The DOI matches its Crossref record.
High-Stakes Testing and Student Achievement: Does Accountability Pressure Increase Student Learning?
Open accessAbstract
This study examined the relationship between high-stakes testing pressure and student achievement across 25 states. Standardized portfolios were created for each study state. Each portfolio contained a range of documents that told the “story” of accountability implementation and impact in that state. Using the “law of comparative judgments,” over 300 graduate-level education students reviewed one pair of portfolios and made independent evaluations as to which of the two states’ portfolios reflected a greater degree of accountability pressure. Participants’ judgments yielded a matrix that was converted into a single rating system that arranged all 25 states on a continuum of accountability “pressure” from high to low. Using this accountability pressure rating we conducted a series of regression and correlation analyses. We found no relationship between earlier pressure and later cohort achievement for math at the fourth- and eighth-grade levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress tests. Further, no relationship was found between testing pressure and reading achievement on the National Assessment of Education Progress tests at any grade level or for any ethnic student subgroup. Data do suggest, however, that a case could be made for a causal relationship between high-stakes testing pressure and subsequent achievement on the national assessment tests—but only for fourth grade, non-cohort achievement and for some ethnic subgroups. Implications and directions for future studies are discussed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Heilig, J. V., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2008) · Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis · doi:10.3102/0162373708317689 · Cited by 316
Critical thinking for 21st-century education: A cyber-tooth curriculum?
Higgins, S. (2014) · PROSPECTS · doi:10.1007/s11125-014-9323-0 · Cited by 79
Rakoczy, K., Klieme, E., Bürgermeister, A., & Harks, B. (2008) · Zeitschrift für Psychologie / Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1027/0044-3409.216.2.111 · Cited by 76
Joo, Y. H. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12176762 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Nichols, S. L., Glass, G. V., & Berliner, D. C.
- Venue
- Education Policy Analysis Archives
- Published
- 2006-01-03
- Volume
- 14
- Pages
- 1
- ISSN
- 1068-2341 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2096806193
- Cited by
- 201
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 33.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: High-Stakes Testing and Student Achievement: Does Accountability Pressure Increase Student Learning? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.14507/epaa.v14n1.2006
- The paper
- Nichols, S. L., Glass, G. V., & Berliner, D. C. (2006). High-Stakes Testing and Student Achievement: Does Accountability Pressure Increase Student Learning? Education Policy Analysis Archives. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v14n1.2006
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.