INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI
films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some
thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may
be from any type of computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the
copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality
illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins,
and improper alignment can adversely afreet reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete
manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if
unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate
the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by
sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and
continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each
original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in
reduced form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced
xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white
photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations
appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly
to order.

U n iversity M icrofilm s International
A B ell & H ow ell Inform ation C o m p a n y
3 0 0 North Z e e b R o a d , Ann Arbor. Ml 4 8 1 0 6 -1 3 4 6 USA
3 1 3 /7 6 1 - 4 7 0 0

8 0 0 /5 2 1 - 0 6 0 0

Order N u m ber 0129451

T he perceived effects o f th e M ichigan E ducational A ssessm ent
P rogram on sm all, rural school districts in th e U p per P eninsula
o f M ichigan
DeMarte, Faye, Ph.D.
Michigan State University, 1991

C opyright © 1 9 9 1 by D eM arte, Faye. A ll righ ts reserved.

UMI

300 N. Zeeb Rd.
Ann Arbor, MI 48106

THE PERCEIVED EFFECTS OF THE MICHIGAN EDUCATIONAL ASSESSMENT
PROGRAM ON SMALL, RURAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN THE
UPPER PENINSULA OF MICHIGAN

By
Faye DeMarte

A DISSERTATION
Submitted t o
Michigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y
in p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t o f t h e re q u ir e m e n ts
f o r t h e degr ee o f
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department o f Educational A d m i n i s t r a t i o n

ABSTRACT

THE PERCEIVED EFFECTS OF THE MICHIGAN EDUCATIONAL ASSESSMENT
PROGRAM ON SMALL, RURAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN THE
UPPER PENINSULA OF MICHIGAN
By
Faye DeMarte

The r e s e a r c h e r ’ s purpose in t h i s stu dy was t o

in v e s t ig a te the

e f f e c t o f t h e Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) on t h e
c u r r ic u lu m

in

s m a l l,

rural

school

districts.

Third-,

fourth-,

s i x t h - , s e v e n t h - , n i n t h - , and t e n t h - g r a d e r e a d in g and math t e a c h e r s
in t e n s e l e c t e d d i s t r i c t s were asked t o respond t o a 3 3 -i t e m f o r c e d c ho ic e survey in s p r i n g 1990.

Personnel

in f o u r o f t h e t e n survey

d i s t r i c t s were in te r v ie w e d t o s u b s t a n t i a t e and e n r i c h d a t a c o l l e c t e d
wit h t h e su rv e y.

The d a t a were an alyzed t o p r o v id e answers t o two

r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s , t o i n d i c a t e t h e l e v e l s o f use o f t h e MEAP, and
t o p ro v id e a d e s c r i p t i o n o f s m a l l, r u r a l s c h o o l s .
Given t h e
conclusions
determ ine

were drawn:
the

curricula;

lim itations

D istricts

strengths

prin cip als

of the

and

bit"

to

students,

parents,

used

the

follow ing

MEAP r e s u l t s

weaknesses

provided

in te r p r e ta tio n of the r e s u l t s ;

study,

"some"

of

math

major

"some"

and

leadership

to

reading
in

the

r e s u l t s were communicated " q u i t e

and

school

bo a rd s ;

and

results

a

had

Faye DeMarte
a l t e r e d c o u r s e c o n t e n t , t e a c h i n g methods, and p r e p a r a t i o n f o r t e s t s .
D i s t r i c t s v a r i e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y on o n e - t h i r d o f t h e su rv e y i t e m s .
number o f p r a c t i c e s were used in s m a l l ,
r a i s e s t u d e n t s ’ MEAP s c o r e s .

rural

school d i s t r i c t s

The f o u r v i g n e t t e s

constructed

t h e i n t e r v i e w s r e v e a l e d t h a t a lt h o u g h t h e s e d i s t r i c t s
common

wi th

respect

to

isolation,

student

A
to

from

had much in

enrollm ent,

ty p e

of

community, and academic h i s t o r y , t h e d i s t r i c t s v a r i e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y
on c u r r i c u l a r i s s u e s .

D is se rta tio n Director:

Dr. Samuel A. Moore I I

Copyright by
FAYE DeMARTE
1991

A CK NO W L E D G M E N T S

I

express

su p p o rt

my g r a t i t u d e

and encouragement

to

in

the

many peo ple

completing t h e

who l e n t

requirements

their

for

th e

d o c t o r a l program, e s p e c i a l l y :
Dr. Samuel Moore I I , my a d v i s o r and d i s s e r t a t i o n chairman, who
provided d i r e c t i o n and meaning th r ough ou t t h i s academic e nde av or.
Drs.

Black ma n,

Groty,

and

Rowan,

dissertatio n

committee

members, who focused and r e f i n e d t h i s s tu d y .
Small, r u r a l school d i s t r i c t e d u c a t o r s who completed t h e survey
and allowed i n t e r v i e w s ; w it h o u t them, t h i s st ud y would not have been
possible.
DeTour

Area

Superintendent

School

Jay

board

VanHoven,

members

and

who g r a n t e d

educators,
the

time

especially

and

pe rsonal

su pp or t t o see t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n t o co mple tion.
My f a m i l y ,

Bob,

Roberto,

time and r e s o u r c e s f o r t h i s
with t h e i r

faith

and K a t r i n a ,
pursuit.

and c o n f i d e n c e ,

accomplishment.

iv

Their

make t h i s

who s a c r i f i c e d

family

sacrifices,

together

achievement

a mutual

T A B L E OF CONT EN T S
Page
LIST OF TABLES

.................................................................................................

viii

Chapter
I.

II.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM..........................................................

1

I n t r o d u c t i o n ...............................................................................
Rural S c h o o l s ...............................................................................
Purpose o f t h e Study ..............................................................
Importance o f t h e Study ..........................................................
Methodology ....................................................................................
D e l i m i t a t i o n s ...............................................................................
D e f i n i t i o n o f Terms ..................................................................
Summary and O v e r v i e w ..............................................................

1
3
8
8
9
10
11
12

REVIEW OF LITERATURE..................................................................

14

I n t r o d u c t i o n ...............................................................................
Measurement and Ev a lu a ti o n .................................................
The P o p u l a r i t y o f Assessment ............................................
T e s t s and T h e i r U s e ..................................................................
The Curriculum and T e s t i n g L i n k ........................................
Research on T e s t i n g ..................................................................
Research on Minimum-Competency T e s t s ...........................
The Evans S t u d y .......................................................................
The Cruse S t u d y .......................................................................
The Rankin S t u d y ..................................................................
The S a n d i f e r S t u d y ..............................................................
The William S t u d y ..................................................................
The Smedley S t u d y ..................................................................
The Walstad S t u d y ..................................................................
General Findi ngs .......................................................................
T e s t i n g in M i c h i g a n ..................................................................
MEAP S t u d i e s ................................................................................
Early MEAP S t u d i e s ..............................................................
D i s s e r t a t i o n s on MEAP..........................................................
Summary........................................................................................
Chapter Summary ...........................................................................

14
15
18
20
23
26
29
30
30
31
31
32
32
33
33
34
37
40
41
46
47

v

Page
METHODS AND PROCEDURES..............................................................

49

The P o p u la ti o n and S a m p l e .....................................................
The Survey In s tr u m e n t ..............................................................
C o l l e c t i o n o f t h e Data ..........................................................
Data A n a ly si s ................................................................................

49
52
53
56

PRESENTATION OF D A T A ..................................................................

58

I n t r o d u c t i o n ................................................................................
Survey Returns ...........................................................................
I n t e r v i e w s ....................................................................................
R e s u lt s o f Data A n a ly si s f o r T e s t Usage ......................
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Item 1
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Item 2 ........................................................
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Item 3
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Item 4 ........................................................
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Items 4b, 4c, and 4 d ..............................
Use o f t h e 1989 MEAP R e s u l t s ............................................
Comparison With Jencka Study ........................................
Summary o f t h e Use o f MEAP R e s u l t s ..........................
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Item 6
Summary o f Communication o f MEAP R e s u l t s . . . .
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Item 7 ........................................................
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Item 8
Four V i g n e t t e s ...........................................................................
Aholahti ....................................................................................
K o s k i t o w n ....................................................................................
M a k i v i l ........................................................................................
V i l m i .............................................................................................
Summary........................................................................................
Chapter Summary ...........................................................................

58
59
59
60
60
65
69
71
75
77
84
86
87
95
96
105
107
109
114
118
121
125
125

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................

128

Summary.............................................................................................
Purpose o f t h e Research .....................................................
M e t h o d o l o g y ................................................................................
F i n d i n g s ....................................................................................
C o n c l u s i o n s ....................................................................................
Recommendations ...........................................................................
F u r t h e r Study ...........................................................................
Process G u i d e l i n e s ..............................................................

128
131
132
132
138
141
141
142

A.

SURVEY....................; .........................................................................

144

B.

LETTER OF PERMISSION TO CONDUCTSTUDY ..................................

149

III.

IV.

V.

APPENDICES

vi

Page
C.

COVER L E T T E R ....................................................................................

150

D.

T A B L E S .................................................................................................

151

BIBLIOGRAPHY

.....................................................................................................

vii

155

LIST OF TABLES

Table
1.
2.

3.

4.
5.
6.

7.

8.

9.

10.
11.

Page
Number o f Surveys Sent t o and Received From
P a r t i c i p a t i n g D i s t r i c t s .........................................................

55

Responses t o Item 1: St a n d a rd iz ed T e s ts Provide
Important Info rmatio n in A sse ssi ng Your
D i s t r i c t ’ s E f f e c t i v e n e s s , by I n d iv i d u a l D i s t r i c t s .

61

Percen tage s f o r Each Item Response in Question 1 -S ta nda rd iz ed T e s t s Provide Important In fo rm at io n
in Asse ssin g Your D i s t r i c t ’ s E f f e c t i v e n e s s - Across All Surveyed D i s t r i c t s ............................... . . .

64

The Use o f MEAP R e s u lt s With Other T e s t s , MEAP
Alone, or Not At All by t h e I n d iv i d u a l D i s t r i c t s

.

66

The Use o f MEAP With Other T e s t s , MEAP Alone, or
Not At All Across All D i s t r i c t s ...............................

69

Responses t o Item 3: D i s t r i c t S e l e c t s o r Develops
T e s ts f o r Items Included in t h e Local C u r r i c u ­
lum But Not Measured by MEAP...................................

69

Percen tage s
D istrict
Included
Measured

f o r Each Item Response in Item 3 - S e l e c t s or Develops T e s ts f o r Items
in t h e Local Curriculum But Not
by MEAP--Across All D i s t r i c t s ......................

Responses to Item 4: Curriculum Guides Are A v a i l a b l e
in Reading and M a t h .........................................................

71

72

Percen tage s f o r Each Item Response in Item 4 - Curriculum Guides Are A v a il a b l e in Reading and
Math--Across All D i s t r i c t s .................................................

74

R e s u lt s o f A n a ly si s o f Variance f o r Item 5e:
To deter mine I n s t r u c t i o n a l P r i o r i t i e s ...........................

80

R e s u lt s o f A na ly si s o f Variance f o r Item 5f: To
Determine Placement o f St ude nts in "Remedial"
P r o g r a m s ...............................................................................

viii

82

Page
12.

R e s u lt s o f A n a ly s is o f Variance f o r Item 5 i :
To
I d e n t i f y Staff-Development Needs ...................................

84

Mean Ratings o f t h e Use o f MEAP R e s u lt s f o r
S p e c i f i e d Purposes by Rural Educators and
by P r i n c i p a l s in M i c h i g a n .....................................................

85

R e s u lt s o f A n a ly s is o f Variance f o r Item 6a: The
P r i n c i p a l Provides Le adership in t h e I n t e r p r e ­
t a t i o n o f MEAP T e s t R e s u l t s .................................................

88

R e s u lt s o f A n a ly si s o f Variance f o r Item 6b: MEAP
Has Been Discussed a t Teacher M e e t i n g s ......................

90

R e s u lt s o f A n a ly s is o f Variance f o r Item 6c: MEAP
R es ults Have Been Discussed a t School Board
M e e t i n g s ........................................................................................

91

R e s u lt s of A n a ly si s o f Variance f o r Item 6d:
I n s e r v i c e A c t i v i t i e s Have Been Provided t o Help
In c o r p o r a te MEAP O b j e c t i v e s I nt o I n s t r u c t i o n a l
P r o g r a m s ........................................................................................

92

R e s u lt s of A n a ly si s o f Variance f o r Item 6e:
Our
S t a f f Shares Inf orm ation Regarding Teaching
S t r a t e g i e s Used t o I n c r e a s e Stude nt Te st
Scores on M E A P ...........................................................................

94

R e s u lt s o f A na ly si s o f Variance f o r Item 7b:
Changes in Course Content Based on MEAP R e s u lt s . .

97

R e s u lt s o f A n a ly si s o f Variance f o r Item 7g: The
Change in t h e Frequency o f Curriculum Revision
Based on MEAP R e s u l t s ..............................................................

103

R e s u lt s o f A n a ly si s o f Variance f o r Item 8a:
Teachers Are F a m i l i a r With MEAP T e s t Que stions

. .

105

Pe rc e nta ge s : Curriculum Guides Are A v a i l a b l e in
Reading and M a t h ......................................................................

151

D.2.

Means f o r All V a r ia b le s on Survey In st rum en t......................

152

D.3.

Means f o r S i g n i f i c a n t C o n t r a s t s

.............................................

153

D.4.

S t a t i s t i c a l l y S i g n i f i c a n t C o n t r a s t s Within D i s t r i c t s
f o r Questions That Are S t a t i s t i c a l l y S i g n i f i c a n t
Between D i s t r i c t s ......................................................................

154

13.

14.

15.
16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.
D.l.

ix

CHAPTER I
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Introduction
Before

1970,

the

word

educational

p u b lications,

educational

organizations.

"accountability"
nor

was

it

rarely

found

A ccountability,

on

appeared

in

agendas

as a p p l i e d

for

to

the

e d u c a t i o n a l p ro c e ss and outcomes, was p e r v a s i v e in t h e 1980s, with
s m a l l,

rural

sc hools

striving

re s p o n se o f s m a l l, r u r a l

for

greater

effectiveness.

The

schools in t h e Upper P e n in s u la o f Michigan

t o t h e c u r r i c u l a r a c c o u n t a b i l i t y i s s u e s , and more s p e c i f i c a l l y ,
Michigan

Educational

Assessment

Program,

was

the

foc us

of

the
this

research.
According t o T y l e r (1971), t h r e e r e c e n t developments ap pea r to
have in f l u e n c e d t h e a c c o u n t a b i l i t y movement.:

t h e l a r g e r p o r t i o n of

t h e f a m i l y ’ s income t h a t

t h e l a r g e r number o f

is

s p en t on t a x e s ,

t e e n a g e r s who a re unab le t o meet

literacy

standards

required

for

employment, and t h e s u c c e s s o f management p r o c e s s e s in i n d u s t r y .
Schools

were

g r e a te r educational

asked

to

justify

increased

effectiveness.

ser ved

More s p e c i f i c a l l y ,

notice

to

the

sc h o o ls

by

Educators were t o l d

must be held a c c o u n ta b le f o r g r e a t e r r e s u l t s
increased.

budgets

said
that

1

that

th e y

i f t a x e s were t o

L e s s in g e r
society

showing

(1970),

members

the

be

public

ex pe c te d

all

2
c h ildren to learn at l e a s t the basic s k i l l s ,

that fa ilu res

were t o

be re g a rd e d l e s s as t h e f a u l t o f t h e c h i l d o r o f h i s / h e r background
th a n o f t h e s ch oo l,

and t h a t t h e p r o p e r re s p o n se t o f a i l u r e

was not

excu se s but reform.
With t h e m e a s u r e m e n t

of basic

sk ill

attainm ent

development and extended use o f s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s .
of

E d u c a ti o n ,

the

Elementary

and

Secondary

came

the

Brown v. Board

Education

Ac t,

the

Coleman Repor t, t h e Natio nal Assessment o f Edu cation al P r o g r e s s , and
t h e "back t o b a s i c s " movement brought f o r t h a c t i v i t y with r e s p e c t t o
e q u i t y and a c c o u n t a b i l i t y o f r e s u l t s .
a stro n g er national

and s t a t e

a sse ssm en t programs

in

in e d u c a t i o n .

some form.

minimum-competency measures.
resulted

role

There was a l s o a t r e n d toward

In 1978,

All

considered

33 s t a t e s

initiated

A lt h o u g h * s ta te a c t i o n s have n o t always

in minimum-competency t e s t s ,

states

r o l e in t h e e d u c a ti o n o f school c h i l d r e n .

have

increased

their

Such a r o l e a f f e c t s t h e

K-12 c u rr ic u lu m .
In 1970, t h e Michigan Department o f Education began t o develop
t h e Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) " t o a s s e s s what
educational

attainments
the

and d e f i c i e n c i e s e x i s t "

668).

MEAP was

selected

to o l

school,

and d i s t r i c t e f f e c t i v e n e s s .

that

(Porter,

would

Adjustments

in

student,

expenditures,

and d e l i v e r y were t o

deficient.

Thus, acc ord in g t o P o r t e r , Michigan could more a s s u r e d l y

social

class,

will

students,

if

measure

p.

curriculum,

" g u a r a n te e t h a t a l l

fo ll o w

1976,

d istricts

w it h o u t r e s p e c t t o

a c q u i r e t h e minimum school

were

race,

skills

found

income,

or

n e c e s s a r y to

3
take

full

advantage

of

the

c h o ic e s

that

a c c ru e

upon

successful

completion o f p u b l i c s c ho oli n g" ( L e s s i n g e r , 1971, p. 42) .
A decade l a t e r ,

Donovan (1982) o f t h e Department o f Education

boa sted t h a t " s t a t e asse ssm en t has been a c c e p ted as a good i n d i c a t o r
of the level

o f achievement in Michigan and a v a l u a b l e c u r r ic u lu m

t o o l " (p. 9 ) .

House, R i v e r s , and St u f fl e b ea m (1974) s ugges te d t h a t

MEAP i s

flawed

in

that

l o c a l d e c i s i o n making.

this

a c c o u n t a b i l i t y model

does

no t

s er v e

Local autonomy i s c r u c i a l t o d i s t r i c t s and

i s not e a s i l y r e l i n q u i s h e d t o t h e s t a t e .
Rural Schools
Data about s m a l l,

rural

scho ols

"tend t o be s c a n t y ,

w o rs t, simply n o n - e x i s t e n t " (Sher, 1977, p. 3 ) .
pe opl e,

rural

communities,

and r u r a l

and,

In a d d i t i o n , r u r a l

conditions are d iv e rse.

commonality o f "an i s l a n d v i l l a g e o f f t h e c o a s t o f Maine,
mining town in West V i r g i n i a ,
town

in

Minnesota,

d e l t a region,

an

a ranch a r e a

impoverished

in Wyoming,

community

in

the

The
a coal

a college
M ississippi

a ski r e s o r t in Vermont, a mi gra nt worker s e t t l e m e n t

in Texas, an Alaskan n a t i v e v i l l a g e n e a r t h e A r c t i c C i r c l e ,
prosp erous g r a i n farming a re a in Iowa" (S he r,
th e y a re a l l

at

rural.

Rural

America i s

1978, p. 3)

and a

is th at

he ter ogen e ou s and complex;

t h u s , a simple s o l u t i o n t o i n c r e a s e t h e e d u c a t i o n a l e f f e c t i v e n e s s of
a l l r u r a l scho ols seems h i g h l y u n l i k e l y .
The National School Board A s s o c i a t i o n d e f i n e d r u r a l
th o s e
located

sc ho ol s
in

a

with
rural

a student
setting.

e n r o ll m e n t
According

of
to

fewer
the

than

s c h o o ls as
2,500

National

or

Rural

4
D e v el o p m e n t

Institu te,

an

area

is

rural

when

the

number

i n h a b i t a n t s i s fewer than 150 p e r square mil e (DeYoung, 1987).

of
Jess

(1984) d e f i n e d r u r a l as t h o s e who l i v e in t h e open c o u n t r y s i d e and
communities with fewer than 2,500 i n h a b i t a n t s .
t h a t t h e commonality o f a l l

definitions

He f u r t h e r s t a t e d

is th a t rural

s c h o o l s a re

small in e n r o l l m e n t s i z e , a r e a g r e a t d i s t a n c e from any major urban
center,

and

a re

an

extension

as

well

as

a

reflection

of

th e

community t h e y s e r v e .
In t h e s t u d i e s conducted in r u r a l

schools,

student enrollment

s i z e tended t o vary due t o t h e manner in which r u r a l was d e f i n e d .
However,

Barker and Muse (1983)

conducted a co mp arati ve

s tu d y o f

d i s t r i c t s with e n r o l l m e n t s o f 300 o r fewer s t u d e n t s v e rs u s d i s t r i c t s
with

enrollments

districts

with

between 301
enrollments

greater d if f ic u ltie s
financial

and 900 s t u d e n t s .

of

300 o r

attracting

d ifficu lties,

fewer

personnel,

had f e w e r

They found

students

tended t o

support

that

e xp e r ie n c e d
have g r e a t e r

services,

had more

t e a c h e r s t e a c h i n g o u t s i d e t h e i r a r e a o f c e r t i f i c a t i o n , and had fewer
curricular

offerings.

Economies

of

scale

were

not

engaged

in

have d e f i n e d

"sm al l"

as

d i s t r i c t s with s t u d e n t e n r o l l m e n t s under 300.
Currently,

in Michigan,

legislators

t h o s e d i s t r i c t s with e n r o l l m e n t s o f 500 o r fewer s t u d e n t s .
d e f i n i t i o n i s used f o r " r e c a p t u r i n g " p ur po se s:

This

These d i s t r i c t s

do

not have t o r e t u r n t o t h e s t a t e c o f f e r s th o s e funds r e c e i v e d in th e
categories

of tran sp o rtatio n ,

special

education,

and so on,

even

though th e y a r e spending more p e r s t u d e n t th a n t h e school f i n a n c i a l a id formula d i c t a t e s .

It

is believed t h a t

these

sc h o o ls

a r e not

5

a b l e t o ta k e advantages o f t h e economies o f s c a l e because o f t h e i r
s t u d e n t en ro ll m e n t s i z e .
Rural sch oo ls vary not only t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t t h e y a re s m a l l,
but

also

located.

acc ord ing

to

the

type

of

community

in

which

the y

a re

G j e l t e n (1982) o f f e r e d t h e f o ll o w i n g typ olo gy:

S t a b l e r u r a l - - C l a s s i c r u r a l community--prosperous,
t r a d i t i o n a l , and mostly w hite .

peaceful,

Depressed ru ral- -Ec onom ic i n s e c u r i t y abounds, o u t m i g r a t i o n i s
high, l o c a l economy i s o f t e n underdeveloped and t h e r e i s a
moderate t o high m i n o r i t y p o p u l a t i o n .
High-growth r u r a l - - F a c e s problems i n h e r e n t in r a p i d
ina deq ua te school f a c i l i t i e s , housing, and s e r v i c e s .

growth:

Reborn r u r a l - - A t t r a c t a r e f u g e e p o p u l a t i o n fr om t h e c i t y
seeking a r u r a l l i f e s t y l e ; they a r e ze a lo us d e f e n d e r s o f many
t r a d i t i o n a l r u r a l customs and i n s t i t u t i o n s .
I s o l a t e d r u r a l - - H a v e many c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e o t h e r t y p e s ,
but i s o l a t i o n le a d s to s e p a r a t e problems ( t r a n s p o r t a t i o n ,
commerce, and c u l t u r a l a c t i v i t i e s a r e a l l a f f e c t e d ) .
Although th e y are d i f f i c u l t t o d e f i n e , r u r a l sc ho ol s a re not so
e l u s i v e as t o evade t h e p r e s s u r e by t h e i r c o n s t i t u e n t s
more a c c o u n ta b le ,

t o become

This p r e s s u r e compounds t h e t a s k of e d u c a ti o n in

small s c h o o ls ; th e y must deal with the f a c t o r s o f r u r a l ism as well
as

the

These

historic
problems

problems
in c lu de

associated

absente eism

hi g h ly competent t e a c h e r s ,

pr ovi di ng

with
and

s m al l,

none nro llm en t,

special

s p e c i a l i z e d s e r v i c e s , s e c u ri n g needed c a p i t a l ,
inherent

isolation

and

Smith, 1983; Sher, 1977).

sparsity

of

rural

e d u c a ti o n

s c h o o ls .
recruiting
and o t h e r

and compensating f o r

p o p u la ti o n

(Muse,

B arker,

&

6
Are r u r a l

schools i n s t i t u t i o n s

of educational

excellence?

"Achievement on t h e c o g n i t i v e measures has demonst rat ed t h e most
consistent

pattern,

w ith

followed by r u r a l - s m a l l
areas

(Kohr,

1983).

the

suburban

areas

town communities,
Superintendents

and

scoring
last

o f sm all,

highest,

of

all

rural

urban

schools

i n d i c a t e d t h a t 61% o f t h e i r s t u d e n t s ’ performance was " c l o s e t o t h e
national

a v e r a g e ,"

whereas

27.8% r e p o r t e d

n a t i o n a l average" (Muse e t a l . , 1983).

performance

"above t h e

In Michigan, usi ng MEAP as a

c o g n i t i v e measure, smal l, r u r a l school d i s t r i c t s have been found in
th e top 20 as well as in t h e bottom 20 ranks
This ranking

s u p p o r ts

S h e r’ s

(1977)

(Hornbeck, 1989).
declaration

that

"rural

scho ols can be e x c e l l e n t and be as p r o d u c ti v e as anywhere in t h e
nation--such excellence will

not occur by d e f a u l t ,

but

rather

by

d e l i b e r a t e a c t i o n s aimed a t b u i l d i n g upon what th e y have, as well as
pro vi d i n g f o r what they la ck "
s t a t e d t h a t a c c e p ti n g r u r a l

(p. 19).

Further,

Na chtiga l

(1980)

r e a l i t y would not mean t h a t t h e same

e du c a ti o n a l program o f f e r e d in t h e urban school should be pro vided
in t h e r u r a l community, f o r t h e s i t u a t i o n s a re d i f f e r e n t and so a re
th e needs.

"Our b e s t s t r a t e g y in t h e small sc h o o ls ar e na f o r both

improvement and s u r v i v a l

i s not t o compete in program br e a d th with

l a r g e r schools but to compete e q u a l l y on t h e i s s u e s o f q u a l i t y such
as th o s e i d e n t i f i e d in t h e school e f f e c t i v e n e s s r e s e a r c h " (M a rs h a ll ,
1986, p. 7).
Buttram and Carlson (1983) d i s c u s s e d t h e seven c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
of

an e f f e c t i v e

strengths

of

school
sm all,

as
rural

they

pertain

schools

to

lie

rural
in

a

schools.
safe,

The

orderly

7

environment;

high

expectations;

school r e l a t i o n s .

opportunity

to

learn;

and

Small r u r a l scho ols do not do as well in f o c u s in g

on a c l e a r mission and pr ovid i n g i n s t r u c t i o n a l l e a d e r s h i p .
with

frequent

home-

m onitoring,

a clear

statem ent

of

Coupled

purpose,

and

in s t r u c t i o n a l le a d e rs h ip are recognized elem ents o f cu rriculu m
development and implementation.
In

B a r k e r’ s

(1985)

st udy,

superintendents

ranked

the

c h a l l e n g e s f a c in g them in t h e i r s m al l, r u r a l d i s t r i c t s .

major

Improving

t h e c urr ic u lu m was a c l o s e second t o o b t a i n i n g adequate f i n a n c i a l
s u p p o rt .

Curriculum improvement "can b e s t be f u r t h e r e d through t h e

encouragement and su p p o rt o f networking and t e c h n i c a l
(G jelten,
shared

1979).

Often encouraged are l o n g - d i s t a n c e

services

counseling,

and

in

vocational

c urr ic u lu m

education,

development

assistance"
l e a r n i n g and

special

(Loustaunau,

education,
1975).

The

c u r r i c u l u m - t e x t b o o k - t e s t match seems not t o have r e c e i v e d a t t e n t i o n
in l i t e r a t u r e on r u r a l s c h o o ls .
Although
adm inistrative

th e

effective

function

schools

research

has

emphasized

an

t o cu rri c ul um development and implementa­

t i o n , McClurkin (1970) reminded t h e e d u c a ti o n a l

community t h a t t h e

e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f minimum s ta n d a r d s depends more on t h e cl assroom
t e a c h e r than
in stru ctio n al

any o t h e r

factor.

The f a c t o r s

c h a n g e s have been

influencing

investigated

(Floden,

teacher
P orter,

Schmidt, Freeman, & Sc h w il le , 1981), and t h e p resen ce o f o b j e c t i v e s
was

found

content.

to

be t h e

strongest

force

to

cause

change

in

co urs e

8
This

s tu d y was

un de rta ken t o

provide

i n f o r m a t i o n as

s t a t u s o f MEAP, t h e mandated s t a t e asse ssm en t t e s t ,
school

d istricts

practices

in

investigated.
question:

in

the

Upper P e n in s u la

of

In a d d i t i o n , t h e r e s e a r c h e r

Do s m a l l,

th e

in s m a l l , r u r a l

Michigan.

c u r r ic u lu m development and t e s t

to

D istrict

alig nm e nt were

also

a tt e m p t e d t o answer th e

r u r a l d i s t r i c t s t e a c h t o t h e t e s t , o r do th e y

c r e a t e a c u rr ic u lu m d e si g ne d t o meet t h e i r l o c a l needs?
Purpose o f t h e Study
The r e s e a r c h e r ’ s purpose in t h i s s tu d y was t o i n v e s t i g a t e th e
e f f e c t o f MEAP on t h e c u r r i c u l u m in s m a l l , r u r a l

school d i s t r i c t s .

The e f f e c t was a s s e s s e d by i n v e s t i g a t i n g t h e t e s t i n g

program,

th e

c u r r i c u l u m , classroom use o f t e s t r e s u l t s , and t h e communication of
test

resu lts.

Subsumed u n d e r

the

main

question

are

several

subquestions:
1.

Are

there

significant

differences

among

d istricts

with

r e s p e c t t o t h e use o f MEAP r e s u l t s ?
2.

I f MEAP r e s u l t s a r e used , how a r e th e y used?

3.

What p r a c t i c e s ,

i f any, a re

intentionally

used by

s m a l l,

r u r a l sc ho ol s t o respond t o t h e MEAP?
Importance of t h e Study
One o f t h e s t a t e d purp os es of t h e MEAP i s t o improve s t u d e n t
achievement.

This

d istricts

ass essment

use

instruction.
Jencka

should

o c cu r and
results

to

On a s t a t e w i d e b a s i s ,

(199),

and S t e e l e ( 1 9 7 6 )

be

revise
Aquino

evident
curricula
(1975),

found t h a t

i f l o c a l school
and

improve

Bushaw (1988),

MEAPwas

used

in

9

d e te r m in in g t h e g e ner al l e v e l o f s t u d e n t s ’ achievement, as well
t h e s t r e n g t h s and weaknesses o f t h e c u r r i c u l u m .
d e te r m in e which " e s s e n t i a l "

skills

as

MEAP was used to

were t a u g h t ,

to

report

to

th e

board o f e d u c a t i o n , o r t o use in c o n j u n c t i o n wit h o t h e r t e s t s .
In only J e n c k a ’ s (1990) s tu d y were d a t a a nal yz ed a c r o s s s t r a t a .
The s i x t h

s t r a t u m was c o n s i d e r e d r u r a l ,

encompassing t h e n o r t h e r n

Lower P e n in s u la and t h e Upper P e n i n s u l a .

As a s t r a t u m , t h e sc h o o ls

in t h e s i x t h s t r a t u m d id n o t d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y from o t h e r s t r a t a .
However, t h i s s t r a t u m i n c l u d e s sc ho ol s w it h s t u d e n t e n r o l l m e n t s o f
1 t o 4,840 .

Is v a r i a b i l i t y in MEAP use p r e s e n t with such v a r i a b i l ­

i t y in e n r o l l m e n t s ?
In a d d i t i o n , a r e S t a t e Department o f Education mandates a b l e to
p r e d i c a t e change in s m a l l ,
from o t h e r
d istricts

d istricts

and

a re a f f e c t e d by

t h i s mandate?

rural

d istricts

from t h e

State

is o la te d geographically
Department?

If

school

MEAP, what has changed as a r e s u l t

Do any d i s t r i c t s

of

in te n tio n a lly t r y to r a is e student

achievement s c o r e s ?
This

exploratory

research

was

designed

to

examine

these

q u e s t i o n s and t o p ro vi de e d u c a t o r s with some in f o r m a t io n as t o t h e
s t a t u s o f MEAP in t h e s m a l l ,

rural

school

d istricts

in t h e Upper

P e n in s u la o f Michigan.
Methodology
To de ter mi ne t h e use o f MEAP in s m a l l , r u r a l s c h o o l s , a random
sample o f t e n
students

was

school

d istricts

selected.

The

with e n r o l l m e n t s
p o p u la ti o n

of

of

such

500 o r
districts

fewer
was

10

reco rd ed in t h e 1990 Michigan Education D i r e c t o r y and B u y e r 's Guide.
Twenty-one

such K-12 d i s t r i c t s

exist

in

the

Upper

Peninsula

of

Michigan.
In
and

the

ten

third-,

selected

fourth-,

districts,

sixth-,

superintendents,

seventh-,

ninth-,

principals,

and

tenth-grade

t e a c h e r s r e c e i v e d a survey c o n t a i n i n g 33 f o r c e d - c h o i c e i te m s .
question,

c o n s i s t i n g o f t e n it e m s , was r e p l i c a t e d

One

from t h e Jencka

(1990) s tu d y .
Data were a l s o c o l l e c t e d through e x t e n s i v e i n t e r v i e w s in fo u r
of

th e

ten

selected

districts.

Interviews

were

v a l i d a t e and extend t h e f i n d i n g s o f t h e su rv e y.

conducted

to

I n t e r v i e w s were not

l i m i t e d t o th o s e i n d i v i d u a l s who r e c e i v e d t h e su rv e y .
The c o l l e c t i v e re s p o n se s o f d i s t r i c t pers onn el were t h e u n i t of
analysis.

This

analysis

was

us ed

t h e r e were s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s
MEAP use,
what,

if

(a)

to

among d i s t r i c t s

(b) to de ter mi ne how MEAP was used,
any,

practices

s m a l l,

determ ine

rural

whether

with r e g a r d to

and (c) t o

identify

sc h o o ls were usi ng t o r a i s e

s t u d e n t s ’ achievement s c o r e s .
Del i m i t a t i o n s
D e l i m i t a t i o n s o f t h e st udy were as fo l l o w s :
1.
school

Data c o l l e c t e d were based on s m a l l ,
d istricts

students.

that

had

a

total

e n r o ll m e n t

rural
of

500

Upper P e n in s u la
or

fewer

This e n ro ll m e n t f i g u r e i s c u r r e n t l y used by t h e S t a t e of

Michigan f o r d i s t r i c t s t o be exempt from r e c a p t u r e o f funds due to
the

d istricts’

inability

to

participate

in

economies

of

scale.

11

Recapture i s t h e payment by t h e l o c a l
o f th o s e c a t e g o r i c a l

school d i s t r i c t t o t h e s t a t e

funds ( t r a n s p o r t a t i o n ,

special

education,

and

so on) t h a t t h e d i s t r i c t r e c e i v e s because t h e d i s t r i c t i s spending
more pe r s t u d e n t than t h e s t a t e - a i d formula d i c t a t e s .
2.

The d a t a f o r t h e stud y were based on t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f

s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s , p r i n c i p a l s , and t h i r d - ,

fourth-,

sixth-,

seventh-,

n i n t h - , and t e n t h - g r a d e t e a c h e r s r a t h e r th a n on observed b e h a v io r or
documents.
3.

The t e a c h e r s ’ p e r c e p t i o n s were l i m i t e d t o t h o s e who t a u g h t

re a d in g and math.
D e f i n i t i o n o f Terms
Curric ulu m.

The body o f knowledge t h a t i s p r e s e n t e d in formal

s t a t e m e n t s , as well as t h a t which i s p r e s e n t e d in a c t u a l e d u c a ti o n a l
experiences.
Effect.

An e f f e c t

i n c lu d e s

the

intentional

as well

as

th e

u n i n t e n t i o n a l r e s u l t s o f MEAP s c o r e s on t e a c h i n g and t h e c u rr ic u lu m .
Michigan Educational Assessment Program.
and a d m in is te r e d by Research,

The program developed

E va lua tio n and Assessment S e r v i c e s :

Michigan Department o f Education.

I t i s d e f i n e d in Act 307 o f t h e

Pu bli c Acts o f 1969 and by Act 38 o f t h e P ub li c Acts o f 1970.
MEAP t e s t s

a r e a d m in is te r e d t o f o u r t h - ,

seventh-,

and t e n t h - g r a d e

s t u d e n t s in t h e academic a r e a s o f re a d in g and mathematics.
eleventh-grade

seventh-,

and

science.

The t e s t s a re analyzed and r e t u r n e d t o th e l o c a l

d i s t r i c t f o r use.

students

are

given

The

Fifth-,

MEAP t e s t s

in

school

12

U tilitv .

U t i l i t y im p li e s worth.

MEAP r e s u l t s p o s se ss u t i l i t y

i f t h e y a r e us ef ul in e v a l u a t i n g what i s t a u g h t , and i f th e y a r e a
component o f measuring s t u d e n t outcomes in an e f f e c t i v e school p l a n .
Summary and Overview
The need f o r r e s e a r c h in s m a l l, r u r a l s c h o o ls was e s t a b l i s h e d
in t h i s c h a p t e r .

A b r i e f d i s c u s s i o n o f a c c o u n t a b i l i t y i s s u e s and

t h e MEAP was i n c lu d e d .
was gi v e n .

Rural

Rural was d e f i n e d , and a community typolog y

school

problems

and c h a l l e n g e s were d i s c u s s e d .

Also includ ed in t h i s c h a p t e r were a s ta t e m e n t o f t h e problem and
the

purpose

for

the

research.

D efinitions

of terms

and

the

to

the

methodology employed in t h e r e s e a r c h were p r e s e n t e d .
Chapter
s tu dy :
tests

II

contains

a review o f

e q u a l i t y and a c c o u n t a b i l i t y ,
and

testing,

their

use,

c u rr ic u lu m

relevant

t h e p o p u l a r i t y o f ass e ss m e nt,

and

minimum-competency t e s t i n g ,

literature

testing

testing

link,

research

on

in Michigan, and MEAP

studies.
Chapter I I I
sample,

contains a d e sc rip tio n o f the population

a description

pro c e d u re s ,

of

the

interview questions,

survey

instrument,

and th e

data-collection

and d a t a - a n a l y s i s pro c e du res used

in t h e st udy .
Chapter IV c o n t a i n s a review o f t h e f i n d i n g s ; t h e ge ner al l e v e l
o f use i s r e p o r t e d as a mean, s i g n i f i c a n t f i n d i n g s a r e d i s c u s s e d ,
and a p o r t r a i t o f fo u r s m a l l, r u r a l scho ols i s pr ovid e d.

13
Chapter
conclusions.
pro vid ed .

V contains

a summary o f

Recommendations

for

the

further

study,

follow ed

research

are

by

also

C H A P T E R II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Introduction
A number o f sweeping changes have oc cu r re d in e d u c a t i o n d u ri n g
t h e l a s t 25 y e a r s in r e s p o n s e t o p u b l i c demands.

In t h e 1960s and

1970s, p u b l i c d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n was widespread with r e g a r d t o s o c i a l
promotion, g r a d u a t i o n based on a tt e n d a n c e r a t h e r th a n achievement,
and a c u rr ic u lu m t h a t was p e r c e i v e d t o be water ed down.

D e c li n i n g

t e s t s c o r e s , gra de i n f l a t i o n , c o m pl a in ts about t h e s k i l l

le v e ls of

high

e d u c a ti o n

school

graduates,

and t h e

rising

costs

of

public

compounded t h i s d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n ( P e d u l l a & Reidy, 1979).
r e s po nse

to

these

failures

was

reform,

no t

excus es

The p ro p e r
(Lessinger,

1970).
Chjnnoc

WiH nrmv' J
w

1 M

W W W W* •

ar»H t h o v
*” ■ •

^

inrliirlpH

‘

■ "

fal
\

" /

-

a nrpat.pr
~

rolp

l o c a l K-12 e d u c a t i o n a l programs by n a t i o n a l - and s t a t e - l e v e l
makers,

(b)

an emphasis on e q u i t a b l e t r e a t m e n t o f s t u d e n t s ,

in
. . .

policy
(c) a

focus on l e a r n i n g and t e a c h i n g p r o c e s s e s , and (d) a g r e a t e r concern
for

accountability

testing,

f o r what c h i l d r e n

particularly

state

asse ssm en t

should
tests,

learn.
has

r e s u l t o f t h e s e changes ( A i r a s i a n , Madaus, & Pe dul a,
1988).

14

The r o l e
increased

as

of
a

1979; Bushaw,

15
Measurement and E v a lu a ti o n
Measuring and e v a l u a t i n g t h e p r o g r e s s o f s t u d e n t s
(Mehrens,

1979).

In 1856,

an ex amination was used f o r admission

i n t o high school and f o r promo ti ons.
spelling t e s t s .

In 1897, Joseph Rice began h i s

The s h i f t from competence t o e d u c a t i o n a l e f f i c i e n c y

and achievement o c c u r re d in 1918.
(1980),

the

evaluation,

i s no t new

1930s

ushered

in

According t o J a e g e r and T i t t l e

the

new c o n c e p t

supplanting the t e s t i n g of individual

World War I I ,

t h e demands on t h e p u b l i c

school

of

educational

students.

After

system in c r e a s e d

because o f a l a r g e r s t u d e n t e n ro ll m e n t and expanded o p p o r t u n i t i e s
(Jaeger & T i t t l e ,

1980).

Resnick (1985) concluded t h a t " t e s t s and

ex am in atio ns have t r a d i t i o n a l l y served as a major means o f s e t t i n g
and

m aintaining

educational

standards,

and

they

do

th is

by

m o ni to ri ng t h e performance o f both e d u c a t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s and th e
individual

students

in

them"

(p.

178).

