Question

in a large city school system with 20 elementary schools, the school board is considering the adoption of a new policy that would require elementary students to pass a test in order to be promoted to the next grade. the pta wants to find out whether parents agree with the plan. here are two proposed questions: question 1) should school-age children have to pass high- stakes tests in order to remain with their classmates? question 2) should school and children be held accountable for meeting yearly learning goals by testing students before they advance to the next grade? a) do you think the responses to these two questions might differ? how? what kind of bias is this?

Answer 1

Yes, responses might differ due to question framing. Question 1 could elicit an emotional bias against testing; question 2 focuses on accountability which may seem more acceptable. This demonstrates question-wording bias concerning high-stakes testing proposals.

Step-by-step explanation:

Responses to the two proposed questions regarding high-stakes testing and learning accountability in the context of a school system might differ due to the framing effect. Question 1 uses emotive language by mentioning 'school-age children' and 'remaining with their classmates,' which could influence respondents towards a more empathetic view, potentially leading to a rejection of high-pressure tests. Question 2 is more neutral, framing the process as a form of accountability which could lead respondents to view the policy more favorably as it emphasizes the principle of meeting yearly learning goals. This kind of discrepancy in responses due to question framing is known as question-wording bias.

The increasing use of standardized testing has been a contentious subject among parents of school-aged children, educators, and policymakers. Initiatives like the No Child Left Behind Act have heightened the stakes associated with testing, promoting practices such as 'teaching to the test', which some argue undermine comprehensive education. With disparities in school funding and the mixed efficacy of testing and accountability measures, the education community continues to debate the best ways to ensure student success and equitable learning opportunities.