针对芝加哥的高考政策，尼尔和尚岑巴赫（2007）确定为“泡沫的孩子的研究，这些学生的成绩的方法指定为精通点，谁收到的补充说明。虽然总体熟练率有所提高，但在学业上最不受尊重的学生中，他们几乎没有获得任何收益。这些研究表明，如果学校针对高风险的测试，针对学生的教学努力低于熟练的利润率，他们可能会看到改善他们的成果。相反，他们可能会看到没有改善，或可能下降，在非常低成就的学生（教育评估和政策分析，2010）的结果。 也有可能退出考试失败，而不是低自我评估，脱离，并没有增加学生的努力。在学校的反应来看，几年的cahee早期管理毕业前能提供学校机会介入对学生代表。然而，由于风险很高，并提供修复的时间量很短，教师可能会觉得被迫采取最终是非生产性的应对策略。为了复杂的问题的动机和课程的影响，退出考试，这些影响可能是不相称的，影响学生刚低于保证金的熟练得分不同于那些最初得分远远低于.
澳洲西悉尼论文代写:芝加哥的高考政策
In response to Chicago's high-stakes testing policy, Neal and Schanzenbach (2007) studies identified as "bubble kids," those students whose scores approach the point designated as proficient and who received supplemental instruction. Although overall proficiency rates improved, they found little to no gain among the students who were the least academically advantaged. These studies suggest that if schools respond to high-stakes tests by targeting instructional efforts on students just below the margin of proficient, they may see improvements in their outcomes. Conversely, they might see no improvement, or possibly a decline, in the outcomes of the very lowest achieving students (Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 2010).It is also possible that exit examination failure leads instead to low self-assessment, disengagement, and no increase in student effort. In terms of school responses, the early administration of the CAHEE several years prior to graduation could provide schools the opportunity to intervene on the students' behalf. Yet because the stakes are high and the amount of time in which to provide remediation is really short, teachers may feel forced to adopt coping strategies that ultimately are nonproductive. To complicate the issue of the motivational and curricular effects of failing an exit examination, these effects may be incongruous and affect students just below the margin of the proficient score differently from those who initially scored far below
查看更多悉尼论文代写 服务