He f u r t h e r

stated

that

" t h e r e i s abundant e vid enc e t h a t t h e o v e r r i d i n g r o l e o f e d u c a t i o n a l
t e s t i n g has been t o s e r v e purposes o f p u b l i c a c c o u n t a b i l i t y , program
e v a l u a t i o n , and i n s t i t u t i o n a l comparison" (p. 11).
The
equality

educational
as well

a dd re ss ed
inputs

but

equal
also

tenor

of

as e q u i t y .
educational
by

a dd re sse d f i n a n c i a l

the

1960s

Brown v.
opportunity

outcomes.

and

1970s

was

that

Board o f Education
as

San Antonio

measured
v.

not

(1954)
only

Rodriguez

to

sear ch

by

(1971)

i n p u t s and t h e i r r e l a t i o n t o s t u d e n t outcomes.

Both c as e s emphasized t h e measurement o f s t u d e n t outcomes,
educators

of

for

ways

to

measure

student

skills.

c au si ng
The

Elementary and Secondary Education Act (1965) h e ig ht e ned t h i s sea rc h

16

f o r s t u d e n t outcome measures by p ro v id i n g f i n a n c i a l
low-income,

assistance

lo w -a c hie vin g s c h o o ls with t h e r e q u ir e m e n t t h a t

programs engage in s y s t e m a t i c e v a l u a t i o n (Wise, 1979).
funds p ro v id e d g r e a t e r e d u c a ti o n a l

to

these

Thus, t h e s e

o p p o rtu n ity w hile e x p ectin g

s u cc e ss t o be monitored and measured by t e s t s .
In

1 96 6,

the

(Coleman e t a l . ,
One c o n c l u s i o n
effect

on

Equality

of

Educational

O pportunity

report

1966) was r e l e a s e d by Coleman and h i s c o l l e a g u e s .
of the

r e p o r t was t h a t

students’

standardized

school

factors

achievem ent

had l i t t l e

test

scores.

D i f f e r e n c e s in achievement r e s u l t e d from f a c t o r s o u t s i d e t h e s c h o o l,
such as t h e home, t h e neighborhood, and p e e r s .

The r e p o r t focused

on outcomes, as measured by s t a n d a r d i z e d achievement t e s t s ,

and s e t

a p re c e d e n t f o r a new ty pe o f r e s e a r c h t h a t would focus on what th e
s t u d e n t le a v e s t h e e d u c a t i o n a l p ro c e ss w i t h , r a t h e r th a n what i s put
i n t o t h e e d u c a ti o n a l p r o c e s s .
Reaction t o t h e Coleman Report caused a s e r i e s o f s t u d i e s t o be
undertaken because groups in t h e e d u c a t i o n a l community b e l i e v e d t h a t
p ro c e s s i n g v a r i a b l e s made a d i f f e r e n c e .

The National Assessment of

Educational P r o g r e s s , developed in 1969 by t h e Education Commission
o f t h e S t a t e s , was an in s tr u m e n t " c r e a t e d t o examine achievement in
10 l e a r n i n g a r e a s , t o sp ot changes in l e v e l s o f achievement, and to
apply t h e
policy"

implications

(Wise,

1979,

p.

of
9).

those

changes

to

national

Numerous s t u d i e s

educational

fo ll o w e d ,

which became p a r t o f t h e e f f e c t i v e sc hools r e s e a r c h .

some of

17
Curricular content,

th a t of the b a sic s ,

was demanded in

the

1960s and 1970s because o f r e p o r t s o f
. . . d e c l i n e s in SAT s c o r e s , o f u n f a v o r a b l e comparison o f
a c h i e v e m e n t l e v e l s among A m e ri c a n y o u n g s t e r s and t h e i r
c o u n t e r p a r t s in Japan and European i n d u s t r i a l n a t i o n s , o f t h e
l a c k o f t e a c h e r s a d e q u a t e l y pre p a re d t o t e a c h math and s c i e n c e ,
. . . o f high school g r a d u a t e s who a r e f u n c t i o n a l i l l i t e r a t e s ,
a l l have been prod uc ing a r i s i n g s e n s e o f alarm among t h e
American p u b l i c . ( H a l l , J a e g e r , Kearney, & Wiley, 1987, p. 16)
The Gallup p o l l s o f t h e 1960s and 1970s c l e a r l y i n d i c a t e d t h a t
the

p u b l i c wanted t h e

(Wise,

1979;

Womer,

primary g o a l ,
basic

to

education,

1981).

reading,

w riting,

The b a c k - t o - b a s i c s

and a r i t h m e t i c

movement

t h a t o f pro ducing p u p i l s who were well

skills.

teachers

basics:

Secondarily,
work h a r d e r ,

and to

in still

to

it

sought

increase

school

L e s s in g e r (1970) s t a t e d t h a t

to
the

grounded

motivate
cost

accountability

had one

students

effectiveness

in
and
of

(Airasian,

1979).

" th e p u b l i c i s demanding t h a t

school

o f f i c i a l s g u a r a n t e e t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f b a s i c s k i l l s and account f o r
p u b l i c money in terms o f c e r t i f i e d e d u c a t i o n a l r e s u l t s . "
The c o u r t c as e s
and

Secondary

involving educational

Education

Act,

the

equity,

Coleman

the

Rep or t,

Elementary

the

National

Assessment o f Educational P r o g r e s s , and t h e b a c k - t o - b a s i c s movement
s h i f t e d t h e focus o f e d u c a t i o n a l e v a l u a t i o n from e q u i t y o f i n p u t to
equality

of output.

These

outputs,

h i s t o r i c a l l y have been measured by t e s t s .
e d u c a ti o n reform e f f o r t

.

or educational

This new f o c u s , o r " t h i s

. . mandated a new form o f t e s t i n g ,

expanded uses o f e x i s t i n g t e s t i n g " (Haney, 1985, p. 4 ) .
effort

brought

forth

an

outcomes,

increase

in

student

or

This reform

testin g

and

development o f c r i t e r i o n - r e f e r e n c e d and minimum-competency t e s t s .

the

18

The P o p u l a r i t y o f Assessment
Educational

policies

of the

1960s

and

1970s

r a t i o n a l i s t i c s e t o f assumptions about s c h o o l i n g .

share

a common

These assumptions

a r e t h a t (a) a l i m i t e d s e t o f me asurable g o a l s f o r e d u c a t i o n can be
d e te r m in e d ,
these

(b) t e s t s can be d e si gne d t o a s s e s s t h e performance o f

goals,

efficiently,

(c)
and

students
(d)

of

rules

various

and

abilities

pro c e d u re s

are

can

be

ed uca te d

superior

e x e r c i s e o f judgment by l o c a l e d u c a t o r s (Wise, 1979).

to

the

The g o a l s of

e d u c a t i o n , as in t h e f i r s t ass umption, were i n i t i a l l y d e f i n e d as t h e
b a s i c s o f r e a d i n g , w r i t i n g , and a r i t h m e t i c in re s p o n se t o t h e p u b l i c
demands o f t h a t time.
S t a t e s responded, t a k i n g t h e i r r o l e in e d u c a t i o n more and more
seriously.

The

lu x u ry

of

le a v i n g

curriculum

to

the

education

e x p e r t s could no l o n g e r be t o l e r a t e d as s t a t e s e x p e r i e n c e d t h e " l o s s
o f b a s i c i n d u s t r i e s t o a l l e g e d l y b e t t e r ed uc a te d f o r e i g n e r s " ( K i r s t ,
1987, p. 9 ) .

In t h e y e a r s between 1963 and 1974, s t a t e l e g i s l a t o r s

en act ed a t l e a s t 73 laws (Popham, 1985).
that

o f e n s u r in g

quality

in

adequacy

educational

American t r a d i t i o n

T h e i r concern seemed t o be

in e d u c a t i o n a l

opportunities

of local

achievement

(Wise,

1979).

autonomy was compromised,

rather

than

The

strong

with

states

doing more m oni tor ing and l e s s c o n s u l t i n g .
T e s ts were used f o r two obvious r e a s o n s .

According t o Lazarus

(1981), a t e s t i s easy t o defend p o l i t i c a l l y :

"The s t a t e can ta k e

t h e p o s i t i o n t h a t i t merely wants t o m o n it o r s t u d e n t p r o g r e s s in th e
basic

sk ills,

leaving

the

means

for

doing

so

to

the

local

19
authorities"

(p.

11).

Second,

a test

is

relatively

in e x p e n s iv e ,

consp ic uous , and i n s t i t u t e d q u i c k l y .
In

addition

control

from

reasons.

to

afar,

being

the

least

tests

were

intrusive

selected

for

means
a

of

number

gaining
of

other

T e s t s had t r a d i t i o n a l l y served t h e f u n c t i o n s o f s e l e c t i o n ,

placem ent,

and

"achievement

outcome

testin g "

comparisons
was

(H aney,

understood;

1985).

people

The t e r m

made

a

quick

a s s o c i a t i o n t o th e S c h o l a s t i c A p ti tu d e T e s t , t h e Iowa T e s t o f Basic
S kills,

or t h e C a l i f o r n i a Achievement T e s t s .

In f a c t ,

the public

would probably d e f i n e "assessment" as t h e "measurement o f s t u d e n t s ’
achievement by s t a n d a r d m u l t i p l e c hoi ce t e s t items f o r t h e purpose
o f showing t h e p u b l i c whether o r no t

sc hools

a r e doing t h e

job"

(S t i g g e n s , 1985, p. 69).
In

1977

th e

surveyed

its

indicated

that

National

me m be rsh ip
75% o f

Association
regarding

their

of

School

testin g .

districts

had

Boards

The

(NASB)

respondents

districtw ide

testing

programs; t h e s e programs were more p r e v a l e n t in suburban and urban
d i s t r i c t s o r in d i s t r i c t s with s t u d e n t e n ro ll m e n ts of 1,000 o r more.
In

addition,

student

was

selection.

one-third
tested,
Porter

of

w ith
(1983)

th o s e
very

responding
few

found t h a t

indicated

d istricts

that

every

practicing

random

93% o f t h e n a t i o n ’ s

school

d i s t r i c t s used s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s o f mathematics in t h e elem entar y
grades.

S ta nda rd iz ed t e s t s seemed "normal" and went unexamined.

Accountability,

usi ng

test

scores,

ranged

from

a

complete

a n a l y s i s o f a sy stem’ s programming, t o simple r e p o r t i n g o f s t u d e n t
performance, t o no r e p o r t i n g .

However, a l l d i s t r i c t s p a r t i c i p a t i n g

20
in compensatory ed u ca ti o n t e s t i n g were engaged in mandated f e d e r a l
government e d u c a ti o n a l program a u d i t s (Smedley, 1987).
Resnick

(1985)

summed

up t e s t i n g

in

the

fo ll o w i n g

manner:

"American c h i l d r e n a r e t h e most t e s t e d in t h e world and th e l e a s t
examined. . . . They t a k e one or more t e s t s p r a c t i c a l l y every y ear "
(p. 17).

S tu d e n ts are t e s t e d , b u t t h e r e s u l t s would seem t o have

l i t t l e e f f e c t on classroom i n s t r u c t i o n .
T e s t s and T h e i r Use
When s t a t e governments mandated t e s t i n g ,
infringing,

at

least

c urr ic ulu m ( A i r a s i a n ,

directly,
1979).

on

the

they d id so withoift

local

responsibility

T h e i r i n t e n t i o n was t o

for

assess,

but

assessment too k on a t l e a s t two d i f f e r e n t meanings.
Teachers i n s i d e t h e classroom d e f i n e assessment q u i t e d i f f e r ­
e n t l y from th o s e o u t s i d e t h e classroom.

Teachers use an a r r a y o f

assessments--some s t a n d a r d i z e d and some i n d i v i d u a l i z e d ,
on p a p e r - a n d - p e n c il
formal

whereas

t e s t s and some based on o b s e r v a t i o n ,

others

a re

informal

teachers

depend h e a v i l y on t h e i r

more

than

so

Airasian,

1982;

the

Salmon-Cox,

only confirm th e

(Stiggens,

1981).

tests
These

(Stiggens,

classroom

1985).

In

fact,

and judgments,

(Kella ghan,

te a c h e r’s perception

s c h o l a s t i c achievement (Kelleghan,

and some

1985).

own o b s e r v a t i o n s

paper-and-pencil

i n f l u e n c e cl assroom l e a r n i n g
resu lts

some based

Madaus,

assess me nts

St a n d a rd iz e d
of

1982; Salmon-Cox,

&

the
1981).

test

p u p ils’
In a

1979 Teacher Opinion Survey, 77% o f t h e t e a c h e r s th ou gh t t h e r e would
be no e f f e c t on t e a c h i n g i f school systems e l i m i n a t e d t h e use o f a l l
s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s , and 62% b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e most im po rt an t a s p e c t s

21

o f s t u d e n t p r o g r e s s a r e no t measured by t e s t s (Mika, 1982).
Cox

(1 9 8 1 )

found

sim ilar

resu lts;

teachers

rarely

Salmon-

used

test

i n f o r m a t i o n t o mold t h e i r i n s t r u c t i o n o r c u r r i c u l u m c o n t e n t .
Dariing-Hammond
randomly s e l e c t e d ,
manner.

and

Wise

(1985)

m id-Atlantic

reported

teachers

in

their

data

a slightly

on

43

different

Ninety-five percent of these teachers

i n d i c a t e d t h a t th e

use o f t e s t s a l t e r e d t h e i r c u r r ic u lu m emphasis.

Teachers found i t

d i f f i c u l t t o adapt uniform e d u c a t i o n a l
needs o f s t u d e n t s .

approaches t o t h e p e r c e i v e d

Although t e a c h e r s acknowledged t h e u s e f u l n e s s o f

a common d i r e c t i o n , th e y a l s o p e r c e iv e d s p e c i f i c , d e t a i l e d s t a n d a r d s
as d e t r i m e n t a l t o i n d i v i d u a l s t u d e n t s .
Why do

the

standardized

tests

that

mean

so

little

to

the

c lassroom t e a c h e r command so much a t t e n t i o n from l e g i s l a t o r s and t h e
g e ne r al p u b l i c ?

Several re a so n s have been proposed, which in c l u d e

d i f f e r e n c e s in i n fo r m a t io n a l needs and d i f f e r i n g p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e
a b i l i t y o f t e s t s t o measure " s u c c e s s . "
Educ ationa l

adm inistrators,

d i f f e r e n t i n fo r m a t io n needs.
the

school

is

doing

the

legislators,

and t h e

public

have

They must show or need t o know whether

job

it

is

supposed

to

be d oin g,

c o n s i s t e n t , s c i e n t i f i c t e s t s c o r e s ( S t i g g e n s , 1985).

using

Teachers need

feedback on clas sr oom t e a c h i n g .
"Success"

to the public

i s mastery o f b a s i c

skills,

whereas

"su c c es s " t o t e a c h e r s means growth in t h e c o g n i t i v e as well as th e
social
further

domain

(Salmon-Cox,

1981).

The

practice

q u e s t i o n e d when t h e mast ery o f b a s i c

of

skills

testing

is

in math and

22
r e a d i n g a p p a r e n t l y has l i t t l e

e f f e c t on t h e employment o r wages o f

s t u d e n t s e n t e r i n g t h e l a b o r f o r c e a f t e r high school

(Ekland,

cited

in J a e g e r , 1980).
The use o f t e s t r e s u l t s by a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and t h e p u b l i c was
confirmed in t h e NASB surve y (1977); d i s t r i c t s
t e s t e d f o r many r e a s o n s ,
d e c i s i o n making.

bu t t h e primary re a so n was t o f a c i l i t a t e

Of t h o s e r e s pondin g, 38% s a i d t h e board used th e

s c o r e s f o r " in f o r m a t i o n a l
ju dge programs,
ju d g in g

the

i n d i c a t e d t h a t they

purposes o n l y " ; 66% used t e s t

adm inistrators,

effectiveness

and t e a c h e r s ;

of districtw ide

scores to

55% used s c o r e s

programs;

for

and 50% used

t e s t s c o r e s t o help de te rm in e c u r r i c u l a r changes.
Both t h e American F e d e r a t i o n o f Teachers (AFT) and t h e Na tional
Education

Association

should be used.

(NEA)

have

taken

a

position

on

how t e s t s

Speaking f o r t h e AFT, Gould (1980) i n d i c a t e d :

The p r o p e r u s e o f s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s i s f o r d i a g n o s t i c ,
p r e s c r i p t i v e , s e l e c t i o n , placement, and program e v a l u a t i o n
purposes and t e s t i n fo r m a t io n should n o t be t h e s o l e b a s i s f o r
d e c i s i o n making, but must be analyzed t o g e t h e r w it h a number of
other fa c to rs.
According to
elim inated

the

because o f

NEA (1979),
its

standardized

m isuse,

wh ic h

testing

includes

should

the

" i n v i d i o u s p u b l i c comparisons o f s t u d e n t achievement t e s t

be

m edia’ s
scores"

and because the y might be "used t o e v a l u a t e t e a c h e r s . "
C l e a r l y , t e s t s have been s e l e c t e d t o measure t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s
o f sc h o o ls and su bsequent comparisons d e s p i t e t e a c h e r d i s s a t i s f a c ­
t i o n with such use.

Teachers p r e f e r t h o s e t e s t s t h a t a r e d i a g n o s t i c

or those

closely

th at

are

aligned

w ith

classroom

in stru ctio n

23
(Salmon-Cox, 1981).

These t e a c h e r s r e s e n t sc h o o ls being "graded" by

improvement o f s t u d e n t s c o r e s in t h e

R em ar ka bly

c o g n i t i v e domain on ly .

The Curriculum and

T e s t i n g Link

little

has

attention

been

given

to

how

the

competencies o r s k i l l s measured on s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s r e l a t e t o t h e
p r e s e n t school c u r r ic u lu m o r , more p r e c i s e l y , t h e match between what
i s t e s t e d and what i s t a u g h t ( A i r a s i a n , Haney, & Madaus, 1979).
im p o r ta n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f t h e U.S. t e s t s , "

"An

wrote Resnick (1981),

" i s t h a t t h e y a re t y p i c a l l y d i v o r c e d from t h e cu rr ic u lu m " (p. 179).
Engl ish (1978) r e i t e r a t e d Resnick in saying t h a t " s t a n d a r d i z e d
t e s t s do not c o r r e l a t e with t h e r e a l

c u r r ic u lu m o r i f th e y do t h e

system i s u s u a l l y i g n o r a n t about t h e d e gr e e o f c o r r e l a t i o n " (p . 46 ).
F urther,

standardized

tests

are

not

measures

of

any s p e c i f i c

c u r r i c u l u m ; th e y a r e composed o f "random e v e n ts which w i l l r e s u l t in
a bell

shaped c u rv e .

Curriculum comes

opposite r a tio n a le - - a
e v e n ts "
Nevin,

(English,

curriculum is

1987, p.

35).

& Paolacci-Whitcomb,

indicating

th at

being

fo r the

exact

a s t a t e m e n t o f non-random

J e n k i n s and Pany ( c i t e d

1986)

stan d ardized

into

too k

tests

a more

extreme

"sometimes

serve

in I d o l ,
position,
as poor

p r e d i c t o r s o f how well a s t u d e n t might perform in t h e c l a s s r o o m . "
When c u r r ic u lu m g u i d e l i n e s
based on t h e

content

of the

are

vague,

c u r r ic u lu m

is

th e s e l e c t i o n o f t e s t s
often

impossible.

A

school system t h a t has vague g o a l s and vague e x pe c te d outcomes has
few c r i t e r i a

to

re a c h e s i t s g o a ls

judge

the e ffe ctiv en e ss of

(E n g l i s h , 1978).

which

approach

best

On t h e o t h e r hand, Popham (1977)

24
predicted

th at

w h e re

sufficient c larity
will

certificatio n

tests

t o p e rm it t a r g e t e d

are

described

instruction,

become more and more t e s t - v a l i d .

Airasian

the

with

curriculum

(1979) agre ed and

i n d i c a t e d t h a t where t h e r e i s a c h o ic e between emphasizing t e s t e d
and n o n t e s t e d o b j e c t i v e s ,
assumes primacy.

in g e n e r a l

the objective a c tu a lly te ste d

"Faced wi th a c h o ic e between one s e t o f o b j e c t i v e s

which i s e x p l i c i t in t h e co ur s e o u t l i n e and a d i f f e r e n t s e t which i s
explicit

in

the

certifying

e x a m i n a ti o n s ,

students

and

teachers

g e n e r a l l y focus upon t h e l a t t e r " ( A i r a s i a n , 1979, p. 129).
However, t e s t s a r e no t g e n e r a l l y connected wit h t h e c u r r i c u l u m
t a u g h t (Schalock,

F e l d i n g , Schalock, E r ic k s o n , & B r o t t ,

1985),

and

" t h e p ro c e du re s f o r s c o r i n g , managing, and r e p o r t i n g do n o t a d d re ss
the

in f o r m a t io n

needs

of

teachers

and

adm inistrators.

Further,

s c h o o ls l a c k p o l i c i e s and pro c e du res t o gu ide i n q u i r y and d i s c u s s i o n
about t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t e s t

in f o r m a t io n

(Haney,

1984,

p.

640).

Haney concluded t h a t school p e ople a r e n o t knowledgeable ab out th e
te chn ol ogy

of

testing.

equivalent

scores

and

M isinterpretations
even

percentile

are

ranks.

made
In

on

g ra d e -

addition,

and

f o r t u n a t e l y , consequences are not a t t a c h e d t o t e s t r e s u l t s .
Sm all,

rural

d i s a d v a n t a g e than

school

d istricts

tend

urban or

suburban

s c h o o ls

p a r t - t i m e employees t o work a t e v a l u a t i o n .

to

be

at

as th e y

a

g reater

do n o t

have

The t a s k i s g e n e r a l l y

s har ed among t e a c h e r s and p r i n c i p a l s , n e i t h e r o f whom has e x p e r t i s e
in

evaluation

but

who must de te rm in e

a planned

re s p o n se

r e s u l t s o f an e v a l u a t i o n (L az a ru s, 1982; McClurkin, 1970).

to

the

25
I t must be noted t h a t th e e x t e n t t o which a t e a c h e r responds t o
any urge t o i n c r e a s e t h e o v e rl a p between i n s t r u c t i o n a l

c o n t e n t and

t e s t coverage i s by and l a r g e determined by th e e x t e n t t o which high
test

scores

a re

a

Popham, 1978).

good

(LaMahlew

& Leinhardt,

Many f a c t o r s i n f l u e n c e c o n t e n t s e l e c t i o n ;

necessarily f ilte r e d
1985;

p e rc e iv e d

through t h e t e a c h e r

LaMahlew & L e i n h a r d t ,

instructional

m aterials

a re

1985).

all

are

(Darling-Hammond & Wise,

When

c o n s id e re d

1985;

for

textbooks
selection

and

other

because

s t a t e - s a n c t i o n e d t e s t s f o r some s p e c i f i e d b i t o f i n f o r m a t i o n ,

of

there

i s p r e c io u s l i t t l e hope f o r autonomy or f o r genuine improvement in
sc h o o ls (O rl ic h & R a t c l i f f , 1977).
Those scho ols which use t e s t s

t h a t a r e c o n s i s t e n t with t h e i r

i n s t r u c t i o n a l focus w i l l appear e f f e c t i v e whereas o t h e r sc h o o ls w i l l
not ( P o r t e r , 1983).
is

ta u g h t"

But f o r many s c h o o l s , "What i s t e s t e d i s what

remains an unexamined t r u t h .

Ebel

(cited

in Rudman,

1977) summed up t h e t e s t i n g - c u r r i c u l u m l i n k in t h e fo ll o w i n g manner:
J u s t as t h e r e i s no w a r r a n t f o r g i v i n g away a n s w e r s t o
p a r t i c u l a r q u e s t i o n s , so t h e r e i s no w a rr a n t f o r t e s t i n g pupil
performance on t a s k s they were not t a u g h t t o pe rform. . . . An
assessment t e s t must be thor oughly r e l e v a n t t o t h e i n s t r u c t i o n
i t i s int ended t o a s s e s s .
Debra P. v. T u r l i n g t o n (1984) a f f i r m e d , through c o u r t mandate,
the

ne ed t o

instruct

objectives

in

Madaus e t

a l.’s

indicated

that

this

students

case

(197 9)

of the

on t h e

tested

Florida

minimum-competency

research

criterion-referenced

in

50

Irish

tests,

the

o bjectives,

schools
tests

the
test.

further

that

match

cu rri c ulu m t o the t e s t , were much more r e l i a b l e in measuring school
e f f e c t i v e n e s s than were norm-re fer enc ed t e s t s .

26

Research on Te s tin g
In t h i s s e c t i o n , t h e review o f r e s e a r c h on t e s t i n g in c l u d e s an
examination o f s t u d i e s using s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s as well as minimumcompetency t e s t s .
According t o Mehrens and P h i l l i p s

(1986),

" t e s t p u b l i s h e r s go

t o g r e a t l e n g t h s t o d e f i n e t h e i r t e s t s ’ c o n t e n t so t h a t the y have as
much

in

common with

p o s s i b l e " (p. 185).

as

large

a

set

of

district

objectives

as

But the y f u r t h e r s t a t e d t h a t t h i s does n o t mean

t h a t " d i f f e r e n t d i s t r i c t s , d i f f e r e n t b u i l d i n g s in t h e d i s t r i c t s ,
teachers

in

a

school

building,

will

be

offering

curricula

i n s t r u c t i o n t h a t match t h e t e s t e q u a l l y w el l" (p. 185).
L e in h a rt

(1980)

and

Cooley and

i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e degree o f mismatch can have a

f a i r l y l a r g e e f f e c t on nor m- referenced t e s t s .
and P h i l l i p s

or

study

indicated

that

However, t h e Mehrens

norm -r efe re nc ed

tests

detected

o v e r a l l d i f f e r e n c e s in t h e q u a l i t y o f i n s t r u c t i o n but did no t d e t e c t
d i f f e r e n c e s a t t h e l e v e l o f in d iv id u a l o b j e c t i v e s .
In 1987, Mathison completed t h r e e case s t u d i e s

a n a ly z in g t h e

e f f e c t o f s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t i n g on t e a c h in g and c u rr ic u lu m in t h r e e
midwestern

school

documentation

as

d istricts.
well

as

Data

were

interviews.

collected

Sena te

Bill

from
730

w ritten
in

this

Midwest s t a t e r e q u i r e d t h a t a l l p u p i l s in gr a de s 3, 6, 8, and 10 be
t e s t e d in r e a d in g , mathematics, and language a r t s .
t e s t s had t o be c o n te n t v a l i d ; t h a t i s ,
l o c a l l y chosen l e a r n e r o b j e c t i v e s .

In a d d i t i o n , t h e

t h e t e s t had t o match t h e

Mathison found t h a t s t a n d a r d i z e d

t e s t s were used p r i m a r i l y f o r i d e n t i f y i n g c h i l d r e n who might have

27
learning d i f f i c u l t i e s .
c u r r ic u lu m d e c i s i o n s .

Data were not p e r c e i v e d t o be r e l a t e d
The e x c e p ti o n e x i s t e d in Middleton,

to

a rural

school d i s t r i c t w it h a s t u d e n t e n ro ll m e n t o f a pp ro xi m a te ly 5, 000.
Here t h e Scie nc e Research A s s o c i a t e s (SRA) t e s t was used e x t e n s i v e l y
f o r c u r r i c u l u m review and had a powerful e f f e c t on what t h e s t u d e n t s
were t a u g h t .
D e sp it e

the

fact that

two o f

the three

d istricts

d id

p e r c e i v e t e s t r e s u l t s t o be r e l a t e d t o c u r r i c u l u m d e c i s i o n s ,
e f f e c t s on te a c h i n g and c u r r ic u lu m o c c u r r e d .
follows:

attempts

t o match m a t e r i a l

not

subtle

These e f f e c t s were as

and t h e

test,

al ign me nt o f

c lassroom q u e s t i o n format t o t e s t for mat, and an i n c r e a s e d awareness
by t h e t e a c h e r of t h e t e s t c o n t e n t , c a u s in g a s h i f t o f c o n t e n t from
one grade l e v e l t o a n o t h e r .
test

scores,

However,

which

poor t e s t

The t e a c h e r s f e l t

increased
results

their

provided

pressured to r a is e

awareness
little

of

test

direction,

content.
with

many

t e a c h e r s r e s o r t i n g t o a review of key c once pt s b e f o r e t e s t t a k i n g .
Some t e a c h e r s gave a d d i t i o n a l
hopes o f r a i s i n g t h e o v e r a l l

instruction

to b rig h te r students

classroom pe rform ance.

in

These r e s u l t s

were s i m i l a r t o t h o s e found by Salmon-Cox (1981).
The I n s t i t u t e

f o r Research on Teaching

number

of studies

regarding

testing

others

(1983) compared f o u r t h - g r a d e math

tests.

They concluded t h a t t h e t e s t s

(IRT)

has conducted a

and c u r r i c u l u m .

Porter

and

textbooks to standardized

and t e x t b o o k s were not always

in agreement on what s t u d e n t s should a c h ie v e .
In

another

researchers

sought

study

conducted

by

the

IRT

t o de te r m in e which f a c t o r s

(P orter,

1981),

caused t e a c h e r s

to

28

change i n s t r u c t i o n a l c o n t e n t .
to six v ig n e tte s

The t e a c h e r s in t h i s s tu dy responded

containing the

district-m andated

textbooks,

standardized t e s t r e s u l t s ,

follow ing p e rsu asiv e

published

r e q u e s t s from p r i n c i p a l s ,

h i g h e r g r a d e s , and r e q u e s t s from p a r e n t s .
caused

teachers

objectives;

to

o bjectives,

include

or

t h e ne xt s t r o n g e s t

factors:
published

t e a c h e r s from

The s t r o n g e s t f a c t o r t h a t

emphasize

material

was

d istrict

f a c t o r was p u b l i s h e d t e s t

results.

These r e s e a r c h f i n d i n g s were s i m i l a r t o Wal st ad ’ s (1984) f i n d i n g s .
Cohen

(1987)

reviewed

and t e s t a lig n m e nt .

four

studies

investigating

instruction

The Koczor, T a l l a r i c o , Fahey, and E l i a s t u d i e s

y i e l d e d t h e fo ll o w i n g c o n c l u s i o n s :

I n s t r u c t i o n a l alignme nt caused a

4:1 e f f e c t , what t o t e a c h was paramount t o how t o t e a c h ,

and poor

t e s t s c o r e s had more t o do with misalignment o f what t e a c h e r s t a u g h t
and what they th ou gh t th e y t a u g h t (Cohen, 1987).
Edelman (1981) s e n t q u e s t i o n n a i r e s t o 130 t h i r d - g r a d e t e a c h e r s
from 39 scho ols in t h e Los Angeles a r e a .

These t e a c h e r s were asked

t o respond t o q u e s t i o n s about t h e C a l i f o r n i a Assessment Program, t h e
Comprehensive Te st o f Basic S k i l l s , t h e Survey o f E s s e n t i a l S k i l l s ,
and t h e Basic In ve nt or y o f Natural Language.
were moderately p re p a re d f o r t h e s e t e s t s ,
from 62% t o 74%.
in fo r m a t io n

with p e r c e n t a g e s ra nging

Thirty percent of the teachers taught the s p e c if ic

in cl ude d

emphasized th e

Teach ers th o u g h t they

on

the

test,

su b jec t m atter

whereas

throughout

60% o f
the

the

year.

teachers
Although

knowledge o f t e s t c o n t e n t d id not a l t e r t e a c h i n g methods, 20% o f t h e
t e a c h e r s sp en t more time with t h e slower s t u d e n t s .

The m a j o r i t y o f

29
t h e t e a c h e r s i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e t e s t i n g program was n o t an im p o r ta n t
p a r t o f t h e school program and t h a t t h e i n f o r m a t i o n g a t h e r e d could
have

been

obtained

u s in g

fewer

tests

and

in

a

more

efficient

manner--namely, through t e a c h e r o b s e r v a t i o n s .
In summary,
teachers

did

the

research

not see

test

on t e s t i n g

data

indicated

d irectly

that

affecting

a lth ough

cu rricu lar

d e c i s i o n s , th e y a l t e r e d t h e i r b e ha vio r because o f t e s t i n g
d istrict.

in t h e i r

The most e f f e c t i v e means t o g e t t e a c h e r s t o a l t e r t h e i r

b e h a v io r was through d i s t r i c t o b j e c t i v e s and t h e p u b l i s h i n g o f t e s t
results.
Research on Minimum-Competencv T e s t s
A irasian

(1 9 7 9 )

d e f i n e d minim um -com pet en cy

testing

as

"a

program in which s t u d e n t s a r e t e s t e d t o de te r m in e t h e i r m a st e ry o f
c e r t a i n s k i l l s d e f i n e d as e s s e n t i a l
essential

a s p e c t s o f school

f o r performing t a s k s r o u t i n e l y c o n f r o n t e d

l e a r n i n g or

in a d u l t l i f e "

(p. x v i ) .
Most o f th e more than 40 s t a t e w i d e competency programs r e l y on
markedly

less

Florida.

The most s t r i n g e n t s a n c t i o n s would in c l u d e gra de r e t e n t i o n

or

d e n ia l

of

stringent

a

high

sanctions

school

for

diploma.

those

Less

who

fail

th a n

stringent

does

standards

in c l u d e n o t i f y i n g p a r e n t s o r p ro v id i n g remedial a s s i s t a n c e .

Studies

by t h e f o ll o w i n g r e s e a r c h e r s a r e reviewed in t h i s s e c t i o n :

Evans,

Cruse, Rankin, S a n d i f e r , William, Smedley, and Walstad.

30

The Evans Study
Evans

(1 9 8 5 )

studied

minimum-competency
level.

test

Sena te B i l l

required

standards

curricular

o f C a l i f o r n i a ’ s mandated
the

secondary

813 i d e n t i f i e d c o u r s e r e q u i r e m e n t s ,

specified

of

on

the e f f e c t

achievement

in

changes

each

at

course,

and

mandated

certain

staff-development a c t i v i t i e s .

Evans compared t h e

overall

credit

school

re q u ir e m e n ts

for

high

graduation

1981-82
and

the

c r e d i t r e q u ir e m e n ts in E ng li sh t o t h o s e o f 1976-77, t h e y e a r o f t h e
b i l l ’ s en actment.
Evans

f oun d

that

t h e m in im um -com pet en cy t e s t

catalyst

for

change.

The

remained

the

same,

there

programming.

bu t

overall
was

r e q u ir e m e n ts
a

return

to

had

for
more

be en

a

graduation
traditional

In t h e Engl ish c o u r s e , a g r e a t e r emphasis was p laced

on w r i t i n g .

Also,

there

was

an

increase

in

staff-development

i n s e r v i c e programs.
The Cruse Study
Four s t u d i e s conducted by Cruse, Rankin, S a n d i f e r , and William
were r e p o r t e d by Popham (1985) as i n d i c a t o r s t h a t minimum-competency
t e s t s encouraged change and produced h i g h e r t e s t r e s u l t s .

A brief

summary f o l l o w s .
The Texas l e g i s l a t u r e pass ed Senate B i l l 350 and, as a p a r t of
that

law,

the

Texas

Education

Agency was d i r e c t e d

to

ad opt

and

ad m in ister c r it e r i o n - r e f e r e n c e d t e s t s designed to a sse ss basic
s k i l l s in r e a d i n g , w r i t i n g , and math o f a l l s t u d e n t s in g r a d e s 3, 5,
and 9.

Cruse ( c i t e d in Popham, 1985)

indicated th a t

in t h e t h i r d

31

and f i f t h gra de s t h e average improvement was 10%.

The n i n t h grade

posted

im pr ov em e nt

its

highest

test

scores.

He c r e d i t e d

in c r e a s e d communication between e d u c a t o r s ,
th e

tested

through

objectives,

the

te x tb o o k

news media.

Assessment

to

standards,

tests

its

Texas

a lig nm en t,
has

mandated t e s t i n g

more g r a d e s ,

instruction
and

added t h e

and r e q u i r e s

that

related

public
Texas

leg islatio n ,

to
to

pressure

Educational

wh ic h r a i s e s

students

pass

a

t w e l f t h - g r a d e t e s t be fo re r e c e i v i n g a high school diploma.
The Rankin Study
In August

1977,

a s s e s s i n g high school
and mathematics.

Detroit

its

Proficiency

Program,

stu d e n ts ’ basic s k i l l s

in r e a d i n g ,

writing,

What

instituted

resulted,

according

to

Popham, 1985), was a modified c u rr ic u lu m , remedial
d i f f e r e n t teaching s t r a t e g i e s .
school

scores

(MEAP)

on

test

the

in
and

Not only d id t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f high

mandated

increased.

(cited

instruction,

s t u d e n t s pa ss in g t h e exam i n c r e a s e each y e a r ,

students’
Program

Rankin

Michigan
The

but a l s o th e

Education

p e rc e n ta g e

of

Assessment
high

school

s t u d e n t s pa ss in g t h e exam in 1981 was 74%, and in 1983 i t was 79.1%.
MEAP s c o r e s du rin g th e same pe rio d went from 29.6% t o 38.7% p a s s i n g
a t t h e 75% l e v e l in re a d in g and from 51% t o 61.5% p a s s i n g a t t h e 75%
l e v e l in math.
The S a n d i f e r Study
In 1978 South C a r o li n a e s t a b l i s h e d a Basic S k i l l s Assessment
Program, s e t t i n g minimum s ta n d a r d s f o r r e a d i n e s s in gra de s 1, 2, 3,

32

6, 8, and 11, as well as a d m i n i s t e r i n g a c r i t e r i o n - r e f e r e n c e d t e s t
in rea di ng and math a t t h e end o f each o f t h e aforeme nti oned g r a d e s .
Sandifer

(cited

in Popham,

1985) r e p o r t e d t h a t ,

between 1981

and

1984, t h e i n c r e a s e ranged from 9% t o 18%.
The William Study
William ( c i t e d in Popham, 1985) r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e S t a t e Board
o f Education in Maryland launched P r o j e c t Basic in 1980.

Included

in t h i s program was t h e Maryland Functional T e s t i n g Program, which
mandated t h e t e s t i n g o f s k i l l s in r e a d in g , w r i t i n g , and mathematics.
In 1980, 78% passed t h e r e a d in g t e s t ; in 1983, 94% passed t h i s t e s t .
S i m i l a r t e s t r e s u l t s were r e p o r t e d in math, with 40% pa ss in g in 1980
and 61% pa ssi ng in 1983.
The Smedlev Study
In October 1976, t h e S t a t e Te s ti n g Program o f Washington was
instituted,

which r e q u i r e d academic-achievement t e s t i n g

grade s t u d e n t s
expanded

to

in t h e p u b l i c s c h o o ls .

in cl ude

eighth-

and

In 1985,

tenth-grade

in s tr u m e n t.

Respondents

to

t h e program was

students,

M etr o p o li ta n Achievement Te s t was adopted as t h e
assessment

of fourth-

and

th e

s ta te ’s official

Smedley’ s

(1987)

survey

i n d i c a t e d t h a t they la cke d t r a i n i n g and time t o use t h e t e s t r e s u l t s
but t h a t t h e t e s t was a v a l u a b l e too l
instruction.

However,

the y

did

not

to e v a l u a t e c u rr ic u lu m and
sup por t

it

as

a

means

of

33
comparison.

They b e l i e v e d t h e program was n ot as e f f e c t i v e as i t

ought to be.
The Malstad Study
Walstad (1984) conducted a stu dy t o de te r m in e wh ether changes
in c u r r i c u l a , t e s t i n g programs, o r t e a c h e r t r a i n i n g would i n f l u e n c e
t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f s t u d e n t s p a s s i n g a minimum-competency t e s t .

He

found t h a t t h e only s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r t h a t a l t e r e d t e s t s c o r e s was
p r e t e s t i n g s t u d e n t s b e f o r e t h e mandated t e s t .
i n v e s t i g a t i o n by s a y i n g ,

Walstad concluded h i s

"Curriculum r e v i s i o n and t e a c h e r t r a i n i n g

may be th or o u g h l y j u s t i f i e d

from th e e d u c a t i o n a l

perspective,

but

t h e s e i n d i r e c t methods do no t appear t o e x p l a i n d i f f e r e n c e s in MCT
performance a c r o s s d i s t r i c t s ov er time" (p. 266)
General Findings
Floden and o t h e r s (1988), in i n v e s t i g a t i n g d i s t r i c t s r e g a r d i n g
t h e t e s t - t e a c h i n g l i n k , found t h a t a d m i n i s t r a t o r s were no t u s in g a l l
t h e t o o l s a v a i l a b l e t o them t o s t r e n g t h e n t h i s l i n k a g e .
t e x tb o o k ,
that

instructional

in f l u e n c e d

objectives,

instructional

The s i n g l e

and time g u i d e l i n e s were t o o l s

content.

D istricts

reported

making

heavy use o f t e s t i n g programs and o b j e c t i v e s but only moderate use
o f time g u i d e l i n e s and a do ptio n o f a s i n g l e t e x t b o o k .
reported th a t

They f u r t h e r

t e a c h e r s did not b e l i e v e th e y would be rewarded or

punished f o r t e a c h i n g t h e p r e s c r i b e d c o n t e n t .

34
P o r t e r (1989) found t h a t , through keeping lo g s o f what t e a c h e r s
a c tu a lly taught,

"the te a c h e r c o n te n t p r a c t i c e s

[were] w holly

c o n s i s t e n t wit h t h e d i s a p p o i n t i n g r e s u l t s o f s t u d e n t ach ie ve ment ."
The u l t i m a t e d e c i s i o n o f c o n t e n t was t h e t e a c h e r ’ s (Floden e t a l . ,
1981;

Porter,

teach,

1989).

despite

Thus,

teachers

mandated t e s t s

t a u g h t what th e y wanted t o

and d i s t r i c t

t e a c h e r s who chose t o te a c h t e s t

objectives;

those

c o n t e n t had s t u d e n t s who s cor ed

h i g h e r th a n t h o s e who chose t o ign ore such an al ig n m e n t.
I t has been found t h a t s t u d e n t s - - t h o s e who a r e t o b e n e f i t from
the educational

p r o c e s s - - s i m p l y do n ot c a r e about t e s t

minimum-competency t e s t s

(Blau, c i t e d

in J a e g e r ,

1980).

results

on

The poor

s t u d e n t s , however, saw t h e t e s t s as an a d d i t i o n a l b a r r i e r t o s u cc e ss
and s e l f - e s t e e m ;

the

good

students

saw them a s

a b arrier

to

e f f i c i e n t use of ti m e .
In summary, i t appea rs t h a t once t e s t s ar e mandated, s t u d e n t s ’
t e s t s c o r e s on t h e s e in s t r u m e n t s r i s e .
i n c lu d e

the

altering

of

c ours e

Other changes o c c u r , which

content,

a do pti on

of

a

single

te x t b o o k , e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f time g u i d e l i n e s , and an i n c r e a s e in s t a f f
development.
tests

is

results.

