The Impact of High-Stakes Testing on Teachers and Students in North Carolina.

What happens to science and the arts in a back-to-basics accountability program? The authors' survey of teachers in North Carolina provides the answer to this and other questions about the impact of that state's most recent reform plan. All schools for miles and miles around Must take a special test. To see who's learning such and such To see which school's the best. If our small school does not do well, Then it will be torn down, And you will have to go to school In dreary Flobbertown.1 LIKE THE school described by Dr. Seuss above, the public schools of North Carolina are currently subject to a very high-stakes accountability program known as "The New ABCs of Public Education. " This is the fifth major state reform plan in the past decade, and it has had a major impact on curriculum, instruction, assessment, and school personnel throughout North Carolina. The ABCs began with a legislative mandate for the state board of education to create a plan that would involve "improving student performance, increasing local flexibility, and promoting economy and efficiency. "2 The resulting plan called for school-based accountability; a focus on the basic subjects of reading, writing, and mathematics; and increased local control. The accountability component of the plan called for each school's performance to be evaluated according to its own previous performance and statewide average test scores. Schools are publicly labeled as "exemplary," "meets expectations," "adequate performance," or "low performance" based on the end-of-grade achievement tests in reading, mathematics, and writing. Among the high stakes associated with this plan are financial incentives of $1,500 bonuses for teachers if their schools exceed expectations. On the other hand, for schools that fail to meet expected growth standards there are mandated assistance teams, the removal of principals and teachers who are "not willing to improve their practices,"3 and competency tests for teachers of low-performing classes. At least part of the goal of the program is to embarrass low-performing schools into higher achievement, as noted by Jay Robinson, former state superintendent: "With the help of a little public scrutiny, I think you'll be amazed at how much better those schools are going to get in the coming year. "4 The focus on the basics indicates that emphasis is to be given to reading, writing, and mathematics. Although the state does not go so far as to eliminate the study of science, social studies, or the arts, the plan stipulates that "principals are free to focus additional instruction in other subject areas as they wish. "5 The result is that science, social studies, and the arts are subjects that are pushed aside and taught only if there is extra time left in the schedule. The local control aspect of the plan is less clearly defined. The express intent of the plan was to move toward school-based management and less involvement on the part of the state. Specifically, the plan allowed local school boards to be flexible in spending state funds and to waive certain state laws and regulations. However, the tradeoff for this flexibility was tight state control of student achievement through high-stakes testing. The ABCs plan was initially implemented for grades K-8 in 1996, with high schools joining the plan in 1998. The impact of the plan has been swift and very public. After the first year of implementation, teachers reported that their principals and superintendents were directing them to teach mathematics, reading, and writing in order to prepare students for testing, even if doing so meant teaching less science or social studies. There were reports from low-performing schools of principals being suspended and battles between assistance teams and teachers over instructional practices. The newspaper headlines have included "ABCs Warrant an F," "Teachers See Disincentive to Helping Low-Rated Schools," and "43% of Schools in N. …