In Experiment 1, 5th-and 6th-grade children were randomly assigned to either a task-focused motivational condition, an ego-focused condition, or a control group. They received a list of 60 words manipulated to be encoded at either shallow or deep levels of processing. An unexpected recall test then followed. Experiment 2 used the same general procedure except that the motivational manipulation was timed to occur at either encoding or retrieval. In both experiments ego involvement resulted in poorer word recall at deep rather than at shallow processing levels. Experiment 2 also indicated that the motivational deficits resulting from ego involvement are more pervasive at the information-retrieval stage. The usefulness of these findings for promoting greater conceptual clarity among motivation constructs is discussed.We thank the staff, faculty, and students of the Corrinne A. Seeds University Elementary School Los Angeles, California, for their participation in this research. We also extend appreciation to Bernard Weiner for his comments on a previous draft of this article.

How much influence does standardized testing exert on teaching and learning in upper elementary classrooms? Is there any difference between the impact of testing on low‐SES and high‐SES classrooms? How much impact does “teaching to the test” appear to have on test scores?

This study brings empirical data to the debate about the efficacy of standardized tests. A teacher questionnaire containing 81 Likert-type items was mailed to 450 upper elementary school teachers in 48 schools. Questions of interest included (a) What are the effects of these tests on the teaching and learning process in schools? (b) What is the meaning of test score gains? and (c) Does such testing have differential effects in schools serving students at different socioeconomic status (SES) levels? Approximately 75% of the teachers (n = 341) completed the questionnaires. Results of Cronbach's alpha and principal components analyses indicated that items within specified subscales were internally consistent. Results of a confirmatory factor analysis showed that the interitem correlations within subscales were stronger than those across subscales. The results of multiple discriminant analysis (DA) using categories of TREND (schools with increasing vs. stable or decreasing test scores) as the grouping variable indicated that only two subscales were significantly different across TREND categories. However, the results of a second multiple DA showed that many subscale scores significantly discriminated groups formed by student SES levels. The DA by SES findings suggest that teachers of lower SES students are under greater pressure to improve test scores and focus more on test content in their classroom instruction than teachers of higher SES students.

Browse Reports & Bookstore Make a charitable contribution Limited Electronic Distribution RightsThis document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of RAND electronic documents to a non-RAND website is prohibited. RAND electronic documents are protected under copyright law. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please see RAND Permissions.The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND focuses on the issues that matter most, such as health, education, national security, international affairs, law and business, the environment, and more. As a nonpartisan organization, RAND operates independent of political and commercial pressures. We serve the public interest by helping lawmakers reach informed decisions on the nation's pressing challenges. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients

three major constructs: (1) the governance, function, and goals of collaborative activities as perceived by the respondents; (2) the extent to which respondents believe that collaboration activities were associated with improvements in the delivery of SMH PEI services and supports; and (3) the respondents' perceptions of ongoing challenges and facilitators to collaboration, their personal level of participation in the group, and their perceptions of the group's achievement of goals.Each potential respondent was asked to give consent (electronically) for his or her participation in the survey. No incentives were off ered for participation, and individuals could refuse to participate and/or refuse to answer any question in the survey. Survey items asked participants to identify themselves by gender and age categories and to provide brief demographic information (e.g., location of workplace by county). Th ere were no unique links between participants' responses and identifying information, however, so responses were not attributable to specifi c individuals. Findings from Collaboration SurveysParticipants. Th e SRI research team consulted with the California Mental Health Services Authority (CalMHSA) program coordinators and partners at the college and university campuses and chancellors' and presidents' offi ces to identify individuals who participated in collaborative activities and represented various programmatic and administrative roles across all locations. Th ese individuals who were invited to participate in the surveys, due to their personal and professional involvement in SMH partnerships, were in positions to judge the benefi ts, challenges, and achievements of collaboration. Here, we summarize program features, describe survey respondents, and report fi ndings from 43 surveys completed in spring 2014 across the higher education program partners.• California Community Colleges (CCC). Th e CCC Student Mental Health Program (SMHP) off ered centralized training and technical assistance at no cost to all of its 112 campuses to support SMH PEI services and supports. In addition, CCC SMHP selected 23 campus-based grantees (CBGs), rep-