The most d i r e c t way t o fo c us t e a c h e r s ’ a t t e n t i o n on

by e s t a b l i s h i n g

district

objectives

and p u b l i s h i n g

Once t e a c h e r s focus on t e s t r e s u l t s ,

test

t h e most e f f e c t i v e

means o f r a i s i n g t e s t s c o r e s i s through a p r e t e s t .
T e s t i n g in Michigan
Resear che rs a t t h e Michigan School T e s t i n g S e r v i c e ,

Bureau of

School S e r v i c e s , U n i v e r s i t y o f Michigan, have conducted a number of

35
s t u d i e s t o deter mine t h e n a t u r e and e x t e n t o f t e s t i n g
( B r e z e z i n s k i , 1976).
he

q u e s ti o n e d

Womer conducted t h e i n i t i a l s ur ve y in 1958-59;

members

of

the

Michigan

Association

School P r i n c i p a l s r e g a r d i n g t e s t s and t e s t us age .
was 50%.
that

in Michigan

of

Secondary

The re s p o n se r a t e

Twenty-two p e r c e n t o f t h e res po nd in g p r i n c i p a l s i n d i c a t e d

test

results

influenced

inservice

activities,

with th e p u b l i c , and e d u c a t i o n a l r e s e a r c h .
responding
children,

prin cip als
for

student

used

the

place ment,

communications

Seventy p e r c e n t o f t h e

tests

to

and

for

identify

exceptional

curricular

evaluation

(Womer, 1959).
Five y e a r s l a t e r , Womer (1981) conducted a second s t u d y ,
the

intention

Ninety-three
inquiry.

o f drawing

percent

of

1963,

the

In

program s h i f t e d
personnel

whereas

1959 was 32%.

t h e school

w ith

of

in itial

responded
d e v el op i ng

to counselors

This s h i f t was

the

the

districts

responsibility

from t h e p r i n c i p a l

specialists.

respondents,

com parisons

percentage o f

The primary pu rp os e s,

the

testing

or other pupil-

reported

by

counselors
those of

study.
to

a

with

50% o f

responsible

identification

the
in
of

e x c e p t i o n a l c h i l d r e n , s t u d e n t placement, and c u r r i c u l a r e v a l u a t i o n ,
remained t h e same.
fo r research;

There was a s l i g h t i n c r e a s e in t h e use o f t e s t s

t h i s was o f f s e t

by a small

d e c r e a s e in t h e

use

of

t e s t s f o r i n s e r v i c e and communications with t h e p u b l i c .
Watson and Schmalegemeier (1970) conducted t h e t h i r d surv ey in
1968-69.
two.

The focus o f t h i s stu dy d i f f e r e d from t h a t o f t h e p re v io u s

The

intention

interrelatedness

was

to

of reported

be

"prescriptive"

in f o r m a t i o n .

by

revealing

The re s p o n se

rate

the
was

36

84%.

"The most im p o r ta n t use o f t e s t r e s u l t s

r e l a t i o n s h i p between t e a c h e r and s t u d e n t "
tests

were

evaluation.

for

settin g

of

(p.

educational

is

inv ol ve d in t h e

1 6).

goals

In a d d i t i o n ,
and

cu rricu lar

Organized t e s t i n g programs were p r e v a l e n t ; 83% o f t h e

re s p o n d e n ts had such a program.
The f i n a l stud y was conducted by t h e Department o f Education in
c o n j u n c t i o n with t h e Michigan School T e s t i n g S e r v i c e .

B r e z e z in s k i

designe d two q u e s t i o n n a i r e s ; one was t o g a t h e r e x t e n s i v e in f o r m a t io n
from sampled d i s t r i c t s , whereas t h e s h o r t e r v e r s i o n would be used t o
g a t h e r in f o r m a t io n from a l l

d istricts.

Response r a t e s t o t h e two

q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were 80% and 96%, r e s p e c t i v e l y .

What f o ll o w s i s a

summary o f t h e d a t a from B r e z e z i n s k i ’ s st u d y :
1.
shifted

The primary person r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e t e s t i n g program had
from th e

building

principal

to

the

MEAP d a t a

in

counselor

or

pupil -

personnel s p e c i a l i s t .
2.

D istricts

were

usi ng

Approximately 50% were r e p o r t i n g

the

following

ass essment r e s u l t s

to the

ways:
school

board, and about 33% o f t h e d i s t r i c t s had t h e s ugg es te d c u r r i c u l u m
stu dy gr oups .
3.

Approximately 50% o f t h e t e a c h e r s

and p r i n c i p a l s d id not

b e l i e v e t h e y had t h e e x p e r t i s e t o i n t e r p r e t r e s u l t s , nor co uld th e y
apply c r i t e r i o n - r e f e r e n c e d o r no rm -r efer enc ed r e s u l t s f o r s t u d e n t o r
c u r r i c u l a r improvement.
In 1986, a j o i n t st udy was conducted by t h e O f f i c e o f Technical
A s s i s t a n c e and E v a l u a t i o n ,

Michigan S t a t e Board o f Ed uc at io n,

and

37
t h e Ingham I n t e r m e d i a t e School D i s t r i c t .

All school d i s t r i c t s were

s e n t s u rv e y s, with a r e t u r n r a t e o f 79.8%.

Ninety-eight percent of

th e res po nd en ts i n d i c a t e d t h a t th e y were usin g MEAP r e s u l t s f o r t h e
fo ll owin g purpo se s:
frame,

t o te a c h e s s e n t i a l s k i l l s in a p r e s c r i b e d time

t o r e p o r t t o t h e board o f e d u c a t i o n ,

and t o

compare MEAP

re s u lts to other t e s t data.
In c o n c l u s i o n , t h e s e Michigan s t u d i e s i n d i c a t e d t h a t a m a j o r i t y
o f school d i s t r i c t s
personnel

specialist

interpretation,
children,

had t e s t i n g programs,
was

responsible

the counselor o r p u p ilfor

pro gr ammi ng

and

and t e s t r e s u l t s were used t o i d e n t i f y e x c e p t i o n a l

prog ra m p l a c e m e n t ,

r e s u l t s were being r e p o r t e d ;

and c u r r i c u l u m e v a l u a t i o n .
however,

s t a f f pe rsonnel

Test

needed more

t r a i n i n g in t e s t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .
MEAP S tu d i e s
A number o f s t u d i e s have focused on t h e MEAP.
development,

and

im plem entation

of

the

The c o n c e p t i o n ,

MEAP ha ve

been

documented in both j o u r n a l a r t i c l e s and d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n s .
brief

summary

of

MEAP’ s

history

is

provided

in

this

well
A

section,

followed by a d i s c u s s i o n o f s ev e ra l s t u d i e s p e r t a i n i n g t o MEAP.
Late in 1968, t h r e e s t a f f members o f t h e Michigan Department o f
Ed u c a ti o n ’ s Bureau o f Research began t o d i s c u s s t h e l a c k o f r e l i a b l e
in fo rm atio n
education.

about

the

level,

d istrib u tio n ,

and

progress

of

What r e s u l t e d from t h e s e d i s c u s s i o n s was a proposal f o r

a s t a t e w i d e e duca ti on a l assessment program.

"Perhaps because o f t h e

r i s i n g concern about a c c o u n t a b i l i t y in e d u c a t i o n , t h e idea r e c e i v e d

38
su pport

and

(Ho us e,

endorsement

1973,

e d u c a ti o n a l
school

p.

of

48).

the
It

state

legislature

appears

th at

the

and

governor"

most

im portant

i s s u e in t h e s t a t e was t h e i n e q u i t a b l e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f

d istrict

achievement l e v e l s .

Thus,

the

p r o g r a m would

"provide members o f t h e S t a t e Board o f Education with
needed

for

allocation

of

the

sta te ’s

educational

i n fo r m a t io n

resources

to

e q u a l i z e and improve t h e e d u c a t i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r a l l c h i l d r e n "
(House, 1973, p. 48).
The Michigan P ubli c Acts o f 1969 provided t h e i n i t i a l

funding

f o r MEAP; subsequent funding was provided under Act 38 o f t h e P ub li c
Acts o f 1970.
system.

MEAP was p a r t o f a s i x - s t e p e d u c a ti o n a l management

Those s t e p s includ ed t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n

development

o f performance

objectives,

o f common g o a l s ,

assessment

of

educational

needs, a n a l y s i s o f d e l i v e r y systems, e v a l u a t i o n and t e s t i n g o f th o s e
systems, and recommendations f o r e d u c a ti o n a l improvement.
designed

to

assess

educational

needs

(Michigan

MEAP was

Department o f

Education, 1972).
From MEAP’ s
results

inception,

publicly

o fficials

plagued th e

thought

superintendents,

the

the

public

principals,

comparisons would be made.

issue

of

program.
had

a

whether

L egislators
right

and t e a c h e r s

However,

to

the

to

and

know,

thought t h a t

legislation

t h a t t h e Department p r e p a re a rank ing o f a l l

report

did

the

state

whereas
unjust
require

sc h o o ls in t h e s t a t e .

F u r t h e r , they were t o be pre pa re d t o r e l e a s e t h e p o i n t s c o r e s o f a l l
scho ols f a l l i n g in t h e bottom q u a r t i l e on two ass essment m e a s u r e s - composite achievement and r e l a t i v e socioeconomic l e v e l .

Section II I

39
monies o f t h e School Aid funds were d i s p e r s e d on t h e b a s i s o f t h i s
ran king in 1970-71 (House, 1973).
Jencka (1990) t r a c e d t h e e v o l u t i o n o f MEAP in t h e
manner.

Initially,

seventh

graders

la nguage.

in

the

test

reading,

was a d m in is te r e d t o
math,

the

fourth

mechanics

of

and

w ritten

This f i r s t t e s t (1970) was norm r e f e r e n c e d and remained

so f o r t h e nex t f o u r y e a r s .
made:

and

all

f o ll o w i n g

The t e s t

In 1973-74, two major changes were

became a c r i t e r i o n - r e f e r e n c e d t e s t

r a t h e r th a n a

norm -referenced t e s t , and t h e t e s t i n g d a t e was moved from Janu ary t o
September.

The is su a n c e o f

performance

objectives

sent

a clear

message t o d i s t r i c t s t h a t t h e s e s k i l l s were what t h e s t a t e deemed
im p o r ta n t.

The performance o b j e c t i v e s were e v e n t u a l l y r e p l a c e d by

"essential objectives."
Another r e v i s i o n in 1976 came in re sp onse t o t h e c r i t i c i s m o f
"top-down"
revised,

management.

The

rea di n g

and math

tests

based on the i n p u t o f p r a c t i t i o n e r s - - t h o s e

were

to

be

in t h e f i e l d .

Also, a l l s t u d e n t s in t e n t h grade were t o be t e s t e d in the a r e a s of
r e a d i n g , math, and t h e mechanics o f w r i t t e n language.

These t e s t s

were p i l o t e d in 1980.
In 1985, h e a l t h t e s t i n g began in t h e f o u r t h , se v e n th , and t e n t h
grades.

Science t e s t i n g

in t h e f o u r t h ,

s e ve nt h,

and t e n t h gra d e s

was added in 1986; t h e s e t e s t s were l a t e r mandated in 1988.
Rev isions

c o n ti n u e d ,

and

test

was

mandated; s c ie n c e t e s t s were a d m in is te r e d in th e f i f t h , e i g h t h ,

and

e l e v e n t h gra de s

and

r a t h e r th a n

the

in

1989

fourth,

a

new

re a din g

sev en th ,

and t e n t h ;

w r i t i n g t e s t s were p i l o t e d in t h e t h i r d , s i x t h , and n i n t h g r a d e s .

40

Edward Roeber, S u p e r v i s o r o f t h e Michigan Edu cation Assessment
Program,

i n d i c a t e d t h a t both math and s c i e n c e o b j e c t i v e s and t e s t s

a r e in t h e p r o c e s s o f r e v i s i o n .
referenced to
input

Thus, MEAP has evolved from a norm-

a criterion-referenced

from p r a c t i t i o n e r s

and

is

test.

It

has

adm inistered

at

changed with
a number

of

d i f f e r e n t g r a d e s and l e v e l s .
Earl y MEAP S t u d i e s
Numerous s t u d i e s fo c u s in g on t h e MEAP have been c on duc te d.
of the f i r s t
1972.

One

s t u d i e s was conducted by F i s h e r and Roth in February

The r e s e a r c h e r s q u e st i o n e d K-12 s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s about t h e i r

ge ne r al

reactions

to

the

use

of

MEAP in

their

S ev en ty -th ree percent of the s u p erin ten d e n ts
questionnaire,
positive
results

districts.

responded to

the

i n d i c a t i n g t h a t t h e ass essment program was having a

effect
with

local

in

some d i s t r i c t s .

t h e i r communities,

They a l s o

despite

the

were

fact

sharing

the

th e y

were

that

n e i t h e r s u p p o r t i v e nor n o n s u p p o rt iv e o f t h e program.
The

Michigan

A ssociation

of

Professors

of

Educational

A d m i n i s t r a t i o n and House, R i v e r s , and St u f fl e b e a m conducted s t u d i e s
th at

are

b etter

known.

The s t u d y

conducted

by t h e

Michigan

A sso c ia tio n o f P ro fe sso rs of Educational A d m in istra tio n

(1 9 7 2 )

focused on t h e p ro c e ss used t o i n t r o d u c e t h e ass e ss m e nt program in
Michigan, t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f asse ssm en t t o a c c o u n t a b i l i t y ,
testing

instrument

used t o

c r i t i c a l o f t h e MEAP.

collect

the

data.

Their

and t h e

summary was

41
In 1973-74, t h e National Education A s s o c i a t i o n and t h e Michigan
Education

Association

contracted

House,

Rivers,

and

St u f fl e b ea m

t o " a s s e s s t h e e d u c a t i o n a l soundness and u t i l i t y f o r Michigan o f th e
Michigan

A ccountability

System,

wit h

particular

asse ssm en t component" (House e t a l . , 1974, p. 1 ) .
viewed documents and g a t h e r e d w r i t t e n
rendering

criticism

of the

emphasis

the

These r e s e a r c h e r s

and ve rb a l

accountability

on

testimony before

system.

They r e p o r t e d

that:
The most s e r i o u s flaws a r e in t h e a sse ssm en t component; i t i s
to o narrow in scope t o s er v e as a s t a t e a ss e ss m e n t, and i t has
been implemented on an e v e r y - p u p i l b a s i s w i t h o u t t e c h n i c a l or
u tility justifications.
O v e r a l l , t h e r e i s no ev id en c e t h a t
s t a t e and l o c a l d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g i s b e i n g s e r v e d by t h e
a c c o u n t a b i l i t y model. (p. 24)
These s t u d i e s

have provided

i n fo r m a t io n t o

practitioners

and

t h e Department o f Education about t h e p e r c e iv e d problems a s s o c i a t e d
wit h t h i s a ss e ss m e n t.

The goal o f t h e s e r e p o r t s was t o modify t h e

program and in doing so " c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e improvement o f e d u c a ti o n
f o r a l l c h i l d r e n in Michigan" (Aquino, 1975).
D i s s e r t a t i o n s on MEAP
Numerous d i s s e r t a t i o n s a r e a v a i l a b l e , in which v a r i o u s a s p e c t s
of the

MEAP were s t u d i e d .

h i s t o r y o f MEAP.

McCormick (1978)

reviewed t h e

stormy

Music (1982) i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e t e s t - t e x t b o o k l i n k

in r e a d in g t e x t s and found t h a t altho ug h t h e Hou ghto n-M iff lin s e r i e s
objectives

were t h e

most

cong rue nt

with

MEAP o b j e c t i v e s ,

groups

using t h i s s e r i e s di d no t perform b e t t e r than t h e o t h e r two groups
in

he r

s tu d y .

B leech er

(1975)

concluded

in

his

stud y

of

K-8

t e a c h e r s t h a t t h e asse ssm en t program was i n c o n s i s t e n t w it h school

42

p u rp o s e s , in c o m p a ti b le w ith t h e i r perso nal i n t e r e s t s , and im p o s s i b le
t o implement.

F i d l e r (1988) i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e MEAP s c i e n c e s c o r e s

were c o r r e l a t e d with socioeconomic l e v e l s .

Farfsing

(1988)

found

t h a t s c h o o ls t h a t s cor ed h i g h e r on MEAP p e r c e iv e d the m s el ve s t o be
doing b e t t e r than t h o s e t h a t sco re d low.
Shinsky (1983) s t u d i e d s p e c i a l e d u c a ti o n s t u d e n t s and concluded
t h a t s t u d e n t s from v a r i o u s d i s a b i l i t y groups s cor ed d i f f e r e n t l y on
t h e MEAP re a d i n g and math t e s t s .
w er e good p r e d i c t o r s
teachers

erred,

it

Simon (1982) found t h a t t e a c h e r s

o f s t u d e n t s ’ perform ance
was

in

an

on MEAP;

underestim ation

of

wh ere

stu d en ts’

performance.
Several d i s s e r t a t i o n s a r e more germane t o t h e u t i l i t y
o f MEAP r e s u l t s .
in

the

and use

D i s s e r t a t i o n s t h a t a r e reviewed more e x t e n s i v e l y

follow ing

pages

are

those

by A q u in o ,

S teele,

Jencka,

T h e la n d er , and Bushaw.
The Aauino

study.

In

1975,

Aquino

questioned

fourth-

and

s e v e n t h - g r a d e t e a c h e r s about t h e i r a t t i t u d e s toward and use o f t h e
MEAP.

A q u e s t i o n n a i r e was s e n t t o randomly sampled t e a c h e r s , w it h a

re s p on se r a t e o f 44% f o r f o u r t h - g r a d e t e a c h e r s and 50% f o r s e v e n th gr ad e t e a c h e r s .

Aquino found

that

ass essment

test

results

were

r e c e i v e d by 80% o f t h e r e s p o n d e n t s .
Fo u r th -g ra d e
"very well

teachers

p rep ared "

to

believed

make use

teachers f e l t le s s prepared.

they
of

were

test

"well

results;

p re p a re d "

or

seventh-grade

Approximately 75% o f t h e f o u r t h - g r a d e

teachers reported th a t the p rincipal or a s s i s t a n t p rin cip al a s s is te d

43
in t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t e s t r e s u l t s ; l e s s than 50% o f t h e s ev e nt hgrade t e a c h e r s r e p o r t e d a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a s s i s t a n c e .
The primary use o f t h e assessment i n s tr u m e n t was t o
t h e i n s t r u c t i o n a l needs o f groups o f s t u d e n t s ;
in

identifying

useful

individual

in pla nn in g

instructional

cl assroom

i t was l e s s h e l p f u l

needs

instruction.

identify

and

only

somewhat

F o u r th -g ra d e

teachers

tended t o p ro vi de remedial help t o s t u d e n t s on nonmastered s k i l l s ;
se v e n th -g r a d e t e a c h e r s provide d re m e d ia t io n l e s s o f t e n .
Aquino found t h a t o nly a small number o f t e a c h e r s were asked t o
change t h e i r i n s t r u c t i o n a l p r a c t i c e s based on MEAP r e s u l t s .

A small

number o f t e a c h e r s r e p o r t e d being c r i t i c i z e d because o f MEAP s c o r e s .
"The g r e a t e s t
confirm

impact o f t h e assessment t e s t

pre vi ou s

judgements

teachers

have

results
had

has been t o

about

individual

s t u d e n t s k i l l s " (Aquino, 1975, p. 84) .
The S t e e l e

and J e n c k a

stu d ies.

e l e m e n t a r y and s e c o n d a r y p r i n c i p a l s

Steele
in

(1 9 7 6 )

an e f f o r t

a d m i n i s t r a t o r s ’ p r a c t i c e s and a t t i t u d e s toward MEAP.

surveyed

to d e s c rib e
Seventy-five

p e r c e n t o f t h e surveys were r e t u r n e d , with a d m i n i s t r a t o r s i n d i c a t i n g
that

th e y were

ge ner al

using

achievement

the
levels

assessment
of

results

students

and

s t r e n g t h s and weaknesses o f th e c u rr ic u lu m .

in

de te r m in in g

the

in

de te r m in in g

the

Ex te ns iv e use o f MEAP

r e s u l t s was a s s o c i a t e d with b u i l d i n g - l e v e l p la n s and t h e s h a r i n g o f
test

results

shortly

after

their

arrival.

The e x t e n s i v e use o f

t h e s e r e s u l t s was a l s o a s s o c i a t e d w ith urban s e t t i n g s and d i s t r i c t s
with high m i n o r i t y and low-income p o p u l a t i o n s .

44
Jencka (1990) r e p l i c a t e d t h e S t e e l e stu dy t o a s c e r t a i n whether
changes had oc cu rr ed in t h e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s ’ p r a c t i c e s and a t t i t u d e s
toward MEAP.
the

The re sp ons e r a t e was 62%.

re s ponden ts

used MEAP r e s u l t s

to

Ninety-eight percent of

de ter mi ne

which

essential

s k i l l s were t a u g h t , t o r e p o r t t o t h e board o f e d u c a t i o n , o r t o use
MEAP in c o n j u n c t i o n with o t h e r t e s t d a t a .
it

was

plan nin g

"quite

useful"

in

instructional

dia gnosi ng

improvement,

l e v e l s o f s t u d e n t s and p a r e n t s .

Administrators reported

students’

learning

and communicating

needs,

achievement

As in S t e e l e ’ s s tu d y , e x t e n s i v e use

o f MEAP r e s u l t s was a s s o c i a t e d with sc ho ol s t h a t had b u i l d i n g - l e v e l
pl a n s t o t a r g e t needs i d e n t i f i e d by MEAP.
In both t h e S t e e l e and Jencka s t u d i e s , t h e p o p u l a t i o n sampled
was e l e m e n t a r y ,
Jencka’ s

junior

analysis

of

high,

data

and h ig h

differed

school

from

addition to the adm inistrative le v e l s ,

adm inistrators.

Steele’s

in

that,

in

he analyzed h i s d a t a using

t h e s i x s t r a t a i d e n t i f i e d by t h e Michigan Department o f Education.
Stratum s i x c o n t a i n s a l l d i s t r i c t s
and a l l

districts

in t h e n o r t h e r n Lower Pe n in s u la

in t h e Upper P e n in s u la .

Jencka d i d

not

find

s i g n i f i c a n t d iffe re n c e s across s t r a t a .
The Thelander s t u d y .
of

local

school

regarding the

board

Thelander (1979) compared t h e p e r c e p t i o n s
members,

influence,

use,

adm inistrators,

and problems

The sample was l i m i t e d t o Macomb County,
r a t e was approximately 93%.
has

influenced

adm inistrators,

c u rr ic u lu m

teach ers

a s s o c i a t e d with MEAP.

Michigan.

The re s ponse

Results indicated t h a t ,

althou gh MEAP

decision

and t e a c h e r s

and

d id

making,

not

these

perceive

the

board

members,

Department

of

45

Education
decision

as

being

making.

directly

involved

Respondents

d id

in

not

local

believe

should be a l l o c a t e d on t h e b a s i s o f MEAP t e s t
indicated

that

teachers

underused

school
that

state

results.

MEAP because

d istrict

of

funds

They a l l

the

lack

of

t e c h n i c a l in f or m at io n and u n d e rs ta n d in g ; the y b e l i e v e d t h i s was due
t o few o r poor i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s .

All b e l i e v e d t h a t MEAP could

be expanded d e s p i t e t h e p e r c e p t i o n t h a t i t di d no t meet d i s t r i c t or
in d iv id u a l s t u d e n t needs.
Thelander

summarized

his

findings

in

the

fo ll o w i n g

manner:

MEAP i s usef ul in deter min ing d i s t r i c t g o a l s , devel opi ng c u rr ic u lu m ,
and de termining
altered

to

K-6 weaknesses.

improve

Instructional

MEAP r e s u l t s .

However,

methods have been
"the

usefulness

of

Michigan’ s p r e s e n t , s t a t e w i d e assessment must be q u e s ti o n e d i f i t is
not meeting th e need o f l o c a l d i s t r i c t s " (T hel an de r, 1979, p. 116).
The

Bushaw

study.

Bushaw

(1988 )

ra n d o m ly

s am pl ed

all

elementary school t e a c h e r s and cor respo ndin g a d m i n i s t r a t o r s based on
demonstrated outcomes or l a c k o f outcomes, as measured by t h e 19841986 MEAP r e s u l t s .

Response r a t e s v a r i e d from 41% o f t h e t e a c h e r s

and 73% o f t h e elementary p r i n c i p a l s t o 80% o f t h e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s .
Pe rc e pt io n s

of

these

existence of a policy

three

groups

statement;

varied

with

superintendents

respect

to

th e

more f r e q u e n t l y

s a i d t h a t p o l i c y s ta t e m e n ts e x i s t e d than di d t e a c h e r s .

However, a l l

three

when

groups

indicated

s ta t em e n ts were w r i t t e n ;

that
this

s t u d e n t s who p e r f o r m e d w e l l ,

more

actions

action
the

o c cu r re d

included

th e

establishm ent

policy

recognition
of

of

a d istrict

46
committee, t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f a goal f o r minimum a t t a i n m e n t ,
related

inservice

activities.

Building-level

activities

and

in c lu de d

n o t i f i c a t i o n t o t h e p a r e n t s , t h e t e a c h i n g o f t e s t - t a k i n g s k i l l s , and
the

establishm ent

of

attainm ent

goals

and

a

building-level

committee.
What Bushaw found,

however, was t h a t

a policy

statement

and

a c t i o n s based on t h a t p o l i c y d i d no t l e a d t o changes in MEAP s c o r e s .
"Teachers

reported

building level

more

actions

policy

statements

and more

d istrict

in s c h o o ls where MEAP s c o r e s

and

had remained

unchanged d u r i n g t h e l a s t t h r e e y e a r s than s c h o o ls

in which MEAP

scores

p.

had

improved

significantly"

(Bushaw,

1988,

114).

In

a d d i t i o n , MEAP was s t r e s s e d t o t e a c h e r s , as i n d i c a t e d by 90% o f th e
respondents.
instructional
Bushaw,

Seventy-five
strategies

as

a

percent

of

the

teachers

result

of

re vie w ing

changed

MEAP.

Said

" I t appea rs t h a t t h e implementation o f a p o l i c y t o u t i l i z e

MEAP r e s u l t s t o improve s t u d e n t achievement as measured by t h e MEAP
d e m o n s t r a t e s symbolic r a t h e r th a n m a t e r i a l consequences" (p. 123).
Summary
In c o n c l u s i o n , d e s p i t e MEAP’ s stormy beg in n in g , i t has su rv iv e d
and c o n t i n u e s in growth with r e s p e c t t o c o n t e n t and number o f gra de s
tested.

The

studies

reviewed

suggested

th at

a d m i n i s t r a t o r s were usi ng MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s .
MEAP f o r t h e development o f d i s t r i c t g o a l s ,
d e te r m in in g
d ia g n o s i n g

strengths

They r e p o r t e d

and r e p o r t i n g t o

and
using

de v e lo p i n g c u r r i c u l u m ,

and weaknesses o f t h e i r

s t u d e n t need s,

teach ers

the

present
public.

curriculum,
Teachers

47
reported

that

improve

the

opposed

to

th e y

had

students’
usi ng

altered

test

these

their

scores.

results

instructional
However,

for

methods

teachers

comparisons

or

to

remained

for

d istrict

evaluations.
Chapter Summary
In t h e 1960s and 1970s,
more

involved

educational
fo ll o w i n g
issues,

five

This

developments:

affected

the

local

involvement can

be

traced

(a)

court

involvement

schools’
to

in

the

equity

r e l e a s e o f t h e Coleman Report, (d) t h e fo r m at io n o f t h e

National Assessment o f Educa tiona l

control

governments became

t h e pass ag e o f t h e Elementary and Secondary Education

Act, (c) t h e

basics

and s t a t e

in p o l i c y making t h a t
programs.

(b)

federal

movement.
ove r

These

e d u c a ti o n a l

Progress,

developments
programs

and

led

and (e)
to

the

increased

the back-to-

loss
the

of

local

reliance

on

s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s as measures o f e f f e c t i v e n e s s .
The 1980s brought a c o n ti n u e d movement toward a c c o u n t a b i l i t y .
Mi
c accoccment- n
rnntinupH
• • . rhi
w , . . nan
3
. *w
r r
• nn
j ram
—

use o f i t s r e s u l t s .
resources,
review

it

th eir

t—n pynanH
With HpmnrKt.rat.Ptl
—
- --r ...

O r i g i n a l l y int e nd e d t o supp ly d a t a t o a l l o c a t e

now was
curricula

i n te n d e d
to

to

ensure

encourage

local

that

students

all

d istricts

to

m astered

" e s s e n t i a l o b j e c t i v e s " in r e a d i n g , ma thematics, and s c i e n c e .
Several
rural schools.
Is

it

being

questions

remain

unanswered with

respect

to

s m a l l,

Is MEAP being used t o t h e e x t e n t r e p o r t e d by o t h e r s ?
used

for

curricular

development

and

review?

s t u d e n t s ’ needs being i d e n t i f i e d through t h e use o f MEAP?

Are

Are MEAP

48
t e s t r e s u l t s communicated t o t h e p u b l i c ?

The methods d e s c r i b e d in

t h e f o ll o w i n g c h a p t e r were de sig ne d t o answer t h e s e q u e s t i o n s .

C H A P T E R III
METHODS AND PROCEDURES
The P o p u la ti o n and Sample
The p o p u l a t i o n o f t h i s st udy c o n s i s t e d o f s m a l l ,

rural

d i s t r i c t s w ith t o t a l e n r o l l m e n t s o f 500 o r fewer s t u d e n t s .
these d i s t r i c t s
The l i s t

were l o c a t e d

o f s m a l l,

rural

school

Further,

in t h e Upper P e n i n s u l a o f Michigan.

school

districts

was g e n e r a t e d from t h e

Michigan Education D i r e c t o r y and Buyer’ s Guide (1990).

At t h e time

o f t h i s st ud y t h e r e were 21 such school d i s t r i c t s .
Ten d i s t r i c t s

were s e l e c t e d

a t random t o

participate

in

th e

s tu d y .

The s t u d e n t e n r o l l m e n t s o f t h e s e t e n d i s t r i c t s ranged from

100

500.

to

The

districts

were

geographically

distributed

i n c lu d e a t l e a s t one d i s t r i c t in each o f t h e s e a r e a s :
Country, t h e w e ste rn Upper P e n i n s u l a ,
and t h e

eastern

Upper P e n i n s u l a .

The d i s t r i c t s

communities

o f economic

hardship.

The s a m p l e i n c l u d e d d i s t r i c t s

financial

d ifficulties

decline,

the central

as well

va ryi ng

as th o s e

in

to

t h e Copper

Upper P e n i n s u l a ,
were l o c a t e d

degrees

in

of

economic

experiencing

extreme

that

were l e s s

concerned

about t h e i r f i n a n c i a l c o n d i t i o n .
The

selected

el em entar y

school

d istricts
and

had

a high

through t h e s e communities,

either

school

a

single

c om bin at ion .

one could p r e d i c t

49

the

facility

or

an

When d r i v i n g
location

o f th e

50
school b u i l d i n g - - e i t h e r on t h e main s t r e e t o r a blo ck o r two from
t h e main s t r e e t .

Community involvement and p r i d e in t h e s c h o o ls was

e v i d e n t through t h e p o s t i n g o f e v en ts held a t t h e school and s ig n s
commemorating a t h l e t i c honors.
Of t h e d i s t r i c t s

su rveyed,

extensive interview s.
factors:

four d i s t r i c t s

were s e l e c t e d

This s e l e c t i o n was based on t h e

degre e o f i s o l a t i o n ,

n i t y , and academic h i s t o r y .

student enrollment,

for

f o ll o w i n g

typ e o f commu­

These d i s t r i c t s were s e l e c t e d s i n c e t h e

r e s e a r c h e r b e l i e v e d t h a t th e y v a r i e d somewhat on t h e s e dimen si ons .
This methodology was used t o add depth t o t h e survey o f MEAP usage
in

sm all,

fictitious

rural

school

names t o

d istricts.

preserve

D istricts

anonymity.

were

A brief

assigned

summary o f t h e

d i s t r i c t s in which i n t e r v i e w s were conducted fo l l o w s .
Aholahti had a s t u d e n t p o p u la ti o n o f ap pro xim at el y 500.
t h e l a r g e s t school d i s t r i c t in t h e survey sample.
adjacent to a large
approxim ately
education,

school

1,000.

w ith

It

I t was

This d i s t r i c t was

d i s t r i c t with a s t u d e n t e n r o ll m e n t o f
had

a long

community members

trad itio n

boasting

of

of

supporting

the

number o f

g r a d u a t e s who were accomplished p h y s i c i a n s , e n g i n e e r s , t e a c h e r s , and
attorneys.

However,

this

d istrict

was

located

in

a

community

undergoing s ev e re economic d e c l i n e .
Koskitown had a s t u d e n t p o p u la ti o n o f ap pr oxim atel y 350.
t h i s st udy, i t was o f moderate s i z e .
with

student

recog nize d

populations

this

d istrict

I t was surrounded by d i s t r i c t s

o f app rox imately 1,000.
as

In

one t h a t

sup po rte d

Area e d u c a t o r s
c o n ti n u e d

formal

e d u ca ti o n and i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s beyond what su rro undin g d i s t r i c t s

51

were

a b le

to

support.

The community

in

which

this

school

was

l o c a t e d tended t o be d e c l i n i n g eco nomi cally but m ai n ta in ed t h e hope
o f f u t u r e mining a c t i v i t y .
Makivil

was

determined

to

be

the

most

isolated

as

approxima te ly 60 m ile s from t h e n e a r e s t a d j a c e n t school
also

had

one

of

the

sm allest

ap proxim ately 100 s t u d e n t s .

enrollm ents

in

th is

it

was

site.

It

study--

Adjacent school d i s t r i c t s had s t u d e n t

e n ro ll m e n ts

of

ap proxim ately

1,500.

Because

isolation,

this

district

had

experimented

with

system s.

The d i s t r i c t

had

been

in

stable

of

its

various
term s

of

size

and

delivery
student

e nro ll m e n ts but was s t a r t i n g t o d e c l i n e econo mi cal ly.
Vilmi

enrolled

approxim ately

125

students.

Neighboring

d i s t r i c t s in cl ude d one o f s i m i l a r s i z e and one o f approx ima te ly 700
students.
sc h oo ls

This
research

school

was

because o f

inc lu de d
its

in

the

long-standing

original

effective

r e c o r d o f academic

achievement d e s p i t e i t s low socioeconomic s t a t u s .

V il m i’ s s t u d e n t

p o p u la ti o n was f a i r l y s t a b l e ; l i k e o t h e r communities in t h e s tu d y ,
i t was d e s c r ib e d as d e c l i n i n g .
In summary, th e p o p u l a t i o n c o n s i s t e d o f a l l K-12 p u b l i c school
d i s t r i c t s in t h e Upper Pe ni ns ul a o f Michigan e n r o l l i n g 500 o r fewer
students.
to

receive

Ten d i s t r i c t s were randomly s e l e c t e d from t h e p o p u l a t i o n
the MEAP sur ve y.

Of t h e s e

te n

districts,

f o u r were

s e l e c t e d f o r more e x t e n s i v e study based on t h e f a c t o r s of i s o l a t i o n ,
s t u d e n t e nro llm e nt s i z e , ty pe o f community, and academic h i s t o r y .

52
The Survey In st rum en t
The survey i n s t r u m e n t was de sig ne d t o examine t h e i n t e g r a t i o n
o f MEAP r e s u l t s i n t o t h e e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e s o f s m a l l , r u r a l s c h o o ls
in t h e Upper P e n in s u la o f Michigan.

The in s t r u m e n t was d e si gne d t o

examine t h e p e r c e p t u a l re s p o n s e s o f s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s , p r i n c i p a l s , and
t h i r d - , f o u r t h - , s i x t h - , s e v e n t h - , n i n t h - , and t e n t h - g r a d e t e a c h e r s .
These grade l e v e l s were s e l e c t e d s i n c e t e a c h e r s a t t h e s e l e v e l s may
be t e a c h i n g

MEAP o b j e c t i v e s

based on MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s .

or

possibly

providing

remedial

work

The u n i t o f a n a l y s i s was t h e c o l l e c t i v e

re s p o n s e s o f d i s t r i c t p e r s o n n e l .
The g en eral a r e a o f i n q u i r y , t h a t o f t h e e f f e c t o f Michi gan ’ s
mandated ass essment t e s t , focused on t h e u t i l i t y o f t h e t e s t r e s u l t s
and how t h e s e r e s u l t s were used.
d istrict

were

collectively

The s t a f f

compared t o

the

perceptions
staff

in

each

perceptions

in

o t h e r d i s t r i c t s r e g a r d i n g u t i l i t y and usage.
Items on t h e survey i n s tr u m e n t were developed a f t e r a c a r e f u l
review

of

literature,

including

writings

sc h oo ls and s t a t e ass essment t e s t s .

Seve ral

on

both

small,

rural

items were developed

from Michigan Department o f Education p u b l i c a t i o n s ;

a m ajority of

t h e s e items came from P e n c i l s Down. A Guide f o r Using and R epo rt ing
Te s t R e s u l t s (Michigan Department o f Edu c a tio n, 1985).

Some items

were g e n e r a t e d as a r e s u l t o f t h e con cerns and uses o f MEAP in t h i s
r e s e a r c h e r ’ s school

d istrict.

In a d d i t i o n ,

one

question

was

s e l e c t e d and r e p l i c a t e d from J e n c k a ’ s (1990) s tu dy o f MEAP.
The q u e s t i o n n a i r e was m odif ied s e v e r a l

time s

after

receiving

i n p u t from e d u c a t o r s p a r t i c i p a t i n g in t h e f i e l d t e s t i n g , o f f i c e r s o f

53
Michigan’ s Rural Education A s s o c i a t i o n , t h e s u p e r v i s o r o f MEAP, and
professors

at

representing
testing,

Michigan

State

University.

seven school d i s t r i c t s

w it h

a 100% r e s p o n s e

Fifteen

staff

p articip ated

rate.

In pu t

members

in t h e

was

field

solicited

from

Cl eland Methner and Henry VerBerkmoes, p r e s i d e n t and p a s t p r e s i d e n t ,
respectively,

o f t h e Rural

Education A s s o c ia tio n

in M ichigan.

Edward Roeber, s u p e r v i s o r o f MEAP, Michigan Department o f Educ at ion ,
a l s o p a r t i c i p a t e d in t h e development o f q u e s t i o n s .
university

level

was

guidance committee.
sources,
The Total

as well

received

from t h e

Feedback a t t h e

re s e a rc h e r’ s doctoral

Based on t h e recommendations from t h e s e

as D ill m a n’ s

Design Method, t h e

(1978) Mail

four

and Telephone Surveys:

survey was developed

into

its

final

form.
C o l l e c t i o n o f t h e Data
Before sending t h e

surveys,

this

s tu dy was announced t o

th e

s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s o f Upper Pe n in s u la sc h oo ls a t a c o n fe re n c e he ld in
M arquette,

Michigan,

superintendent

of

on April

the

11,

1990.

researcher’s

At t h i s

d istrict

requested

c o o p e r a t i o n in t h e completion o f t h e s u r v e y s .
the

surveys,

contacted,

the

R ura l

and t h i s

met

wit h

the

d i s c u s s t h e study and s o l i c i t c o o p e r a t i o n .

he lp

th e
and

Also, b e f o r e sending

Education A ss o c ia tio n

researcher

conference,

o f Michigan

governing

was

board

In a d d i t i o n ,

to

t h e U.P.

Outreach D i r e c t o r o f t h e Michigan Department o f Education c o n t a c t e d
t h e s e l e c t e d scho ols t o encourage c o o p e r a t i o n in t h i s s tu d y .
Superintendents
whether

th eir

in

the

d istricts

districts
would

to

be

surveyed

p articip ate

in

were
the

asked
study.

54
Individuals,

in

most

c o n t a c t e d in April
the

surveys.

cases

the

superintendent’s

secretary,

were

and asked i f th e y would d i s t r i b u t e and c o l l e c t

Pack ets were s e n t

to these

identified

individuals.

These p a c k e t s c o n ta i n e d a c o v er l e t t e r i n d i c a t i n g t h e i n t e n t i o n of
t h e s urv e y, a l i s t o f i n d i v i d u a l s t o r e c e i v e t h e s u rv e y ,
directions

for

distribution

survey p a c k e ts .

and

According to

collection,
in stru ctio n s,

and

the

a set of
individual

i n d i v i d u a l s would

r e c e i v e a co ver l e t t e r , a su rv e y, and an envelope f o r t h e completed
sur ve y.

V oluntary p a r t i c i p a t i o n was emphasized in t h e co ver l e t t e r .

Telephone

calls

w e re made t o

the d i s t r i c t s

a week a f t e r

the

a n tic ip a te d re c e ip t of the packets.
The r e s e a r c h e r went t o each o f t h e t e n d i s t r i c t s t o c o l l e c t t h e
completed s u r v e y s .

B rief conversations

districts

discussions

regarding

oc c u r re d

generated

about

in

all

this

surveyed

inquiry

or

d i s t r i c t comments about MEAP.
The survey re s p on se r a t e
rate

is

shown in Table 1.

f o r nin e o f t h e t e n d i s t r i c t s

resp on se r a t e

was e x c e l l e n t .

to

the

anonymity,
prohibited

However,

from one d i s t r i c t was lower than d e s i r e d .

c o n t a c t s were made with t h i s d i s t r i c t ,
sent

The re s ponse

d i s t r i c t ’s
coupled
a

nonre s ponden ts .

w ith

d istrict

e le m en ta ry
the
v isit

and a d d i t i o n a l

school.

conclusion
and

The
of

the

individual

the

Several

su rveys were

r e q u ir e m e n t
school

of

year,

requests

of

55
Table 1 . --Number o f su rve ys s e n t t o and r e c e i v e d from p a r t i c i p a t i n g
d istricts.
Surveys
Sent

D istrict
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Pe r c e n t

13
8
14
12
7
6
7
11
8
10

100
89
100
100
100
100
64
100
100
100

13
9
14
12
7
6
11
11
8
10

A f t e r t h e surveys were c o l l e c t e d ,
t h e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s and p r i n c i p a l s
interviews

Surveys
Returned

would

be c o nd uct ed .

a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and t e a c h e r s .
t h o s e su rveyed.

