O papel dos testes padronizados na politica educacional para o ensino basico nos Estados Unidos

Remo Moreira Brito Bastos

Resumo


Com o advento do programa federal No Child Left Behind, um aumento desproporcional das horas destinadas a testes, o estreitamento de conteúdos curriculares e as avaliações verticalizantes, focando responsabilização de professores e diretores, passaram a conformar a agenda para a reforma educacional nos Estados Unidos. O presente artigo, desenvolvido por meio de pesquisa bibliografica e documental, questiona as premissas que fundamentam essas politicas, fortemente estruturadas em torno dos testes padronizados de larga escala, os quais constituem a “ferramenta por excelencia” do programa governamental em questao. Ademais dos perversos efeitos impingidos aos educandos, mostram-se as limitacoes intrinsecas desses instrumentos para aferir a assimilação de conhecimentos por parte dos discentes, bem como a proliferação de todo tipo de expedientes de questionavel validade etica com vistas a simular o alcance das metas de desempenho academico estipuladas pelo mencionado programa.


Palavras-chave


Testes padronizados; Politica educacional; Estados Unidos

Referências


ADLER, M. Review of measuring the impacts of teachers. Think Twice Review National Education Policy Center Report, 2014. Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center. Disponivel em: . Acesso em: 22 mar. 2016.

AFONSO, A. J. Nem tudo o que conta em educacao e mensuravel ou comparavel: critica à accountability baseada em testes estandardizados e rankings escolares. Revista Lusofona de Educacao, Lisboa, v. 13, n. 13, p. 13–29, 2009. Disponivel em: . Acesso em: 29 abr. 2017.

AMREIN-BEARDSLEY, A. Methodological concerns about the education value-added assessment system. Educational Researcher, v. 37, n. 2, p. 65–75, 2008. doi: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X08316420

AU, W. High-stakes testing and curricular control: a qualitative metasynthesis. Educational Researcher, v. 36, n. 5, p. 258–267, 2007. doi: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x07306523

BRAUN, H. Value-added modeling and the power of magical thinking. Ensaio: Avaliacao e Politicas Públicas em Educacao, v. 21, n. 78, p.115–130, 2013. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0104-40362013000100007

BRITO, M. S. T. Norma e criterio de desempenho como parâmetros da avaliacao da aprendizagem. Estudos em Avaliacao Educacional, Sao Paulo, n. 15, p. 135–198, 1997. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.18222/eae01519972276

BROWN, E. How schools would be judged under ‘Every Student Succeeds’, the new No Child Left Behind. The Washington Post, [S.l.], 30 Nov. 2015. Disponivel em: . Acesso em: 27 abr. 2016.

BURRIS, C. How come officials could predict new test score results? The Washington Post, [S.l.], 12 Aug. 2013a. Disponivel em: . Acesso em: 27 fev. 2016.

BURRIS, C. What big drop in new standardized test scores really means. The Washington Post, [S.l.], 7 Aug. 2013b. Disponivel em: . Acesso em: 27 fev. 2016.

CAMPBELL, D. T. Assessing the impact of planned social change. Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation, v. 7, n. 15, p. 3–43, 2010.

CASSETTARI, N. Pagamento por performance na educacao basica. In: REUNIAO ANUAL DA ANPED. 31., 2008, Caxambu. Anais... Caxambu: Anped, 2008. p. 1–15.

DARLING-HAMMOND, L. et al. Getting teacher evaluation right: A background paper for policy makers. [S. l]: American Educational Research Association; National Academy of Education. 2011. Disponivel em: . Acesso em: 24 mar. 2016.

FINN, C. E.; RAVITCH, D. Not by geeks alone. The Washington Post, [S.l.], 8 Aug. 2007. Disponivel em: . Acesso em: 10 abr. 2016.

FLEMING, N. Some efforts on merit pay scaled back. Education Week, Bethesda, v. 31, n. 4, p. 1–18, 2011.

FOSTER, J. B. The opt out revolt: democracy and education. Monthly Review, New York, v. 67, n. 10, p. 1, 2016.

FOX, L.; HACKER, H. K. Dallas-Fort worth students struggle with TAKS’ Shortresponse Written Test. The Dallas Morning News, Dallas, 20 Jul. 2008. Disponivel em: . Acesso em: 10 abr. 2016.

FREITAS, L. C. Os reformadores empresariais da educacao: da desmoralizacao do magisterio à destruicao do sistema público de educacao. Educacao e Sociedade, Campinas, v. 33, n. 119, p. 379–404, 2012. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0101-73302012000200004

GLASER, R. Instructional technology and the measurement of learning outcomes: some questions. American Psychologist, v. 18, n. 8, p. 519–521, 1963. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0049294

GLAZERMAN, S.; SEIFULLAH, A. An evaluation of the Chicago teacher Advancement Program (Chicago TAP) after four years. Washington, DC: The Joyce Fundation, 2012.

GOLDHADER, D. D.; BREWER, D. J.; ANDERSON, D. J. A three-way error components analysis of educational productivity. Education Economics, v. 7, n. 3, p. 199–208, 1999. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09645299900000018

GUISBOND, L.; NEILL, M.; SCHAEFFER, B. NCLB’s lost decade for educational progress: what can we learn from this policy failure?. Educacao e Sociedade, Campinas, v. 33, n. 119, p. 405–430, 2012. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0101-73302012000200005

HAERTEL, E. H. Reliability and validity of inferences about teachers based on student test scores. Washington, DC: ETS, 2013. Disponivel em: . Acesso em: 24 fev. 2016.

HARRIS, D. C. The promises and pitfalls of alternative teacher compensation approaches. Arizona: Arizona State University, 2007.

