Ethnic-Based Equity in Teacher Judgment of Student Achievement on a Language and Literacy Curriculum-Embedded Performance Assessment for Children in Grade One

Oct 15, 2026

Upload by moss~

Explores how ethnic-based equity influences teacher judgments of student achievement when using a language and literacy curriculum-embedded performance assessment for first-grade children. Frames the context of U.S. public education where testing has become central to accountability and school reform, including standards that evolved into high-stakes testing. Discusses concerns that educators may teach to the test and that standardized results can disadvantage students of color, shaping pressures and perceptions around teaching and assessment.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages15

Reading Time38 min

AccessFree to download

Background: Testing and Accountability in U.S. Education

High-stakes testing and the policy context

Teacher pressures and effects on student learning

Equity concerns for students of color

Dorinda J. Gallant is an assistant professor in quantitative research, evaluation, and measurement in the College of Education at The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. James L. Moore III isan associate professor in the College of Education and Human Ecology, coordinator of the School Counseling Program, and the inaugural director of the Todd Anthony Bell National Research Center on the African American Male at The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. Ethnic-Based Equity in Teacher Judgment of Student Achievement on a Language and Literacy Curriculum-Embedded Performance Assessment for Children in Grade One By Dorinda J. Gallant & James L Moore, III In today’s American educational system, testing has increasingly become the preferred educational practice for measuring students’ academic achievement. It is often seen as the most suitable means to raise academic achievement for students,by insisting on educational accountability among educators—teachers, school counselors, and administrators (Moore, 2003) . Given the steady decline of school achievement among students in the United States, greater interest in public education now exists. Such interest extends beyond the walls of professional educators, district and building administrators, local school boards, and state education departments. Increasingly, business and political leaders are involving themselves in educational policy, in turn, to improve school achievement in America’s public schools (Usdan, 2006) . These leaders’ involvement in public education evolved out of their concern that the United States may no longer be producing students who are able to compete in today’s global economy (Friedman, 2005) . Because public education is commonly seen asthe“drivingforce”of the country’s economic prosperity, public education isan important topic of debate (Moore, 2003; Southern Education Foundation, 1995, 1999, 2000a, 2000b), and desperate measures are frequently offered to improve public education for all students (Moore, 2003), especially low-income students, students with disabilities, and students of color. Too often, students with these particular backgrounds find themselves in failing schools or educational systems that do not give them the skills needed to succeed in the “new” global workplace (Kozol, 1991; Sears, 2002) . There are a number of variables that interact to impede school outcomes for these students. They range from chronic poverty, low teacher expectations, poor parental involvement, and inadequate school funding and resources (Flowers, Milner, & Moore, 2003; Ford & Moore, 2004; Kozol, 1991; Sears, 2002) . Nevertheless, based on national statistics, it is quite clear that these students are being left behind in these schools, and society offers them few assurances that they will be able to compete in today’s global economy. Therefore, the demands from business and political leaders to educators—teachers, school counselors, and administrators—to leave no child or group behind are seen as warranted. It is increasingly apparent, at least from these leaders, that public schools will not be able to reform themselves without assistance or force from outside entities (Usdan, 2006). This belief, of course, mirrors earlier calls for action to improve the quality of education in the United States (Cobia & Henderson, 2007) . Arguably, no other time in public education has generated as much attention on the quality of America’s educational system than the seminal report A Nation At Risk (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983) . This document revealed that America is no longer leading the world in educating its citizens. Thereport further indicated that students in the United States lagged drastically behind their student counterpartsin other countries (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983). In recognition of these educational trends, special efforts—from the business and political communities—are frequently given to re

FAQs

Why does the document emphasize testing in U.S. education?

It explains that testing became the preferred practice for measuring academic achievement and enforcing accountability among educators and schools. It links this shift to education policy demands and standards-setting efforts.

What are the concerns about high-stakes testing mentioned in the text?

The text notes that educators may teach to the test to secure passing scores, sometimes at the expense of deeper student learning. It also describes how testing can feel punitive and overwhelming for teachers and administrators.

How does ethnic-based equity relate to teacher judgment in the document?

The core focus is whether equity issues tied to ethnicity affect how teachers judge student achievement. It is situated within concerns that students of color may not perform well on standardized tests, influencing perceptions and evaluation outcomes.

Oct 15, 2026

Upload by moss~