In a l l

appointments were made with

in t h e f o u r d i s t r i c t s
Interviews

were

based on two b a s i c q u e s t i o n s :

clas sr oom

perm ission

granted

by

The i n t e r v i e w s were

"How do you know you a r e t e a c h i n g

and "Where do s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s

program?"

Interviews
each

were

interview ee

tape
before

fit

recorded,
the

th ree

interviewed.

larger

d istricts,

at

In t h e f o u r t h d i s t r i c t ,

and t e a c h e r s were i n t e r v i e w e d .

least
all

ten

in

with

taping.

I n t e r v i e w s were conducted d u r in g t h e f i r s t t h r e e weeks o f May.
the

both

i f a c o u n s e l o r was employed by th e

d i s t r i c t , t h i s i n d i v i d u a l was a l s o i n t e r v i e w e d .

yo ur

with

Teacher i n t e r v i e w s were no t l i m i t e d to

cases,

what you ought t o te a c h ? "

held

in which

individ uals

In
were

available adm inistrators

56
Data Anal ysi s
Data from t h e r e t u r n e d surveys were e n t e r e d i n t o computer f i l e s
byd i s t r i c t s .

Data

a n a l y s i s was

accomplished

usi ng

S tatistical

Ana lys is Systems (SAS, 1985).
A m ajority

of

the

research

a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e (ANOVA).
were analyzed

questions

were

analyze d

Questions 4b, 4c, 4d, 5, 6, 7, and 8

usi ng one-way ANOVA, comparing d i s t r i c t

means with

o t h e r d i s t r i c t means in t h e sample f o r each q u e s t i o n .
te st,

the

criterion

Scheffe,

was done when d i f f e r e n c e s

for s t a t i s t i c a l

usi ng

significance

was

A p o s t- h o c

occurred.

set at

the

The

.05

alp ha

level.
Questions 3 and 4a were
districts
selecting

selecting
"no."

"yes" and

reported
the

Question 1 was

as

the proportion

proportion

reported

as

of
the

the

of

the

districts

proportion

of

d i s t r i c t s t h a t " s t r o n g l y a g r e e , " " a g r e e , " " n e u t r a l , " " d i s a g r e e , " or
" s t r o n g l y d i s a g r e e " with t h e use o f s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s
ofd i s t r i c t

effectiveness.

Q uestion

2

as measures

was r e p o r t e d

as

the

p r o p o r t i o n of th e d i s t r i c t s using MEAP r e s u l t s in c o n j u n c t i o n with
o t h e r s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s , t h e p r o p o r t i o n o f d i s t r i c t s t h a t used only
MEAP, and t h e p r o p o r t i o n o f d i s t r i c t s t h a t di d not use MEAP.
Response r a t e s v a r i e d from q u e s t i o n t o q u e s t i o n ,
coded- in response o f th o s e surveyed.
included

4,

6c,

and

8 c . Thes e

based on t h e

Questions with fewer res pon se s
questions p ertain ed

to

the

a v a i l a b i l i t y o f c urr ic u lu m g u i d e s , t h e d i s c u s s i o n o f MEAP r e s u l t s a t
school

board me etings,

MEAP s c o r e s .

and p a r e n t s ’

knowledge o f t h e i r

students’

57

Finally,

in t e r v i e w s were conducted in f o u r s e l e c t e d d i s t r i c t s

t o develop f u r t h e r th e a r e a s o f i n q u i r y .
asked o f a d m i n i s t r a t o r s

and t e a c h e r s :

Two b a s i c q u e s t i o n s were
"How do you know you a re

t e a c h i n g what you ought t o te ach ?" and "Where do s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s
f i t in your classroom program?"

The re s p o n se s t o t h e s e i n t e r v i e w s

ar e r e p o r t e d as case s t u d i e s and a r e a l s o woven i n t o t h e f a b r i c of
Chapter IV.

CH A P T E R IV
PRESENTATION OF DATA
Introduction
The

researcher’s

purpose

in

this

st ud y

was

to

examine

e f f e c t t h a t MEAP has had on t h e c u r r ic u lu m in s m a l l , r u r a l
districts.

the

school

The e f f e c t was measured by i n v e s t i g a t i n g t h e p r e s e n c e of

MEAP in t h e t e s t i n g program, in c u r r ic u lu m d e c i s i o n s ,

in c las sroo m

t e a c h e r s ’ c o n t e n t d e c i s i o n s , and in t h e d i s c u s s i o n o f t e s t r e s u l t s .
In t h e

first

section,

educators’ b eliefs
in f o r m a t i o n ,

percentages

about

the

are

presented

usefulness

of

to

indicate

standardized

the
test

th e use o f MEAP in c o n j u n c t i o n wi th o t h e r t e s t s ,

t h e pre s e n c e o f c u r r i c u l u m g u i d e s .
mean r a t i n g s

and d i s c u s s i o n

Que stion s 4b through 8d.
use o f MEAP t e s t

results,

and

The second s e c t i o n c o n t a i n s th e

of rural

e d u c a to rs ’ responses

to

This s e c t i o n i n c l u d e s a d i s c u s s i o n o f th e
t h e communication o f MEAP t e s t

results,

and t h e changes t h a t have o c c u r re d based on t h e d i s t r i c t s ’ MEAP t e s t
results.
describe
su rveyed.

In t h e
briefly
In a l l

third
to

the

section,
reader

sections,

four vignettes

are

the

school

ty p e s

of

interview material

is

presented

to

d istricts

i n c o r p o r a t e d to

s u b s t a n t i a t e or exten d t h e d a t a c o l l e c t e d in t h e su rv e y.
From t h e d a t a c o l l e c t e d , r e s p o n s e s were sought t o t h e f o ll o w i n g
research questions:

58

59
1.

Are

there

significant

differences

among

districts

with

r e s p e c t t o t h e use o f MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s ?
2.

What p r a c t i c e s ,

if

any,

are

i n t e n t i o n a l l y used by s m al l,

r u r a l sch ools in r e s p o n s e t o t h e MEAP?
Survey Returns
On April
principals,

22, 1990,
and

101 s urv ey s were s e n t t o

third-,

fourth-,

sixth-,

superintendents,

seventh-,

ninth-,

and

t e n t h - g r a d e t e a c h e r s in t h e d i s t r i c t s s e l e c t e d f o r i n c l u s i o n in t h e
study.

A m ajority of the

surveys were c o l l e c t e d

o u t s t a n d i n g surveys were r e c e i v e d in t h e f i r s t

by May 7.

The

few weeks o f June.

One d i s t r i c t , because o f i t s low r e t u r n r a t e , r e c e i v e d second c o p ie s
o f t h e survey in l a t e May in an e f f o r t t o i n c r e a s e t h e p e r c e n t a g e of
educators

responding

from

that

d istrict.

The

su rve ys r e t u r n e d as o f J u l y 1,

1990, was 94.

ra te to th i s

On s e v e r a l

survey was 93%.

total

number

of

Thus,

the

resp on se

questions,

the

resp on se

r a t e was somewhat lower due t o om is si on s.
In te rv ie w s
In te rv ie w s were conducted in A h o l a h t i , Koskitown, M ak iv i l,
Vilmi

du rin g

follows:

May.

The

two

interview

questions

asked

were

and
as

"How do you know you ’ r e t e a c h i n g what you ought t o te ac h? "

and "Where do s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s f i t i n t o your c las sr oo m program?"
Interview ees
counselor,
grade

in

each

d istrict

included

a compensatory e d u c a ti o n

levels.

Teacher

completing t h e su rv e y.

interviews

teacher,
were

In M akiv il, a l l

not

an

adm inistrator,

and t e a c h e r s
restricted

to

of

a
all

th o s e

t e a c h e r s were i n t e r v i e w e d .

60

In t h e remaining d i s t r i c t s , i n t e r v i e w s were sought from a t e a c h e r a t
each grade l e v e l .
R e s u l t s o f Data A na ly sis f o r T e s t Usage
In t h i s s e c t i o n , t h e c o l l e c t i v e p e r c e n t a g e o f r u r a l
a c r o s s t h e i r d i s t r i c t s i s r e p o r t e d pe r item.

educators

The i n t e n t i o n o f t h e s e

items was t o de ter mi ne t h e p e rc ei v e d use o f s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s
small,
results

rural

sc h o o ls

as well

in r e l a t i o n s h i p

to

as t h e

perceived

standardized t e s t s .

use

in

o f MEAP t e s t

In t h e

fo ll o w i n g

pa r a g r a p h s , t h e item i s p r e s e n t e d along with t h e i n t e r v i e w m a t e r i a l
r e l a t e d t o t h a t item.
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Item 1

Standardized t e s t s (SAT, ACT, Stanford, Metropolitan, MEAP,
e t c . ) provide important information in a s s e s s in g your
d i s t r i c t ’s effectiv en ess.
The res ponse s o f d i s t r i c t a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and s e l e c t e d t e a c h e r s
to

this

item

are

shown

in

Table

2.

Educators

in

s m a l l,

rural

d i s t r i c t s d id not r e p r e s e n t t h e e n t i r e spectrum o f b e l i e f s about th e
usefulness of standardized t e s t s

for assessing e ffe c tiv e n e s s.

one " s t r o n g l y d i s a g r e e d " with t h e use o f t e s t s
Respondents from some d i s t r i c t s

for th is

c onfi ne d t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n s

No

purpo se .
t o two

c a t e g o r i e s , whereas o t h e r s used a br oa de r range , s p r e a d in g re s p o n s e s
across four cate g o rie s.

61
Table 2 . --Responses t o Item 1: S t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s p r o v id e im po rt an t
in f o r m a t io n in a s s e s s i n g your d i s t r i c t ’ s e f f e c t i v e n e s s , by
individual d i s t r i c t s .

D istrict

S tr o n g ly
Agree
(%)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

3 0 .8
25.0
7.1
0 .0
14.3
33.3
16.7
9.1
12.5
11.1

In t h i s
acronyms:

Agree
(%)
38 .5
50.0
42.9
63 .6
28.6
66.7
66.7
54.5
87.5
66.7

section,

tests

Preliminary

a re

S c h o l a s t i c A pti tu d e T e s t

D is ag r ee
(%)

30 .8
12.5
35.7
18.2
42.9
0 .0
16.7
18.2
0 .0
11.1

0.0
12.5
14.3
18.2
14.3
0 .0
0.0
18.2
0.0
11.1

referred

American

S c h o la stic A ptitude Test

Neutral
(%)

College

to
Tes t

usi n g

Strongly
D is ag re e
(%)
0.0
0. 0
0 .0
0 .0
0.0
0 .0
0 .0
0 .0
0 .0
0 .0

the

(PACT),

fo ll o w i n g
Preliminary

(PSAT) , A m e ric an C o l l e g e

Test

(ACT),

(SAT), Armed S e r v i c e s Voc ationa l A p ti tu d e

B a t t e r y (ASVAB), and Sci en ce Research A s s o c i a t e s (SRA).
Respondents from A h o l a h t i ,
agreed

that

tests

provided

r e p o r t e d as D i s t r i c t 1 in Table 2,
inform ation

effectiveness of th e ir d i s t r i c t .
slig h tly

d ifferen t

co n sisten tly

picture.

reported

th at

and

the

engineers,

high
and

percentage
teachers.

Interviewees,
Interview ees

its

de mo nst rat ed by t h e p e r c e n t a g e
of

us ed

success

or

to

measure

the

however, p a i n t e d a
fr om t h i s

d istrict

effectiveness

was

(90%) o f s t u d e n t s going t o c o l l e g e
successful

Other

physicians,

indicators

attorneys,

i n c lu d e d

n o n e x i s t e n t dropout r a t e - - o n e every t h r e e o r f o u r y e a r s ,

an

almost

a higher

62

average on t h e ACT th a n t h e

national

av erage

(22 v e r s u s

18 ),

an

a t t e n d a n c e r a t e of 95%, and t h e l a c k o f s e r i o u s d i s c i p l i n e problems.
Less

tangible

measures

community’ s s a t i s f a c t i o n

of

s u cc e ss

in

Ahola hti

with t h e e d u c a t i o n a l

in c lu d e d

program,

the

the

active

involvement o f p a r e n t s in school a c t i v i t i e s , and t h e number o f happy
students.

Teachers

in t h i s

d istrict

found t h a t

student

feedback

b e s t measured t h e i r e f f e c t i v e n e s s and pro vid ed d i r e c t i o n in i n s t r u c ­
tional content.
A holahti
indicative

respondents’

of

the

staff

in d ecisiv en ess

members’

struggle

on

the

to

add

survey
the

was

S ta n f o r d

Achievement T e s t t o t h e i r t e s t i n g program; some members were e ag e r
t o ad opt t h e t e s t ,
results.

whereas o t h e r s wanted n o th in g t o do wit h t e s t

With th e e x c e p ti o n o f t h e r e p o r t e d ACT s t a t i s t i c ,

probing

q u e s t i o n s were r e q u i r e d t o e v a l u a t e t h e importance o f t e s t s in t h i s
d istrict.

The

typical

response,

with

the

exception

s u p e r i n t e n d e n t , was t h a t t e s t s were no t very i m p o r t a n t .
some re s p o n d en ts i n d i c a t e d a d e s i r e f o r more t e s t s

of

the

However,

and t h a t t e s t s

become more im p o r ta n t.
I n te r v ie w e e s from Koskitown,
tests

r e p o r t e d as D i s t r i c t

were f a i r l y

verbally

indicated

that

success.

They looked s e r i o u s l y a t t h e ACT, th e C a l i f o r n i a Achieve­

ment T e s t , and th e MEAP.
on t h e s e
results
Yet,

in

tests.

im p o r ta n t

4,

in t h e measurement

of

Comparisons were made wi th p re v i o u s y e a r s

S t a f f members met

specifically

to

discuss

test

and develop p la n s t o compensate f o r p e r c e i v e d weaknesses.
this

district,

some

members

preferred

to

ig n o re

test

63
results,

generating

experience,

what

readings,

was

impor tant

for

and o t h e r e x p e r t s .

their

Overall,

students
staff

from

members

f e l t p re s s u r e d t o "show w e ll " on t e s t s .
However, s t a f f members in Koskitown a l s o measured e f f e c t i v e n e s s
by t h e atmosphere o f t h e s c ho ol , t h e su pp ort o f t h e community, t h e
number o f s t u d e n t s q u a l i f y i n g f o r s c h o l a r s h i p s ,
students attending c o lleg e.

and t h e number o f

Other f a c t o r s t h a t i n d i c a t e d succ ess in

Koskitown were t h e low dropout r a t e , t h e high a t t e n d a n c e r a t e ,
high ACT s c o r e s .

Koskitown’ s freshmen had a h i g h e r grade p o i n t

average than o t h e r freshmen a t Northern Michigan U n i v e r s i t y .
p r e s e n t e d in Table 2 tended t o be confirmed by t h e
Koskitown ( D i s t r i c t 4 ) .
th e ir effectiveness.
were

used,

and

Data

interviews

in

T e s ts provided impor tan t in fo r m a t io n about

However, because o f t h e degree t o which t e s t s

some r e s i s t e d

their

use;

this

is

cong rue nt

with

th e

f i n d i n g s from t h e Dariing-Hammond and Wise (1985) s tu dy .
Respondents from M akivil, r e p r e s e n t e d by D i s t r i c t 5 in Table 2,
tended

to

agree

that

tests

provided

t h e i r d i s t r i c t ’s e f f e c t i v e n e s s .

im port ant

i n fo r m a t io n

about

Responses in i n t e r v i e w s a l s o ranged

from th e use of t e s t s in math and ph ys ic s c o m p e t i t i o n s t o "I don’t
pay much a t t e n t i o n

t o them."

However,

overall,

testing

played a

very small p a r t in t h i s d i s t r i c t ; o b s e r v a t i o n played a l a r g e r r o l e .
Said one s t a f f member, "I have t h e s e s t u d e n t s f o r t h r e e hours each
day,

and

reported

I

know what

by th e

t e s t scores.

they

know and

superintendent,

don’t

know."

However,

succ ess was de mon strated

as

by high

64
Respondents from Vi 1mi, r e p r e s e n t e d by D i s t r i c t 9 in Table 2,
re p o r t e d t h a t s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s provided u s e f u l i n fo r m a t io n in t h e
assessment

of

th eir

d is tr ic t’s

effectiveness.

Interview ees

i n d i c a t e d t h a t t e s t s were used t o determine whether t h e d i s t r i c t was
doing t h e j o b , but " c e r t a i n l y t e s t s do n o t have a major impact on
a l t e r i n g t h e c ou rs e o f ch ang e. "
do w e l l , "

but,

in th e

In g e n e r a l , s t a f f members s a i d , "We

same b r e a t h ,

the y

don’ t t a k e t h e t e s t s s e r i o u s l y enough."

indicated th a t

"students

S t a f f members d i s t r u s t e d

t e s t r e s u l t s and i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e s e r e s u l t s u n d e r r e p r e s e n t e d t h e
s k ill le v els of t h e i r students.
from t h e i r
their

Vilmi pe rsonnel r e l i e d on feedback

alumnae t o measure t h e i r s u c c e s s .

effectiveness

by t h e

number of

students

They a l s o measured
going

to

college,

t h e i r high a t te n d a n c e r a t e , t h e i r low dropout r a t e , and t h e i r d a i l y
i n t e r a c t i o n s with s t u d e n t s .
The

pe rc e n ta g e s

for

each

item

re sp ons e

in

Question

1

are

c o l l a p s e d a c r o s s d i s t r i c t s and p r e s e n te d in Table 3.

Table 3 . - - P e r c e n t a g e s f o r each item resp on se in Question 1 - - S t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s provid e impor tant i n fo r m a t io n in a s s e s s i n g
your d i s t r i c t ’ s e f f e c t i v e n e s s - - a c r o s s a l l surveyed
districts.

All d i s t r i c t s

St ro n g ly
Agree

Agree

Neutral

D isagree

S tr o n g ly
D isagree

15.1

54.8

20.4

9.7

0.0

65
Respondents from s m a l l ,

rural

districts

te nd ed t o agree t h a t

t e s t s provide d im p o r ta n t in f o r m a t io n in a s s e s s i n g t h e i r d i s t r i c t s ’
effectiveness.

Approximately

70% o f

s t r o n g l y agre ed wit h t h e use o f t e s t s
re s po ndin g t o t h e s u rv e y,
tests

those

ten ded

to

rural
be

or

Of th o s e

l e s s th a n 10% d i s a g r e e d w it h t h e use of

districts

favorably

agreed

in t h i s manner.

as a measure o f e f f e c t i v e n e s s .

from s m a l l ,

survey ed

in

the

disposed

to

In c o n c l u s i o n ,
Upper
the

Peninsula

use o f t e s t

re s p o n d en ts
of

Michigan

results

to

measure s u c c e s s in t h e i r school d i s t r i c t s .
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Item 2
The f o ll o w i n g most a c c u r a t e l y d e s c r i b e s our d i s t r i c t :
MEAP r e s u l t s a re used in c o n j u n c t i o n with o t h e r s t a n d a r d i z e d
tests.
MEAP r e s u l t s a r e t h e o n l y outcome m e a s u r e s u s e d in o u r
d istrict.
MEAP r e s u l t s a re n o t used.
The p a r t i c i p a n t s ’ r e s p o n s e s t o Item 2, t h e i n t e g r a t i o n o f MEAP
results

in t h e d i s t r i c t ’ s t e s t i n g

Responses i n d i c a t e d t h a t
Upper

Peninsula

d istricts,

school

all

a re

shown in Table 4.

combinations were p r e s e n t e d

d istricts.

MEAP r e s u l t s

standardized t e s t s .

program,

w ere

used

However,
in

in t h e

in t h e s e

m a j o r i t y of

c o n ju n c tio n with

other

66
Table 4 . --The use o f MEAP r e s u l t s with o t h e r t e s t s , MEAP a l o n e , or
n ot a t a l l by t h e i n d i v i d u a l d i s t r i c t s .

D istrict

MEAP and
Other T e s t s
(%)

MEAP
Alone
(*)

MEAP Not
Used
(%)

69.2
75.0
100.0
90.9
71.4
100.0
100.0
70.0
100.0
90.0

23.1
0.0
0.0
9.1
14.3
0.0
0.0
10.0
0.0
10 .0

7. 7
25.0
0.0
0.0
14.3
0.0
0.0
20.0
0.0
0.0

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Respondents from A h o l a h t i , r e p r e s e n t e d by D i s t r i c t 1 in Table
4, g e n e r a l l y i n d i c a t e d t h a t MEAP was used in c o n j u n c t i o n wit h o t h e r
standardized t e s t s .
for

college

or

The t e s t s a d m i n i s t e r e d in A hol ah ti were th o s e

armed

service

entrance

in

addition

to

the

MEAP.

Approximately o n e - f o u r t h o f t h e t e a c h e r s i n d i c a t e d t h e MEAP was used
alone,

which

responses.

probably

represented

the

elem entary

teach ers’

Elementary t e a c h e r s d id not have a n o t h e r s t a n d a r d i z e d

t e s t in p l a c e .

Other i n d i v i d u a l s i n d i c a t e d t h a t "we always do w e l l ,

so I d i s c o n t i n u e d lo ok ing a t them," "MEAP i s used o n ly f o r s p e c i a l
education kids,
tests,

but

I do n’t

that

professionals

is

not

believing

use i t , "

and "I could use

likely."
that

tests

Ah olahti
should

had

a

measure

[standardized]
fair
the

share

of

"general

f a c t o r " and t h a t s t u d e n t s should no t be t a u g h t t h e t e s t ’ s c o n t e n t .

67
In c o n t r a s t with A h o l a h t i , 90% o f t h e t e a c h e r s from Koskitown
r e p o r t e d usi ng MEAP in c o n j u n c t i o n with o t h e r t e s t s .
Koskitown "know t h a t t e s t s a r e i m p o r t a n t .
have low s c o r e s . "
[tests]

as

. . . They do n o t want t o

Said one s t a f f member, " S tu d e n ts do n’ t se e them

important,

t e a c h e r s do.

T h a t ’ s how we g e t e v a l u a t e d .

The r e a l i t y o f l i f e i s t h a t

no m a t t e r what i s s a i d

what

newspaper

gets

Teach ers in

printed

in

the

to the contrary,

i s how you a r e

evaluated."

Teachers were not opposed t o t e a c h i n g t e s t o b j e c t i v e s , matching t h e
t e s t q u e s t i o n fo rm at , o r t e a c h i n g t h e t e s t ’ s v o c a b u la r y .

Teachers

i n d i c a t e d t h a t the y th ought t h e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s used t e s t r e s u l t s t o
e v a l u a t e them.

Koskitown a d m i n i s t e r e d t h e

T e s t in g ra d e s 1 t o 8,

t h e PACT in t e n t h g r a d e ,

ASVAB in e l e v e n t h and t w e l f t h g r a d e s .
t h e one i n d i v i d u a l

California

who d id

Achievement

and t h e ACT and

I t might be s p e c u l a t e d t h a t

not re c o g n iz e t h e use

o f MEAP r e s u l t s

might have been r e g i s t e r i n g a p r o t e s t v o t e .
In M ak iv i l, r e p r e s e n t e d by D i s t r i c t 5 in Table 4, a m a j o r i t y o f
s t a f f members responded t h a t MEAP was used in c o n j u n c t i o n w it h o t h e r
tests.

One s t a f f member i n d i c a t e d t h a t i t was t h e o nl y t e s t used,

whereas a n o t h e r s t a f f member i n d i c a t e d t h a t i t was n o t used a t a l l .
Teachers in Makivil

a d m i n i s t e r e d t h e S ta n f o r d Achievement T e s t

in

el em ent ary sc h o o l; t h e PSAT, PACT, ACT, and ASVAB were a d m i n i s t e r e d
in t h e t e n t h , e l e v e n t h ,
in

th e

designated

and t w e l f t h g r a d e s .

grades.

One

teacher

MEAP Was a d m i n i s t e r e d
administered

math

c h em i st r y t e s t s

t h a t a r e developed n a t i o n a l l y o r s t a t e w i d e .

results

to

tended

valued t h e t e s t ,

be

im p o r ta n t

if

the

recipient

of

the

and
Te s t

results

as in t h e s i t u a t i o n o f t h e m a t h / s c i e n c e t e a c h e r .

68

This

teacher

inform ation

said,
about

"My math
the

and

c h e m i s tr y

content

of

o b j e c t i v e s , th e y should go away."

tests

my c o u r s e s ,

p r o v id e
but

u s ef u l

tests

and

Thus, in M ak iv i l, t e s t s te nded to

be used in c o n j u n c t i o n w it h o t h e r s ,

but t h i s was n o t a unanimous

opinion.
In

Vilmi,

represented

by D i s t r i c t

9

in

Tabl e

4,

educators

unanimously r e p o r t e d t h a t "MEAP r e s u l t s a r e used in c o n j u n c t i o n with
other

standardized

tests."

Research A s s o c i a t e s
years.

Vilmi

(SRA)

test

had

administered

t o K-12 s t u d e n t s

for

the

Scie nce

a number of

Other t e s t s a d m i n i s t e r e d were t h e PACT, ASVAB, ACT, and SAT

a t t h e high school l e v e l .

MEAP was given in t h e d e s i g n a t e d g r a d e s .

Responses t o Item 2 were c o l l a p s e d a c r o s s d i s t r i c t s t o i n d i c a t e
t h e manner in which s m a l l , r u r a l
Michigan used t e s t s .
majority

of

These

r e s p o n d e n ts ,

t h e el em en ta ry school
available

to

data

86%,

c o n j u n c t i o n w ith o t h e r t e s t s .

sc ho ol s in t h e Upper P e n in s u la o f
a re

presented

indicated

that

MEAP was

5.
used

in A h o l a h t i , was a combination o f t e s t s

educators.

indicated

Table

through

t h a t MEAP r e s u l t s were used.

A
in

In only one o f t h e s c h o o ls sur ve yed ,

Approximately

7% o f

i n d i c a t e d t h a t MEAP r e s u l t s were not used.
educators

in

the

survey

the

participants

However,

i n s tr u m e n t

not

and

as a whole,
interviews

69
Table 5 . --The use o f MEAP with o t h e r t e s t s , MEAP a l o n e , o r not a t
a ll across a ll d i s t r i c t s .
MEAP and
Other T e s ts

MEAP
Alone

( %)

{ %)

86.0

All d i s t r i c t s

MEAP Not
Used
( %)

7 .5

6 .5

Q u e s ti o n n a ir e Item 3

Our d is tr ic t se lec ts or develops te s ts for items in the local
curriculum but not measured by MEAP.
Responses t o

Item 3 are p r e s e n t e d

in Table 6 by i n d i v i d u a l

districts.

Table 6 . --Responses t o Item 3: D i s t r i c t s e l e c t s or develops t e s t s
f o r items includ ed in th e lo c al c urr ic ul u m but not
measured by MEAP.

D istrict
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Yes
(%)

No
(%)

15.4
50.0
46.2
72.7
42.9
83.3
50.0
66.7
25.0
60.0

84.6
50.0
53.8
27.3
57.1
16.7
50.0
33.3
75.0
40.0

Study p a r t i c i p a n t s tended t o be p o l a r i z e d in responding to t h i s
question.

Those from A h o la h ti , r e p r e s e n t e d by D i s t r i c t 1 in Table

70

6, tended t o respond t o t h e survey as th e y d id in t h e i n t e r v i e w s .
The t e s t i n g program was no t well c o o r d i n a t e d ,
t e s t s was i n d i c a t e d .

and a need f o r more

Koskitown’ s s t a f f responded as a n t i c i p a t e d .

m ajority of educators

indicated

b a s i s of g o a ls and o b j e c t i v e s .

that

tests

were

selected

A

on t h e

Koskitown’ s t e a c h e r s f e l t p r e s s u r e d

t o te a c h t h e l o c a l c u rr ic u lu m and were p e r c e iv e d t o be e v a l u a t e d by
the r e s u l t s of the selected t e s t s .
in a d i v e r g e n t f a s h i o n ;

however,

The s t a f f in Makivil responded
instructors

in Makivil

were a l s o

di v i d e d on t h e i s s u e o f t e s t use f o r measures o f e f f e c t i v e n e s s and
were not u n i t e d in t h e r e p o r t i n g o f t h e i r t e s t i n g program.

V il m i’ s

s t a f f p r e s e n t e d a u n i t e d f r o n t in d e s c r i b i n g t h e i r t e s t i n g program
and were a l s o fa v o r a b ly d is pose d t o t e s t i n g as p a r t o f a measure o f
effectiveness.

Thus, V il m i’ s resp on se was a n t i c i p a t e d and confirmed

by i n t e r v i e w s .
As in t h e pre vi ou s

items,

the

participant

re s p o n s e s

in t h i s

survey were combined t o achiev e a p e rc e n ta g e r a t e a c r o s s d i s t r i c t s
(see Table 7).

Small,

rural

sc ho ol s

in t h e Upper P e n in s u la were

almost evenly d i v id e d on t h e s e l e c t i o n o r development o f t e s t s f o r
items not measured by MEAP.
indicated

that

some d i s t r i c t s

I n d iv i d u a l
selected

school

d istrict

additional

cu rr ic u lu m needs whereas o t h e r d i s t r i c t s d id n o t .

tests

profiles
to

meet

71

Table 7 . - - P e r c e n t a g e s f o r each item re s p o n se in Item 3 - - D i s t r i c t
s e l e c t s o r d e v el op s t e s t s f o r items i n c lu d e d in t h e l o c a l
c u r r i c u l u m but n o t measured by MEAP--across a l l d i s t r i c t s .
No

Yes
{ %)

All d i s t r i c t s

Based

on

the

( %)

47.3

data

presented

for

52.7

the

first

three

item s,

e d u c a t o r s from s m a l l, r u r a l d i s t r i c t s tended t o view t e s t s f a v o r a b l y
as a measure o f e f f e c t i v e n e s s

and te nd ed t o

c o n j u n c t i o n wit h o t h e r t e s t s .

However, t h e d i s t r i c t s

were

sp lit

on

th e

selection

and development

use MEAP r e s u l t s

of

in

collectively

tests

for

items

in c lu d e d in t h e l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m but not measured by t h e MEAP.
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Item 4
Curriculum guid es a r e a v a i l a b l e in re a d i n g and math.
This q u e s t i o n was p r e s e n t e d in such a manner t h a t r e s p o n d e n t s
acknowledged

either

the

Table 8 c o n t a i n s d a t a

pre sen ce
for

or

individual

absence

of

districts,

such

documents.

whereas

Table

9

in c l u d e s d a t a as a combination o f r e s p o n s e s a c r o s s t h e t e n d i s t r i c t s
p a r t i c i p a t i n g in t h e s tu d y .

72
Table 8 . --Responses t o Item 4:
re a d i n g and math.

Curriculum g u id e s a r e a v a i l a b l e in

D istrict

Yes
(%)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

53.8
62.5
64.3
63.6
0 .0
33.3
50.0
54.5
25.0
80.0

In A h o l a h t i ,
r e s p o n d e n ts

No
(%)
46 .2
37.5
35.7
36.4
100.0
66 .7
5 0 .0
45 .5
75 . 0
20 .0

D i s t r i c t 1 in Table 8, a pp ro x im a te ly 50% o f th e

indicated

that

c u rr ic u lu m

gu id e s were

available,

and

a pp ro xim a te ly 50% i n d i c a t e d t h a t th e gu id e s were not a v a i l a b l e
r e a d in g

and math.

North C en t ra l

A h o l a h t i ’ s high school

was a c c r e d i t e d

by the

A s s o c i a t i o n in t h e e a r l y 1980s but had s u b s e q u e n tl y

l o s t t h i s a c c r e d i t a t i o n due t o t h e d i l a p i d a t e d school p l a n t .
were in p l a c e f o r t h e high school
and j u n i o r high s c h o o l s .
across

g ra d e s

on

"We

have

stated,

adm inistration,
input."
each

teacher

lack

a

board

but h a r d l y so in t h e el em en ta ry

Most t e a c h e r s

curricular

issues.

curriculum
members,

Guides

i n d i c a t e d no c o o r d i n a t i o n
One

committee

and

staff

member

here

parents--there

angrily

com prised
is

no

of

teacher

Another s t a f f member i n d i c a t e d t h a t "We have no c u r r i c u l u m ;

meetings."
the

in

does

their

own t h i n g .

We d o n ’t

even

have

staff

These q u e s t i o n n a i r e re s p o n se s were not s u r p r i s i n g , given
of

coordination

in

the

elem entary

facility ;

this

73

p e r c e n t a g e , 46.2%, ro ug h ly corre spo nded t o t h e number o f t e a c h e r s in
this

facility.

The p e r c e n t a g e o f s t a f f who i n d i c a t e d t h a t guid es

were a v a i l a b l e approximated t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f s t a f f t e a c h i n g in t h e
p r e v i o u s l y a c c r e d i t e d high s c h o o l .
A m a j o r i t y o f t h e s t a f f members in Koskitown

( D i s t r i c t 4 in

Table 9) i n d i c a t e d t h a t c u r r i c u l u m gu id e s were a v a i l a b l e in math and
reading.

Teachers,

in

interview s,

talked

about

teaching

the

d i s t r i c t ’ s o b j e c t i v e s and communicating t h e s e g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s
to

students

However,

so t h a t

t h e y would

know what

was ex pec te d

some t e a c h e r s i n d i c a t e d t h a t i n s t r u c t i o n was l e f t

t e a c h e r , with some guidance by t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n .
this

of

s tu d y ,

curriculum

Koskitown

did

in

due

place

not
to

have
a

a

valid

stalem ate

them.
t o th e

At t h e time o f

e le m e n ta ry
by

r e a d in g

teachers

and

a d m i n i s t r a t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e time and manner in which t h i s new guide
was t o be g e n e r a t e d .

Elementary t e a c h e r s in Koskitown had asked t o

r e c e i v e a s t i p e n d f o r work t o be done a f t e r t h e completion o f th e
1989-90 school

year,

and such a s t i p e n d

t e a c h e r s had i n c o r p o r a t e d b i t s

was n o t

funded.

Thus,

and p i e c e s o f a " l i t e r a t u r e - b a s e d "

re a d in g program w it h o u t s p e c i f i e d g o a ls and o b j e c t i v e s .
account f o r a l a r g e p o r t i o n o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s

Thi s could

resp onding t o t h e

l a c k o f a c u r r ic u lu m .
Makivil

re s p o n d e n ts

(D istrict

5 in

Table

c u r r i c u l a were not a v a i l a b l e in r e a d i n g and math.

8)

indicated

that

C o ns id e ri ng t h a t

t h i s d i s t r i c t employed t e n t e a c h e r s , f o u r t e a c h i n g in t h e el em en ta ry
school

and

the

rem ainder

in

the

high

s c h o o l,

guide s

could

be

74
g e n e r a t e d by a s i n g l e t e a c h e r .
could

be

a

function

of

In t h i s d i s t r i c t , t h e l a c k o f guid e s

tim e,

not

a

function

of

time

and

communication as in o t h e r d i s t r i c t s .
Vilmi

( D i s t r i c t 9 in Table 8) had a North C e n t ra l A s s o c i a t i o n

a c c r e d i t e d high s c h o o l; t h u s , gu id e s were a v a i l a b l e .

Approximately

25% o f t h e s t a f f in Vilmi responded t h a t gu id e s were a v a i l a b l e ; t h i s
was t h e same p r o p o r t i o n o f high
staff.

school

teachers

to

instructional

Elementary t e a c h e r s did not r e f e r t o g o a l s , o b j e c t i v e s , or

g u id e s when i n t e r v i e w e d ; t h e r e s e a r c h e r assumed t h a t g u id e s were not
used.
Based on t h e d a t a p r e s e n t e d , some o f t h e surveyed d i s t r i c t s had
c u rr ic u lu m gu ide s in p l a c e ; o t h e r s did n o t .
in

place

standards.

at

the

high

school

level

The gu id e s tend ed t o be

because

of

accred itatio n

As shown in Table 9, d i s t r i c t s were q u i t e ev en ly d i v i d e d

on t h e pr e s en c e of gu id e s in r e a d in g and math.

Table 9 . - - P e r c e n t a g e s f o r each item re sp onse in Item 4 - - C u r ri c u lu m
gu id e s a r e a v a i l a b l e in re a d in g and m a t. h - - a c ro s s a l l
districts.

All d i s t r i c t s

Yes

No

52.1

47 .9

75
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Items 4b. 4c . and 4d

HEAP objectives are incorporated into our d i s t r i c t curriculum
guides.
Textbooks are chosen on the basis o f our curriculum guides.
Curriculum guides influence classroom Instruction.
Only t h o s e re s p o n d e n ts who i n d i c a t e d t h a t

their d is tric t

c u r r ic u lu m gu id e s answered Items 4b, 4c , and 4d.

had

Thus, t h e number

o f r e s p o n s e s f o r t h e s e t h r e e q u e s t i o n s was 48 each .

Data f o r t h e s e

t h r e e items a r e shown in Appendix Table D . l .
Item 4b.
curriculum.

MEAP o b j e c t i v e s a r e i n c o r p o r a t e d

i n t o our d i s t r i c t

The mean s c o r e f o r t h i s item was 3 . 9 2 , i n d i c a t i n g t h a t ,

on t h e a v er ag e , t h e t o t a l group p e r c e iv e d t h a t MEAP o b j e c t i v e s were
"somewhat" i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o c u r ri c u lu m g u i d e s .

Thus, i f c u r r i c u l u m

g u id e s were p r e s e n t in t h e d i s t r i c t , MEAP o b j e c t i v e s would be found
in t h e s e g u i d e s .

However, t h e s e o b j e c t i v e s were not " e x t e n s i v e l y "

found in t h e guid e s because t h e MEAP o b j e c t i v e s tend ed t o be viewed
as "minimal."

These gu id e s would in c l u d e

objectives

de si g ne d

to

extend t h e s k e l e t a l framework provided by MEAP o b j e c t i v e s .
Item 4c.
guides.
the

Textbooks a r e chosen on t h e b a s i s o f ou r c u r r ic u lu m

This item had a mean r a t i n g o f 4 . 1 0 ,

av er ag e ,

the

total

group

"somewhat" on t h e b a s i s

of the

significant

was

variability

not

p e r c e iv e d

indicating th a t,

te x tb o o k s

c u rr ic u lu m g u i d e s .
found

among

to

be

on

chosen

S tatistically

districts,

with

an

F-valu e o f .058, but t h e i n t e r v i e w component o f t h i s st u dy tend ed t o
disclose v a ria b ility .

76
Aholahti
pres enc e

of

coordination

respondents,
guides,
of

also

who r e m a i n e d f a i r l y
reported

c u rr ic u lu m .

that

there

Elementary

and

d i v i d e d on t h e
was

very

little

junior

high

school

t e a c h e r s i n d i c a t e d t h a t th e y i n d i v i d u a l l y made a s e l e c t i o n and t h a t
s e l e c t i o n s were "not in a s e r i e s .

In our method, t h e r e i s a l o t o f

duplication."
In Koskitown,
superintendent

quite

a d i f f e r e n t p i c t u r e was p r e s e n t e d .

in Koskitown

indicated

that

t h e y were c o n s c i o u s l y

t r y i n g to fo ll ow t h e p ro c e s s o f de velopin g
with te xt b oo k adoption

to

f o ll ow .

The

t h e c u rr ic u lu m

The d i s t r i c t

first,

had ex pe ri en c e d

d is ap po in tm en ts when th e pro ce ss was r e v e r s e d , as in t h e s e l e c t i o n
o f a math book about te n y e a r s b e f o r e .

The s e l e c t i o n o f t h e s i x t h -

grade s o c i a l s t u d i e s book was based on a c ur ri c u lu m t h a t i n t e g r a t e d
MEAP o b j e c t i v e s with l o c a l o b j e c t i v e s .
Item 4d.
The mean r a t i n g
a verage,

Curriculum guide s i n f l u e n c e classroom
for th is

e d u c a to r s

in

item was 4 .3 6 ,

s m al l,

rural

indicating

districts

instruction.
that,

allowed

on th e

gui de s

to

in f l u e n c e c l a s s i n s t r u c t i o n "some."

Koskitown t e a c h e r s ’ i n s t r u c t i o n

was based on "goals and o b j e c t i v e s

. . . t h e s t a t e model and what

our

curriculum

in d icates,"

Koskitown’ s p r i n c i p a l s
effort

to

paralleled

te ac h

agre ed,

objectives."

as

stated

s a y in g ,

by

the

"Teachers make a con sci ous

The Koskitown

those of adm inistrators

in t h e

teachers’

district:

w r i t t e n cu rri c ulu m and we a d j u s t as we go .
based on t h e k i d s . "

superintendent.

.

re s p o n se s

"We have a

. do m o d i f i c a t i o n s

77
T e a c h e rs ’ i n s t r u c t i o n in A h o l a h t i , M aki vi l, and Vilmi tended to
be l e s s in f l u e n c e d by g u i d e s .
g uid e my t e a c h i n g .

One Makivil t e a c h e r s a i d , "Textbooks

I would be h e l t e r s k e l t e r w it hout them."

f e l l o w t e a c h e r in Makivil
f o ll o w t h a t c u r r i c u l u m . "

followed w i t h ,

"I

A

use t h e t e x t b o o k and

Teachers in Aholahti and Vilmi tended t o

use t h e tex tb oo k as t h e guidin g document, with f i n a l d e c i s i o n s based
on t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f m a t e r i a l s and perso nal e x p e r i e n c e .
In

summary,

significant
objectives
curriculum

d istricts

man ner w i t h

did

regard

in c u rr ic u lu m g u id e s ,
guides,

instruction.

or

However,

not d i f f e r

the
based

to the

on

as t a t i s t i c a l l y

in co rp o ratio n of

selection

guides’

in

o f te x tb o o k s

influence

interview

on

MEAP

based on
classroom

responses,

Koskitown

appeared t o have a c l o s e r alignment o f gu id e s to te xtb o o k s and of
te xtb o o k s t o i n s t r u c t i o n .
Use o f the 1989 MEAP R es ul ts
Educators in t h e sampled s m al l,

rural

sch ools

were asked to

respond t o ten s t a t e m e n t s re ga rd in g t h e e x t e n t t o which the y used
t h e 1989 MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s .