HEWITT, K. K. Educator Evaluation Policy that Incorporates EVAAS Value-Added Measures: undermined intentions and exacerbated inequities. Education Policy Analysis Archives, v. 23, n. 76, p. 1–49, 2015. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v23.1968

HULL, J. The proficiency debate: a guide to NAEP achievement levels. Alexandria, VA : The Center for Public Education, 2008. Disponivel em: . Acesso em: 31 dez. 2015.

KOHN, A. The schools our children deserve: Moving beyond traditional classrooms and “tougher standards”. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2000.

KORETZ, D. M. Measuring up. Harvard: Harvard University, 2008.

KUPERMINTZ, H. Teacher effects and teacher effectiveness: A validity investigation of the Tennessee Value Added Assessment System. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, v. 25, n. 3, p. 287–298, 2003. doi: https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737025003287

LEVIN, H. M. The limits of test score comparisons. Unesco Office in Santiago: Newsletter LLEC. [S.l.], 13 Jun 2013. Disponivel em: . Acesso em: 12 mar. 2016.

MORGANSTEIN, D.; WASSERSTEIN, R. ASA statement on using value-added models for educational assessment. Statistics and Public Policy, v. 1, n. 1, 2014. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/2330443X.2014.956906

McMURRER, J. Instructional time in elementary schools: a closer look at changes for specific subjects. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy, 2008.

McMURRER, J. KOBER, N. Choices, changes, and challenges: curriculum and instruction in the NCLB era. Washington, DC: Centre on Education Policy, 2007.

MEYER, L. The complete curriculum: ensuring a place for the Arts in America’s Schools. Arts Education Policy Review, v. 106, n. 3, p. 35–39, 2005.

MONTEFINISE, A. Lost lessons in test-prep craze. The New York Post, [S.l.], 28 Jan. 2007. Disponivel em: . Acesso em: 6 abr. 2016.

MORTON, B. A.; DALTON, B. National Center for Educational Statistics, and Institute of Education Sciences (US). Changes in instructional hours in four subjects by public school teachers of grades 1 through 4. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, 2007.

MURNANE, R.; COHEN, D. Merit pay and the evaluation problem: Why most merit pay plans fail and a few survive. Harvard Educational Review, Harvard, v. 56, n. 1, p. 1–18, 1986. doi: https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.56.1.l8q2334243271116

NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS. Mapping 2005 state proficiency standards onto the NAEP scales. National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: Department of Education, 2007.

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL. High stakes: testing for tracking, promotion, and graduation. Washington, DC: National Academies, 1999. doi: https://doi.org/10.17226/6336

NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT (NYSED). English Language Arts (ELA) and Mathematic Assessment Results. New York: NYSED, 2015. Disponivel em: . Acesso em: 31 dez. 2015.

NYE, B.; KONSTANTOPOULOS, S.; HEDGES, L. V. How large are teacher effects? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, v. 26, n. 3, p. 237–257, 2004. doi: https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737026003237

OREL, S. Left behind in Birmingham: 522 pushed-out students. In: LENT, R. C.; PIPKIN, G. (Ed.). Silent no more: voices of courage in American schools. Portsmouth: Heinemann, 2003. p. 1–14.

PERLSTEIN, L. Tested: one American school struggles to make the grade. New York: Henry Holt, 2007.

POPHAM, W. J. Why standardized test scores don’t measure educational quality. Educational Leadership, v. 56, n. 6, p. 8–15, 1999.

RAVITCH, D. The death and life of the great American school system: how testing and choice are undermining education. New York: Basic, 2010.

RAVITCH, D. Reign of error: The hoax of the privatization movement and the danger to America’s public schools. New York: Basic, 2013.

ROTHSTEIN, J. Review of learning about teaching. Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center, 2011.

ROTHSTEIN, R.; JACOBSEN, R.; WILDER, T. Grading education: Getting accountability right. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute, 2008.

SANTOS, L. L. C. P. Formacao de professores na cultura do desempenho. Educacao e Sociedade, Campinas, v. 25, n. 89, p. 1145-1157, 2004.

SENNET, R. A cultura do novo capitalismo. Rio de Janeiro: Record, 2006.

SMITH, M. A serious design flaw is suspected in state tests. The New York Times, [S.l.] 28 Jul. 2012. Disponivel em: . Acesso em: 14 mar. 2016.

SPARKS, S. Study leads to end of New York City merit-pay program. Education Week, July 20, 2011. Disponivel em: . Acesso em: 9 jan. 2016.

SPRINGER, M. G. et al. Teacher pay for performance: experimental evidence from the Project on Incentives in Teaching (Point). Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2011. Disponivel em: . Acesso em: 9 jan. 2016.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (USA). No Children Left Behind Act. Washington, DC: US Department of Education, Jan. 2002. Disponivel em: . Acesso em: 15 dez. 2015.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (USA). President Obama signs the every student succeeds act. Washington, DC: The White House, 2015. Disponivel em: . Acesso em: 22 dez. 2015.

VIADERO, D. Texas merit-pay pilot failed to boost student scores, study says. Education Week, Nov. 4, 2009. Disponivel em: . Acesso em: 9 jan. 2016.

ZHAO, Y. Catching up or leading the way: American education in the age of globalization. Alexandria, VA: ASCD, 2009.

ZHAO, Y. Double-Think: The Creativity-Testing Conflict. Education Week, v. 31, n. 36, p. 2632. 2012. Disponivel em: . Acesso em: 07 jun. 2017.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/s0104-403620180026000993

Apontamentos

  • Não há apontamentos.




Direitos autorais 2018 Revista Ensaio: Avaliação e Politicas Públicas em Educação

Licença Creative Commons
Este obra está licenciado com uma Licença Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial 4.0 Internacional.

SCImago Journal & Country Rank