The Effects of High Stakes Testing on Teachers in NJ

Dr. Sylvia Bulgar*
Rider University
Periodicity:May - July'2012
DOI : https://doi.org/10.26634/jpsy.6.1.1883

Abstract

A great number of teachers in the United States have found themselves wrestling with an internal conflict between their teaching beliefs and a need to revert back to traditional modes of teaching in order to have their students demonstrate proficiency on high-stakes tests. While they want to include more non-traditional methods in their repertoire of teaching strategies, they fear that in implementing these methodologies their students will not be prepared for success on standardized testing. This paper examines why teachers experience this conflict, even when they have a commitment to non-traditional teaching strategies. Additionally, the data that is presented will demonstrate that students can and do develop computational skill, a necessity for achievement on standardized tests, in a learning environment that fosters inquiry, discovery and problem- solving.

Keywords

High Stakes Testing,NJ Education,Models and Modeling,Middle School Education

How to Cite this Article?

Sylvia Bulgar (2012). The Effects of High Stakes Testing on Teachers in NJ. i-manager’s Journal on Educational Psychology, 6(1), 34-44. https://doi.org/10.26634/jpsy.6.1.1883

References

[1]. Bellisio, C. (1999). A study of elementary students' ability to work with algebraic notation and variables. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey. New Brunswick, NJ.
[2]. Bulgar, S. (2002). Through a teacher's lens: Children's constructions of division of fractions.(Doctoral dissertation, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 2002).Dissertation Abstracts International,63/05, 1754.
[3]. Bulgar, S. (2003). Children's sense-making of division of fractions. The Journal of Mathematical Behaviors: Special Issue on Fractions, Ratio and Proportional Reasoning, Part B. 22(3), 319 – 334.
[4]. Bulgar, S., Schorr, R.Y. & Warner, L.B. (2004). Extending and refining models for thinking about division of fractions. Twenty-sixth Conference of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education: Building Connections Between Communities. Toronto, Ontario.
[5]. Bulgar, S. (2009). A longitudinal study of students' representations for division of fractions. The Montana Mathematics Enthusiast. Vol. 6 (Nos. 1&2).165-200.
[6]. Cuban, L. (1993). How teachers taught: Constancy and change in American classrooms, 1890-1980. (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
[7]. Davis, G., Hunting, R.P., & Pearn, C. (1993). What might a fraction mean to a child and how would a teacher know? Journal of Mathematical Behavior,12(1),63- 76.
[8]. Davis, R.B., Alston, A, & Maher, C. A. (1991). Brian's number line representation of fractions. Proceedings of Psychology of Mathematics Education XV. Assisi, Italy.
[9]. Fosnot, C.T. & Dolk, M. (2001). Young mathematicians at work: Constructing multiplication and division. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
[10]. Lamon, S.J. (2001). Presenting and representing: From fractions to rational numbers. In A.A. Cuoco& F. R. Curcio (Eds.).The Roles of Representation in School Mathematics:2001 Yearbook. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics: Reston, VA.
[11]. Lesh, R., & Doerr, H. (2003). (Eds.) Beyond constructivism: a models and modeling perspective on teaching, learning, and problem solving in mathematics education. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
[12]. Lesh, R., Lester, F.K., Jr. & Hjalmarson, M. (2003). A models and modeling perspective on metacognitive functioning in everyday situations where problem solvers develop mathematical constructs. In R. Lesh & H. Doerr (Eds.) Beyond constructivism: a models and modeling perspective on teaching, learning, and problem solving in mathematics education. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
[13]. Maher, C.A., Martino, A. M. (2000). From patterns to theories: conditions for conceptual change. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior.19 (2), 247-271.
[14]. Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[15]. New Jersey State Common Core Standards (2010). http://www.corestandards.org/thestandards/mathematics-
[16]. New Jersey Mathematics Coalition and New Jersey State Department of Education. New Jersey Mathematics Curriculum Framework, 2002.
[17]. New Jersey State Department of Education Website http://www.state.nj.us/education/ retrieved from the internet on August 14, 2011.
[18]. Ott, J., Snook, S.L., & Gibson, D.L. (1991). Understanding partitive division of fractions. Arithmetic Teacher, 39(2), 7-11.
[19]. Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC). (2012). http://www.achieve.org/ parcc/ Retrieved from the internet on July 18, 2012.
[20]. Pirie, S. & Kieren, T. (1994). Growth in mathematical understanding: How can we characterize it and how can we represent it. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26(2- 3), 165-190
[21]. Schorr, R.Y. Bulgar, S. (2002a). Testing and fourth grade teaching. In A.D. Cockburn & E. Nardi (Eds.), 26th Annual Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education: Vol. 4. Learning From Learners (193-199). Norwich, UK: School of Education and Professional Development University of East Anglia.
[22]. Schorr, R.Y., & Bulgar, S. (2002b). Teaching mathematics and science: Investigating classroom practice. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA). New Orleans, LA.
[23]. Schorr, R.Y., Bulgar, S. (2003). The impact of preparing for the test on classroom practice. In N.A. Pateman, B.J. Dougherty & J.T. Zilliox (Eds.), 27th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education held jointly with the 25th Conference of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education: Vol. 4. Navigating Between Theory and Practice (135-142).Honolulu, HI: CRDG, College of Education, University of Hawai'I.
[24]. Schorr, R.Y., Bulgar, S., Monfils, L., & Firestone, W.A. (2002). Teaching and testing at the fourth grade level: An analysis of a two – year study in New Jersey. Proceedings of Psychology of Mathematics Education – North American Chapter XXIV.Athens, GA.
[25]. Schorr, R.Y., Bulgar, S., Razze, J., Monfils, L., Firestone, W.A. (2004). Teaching fourth grade mathematics and science. In Firestone, Schorr, Monfils (Eds.). The Ambiguity of Teaching to the Test. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
[26]. Schorr, R.Y., Lesh, R. (2003). A models and modeling perspective on classroom-based Teacher Development. In R. Lesh & H. Doerr (Eds.) Beyond constructivism: A models and modeling perspective on teaching, learning, and problem solving in mathematics education. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
[27]. Steffe, L.P. (2000). Construction and interaction: Children's fractional schemes. Poster session presented at the National Science Foundation meeting, Washington, D.C.
[28]. Stigler, J.W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world's teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York: The Free Press.
[29]. Tirosh, D. (2000). Enhancing prospective teachers' knowledge of children's conceptions: The case of division of fractions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(1), 5-25.
[30]. Towers, J. (1998). Teacher's interventions and the growth of students' mathematical understanding. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The University of British Columbia, Canada.
[31]. Tzur, R. (1999). An integrated study of children's construction of improper fractions and the teacher's role in promoting that learning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(4), 390-416.
[32]. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
If you have access to this article please login to view the article or kindly login to purchase the article

Purchase Instant Access

Single Article

North Americas,UK,
Middle East,Europe
India Rest of world
USD EUR INR USD-ROW
Pdf 35 35 200 20
Online 35 35 200 15
Pdf & Online 35 35 400 25

Options for accessing this content:
  • If you would like institutional access to this content, please recommend the title to your librarian.
    Library Recommendation Form
  • If you already have i-manager's user account: Login above and proceed to purchase the article.
  • New Users: Please register, then proceed to purchase the article.