The e x t e n t t o which r u r a l

educators

used t h e s e r e s u l t s f o r each of t h e s e l e c t e d purposes i s d i s c u s s e d in
the

follow ing

paragraphs.

In

s i g n i f i c a n tl y , those co n tra sts
other

significant

identified.

Mean

Appendix Table D.2.

contrasts
scores

for

addition,

if

d istricts

i d e n t i f i e d are discussed.
may
these

be p r e s e n t
test

but have

items

are

varied
However,

not
reported

been
in

78
a.

To determine the general
students.

The mean r a t i n g f o r t h i s
the

av er ag e , r u r a l

achievement

level

of

tested

purpose was 3 . 9 6 , i n d i c a t i n g t h a t ,

e d u c a t o r s used MEAP r e s u l t s t o "some" e x t e n t

on
to

de ter mi ne t h e g e ne r al achievement l e v e l o f t e s t e d s t u d e n t s in t h e i r
schools.

Thi s appeared t o be one o f t h e more im p o r ta n t p u r p o s e s ,

ranking somewhat lower th a n d e te r m in in g t h e s t r e n g t h s and weaknesses
o f t h e math and r e a d in g c u r r i c u l a .

b.

To inform the school community o f the general achievement
level of tested students.

Rural e d u c a t o r s gave t h i s purpose a mean r a t i n g o f 3 . 8 7 .
educators indicated t h a t ,

on t h e av er ag e ,

These

they made "some" use of

th e 1989 MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s t o inform t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e communities o f
t h e i r s t u d e n t s ’ g en eral achievement l e v e l .

Of t h e f o u r d i s t r i c t s in

which i n t e r v i e w s were c onduct ed , none had a newspaper p u b l i s h e d in
i t s community.

Aholahti and Vilmi could r e p o r t t h e i r r e s u l t s t o a

b i - c o u n t y newspaper; however, r e s i d e n t s in Vilmi t y p i c a l l y d i d not
s u b s c r i b e t o t h e newspaper.
newspaper c o ve r ag e .

N e i t h e r Koskitown nor Makivil r e c e i v e d

Koskitown s har ed i t s r e s u l t s as an i n s e r t in a

"Buyer’s Guide," and Makivil s ha re d i t s r e s u l t s in a school l e t t e r
sent

to

all

box h o l d e r s .

Comparisons

on achievement

levels

of

s t u d e n t s from d i s t r i c t t o d i s t r i c t were l e s s d i r e c t due t o t h e l a c k
o f newspaper co verage.

79
c.

To de ter mi ne t h e s t r e n g t h s and weaknesses i n t h e a r e a o f
math.

The mean r a t i n g
that,

for

on t h e a v er ag e ,

"some" t o

rural

de ter mi ne t h e

math. The MEAP t e s t
survey to

this

purpose was

the

which

indicates

e d u c a t o r s used t h e 1989 MEAP r e s u l t s

s t r e n g t h s and weaknesses

r e s u l t s were

indicate

4.14,

in

the area

used bys t a f f members

adequacy o f

th eir

cu rricu lar

in

of

this

content.

I n te r v ie w s i n d i c a t e d t h a t i f MEAP r e s u l t s were revie wed , d i s t r i c t s
most

frequently

area.

Teachers in A h o l a h t i , Koskitown, and Vilmi emphasized t h e s e

math

c o n c e p ts ,

r e p o r t e d weaknesses

insuring th a t

instead of d eletin g

it,

in

the

the textbook

as was t y p i c a l

fraction

and decimal

material

was covered

a t t h e end o f t h e

school

year.
d.

To de ter mi ne t h e s t r e n g t h s and weaknesses i n t h e a r e a o f
reading.

This purpose r e c e i v e d a mean r a t i n g o f 4 .1 6 , t h e h i g h e s t mean
reco rded

in t h i s

section

on t e s t - r e s u l t

us e.

T h is

rating

means

t h a t , on t h e av er ag e , e d u c a t o r s in t h i s s t u d y used t h e most r e c e n t
MEAP r e s u l t s

"some" t o d e te r m in e t h e

strengths

and weaknesses

of

t h e i r r e a d in g c u rr ic u lu m .
Reading

had

been

Michigan due t o t h e
The 1989-90

in

the

forefront

of

curricular

i n t r o d u c t i o n o f a new d e f i n i t i o n

issues

in

of reading.

MEAP r e a d in g t e s t was t h e f i r s t ass e ss m e nt o f r e a d i n g

based on t h i s d e f i n i t i o n .

D i s t r i c t e d u c a t o r s were e a g e r t o review

r e s u l t s as t h e Michigan Department o f Education p r e d i c t e d t h a t two
out o f t h r e e

s t u d e n t s would f a i l

this

a sse ssm en t t e s t .

However,

80
i n t e r v i e w s d id not re v e a l any p a r t i c u l a r concern about t h e r e a d in g
c u r r ic u lu m , even w it h t h i s new d e f i n i t i o n .
One d i s t r i c t , Vilmi, had p r e v i o u s l y had concerns in t h e r e a d in g
area--particularly
instructor

about

in Vilmi

the

said,

objectives

regarding

prefixes.

"We j u s t made s u r e t h a t

The

instruction

on

p r e f i x e s was in c lu d e d t h e nex t y e a r . "

e.

To determine instructional p r io r itie s .

Educators
rating

of 3.87,

results

"some"

in

s m a l l,

rural

indicating
to

de ter mi ne

sc h o o ls

that,

gave t h i s

on t h e

purpose

a v er ag e ,

instructional

a mean

th e y used MEAP

priorities.

However,

r u r a l e d u c a t o r s d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y on t h i s pu rp o s e , as i n d i c a t e d
in Table 10.

Table 1 0 . - - R e s u l t s o f a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e f o r Item 5e:
de te rm in e i n s t r u c t i o n a l p r i o r i t i e s .

df

Sum o f
Squares

9

63.283

7.031

Error

83

279.168

3.363

C orr e c te d t o t a l

92

342.452

Source o f V a r i a t i o n

Instructional
priorities

Mean
Square

To

F-Value

p-Value

2.09

.039*

♦ S i g n i f i c a n t a t t h e .05 alph a l e v e l .

I n te r v ie w s
subject.

d id

not

elicit

any

particular

comments

on

this

What e d u c a t o r s tended t o mention most was a concern about

81
i n c l u s i o n o f s u b j e c t m a t t e r , but t h e p r i o r i t i z i n g o f s u b j e c t m a t t e r
was not seen as an i s s u e worthy o f comment.

As i n d i c a t e d in Table

10, r e s p o n d e n ts from t h e v a r i o u s d i s t r i c t s d i f f e r e d with r e g a r d to
t h e use o f MEAP r e s u l t s t o d e te r m in e i n s t r u c t i o n a l p r i o r i t i e s .

f.

To determine placement o f students in "remedial11 programs.

The mean r a t i n g

for

this

purpose was 2 .8 2 .

This

indicates

t h a t , on t h e av er ag e , a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and t e a c h e r s used MEAP r e s u l t s
"very l i t t l e "

t o de te r m in e t h e placement o f s t u d e n t s

in " reme di al"

programs.

However, t h e c o l l e c t i v e re s p o n se s o f e d u c a t o r s by t h e i r

respective

districts

differed

significantly

(s e e Table

f o ll o w i n g c o n t r a s t was found usi ng t h e Sc he ff e t e s t :

11 ).

The

D i s t r i c t s 2,

7, 8, 10, and Vilmi d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y from A h o l a h t i , Koskitown,
and

D istrict

placement

of

6

on

the

students

use
in

of

MEAP t e s t

"remedial"

results

programs.

to

d e te r m in e

Respondents

from

A h o l a h t i , Koskitown, and D i s t r i c t 6 i n d i c a t e d t h a t the y used t h e s e
results

"some,"

results

"very l i t t l e . "

f o r t h i s us e.

whereas

th e

other

identified

d istricts

used

th e

The mean r a t i n g s were 1.8032 v e r s u s 3.6587

82
Table 1 1 . - - R e s u l t s o f a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e f o r Item 5 f : To d e t e r ­
mine placement o f s t u d e n t s in "re m ed ia l" programs.

df

Sum o f
Squares

9

94.671

10.519

Error

82

349.187

4.258

C o r re c te d t o t a l

91

443.859

Source o f V a r i a t i o n
S tu de nt placement
in remedial
programs

Mean
Square

F-Value

p-Value

2.47

.015*

♦ S i g n i f i c a n t a t t h e .05 a lp h a l e v e l .

A h o l a h t i ’ s com pensatory t e a c h e r
results

w ere

considered

included

in

the

f o r t h e program.

instructional

planning.

needs

MEAP t e s t

Vilmi

indicated

that

assessm ent
results

and Makivil

MEAP t e s t

for

students

were not

educators

did

used
not

in
use

MEAP r e s u l t s in a methodical way f o r t h e i r " re m ed i al " or compensa­
t o r y e d u c a t i o n programs.
Koskitown, however,
program,

ty p ically

in

in t h e p a s t had e s t a b l i s h e d
math,

s u c c e s s f u l l y pass t h e t e s t .
to take a special
objectives.

for

those

students

a " re me di al"
who d i d

not

Seventh and t e n t h g r a d e r s were r e q u i r e d

math c l a s s ,

which s t r e s s e d t h e m a st er y o f math

S tu d e n ts could t e s t out o f t h e c l a s s a t any t i m e .

This

program was unique t o t h o s e sc hools surveyed and i n t e r v i e w e d .
g.

To de te r m in e t h e need f o r new programs.

For t h i s purpo se ,
On

the

av er ag e ,

r u r a l e d u c a t o r s gave a mean r a t i n g o f 2.7 6.

educators

used

MEAP r e s u l t s

"very

little"

to

83

determine t h e need f o r new programs.
interviews indicated th a t rural

Comments by r u r a l e d u c a t o r s in

sch ools in t h e Upper P e n in s u la of

Michigan o f f e r e d only th e b a s i c s .

They were s t r u g g l i n g t o m a in ta in

t h e b a s i c s ; adding new programs was ou t o f t h e q u e s t i o n .
h.

To a na ly z e t e a c h e r performance.

The mean r a t i n g f o r t h i s purpose was 1.521, i n d i c a t i n g t h a t , on
th e

av er ag e ,

results

s t a f f members

were

used

"very

in

rural

little"

to

sc ho ol s
analyz e

This purpose r e c e iv e d t h e lowest mean r a t i n g
presented.

p e rc ei v e d
teacher

that

MEAP

performance.

o f t h e t e n purposes

C onsi de rable d i s c u s s i o n was g e n e r a t e d on t h i s purpose in

t e a c h e r i n t e r v i e w s , p a r t i c u l a r l y in Koskitown.
i.

To i d e n t i f y s t a f f - d e v e l o p m e n t needs.

Rural e d u c a to r s gave t h i s purpose a mean r a t i n g o f 2.591.

This

means t h a t , on t h e av era ge , MEAP r e s u l t s were used "very l i t t l e " t o
identify

staff-development

needs.

However,

re s po nd en ts

from th e

v a r io u s d i s t r i c t s d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y on t h i s purpose ( s e e Table
12).

D i s t r i c t 10 d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y from A h o l a h t i , M ak iv il , and

Vilmi on t h i s dimension.

This was t h e only c o n t r a s t found,

mean r a t i n g s o f 4.8000 v e rs u s 1.6230.

with

D i s t r i c t 10 used MEAP " q u i t e

a b i t " t o i d e n t i f y s t a f f - d e v e l o p m e n t needs, whereas o t h e r d i s t r i c t s
used MEAP "very l i t t l e " f o r t h i s purpose.
comments on t h i s s u b j e c t .

I n te r v ie w s were devoid of

84
Table 1 2 . - - R e s u l t s o f a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e f o r Item 5 i :
s t a f f - d e v e l o p m e n t needs.

df

Sum o f
Squares

9

86.975

9.664

Error

83

313.498

3.777

C or re cted t o t a l

92

400.473

Source o f V a r i a t i o n
Identify s ta f f development needs

Mean
Square

To i d e n t i f y

F-Value

p-Value

2.56

.012*

♦ S i g n i f i c a n t a t t h e .05 alpha l e v e l .

j.

To predict students' future academic success.

For t h e
success,
th at,

purpose

rural

on t h e

of

predicting

stu d en ts’ future

e d u c a t o r s gave a mean r a t i n g
average,

MEAP r e s u l t s

were

o f 2. 398 ,
used

"very

academic
indicating
little ."

I n te rv ie w s di d not add any i n s i g h t i n t o t h i s s u b j e c t .
Comparison With Jencka Study
Item 5, th e use o f MEAP r e s u l t s f o r s p e c i f i e d p u rp o s e s , was a
duplication

o f an item used in

(J encka, 1990).

a statewide

survey o f

principals

The mean r a t i n g o f t h i s study i s compared with t h a t

o f t h e Jencka study in Table 13.

85
Table 1 3 . --Mean r a t i n g s o f t h e use o f MEAP r e s u l t s f o r s p e c i f i e d
purposes by r u r a l e d u c a t o r s and by p r i n c i p a l s in
Michigan.
Mean Rating
-----------------------------------------------Rural Educa tors
Principals

Purpose

General achievement l e v e l
Inform community
S t r e n g t h s and weaknesses in math
S t r e n g t h s and weaknesses in r e a d in g
Instructional p r io r itie s
Placement in remedial c l a s s e s
Need f o r new programs
Analyze t e a c h e r performance
I d e n t i f y s t a f f - d e v e l o p m e n t needs
P r e d i c t s t u d e n t s ’ f u t u r e academic
su cc e ss

Data g a t h e r e d from t h i s
indicated

that,

overall,

3.97
3.87
4.14
4.16
3.87
2.82
2.76
1.52
2.59
2.40

4.89
4.72
5.57
5.45
4.71
3.01
3. 15
1.87
3.3 8
2.71

sample o f e d u c a t o r s

rural

educators

in r u r a l

tended

to

use

sc h o o ls
the

MEAP

r e s u l t s t o a l e s s e r de gre e than d id t h e p r i n c i p a l s in t h e s t a t e w i d e
sample

in J e n c k a ’ s s t u d y .

However,

this

result

aligns

w it h

the

l i t e r a t u r e o f Bushaw (1988). who i n d i c a t e d t h a t a d m i n i s t r a t o r s tend
t o p l a c e g r e a t e r va lu e on t e s t s
Aholahti,

Koskitown,

observation.

M aki vi l,

than do t e a c h e r s .
and

Vilmi

added

Interviews

cre de nc e

to

in

this

A d m i n i s t r a t o r s o f t h e s e s c h o o ls more f r e q u e n t l y quoted

t e s t r e s u l t s o r i n d i c a t e d t h a t t e s t s determined what c o n t e n t should
be t a u g h t .
However, s i m i l a r i t i e s were p r e s e n t in t h e s e two s t u d i e s .
r a nk in g

of

the

reported

means

tended

to

be

e d u c a t o r s used MEAP r e s u l t s t o d e t e c t s t r e n g t h s

the

same.

The
Rural

and weaknesses

in

86
re a d in g more so than in math.
two purposes was r e v e r s e d .
inordinate

In J e n c k a ’ s s tu d y , t h e o r d e r o f t h e s e
This d i f f e r e n c e

amount o f p u b l i c i t y

co uld

be due t o

su rro un din g t h e MEAP r e a d i n g

the
test

in 1989-90, t h e f i r s t y e a r in which t h i s t e s t was a d m i n i s t e r e d to
a l l f o u r t h - , s e v e n t h - , and t e n t h - g r a d e s t u d e n t s .
"Determining t h e g e n e r a l achievement l e v e l o f t e s t e d s t u d e n t s "
was th e t h i r d - r a n k e d purpose in both s t u d i e s .
c o ntin ue d

until

the

sixth

ranking,

where

P a r a l l e l i s m o f means
rural

educators

rated

"Placement o f s t u d e n t s in remedial c l a s s e s " h i g h e r th a n d id J e n c k a ’ s
p r i n c i p a l s , who ranked " I d e n t i f y s t a f f - d e v e l o p m e n t needs"
position.

in s i x t h

S i m i l a r i t i e s o f ranks co n tin ued through t h e rem ainder of

the question.
In c o n c l u s i o n , t h e r e p l i c a t i o n o f t h i s q u e s t i o n i n d i c a t e d t h a t
although t h e means v a r i e d somewhat, s i m i l a r i t i e s e x i s t e d in o v e r a l l
ra n k i n g s .
Summary o f t h e Use o f MEAP R e s u lt s
On t h e av er ag e , r u r a l e d u c a t o r s ten ded t o use MEAP r e s u l t s to
det ermi ne c u rr ic u lu m s t r e n g t h s and weaknesses and t o de te rm in e th e
g en eral achievement l e v e l o f t e s t e d s t u d e n t s .

They made "some" use

o f MEAP r e s u l t s t o inform t h e school community o f t h e i r s t u d e n t s ’
achievement l e v e l s and t o de ter mi ne i n s t r u c t i o n a l
res po nd en ts

in

this

stu dy

used

MEAP r e s u l t s

p riorities.
"very

little"

The
for

p l a c i n g s t u d e n t s in remedial programs, de te r m in in g t h e need f o r new
programs,

analyzing

teacher

perform ance,

identifying

staff-

development needs, and p r e d i c t i n g s t u d e n t s ’ f u t u r e academic s u c c e s s .

87
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Item 6
The

intention

of

this

item was t o

assess

d i s t r i c t ’ s communication o f MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s .
c on fi n e d

to

interpretation

o f MEAP r e s u l t s ,

the

local

school

This a sse ssm en t was
discussions

of

MEAP

r e s u l t s a t d i s t r i c t - l e v e l m e e t in g s, and d i s c u s s i o n s o f s t r a t e g i e s t o
i n c o r p o r a t e MEAP o b j e c t i v e s i n t o t h e l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m .
t o which s m a l l ,

rural

discussed

school

results

is

varied

sig n ifican tly ,

significant
other

in

the
a

contrasts.

co n trasts

district

These

might

be

e d u c a t o r s communicated MEAP

fo ll o w i n g

Scheffe

paragraphs.

test

was

contrasts

present

The e x t e n t

and

are

used

If

districts

to

identify

discussed;

significant

however,

but

remain

unidentified.
a.

The p r i n c i p a l p ro v id e s l e a d e r s h i p in t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of
MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s .

The mean resp onse f o r t h i s item was 2.974 .

Rural e d u c a t o r s , on

t h e av erage , i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e p r i n c i p a l provided "some" l e a d e r s h i p
in t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s .
various

s m a l l,

( s e e Table 1 4 ) .
found

to

vary

rural

d istricts

Using t h e

varied

S c he ffe

sig n ifican tly

from

Respondents from th e

significantly

test,
the

Makivil

on t h i s

item

and Vilmi

were

rem aining

d istricts.

Respondents from Makivil and Vilmi (mean = .4643) i n d i c a t e d t h a t th e
p r i n c i p a l provide d "very l i t t l e " bu t c l o s e r t o no l e a d e r s h i p in the
in terp retatio n

of te s t

resu lts,

whereas

those

fr om t h e

other

d i s t r i c t s i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e p r i n c i p a l prov ide d "some" l e a d e r s h i p on
t h i s t a s k (mean = 3 . 4 4 8 4 ) .

This v a r i a b i l i t y was su p p o rt e d by both

a d m i n i s t r a t o r and t e a c h e r comments.

88

Table 1 4 . - - R e s u l t s o f a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e f o r Item 6a: The p r i n c i ­
pal p r o v id e s l e a d e r s h i p in t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f MEAP
te st results.

Source o f V a r i a t i o n

df

Sum o f
Squares

Mean
Square

9

213.993

23.777

P r i n c i p a l p ro v id e s
l e a d e r s h i p in
interpretation

F-Value

p-Value

5.98

Error

84

333.837

C or re c te d t o t a l

93

547.830

.0001*

3.974

♦ S i g n i f i c a n t a t t h e .05 a lp h a l e v e l .

Comments by a d m i n i s t r a t o r s a r e p r e s e n t e d t o g e t h e r t o p r e s e r v e
anonymity

of

individual

adm inistrator said,

In

responsibility

In a n o t h e r d i s t r i c t ,

for

the

interpretation

conveyed t h e s e r e s u l t s a t t e a c h e r m e e t in g s.
the

rem aining

one

d istrict,

the

"Don’ t ask me any q u e s t i o n s about MEAP; s ee th e

counselor fo r th o se."
the

p rincipals.

two

d istricts

communicating r e s u l t s .

took

the

In t h e s e d i s t r i c t s ,

a d m i n i s t r a t o r s a c c e pte d
of

MEAP

results

and

The s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s in
resp o n sib ility

for

communications were to

t h e c u r r i c u l u m committee o r t o t h e school board.

I n t e r p r e t a t i o n to

t h e t e a c h e r s was minimal o r n o n e x i s t e n t .
T e a c h e r s ’ comments s u b s t a n t i a t e d t h e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s ’ r e p o r t s .
Said one t e a c h e r ,

"I d o n ’ t know i f I should be doing more on some

o b j e c t i v e s , i f I should be p u l l i n g back on o t h e r s .
right.

Praise

goes

to

the

superintendent

at

. . .
the

We do a l l

school

board

89
m e e t i n g s ."

Another

teacher

"What does t h e number t e l l

asked

us?

about

standardized

measures:

We don’ t do any th in g s p e c i f i c a l l y

with t h e t e s t r e s u l t s . "
Thus, a t l e a s t one o f t h e d i s t r i c t s
conducted

had

a principal

who was

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f MEAP r e s u l t s .

in which i n t e r v i e w s were

actively

involved

This d i s t r i c t ,

in

along wit h

the
other

surveyed d i s t r i c t s , provided t h e c o n t r a s t t o Makivil and Vilmi.
b.

MEAP has been d i s c u s s e d a t t e a c h e r m e e t in g s.

Small, r u r a l d i s t r i c t e d u c a to r s in t h i s stud y gave t h i s item a
mean r a t i n g o f 4.352, i n d i c a t i n g t h a t , on t h e a v er ag e , s t a f f members
d i s c u s s e d MEAP r e s u l t s "some" a t t e a c h e r meet ing s.
significantly
significant
2.4732)

on t h i s
contrast

and t h e

type

o f communication

existed

remaining

between

districts,

Makivil

D i s t r i c t s varied

(s e e

Table

and

Vilmi

(mean

=

Aholahti

(mean

=

ex clu di ng

15 ).

A

4 .8 57 6) .
Respondents
sur ve y,
meet ing s.

that

from Makivil

MEAP had

been

and

Vilmi

discussed

indicated,

"very

little"

Educators from t h e remaining d i s t r i c t s

MEAP was d i s c u s s e d "some" t o " q u i t e a b i t . "

through
at

th e

teacher

indicated

that

However, i n t e r v i e w e e s

from only one d i s t r i c t - - K o s k i t o w n - - n o t e d such a d i s c u s s i o n .

90
Table 1 5 . - - R e s u l t s o f a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e f o r Item 6b:
been d i s c u s s e d a t t e a c h e r meet ing s.

df

Sum of
Squares

9

132.724

14.747

Error

84

286.978

3.416

C or re c te d t o t a l

93

419.702

Source o f V a r i a t i o n
MEAP d i s c u s s e d a t
t e a c h e r meetings

Mean
Square

MEAP has

F-Value

p-Value

4.32

.0001*

♦ S i g n i f i c a n t a t t h e .05 alpha l e v e l .

c.

MEAP t e s t
me et ing s.

results

have

been

discussed

at

school

board

This type o f communication re c e iv e d a mean r a t i n g o f 4.472 from
respondents.

This means t h a t , on t h e a ver age , MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s had

been d i s c u s s e d "some" but le a n i n g toward " q u i t e a b i t "
board meet ing s.

The number o f res po nse s t o t h i s

i n s t e a d o f 93.

In a d d i t i o n ,

among d i s t r i c t s was p r e s e n t .
Table 16.

school

q u e s t i o n was 87

significant v a ria b ility
Data f o r t h i s

at

in re s p o n se s

item a r e p r e s e n t e d in

91

Table 1 6 . - - R e s u l t s o f a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e f o r Item 6c: MEAP
r e s u l t s have been d i s c u s s e d a t school board m e e t in g s.

df

Sum o f
Squares

9

80.606

8.956

Error

78

277.348

3.556

C orr e c te d t o t a l

87

357.955

Source o f V a r i a t i o n
MEAP r e s u l t s d i s ­
cu sse d a t board
meetings

Mean
Square

F-Value

p-Value

2.5 2

.014*

♦ S i g n i f i c a n t a t t h e .05 a lp h a l e v e l .

In t h e

interview s,

only

s t a f f members

fr om A h o l a h t i

Koskitown r e f e r r e d t o t h e s h a r i n g o f MEAP r e s u l t s
m e et in gs.

a t school

and
board

In both c a s e s , t h e r e p o r t i n g o f t h e i n c i d e n t was in th e

form o f a c o m p la in t, such as "They came down hard on t h e e lem en ta ry
principal

because o f a s m a l l e r p e r c e n t a g e o f s t u d e n t s

q u a rtile th is year.
directed to
that

it

Can you imagine t h a t ? "

The o t h e r comment was

"who" was r e p o r t i n g t h e r e s u l t s .

should

have been t h e

building

in t h e top

The i m p l i c a t i o n was

principal

r a t h e r th a n

th e

s u p e r i n t e n d e n t communicating t e s t r e s u l t s as p r i n c i p a l s a re involved
in t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t e s t r e s u l t s .
d.

I n s e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s have been provided t o h e l p i n c o r p o r a t e
MEAP o b j e c t i v e s i n t o i n s t r u c t i o n a l programs.

The mean r a t i n g f o r t h i s

item was 2.691,

indicating th a t,

on

t h e a v er ag e , e d u c a t o r s in s m a l l, r u r a l sc h o o ls had had "very l i t t l e "
help

in

the

form

of

inservice

activities

to

incorporate

MEAP

92

objectives

into

their

instructional

programs.

D istricts

varied

s i g n i f i c a n t l y in r e s p o n s e s t o t h i s item (s e e Table 17 ).

Table 1 7 . - - R e s u l t s o f a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e f o r Item 6d: I n s e r v i c e
a c t i v i t i e s have been provided t o he lp i n c o r p o r a t e MEAP
o b j e c t i v e s i n t o i n s t r u c t i o n a l programs.

df

Sum o f
Squares

Mean
Square

9

223.898

24.878

Error

84

346.156

4.121

C o r re c te d t o t a l

93

570.053

Source o f V a r i a t i o n
Inservice a c ti v i t i e s

F-Value

p-Value

6.04

.0001*

* S i g n i f i c a n t a t t h e .05 alp ha l e v e l .

Using t h e Sc he ffe t e s t ,

two s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r a s t s were found.

D i s t r i c t 10 d i f f e r e d

s i g n i f i c a n t l y from a l l o t h e r s ,

with a mean of

6.5

The e d u c a t o r s

indicated

v e rs u s

2.2678.

in D i s t r i c t

10

that

q u i t e a few t o e x t e n s i v e i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s had been pro vid e d to
help

i n c o r p o r a t e MEAP o b j e c t i v e s

Respondents from o t h e r d i s t r i c t s

into

in stru ctio n al

programs.

i n d i c a t e d fewer i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i ­

t i e s o f t h i s type had been pr ov id e d.
Aholahti,

M akiv il,

remaining d i s t r i c t s ,
Educators
inservice

from t h e s e
activities

and Vilmi d i f f e r e d

w it h mean r a t i n g s
three

d istricts

had been

o b je ctiv es into the local

provided

c u rr ic u lu m .

significantly

o f 1.0843

v e rs u s

indicated

that

t o help

from th e
3.3797.
very

incorporate

In i n t e r v i e w s ,

few
MEAP

teachers

in

93
t h e s e d i s t r i c t s were e i t h e r r e s t r i c t e d o r d id not c a r e t o t r a v e l t o
inservice

sessions

geographically

removed

from

their

This r e s t r i c t i o n might have a f f e c t e d t h e acc e ss t o

districts.

i n f o r m a t i o n on

such i n s e r v i c e s o r t h e p e r c e i v e d a v a i l a b i l i t y o f such i n s e r v i c e s .
Respondents from o t h e r d i s t r i c t s

in t h i s study p e r c e i v e d a g r e a t e r

number o f i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s d i r e c t e d t o t h i s purp os e .
Both a d m i n i s t r a t o r s

and t e a c h e r s

in A h o l a h t i ,

Koskitown,

and

Vilmi i n d i c a t e d t h a t i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i t y t h a t y e a r had been t a r g e t e d
t o t h e new d e f i n i t i o n o f r e a d in g and e f f e c t i v e s c h o o l s .
th ree

d istricts

named

sent

a

delegate

to

the

Each o f t h e

Department

E d u c a t i o n / M i d c e n t r a l R u ra l E d u c a t i o n L a b o r a t o r y s e r i e s .

of

T he se

d e l e g a t e s the n p r e s e n t e d i n s e r v i c e s t o t e a c h e r s in t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e
d istricts

aimed

at

fam iliarizing

teachers

with

the

new r e a d in g

d e f i n i t i o n and p ro v id i n g s t r a t e g i e s t o te a c h r e a d i n g in accordance
with t h i s

new d e f i n i t i o n .

Such a d e l e g a t e was no t mentioned

in

Mak ivil; t e a c h e r s from t h a t d i s t r i c t a t t e n d e d few c o n f e r e n c e s .
Responses from Ahola hti and Vilmi e d u c a t o r s were e n i g m a t i c .
delegate

from t h e s e d i s t r i c t s

conferences.

had a t t e n d e d

A

ap p ro x im ately nine

An equal number o f modules was a v a i l a b l e f o r p r e s e n t a ­

t i o n in t h e l o c a l d i s t r i c t .
e.

Our s t a f f s h a r e s in f o r m a t io n r e g a r d i n g t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g i e s
used t o i n c r e a s e s t u d e n t t e s t s c o r e s on MEAP.

Rural e d u c a t o r s gave t h i s
means

that,

on t h e

a v er ag e ,

item a mean r a t i n g o f 2.872.
staff

members did

"very

little"

This
to

"some" s h a r i n g o f in f o r m a t io n r e g a r d i n g t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g i e s used t o

94
increase stu d e n ts ’ t e s t scores.

D is tr ic ts also varied s t a t i s t i c a l l y

in t h i s r e g a r d (see Table 18) .

Table 1 8 . - - R e s u l t s o f a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e f o r Item 6e: Our s t a f f
s h a r e s i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g i e s used to
i n c r e a s e s t u d e n t t e s t s c o r e s on MEAP.

df

Sum o f
Squares

Mean
Square

9

133.129

14.792

Error

84

289.339

3.445

C orr e c te d t o t a l

93

422.468

Source o f V a r i a t i o n
Sharing o f
strategies

F-Value

p-Value

4 .29

.0001*

♦ S i g n i f i c a n t a t t h e .05 al ph a l e v e l .

The Sche ffe t e s t i n d i c a t e d a t l e a s t two s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r a s t s .
M akivi l, Vilmi, and D i s t r i c t 8 d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y from t h e o t h e r
school

d istricts

in t h e

3.3468 and

1.3701.

strategies

to

sample;

the

These t h r e e

increase

test

respective

d istricts

scores,

did

whereas

mean r a t i n g s
"some"

the

other

were

sharing

districts

tended t o do l e s s , a c t u a l l y "very l i t t l e " s h a r i n g o f s t r a t e g i e s .
the

other

districts

extreme,
sh ared

D istrict

"some"

to

r a t i n g s were 5.60 and 2.4375.

10 s har ed
"very

"quite

little."

a bit,"
The

of

and

respective

At

other
mean

V a r i a t i o n s were v e r i f i e d thro ugh th e

interviews.
In A h o l a h t i , s e v e r a l t e a c h e r s i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e y d id no t te ac h
the t e s t o b je ctiv es.

Thus, one might deduce t h a t t h e y pro ba bl y did

95
n o t s h a r e s t r a t e g i e s t o improve t e s t r e s u l t s .

Said one t e a c h e r ,

do n ’ t do i t [t e a c h t e s t o b j e c t i v e s ] , and I a d m i n i s t e r i t !
f i n d ou t t h e i r t r u e l e v e l
"I don ’ t p r e p a r e

[of functioning]."

"I

I want t o

Another t e a c h e r s a i d ,

g r a d e r s f o r t h e _______ g ra de t e s t .

Is t h a t

good?"
Koskitown r e s p o n d e n ts p r e s e n t e d an e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t
w ith re g a rd

to teac h in g t e s t

strategies.

Said t h e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t , "Teachers a r e no t r e l u c t a n t to

teach the t e s t o b je c tiv e s .

principal:

and

sharing

teaching

. . . They a r e concerned about t h e way

th e y p r e s e n t t h e m a t e r i a l . "
byt h e

objectives

picture

This was backed up by a s t a t e m e n t made

"We do

an

it e m - b y - i t e m

analysis,

trying

to

d i s c o v e r ways t o improve our s c o r e s . "
In te r v ie w e e s from Makivil were r e l a t i v e l y s i l e n t on t h e s h a r in g
o f teaching s t r a t e g i e s ,

as were t h o s e from Vilmi.

This c o r r e l a t e d

with t h e i r survey r e s p o n s e s .
Summary o f Communication o f MEAP R e s u lt s
P r i n c i p a l s in s m a l l, r u r a l
in

th e

interpretation

of

sc hoo ls provided

MEAP

results.

"some" l e a d e r s h i p

When

counselors

were

p r e s e n t , t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f r e s u l t s was o f t e n d e l e g a t e d t o them.
Respondents from d i f f e r e n t d i s t r i c t s

varied

in t h e i r

re s p o n s e s

to

t h i s question.
MEAP was d i s c u s s e d "some" a t t e a c h e r m e e t in g s ;
d id

this

more

intensely

than

others.

In

some d i s t r i c t s

Koskitown,

t e a c h e r s ’ meeting was devoted t o such a d i s c u s s i o n .

an

entire

96
MEAP t e s t
m eetings,

with

resu lts

were d i s c u s s e d

variab ility

present

"some"
among

at

school

board

d istricts.

T he se

d i s c u s s i o n s were r e p o r t e d in Aholahti and Koskitown.
"Some"

inservice

activ ities

i n c o r p o r a t e MEAP o b j e c t i v e s
A holahti,
involved

and Kosk itow n

into

had

instructional

respondents

in re a d in g a c t i v i t i e s .

b e en

provided
programs.

indicated

Respondents

to

that

help
Vilmi,

t h e y w ere

from d i f f e r e n t

d is­

t r i c t s v a r i e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y in t h e i r re s p o n se s t o t h i s item.
"Very l i t t l e "

to

"some" s h a r i n g

of inform ation

regarding

t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g i e s used t o i n c r e a s e s t u d e n t t e s t s c o r e s oc cu r re d in
sm al l, r u r a l d i s t r i c t s in t h e Upper P e n i n s u l a .

However, re s p o n d en ts

from d i f f e r e n t d i s t r i c t s v a r i e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y in t h e i r re s p o n se s to
t h i s item.
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Item 7
The i n t e n t i o n of Item 7 was t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e ty pe and amount
o f change t h a t had occu rr ed as a consequence o f MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s .
Small, r u r a l

school e d u c a t o r s responded t o seven p o s s i b l e changes.

A d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e type and number o f changes i s pro vided in t h e
fo ll ow in g pa ra gr ap hs .
If

variability

was

present,

identify significant contrasts.
contrasts

i s prov ided.

the

Sc he ff e

test

was

A discussion of these

used

to

identified

However, o t h e r c o n t r a s t s might be p r e s e n t

and s i g n i f i c a n t but remain u n i d e n t i f i e d .

97
a.

Course o f f e r i n g s .

The mean r a t i n g f o r t h i s change was 2.4 78, i n d i c a t i n g t h a t , on
t h e a v e r a g e , r u r a l e d u c a t o r s p e r c e i v e d "ver y l i t t l e "
c o u r s e o f f e r i n g s based on MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s .

change in t h e

F u r t h e r e v id en c e o f

t h i s was provide d by t h e int erview ees..
Aholahti

was d e s c r i b e d

providing the e s s e n t i a l s

as

a "bar e

bones"

and could a f f o r d l i t t l e

d istrict.
more.

e d u c a t o r s d e s c r i b e d t h e i r c u r r ic u lu m as "very b a s i c . "

It

was

Koskitown
I f a c ou rs e

were t o be added, a f o r e i g n language would be c o n s i d e r e d .

Educators

in Makivil and Vilmi were s i l e n t on t h i s i s s u e .

b.

Course c o n t e n t .

Rural e d u c a t o r s gave t h i s change a mean r a t i n g o f 3 .4 1 3 .
means t h a t , on t h e a v er ag e , e d u c a t o r s i n d i c a t e d t h a t
had oc cu r re d

in c o u rs e c o n t e n t based on MEAP t e s t

v a r i a t i o n among d i s t r i c t s was s t a t i s t i c a l l y

This

"some" change
results.

significant

The

( s e e Table

19).
Tabl e 1 9 . - - R e s u l t s o f a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e f o r Item 7b:
cou rse c o n t e n t based on MEAP r e s u l t s .

Source o f V a r i a t i o n
Course c o n t e n t
change

df

Sum of
Squares

Mean
Square

9

83.852

9.317

F-Value

4.23
Error

82

180.452

C o rr e c te d t o t a l

91

264.304

♦ S i g n i f i c a n t a t t h e .05 a lp ha l e v e l .

2.201

Changes in

p-Value

.0002*

98

One s i g n i f i c a n t

contrast

was

found

usi ng

the

S c h e ff e

test.

Makivil v a r i e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y from t h e rema inder o f t h e d i s t r i c t s
t h e amount o f c o u r s e - c o n t e n t change t h a t
MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s .

in

had o c c u r r e d be cause o f

Makivil e d u c a t o r s i n d i c a t e d "very l i t t l e " change

had o c c u r r e d , whereas t h o s e from o t h e r d i s t r i c t s te n d ed t o i n d i c a t e
t h a t "some" change had o c c u r r e d .
Respondents

from

the

Mean r a t i n g s were 1 . 0 and 3.664 0.

sm all,

rural

v a r i a b i l i t y in t h e i n t e r v i e w s a l s o .

d istricts

In A h o l a h t i ,

indicated

teachers

in t h e

p a s t had met and d i s c u s s e d weaknesses in t h e i r c u r r i c u l a based on
MEAP r e s u l t s .

Teachers tended t o focu s t h e d i s c u s s i o n on math.

t e a c h e r s a i d , "Our lowest p a r t i s de cim al s and f r a c t i o n s .
them in f i f t h and s i x t h g ra d e .

One

We s t r e s s

Now t h e t e a c h e r s must g e t t o them."

However, one o f t h e s e t a r g e t e d t e a c h e r s

indicated,

"I h i t hard on

f r a c t i o n s and de cimals but not in t h e same manner as in t h e t e s t .

I

use v a r i o u s t e x t s and g iv e them a d i f f e r e n t p r e s e n t a t i o n from t h a t
o f t h e s e l e c t e d math s e r i e s .

Kids don’ t adapt well t o v a r i a b i l i t y

in

indicated

fo r m a t . "

Administrators

that

discussions

of

test

r e s u l t s were p e rc e iv e d t o a l t e r i n s t r u c t i o n , but t h e y di d n ot check
on i t .

The c o u n s e l o r i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e l i k e l i h o o d t h a t t e a c h e r s

a l t e r e d i n s t r u c t i o n and c o n t e n t was b e t t e r than 50%.
One t e a c h e r summed up t h e m a j o r i t y o f e d u c a t o r s in Ah ol ah ti in
the

fo ll o w i n g

objectives,

but

manner:

"I

don’t

believe

I would te ac h g e ne r al

in

teaching

objectives.

the

test

Teachers

have

decis ion -m aki ng power; I can do i t and I enjoy doing i t . "

99
In Koskitown,

t e a c h e r s made a c o n s c io u s e f f o r t

to teach

the

t e s t objectives.
Teachers in Vilmi tend ed t o a l i g n w it h t h i s t e a c h e r ’ s comment:
"I do n’ t b e l i e v e in t e a c h i n g toward t h e t e s t .
t h e MEAP t e s t ,

What i s cover ed in

I am c ov e r in g in my c l a s s e s .

The c u r r i c u l u m does

meet t h e t e s t a lt ho ugh a l l t h e m a t e r i a l s a r e no t t h e r e p r i o r t o t h e
test.

Some o f t h e m a t e r i a l comes l a t e r . "
Educators

interviews.
experience;

in

Course

M akivil
content

MEAP r e a l l y

w e re
was

did

not

silen t

on

det ermi ne d
have

a

th is
by

role

the
in

issue

during

te x t b o o k

and

course-content

change.
c.

Teaching methods.

The mean r a t i n g f o r t h i s change was 3 .3 66, i n d i c a t i n g t h a t , on
t h e av er ag e , r u r a l e d u c a t o r s changed t e a c h i n g methods "some" based
on MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s .
Koskitown was t h e only d i s t r i c t

whose re s p o n d e n ts

t h e s h a r in g o f s t r a t e g i e s based on t e s t r e s u l t s .

a l l u d e d to

In t h i s d i s t r i c t ,

s u g g e s t i o n s were implemented as a team; i n d i v i d u a l t e a c h e r s were not
r e q u e s t e d t o make changes.
d.

I n s t r u c t i o n a l methods.

For t h i s change, r u r a l a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and t e a c h e r s gave a mean
rating

o f 3. 366,

indicating

that,

on t h e

av er ag e ,

"some"

changes

were made in i n s t r u c t i o n a l methods based on MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s .

100
e.

Preparation for t e s t s .

The mean r a t i n g
respondents,

on

the

for

this

average,

item was 3 .2 8 3 .
changed

"some"

This
wi th

means

that

reference

to

preparation fo r t e s t s .
A h o la h ti’ s a d m in is tr a to r s in d ic a te d t h a t they did nothing
s p e c i a l t o g e a r s t u d e n t s up f o r t e s t s .

