Haciendo trampa en el primer, segundo y tercer grado: Las respuestas de los docentes a las evaluaciones con consecuencias severas

Translated title of the contribution: Cheating in the first, second, and third degree: Educators' responses to high-stakes testing

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

37 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Educators are under tremendous pressure to ensure that their students perform well on tests. Unfortunately, this pressure has caused some educators to cheat. The purpose of this study was to investigate the types of, and degrees to which, a sample of teachers in Arizona were aware of, or had themselves engaged in test-related cheating practices as a function of the high-stakes testing policies of No Child Left Behind. A near census sample of teachers was surveyed, with valid responses obtained from about 5 percent, totaling just over 3,000 teachers. In addition, one small convenience sample of teachers was interviewed, and another participated in a focus group. Data revealed that cheating occurs and that educators can be quite clever when doing so. But how one defines cheating makes it difficult to quantify the frequency with which educators engage in such practices. Our analysis thus required us to think about a taxonomy of cheating based on the definitions of 1st, 2nd, and 3rd degree offenses in the field of law. These categories were analyzed to help educators better define, and be more aware of others' and their own cheating practices, in an attempt to inform local testing policies and procedures.

Original languageSpanish
Pages (from-to)1-36
Number of pages36
JournalEducation Policy Analysis Archives
Volume18
StatePublished - 2010

Fingerprint

educator
teacher
taxonomy
census
offense
Law
Group
student

Keywords

  • Cheating
  • Education policy
  • High-stakes tests
  • Unintended effects
  • Validity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education

Cite this

@article{1d521a042628414a8e5105166c5f9796,
title = "Haciendo trampa en el primer, segundo y tercer grado: Las respuestas de los docentes a las evaluaciones con consecuencias severas",
abstract = "Educators are under tremendous pressure to ensure that their students perform well on tests. Unfortunately, this pressure has caused some educators to cheat. The purpose of this study was to investigate the types of, and degrees to which, a sample of teachers in Arizona were aware of, or had themselves engaged in test-related cheating practices as a function of the high-stakes testing policies of No Child Left Behind. A near census sample of teachers was surveyed, with valid responses obtained from about 5 percent, totaling just over 3,000 teachers. In addition, one small convenience sample of teachers was interviewed, and another participated in a focus group. Data revealed that cheating occurs and that educators can be quite clever when doing so. But how one defines cheating makes it difficult to quantify the frequency with which educators engage in such practices. Our analysis thus required us to think about a taxonomy of cheating based on the definitions of 1st, 2nd, and 3rd degree offenses in the field of law. These categories were analyzed to help educators better define, and be more aware of others' and their own cheating practices, in an attempt to inform local testing policies and procedures.",
keywords = "Cheating, Education policy, High-stakes tests, Unintended effects, Validity",
author = "Audrey Beardsley and David Berliner and Sharon Rideau",
year = "2010",
language = "Spanish",
volume = "18",
pages = "1--36",
journal = "Education Policy Analysis Archives",
issn = "1068-2341",
publisher = "Arizona State University",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Haciendo trampa en el primer, segundo y tercer grado

T2 - Las respuestas de los docentes a las evaluaciones con consecuencias severas

AU - Beardsley, Audrey

AU - Berliner, David

AU - Rideau, Sharon

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - Educators are under tremendous pressure to ensure that their students perform well on tests. Unfortunately, this pressure has caused some educators to cheat. The purpose of this study was to investigate the types of, and degrees to which, a sample of teachers in Arizona were aware of, or had themselves engaged in test-related cheating practices as a function of the high-stakes testing policies of No Child Left Behind. A near census sample of teachers was surveyed, with valid responses obtained from about 5 percent, totaling just over 3,000 teachers. In addition, one small convenience sample of teachers was interviewed, and another participated in a focus group. Data revealed that cheating occurs and that educators can be quite clever when doing so. But how one defines cheating makes it difficult to quantify the frequency with which educators engage in such practices. Our analysis thus required us to think about a taxonomy of cheating based on the definitions of 1st, 2nd, and 3rd degree offenses in the field of law. These categories were analyzed to help educators better define, and be more aware of others' and their own cheating practices, in an attempt to inform local testing policies and procedures.

AB - Educators are under tremendous pressure to ensure that their students perform well on tests. Unfortunately, this pressure has caused some educators to cheat. The purpose of this study was to investigate the types of, and degrees to which, a sample of teachers in Arizona were aware of, or had themselves engaged in test-related cheating practices as a function of the high-stakes testing policies of No Child Left Behind. A near census sample of teachers was surveyed, with valid responses obtained from about 5 percent, totaling just over 3,000 teachers. In addition, one small convenience sample of teachers was interviewed, and another participated in a focus group. Data revealed that cheating occurs and that educators can be quite clever when doing so. But how one defines cheating makes it difficult to quantify the frequency with which educators engage in such practices. Our analysis thus required us to think about a taxonomy of cheating based on the definitions of 1st, 2nd, and 3rd degree offenses in the field of law. These categories were analyzed to help educators better define, and be more aware of others' and their own cheating practices, in an attempt to inform local testing policies and procedures.

KW - Cheating

KW - Education policy

KW - High-stakes tests

KW - Unintended effects

KW - Validity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77955481364&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77955481364&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:77955481364

VL - 18

SP - 1

EP - 36

JO - Education Policy Analysis Archives

JF - Education Policy Analysis Archives

SN - 1068-2341

ER -