Berliner’s article discusses the negative effects of high-stakes testing, with particular emphasis on response to test pressures.\u00a0<\/sup>\u00a0When standardized testing became mandatory for all public schools and school funding was tied to those results, added pressure was put on teachers and administrators.\u00a0 This additional pressure caused some to cheat and others to frequently break the procedures that went with the tests.20<\/sup>\u00a0Also, as the amount of pressure surrounding the tests increased, teachers spent more time strategizing with their students and preparing them for the tests, therefore causing a decline in the amount of learning exposed to students.20<\/sup>\u00a0The worst outcome of this pressure caused teachers and administrators to move students that would not likely pass the test out of schools, by telling them to stay home, sending them on trips, or treating them poorly with the intention of making them drop out of school.20<\/sup>\u00a0Another response to pressure to pass the tests includes narrowing curriculums.\u00a0 This concept refers to core academic subjects, like English, math and science, being given time and resource precedence over other subjects, such as social studies, music, art and physical education.\u00a0<\/sup>20\u00a0<\/sup>Narrowing curriculums also caused teachers to exclude information from lesson plans if the information will not be asked on the tests.\u00a0<\/sup>20<\/sup><\/p>\n The article by Minarechova discusses the impact of high-stakes testing, particularly on students, teachers and administrators.\u00a0 Students become frustrated as a result of having to take these tests, which causes a resultant decline in effort.21<\/sup>\u00a0Also, the added emphasis that teachers and administrators place on students to pass the tests has resulted in students becoming more competitive with one another.\u00a0<\/sup>21<\/sup>\u00a0Students have been found to undervalue their grades and other school assessments.\u00a0<\/sup>21\u00a0<\/sup>Teachers are impacted by these tests in that they are encouraged to spend more time teaching subjects and instructions that will increase test scores, rather than on lesson plans.\u00a0<\/sup>21<\/sup>\u00a0As a result, teachers feel that their sense of professional worth is devalued.\u00a0<\/sup>21\u00a0<\/sup>Lastly, administrators are pressured to enact policies to heighten test scores, rather than emphasizing learning in the school environment.\u00a0<\/sup>21\u00a0<\/sup>Administrators also tend to reallocate resources to the subjects being tested, thus causing a higher probability of wasted resources.\u00a0<\/sup>21<\/sup><\/p>\n Both of these articles address the negative aspect of mandatory high-stakes testing as a direct result of NCLB.\u00a0 These impacts are particularly prevalent today as evidenced by the multitude of organizations that are trying to get the tests eliminated from the public schools.\u00a0 These opposition efforts should continue because high-stakes testing is making more problems than solving them.<\/p>\n Rational responses to high stakes testing: the case of curriculum narrowing and the harm that follows<\/a>\u00a0<\/a>by David Berliner20<\/sup><\/p>\n![\"Screen](\"https:\/\/courses.bowdoin.edu\/education-2272-fall-2014-adrake\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/65\/2014\/12\/Screen-Shot-2014-12-06-at-10.41.28-AM.png\")
26<\/sup><\/p>\n![\"Screen](\"https:\/\/courses.bowdoin.edu\/education-2272-fall-2014-adrake\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/65\/2014\/12\/Screen-Shot-2014-12-06-at-10.17.29-AM-300x119.png\")
27<\/sup><\/p>\nLinks<\/h3>\n