They had sample t e s t s ,

as

f o r t h e ACT, and announced a seminar held in an a d j a c e n t community
t o p r e p a r e f o r t h e ACT.
Koskitown’ s p r e p a r a t i o n f o r MEAP t e s t s was on-go ing due t o t h e
importance o f t h e "pre-MEAP" t e s t s
group s t u d e n t s by a b i l i t y .

and t h e use o f t e s t r e s u l t s t o

St u d e n ts in t h e el em en ta ry g r a d e s knew

t h a t t h e s e t e s t s det ermi ne d who would be in t h e h i g h - a b i l i t y gr ou ps .
In Koskitown, t h e importance o f t h e s e t e s t s was a l s o i n d i c a t e d by
having t h e high school p r i n c i p a l a d m i n i s t e r MEAP t e s t s .
that

"testing

is

the

best

in s tr u m e n t"

to

tended t o permeate t h e c o re o f Koskitown.

measure

The b e l i e f

effectiveness

However, as many as would

ag ree t h a t t e s t s a r e t h e b e s t measure, an equal number o f t e a c h e r s
would a l s o agree t h a t

th e y a r e not

t h e onl y measure.

If

it

is

im p o r ta n t, c o ntin uous p r e p a r a t i o n i s t a k i n g p l a c e .
Vilmi
organized.

d id

some t e s t

preparation,

but

its

actions

grade s ta ken and t h e r e f o r e no p r e s s u r e .
a lot

not

One c la ss roo m t e a c h e r had a segment "where I go over

t e s t p ro c e du re s and do p r a c t i c e t e s t ty p e s o f t h i n g s .

feel

were

of p r e s s u r e

on t e s t

day.

There a r e no

There a r e s t u d e n t s who do
. . .

I make

it

s t u d e n t s t h a t th e t e s t i s not going t o make o r break them."

clear

to

Another

101
c lass roo m t e a c h e r d i d an i n t e r e s t i n g e x e r c i s e w ith h i s s t u d e n t s .

He

d e s c r i b e d i t as f o l l o w s :
I gave s t u d e n t s an answer s h e e t w i t h o u t a t e s t b o o k l e t .
I
i n d i c a t e d t h a t th e y had 15 minutes t o do 93 q u e s t i o n s . The top
t h r e e s t u d e n t s would be rewarded.
A f t e r 15 m in u te s , we
corrected the t e s t .
I would t e l l them, " L e t ' s c o r r e c t t h e
sample q u e s t i o n s f i r s t - - t h e y a r e t h e e a s i e s t . " I asked how
many g o t t h e s e r i g h t .
Then I went i n t o a s p i e l ab o u t,
"You
d i d n ’ t g e t them r i g h t , how come? e t c . " At t h e end o f t h i s
e x e r c i s e , t h e h i g h e s t s c o r e r was 25 c o r r e c t o u t o f 93.
The
i n t e n t o f t h e e x e r c i s e was t h a t g u e s s i n g d o e s n ' t pay.
This t e a c h e r i n d i c a t e d t h a t

marginal

s t u d e n t s t ook

a little

more

time wi th t e s t completion a f t e r t h e e x e r c i s e .
f.

Battery of t e s t s .

Rural e d u c a t o r s , on t h e a v er ag e , changed t h e b a t t e r y o f t e s t s
"very l i t t l e , " as i n d i c a t e d by t h e mean r a t i n g
In A h o l a h t i ,

o f 2. 429 .

c o l l e g e and armed s e r v i c e s e n t r a n c e exams

a d m i n i s t e r e d in a d d i t i o n t o t h e MEAP.
d i s c o v e r e d t h a t some s p e c i a l
from t a k i n g t h e MEAP t e s t s .

were

Rec en tly t h e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t

e d u c a ti o n s t u d e n t s co uld be excluded
This had not been p r a c t i c e d in Ahola hti

and was now being c o n s i d e r e d "so t h a t we can look b e t t e r . We do a l l
r i g h t , but we can do much b e t t e r i f we ex clu de them.
r e p r e s e n t 4% o f our p o p u l a t i o n . "
tests

had not

altered,

change as a means t o

the

Thus,

population

improve o v e r a l l

a lt ho ug h
of

One kid could
the

students

MEAP s c o r e s .

battery

tested

of

might

Change might

oc cur in t h e f u t u r e as a number o f t e a c h e r s in Aholah ti were hoping
f o r more t e s t i n g ,
results.

better

interpretations,

and g r e a t e r use o f t e s t

102
In Koskitown, t h e C a l i f o r n i a Achievement T e s t , MEAP, and t e s t s
a s s o c i a t e d with c o l l e g e o r armed s e r v i c e s e n t r a n c e were g i v e n .

MEAP

had not a l t e r e d t h e d i s t r i c t ’ s t e s t b a t t e r y .

The s u p e r i n t e n d e n t had

asked h i s

C a l i f o r n i a Achievement

Te s t? "

principals,

"Why do we g i v e t h e

D e s p i t e t h e c o n s i d e r a b l e expense,

p r i n c i p a l s had i n d i c a t e d

only t h a t t h e t e s t r e s u l t s confirmed t e a c h e r s ’ p e r c e p t i o n s and t h a t
t h e t e s t was used as a g a t e k e e p e r f o r t h e i r compensatory e d u c a t i o n
programs.

However, t h e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t i n d i c a t e d a need t o e x p l o r e

the c u rric u lu m -test lin k .
Educators

in

Makivil

were

silent

on

the

issue

of

a

test

b a t t e r y , a lt hou gh t h e y d i d a d m i n i s t e r t h e S t a n f o r d Achievement Tes t
and t e s t s in t h e c o l l e g e and armed s e r v i c e s e n t r a n c e b a t t e r y .

Te s t

r e s u l t s j u s t were not t h e focus o f t h i s d i s t r i c t ’ s en ergy.
Vilmi a d m i n i s t e r e d t h e SRA, t h e MEAP, and a b a t t e r y o f t e s t s
in te n d e d f o r e n t r a n c e i n t o c o l l e g e o r t h e armed s e r v i c e s .

Educators

tended t o t h i n k t h a t t e s t i n g was im p o r ta n t so t h a t " s t u d e n t s can be
compared and t o compare them t o
a v er ag e .

a statewide

aver age or n a t i o n a l

S tu d e n ts as well as t e a c h e r s want t o know."

In V ilmi, th e

method o f how t e s t s were s e l e c t e d was n o t well documented;

i t was

assumed t h a t t e s t s were s e l e c t e d on t h e b a s i s o f a recommendation
made

by

a

com pensatory

recommended because i t
program.

education

consultant.

allowed more s t u d e n t s

The

into th is

SRA was
" re m ed i al "

Of t h e MEAP and t h e SRA, t h e l a t t e r was o f g r e a t e r v a l u e .

Respondents from Aholahti i n d i c a t e d t h a t , i f t h e MEAP were not
mandated, th e y would no t have t h e money t o c o n t i n u e i t .
good i d e a , "

said the superintendent.

"It

is a

"We would need a n o t h e r t e s t

103

sim ilar to i t .

Yes, we’ d g iv e a n o th e r t e s t , pro bably t h e S t a n f o r d . "

The s u p e r i n t e n d e n t in Vilmi a l s o i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e MEAP would not
be given i f

i t were no t mandated.

r e p l a c e d with something.

As in A h o l a h t i ,

Both s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s

it

would be

i n d i c a t e d t h a t th e

MEAP had become a p a r t o f t h e school system; i t was e x p e c te d .

Thus,

i t must be r e p l a c e d .

g.

Frequency of curriculum revision .

The mean r a t i n g f o r t h i s change was 2.667, i n d i c a t i n g t h a t , on
t h e av erage ,

a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and t e a c h e r s a l t e r e d t h e freque ncy o f

curriculum re v isio n

"very l i t t l e . "

However, d i s t r i c t s

s i g n i f i c a n t l y in t h e i r c o l l e c t i v e re s p o n se s t o t h i s

varied

item, as shown

in Table 20.

Table 2 0 . - - R e s u l t s o f a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e f o r Item 7g: The change
in th e fr equency of c u rr ic ulu m r e v i s i o n based on MEAP
results.

df

Sum of
Squares

Mean
Square

9

76.232

8.470

Error

83

272.434

3.282

Co rre ct ed t o t a l

92

348.667

Source of V a r i a t i o n

Frequency o f c u r ­
riculum r e v i s i o n

F-Value

2.58

♦ S i g n i f i c a n t a t t h e .05 alpha l e v e l .

p-Value

.0113*

104
Two s i g n i f i c a n t
test.

Makivil

contrasts

and Ahola hti

were

identified

differed

w it h

the

S ch ef fe

s i g n i f i c a n t l y from Koskitown

and D i s t r i c t 10, with mean r a t i n g s o f 1.9523 and 3.90 45.

The MEAP

pla yed a minuscule r o l e in c u r r i c u l u m r e v i s i o n in t h e s e d i s t r i c t s ,
whereas t h e t e s t played a l a r g e r r o l e in Koskitown and D i s t r i c t 10.
I t had i n c r e a s e d t h e fr eq ue ncy o f c u r r i c u l u m r e v i s i o n "some."
M ak iv il , A h o l a h t i ,

and D i s t r i c t 3 d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y from

Koskitown and D i s t r i c t 10.

MEAP had no t a f f e c t e d t h e fr eq u e ncy of

c u rr ic u lu m change in M ak iv il , A h o l a h t i , and D i s t r i c t 3 as i t had in
Koskitown and D i s t r i c t 10.
Educators

in

these

The mean r a t i n g s were 1.5879 and 3.9045.
s m a l l,

rural

school

comment e x t e n s i v e l y on c u r r ic u lu m r e v i s i o n .
on,

as i n d i c a t e d by t h e

fact that

all

d istricts

of the d i s t r i c t s

they

d id

not

have

all

the

in which

incorporate

re a d in g d e f i n i t i o n i n t o t h e i r r e a d in g programs.
that

not

However, i t was going

e d u c a t o r s were i n te rv ie w e d were s t r u g g l i n g t o

indicated

d id

t h e new

Koskitown e d u c a t o r s
curricula

however, the y c o n t i n u a l l y s t r o v e t o reach t h a t g o a l .
t h i s sample could r e v i s e t h e e x i s t i n g c u r r i c u l u m .

in

place;

Roughly 50% of

The remaining 50%

needed t o work on de ve lop in g c u r r i c u l a , as i n d i c a t e d by r e s p o n s e s to
Item 4.
As in Item 6d,

t h e re s p o n se s o f Ahol ah ti

remain a p uz zl e because
in c o n g r u e n t.

Personnel

th e

survey

and

and Vilmi e d u c a t o r s

interview

from both d i s t r i c t s

re s p o n s e s

were

had a t t e n d e d a r a t h e r

l a r g e number o f i n s e r v i c e s e s s i o n s on t h e new r e a d i n g d e f i n i t i o n f o r
t h e MEAP r e a d in g t e s t .

105
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Item 8
Item 8 comprised f o u r p a r t s .
fam iliarity

o f t e a c h e r s wit h

The f i r s t

MEAP t e s t

questions.

items measured t h e ownership o f MEAP t e s t
th e i r parents.

item a d d r e s s e d

The n e x t two

s c o r e s by s t u d e n t s

and

The l a s t item a s s e s s e d t h e co nce pt o f re m e d i a t i o n

f o r MEAP o b j e c t i v e s no t mast ere d by i n d i v i d u a l s t u d e n t s .
items a r e d i s c u s s e d in t h e fo ll o w i n g p a r a g r a p h s .
present,

the

the

Scheffe

contrasts.

The

additional

contrasts

test

contrast

was

used

found

to

w ill

might be p r e s e n t

I f v a r i a b i l i t y was

identify

be

These f o u r

sig n ifican t

discussed;

and s i g n i f i c a n t

however,
bu t

remain

unidentified.
a.

Teachers a r e f a m i l i a r wit h HEAP t e s t q u e s t i o n s .

The mean r a t i n g f o r t h i s

item was 4 .1 28 ,

indicating th a t,

on

t h e av er ag e , r u r a l e d u c a t o r s were somewhat f a m i l i a r wi th MEAP t e s t
questions.

However,

re s p o n d e n ts

from d i f f e r e n t

d istricts

varied

s i g n i f i c a n t l y in t h e i r re s p o n s e s t o t h i s item (s e e Table 21 ).
Table 2 1 . - - R e s u l t s of a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e f o r Item 6a:
a r e f a m i l i a r wi th MEAP t e s t q u e s t i o n s .

df

Sum o f
Squares

Mean
Square

9

69.037

7.671

Error

84

287.431

3.422

C or re c te d t o t a l

93

356.468

Source o f V a r i a t i o n
Teachers a re
f a m i l i a r with
t e s t questions

F-Value

2.24

^ S i g n i f i c a n t a t t h e .05 alp ha l e v e l .

Teachers

p-Value

.0268*

106

One s i g n i f i c a n t
Vilmi d i f f e r e d

c o n t r a s t was found.

significantly

Aholahti,

M a k iv i l,

from Koskitown and D i s t r i c t

mean r a t i n g s o f 3.0485 and 5.4227.

and

10, with

Educators from Koskitown and

D i s t r i c t 10 i n d i c a t e d t h a t th e y were " q u i t e " f a m i l i a r wit h MEAP t e s t
questions;

A holahti,

M akivil,

and

Vilmi

teachers

had

"some"

f a m i l i a r i t y wit h t h e s e q u e s t i o n s .
As t h e

superintendent

in

Koskitown

reported,

s t u d i e d t h e manner in which t h e m a t e r i a l

is

"Teachers

tested."

have

They were

concerned about t h e q u e s t i o n format and t h e way t h e y p r e s e n t e d t h e
m aterial.

Thi s was t h e only d i r e c t comment made on t h i s i s s u e , but

i t s u p p o r t s t h e f i n d i n g s from t h e survey.

b.

Students know th eir MEAP scores in our d is t r ic t .

Rural e d u c a t o r s gave t h i s
means t h a t ,
scores.

on t h e av era ge ,
Students

in

knowing

item a mean r a t i n g o f 5.527.

q u i t e a few s t u d e n t s

K o sk it ow n
their

and

knew t h e i r MEAP

Vilmi

had

Tests

were

scores.

This

the

greatest

probability

of

im p o r ta n t

in

Koskitown.

in v i l m i , " s t u d e n t s want to know t h e i r s c o r e , " s a i d one

teacher.

c.

Parents know th eir student’s MEAP score.

Administrators
gave t h i s
av er ag e ,

and t e a c h e r s

item a mean r a t i n g
quite

a few p a r e n t s

of

in s m a l l,
5.693,

knew t h e i r

rural

school

indicating
students’

districts

that,

on t h e

MEAP s c o r e s .

I n t e r v i e w i n g d id not produce any comments on t h i s s u b j e c t .

107
d.

Remedial cla sse s are designed to teach students the mastery
of sp e c ific MEAP o b jectives.

The mean r a t i n g f o r t h i s item was 2.2 33.
very

few

remedial

classes

were

de sig ne d

This i n d i c a t e s t h a t

to

teach

students

the

mastery o f s p e c i f i c MEAP o b j e c t i v e s .
Compensatory e d u c a t i o n t e a c h e r s
results

could

a ss e ss m e n t.

be

included

as

i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e MEAP t e s t

one

criterio n

on

th eir

needs

However, t h e s e r e s u l t s were used onl y f o r s c r e e n i n g ;

t h e y were n o t used t o pla n an i n s t r u c t i o n a l

program and c e r t a i n l y

were not used as p a r t o f t h e e x i t c r i t e r i a .

Said one compensatory

e d u c a ti o n t e a c h e r , "1 am hoping t o use i t [MEAP] more."
In one d i s t r i c t ,
instruction,

Koskitown,

based on MEAP t e s t

students

results.

received

additional

I f performance was not

s a t i s f a c t o r y , s t u d e n t s were e n r o l l e d in a "remedial MEAP c l a s s " and
remained in t h a t c l a s s u n t i l

th e y passed t h e t e s t .

with seventh and t e n t h g r a d e r s in Koskitown.
were r e q u i r e d

to

pa ss

"pre-MEAP"

tests

This o c cu r re d

Elementary s t u d e n t s

before

being

promoted

to

seventh g r a d e .

These t e s t s were a d m i n i s t e r e d in f o u r t h , f i f t h , and

six th grades.

Over t h e y e a r s , t h e "pre-MEAP" t e s t s have remained,

but

the

"remedial

MEAP c l a s s "

has

been

discontinued.

The

s u p e r i n t e n d e n t i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h i s com bina tion, remedial c l a s s e s and
pre-MEAP t e s t s ,

pro vid ed t h e m o t i v a t i o n f o r s t u d e n t s and s t r u c t u r e

for teachers.
Four V ig n e t t e s
The r e s e a r c h e r ’ s

intention

in t h i s

section

is

to

p r o v id e

a

d e s c r i p t i o n o f f o u r s m a l l, r u r a l d i s t r i c t s in t h e Upper P e n i n s u l a of

108

Michigan, each o f which was surveyed in t h i s s tu d y .

All d i s t r i c t s

had e n r o ll m e n ts o f 500 o r fewer s t u d e n t s .
The f o u r d i s t r i c t s were g e o g r a p h i c a l l y removed from t h e s t a t e
c a p i t a l and t h e Department o f Education by t h e S t r a i t s o f Mackinaw;
a b r id g e conn ect s t h e p e n i n s u l a s .
500 m ile s

from Lansing,

One d i s t r i c t was a ppr oxim at el y

whereas a n o th e r was j u s t

250 m ile s

from

Lansing.

The Michigan Department o f Education had acknowledged t h e

p ro b l e m s

a s s o c ia te d with d is ta n c e

and had p r o v i d e d

the

Upper

Pe nin s ula Outreach O ff i c e in Marquette.
All

districts

depressed.
tion,

Gjelten

commerce,

community.

classified

their

communities

as

isolated

and

(1982) a s s o c i a t e d t h e problems o f t r a n s p o r t a ­

and c u l t u r a l

In a d d i t i o n ,

activities

wit h t h e

isolated,

economic i n s e c u r i t y abounds,

i s hi gh , and t h e lo c a l economy i s underdeveloped.
were in agreement with such a d e s c r i p t i o n ;

rural

outmigration

Superintendents

however,

it

seemed t o

vary in terms o f amount o f d e p r i v a t i o n as well as rec enc y.
All d i s t r i c t s in which i n t e r v i e w s were conducted had an average
1988 MEAP ranking o f 75 o r b e t t e r
This means t h a t ,

across

all

( Public

rea di ng

Sector Report.

and math t e s t s ,

the

ranking was 7 5 - - a s a t i s f a c t o r y rankin g on t h e MEAP t e s t .

1989).
average

Three o f

th e d i s t r i c t s had a ra nking in t h e 80s.
D istricts
others.
i n s tr u m e n t,

were

Th e se

sim ilar

d istric ts

indicating

usually v e rifie d

in

some

varied

respects
on

11

but

item s

dissim ilar
on

"between"-district differences.

such d i f f e r e n c e s .

Additionally,

the

in

survey

I n te rv ie w s

v ariability

was

109
p r e s e n t " w ith in" t h e d i s t r i c t s , as w it n e s s e d by t h e l a c k o f uniform
res po ns e s t o
interview.

questions

both on t h e

Responses w i t h i n

questions

except

survey

each

district

2

4.

questions

and

i n s tr u m e n t
varied

and in

on

all

V ariab ility

survey

th at

s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t i s shown in Appendix Table D.4.
the

researcher

district

a d v is e s

differences

each d i s t r i c t .

extreme c a u t i o n

when

because o f t h e small

the

is

However,

interpreting

within-

number o f re s p o n se s

in

Thus, s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t e d

between and w it h in s m al l, r u r a l d i s t r i c t s in t h i s s tu dy .
A d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e fo u r d i s t r i c t s

in which i n t e r v i e w s were

conducted fo ll ow s .
Aholahti
Aholahti was n e s t l e d
G reat

La k e s.

in rocky b l u f f s a d j a c e n t t o one o f t h e

A federal

highway

approximately 2,500 i n h a b i t a n t s .

passed

through

the

town

of

Bu sinesse s g r e e t e d one a t t h e e a s t

g a t e as they bade one fa re w el l a t t h e west g a t e .

Aholahti was one

o f s e v e ra l small communities w it h in a t e n - m i l e r a d i u s .
The economy o f Aholahti- was q u i t e
industries.
s ea s ons,

The

which

community

include d

relied

a growing

on

dependent

on t h e

service

to u r i s m

d u ri ng

all

snowmobiling

trade,

a

four
stable

c h a r t e r boat and f i s h i n g t r a d e , and a de vel opin g hik in g and camping
business.

Aholahti

seemed t o

have s t a b i l i z e d

selling.

had one primary man ufacturin g
with

new management

industry,

which

and a g g r e s s i v e

In t h e r e c e n t p a s t , i t had e x p er ie n c e d y e a r s o f f i n a n c i a l

l o s s and bankruptcy.

Other s m a l l e r b u s i n e s s e s were p r e s e n t ,

which

110
in c lu d e d a sawmill and s e v e r a l g i f t shops.

Several s e r v i c e s t a t i o n s

and r e s t a u r a n t s peppered t h e edges o f t h e highway.
Ah ola hti was l o c a t e d in a county where t h e median age was 39.
Its

aging

population

com prised

21% o f

the

county

citizen s.

Approximately 50% o f t h e households in c lu d e d someone who was 60 or
older.

Aholahti’s

superintendent

perceived

t y p e s o f new r e s i d e n t s in t h e community:

that

there

were

two

alumnae who had r e t u r n e d

t o r e t i r e , and o n e - p a r e n t f a m i l i e s seek ing p u b l i c a s s i s t a n c e .
The e d u c a t i o n a l

level

in Aholahti

r e s i d e n t s had a high school diploma.
had not r e c e i v e d a high school diploma.

varied,

bu t

a m ajority

of

However, 34% o f t h e populace
Ten p e r c e n t o f t h e c o u n t y ’ s

r e s i d e n t s were c o l l e g e g r a d u a t e s .
Ahola hti was unique in i t s
educational

successes.

p r e v a l e n t and documented p r i d e

in

In r e c e n t y e a r s , d o c t o r s p r a c t i c i n g a t t h e

U n i v e r s i t y o f Michigan, Mayo C l i n i c , and e lse w he re had been asked t o
return

to

address

the

principal,

himself

engineers,

attorneys,

graduating

a graduate

classes.

o f Aholahti,

The
said,

and e d u c a t o r s have come ou t

high

"More

doctors,

of th is

p e r c e n t a g e - w i s e than any school

I know o f . "

made t h e p i l g r i m a g e t o Aholah ti

not onl y f o r g r a d u a t i o n ,

r e u n io n s on t h e Fourth o f J u l y ,

school

school

These p r o f e s s i o n a l s

Labor Day, and so on.

but f o r

The school

had ed uca te d i t s c l i e n t e l e t o l e a v e t h e a r e a ; y e t t h e r e remained t h e
y e a r n i n g t o r e t u r n t o t h e community whenever p o s s i b l e .
The median household income f o r t h e county in which Aholahti
was l o c a t e d was $10,972.

The s t a t e ’ s median income was $28,956 a t

Ill

the

time

of

the

s tu d y .

The

superintendent

also

believed

th e

community f e l l i n t o t h e low-middle socioeconomic c a t e g o r y .
The Aholah ti

district

was

made up o f

combined j u n i o r h ig h / h i g h s c h o o l .
about

the

turn

of the

century;

an

e le m e n ta r y

The b u i l d i n g s
one

and

were e r e c t e d

building’s

stru ctu re

a
at

was

p a r t i a l l y wooden and was in g r e a t need o f r e p a i r .
Ah olahti had a s u p e r i n t e n d e n t , a high school p r i n c i p a l ,
p r i n c i p a l / t e a c h e r as i t s a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t a f f .
to the area,
adm inistrative

as were many o f t h e t e a c h e r s .
staff,

all

areas of c e r t i f i c a t i o n .

teachers

were

and a

All were ind ige nou s
As i n d i c a t e d by t h i s

instructing

within

their

T h i r t y - s i x t e a c h e r s pro vid ed i n s t r u c t i o n to

A h o l a h t i ’ s 500 s t u d e n t s .
The

d i s t r i c t ’s

average

MEAP s co r e

was

o ve r

80.

Ahola hti

e d u c a t o r s i n d i c a t e d t h a t th e y r e a l l y di d no t do much wit h MEAP t e s t
scores.

In t h e p a s t , t e a c h e r s had looked a t t h e math p r o f i l e , found

weaknesses in decimals and f r a c t i o n s , and s t r e s s e d t h e s e c o n c e p ts in
t h e f i f t h and s i x t h g r a d e s .
be opposed t o t e s t o b j e c t i v e s .

These t e a c h e r s , as a whole, tend ed to
T e s t s were t o y i e l d a " t r u e " s c o r e .

Teachers did no t fe e l p r e s s u r e d t o i n c o r p o r a t e MEAP o b j e c t i v e s i n t o
d a i l y i n s t r u c t i o n , although most acknowledged t h a t th e y covered th e
c o n t e n t a r e a s o f t h e MEAP.
MEAP t e s t

results

b o a r d and a p p r o p r i a t e

t y p i c a l l y were communicated t o
committees

by t h e

the

superintendent.

superintendent also reported the r e s u l t s to the te a c h e rs .

school
The

112
A holahti was found t o vary s i g n i f i c a n t l y from o t h e r d i s t r i c t s
on t h e fo ll o w i n g ite m s:
1.

MEAP a f f e c t e d

the

frequency

of

curriculum

revision

"little ."
2.

MEAP was used "very l i t t l e "

to id e n tify staff-development

ne eds.
3.

Very few i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s were prov ide d t o he lp i n c o r ­
p o r a t e MEAP o b j e c t i v e s i n t o i n s t r u c t i o n a l programs.

4.

Very few t e a c h e r s were f a m i l i a r wit h MEAP t e s t q u e s t i o n s .

The r e s e a r c h e r s p e c u l a t e s t h a t t h e s e dimensions vary due t o a
l a c k o f l e a d e r s h i p in c u r r i c u l a r a r e a s .
to

be

providing

direction,
other.

the

teachers

only
are

direction,

making

The s u p e r i n t e n d e n t appea rs
which

decisions

is

lim ited;

i n d e p e n d e n tl y

w it h o u t
of

each

A d d i t i o n a l l y , t h e s e t e a c h e r s a r e not communicating d e c i s i o n s

wit h f e l l o w s t a f f members.
An a d d i t i o n a l s p e c u l a t i o n i s t h a t t h e long t e n u r e s o f both th e
s u p e r i n t e n d e n t and t h e high school p r i n c i p a l
student

successes.

successfully

completed

Under

th eir

college,

have been a t t e s t e d

leadership,

vocational

students

s c h o o l,

or

the

by

hav e
armed

s e r v i c e s and have e n t e r e d and achieved r e c o g n i t i o n in t h e i r chosen
professions.

Very few community members would c h a l l e n g e t h e su cc e ss

o f t h e s t u d e n t s under t h e i r l e a d e r s h i p .
One f u r t h e r o b s e r v a t i o n seems a p p r o p r i a t e .

Budgetary p r a c t i c e s

with r e s p e c t t o procurement o f te x tb o o k s a r e s u s p e c t .

In t h e p a s t ,

only one o r two gr a de s were a b le t o purc ha se a t e x t b o o k .
communication and c o o r d i n a t i o n might occu r

if

Greater

a textbook-adoption

113

process

were

endorsed

f r e q u e n t l y but f o r a l l

and

if

textbooks

e le m en ta ry gr a de s

w e re

in

purchased

a particular

less

subject

matter.
D e sp it e

the

l a c k o f usage o f MEAP t e s t

im p o r ta n t in A h o l a h t i .

D i s t r i c t pe rs on ne l

results,

tests

were

were c o n t e m p l a t i n g t h e

a d d i t i o n o f t h e S t a n f o r d Achievement T e s t t o t h e i r t e s t b a t t e r y in
t h e el em en ta ry s c h o o l.

The high school would c o n t i n u e t o g i v e t h e

t y p i c a l b a t t e r y o f t e s t s f o r s t u d e n t s bound f o r c o l l e g e o r t h e armed
services.
Educators in Ahol ah ti i n d i c a t e d t h a t c o n f e r e n c e s were t h e b e s t
method

of

intermediate

infusing

th eir

school

d istrict

th a t service well.

d istrict

w ith

t o which th e y

common

ideas.

The

belonged had provide d

However, t e a c h e r s would have l i k e d some o f th e

" p r e s e n t e r s " t o provid e i n s e r v i c e in t h e i r d i s t r i c t .
O v e r a l l , Aholahti s t u d e n t s had scor ed very well on t e s t s in th e
past.

There was t h e p e r c e p t i o n t h a t th e y would c o n t i n u e t o s cor e

well d e s p i t e t h e d e c l i n e in t h e c a l i b e r o f s t u d e n t s a r r i v i n g a t th e
schools.

The c u r r i c u l u m - t e x t - t e s t l i n k had not been e x p l o r e d ,

was i t o f p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t in t h i s d i s t r i c t
s tu d y .

a t t h e time o f t h e

The s e l e c t i o n o f t e x t b o o k s was u n c o o r d i n a t e d , t e s t s e l e c t i o n

was based
t e x tb o o k

nor

on t h e

recommendations o f o t h e r s

selection,

e le m ent ary s ch ool.

and

the

c u r r ic u lu m

was

and was u n r e l a t e d
not

defined

in

to
th e

The c u r r i c u l u m - t e x t - t e s t l i n k was no t p e r c e i v e d

t o be t h e gra y cloud on t h e h o r iz o n ;

keeping t h e s c h o o ls open and

114
o p e r a t i n g consumed t h e time and energy o f e d u c a t o r s in t h i s school
district.
Koskitown
Koskitown was l o c a t e d on a major highway t r a v e r s i n g t h e Upper
Pe n in s u la o f Michigan.

When approaching Koskitown, t h e t r a v e l e r i s

t r e a t e d wit h s p e c t a c u l a r views o f i n la n d l a k e s ,
one o f t h e Great Lakes.

rocky c l i f f s ,

and

Koskitown had one t r a f f i c l i g h t , w it h small

b u s i n e s s e s c l u s t e r e d around t h i s i n t e r s e c t i o n .
The d i s t r i c t was roughly 300 miles square and had t o deal with
a r a t h e r unusual problem:

There was v i r t u a l l y no land a v a i l a b l e to

buy f o r development pu rp o s e s.
or

state

or

federally

owned.

I t s s h o r e l i n e s were p r i v a t e l y owned
As much

as

one

condominium development on th e a v a i l a b l e beaches,

would

expect

such development

was not found.
Koskitown was l o c a t e d
people r e s i d e d .

in a county where a ppro xi m a te ly 10,000

The median age o f r e s i d e n t s was 3 2 . 5 .

mately 17% o f t h e r e s i d e n t s were 65 o r o l d e r .

Approxi­

The s u p e r i n t e n d e n t o f

Koskitown i n d i c a t e d t h a t new a r r i v a l s tended t o be r e t i r e e s ;
were well

e d u ca te d , whereas o t h e r s had r e t i r e d

from t h e

some

assembly

line.
The median le v el

o f e du ca tio n f o r Koskitown was 12.3 y e a r s .

Approximately 9% o f t h e r e s i d e n t s were c o l l e g e g r a d u a t e s ;

14.2% o f

th e r e s i d e n t s in Michigan were c o l l e g e g r a d u a t e s a t t h e time o f t h i s
s tu dy .

The c u r r e n t dropout r a t e ranged from 0% t o 6%; most s t u d e n t s

dropped out o f school due t o pregnancy.

115
Koskitown measured s u cc e ss by t h e number o f s t u d e n t s a t t e n d i n g
c o l l e g e , t h e high a tt e n d a n c e r e c o r d , and a low dropout r a t e .

But,

u n l i k e o t h e r d i s t r i c t s in which i n t e r v i e w s were conducted, Koskitown
"looked a l o t " a t t h e MEAP, t h e C a l i f o r n i a Achievement T e s t , and t h e
ACT.

Teachers i n d i c a t e d t h a t " t e s t i n g

i s t h e b e s t i n s tr u m e n t [we

have] but n o t t h e only one."
The e s t i m a t e d median household income f o r t h e county in which
Koskitown was l o c a t e d was $17,280.
Michigan was $28,956.
mining

industry,

The median household income f o r

Household incomes could be g e n e r a t e d from t h e

governmental

service,

and

tourism.

There

was

l i t t l e employment f o r young pe ople.
Koskitown’ s school
nearly

been

engu lfe d

instructed

was
by

one f a c i l i t y .

additions.

350 s t u d e n t s .

s c h o o l,

as

one

Approximately

The a t m o s p h e r e

b u s i n e s s l i k e but a l s o f r i e n d l y .
this

The o l d e r

teacher

T e s ts
stated:

[ t e s t s ] as im p o r ta n t; t e a c h e r s do."

of th is

school
25

had

teachers

school

was

helped measure su cc e ss
"S tu de nt s

don’t

see

in

them

In f a c t , some t e a c h e r s th ought

t h a t a d m i n i s t r a t o r s used t e s t r e s u l t s t o e v a l u a t e them.
Because t e s t

results

were va lued,

teachers

in t h i s

d istrict

s p en t time c u l l i n g t h e r e s u l t s , developing s t r a t e g i e s , and a c c e p t i n g
re sp o n sib ility for instruction of te s t objectives.
principal
students.

a dm in is te r e d

the

test

to

junior

high

The high school
and

high

school

Elementary s t u d e n t s were mo tiv at ed t o do well on t e s t s

because t h e s e measures were used

to s o rt c lasses into h i g h - a b i l it y

and m o d e r a t e - a b i l i t y groups. St ude nt s a l s o took
be fo re l e a v i n g s i x t h gr ad e.

a "pre-MEAP" t e s t

116

Koskitown

was

actively

de ve lo pi ng

and

upg rading

curricula.

The s u p e r i n t e n d e n t i n d i c a t e d t h a t th e y were s t r i v i n g t o develo p t h e
c u r r i c u l u m f i r s t , and th e n s e l e c t t h e t e x t b o o k .
had

not

looked

textbook-test

system atically

link,

but

sometime in t h e f u t u r e .
as f a m i l i a r with t e s t

they

or

Koskitown pe rs onnel

carefully

were

aware

at

that

the
it

curriculum-

must

be

done

They a l s o r e a l i z e d t h a t t e a c h e r s were not
interpretation

as t h e y sho uld be.

Koskitown wanted t o do more with t e s t r e s u l t s .

Many in

The s u p e r i n t e n d e n t

wanted t e s t r e s u l t s t o have g r e a t e r consequences.
One would be remiss t o al low t h e r e a d e r t o

believe th a t

e d u c a t o r s in Koskitown were e n t h r a l l e d with t h e t e s t b a t t e r y .
members

"avoided them on p u r p o s e . "

Thi s

avo ida nc e

all
Some

tended t o

be

s e l e c t i v e t o p a r t i c u l a r t e s t s as t h i s same e d u c a t o r i n d i c a t e d t h a t
t h e "new r e a d in g t e s t i s j u s t g r e a t ! "
In

contrast

to

other

d istricts

in

this

survey,

Koskitown

re s p o n d e n ts b e l i e v e d t h a t MEAP in c r e a s e d t h e f r e q u e n c y o f c u r r i c u l a r
revisions.

Teachers were q u i t e f a m i l i a r w it h t e s t

questions,

and

s t u d e n t s were pla ced in remedial programs based on t h e i r MEAP t e s t
results.
The

interviews

conducted

in

this

district

clearly

indicated

t h a t a d m i n i s t r a t o r s were a c t i v e l y involved in t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and
in te rp re ta tio n

of

test

resu lts.

It

is

suspected

that

the

s u p e r i n t e n d e n t sought a d d i t i o n a l in f o r m a t io n on t e s t i n g and pro vid ed
the lead ersh ip fo r a d m in istrato rs
MEAP r e s u l t s were d i s c u s s e d

and o t h e r s t a f f members.

a t t e a c h e r s ’ m e e t in g s ,

Thus,

and i n d i v i d u a l

117
pla n n in g s e s s i o n s were conducted f o r t e a c h e r s in t h e t h i r d ,

sixth,

and n i n t h g ra d e s t o p r e p a r e s t u d e n t s f o r t h e t e s t .
A d m i n i s t r a t o r s in Koskitown have asked f o r a p r o c e s s t o a l i g n
the curriculum,

instruction,

and t h e t e s t .

a c c e s s t o answers t o t e c h n i c a l

questions,

Given t h e p r o c e s s and
th is researcher believes

t h a t t h e s e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s can l e a d t o a li g n m e n t.
This d i s t r i c t v a r i e s from o t h e r s
is

prized,

encouraged,

conferences,

inservices,

and

in t h a t a d d i t i o n a l

financed.

S taff

and g r a d u a t e c o u r s e s .

education

members

attend

S t a f f members are

required to discuss the contents of t h e i r educational

pursuits

at

variations

in

s t a f f m e e t in g s.
Finally,

school

te st results.

board members a r e s e n s i t i v e t o

They e x p e c t improvement and q u e s t i o n p r i n c i p a l s when

MEAP r e s u l t s do not r e f l e c t improvement.
Thus,

Koskitown

varies

from

other

interviewed

districts

in

human r e s o u r c e and p r o c e s s dimensions.
Rural e d u c a t o r s in Koskitown were s a t i s f i e d w it h t h e i n s e r v i c e
activities

provide d

by t h e i r

lo c a l

interm ediate

school

d istrict.

One member i n d i c a t e d t h a t "we don’ t need a m o t i v a t i o n a l s p e a k e r , we
need an o p p o r t u n i t y t o s h ar e id e a s wit h t e a c h e r s in s i m i l a r gra de s
or s i t u a t i o n s ."

The s u p e r i n t e n d e n t

c u r r i c u l a r i s s u e s would be h e l p f u l .

indicated

that

The p r i n c i p a l

assistance

indicated th at

having " e x p e r t s " v i s i t t h e d i s t r i c t would be b e n e f i c i a l
improvement.

in

in school

Thus, t h e focus o f e d u c a t o r s in Koskitown seemed t o be

t h e r e v i s i o n and r e f in e m e n t o f t h e i r c u r r i c u l a .

118
Makivil
A s t a t e highway was t r a v e l e d t o a r r i v e
to

a t M a k iv i l. The a s c e n t

t h e v i l l a g e was p i c t u r e s q u e , encompassing a l a r g e in l a n d l a k e and

s ur ro un di ng f o r e s t s .

This was a town w it h o u t a t r a f f i c

w ith

businesses

a

m ajority

of

p o p u l a t i o n was a ppro xim a te ly 300.

clustered

on

main

l i g h t but

street.

The

Neighboring v i l l a g e s were about

30 m ile s away.
The d i s t r i c t encompassed a pp ro x im a te ly

250 s q u a r e m i l e s .

The

s t u d e n t s r e s i d e d c l o s e t o t h e community so t h a t , a t t h e time o f t h e
s tu d y , th e y were t r a n s p o r t e d t o t h e school by p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n .
This

d istrict,

a v a i l a b l e t o buy.

much

like

Koskitown,

had

very

little

land

A m a j o r i t y o f i t s land was in commercial f o r e s t ,

f e d e r a l r e s e r v e , o r a sp orts m en ’ s c l u b .

Less th a n 15% o f M a k i v i l ’ s

land was on t h e t a x r o l l s .
Makivil was l o c a t e d in a county o f a pp ro x im a te ly 8,000 pe o p le .
The median age in t h i s county was 3 1 .7 ; t h e median age in t h e s t a t e
was 28 .8 .
65.

Approximately 19% o f t h i s c o u n t y ’ s populace was o ve r age

The s u p e r i n t e n d e n t d e s c r i b e d t h i s r e t i r e d p o p u l a t i o n as h ig h l y

ed uca te d.
The median

level

of

e d u c a ti o n

in

Makivil

was

12.3

years.

Approximately 10% o f t h e r e s i d e n t s were c o l l e g e g r a d u a t e s ; t h e s t a t e
average was 14.2%.
The
$21,168.

estimated

median

household

income

in

the

c o u n tr y

The s t a t e median household income was $28,956.

was th e l a r g e s t employer in t h e v i l l a g e .

was

Makivil

Tourism was on t h e r i s e

and was c u r r e n t l y l i m i t e d by t h e number o f "y ea r around" r e s t a u r a n t s

119

and h o t e l s a v a i l a b l e .
the v i l l a g e .

The lo ggin g i n d u s t r y a l s o pla ye d a r o l e

People worked "two o r t h r e e j o b s

in

he re because the y

want t o be h e r e , " s a i d t h e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t .
Makivil had one w e l l - k e p t ,
ten

teachers

delivered

two-story bu ild in g .

instru ctio n

to

100

Approximately

students.

The

s u p e r i n t e n d e n t tended t o be t h e a d m i n i s t r a t o r , a l t h o u g h one t e a c h e r
was r e c o g n iz e d as t h e p r i n c i p a l :

" [ I am] p r i n c i p a l by d e f a u l t , I do

i t because i t

needs t o be do ne. "

thus,

were t e a c h i n g o u t o f t h e i r

several

D e sp it e t h e ass ignm en t,
teachers.

Teachers had n in e p r e p a r a t i o n s ;
areas

of c e rtific a tio n .

i t was not d i f f i c u l t t o a t t r a c t o r r e t a i n

This was a f a c u l t y who worked well t o g e t h e r ; exchanging

o f f a v o r s was common but was s t i l l

"very much a p p r e c i a t e d . "

This d i s t r i c t had experimented with t h e e l e c t r o n i c b la ck b o a rd ,
linking

i t s e l f with a much l a r g e r d i s t r i c t .

common c a l e n d a r ,

c l a s s ho urs ,

program t o be dis ban de d.

and

teacher

D i f f i c u l t i e s wi th a
agreements caused t h i s

However, Makivil was once agai n lo ok in g a t

some l o n g - d i s t a n c e l e a r n i n g .
Makivil
number o f
e duc at ed

measured

students
its

its

s u cc e ss

going

to

students to

by t h e

college,

leave;

low dro po ut

and t e s t

students

scores.

usually

rate,

th e

Makivil

selected

the

service or college.
Makivil
inform ation

e d u c a t o r s tended t o
about

school

c o n j u n c t i o n with o t h e r t e s t s .
pro ce du re

to

review t h e

test

agr ee t h a t t e s t s

effectiveness;

they

pro vid ed us ef ul
used

MEAP

in

They d i d not r e p o r t any s y s t e m a t i c
results

o r develop

strategies.

In

120
f a c t , most i n d i c a t e d t h a t i n s t r u c t i o n was based on a combination of
te x tb o ok m a t e r i a l and pers onal e x p e r i e n c e .
Teachers in Makivil i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e c ur ri c u lu m was in p la c e
but "not o b j e c t i v e b a s e d ."
be ex plo re d

in Mak ivil.

