testing, and the application of value-added models to educational achievement. His current work focuses on variations in score inflation across types of students and schools, the relationships between test scores and later outcomes, and the design and evaluation of ‘self-monitoring assessments.
Using Large-Scale Assessments For Monitoring And Accountability: Some Lessons From The U.S. Experience
Large-scale assessments have been used in the U.S. for monitoring and accountability for many years, and both have become more influential over time. Monitoring at the national level began half a century ago. Testing for accountability began on a small scale about 40 years ago, but both the amount of accountability testing and the pressure to raise scores have increased dramatically since then, and as a result, testing now dominates educational practice. Monitoring has been reasonably successful, although not without problems. Test-based accountability has largely failed. After providing a brief description of our monitoring and accountability systems, I will discuss successes and failures of both. I will highlight issues that must be confronted to make both more effective and will suggest alternative methods of using tests in accountability systems.