Cheating in the First, Second, and Third Degree: Educators' Responses to High-Stakes Testing.
By A. Amrein-Beardsley, David C. Berliner, S. Rideau. 2010
125 citations recorded by the source corpus.
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 1 st , 2 nd , and 3 rd 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.
Subfields: Law, Safety Research
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d2fe591c38a125127a59fa600155b4692bdfed22
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Safety Research
Citations in the corpus
- Handbook of Human and Social Conditions in Assessment (2016, background): “Some undoubtedly are acting to retain their jobs, while others may be concerned about the impact of continued failure on student well-being or their own promotion (Amrein-Beardsley et al. 2010).”