The c u r r i c u l u m - t e x t - t e s t l i n k was y e t t o
The m a th -s c i e n c e t e a c h e r a d m i n i s t e r e d

b a t t e r y o f t e s t s t h a t he found u s e f u l ,
based on t h e t e s t r e s u l t s .
. . . the y te ac h

and he a l t e r e d

a

instruction

However, most "don’ t te a c h f o r t h e t e s t ;

f o r t h e whole c h i l d

to

get

him through

Observation and s t u d e n t feedback played a very

life."

im p o r ta n t

role

from t h o s e

in

in

Makivil as "I have them f o r t h r e e h o u rs ."
Teachers

in

Makivil

varied

significantly

o t h e r d i s t r i c t s by i n d i c a t i n g t h a t MEAP had l i t t l e

th e

i n f l u e n c e on th e

fo ll o w i n g items:
1.

Course c o n t e n t .

2.

Frequency o f c u rr ic u lu m r e v i s i o n .

3.

The number o f i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s provided t o i n c o r p o r a t e
MEAP o b j e c t i v e s i n t o t h e l o c a l c u rr ic u lu m .

4.

Use o f MEAP t o i d e n t i f y s t a f f - d e v e l o p m e n t needs.

5.

The s h a r in g o f s t r a t e g i e s t o i n c r e a s e s t u d e n t t e s t

6.

F a m i l i a r i t y with t e s t q u e s t i o n s .

7.

The p r i n c i p a l p ro v id i n g l e a d e r s h i p in t e s t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .

8.

Discu ssion o f MEAP a t t e a c h e r meet ing s.

Based on in t e r v i e w s

in M akiv il,

the researcher suspects th a t

l e a d e r s h i p i s l a c k i n g with r e s p e c t t o c u r r i c u l u m .
the

superintendent,

responsibility.

as

sole

scores.

adm inistrator,

In t h i s d i s t r i c t ,
must

assume

this

I t appears t h a t l i t t l e d i r e c t i o n i s pro v id e d , with

121

each

teacher

making

independent

decisions

and

not

communicating

these decisions to others.
This

d i s t r i c t ’s

However, i t ,

sm allness

should

enhance

communication.

along with Vilmi, communicated MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s l e a s t

a t meetings and with t e a c h e r s .
Makivil appears t o l a c k t h e l e a d e r s h i p and communication t h a t
a r e p r e s e n t in Koskitown.
Educators
school

in Makivil

district,

felt

alienated

not only by d i s t a n c e

from t h e i r

intermediate

but by i s s u e s

o f concern.

They had n e i t h e r t h e d e s i r e nor t h e i n t e r e s t t o a t t e n d workshops.
Mak'ivil

t e a c h e r s ’ energy was focused on a " f i g h t

prim arily survival.

However,

f o r our l i f e , "

s t u d e n t s tended no t t o

slip

through

th e c ra ck s w it h such i n t e n s e o b s e r v a t i o n as was found in M ak iv il .
Vilmi
Vilmi could be approached from t h e e a s t and west by a f e d e r a l
hig hw a y.

One o f

in tersection.

the

t o w n ’ s two t r a f f i c

Several

small

businesses

lig h ts

marked

clustered

th is

around t h i s

i n t e r s e c t i o n , and t h e remaining b u s i n e s s e s were s c a t t e r e d thr oug ho ut
th e town.
shorelines

The 1,000 r e s i d e n t s l i v e d along t h e highways, r i v e r s , and
of

one o f

the

Great

Lakes.

The

nearest

towns

were

ap proxim ately 30 long, d e s o l a t e m ile s away.
Vilmi was l o c a t e d
residents.

in a county t h a t

had a pp ro x im a te ly 20,000

The median age o f t h e s e r e s i d e n t s was 39.

30% o f th e r e s i d e n t s were 60 y e a r s o r o l d e r .
comprised 25% o f the populace.

Approximately

The school enrol l e e s

122

A m ajority
located

had

a

of

residents

high

school

in

the

diploma.

county

in

which

Approximately

Vilmi

was

10% o f

th e

r e s i d e n t s were c o l l e g e g r a d u a t e s .
Like o t h e r r u r a l d i s t r i c t s , Vilmi measured i t s su cc e ss by th e
number o f s t u d e n t s going

to

college.

d e fi n e d s u cc e ss as "being s u c c e s s f u l

However,

teachers

further

in t h e f i e l d t h e y want t o ,

i t t h e j o b market, be i t v o c a ti o n a l sc h o o l; being a b l e t o ,

be

in some

meaningful way t o them, f i t i n t o t h e world in which t h e y want t o .
In

other

words,

indicated t h a t
college

the

being

successful

in

100% o f t h e g r a d u a t i n g

fo ll ow in g

fall;

the

th e m s e l v e s . "
seniors

p e rc en ta g e

In te rv ie w e es

would be a t t e n d i n g

attending

college

was

u s u a l l y about 80%.
The median household income was $10,972.
income f o r t h e s t a t e was $28,956.
g e n er at e d

from governmental

The median household

Household incomes in Vilmi were

work,

log gin g,

to u r i s m ,

and

service

industries.
V ilm i’ s school complex c o n s i s t e d o f one b u i l d i n g .

The c e n t e r

of th e s t r u c t u r e was t h e old t w o - s t o r y s c h o o l; a d d i t i o n s had been
made t o t h e west and e a s t s i d e s .

In t h i s f a c i l i t y , a pprox im at el y 15

t e a c h e r s provided i n s t r u c t i o n t o 125 s t u d e n t s .
the

inhabitants

of t h i s

Educators d e s c r i b e d

b u i l d i n g as one big f a m i l y ,

t o g e t h e r and c a r i n g f o r each o t h e r .

working well

Said one s t a f f member, " I t i s a

c lo s e n e s s t h a t i s hard t o fi nd in t h e schools o f t o d a y . "
H istorically,

t h i s school d i s t r i c t was known f o r i t s

academic

success s t o r y , being inc lud ed in t h e e f f e c t i v e scho ols r e s e a r c h .

It

123
had been a b l e t o r i s e above a low socioeconomic s t a t u s t o produce
high t e s t r e s u l t s .
SRA t e s t t o a l l

At t h e time o f t h e s t u d y , Vilmi a d m i n i s t e r e d th e

i t s students.

Other t e s t s i n c lu d e d in i t s b a t t e r y

were t h e MEAP, ACT, SAT, and ASVAB.
As t h e

superintendent indicated,

" t e s t s do n o t

p a r t " in t h e asse ssm en t o f t h e d i s t r i c t .

play

a major

Tea chers te nded t o b e l i e v e

t h a t t e s t s were n o t ta ke n s e r i o u s l y by t h e s t u d e n t s .

Teach er s had

reviewed t h e MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s , a l t e r i n g t h e E ngl ish c o u r s e c o n t e n t
to

in c l u d e

instruction

onp r e f i x e s .

However,

d i s t r i c t tended t o a gr e e t h a t "I don’t

I d on’ t t h i n k t h a t i s v a l i d . "

that

is

classes.
are

covered

in

in

this

b e l i e v e in t e a c h i n g toward

any t e s t .
"what

teachers

They te nded t o b e l i e v e

t h e MEAP t e s t . . .

is

covered

in

my

The c u r r ic u lu m does meet t h e t e s t a lt ho ugh t h e m a t e r i a l s

not

there

prior

to

the

MEAP t e s t . "

Some

instruction

was

p r e s e n t e d on t e s t - t a k i n g s k i l l s in Vilmi.
Overall,

t e a c h e r s in Vilmi b e l i e v e d t e s t s were u s ef u l

in t h a t

s t u d e n t s could be compared t o a s t a t e w i d e o r n a t i o n a l a v e r a g e .
curriculum -text-test
effort

had

link

had

been made t o

re a d in g t e x t b o o k .

no t

align

been

the

discovered,

newr e a d in g

The

a lt ho ug h

definition

to

an
a

The s u p e r i n t e n d e n t had r a i s e d t h e concern as to

how Vilmi would c o n t i n u e to show improvement when i t s s t u d e n t s were
a l r e a d y s c o r i n g ve ry hi g h .
that

this

Vilmi
issues

school

wanted to

I t was obviou s,
be c o n s id e r e d

e d u c a t o r s ’ time and energy could
because

the

district

was

not

an

from t h e

"improving"

be d i r e c t e d
plagued

w o rr i e s o f most s m a l l, r u r a l school d i s t r i c t s .

interview s,

w it h

s c h o o l.

to

curriculum

the

financial

124

Vilmi, along with M ak iv i l, v a r i e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y from t h e o t h e r
small,

rural

districts

s t u d i e d in t h e use o f MEAP r e s u l t s

in th e

f o ll o w i n g ways:
1.

Inservice

activ ities

provided

to

incorporate

MEAP

o b j e c t i v e s i n t o t h e l o c a l c u rr ic u lu m .
2.

I d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f s t a f f - d e v e l o p m e n t needs.

3.

The s h a r in g o f t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g i e s t o i n c r e a s e s t u d e n t MEAP
scores.

4.

F a m i l i a r i t y with t e s t q u e s t i o n s .

5.

The p r i n c i p a l p r o v id i n g l e a d e r s h i p in t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of
te st results.

6.

The communication o f t e s t r e s u l t s a t t e a c h e r m e et in gs .

These
little,"

two d i s t r i c t s

whereas

other

indicated
d istricts

t h a t th e y
indicated

used r e s u l t s
that

results

"very
on

th e

aforementioned items were used "somewhat."
The r e s e a r c h e r s u s p e c t s t h a t t h e emergent p a t t e r n f o r Vilmi and
Makivil stems from t h e pe rson al a f f i l i a t i o n s o f s t a f f members.
big

family" may communicate i t

best,

but t h e

pro ba bly i s not viewed as a h i g h - p r i o r i t y

item.

issue of t e s t

"One
usage

A dditionally,

if

d i s c u s s e d , t h e s e exchanges a re not fo r m al i ze d so as t o be c o n s id e r e d
a t t e a c h e r s ’ m eet in gs.
Second, t h e r e s e a r c h e r s u s p e c t s t h a t n e i t h e r a d m i n i s t r a t o r in
Vilmi or Makivil

f e e l s c o m fo rt a b le in le a d i n g t h e i r s t a f f s

development or r e v i s i o n o f c u rr ic u lu m .

in th e

125
Summary
Four v i g n e t t e s were p r e s e n t e d t o a c q u a i n t t h e r e a d e r w it h t h e s e
small,

rural

districts

in

t h e Upper P e n i n s u l a o f Michigan.

d i s t r i c t s were s i m i l a r in t h a t th e y a l l

s co r ed high on t h e s t a t e -

mandated MEAP t e s t , as well as on o t h e r t e s t s .
as d e c l i n i n g ,

rural

d istricts.

The

All were d e s c r i b e d

In t h e s e d i s t r i c t s ,

s t u d e n t s were

e ducat ed t o l e a v e .
D e sp it e t h e s i m i l a r i t i e s among d i s t r i c t s , d i f f e r e n c e s were a l s o
present.

Educators

in Koskitown ten ded

s tra te g ie s to ra ise t e s t
A holahti

had

engineers,
s c h o o l.

an

scores.

inordinately

attorneys,

to

Makivil
high

review

and

implement

had c u r r i c u l a

in p l a c e .

percentage

of

physicians,

and e d u c a t o r s who were g r a d u a t e s o f i t s

high

H i s t o r i c a l l y , Vilmi s t u d e n t s had s co re d high on t e s t s and

c o nt in ue d

to

do

so.

A review

of

the

su rveys

and

interviews

i n d i c a t e d t h a t s i m i l a r i t i e s as well as d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t e d in s m a l l,
r u r a l d i s t r i c t s o f Michigan’ s Upper P e n i n s u l a .
Chapter Summary
P e rc e n ta g e s were p r e s e n t e d in t h e f i r s t s e c t i o n t o i n d i c a t e t h e
educators’ b eliefs

about

measure e f f e c t i v e n e s s ,
tests,

the

usefulness

of

t h e use o f MEAP in

standardized

tests

c o n j u n c t i o n w it h

and t h e pr e s en c e o f c u r r ic u lu m g u i d e s .

to

other

These p e r c e n t a g e s

were p r e s e n t e d as a d i s t r i c t mean, as well as a c o l l e c t i v e mean of
t h e d i s t r i c t s sampled.
In th e second s e c t i o n o f t h i s c h a p t e r , means were p r e s e n t e d f o r
t h e sampled p o p u l a t i o n .

Significant differences

in d i s t r i c t means

126
were found r e g a r d i n g t h e use o f MEAP t e s t s t o de ter mi ne placement o f
students
needs.

in "remedial"

programs and t o

identify

staff-development

D i s t r i c t s a l s o v a r i e d on t h e dimensions o f p r i n c i p a l as t h e

in terp reter
school

o f MEAP r e s u l t s ,

board

m eetings,

discussion

inservice

o f MEAP a t

programs

teacher

targeted

at

and
the

i n c o r p o r a t i o n o f MEAP o b j e c t i v e s i n t o t h e l o c a l program, t h e s h a r i n g
o f s t r a t e g i e s t o r a i s e MEAP s c o r e s , t h e a l t e r i n g o f cou rs e c o n t e n t
based on MEAP s c o r e s ,

the

frequency

o f c u rr ic u lu m

revision,

and

t e a c h e r s ’ f a m i l i a r i t y with MEAP q u e s t i o n s .
In t h e l a s t

section,

the four d i s t r i c t s

were conducted were p r e s e n t e d

as

in which

vignettes.

interviews

The d i s t r i c t s

were

s i m i l a r , y e t in some ways they were q u i t e d i f f e r e n t .
These d i s t r i c t s v a r i e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y on 11 items in t h e survey
in s tr u m e n t.

V ariability

was

duri ng the i n t e r v i e w p r o c e s s .

found

between

and

within

d istricts

In t h e domains o f MEAP as a p a r t o f

th e t e s t i n g program, c u r r i c u l a r d e c i s i o n s , c ou rs e c o n t e n t d e c i s i o n s ,
and communication, v a r i a b i l i t y was p r e s e n t .
when r e s p o n s e s

indicated

"somewhat"

r e s u l t e d from MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s .

V a r i a b i l i t y was found

as w e l l

as

"very

little"

Also, s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b i l i t y was

found in "low" e f f o r t v a r i a b l e s , as in t e a c h e r f a m i l i a r i t y with t e s t
questions,

as well as in "high" e f f o r t v a r i a b l e s , as in c u rr ic u lu m

revision.
A pattern
districts

that

seems

to

emerge

is

that

the

two

smallest

te nd t o vary s i g n i f i c a n t l y from l a r g e r d i s t r i c t s .

The

r e s e a r c h e r s u s p e c t s t h a t t h e s e d i f f e r e n c e s a r e due t o human r e s o u r c e

127
and pro c e ss d e f i c i t s .

S p e c i f i c a l l y , l e a d e r s h i p in c u r r i c u l a r i s s u e s

and communication o f t e s t r e s u l t s seem t o be l a c k i n g .
In Chapter V,

a summary o f t h e

major

findings,

conclusions

based on th o s e f i n d i n g s , and recommendations f o r f u r t h e r s tu d y a re
presented.

CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
The f e d e r a l - and s t a t e - l e v e l

i n i t i a t i v e s o f t h e 1960s and th e

1970s a f f e c t e d l o c a l e d u c a t i o n a l programs.

The pri m ary concern of

t h e s e i n i t i a t i v e s was t o pr o v id e equal e d u c a t i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s to
all

children.

In t h e

late

1970s and e a r l y

1980s,

the

fo c us

of

e d u c a t i o n began t o s h i f t t o a c c o u n t a b i l i t y , but e q u i t y remained in
the

fo r eg r o u n d .

States

assumed

greater

responsibility

e d u c a t i o n o f c h i l d r e n ; t e s t i n g was s e l e c t e d as t h e l e a s t
means o f m on it or in g and c o n t r o l l i n g .

in

th e

intrusive

As a r e s u l t , mandatory s t a t e

ass e ss m e nt programs appea red.

These programs became p r e v a l e n t , with

all

assessment

states

considering

C onsequently,

a m ajority

an
of

states

program

ha ve

of

some

mandated

type.

assessment

programs, which s t r i v e t o deal w it h t h e a c c o u n t a b i l i t y and e q u i t y
issues.
The

Michigan

Educational

Assessment

Pr o g ra m

Michi gan ’ s means o f a s s e s s i n g and a d d r e s s i n g t h e
and a c c o u n t a b i l i t y .

issues

was

of equity

MEAP l e g i s l a t i o n was e na c te d in 1969 amid and

fo ll owed by c o n s i d e r a b l e c o n t r o v e r s y .
assess educational

(MEAP)

needs:

The MEAP t e s t was d e si gn e d to

" t o he lp c h i l d r e n l e a r n " and " to inform

t h e p u b l i c about i t s s c h o o l s , " as t h e MEAP handbook (1985) s t a t e s .

128

129
In he lp in g c h i l d r e n l e a r n , MEAP r e s u l t s were t o be used in a n a ly z in g
t h e s t r e n g t h s and weaknesses o f l o c a l

curricula.

were t o c o n t a i n t h e " e s s e n t i a l o b j e c t i v e s . "

Local

curricula

The a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of

t h e MEAP t e s t i s mandated; t h e communication o r use o f t e s t r e s u l t s
is not.
P u b l i c a t i o n s by t h e Michigan Department o f E d uc a tio n, t h e MEAP
handbook in p a r t i c u l a r ,

pr ov ide d d e t a i l e d i n s t r u c t i o n s f o r t h e use

o f MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s in c u r r i c u l a r asse ssm en t and t h e communication
o f MEAP t e s t

scores.

The Department

of

Education

pro vid ed

th e

s t r u c t u r e and encouragement; t h e a c t u a l asse ssm en t and communication
were l e f t t o lo c a l school d i s t r i c t s .
The

communication

of

MEAP t e s t

resu lts,

especially

the

p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e r e s u l t s in t h e newspaper, i s one o f t h e s t r o n g e s t
forces

to

cause

Educa tion,
strongest

teachers

to

in making p u b l i c
forces

available

alter
these

to

to publication of t e s t r e s u l t s ;

such c u r r i c u l a .

results,

c au se l o c a l

t e a c h e r s , t o a l i g n with th e t e s t .

p ro v id i n g d i s t r i c t s with

behavior.

The Department
is

us in g

districts,

of

one o f

th e

thro ugh

the

But t h e Department i s n o t l i m i t e d
it

"essential

recommends c u r r i c u l a r r e v i s i o n ,
objectives"

to

be i n c lu d e d

in

Thus, th e Department o f Education c o u p le s t h e two

s t r o n g e s t f o r c e s t o g e t h e r t o cause t e a c h e r s t o change.

What remains

i s t h e re s p o n se o f d i s t r i c t s t o t h e s e f o r c e s .
S t u d i e s have been conducted t o a s s e s s t h e communication and use
of te s t re s u lts .
in fo r m a t io n

In g e n e r a l ,

altered

t e a c h e r s did not p e r c e i v e t h a t t e s t

instruction

or

curricular

content,

t e s t s ten ded t o confirm t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n s o f i n d i v i d u a l

but

that

students’

130

achievement.

However,

as t e s t s

started

to

match

the

c o n t e n t more c l o s e l y , as in c r i t e r i o n - r e f e r e n c e d t e s t s ,
o f such t e s t s

became more m e ani ngf ul.

Teach er s

curriculum
the r e s u lts

acknowledged t h e

u s e f u l n e s s o f t e s t s f o r a common focus bu t r e s e n t e d t h e "g ra d in g " o f
s c h o o ls on t h e b a s i s o f t e s t s a l o n e .
Of p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t t o t h e r e s e a r c h e r were s t u d i e s o f th e
MEAP.

MEAP was a cc e p te d and used, as i n d i c a t e d in t h e s t u d i e s

Aquino (1975), S t e e l e (1976), Jencka (1990), Th e la n d e r (197 9) ,
Bushaw

(1988).

p rincipals,

Their

research

superintendents,

populations

sampled tended

Thelander’s

study

the

to

samples

and

school

be t h e

population

was

included
board

state

of

lim ited

Michigan,
a

and

teachers,

members.

to

by

The
but

c ounty .

in
To

summarize t h e s e s t u d i e s , MEAP was used in de ve lo pi ng t h e d i s t r i c t s ’
g o a l s and c u rr ic u lu m ,

d e te r m in in g t h e s t r e n g t h s

and weaknesses of

t h e p r e s e n t c u r r ic u lu m , di a g n o si n g s t u d e n t need s,
the

public.

Teachers

instructional

me tho ds

reported
to

im pr ove

th at

they

the

and r e p o r t i n g to

had

altered

students’

test

th eir
scores.

However, t h e f o r m a l i z a t i o n o f p o l i c y s t a t e m e n t s and p o l i c y a c t i o n s
r e l a t e d t o MEAP d id n o t ,
Teachers

remained

in i t s e l f ,

opposed

to

the

l e a d t o improved MEAP s c o r e s .
use

of

MEAP t e s t

results

for

comparisons and f o r d i s t r i c t e v a l u a t i o n s .
Of t h e
rural
other.

studies

schools.

previously

conducted,

none focused on s m a l l,

Rural communities are complex and d i f f e r from each

They are d e f i n e d

d i s t a n c e from u r b a n i z a t i o n .

in terms o f s p a r s i t y

of population

and

Small, r u r a l school d i s t r i c t s a re th u s

131
d e f i n e d in t h e same manner:
isolation.

Gjelten

small s t u d e n t e n r o l l m e n t and d e g re e o f

(1982)

s ug ge s te d

an

additional

factor--the

community in which t h e y a r e l o c a t e d .
Although

d ifficult

to

define,

small,

rural

s c h o o ls

remain

s u b j e c t t o t h e mandates o f t h e s t a t e and t h e p r e s s u r e s a s s o c i a t e d
with such mandates.
and

ru ral--fo r

They have problems a s s o c i a t e d with be in g small

example,

attractin g

and

retain in g

especially

knowledgeable a d m i n i s t r a t o r s - - w h i c h must be surmounted in o r d e r to
compete with

their

urban and

suburban

counterparts.

To compete

e f f e c t iv e ly is to survive.
Of i n t e r e s t in t h i s

study was t h e d e gre e t o which t h e s t a t e -

mandated ass essment t e s t had been a s s i m i l a t e d i n t o t h e c u r r i c u l u m o f
s m a l l, r u r a l school d i s t r i c t s .
which s m a l l,

rural

school

Second, o f i n t e r e s t were t h e ways in

districts

were

r a i s e s t u d e n t s ’ s c o r e s on t h e MEAP in

intentionally

an e f f o r t

to

trying

to

compete more

e ffe c tiv e ly - -th u s , to survive.
Pur p ose of t h e Research
The r e s e a r c h e r ’ s purpose in t h i s s tu dy was t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e
e f f e c t o f MEAP on t h e c u r r ic u lu m in s m a l l , r u r a l

school d i s t r i c t s .

MEAP was examined in c o n j u n c t i o n with t h e c u r r i c u l u m components of
guides,

instructional

content,

instructional

b a t t e r y , and communication o f t e s t r e s u l t s .

strategies,

the

test

The r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s

i n v e s t i g a t e d were:
1.

Are

there

significant

r e s p e c t t o t h e use o f MEAP r e s u l t s ?

differences

among

d istricts

with

132
2.

What p r a c t i c e s ,

if

any,

a re

i n t e n t i o n a l l y used by s m a l l,

r u r a l sc h o o ls in re s p o n se t o t h e MEAP?
Methodology
To d e t e r m i n e

the

effect

o f MEAP on

sm all,

rural

school

d i s t r i c t s , t h e r e s e a r c h e r surveyed and i n t e r v i e w e d e d u c a t o r s from a
sample o f s m a l l , r u r a l
students.
seventh-,
school

S u p e r i n t e n d e n t s , p r i n c i p a l s , and t h i r d - , f o u r t h - , s i x t h - ,
ninth-,

districts

choice

item s.

and t e n t h - g r a d e t e a c h e r s
received the
Interview s

d i s t r i c t s surv ey ed.
of isolation,
history.

d i s t r i c t s with e n r o l l m e n t s o f 500 o r fewer

su rv e y,

which c o n t a i n e d 33 f o r c e d -

w er e c o n d u c t e d

in

four

of

the

ten

These f o u r d i s t r i c t s were s e l e c t e d on t h e b a s i s

student enrollment,

ty pe o f community,

A n a ly si s o f d a t a was used t o

research

in t e n Upper P e n i n s u l a

questions,

(b)

indicate

and academic

(a) p r o v id e answers t o t h e

levels

of

MEAP usage,

and

(c)

pro vid e a d e s c r i p t i o n o f s m a l l, r u r a l s c h o o l s .
Findings
The f o ll o w i n g i s a summary o f t h e g e n e r a l l e v e l s o f MEAP usage,
s i g n i f i c a n t f i n d i n g s c on cer nin g t h e two r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s ,
profile

o f f o u r s m a l l,

rural

districts

and a

in t h e Upper P e n i n s u l a of

Michigan.
General
d istricts

lev els.

Educators

believed th a t

stan d ard ized

i n f o r m a t i o n when a s s e s s i n g
majority of d i s t r i c t s

from t h e
tests

sm all,

rural

provided

school

im portant

th e ir d i s t r i c t s ’ effectiveness.

used MEAP r e s u l t s

A

in c o n j u n c t i o n w ith o t h e r

s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s to a i d in d e c i s i o n making.

The s e l e c t i o n o f a

133

t e s t t o measure items o f t h e lo c a l c u rr ic ulu m not found on t h e MEAP
brought f o r t h mixed r e s u l t s ; about h a l f o f t h e d i s t r i c t s d i d so, and
h a l f did n o t .
The pr e s en c e o f c u r r i c u l a
about h a l f o f t h e d i s t r i c t s .
"essential"

objectives

in re a d in g

and math was found

in

Of th o s e having c u r r i c u l a , some o f t h e

w ere

included

i n th e m ,

textbooks

"somewhat" s e l e c t e d on t h e b a s i s o f t h e s e g u i d e s ,

were

and t h e gui de s

"somewhat" i n f l u e n c e d classroom i n s t r u c t i o n .
MEAP t e s t
gen er al

results

were

achievement l e v e l ,

strengths

and weaknesses

remedial
These

programs,

test

performance,

to

"some"

were

the

math

determine
used

identify

to

inform t h e

p rio rities,

and t o

results

to
of

determ ine i n s t r u c tio n a l

used

"very

de ter mi ne

community,

and

to

det ermi ne

curricula,

to

to determ ine placem ent

in

th e

re a d in g

students’

need

little"

staff-development

for
to

new programs.

a naly ze

needs,

or

teacher

to

predict

s t u d e n t s ’ f u t u r e academic s u c c e s s .
P r i n c i p a l s provided "some" l e a d e r s h i p in t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f
MEAP r e s u l t s ;

the

results

were d i s c u s s e d

meetings and t e a c h e r s ’ m eet in gs .

"some"

at

school

S t a f f s s har ed "some" in fo r m a t io n

about t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g i e s used t o i n c r e a s e MEAP s c o r e s .
"very l i t t l e "

had been done t o

board

incorporate

However,

MEAP o b j e c t i v e s

into

i n s t r u c t i o n a l programs.
The
course

fo ll ow in g
content,

preparation

for

had

changed

teaching
tests.

"some,"

methods,
"Very

based

on

instructional

little"

had

test

results:

methods,

c ha ng e d

in

and

course

134
offerings,

the

battery of te s ts ,

or

the

frequ en cy

of

c u rr ic u lu m

r e v i s i o n , based on t h e MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s .
T e a c h e r s were somewhat f a m i l i a r w i t h t h e

test

questions.

However, q u i t e a few p a r e n t s and s t u d e n t s knew t h e i r s c o r e s .
little"

"Very

had been done in reg ard t o re m e d ia t io n f o r t h o s e s t u d e n t s

who had not mastered t h e MEAP " e s s e n t i a l " o b j e c t i v e s .
P a r e n t s and s t u d e n t s were aware o f MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s .

Thus,

s m al l, r u r a l school d i s t r i c t s were doing " q u i t e a b i t " o f p u b l i c i t y
r e g a r d i n g MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s while using t h e s e r e s u l t s "some" in t h e
assessment o f c u r r i c u l a .
Research Question 1 .

Are t h e r e s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s among

d i s t r i c t s w it h r e s p e c t t o t h e use o f MEAP t e s t
items

were

found

to

vary

significantly

d i s t r i c t s in t h e Upper P e n in s u la .

in

results?

small,

Eleven

rural

school

D i s t r i c t s v a r i e d in t h e e x t e n t t o

which th e 1989 MEAP r e s u l t s were used t o

"determine i n s t r u c t i o n a l

p r i o r i t i e s , " t o change "course c o n t e n t , " t o a l t e r t h e " fre quen cy o f
c u rr ic ulu m
D istricts
provided

revision,"
varied

to

and t o

"identify

in t h e number o f

incorporate

staff-development

inservice

MEAP o b j e c t i v e s

activities

and

in

the

ne ed s. "

that

were

s h a r in g

of

scores

to

t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g i e s used t o i n c r e a s e t e s t s c o r e s .
Some d i s t r i c t s

made g r e a t e r

use

"determ ine the placem ent of s tu d e n ts
Schools d i f f e r e d

o f MEAP t e s t
in

’ r e m e d ia l’ program s."

in terms o f t e a c h e r s ’ f a m i l i a r i t y with MEAP t e s t

questions.
The person or p ers ons who i n t e r p r e t e d MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s and t o
whom they were i n t e r p r e t e d v a r i e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y in t h i s s tu d y .

Some

135

p r i n c i p a l s d i d more i n t e r p r e t i n g
members

and t e a c h e r s

received

th a n o t h e r s .

these

reports

Some school
at

their

board

respective

m e e t in g s ; o t h e r s d i d n o t .
Research Question 2 .
used by s m a l l ,
interview s,
MEAP t e s t

rural

several

What p r a c t i c e s , i f any, a r e i n t e n t i o n a l l y

schools

in

response

p ra c tic e s surfaced:

by t h e p r i n c i p a l ,

matching o f i n s t r u c t i o n

test

to the

HEAP?

In

the

the adm inistration o f the

p r e p a r a t i o n , a "pre-MEAP"

test,

and q u e s t i o n f o r m a t, p r o v i d i n g i n s t r u c t i o n

in t h e weakest a r e a s , a remedial c l a s s , and emphasizing t o t e a c h e r s
t h e importance o f t h e MEAP t e s t .
In one d i s t r i c t t h e MEAP was a d m i n i s t e r e d by t h e high school
p r i n c i p a l in an e f f o r t t o a l e r t s t u d e n t s t o t h e s e r i o u s n e s s o f th e
t e s t , t h u s m o t i v a t i n g s t u d e n t s t o do w e l l .
tests

as a c r i t e r i o n

This same d i s t r i c t used

f o r s t u d e n t placement in hi g h - and moderate-

a b i l i t y gr o u p s .
Another d i s t r i c t
high school l e v e l .

pro vided

instruction

At t h e e le m en ta ry l e v e l ,

on t e s t

taking

at

the

an e x e r c i s e was done t o

show s t u d e n t s what g u e ss in g d id t o t e s t r e s u l t s .
In Koskitown, a t e s t was a d m i n i s t e r e d in t h e f o u r t h , f i f t h , and
s ix th grades.

This t e s t

c o n t a i n e d t h r e e q u e s t i o n s f o r each MEAP

math o b j e c t i v e and a few o t h e r it e m s .

S t u d e n t s had t o

pa ss t h i s

t e s t b e f o r e l e a v i n g s i x t h gr a d e ; t h u s , r e m e d ia t io n d id t a k e p l a c e in
t h e el em en ta ry g r a d e s .
In a t l e a s t one d i s t r i c t , t e a c h e r s s t u d i e d t h e q u e s t i o n format
and i n t e n t i o n a l l y p r e s e n t m a t e r i a l usi ng t h i s f o r m a t.

A matching of

136
test

vocabulary

to

instructional

vocabulary occurred

in

th is

d i s t r i c t also.
In most o f t h e d i s t r i c t s
MEAP t e s t

results

curriculum.

If

were

in which i n t e r v i e w s were co nducted,

review ed,

lo oki ng

such weaknessed were

for

found,

weaknesses

in

instruction

in

the
that

s u b j e c t a r e a was p r o v id e d .
Several
th o s e

high

years
school

ago,

Koskitown

students

o b j e c t i v e s in math.

prov ide d

who had n o t

a re medial

mastered

the

class

for

"essential"

S t u d e n t s were a b l e t o drop t h i s c l a s s when th e y

passe d t h e MEAP t e s t in math.
Teachers
Some th ou gh t

in Koskitown

believed

th e y were e v a l u a t e d

test

results

were

important.

on t h e

results

of these

tests.

S t a f f members in t h i s school d i s t r i c t were aware o f t h e t e s t c o n t e n t
and form at;

th e y sh ared s t r a t e g i e s a t t e a c h e r m e e t in g s.

Teachers

did no t want t o be " s c o r i n g low."
Summary o f f o u r s m a l l,
sc h o o ls

in which

respects

interviews

and d i f f e r e n t

rural

schools.

The f o u r s m a l l,

were

conducted

were

in o t h e r s .

All

sim ilar

were c o n s i d e r e d

in

rural
some

isolated;

some were f a r t h e r from ne ig h b o ri n g d i s t r i c t s o r l a r g e r towns than
others.
small

All were d e s c r i b e d as d e p r e s s e d ; some communities had more
industries

described
better

as

on t h e

or

tourist

a c h ie v in g
MEAP.

development

schools;
All

the

all

than

s co re d

sc h o o ls

in

an

others.
av er age

which

All
of

interviews

were
75 or
were

conducted had concerned and d e d i c a t e d s t a f f members; e d u c a t o r s went
about i n s t r u c t i n g neighborhood c h i l d r e n as i f th e y were t h e i r own.
All

educators

e xpre ss ed

a

desire

to

improve,

thr oug h

inservice

137

programs,

conferences,

or

courses;

however,

accessibility

was

a

problem.
These d i s t r i c t s v a r i e d in s i z e , o r g a n i z a t i o n ,
te st results.
500.

The

and re s pon se t o

D i s t r i c t s v a r i e d in s t u d e n t e n ro ll m e n t from 100 to

facilities

adm inistrative

varied

structure

from

could

one

to

in c lu d e

two

buildings.

The

a superintendent,

a

high

school p r i n c i p a l , and an elem ent ary p r i n c i p a l ; o r i t might be s o l e l y
the superintendent.
might not be h e ld .
as

fami ly ,

T e a c h e r s ’ meetings could be r e g u l a r ,

o r th e y

Teachers in t h e d i s t r i c t might view the mselves

or th e y might

be

fragmented.

S tu d e n ts

might

be

in

c l a s s e s o f s i x o r in groups o f 30.
D istrict

effectiveness

tended to

succ ess o f t h e i r g r a d u a t e s .
test

scores

be viewed

in

in c o n ju n c t io n with s tu d e n t p o s t - h i g h - s c h o o l
e d u c a to rs d i s c u s s e d t e s t

questions,

shared

strategies,

districts,

personnel tended t o look a t t h e r e s u l t s ,

scored

revision

was

high,
done

and
in

file
all

of

the

At l e a s t one o f t h e d i s t r i c t s included

In t h i s d i s t r i c t ,

they

terms

scores,

and re me di at ed .

the

test

districts,

results.
but

success.

looked a t t e s t

However,

in

other

r e c o g n iz e t h a t
Some c u rr ic u lu m

some were

involved

in

r e v i s i o n more than o t h e r s .
What i s c l e a r i s t h a t MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s were communicated t o
p a r e n t s and s t u d e n t s in a l l d i s t r i c t s .

All had been s u c c e s s f u l

s c o r in g above t h e s t a t e a ver age ,

and t h i s

a s p e c t was s h a r e d .

q u e s ti o n of how t h e s e d i s t r i c t s

would improve beyond t h e

in
The

current

l e v e l was a q u e st io n t h a t i n te rv ie w e e s in some d i s t r i c t s r a i s e d .

An

138
answer t o t h i s q u e s t i o n was a c t i v e l y being sought in a t l e a s t one
s m a l l , r u r a l school d i s t r i c t in t h e Upper P e n i n s u l a o f Michigan.
Conclusions
A m a j o r i t y o f t h e s m a l l,

rural

school d i s t r i c t s

in t h e Upper

P e n in s u la o f Michigan were going about t h e b u s i n e s s o f e d u c a t i o n as
th e y had done in t h e p a s t - - n a m e l y ,
tinkering

with

m odifications,
sc h oo ls

were

the

curriculum

however

slight,

p r o v id i n g

at

by a ve ry l o o s e l y c o o r d i n a t e d

by c l a s s r o o m
reinforced

least

an

the

equal,

if

teachers.

These

notion

rural

that

n ot

a

superior,

e d u c a ti o n t o t h e i r s t u d e n t s .
C l e a r l y , t h e d a t a i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e r e was a l a c k o f agreement
w ithin

and

be tw e e n

d istricts.

t y p i c a l l y d id not a gre e
w ith

regard

to

the

in t h e i r

follow ing:

Respondents
reporting

w ithin

of d i s t r i c t

stan d ard ized

tests

d istricts
practices
providing

in f o r m a t io n in a s s e s s i n g e f f e c t i v e n e s s , t h e use o f MEAP r e s u l t s with
other t e s t s ,

and t h e use of t e s t s f o r items no t measured by MEAP.

A d d i t i o n a l l y , re s p o n d e n ts w i t h i n d i s t r i c t s d id no t uni for ml y agree
on

the

use

or

impact

of

MEAP t e s t

results.

B etween-district

v a r i a b i l i t y was p r e s e n t with r e g a r d t o t h e fo l l o w i n g :

t h e pr e s en c e

o f c u r r ic u lu m g u i d e s , t h e use o f MEAP t o a l t e r i n s t r u c t i o n a l c o n t e n t
and s t r a t e g i e s , t h e t e s t b a t t e r y , and t h e communication o f MEAP t e s t
results.
What a m a j o r i t y o f s m a l l,
systematic,

technically

valid

rural

school d i s t r i c t s la cke d was a

method o f

de ve lo pi ng

c u r r i c u l u m - - i n t h i s c a s e , th e c u r r i c u l u m - t e s t match.

and

reviewing

At l e a s t h a l f

139
o f t h e re s p o n d e n ts i n d i c a t e d t h a t c u r r i c u l a were n o t p r e s e n t .
the

remaining

curriculum

half,

few had examined

objectives

to

test

the

matching

o bjectives.

of the

The

In
local

selection

of

t e x t b o o k s and clas sr oom m a t e r i a l s based on t h e c u r r i c u l u m was t h e
exception r a th e r than the r u le .
and then use i t
ap pea r

that

as t h e c u r r i c u l u m was predomi na nt.

the

researcher,

it

The te nden cy t o s e l e c t t h e t e x t b o o k

curriculum -test

match

model

was

While i t
fa v o re d

should be acknowledged t h a t t h e e m p i r i c a l

reviewed d id not s u p p o rt any one " b e s t" model.

by

may
the

research

An u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f

t h e use o f c r i t e r i o n - r e f e r e n c e d t e s t s was g e n e r a l l y l a c k i n g .
Within

the

realm

standardized t e s t
about s t u d e n t s .
objectives.

of

testing,

most

teachers

di d

in f o r m a t io n e xce pt t o c onf irm t h e i r

no t

use

perceptions

They tended t o be opposed t o t e a c h i n g t o t h e t e s t

Most wanted t o know t h e " t r u e " s c o r e .

The d i s t i n c t i o n

b e tw e e n c r i t e r i o n - r e f e r e n c e d and n o r m - r e f e r e n c e d t e s t s was n o t
f r e q u e n t l y made by t h e s e r u r a l e d u c a t o r s .

There was a te nd enc y to

d e f e r t e s t i n g q u e s t i o n s t o t h e c o u n s e l o r , who was d e s i g n a t e d as th e
t e s t i n t e r p r e t e r and t r a n s l a t o r o f t e s t i n f o r m a t i o n .

In some c a s e s ,

t h e c o u n s e l o r met wit h t e a c h e r s and s ugges te d changes t h a t shou ld be
made; however, t h e c o u n s e l o r d i d not have t h e a u t h o r i t y t o e n f o r c e
such changes.
In summary, t e s t s were g i v e n ; when t h e r e s u l t s were r e c e i v e d ,
the y were reviewed and then f i l e d .

S tu d e n t s in t h e s e r u r a l

sc h o o ls

s cor ed w e l l , so l i t t l e was done t o a l t e r s t r a t e g i e s o r c o n t e n t .
However,
indicated

a

all

of the

change

in

superintendents
the

types

of

new

who w e re

interview ed

resid en ts

in

th eir

140

communities.

S i n g l e - p a r e n t f a m i l i e s and f a m i l i e s r e c e i v i n g p u b l i c

a s s i s t a n c e were sending new s t u d e n t s
differed

markedly

fam ilies,

who

success.

valued

as

interested

in

"showcasing"

viewed

th at

parents

According

to

their

s c h o o l.

These

second-generation

and

indicated

compared t o

students.

or

education

Teachers

th e m s e l v e s , "
guiding

from f i r s t -

to

it

as

caring

these

for,

w ere

to

means

parents

enhance t h e i r

image, r a t h e r than being g e n u in e l y i n t e r e s t e d

to

"raising

supporting,

teachers,

children

immigrant

the

children

fam ilies

and
were
self-

in t h e i r y o u n g s t e r s .

All o f t h e e d u c a t o r s who were in te rv ie w e d tended t o b e l i e v e t h a t th e
pool o f academic t a l e n t was d e c l i n i n g .

In summary, t h e c l i e n t e l e in

s m a l l, r u r a l sc ho ol s has changed.
Most

sc h o o ls

appeared

to

be

doing

little

to

alter

their

s t r a t e g i e s t o meet t h e d i f f e r i n g needs o f t h e "new s t u d e n t . "

When

e f f o r t s were made, the y tended t o be by an i n d i v i d u a l
no t c o o r d i n a t e d systemwide.

They tended t o l a c k t h e s t r u c t u r e and

s o p h i s t i c a t i o n t h a t would permit an e v a l u a t i o n ;
unrelated to the t e s t .

t e a c h e r and

t h e changes seemed

Most sc ho ols j u s t d id not s u b s c r i b e t o an

e x p l i c i t , o v e r t c u rr ic u lu m model o f t e a c h i n g s p e c i f i c o b j e c t i v e s and
te s tin g these objectives.

