School counselors' perceptions of the impact of high-stakes testing

Professional School Counseling, Oct, 2004 by Duane Brown, John P. Galassi, Patrick Akos

Two studies of school counselors' perceptions of the impact of the North Carolina ABC (high-stakes) testing program are reported. (For ease of interpretation, percentages were rounded to the nearest whole number in both studies.) One hundred forty-one counselors who attended their state association's professional conference participated in study one, and a random sample of 139 school counselors, members of the state school counseling association, participated by mail in study two. Eighty percent or more of the counselors reported that they or another counselor served as the school's testing coordinator and that this function consumed a considerable percentage of their time. Although counselors noted some positive effects of the high-stakes testing program, they overwhelmingly reported that it negatively impacted their ability to provide services and their relationships with students, teachers, and administrators.

**********

It is difficult to identify the precise beginning of current efforts to reform America's educational system. Parr (1993) suggested that the publication, A Nation at Risk (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983), might have been one stimulus for the educational reform movement. Regardless of its origin, many facets of the movement continue. One aspect of school reform that has impacted many school counselors, including those in North Carolina, is high-stakes testing. High-stakes testing is one method departments of education and legislatures are using to set standards of achievement individually for students and collectively for schools and school districts.

Testing is not new to schools or to school counselors (Elmore, Ekstrom, Diamond, & Whitaker, 1993). However, determining the effectiveness of the educational process by using criterion-referenced tests and standardized tests is relatively new. It is presumed that accountability measures in the form of tests will promote higher educational standards and ensure equitable opportunities to quality education (Riley & Cantu, 2000). Because the results of the high-stakes tests are public and often carry significant rewards in the form of monetary bonuses and punishments such as state departments of education seizing control of local schools, the educational process has in all likelihood never been more pressure-packed. School counselors are heavily involved in the high-stakes testing program, and anecdotal reports on its impact on their functioning abound. Although research has been conducted about the effects of high-stakes testing on teachers (see Cimbricz, 2002 for a review) and on student learning (e.g., Amrein & Berliner, 2002), to this point systematic efforts to understand the impact of high-stakes testing on school counselors and their programs have yet to emerge. The purpose of the studies reported here was to begin to address this oversight by studying North Carolina school counselors' perceptions of the impact of their state's ABC testing program on themselves, their programs, and other key stakeholders within the school.

METHOD

Context: The North Carolina ABCs of Public Education

"The ABCs of Public Education is a comprehensive plan to improve public schools that is based on three goals of strong accountability: an emphasis on the basics, high educational standards, and local control of schools" (NCDPI, 1999). An ABCs accountability model for elementary and middle schools was implemented in 1996-97, and the high school model was first implemented in 1997-98. State officials hold students, teachers, and administrators accountable for how well their students perform on end-of-grade (EOG) reading, mathematics, and writing tests in grades 3-8 and end-of-course (EOC) tests in some high school courses. The tests are based on the North Carolina Standard Course of Study, the state-mandated curriculum.

With respect to school accountability, the North Carolina State Board of Education and the Department of Public Instruction classify schools based on performance on the state tests. The categories described below are the ones that were used during the fall of 2001 and the spring of 2002 when this study was conducted. A school of excellence is one in which at least 90% of the students tested performed at or above grade level (proficiency) and where the school met or exceeded expected growth. For K-8 schools, expected growth is a statistical calculation based on a school's previous EOG performance and a statewide growth average. For high schools, EOC rather than EOG indices enter into the calculation. In a school of distinction, at least 80% of the students performed at or above grade level (proficient) irrespective of growth. Schools with no recognition failed to reach expected growth but had at least 50% of their students at or above grade level (proficient). Low-performing schools failed to meet the expected growth standard and had more than 50% of their students below grade level.

Licensed staff in schools that meet expected or exemplary growth standards receive incentive bonuses. Schools that fall far below the growth standards are assigned an assistance team to help the staff to improve student achievement. Student promotion in grades 3, 5, and 8 and graduation from high school are based in part on achieving proficiency or a passing score on these tests.