There was a tendency t o avoid " t e a c h in g

as a s c ie n c e " and t o c l i n g t o " t e a c h in g as an a r t . "
In a l l f a i r n e s s to t h e s e e d u c a t o r s in s m al l, r u r a l s c h o o l s , i t
was not t h a t they d id not want t o be th e b e s t t h a t the y could be, i t
was

just

difficult

given

their

d i s t r i c t s and from t h e e x p e r t s .

degree

of

isolation

from

other

These t e a c h e r s were as good as any

141
others;

however,

t h e demands o f t h e i r j o b d i f f e r e d

t h e i r urban and suburban c o u n t e r p a r t s .

from t h o s e o f

They i n d i c a t e d a d e s i r e t o

know more, t o do t h i n g s d i f f e r e n t l y , t o l e a r n - - b u t a t a r e a s o n a b l e
sacrifice.

They a l l wanted t o be p a r t o f an "improving" s c h o o l , but

t h e y b e l i e v e d t h i s could be accomplished o nl y when someone v i s i t e d
and knew t h e i r s c h o o l.
w in n e rs .

These t e a c h e r s wanted t h e i r s t u d e n t s t o be

Thus, t h e fo ll o w i n g recommendations a r e made in t h e a r e a s

o f f u r t h e r s tu d y and p ro c e s s g u i d e l i n e s .

They a r e as f o l l o w s :

Recommendations
Based

on

the

findings

of

th is

study,

the

follow ing

recommendations f o r f u r t h e r s tu d y a r e made:
F u r t h e r Study
1.

One d i s t r i c t , D i s t r i c t 10, along with Koskitown, was found

t o vary s i g n i f i c a n t l y from o t h e r d i s t r i c t s but was n o t in c lu de d in
the

interview

examined

to

process.

de ter mi ne

D istricts
what

like

practices

s t u d e n t s ’ academic performance.

are

D istrict
being

10

used

should
to

be

improve

Such in f o r m a t io n would be h e l p f u l

as r u r a l d i s t r i c t s engage in t h e school-improvement p r o c e s s .
2.

A human

significant

resource

element

v a r i a b i l i t y was p r e s e n t .

appea rs

to

be

operating

In both Makivil

when

and Vilmi,

a d m i n i s t r a t o r s did no t appea r t o a c c e p t l e a d e r s h i p in t h e c u r r i c u l a r
domain.

This seems a p p r o p r i a t e f o r f u r t h e r s tu d y .

For example, i s

t h i s g e n e r a l l y t r u e o f d i s t r i c t s having a s t u d e n t p o p u l a t i o n o f l e s s
tha n 300?

142
3.

The s m a l l,

rural

districts

about t e s t s and c u r r i c u l a r i s s u e s .

appeared t o

communicate

least

A d d it io n a l s t u d i e s a r e needed t o

c onf irm and d i s c o v e r t h e n a t u r e and s u b s t a n c e o f communication in
s m a l l , r u r a l d i s t r i c t s w it h s t u d e n t e n r o l l m e n t s under 300.
4.

A dd it io n a l

d istricts
among

to

research

substantiate

respondents

when

should be

conducted

in

and i n v e s t i g a t e whether t h e
they

report

d istrict

small,

rural

variability

p ractices

is

a

persistent ch aracteristic.
5.

This study should be r e p l i c a t e d t o in c l u d e a l a r g e r number

of d is tr ic ts

within

and o u t s i d e Michigan so t h a t f i n d i n g s

can be

g e n e r a l i z e d beyond t h e c o n f i n e s o f t h e Upper Pe n in s u la o f Michigan.
Pr oce ss G u id e li ne s
1.
does

The

not

visit,

traditional

accommodate

method

the

a d istrict-tailored

beneficial

of

s m a l l,

delivering

rural

workshop,

to these d i s t r i c t s .

inservice

school
and

so

well.
on,

programs

An o n - s i t e

would

be

more

T e l e v i s i o n workshops would be an

immediate improvement ove r t h e c u r r e n t d e l i v e r y method.
2.

Respondents

number o f c o n fe re n c e s
d istrict.
However,

Their

from most

were

provided by t h e i r l o c a l

relative

many voiced

d istricts

pro xi m ity

a desire

to

afforded

share

s u b j e c t m a t t e r r a t h e r tha n bri n g e x p e r t s

satisfied

w it h

intermediate
greater

across

gr ad e

in t o s h a r e

the

school

attendance.
levels

and

information.

Also, a c u rr ic u lu m e x p e r t in each i n t e r m e d i a t e school d i s t r i c t would
be h e l p f u l f o r d i s t r i c t s wishing t o b r id g e t h e t e a c h i n g - t e s t i n g gap.

143
3.

A d m i n i s t r a t o r s need t o r e a s s e s s t h e i r r o l e as i n s t r u c t i o n a l

leaders.

This r o l e must i n c r e a s e in importance i f r u r a l s c h o o l s a re

system atically

to

alter

the

lin k ag e

of curriculum

variab les.

Seve ral avenues t o be c o n s i d e r e d would be c o n f e r e n c e s , c o u rs e work,
and m e n to rs h ip s .
4.

Sm all,

rural

school

d istricts

c o l l a b o r a t i v e e f f o r t s so t h a t a l l w i l l
of e ffe ctiv e s tra te g ie s .
d ifferin g
teacher

calendars,

contracts.

interactive

television

must

inten sify

th eir

improve thr ou gh t h e s h a r i n g

They must overcome t h e c u r r e n t b a r r i e r s of

v a ry in g school

hours,

Use o f t e c h n o l o g i c a l
and

electronic

and l o c a l
innovations

b la ck bo a rd s

can

d istrict
such
become

as
a

r e a l i t y as t h e s e b a r r i e r s a r e e rod ed .
5.

Small,

communication

rural
in

districts

an e f f o r t

d i s t r i c t practices.

to

need t o
validate,

examine t h e i r methods
e n d o rs e ,

of

and communicate

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A
SURVEY

144

—

J

1 - i- " —

■

i". i.H. —

■

RURAL, SMALL
SCHOOLS

—— i

)

in

THE
UPPER PENINSULA

Study cond u c t e d by
Faye N. DeMarte
HC Box 16
Drummond Island, Mich.
493-5633

r

145

THE USE OF MEAP RESULTS IN RURAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS
Circle a response for each statement which most accurately reflects
your perceptions of what occurs within your district.
1.

Standardized tests (SAT, ACT, Stanford, Metropolitan, MEAP, etc.)
provide important information in assessing your district's
effectivness.
1
2
3
4
5

2.

STRONGLY AGREE
AGREE
NEUTRAL
DISAGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE

The following most accurately describes our district:
1
2
3

3.

MEAP RESULTS ARE USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH OTHER
STANDARDIZED TESTS
MEAP RESULTS ARE THE ONLY OUTCOME MEASURES USED IN OUR
DISTRICT
MEAP RESULTS ARE NOT USED

Our district selects or develops tests for items included in the
local curriculum but not measured by MEAP
1
2

4.

YES
NO

Curriculum guides are available in reading and math.
IF YES, RESPOND USING THE FOLLOWING SCALE:

Not at Very
Some
Quite Extensively
all
Little
A Bit
0 | 1 2 | 3 4 | 5 6 | 7 8________
Example: A "4" response shows your perception to
Ko **scir.s11 but ir.ors tovsirc!
A Bit*1
A "3" response shows your perception to
be "some" but more toward "Very Little".
N

V

S

Q

E

A A A A
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

MEAP OBJECTIVES ARE INCORPORATED INTO OUR
DISTRICT CURRICULUM GUIDES

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

TEXTBOOKS ARE CHOSEN ON THE BASIS OF OUR
CURRICULUM GUIDES

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

CURRICULUM GUIDES INFLUENCE CLASSROOM INSTRUCTION

146

5. Using the eight point scale of "Not at all", "Very Little",
"Some", "Quite A Bit", and "Extensively" rate the extent to which
you have used the 1989 MEAP results for the following purposes:
Not at
All

0

I

Very
Some
Little
1 2 | 3 4

Quite
A Bit
5 6
N

V

Extensively
7

8

S

Q

A A A
1 2 3 4 5 6

A. TO DETERMINE THE GENERAL ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL
OF TESTED STUDENTS

0

B. TO INFORM THE SCHOOL COMMUNITY OF THE GENERAL
ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL OF TESTED STUDENTS

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

C. TO DETERMINE STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES
IN THE AREA OF MATH

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

D. TO DETERMINE STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES
IN THE AREA OF READING

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

E. TO DETERMINE INSTRUCTIONAL PRIORITIES

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

F. TO DETERMINE PLACEMENT OF STUDENTS IN
"REMEDIAL" PROGRAMS

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

G. TO DETERMINE THE NEED FOR NEW PROGRAMS

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

H. TO ANALYZE TEACHER PERFORMANCE

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

I. TO IDENTIFY STAFF DEVELOPMENT NEEDS

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

J. TO PREDICT STUDENTS' FUTURE ACADEMIC SUCCESS

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

7 8

Using the same scale, circle the number that best describes
the communication of MEAP test results in your district:
N

V

S

Q

E

A. THE PRINCIPAL PROVIDES LEADERSHIP IN THE
INTERPRETATION OF MEAP TEST RESULTS

A A A A
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

B. MEAP HAS BEEN DISCUSSED AT TEACHER MEETINGS

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

C. MEAP TEST RESULTS HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED AT
SCHOOL BOARD MEETING

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

D. INSERVICE ACTIVITIES HAVE BEEN PROVIDED
TO HELP INCORPORATE MEAP OBJECTIVES
INTO INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAMS

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

E. OUR STAFF SHARES INFORMATION REGARDING
TEACHING STRATEGIES USED TO INCREASE
STUDENT TEST SCORES ON MEAP

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

147

7. Indicate by circling the appropriate number the changes that have
been made in your district based on HEAP test results:
Not At Very Some
Quite
Extensively
All
Little
A Bit
0 I 1 2 I3
4 I5
6 I7 B
N

V

S

Q

E

0 1A2 3A4 5A6 A
0123 4 5 67 8
0123 4 5 67 8
0123 4 5 67 8
0123 4 5 67 8
012 3 4 5 67 8
012 3 4 5 67 8

COURSE OFFERINGS
COURSE CONTENT
TEACHING METHODS
INSTRUCTIONAL METHODS
PREPARATION FOR TESTS
BATTERY OF TESTS
FREQUENCY OF CURRICULUM REVISION

8. Circle the number that reflects your perception using the previous
scale:
N V
S
Q
E
A. TEACHERS ARE FAMILIAR WITH MEAP
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
TEST QUESTIONS

A A A A

B.

STUDENTS KNOW THEIR MEAP SCORES
IN OUR DISTRICT

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

C.

PARENTS KNOW THEIR STUDENT'S MEAP SCORE

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

D.

REMEDIAL CLASSES ARE DESIGNED TO TEACH
STUDENTS THE MASTERY OF
SPECIFIC MEAP OBJECTIVES

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Please indicate your position:
1
2
3
4
(

ADMINISTRATOR
ELEMENTARY TEACHER
JUNIOR HIGH TEACHER
HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER

) I WOULD LIKE A COPY OF THIS STUDY'S FINDINGS

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS___________________________________

148

TO RESEARCH
THE U.P.
THE UP.

APPENDIX B
LETTER OF PERMISSION TO CONDUCT STUDY

149

MICHIGAN

STATE U N I V E R S I T Y
E A S T E A N M N G • M IC H IG A N • <HK2A-1111

C O L I E G E D E - O I . J A L i r j E . N C E • O E E IC F . O E T H E D E A N
iOA B F .R K E V H A L L

IR B # 9 0 -1 5 8

April 17, 1990

F ay e N. D eM arte
HC 52 Box 16
D ru m m o n d Island, Ml 49726
D ear M s. D eM arte:

HE:

T H E U SE O F THE MICHIGAN EDUCATIONAL A SS E S S M E N T PROGRAM
IN SMALL, RURAL SC H O O L DISTRICTS IN TH E U PP E R PENINSULA O F
MICHIGAN IR B # 90-158"

T he a b o v e p ro jec t is e x e m p t from full UCRIHS review . I h a v e rev iew ed th e p r o p o s e d
r e s e a r c h p ro to c o l a n d find th a t th e rig h ts a n d w elfare of h u m a n s u b je c ts a p p e a r to b e
p ro te c te d . You h a v e ap p ro v a l to c o n d u c t th e re s e a r c h .
You a r e re m in d e d th a t UCRIHS ap p ro v a l is valid for o n e c a le n d a r y ea r. If y o u plan to
co n tin u e this p ro jec t b e y o n d o n e y ear, p le a s e m a k e p ro v isio n s for o b ta in in g a p p ro p ria te
UCRIHS ao p ro v a l o n e m o n th prior to April 1 7 ,199I.
Any c h a n g e s in p r o c e d u re s involving h u m a n s u b je c ts m u s t b e rev ie w ed by UCRIHS prior
to initiation of th e c h a n g e . U CRIHS m u st a lso b e notified p ro m p tly of a n y p ro b le m s
(u n e x p e c te d sid e effects, c o m p la in ts, etc.) involving h u m a n s u b je c ts d u rin g th e c o u rs e of
th e w ork.
T h an k y o u for bringing this p ro je c t to o u r atten tio n .
p le a s e d o n o t h e s ita te to let u s know .
S incerely,

J c h n K. H udzik. Ph.D .
Chair, UCRIHS
JK H /s a r
cc:

S. M ocre

If w e c a n b e of an y fu tu re help,

APPENDIX C
COVER LETTER

150

A pril 18, 1990
D e a r ___________________________ ,
Your school has been s e l e c t e d randomly t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n a v o l u n t a r y
s tu d y d e si gn e d t o f i n d o u t i f and how s m a l l , r u r a l s c h o o l s in t h e
Upper P e n i n s u l a use Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP)
results.
In d e ve lo pi ng t h e MEAP, t h e Michigan Department o f Education
i n te n d e d f o r l o c a l school d i s t r i c t s t o use t h e a ss e ss m e nt r e s u l t s to
e v a l u a t e t h e i r c u r r i c u l u m . The d a t a c o l l e c t e d by t h i s s urve y should
answer t h e q u e s t i o n o f wh ether MEAP t e s t r e s u l t s a r e used , how th e y
a r e used, and what p r a c t i c e s s m a l l, r u r a l d i s t r i c t s use t o i n c o r p o ­
r a t e MEAP i n t o t h e i r d i s t r i c t s .
Enclosed i s a survey and en velo pe . This survey can be completed in
f i f t e e n m in u te s . P le a s e p l a c e t h e completed surve y in t h e envelope
and r e t u r n i t t o [ t h e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t ’ s s e c r e t a r y ] .
I will v i s i t
y ou r d i s t r i c t d u ri n g t h e week o f April 23 t o c o l l e c t t h e s u r v e y s .
All answers w i l l be kept c o n f i d e n t i a l . P a r t i c i p a t i o n in t h i s study
i s c o m p le te ly v o l u n t a r y . You i n d i c a t e yo ur v o l u n t a r y agreement t o
p a r t i c i p a t e by completing and r e t u r n i n g t h i s su rv e y. On r e q u e s t , a
copy o f t h e f i n a l r e p o r t w i l l be s e n t t o your d i s t r i c t upon comple­
t i o n o f t h i s s tu d y .
I f you have any q u e s t i o n s , p l e a s e c a l l me a t (906) 493-5633.
you in advance f o r your a s s i s t a n c e .
Sincerely,

Faye N. DeMarte
Enclosure

Thank

APPENDIX D
TABLES

151

Tabl e D . l . - - P e r c e n t a g e s :
and math.

Curriculum gu id e s a r e a v a i l a b l e in r e a d i n g

Presence o f Curriculum Guides
D istrict
Yes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

53.8
62.5
64.3
63.6
0 .0
33.3
50.0
54.5
25.0
80 .0

Of t h o s e i n d i c a t i n g t h e
p r e s e n c e o f g u i d e s , th e n

-

O b j e c t i v e s in g u id e s

3.92

Textbooks chosen as
b a s i s o f gu id e s

4.10

Guides i n f l u e n c e
instruction

4.36

152

Table D.2 . --Means f o r a l l v a r i a b l e s on survey i n s t r u m e n t .
Variable

Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q4A
Q4B
Q4C
Q5A
Q5B
Q5C
Q5D
Q5E
Q5F
Q5G
Q5H
Q5I
Q5J
Q6A
Q6B
Q6C
Q6D
Q6E
Q7A
Q7B
Q7C
Q7D
07E
Q7F
Q7G
Q8A
Q8B
Q8C
Q8D

T e s t ’ s importance
MEAP usage wi th o t h e r t e s t s
T e s t development
Curriculum g u i d e s ’ pr e s en c e
MEAP o b j e c t i v e s in gui de s
Textbook and g u i d e s l i n k a g e
Guides i n f l u e n c e i n s t r u c t i o n
Determine g e n e r a l achievement l e v e l
Inform community
Determine s t r e n g t h s / w e a k n e s s e s in math
Determine s t r e n g t h s / w e a k n e s s e s in r e a d in g
Instructional p r io r itie s
Placement in remedial programs
Need f o r new programs
Analyze t e a c h e r performance
I d e n t i f y s t a f f needs
P r e d i c t f u t u r e s u cc e ss
P r i n c i p a l p r o v id e s l e a d e r s h i p
D iscussed a t t e a c h e r s ’ meetings
Dis cus sed a t board meetings
Inservice a c t i v i t i e s
S t a f f sh ared in f o r m a t io n
Course o f f e r i n g s
Course c o n t e n t
Teaching methods
I n s t r u c t i o n a l methods
Preparation fo r t e s t s
Battery of t e s t s
Frequency o f c u r r i c u l u m r e v i s i o n
Teach ers f a m i l i a r with q u e s t i o n s
S t u d e n t s know t h e i r s co r e
P a r e n t s know s t u d e n t ’ s s c o r e
I n f l u e n c e d e s ig n o f c l a s s e s

Mean
2.247
1.204
1.527
1.478
3.918
4.102
4.632
3.967
3.870
4.142
4.163
3.870
2.815
2.760
1.521
2.591
2.397
2.957
4.361
4.478
2.681
2.872
2.478
3.413
3.365
3.365
3.282
2.428
2.666
4.127
5.527
5.693
2.233

153

Table D.3 . --Means f o r s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r a s t s .
Question

Schools

Mean

5e

Unknown

5f

2, 7, 8, 9, & 10
All t h e r e s t

1.8032
3.6587

5i

10
1, 5, & 9

4.8000
1.6230

6a

5 &9
All t h e r e s t

0.4643
3.4486

6b

5 &9
All t h e r e s t e xce pt 1

2.4732
4.8676

6c

Unknown

6d

1, 5, & 7
All t h e r e s t

1.0843
3.3797

10
All t h e r e s t

6.5000
2.2678

5, 8, & 9
All t h e r e s t

3.3468
1.3701

10
All t h e r e s t

5.6000
2.4375

7b

5
All t h e r e s t

1.0000
3.6640

7g

4 & 10
1 &3

3.9045
1.1952

4 & 10
1, 3, & 5

3.9045
1.5879

1, 5, & 9
4 & 10

3.0485
5.4227

6e

8a

154
Table D.4 . - - S t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r a s t s w i t h i n d i s t r i c t s
f o r q u e s t i o n s t h a t a r e s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t between
districts.
Question
5e
5f
6a
6b
6d
6e
7g
8a

School
6
Makivil
Koskitown
8
8
Makivil
3
Vilmi
3
6

Number o f Respondents
6
7
12
11
11
7
14
8
14
6

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BI B L I OGRA P H Y

A i r a s i a n , P. W. (1979). Educa tiona l measurement and t e c h n o l o g i c a l
base s u n d e r l y i n g minimum competency t e s t i n g .
In P. W.
A i r a s i a n , G. F. Madaus, & J . J . Pedula ( E d s . ) , Minimum compe­
t e n c y t e s t i n g (pp. 3 3 - 4 8 ) . Englewood C l i f f s , NJ: Educa tiona l
Technology P u b l i c a t i o n s .
A i r a s i a n , P. W., Madaus, G. F . , & Pedula, J . J . ( E d s . ) .
Minimum competency t e s t i n g . Englewood C l i f f s , NJ:
Technology P u b l i c a t i o n s .

(1979).
Educational

Aquino, A. F. (1975). A t t i t u d e s o f f o u r t h and s ev en th g ra de
t e a c h e r s toward t h e 1974-75 Michigan Educational Assessment
Program and t h e i r use o f t h e r e s u l t s . Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
Wayne S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y .
B arker , B. 0. (1985). Research focus on r u r a l s c h o o ls in Oklahoma.
El Reno, OK: Annual Conference o f t h e Communities United f o r
Rural Educ at ion .
(ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED
256 536)
Barker, B., & Muse, I .
(1983). Research f i n d i n g s on K-12 and 1-12
r u r a l school d i s t r i c t s in t h e United S t a t e s . Manhattan, KA:
Annual Conference o f t h e Rural Education A s s o c i a t i o n .
(ERIC
Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 234 973)
Barker, B. W., Muse, I . , & Smith, R. B. (1983). A r e p o r t on r u r a l
e d u c a t i o n in A r k a n s a s . (ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No.
ED 231 583)
Blau, T. H. (1979). Minimum competency t e s t i n g , p s y c h o l o g i c a l
im plications fo r students.
In P. W. A i r a s i a n , G. F. Madaus, &
J . J . Pedula ( E d s . ) , Minimum competency t e s t i n g . Englewood
C l i f f s , NJ: Educa tiona l Technology P u b l i c a t i o n s .
B le e c h e r , H. (1975). The a u t h o r i t a t i v e n e s s o f Michi gan ’ s a c c o u n t a ­
b i l i t y program. Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Michigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y .
B r e z e z i n s k i , E. J .
(1976). T e s t i n g in Michigan: A tw e n t y - y e a r
p e r s p e c t i v e . Ann Arbor: U n i v e r s i t y o f Michigan, Bureau of
School S e r v i c e s .
Brown v. Board of Edu ca tio n, 347 U.S. 483

155

(1954).

156
Bushaw, W. J .
(1988). Assessment t e s t i n g : Implementation and
u t i l i z a t i o n . Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , The U n i v e r s i t y o f Michigan.
Buttram, J . L ., & C ar ls o n , R. V. (1983). E f f e c t i v e school
research: Will i t o la v in t h e c ou ntr y? Pr oc ee din gs o f t h e
Annual Meeting o f t h e American Edu cation al Research A s s o c i a ­
t i o n , Mo ntrea l, Quebec, Canada. (ERIC Document Reproduction
S e r v i c e No. ED 235 561)
Cohen, S. A. (1987). I n s t r u c t i o n a l a li g n m e n t: Se a rc hin g f o r a
magic b u l l e t . Educationa l R e s e a r c h e r . 16, 16-19.
Coleman, J . S . , Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J . , M cP artland, J . ,
Mood, A., W e in f ie l d , F. D., & York, R. (196 6) . E q u a l i t y o f
e d u c a t i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t y . Washington, DC: U.S. Government
Printing Office.
Cooley, W. W., & Lei nhard, T. G. (1980). The i n s t r u c t i o n a l dimen­
s i o n s s tu d y . Educa tiona l Ev a lu a ti o n and P o l i c y A n a l y s i s . 2,
7-25.
Darling-Hammond, L. , & Wise, A. (1985). Beyond s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n :
S t a t e s t a n d a r d s and school improvement. Elementary School
J o u r n a l . 8 5 ( 3 ) , 315-336.
Debra P. v. T u r l i n g t o n , 730 S. 2nd 1405, 11th C i r . (1984).
DeYoung, A. (1987). The s t a t u s o f American r u r a l e d u c a t i o n
r e s e a r c h : An i n t e g r a t e d review and commentary. Review o f
Educational Re se ar ch . 5 7 ( 2 ) , 123-148.
Dillman, D. A. (1978). Mail and t e l e p h o n e s u r v e y s :
desi gn method. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

The t o t a l

Donovan, D. (1982).
All c h i l d r e n can l e a r n - - S c h o o l s make a
d i f f e r e n c e . Michigan School Board J o u r n a l . 2 9 ( 4 ) , 8-11.
Edelman, J . (1981).
The impact o f t h e mandated t e s t i n g program on
th e classroom p r a c t i c e s : T e a c h e r s ’ p e r s p e c t i v e s . E d u c a t i o n .
10 2( 1), 56-59.
E n g l is h , F. (1978). Q u a l i t y c o n t r o l in c u r r i c u l u m d ev elo pm en t.
A r l i n g t o n , VA: American A s s o c i a t i o n o f School A d m i n i s t r a t o r s .
En g l is h , F. (1987).
The p r i n c i p a l as m a s t e r a r c h i t e c t o f c u r r i c u ­
l a r u n i t y . National A s s o c i a t i o n o f Secondary School P r i n c i p a l s
B u l l e t i n . 72, 35-42.
Evans, M. C. (1985). Is s t a t e l e g i s l a t i o n a c a t a l y s t f o r change?
Phi Del ta Kappan. 6 6 ( 7 ) , 501-503.

157
F a r f s i n g , J . E. (1988). A s tu d y o f t h e c o r r e l a t i o n between key
t r a i t s o f e f f e c t i v e school r e s e a r c h and t h e Michigan Educa­
t i o n a l Assessment Program. D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a ­
t i o n a l . 26, 362. ( U n i v e r s i t y Microfilms No. ADG13-33085, 72)
F i d l e r , R. A. (1988). F a c t o r s e x p l a i n i n g s u c c e s s and l a c k o f
s u c c e s s on t h e Michigan Educationa l Assessment Program s c i e n c e
a s s e s s m e n t. D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l . 49, 3601.
( U n i v e r s i t y M icrofilms No. 89-0697, 130)
F i s h e r , T. H., & Roth, R. W. (1972). A d e s c r i p t i v e s tu d y o f l o c a l
d i s t r i c t s ’ r e a c t i o n s to t h e Michigan Educ at ion al Assessment
Program. Michigan A s s o c i a t i o n o f School Boards J o u r n a l . 12,
13-15.
Floden, R. E . , P o r t e r , A., A l f o r d , L. , Freeman, D., Ir w i n , S . ,
Schmidt, W., & S c h w i l l e , J .
(1988). I n s t r u c t i o n a l l e a d e r s h i p
a t t h e d i s t r i c t l e v e l . Educational A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Q u a r t e r l y .
2 4 ( 2 ) , 96-124.
Floden, R. E ., P o r t e r , A., Schmidt, W., Freeman, D., & S c h w i l l e , J .
(1981). Responses t o c u r r ic u lu m p r e s s u r e s : A p o l i c y - c a p t u r i n g
stu dy o f t e a c h e r d e c i s i o n s about c o n t e n t . J o u r n a l o f Educa­
t i o n a l Psychology. 7 3 ( 2 ) , 129-141.
G j e l t e n , T. (1982). A ty polog y o f r u r a l school s e t t i n g s . Washing­
to n , DC: U.S. Department o f Educa tion, Rural Education
Seminar. (ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 215 858)
Gould, J . C. (1980). Why t h e AFT su p p o rt s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t i n g .
New D i r e c t i o n s f o r T e s t i n g and Measurement. 16, 53-57.
H a l l , G., J a e g e r , R. M., Kearney, C. P . , & Wiley, D. E. (1987).
A l t e r n a t i v e s f o r a n a t i o n a l d a t a system on el em en ta ry and
secondary e d u c a t i o n . I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u rn a l o f Ed uca tio na l
R e s e a r c h . 1 1 ( 4 ) , 453-502.
Haney, W. (1984). T e s t i n g r e a s o n in g and r e a s o n i n g ab out t e s t i n g .
Review o f Educa tiona l R e s e a r c h . 5 4 ( 4 ) , 597-654.
Haney, W. (1985). Making t e s t i n g more e d u c a t i o n a l .
L e a d e r s h i p . 4 3 ( 2 ) , 4-13.

Edu ca tio na l

Haney, W., & Madaus, G. F. (1979). Making se ns e o f t h e competency
movement. In P. W. A i r a s i a n , G. F. Madaus, & J . J . Pedula
( E d s . ) , Minimum competency t e s t i n g . Englewood C l i f f s , NJ:
Educational Technology P u b l i c a t i o n s .

158
Hornbeck, M. (1989, June 1 1). The MEAP and p e r - p u p i l sp ending.
D e t r o i t Free P r e s s , p. 14a.
House, E. R. ( E d . ) . (1973). School e v a l u a t i o n :
p r o c e s s . Berkeley: McCutchan.
House, E., R iv e r s , W., & S tu ff le be am , D.
t h e Michigan a c c o u n t a b i l i t y s yst em .
tion Association.

The p o l i t i c s and

(1974). An a sse ssm en t o f
Lansing: Michigan Educa­

I d o l , L ., Nevin, A., & Paolucci-Whitcomb, P. (1986). Models o f
c ur ri c ul um -b a s ed a s s e s s m e n t . R o c k v i l l e , MD: Aspen P u b l i c a ­
tions.
J a e g e r , R. M., & T i t t l e , C. ( E d s . ) . (1980). Minimum competency
acheivement t e s t i n g : Motives, models, measures, and c o n s e ­
q ue nce s . Washington, DC: American Educational Research Asso­
ciation.
Jen cka, C. G. (1990). A l o n g i t u d i n a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f school
a d m i n i s t r a t o r s * p r a c t i c e s and a t t i t u d e s r e l a t e d t o t h e use o f
t h e Michigan Educational Assessment Program t e s t r e s u l t s .
Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Michigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y .
J e s s , J . D. (1984).
Rural ed u ca ti o n 1984: Is s u e s and impacting
f o r c e s . A lo c a l p e r s p e c t i v e . (ERIC Document Reproduction
S e rv ic e No. ED 251 253)
Kelleghan, T . , Madaus, G. F . , & A i r a s i a n , P. W. (1982). The
e f f e c t s o f s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t i n g . Boston: K lu w e r- N ij o ff
P u b li s h in g .
K i r s t , M. (1987). C u r r i c u l a r l e a d e r s h i p a t t h e s t a t e l e v e l : What
i s t h e new focus? National A s s o c i a t i o n o f Secondary School
P r i n c i p a l s B u l l e t i n . 72(505), 8-14.
Kle in, K. (1984). Minimum competency t e s t i n g :
Shaping and
r e f l e c t i n g c u r r i c u l a . Phi Del ta Kappan. 65, 565-567.
Kohr, R. L. (1983).
An examination o f community t y p e d i f f e r e n c e s
in t h e ed u ca ti o n a l q u a l i t y assessment d a t a . (ERIC Document
Reproduction S e rv ic e No. ED 244 972)
LaMahiew, P . , & Le in h a rd t, G. (1985). Overlap: I n f l u e n c i n g w h a t’ s
t a u g h t . A pr oc e ss model o f t e a c h e r s ’ c o n t e n t s e l e c t i o n .
Journal o f Classroom I n t e r a c t i o n . 21.(1), 2-11.
Lazarus, M. (1981).
Goodbye t o e x c e l l e n c e : A c r i t i c a l look a t
minimum competency t e s t i n g . Boulder, CO: Westview P r e s s .

159
Lazarus, M. (1982). E v a lu a ti n g e d u c a ti o n a l programs. A r l i n g t o n ,
VA: American A s s o c i a t i o n o f School A d m i n i s t r a t o r s .
L e s s i n g e r , L. M. (1970). Every kid a winner:
e d u c a t i o n . New York: Simon & S c h u s t e r .

A c c o u n t a b i l i t y in

L e s s i n g e r , L. M., & T y l e r , R. W. ( E d s . ) . (1971). A c c o u n t a b i l i t y in
e d u c a t i o n . Worthington, OH: C har les A. J o n e s .
Loustaunau, M. (1975). Small r u r a l sch ools can have adequate
c u r r i c u l u m s . U n i v e r s i t y Park: New Mexico S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y .
(ERIC Document Reproduction S e rv ic e No. ED 100 559)
McClurkin, W. D. (1970). Rural ed u ca ti o n in t h e United S t a t e s .
U n i v e r s i t y Park: New Mexico S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y .
(ERIC Document
Reproduction S e rv ic e No. ED 043 408)
McCormick, R. (1978). The c o n t r o v e r s i a l development o f t h e
Michigan Educational Assessment Program. Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
Michigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y .
Madaus, G., Kelleghan, T . , Rakaw, E. A., & King, D. J .
(1979). The
s e n s i t i v i t y o f measures o f school e f f e c t i v e n e s s . Harvard Edu­
c a t i o n Review. 49, 207-230.
M ar sh a ll , D. G. (1986). From r h e t o r i c t o a c t i o n : Approaches t o
small scho ols f o r t h e coming d e cad e. Pro ceeding s o f t h e Annual
Meeting o f t h e Canadian National Symposium on Small Schools,
Atkokan, O n t a r i o , Canada. (ERIC Document Reproduction S e rv ic e
No. ED 276 106)
Mathison, S. M. (1987). The p e rc e iv e d e f f e c t s o f s t a n d a r d i z e d
t e s t i n g on te a c h in g and c u r r i c u l a . D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s
I n t e r n a t i o n a l . 49, 35. ( U n i v e r s i t y Microfilms No. ADG88-03130,
252)
Mehrens, W. A. (1979). The te chnology o f competency measurement.
In R. I n g l e , M. C a r r o l l , & W. Gephart ( E d s . ) , Assessment o f
s t u d e n t competence. Bloomington, IN: Phi D e lt a Kappan.
Mehrens, W., & P h i l l i p s , S. E. (1986). D e t e c t i n g impacts o f
c u r r i c u l a r d i f f e r e n c e s in achievement d a t a . J ourn al o f
Educational Measurement. 2 3 ( 3 ) , 185-196.
Michigan A s s o c i a t i o n o f P r o f e s s o r s o f Educational A d m i n i s t r a t i o n .
(1972). The Michigan Educational Assessment Program: An
a b s t r a c t . East Lansing: Author.
Michigan Department o f Education. (1972). Analyzing Michigan’ s
e d u c a ti o n a l p r o g r e s s . Lansing: Author.

160
Michigan Department o f Education. (1985).
f o r usi ng and r e p o r t i n g t e s t r e s u l t s .
Mika, W. J . , J r .
T e s ti n g and

P e n c i l s down. A guide
Lansing: Author.

(1982). An NEA-VEA r e s p o n s e .
Measurement. 16 (5 3) , 59-64.

New D i r e c t i o n s f o r

Muse, I . D., Barker, B. 0 . , & Smith, R. B. (1983). Rural ed u ca ti o n
in Colorado: Recent r e s e a r c h f i n d i n g s . Proceedings o f t h e
Annual Colorado Rural and Small Schools Conference, Fo r t
C o l l i n s , CO. (ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 231
573)
Music, P. H. W. (1982). An a n a l y s i s o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between
s e l e c t e d i n s t r u c t i o n a l m a t e r i a l s and t h e Michigan Educational
Assessment Program o b j e c t i v e s f o r t h e primary g r a d e s . D i s s e r ­
t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l . 43, 2886. ( U n i v e r s i t y Micro­
fi l m s No. ADG83-03831, 144)
N a c h t i g a l , P. M.(1980). Improving r u r a l s c h o o l s .
Denver, CO:
Education Commission o f t h e S t a t e s .
(ERIC Document Reproduc­
t i o n S e rv ic e No. ED 192 992)
National Education A s s o c i a t i o n .

(1979).

National School Boards A s s o c i a t i o n .

Handbook.

(1977).

S ta n d a r d iz e d t e s t i n g .

O r l i c h , D., & R a t c l i f f , J . L. (1977). Coping with t h e myth o f
a c c o u n t a b i l i t y . Educational L e a d e r s h i p . 3 4 ( 4 ) , 246-251.
Pedula, J . J . , & Reidy, E. F. (1979). The r i s e o f t h e minimal
competency t e s t i n g movement. In P. W. A i r a s i a n , G. F. Madaus,
& J . J . Pedula ( E d s . ) , Minimal competency t e s t i n g (pp. 23-3 3) .
Englewood C l i f f s , NJ: Educational Technology P u b l i c a t i o n s .
Popham, W. J .
(1977). Customized c r i t e r i o n - r e f e r e n c e d t e s t s .
Educational L e a d e r s h i p . M ( 4 ) , 258-259.
Popham, W. J .
(1985). Measurement-driven i n s t r u c t i o n
road. Phi Del ta Kappan. 6 6 ( 9 ) , 628-634.

I t ’ s on th e

P o r t e r , A. C.
(1983). The r o l e o f t e s t i n g in e f f e c t i v e s c h o o l s .
American E du c a tio n. 1 9 ( 1 ) , 25-28.
P o r t e r , A. C.
(1988). O b je c ti v e i n d i c a t o r s : O b je c ti v e d a t a or
p o l i t i c a l t o o l . Phi Delta Kappan. 6 9 ( 8 ) , 503-505.
P o r t e r , A. (1989). A c u rr ic u lu m out o f b a l a n c e : The ca s e o f
el em entary school mathematics. Educational R e s e a r c h e r . 1 8 ( 5 ) ,
9-15.

161
P o r t e r , J . W. (1976). The v i r t u e s o f a s t a t e a ss e ss m e nt program.
Phi D e l t a Kappan. 58, 665-668.
Public Sector C onsultants.

(1989). P u b l i c s e c t o r r e p o r t .

R esnick, D., & Resnick, L.
(198 5) . S t a n d a r d s , c u r r i c u l u m ,
performance: H i s t o r i c a l and c om pa rat iv e p e r s p e c t i v e .
t i o n a l R e s e a r c h e r . 15, 5-20.

and
Educa­

Rudman, H. (1977). The Michigan Ed uc atio nal Assessment Program,
1976-77: I t s meaning t o school b o a r d s . Michigan School Board
J o u r n a l . 2 4 ( 7 ) , 10-1 1.
Salmon-Cox, L. (1981). Teachers and s t a n d a r d i z e d achievement
t e s t s : What’ s r e a l l y happening? Phi D e lta Kappan. 62.(9),
631-634.
San Antonio Independent School D i s t r i c t v. Rod rigu es.
601 (1971).

96 C a l . R ptr .

Scha lock, D., Fe ld in g , G., Sc ha loc k, M., Er ic k s o n , J . , & B r o t t , M.
(1985). I n t e g r a t i n g t e a c h i n g and t e s t i n g w ith program manage­
ment. Educational L e a d e r s h i p . 4 3 ( 2 ) , 55-58.
Sh e r, J . P.
(1977). P u b l i c e d u c a ti o n in s p a r s e l y p o p u la te d a r e a s
o f t h e United S t a t e s . Washington, DC: Department o f H e a l t h ,
Edu ca tio n, & Wel fa re, Natio nal I n s t i t u t e o f Educ at ion .
Sh e r, J . P.
(1978). R e v i t a l i z i n g r u r a l e d u c a t i o n : A l e g i s l a t o r ’ s
handbook. Washington, DC: Department o f H e a l t h , Ed u c a ti o n , &
Welfare, National I n s t i t u t e o f Edu c a tio n. (ERIC Document
Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 168 750)
Shinsky. E. J .
(1983). The a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s o f t h e c r i t e r i a f o r
i n c l u s i o n o f s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n s t u d e n t s in t h e Michigan
Educa tiona l Assessment Program a t t h e f o u r t h g ra de l e v e l .
D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l . £5, 814. ( U n i v e r s i t y
M icrofilm s No. ADG84-07238, 203)
Simon, R. F. (1982). T e a c h e r s ’ p e r c e p t i o n s o f s t u d e n t s ’ p e r f o r m ­
ance on Michigan Edu ca tio na l Assessment Program mathematics
t e s t s . D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l . 43, 2324.
(Uni­
v e r s i t y Microfilms No. AADG82-27818, 155)
Smedley, S. L. (1987). S ta n d a r d iz e d achievement t e s t i n g in e d u c a ­
t i o n and the 1987 Washington S t a t e T e s t i n g Program. Ed.D.
d i s s e r t a t i o n , Brigham Young U n i v e r s i t y .
S t a t i s t i c a l A na ly si s Sy st em s.
Institute.

(1985).

North C a r o l i n a :

SAS

162
S t e e l e , D. J . , J r .
(1976). An i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e
p r a c t i c e s and a t t i t u d e s r e l a t e d t o t h e use o f Michigan
Educational Assessment Program t e s t r e s u l t s . Ph.D. d i s s e r ­
t a t i o n , The Ohio S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y .
S t i g g e n s , R. J .
(1985).
Improving ass essment where i t means t h e
most: In t h e c la s s ro om . Educational L e a d e r s h i p . 4 3 ( 2 ) , 69-74.
Th e la n d er , J . E. (1979). An examination o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f th e
Michigan Educational Assessment Program t o l o c a l school d i s ­
t r i c t c u r r ic u lu m d e c i s i o n making. Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , The
U n i v e r s i t y o f Michigan.
T y l e r , R. W. (1971). A c c o u n t a b i l i t y in p e r s p e c t i v e .
In L. M.
L e s s in g e r ( E d . ) , A c c o u n t a b i l i t y in e d u c a t i o n (pp. 1 - 8 0 ) .
Worthington, OH: C ha r le s A. Jones P u b l i s h i n g House.
Walstad, W. B. (1984). Analyzing minimum competency t e s t p e r f o r m ­
ance. J ou rn a l o f Educa tiona l Re se ar ch . 7 7 ( 5 ) , 261-266.
Watson, R., & Schmalgemeir, W. L. (1970). Michigan s c h o o l s : The
o r g a n i z a t i o n and management o f t h e i r t e s t i n g prog ram s. Ann
Arbor: The U n i v e r s i t y o f Michigan, Bureau o f School S e r v i c e s .
Wise, A. (1979). L e g i s l a t e d l e a r n i n g :
th e American c l a s s r o o m . Berkeley:
Press.

The b u r e a u c r a t i z a t i o n o f
University of C alifo rn ia

Womer, F. B. (1959). T e s t i n g programs in Michigan s c h o o l s . Ann
Arbor: The U n i v e r s i t y o f Michigan, Michigan School T e s t i n g
Services.
Womer, F. D. (1981). S t a t e l e v e l t e s t i n g : Where we have been may
not t e l l us where we a re goin g. In D. Car lso n ( E d . ) , New
d i r e c t i o n s f o r t e s t i n g and measurement: Vol. 10. T e s t i n g in
t h e s t a t e s : Bevond a c c o u n t a b i l i t y (pp. 1 - 1 2 ) . San F r a n c i s c o :
Jossey-Bass.